Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

NICE guidelines on anti-tumor necrosis factor therapy for RA

Nature Clinical Practice Rheumatology volume 5, pages 16–17 (2009)Cite this article

The UK National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE) utilizes the available evidence to provide guidance on the efficacy and cost-effectiveness of existing health technologies. NICE advisors decide that a technology is of value to society when its cost falls beneath a certain threshold—conventionally under £30,000 (approximately $50,000) per quality-adjusted life year. NICE can work only with the available evidence. In many cases, this evidence is neither good nor complete, but the quality of the evidence is not something that NICE can influence directly. Its proponents believe that NICE is far more than a system for rationing expensive treatments.1 Its critics, however, argue that rationing is its central business, and that NICE often deprives patients from receiving the effective treatments they wish to have.2

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution

Access options

Rent or buy this article

Prices vary by article type

from$1.95

to$39.95

Learn more

Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout

References

  1. Rawlins MD and Culyer AJ (2004) National Institute for Clinical Excellence and its value judgments. BMJ 329: 224–227

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Maynard A et al. (2004) Challenges for the National Institute for Clinical Excellence. BMJ 329: 227–229

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence [http://www.nice.org.uk/Guidance/TA130/Guidance/pdf/English] (accessed 6 November 2008)

  4. Chen YF et al. (2006) A systematic review of the effectiveness of adalimumab, etanercept and infliximab for the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis in adults and an economic evaluation of their cost-effectiveness. Health Technol Assess 10: 1–229

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Zink A et al. (2006) Effectiveness of tumor necrosis factor inhibitors in rheumatoid arthritis in an observational cohort study: comparison of patients according to their eligibility for major randomized clinical trials. Arthritis Rheum 54: 3399–3407

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Greenberg JD et al. (2008) Tumor necrosis factor antagonist responsiveness in a United States rheumatoid arthritis cohort. Am J Med 121: 532–538

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Goekoop-Ruiterman YP et al. (2005) Clinical and radiographic outcomes of four different treatment strategies in patients with early rheumatoid arthritis (the BeSt study): a randomized, controlled trial. Arthritis Rheum 52: 3381–3390

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. van Vollenhoven RF (2004) Switching between biological agents. Clin Exp Rheumatol 22 (5 Suppl 35): S115–S121

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Keystone EC (2006) Switching tumor necrosis factor inhibitors: an opinion. Nat Clin Pract Rheumatol 2: 576–577

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Erickson AR and Mikuls TR (2007) Switching anti-TNF-alpha agents: what is the evidence? Curr Rheumatol Rep 9: 416–420

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Bombardieri S et al. (2007) Effectiveness of adalimumab for rheumatoid arthritis in patients with a history of TNF-antagonist therapy in clinical practice. Rheumatology 46: 1191–1199

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Buch MH et al. (2007) Therapy of patients with rheumatoid arthritis: outcome of infliximab failures switched to etanercept. Arthritis Rheum 57: 448–453

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Hyrich KL et al. (2008) Effects of switching between anti-TNF therapies on HAQ response in patients who do not respond to their first anti-TNF drug. Rheumatology 47: 1000–1005

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Hyrich KL et al. (2007) Outcomes after switching from one anti-tumor necrosis factor alpha agent to a second anti-tumor necrosis factor alpha agent in patients with rheumatoid arthritis: results from a large UK national cohort study. Arthritis Rheum 56: 13–20

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Karlsson JA et al. (2008) Treatment response to a second or third TNF-inhibitor in RA: results from the South Swedish Arthritis Treatment Group Register. Rheumatology 47: 507–513

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Barton P et al. (2004) The use of modelling to evaluate new drugs for patients with a chronic condition: the case of antibodies against tumour necrosis factor in rheumatoid arthritis. Health Technol Assess 8: iii, 1–91

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. DL Scott is Professor of Clinical Rheumatology and Honorary Consultant Rheumatologist, and S Steer is a recently appointed Consultant Rheumatologist at King's College Hospital, London, UK.,

    David L Scott & Sophia Steer

Authors
  1. David L Scott
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Sophia Steer
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to David L Scott.

Ethics declarations

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing financial interests.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Scott, D., Steer, S. NICE guidelines on anti-tumor necrosis factor therapy for RA. Nat Rev Rheumatol 5, 16–17 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1038/ncprheum0964

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/ncprheum0964

This article is cited by

Search

Advanced search

Quick links

Nature Briefing

Sign up for the Nature Briefing newsletter — what matters in science, free to your inbox daily.

Get the most important science stories of the day, free in your inbox. Sign up for Nature Briefing