ReviewRMD open2026
Expert viewpoint on endpoints in systemic sclerosis: current and future outlook.
Review in RMD open, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Systemic sclerosis (SSc) is a rare, heterogeneous, systemic autoimmune rheumatic disease characterised by vasculopathy, immune dysregulation and fibrosis affecting multiple organ systems. The complexity and variability of SSc manifestations pose significant challenges for clinical trial design and endpoint selection. Historically, three types of trial concepts have emerged: studies focused on a single organ; studies suggesting disease modification by combining a primary single-organ endpoint with supportive secondary endpoints across other systems, and studies explicitly designed to demonstrate disease modification through combined endpoints.This expert review explores the current landscape and future directions of clinical endpoints in SSc trials. It highlights the growing importance of patient-reported outcomes, such as the Health Assessment Questionnaire-Disability Index and ScleroID, which provide valuable insights into patient experiences. The review also discusses the emergence of candidate composite endpoints, including the revised Composite Response Index in Systemic Sclerosis, which integrates clinical, functional and patient-centred measures to better reflect treatment efficacy.Despite progress, significant unmet needs remain. Many endpoints assess damage at advanced stages, underscoring the need for earlier indicators of disease progression. The review advocates for incorporating time-to-event analyses, imaging and biomarker-based assessments to enhance sensitivity and relevance. It also emphasises the importance of refining composite endpoints to include continuous measures and broader domains such as vascular and gastrointestinal involvement. These efforts aim to improve the design and interpretability of SSc clinical trials, ultimately enhancing therapeutic development and patient outcomes.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.