Validation of the associations between single nucleotide polymorphisms or haplotypes and responses to disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs in patients with rheumatoid arthritis: a proposal for prospective pharmacogenomic study in clinical practice

2007 ◽  
Vol 17 (6) ◽  
pp. 383-390 ◽  
Author(s):  
Atsuo Taniguchi ◽  
Wako Urano ◽  
Eiichi Tanaka ◽  
Shiori Furihata ◽  
Shigeo Kamitsuji ◽  
...  
2021 ◽  
Vol 80 (Suppl 1) ◽  
pp. 1151.2-1152
Author(s):  
M. Kamiya ◽  
D. Togawa ◽  
S. Mori ◽  
K. Yamazaki

Background:In clinical practice, when refractory rheumatoid arthritis (RA) is present, of which the definition implies previous use of at least two biologic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (bDMARDs) (generally tumour necrosis factor inhibitors (TNFis)), the next treatment choice often made is a bDMARD of another class (non-TNFis) [1]. However, patients who are inadequately responding to bDMARDs need new treatment options because subsequent bDMARDs treatment reduces their response [2]. Janus Kinase inhibitors (JAKis) are the first targeted synthetic DMARDs (tsDMARD) licensed for the treatment of RA with comparable efficacy to bDMARDs. Unlike the single cytokine targeting approach of bDMARDs, JAKis are specifically designed to inhibit intracellular signalling molecules common to the receptors of multiple inflammatory cytokines implicated in RA pathogenesis. The choice of therapeutic agents for refractory RA is increasing, and its efficacy is expected. On the other hand, it is also true that some patients discontinued JAKis at a rate that cannot be overlooked because of insufficient efficacy. Difficult-to-treat (D2T) RA is defined as refractory to two or more b/ts DMARDs with different mechanisms of action, with active and progressive disease, as published by Eular(3)Objectives:To evaluate real world efficacy of approved JAKis switching in patients with D2T RA who were unable to control their disease activity due to insufficient efficacy despite the sequential use of multiple bDMARDs and JAKis, focusing on the drug retention rate.Methods:In our hospital, RA was diagnosed according to the 1987 or 2010 classification criteria, and when two or more bDMARDs (including both TNFis and non-TNFis) were inadequately effective, it was defined as D2T RA. We retrospectively investigated patients who switched to JAKis for D2T RA. The drug retention rate was investigated by the Kaplan-Meier method, and the difference was tested by the Logrank test.Results:The 1-year retention rate of JAKis for D2T RA was 50.8% in TOF 38 cases [28 women, age average 70.2 years, disease duration average 12.4 years, past bDMARDs use average 3.5 drugs, MTX combination 9 cases, DAS28 ESR average 4.11] and 66.3% in BAR 35 cases [26 cases, 73.0 years old, 14.8 years, 4.17 agents, 9 cases, 3.68], and there was no significant difference (P = 0.30). Among them, there were 17 cases [11 cases, 70.6 years old, 13.5 years, 4.18 drugs, 2 cases, 3.65] of switching between JAKis, all of which were switching from TOF to BAR. The 1-year retention rate was 45.8% [reason for discontinuation: insufficient effect in 3 cases, adverse events in 6 cases], which was not significantly different but tended to be lower than 72.7% [reason for discontinuation: insufficient effect in 1 case, adverse event in 2 cases, patient’s convenience in 1 case] in 16 patients [13 cases, 76.3 years old, 17.1 years, 3.19 drugs, 7 cases, 3.69] who received BAR as the first JAKi for D2T RA patients (P = 0.089).Conclusion:Although the number of cases is small in the retrospective survey, it is suggested that the retention rate of BAR switched to D2T RA may be slightly lower in patients with a history of TOF discontinuation due to insufficient efficacy than in JAKi naive patients. It is expected that the number of new JAKi usage cases will increase in the future, and it is necessary to consider switching between other JAKis in addition to switching from BAR to TOF.References:[1]Smolen JS, Landewe R, Bijlsma J et al. EULAR recommendations for the management of rheumatoid arthritis with synthetic and biological disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs: 2016 update. Ann Rheum Dis 2017;76:960_77.[2]Rendas-Baum R, Wallenstein GV, Koncz T et al. Evaluating the efficacy of sequential biologic therapies for rheumatoid arthritis patients with an inadequate response to tumor necrosis factor-α inhibitors. Arthritis Res Ther 2011;13:R25.[3]Nagy G, et al. EULAR definition of difficult-to-treat rheumatoid arthritis. Ann Rheum Dis 2021;80:31–35. doi:10.1136/annrheumdis-2020-217344.Disclosure of Interests:None declared


2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Eri Sugano ◽  
Eiichi Tanaka ◽  
Eisuke Inoue ◽  
Ryoko Sakai ◽  
Mai Abe ◽  
...  

ABSTRACT Objectives To evaluate the differences in patients’ population and efficacy/effectiveness of biological disease–modifying antirheumatic drugs (bDMARDs) between randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and clinical practice in patients with rheumatoid arthritis. Methods We reviewed inclusion criteria in Phase II or III RCTs of bDMARDs conducted in Japan. The Institute of Rheumatology, Rheumatoid Arthritis study participants during the period when each RCT was conducted (Cohort A) and new bDMARD users at our institute in 2016 (Cohort B) were assessed for the fulfilment of the inclusion criteria. The effectiveness of bDMARDs in our cohort and their efficacy in RCTs were compared using the inverse-variance method. Results Nineteen RCTs were selected. The mean proportions of patients fulfilling all inclusion criteria of each RCT in Cohorts A and B were 2.3% and 7.6%, respectively. The pooled proportion ratios (95% confidence interval) for achieving the American College of Rheumatology 20 (ACR20), ACR50, ACR70, and disease activity score 28 remission in non-eligible cases for eight RCTs versus all corresponding RCTs were 0.38 (0.30–0.51), 0.41 (0.30–0.57), 0.54 (0.35–0.82), and 1.28 (1.10–1.56), respectively. Conclusions Few rheumatoid arthritis patients fulfilled the inclusion criteria of the RCTs in clinical settings. There was a difference in the efficacy/effectiveness of bDMARDs between RCTs and clinical practice.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document