{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.021711366538952746, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0, 'mean_word_length': 5.842794759825328, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Comparison of adverse events of biologicals for treatment of juvenile idiopathic arthritis: a systematic review

ABSTRACT Objectives: Treatment of juvenile idiopathic arthritis has changed rapidly since the introduction of various biologics almost twenty years ago. Many clinical trials have been performed to monitor efficacy and safety of new agents. The aim of this review is to summarize safety concerns, which were observed during prospective clinical trials. Methods: Since etanercept was the first biologic approved and remains the most frequently used, as first biologic in polyarticular JIA patients, the authors calculated the relative risk of the adverse events for all examined biologicals and compared the values with the value of etanercept. Results: Relative rates for all adverse events showed similar rates for etanercept, infliximab, golimumab, and tocilizumab, whereas adalimumab showed higher rates and abatacept lower rates. Comparison of rates for serious adverse events demonstrated, that rates seemed comparable for etanercept, adalimumab, infliximab, and tocilizumab. Again, abatacept showed a lower rate, whereas golimumab seems to have a higher relative risk for serious adverse events. Rate of infection was lowest in patients treated with abatacept or tocilizumab, patients treated with etanercept, adalimumab and Infliximab again had similar rates. Conclusion: The safety profiles of actually approved biologics are highly acceptable. However, further observation, especially long-term observation through registry studies, is required.