OP0028 POST-APPROVAL COMPARATIVE SAFETY STUDY OF TOFACITINIB AND BIOLOGIC DMARDS: FIVE–YEAR RESULTS FROM A US-BASED RHEUMATOID ARTHRITIS REGISTRY

Background:Musculoskeletal Ultrasonography (MSUS) is now a widely used tool for monitoring of rheumatoid arthritis (RA). Although there are many proposed sets of composite scores, a fixed set of joints may not be an ideal tool to assess a disease like RA, which affects many joints and tendons in different presentations. In previous study (1) U9 score was proven to be correlated with disease activity parameters.Objectives:To determine whether US assessment using U9 score is useful for monitoring response to treatment for RA or not?Methods:A prospective, multicenter study were conducted in period from July 2019 to December 2019. All recruited RA patients were subjected to: Disease activity assessment by clinical disease activity indices (CDAI and DAS28 ESR). Functional status assessment by (HAQ) and ultrasonographic assessment using U9 score which include 8 joints (bilateral wrists,2ndMCP,3RDMCP and knees) plus most clinically affected joint or tendon (one joint or one tendon). Most clinically affected joints from 48 joints. Any affected tendons could be choosing. All targeted joints were evaluated according to EULAR guidlines and by EULAR/ OMERACT combined score (0-3). Targeted tendons were scored (0-3).All patients received their treatment (biologic and non biologic DMARDs) according to the decision of the treating physicians. No specific therapy is needed. CDAI and DAS28 ESR, HAQ and U9 score were repeated after 3 months to detect the response to change after receiving the therapy.Results:One hundred and forty patients (23.6% were male) with mean age 39.26±11.30 were recruited from 4 tertiary referral university hospitals.There was a significant difference (<0.001) between the first and second visits as regards clinical, laboratory and ultrasonographic parameters. DAS 28 decreased form (5.29±1.21) to (3.95±0.99), ESR decreased from (42.12±15.24) to (26.84±12.32), HAQ2 improved from (0.652±0.350) to (0.510±0.237) and U9 total US score decreased from (13.56±5.18) to (8.02±4.28).There was significant correlation between U9 ultrasonographic score and clinical parameters at both visits (table 1).Table 1.correlation between U9 ultrasonographic score and clinical parameters.U9 at 1stvisitU9 at 2ndvisitDAS-28Pearson Correlation(P value)0.806<0.0010.790<0.001CDAIPearson Correlation(P value)0.787<0.0010.773<0.001HAQPearson Correlation(P value)0.431<0.0010.317<0.001We found that the most suitable cut-off value of U9 score to predict high disease activity was 11.5 (sensitivity 85.7% and specificity 80.6%), cut off value for moderate disease activity was 5.5(sensitivity 83.2% and specificity 88%) and cut off value for low disease activity was 3.5 (sensitivity of 83.3% and specificity 57.1%). These results are summarized in the following table:Conclusion:U9 ultrasonographic score is very useful method for evaluating the monitoring the response of treatment.References:[1]Mortada, et al. Annals of the Rheumatic Diseases 2019;78:1009.Disclosure of Interests:None declared

Download Full-text

POS0642 THE IMPACT OF AGE ON DISCONTINUATION OF BIOLOGIC DMARDs IN PATIENTS WITH RHEUMATOID ARTHRITIS

Annals of the Rheumatic Diseases ◽

10.1136/annrheumdis-2021-eular.3759 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 80 (Suppl 1) ◽

pp. 559.2-560

Author(s):

V. Rivera Teran ◽

S. Sicsik ◽

D. Vega-Morales ◽

F. Irazoque-Palazuelos ◽

D. Miranda ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Rheumatoid Arthritis ◽

Adverse Effects ◽

Adverse Events ◽

Cox Regression ◽

Retention Rate ◽

Drug Discontinuation ◽

Discontinuation Rate ◽

Biologic Dmards ◽

Conventional Dmards ◽

The Impact

Background:Rheumatoid arthritis (RA) is the most common autoimmune disease. Older patients treated with biologic DMARDs (bDMARDs) are at a significantly greater risk of adverse effects (AEs) [1]. However, the rate of drug discontinuation because of adverse effects caused by bDMARDs has not differed in elderly compared to younger patients in different registries.Objectives:Determine if drug discontinuation of bDMARDs differs by age in patients with rheumatoid arthritis in the Mexican Adverse Events Registry (BIOBADAMEX).Methods:BIOBADAMEX is a Mexican ongoing cohort of patients using bDMARDs since 2016. In this analysis we included all patients with diagnosis of RA with at least two assessments. Survival on bDMARDs was estimated using Kaplan-Meier analysis. Predictors of discontinuation, including age older than median age in the sample were investigated by Cox regression analyses.Results:Among 743 patients in the registry, 497 had RA diagnosis, from which, 214 had at least two assessments. At baseline, patients had a median (IQR) age of 53.4 (45-61) years old, median disease duration of 10.7 (6-17) months and median DAS28 of 4.7 (3-6). Conventional DMARDS were used by 185 (87%) patients and 94 (44%) patients used corticosteroids. Comorbidities were present in 194 (91%). The most common bDMARDs received at baseline were abatacept 59 (27%), tocilizumab 45(21%), adalimumab 31 (15%) and certolizumab 30 (14%). At the time of analysis, the median bDMARDs treatment duration was 21.0(13-34) months, 128 (59%) had discontinued treatment, 66 for inefficacy, 32 for adverse events and 30 for others. Fig 1 shows discontinuation rate curves in patients younger and older than median age. Cox proportional-hazards demonstrated no significant differences regarding age older than median age (HR 1.1, 95% CI 0.8-1.4, p=0.7), female sex (HR 1.2, 95% CI 0.7-1.9, p=0.44), use of corticosteroids (HR 1.2, 95% CI 0.9-1.6, p=0.20), comorbidities (HR 0.9, 95% 0.6-1.5, p=0.78), DAS28 (HR 0.9, 95% 0.9-1.1, p=0.93) or other factors.Figure 1.Discontinuation rate curves in patients younger and older than median age (< 53.4 and >=53.4 years old)Conclusion:This analysis did not show a role of age on discontinuation of bDMARDs in Mexican RA patients. Further longitudinal analyses will be performed including more patients to assess retention rate of bDMARDs and identify predictive variables of discontinuation in Mexican population.References:[1]Akter R, et al. Can Geriatr J. 2020 May 1;23(2):184-189.[2]Ikari Y, et al. Medicine (Baltimore). 2020 Dec 24;99(52):e23861.Disclosure of Interests:None declared

Download Full-text