Loading…
A systematic review and network meta-analysis of current and investigational treatments for active ankylosing spondylitis
Objective To compare the relative efficacy of current and investigational biologic and oral small molecule (OSM) treatments for active ankylosing spondylitis (AS). Methods A systematic literature review was conducted to identify all phase 2/3 randomized trials of interest in patients with AS. Outcom...
Saved in:
Published in: | Clinical rheumatology 2020-08, Vol.39 (8), p.2307-2315 |
---|---|
Main Authors: | , , , , , , , , , |
Format: | Article |
Language: | English |
Subjects: | |
Citations: | Items that this one cites Items that cite this one |
Online Access: | Get full text |
Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
cited_by | cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c474t-db69b7303ee4db3aeee06a3446a3d461b2a9a41831520aef3f81aefacdeb52193 |
---|---|
cites | cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c474t-db69b7303ee4db3aeee06a3446a3d461b2a9a41831520aef3f81aefacdeb52193 |
container_end_page | 2315 |
container_issue | 8 |
container_start_page | 2307 |
container_title | Clinical rheumatology |
container_volume | 39 |
creator | Deodhar, A. Chakravarty, S. D. Cameron, C. Peterson, S. Hensman, R. Fogarty, S. Spin, P. Kafka, S. Nair, S. Gensler, L. S. |
description | Objective
To compare the relative efficacy of current and investigational biologic and oral small molecule (OSM) treatments for active ankylosing spondylitis (AS).
Methods
A systematic literature review was conducted to identify all phase 2/3 randomized trials of interest in patients with AS. Outcomes assessed were ≥ 20% improvement in the Assessment of Spondyloarthritis International Society Criteria (ASAS20) and change from baseline in Bath Ankylosing Spondylitis Functional Index (BASFI) and C-reactive protein (CRP) at weeks 12–16. Bayesian network meta-analyses were conducted for outcomes using a random effects model. Baseline-risk adjustment was also conducted to account for differences in placebo response across studies. Surface Under the Cumulative Ranking curve (SUCRA) values are reported, reflecting the relative probability that intervention was the best of all interventions.
Results
The investigational agent tofacitinib 5 mg was the top-ranked treatment (SUCRA, 93%) for ASAS20 response, followed by intravenous (IV) golimumab 2 mg/kg (90%). Golimumab IV 2 mg/kg and infliximab 5 mg/kg were the top two ranked treatments for change from baseline in BASFI (golimumab IV, 81%; infliximab, 80%) and change from baseline in CRP (infliximab, 90%; golimumab IV, 82%).
Conclusions
Two approved therapies (golimumab IV, infliximab) and one investigational product ranked highest for efficacy in AS.
Key Points
• Although golimumab IV, infliximab, and tofacitinib ranked highest for efficacy in AS, differences in efficacy between approved and investigational therapies were not statistically significant. |
doi_str_mv | 10.1007/s10067-020-04970-3 |
format | article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_pubme</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_7338808</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>2420334037</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c474t-db69b7303ee4db3aeee06a3446a3d461b2a9a41831520aef3f81aefacdeb52193</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp9kU1vFDEMhiMEokvhD3BAkTgPOHE6mVyQqqp8SJW4wDnKzHiWtDPJkmS3mn9P2i0FLlxsyX782tbL2GsB7wSAfp9rbHUDEhpQRkODT9hGKFSNMco8ZRvQd0VhuhP2IudrAJCdEc_ZCUoBum3bDVvPeV5zocUVP_BEB0-33IWRByq3Md3whYprXHDzmn3mceLDPiUK5R7y4UC5-G0djhXhJZErS-1mPsXE3VD8gSp5s84x-7DleRfDuM6--PySPZvcnOnVQz5l3z9efrv43Fx9_fTl4vyqGZRWpRn71vQaAYnU2KMjImgdKlXDqFrRS2ecEh2KMwmOJpw6UZMbRurPpDB4yj4cdXf7fqFxqNclN9td8otLq43O2387wf-w23iwGrHroKsCbx8EUvy5r__a67hP9d1spZKAqAB1peSRGlLMOdH0uEGAvbPLHu2y1S57b5fFOvTm79seR377UwE8Arm2wpbSn93_kf0F9A-lZg</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Open Access Repository</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2420334037</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>A systematic review and network meta-analysis of current and investigational treatments for active ankylosing spondylitis</title><source>Springer Link</source><creator>Deodhar, A. ; Chakravarty, S. D. ; Cameron, C. ; Peterson, S. ; Hensman, R. ; Fogarty, S. ; Spin, P. ; Kafka, S. ; Nair, S. ; Gensler, L. S.</creator><creatorcontrib>Deodhar, A. ; Chakravarty, S. D. ; Cameron, C. ; Peterson, S. ; Hensman, R. ; Fogarty, S. ; Spin, P. ; Kafka, S. ; Nair, S. ; Gensler, L. S.</creatorcontrib><description>Objective
To compare the relative efficacy of current and investigational biologic and oral small molecule (OSM) treatments for active ankylosing spondylitis (AS).
