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...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Clinical rheumatology 2020-08, Vol.39 (8), p.2307-2315
Main Authors: Deodhar, A., Chakravarty, S. D., Cameron, C., Peterson, S., Hensman, R., Fogarty, S., Spin, P., Kafka, S., Nair, S., Gensler, L. S.
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 &amp; 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 &amp; 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 &amp; 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 &amp; 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 &amp; 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 &amp; 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 &amp; 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 &amp; Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>Health &amp; 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