You are here

Article Text

Article menu
Download PDFPDF
Electronic pages
Correspondence response
Response to Dr Bredemeier's letter
  1. Edward M Vital1,2,
  2. Shouvik Dass1,2,
  3. Maya H Buch1,2,
  4. Andrew C Rawstron3,
  5. Paul Emery1,2
  1. 1National Institute of Health Research Leeds Musculoskeletal Biomedical Research Unit, Leeds Teaching Hospitals NHS Trust, Leeds, UK
  2. 2Leeds Institute of Rheumatic and Musculoskeletal Medicine, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK
  3. 3Haematological Malignancy Diagnostic Service, Leeds Teaching Hospitals NHS Trust, Leeds, West Yorkshire, UK
  1. Correspondence to Prof Paul Emery, Leeds Institute of Rheumatic and Musculoskeletal Medicine, Chapel Allerton Hospital, Leeds LS7 4SA, UK; p.emery{at}leeds.ac.uk

https://doi.org/10.1136/annrheumdis-2014-205405

Statistics from Altmetric.com

    Request Permissions

    If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.

    We thank Dr Bredemeier for his interest in our work.1 The need to measure duration as well as initial quality of response to a single cycle of rituximab has been recognised since the earliest trials using rituximab. Indeed, concomitant methotrexate was included in rituximab's license for rheumatoid arthritis because of improved duration of response, despite no difference in American College of Rheumatology (ACR) or European League Against Rheumatism (EULAR) response rates at 6 months.2 We therefore consider duration of response to be a meaningful outcome measure. We do not …

    View Full Text

    Footnotes

    • Competing interests None.

    • Provenance and peer review Commissioned; internally peer reviewed.

    Linked Articles