Methods
A systematic literature review was conducted to identify all phase 2/3 randomized trials of interest in patients with AS. Outcomes assessed were ≥ 20% improvement in the Assessment of Spondyloarthritis International Society Criteria (ASAS20) and change from baseline in Bath Ankylosing Spondylitis Functional Index (BASFI) and C-reactive protein (CRP) at weeks 12–16. Bayesian network meta-analyses were conducted for outcomes using a random effects model. Baseline-risk adjustment was also conducted to account for differences in placebo response across studies. Surface Under the Cumulative Ranking curve (SUCRA) values are reported, reflecting the relative probability that intervention was the best of all interventions.
Results
The investigational agent tofacitinib 5 mg was the top-ranked treatment (SUCRA, 93%) for ASAS20 response, followed by intravenous (IV) golimumab 2 mg/kg (90%). Golimumab IV 2 mg/kg and infliximab 5 mg/kg were the top two ranked treatments for change from baseline in BASFI (golimumab IV, 81%; infliximab, 80%) and change from baseline in CRP (infliximab, 90%; golimumab IV, 82%).
Conclusions
Two approved therapies (golimumab IV, infliximab) and one investigational product ranked highest for efficacy in AS.
Key Points
• Although golimumab IV, infliximab, and tofacitinib ranked highest for efficacy in AS, differences in efficacy between approved and investigational therapies were not statistically significant.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0770-3198</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1434-9949</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1007/s10067-020-04970-3</identifier><identifier>PMID: 32107666</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Cham: Springer International Publishing</publisher><subject>Administration, Intravenous ; Ankylosing spondylitis ; Antibodies, Monoclonal ; Arthritis ; Bayes Theorem ; Bayesian analysis ; C-reactive protein ; Clinical trials ; Humans ; Inflammatory diseases ; Infliximab ; Intravenous administration ; Literature reviews ; Medicine ; Medicine & Public Health ; Meta-analysis ; Monoclonal antibodies ; Network Meta-Analysis ; Original ; Original Article ; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic ; Rheumatic diseases ; Rheumatology ; Spondylitis, Ankylosing - drug therapy ; Statistical analysis ; Therapies, Investigational ; TNF inhibitors ; Tumor Necrosis Factor Inhibitors - administration & dosage ; Tumor Necrosis Factor Inhibitors - therapeutic use ; Tumor necrosis factor-α</subject><ispartof>Clinical rheumatology, 2020-08, Vol.39 (8), p.2307-2315</ispartof><rights>The Author(s) 2020</rights><rights>The Author(s) 2020. This work is published under http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (the “License”). Notwithstanding the ProQuest Terms and Conditions, you may use this content in accordance with the terms of the License.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c474t-db69b7303ee4db3aeee06a3446a3d461b2a9a41831520aef3f81aefacdeb52193</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c474t-db69b7303ee4db3aeee06a3446a3d461b2a9a41831520aef3f81aefacdeb52193</cites><orcidid>0000-0002-2130-1246</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>230,314,780,784,885,27924,27925</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32107666$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Deodhar, A.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Chakravarty, S. D.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Cameron, C.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Peterson, S.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Hensman, R.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Fogarty, S.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Spin, P.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kafka, S.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Nair, S.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Gensler, L. S.</creatorcontrib><title>A systematic review and network meta-analysis of current and investigational treatments for active ankylosing spondylitis</title><title>Clinical rheumatology</title><addtitle>Clin Rheumatol</addtitle><addtitle>Clin Rheumatol</addtitle><description>Objective
To compare the relative efficacy of current and investigational biologic and oral small molecule (OSM) treatments for active ankylosing spondylitis (AS).
Methods
A systematic literature review was conducted to identify all phase 2/3 randomized trials of interest in patients with AS. Outcomes assessed were ≥ 20% improvement in the Assessment of Spondyloarthritis International Society Criteria (ASAS20) and change from baseline in Bath Ankylosing Spondylitis Functional Index (BASFI) and C-reactive protein (CRP) at weeks 12–16. Bayesian network meta-analyses were conducted for outcomes using a random effects model. Baseline-risk adjustment was also conducted to account for differences in placebo response across studies. Surface Under the Cumulative Ranking curve (SUCRA) values are reported, reflecting the relative probability that intervention was the best of all interventions.
Results
The investigational agent tofacitinib 5 mg was the top-ranked treatment (SUCRA, 93%) for ASAS20 response, followed by intravenous (IV) golimumab 2 mg/kg (90%). Golimumab IV 2 mg/kg and infliximab 5 mg/kg were the top two ranked treatments for change from baseline in BASFI (golimumab IV, 81%; infliximab, 80%) and change from baseline in CRP (infliximab, 90%; golimumab IV, 82%).
Conclusions
Two approved therapies (golimumab IV, infliximab) and one investigational product ranked highest for efficacy in AS.
Key Points
• Although golimumab IV, infliximab, and tofacitinib ranked highest for efficacy in AS, differences in efficacy between approved and investigational therapies were not statistically significant.</description><subject>Administration, Intravenous</subject><subject>Ankylosing spondylitis</subject><subject>Antibodies, Monoclonal</subject><subject>Arthritis</subject><subject>Bayes Theorem</subject><subject>Bayesian analysis</subject><subject>C-reactive protein</subject><subject>Clinical trials</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Inflammatory diseases</subject><subject>Infliximab</subject><subject>Intravenous administration</subject><subject>Literature reviews</subject><subject>Medicine</subject><subject>Medicine & Public Health</subject><subject>Meta-analysis</subject><subject>Monoclonal antibodies</subject><subject>Network Meta-Analysis</subject><subject>Original</subject><subject>Original Article</subject><subject>Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic</subject><subject>Rheumatic diseases</subject><subject>Rheumatology</subject><subject>Spondylitis, Ankylosing - drug therapy</subject><subject>Statistical analysis</subject><subject>Therapies, Investigational</subject><subject>TNF inhibitors</subject><subject>Tumor Necrosis Factor Inhibitors - administration & dosage</subject><subject>Tumor Necrosis Factor Inhibitors - therapeutic use</subject><subject>Tumor necrosis factor-α</subject><issn>0770-3198</issn><issn>1434-9949</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2020</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNp9kU1vFDEMhiMEokvhD3BAkTgPOHE6mVyQqqp8SJW4wDnKzHiWtDPJkmS3mn9P2i0FLlxsyX782tbL2GsB7wSAfp9rbHUDEhpQRkODT9hGKFSNMco8ZRvQd0VhuhP2IudrAJCdEc_ZCUoBum3bDVvPeV5zocUVP_BEB0-33IWRByq3Md3whYprXHDzmn3mceLDPiUK5R7y4UC5-G0djhXhJZErS-1mPsXE3VD8gSp5s84x-7DleRfDuM6--PySPZvcnOnVQz5l3z9efrv43Fx9_fTl4vyqGZRWpRn71vQaAYnU2KMjImgdKlXDqFrRS2ecEh2KMwmOJpw6UZMbRurPpDB4yj4cdXf7fqFxqNclN9td8otLq43O2387wf-w23iwGrHroKsCbx8EUvy5r__a67hP9d1spZKAqAB1peSRGlLMOdH0uEGAvbPLHu2y1S57b5fFOvTm79seR377UwE8Arm2wpbSn93_kf0F9A-lZg</recordid><startdate>20200801</startdate><enddate>20200801</enddate><creator>Deodhar, A.</creator><creator>Chakravarty, S. D.</creator><creator>Cameron, C.</creator><creator>Peterson, S.</creator><creator>Hensman, R.</creator><creator>Fogarty, S.</creator><creator>Spin, P.</creator><creator>Kafka, S.</creator><creator>Nair, S.</creator><creator>Gensler, L. S.</creator><general>Springer International Publishing</general><general>Springer Nature B.V</general><scope>C6C</scope><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>7T5</scope><scope>7X7</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>88E</scope><scope>8AO</scope><scope>8FI</scope><scope>8FJ</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>FYUFA</scope><scope>GHDGH</scope><scope>H94</scope><scope>K9.</scope><scope>M0S</scope><scope>M1P</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>PRINS</scope><scope>5PM</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2130-1246</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>20200801</creationdate><title>A systematic review and network meta-analysis of current and investigational treatments for active ankylosing spondylitis</title><author>Deodhar, A. ; Chakravarty, S. D. ; Cameron, C. ; Peterson, S. ; Hensman, R. ; Fogarty, S. ; Spin, P. ; Kafka, S. ; Nair, S. ; Gensler, L. S.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c474t-db69b7303ee4db3aeee06a3446a3d461b2a9a41831520aef3f81aefacdeb52193</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2020</creationdate><topic>Administration, Intravenous</topic><topic>Ankylosing spondylitis</topic><topic>Antibodies, Monoclonal</topic><topic>Arthritis</topic><topic>Bayes Theorem</topic><topic>Bayesian analysis</topic><topic>C-reactive protein</topic><topic>Clinical trials</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Inflammatory diseases</topic><topic>Infliximab</topic><topic>Intravenous administration</topic><topic>Literature reviews</topic><topic>Medicine</topic><topic>Medicine & Public Health</topic><topic>Meta-analysis</topic><topic>Monoclonal antibodies</topic><topic>Network Meta-Analysis</topic><topic>Original</topic><topic>Original Article</topic><topic>Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic</topic><topic>Rheumatic diseases</topic><topic>Rheumatology</topic><topic>Spondylitis, Ankylosing - drug therapy</topic><topic>Statistical analysis</topic><topic>Therapies, Investigational</topic><topic>TNF inhibitors</topic><topic>Tumor Necrosis Factor Inhibitors - administration & dosage</topic><topic>Tumor Necrosis Factor Inhibitors - therapeutic use</topic><topic>Tumor necrosis factor-α</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Deodhar, A.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Chakravarty, S. D.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Cameron, C.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Peterson, S.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Hensman, R.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Fogarty, S.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Spin, P.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kafka, S.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Nair, S.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Gensler, L. S.</creatorcontrib><collection>Springer_OA刊</collection><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>Immunology Abstracts</collection><collection>Health & Medical Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Medical Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Pharma Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection (Alumni)</collection><collection>AIDS and Cancer Research Abstracts</collection><collection>ProQuest Health & Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>Health & Medical Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Medical Database</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>ProQuest Central China</collection><collection>PubMed Central (Full Participant titles)</collection><jtitle>Clinical rheumatology</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Deodhar, A.</au><au>Chakravarty, S. D.</au><au>Cameron, C.</au><au>Peterson, S.</au><au>Hensman, R.</au><au>Fogarty, S.</au><au>Spin, P.</au><au>Kafka, S.</au><au>Nair, S.</au><au>Gensler, L. S.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>A systematic review and network meta-analysis of current and investigational treatments for active ankylosing spondylitis</atitle><jtitle>Clinical rheumatology</jtitle><stitle>Clin Rheumatol</stitle><addtitle>Clin Rheumatol</addtitle><date>2020-08-01</date><risdate>2020</risdate><volume>39</volume><issue>8</issue><spage>2307</spage><epage>2315</epage><pages>2307-2315</pages><issn>0770-3198</issn><eissn>1434-9949</eissn><abstract>Objective
To compare the relative efficacy of current and investigational biologic and oral small molecule (OSM) treatments for active ankylosing spondylitis (AS).
Methods
A systematic literature review was conducted to identify all phase 2/3 randomized trials of interest in patients with AS. Outcomes assessed were ≥ 20% improvement in the Assessment of Spondyloarthritis International Society Criteria (ASAS20) and change from baseline in Bath Ankylosing Spondylitis Functional Index (BASFI) and C-reactive protein (CRP) at weeks 12–16. Bayesian network meta-analyses were conducted for outcomes using a random effects model. Baseline-risk adjustment was also conducted to account for differences in placebo response across studies. Surface Under the Cumulative Ranking curve (SUCRA) values are reported, reflecting the relative probability that intervention was the best of all interventions.
Results
The investigational agent tofacitinib 5 mg was the top-ranked treatment (SUCRA, 93%) for ASAS20 response, followed by intravenous (IV) golimumab 2 mg/kg (90%). Golimumab IV 2 mg/kg and infliximab 5 mg/kg were the top two ranked treatments for change from baseline in BASFI (golimumab IV, 81%; infliximab, 80%) and change from baseline in CRP (infliximab, 90%; golimumab IV, 82%).
Conclusions
Two approved therapies (golimumab IV, infliximab) and one investigational product ranked highest for efficacy in AS.
Key Points
• Although golimumab IV, infliximab, and tofacitinib ranked highest for efficacy in AS, differences in efficacy between approved and investigational therapies were not statistically significant.</abstract><cop>Cham</cop><pub>Springer International Publishing</pub><pmid>32107666</pmid><doi>10.1007/s10067-020-04970-3</doi><tpages>9</tpages><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2130-1246</orcidid><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 0770-3198 |
ispartof | Clinical rheumatology, 2020-08, Vol.39 (8), p.2307-2315 |
issn | 0770-3198 1434-9949 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_7338808 |
source | Springer Link |
subjects | Administration, Intravenous Ankylosing spondylitis Antibodies, Monoclonal Arthritis Bayes Theorem Bayesian analysis C-reactive protein Clinical trials Humans Inflammatory diseases Infliximab Intravenous administration Literature reviews Medicine Medicine & Public Health Meta-analysis Monoclonal antibodies Network Meta-Analysis Original Original Article Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic Rheumatic diseases Rheumatology Spondylitis, Ankylosing - drug therapy Statistical analysis Therapies, Investigational TNF inhibitors Tumor Necrosis Factor Inhibitors - administration & dosage Tumor Necrosis Factor Inhibitors - therapeutic use Tumor necrosis factor-α |
title | A systematic review and network meta-analysis of current and investigational treatments for active ankylosing spondylitis |
url | http://sfxeu10.hosted.exlibrisgroup.com/loughborough?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-12-20T10%3A12%3A50IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_pubme&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=A%20systematic%20review%20and%20network%20meta-analysis%20of%20current%20and%20investigational%20treatments%20for%20active%20ankylosing%20spondylitis&rft.jtitle=Clinical%20rheumatology&rft.au=Deodhar,%20A.&rft.date=2020-08-01&rft.volume=39&rft.issue=8&rft.spage=2307&rft.epage=2315&rft.pages=2307-2315&rft.issn=0770-3198&rft.eissn=1434-9949&rft_id=info:doi/10.1007/s10067-020-04970-3&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_pubme%3E2420334037%3C/proquest_pubme%3E%3Cgrp_id%3Ecdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c474t-db69b7303ee4db3aeee06a3446a3d461b2a9a41831520aef3f81aefacdeb52193%3C/grp_id%3E%3Coa%3E%3C/oa%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2420334037&rft_id=info:pmid/32107666&rfr_iscdi=true |