scholarly journals Efficacy and safety of tofacitinib versus baricitinib in patients with rheumatoid arthritis in real clinical practice: analyses with propensity score-based inverse probability of treatment weighting

2021 ◽  
pp. annrheumdis-2020-219699
Author(s):  
Yusuke Miyazaki ◽  
Kazuhisa Nakano ◽  
Shingo Nakayamada ◽  
Satoshi Kubo ◽  
Yoshino Inoue ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Rheumatoid Arthritis ◽  
Clinical Practice ◽  
Propensity Score ◽  
Disease Activity ◽  
Selection Bias ◽  
Janus Kinase ◽  
Jak Inhibitors ◽  
Treatment Resistant ◽  
Inverse Probability ◽  
Resistant Group

ObjectivesThe differences of efficacy between each Janus kinase (JAK) inhibitors have not been clarified in the patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) in clinical practice. Here, we compared the efficacy between tofacitinib (TOFA) and baricitinib (BARI) in clinical practice.MethodsThe efficacy of TOFA (n=156) in patients with RA was compared with BARI (n=138). Selection bias was reduced to a minimum using propensity score-based inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW). The Clinical Disease Activity Index (CDAI) trajectory for patients who started TOFA or BARI was analysed using growth mixture modelling (GMM).ResultsNo significant difference was observed in patient characteristics between the TOFA and BARI groups in after adjustment by propensity score-based IPTW. The BARI group had a significantly higher rate of CDAI remission at week 24 after the introduction of JAK inhibitors than the TOFA group. The treatment-resistant group defined by GMM, comprising patients who did not achieve low disease activity at week 24, was more likely to include those who had received many biological disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (bDMARDs) before the introduction of JAK inhibitors and those who received TOFA. Among patients with RA who received TOFA, those who had received ≥4 bDMARDs before the introduction of TOFA were more likely to be classified into the treatment-resistant group.ConclusionsBARI showed a similar safety profile and better clinical outcome when compared with TOFA after reduction to a minimum of selection bias. However, these were observed in a small population. Accordingly, further investigation is required in an accurately powered head-to-head trial.

scholarly journals Predictors for clinical effectiveness of baricitinib in rheumatoid arthritis patients in routine clinical practice: data from a Japanese multicenter registry

2020 ◽  
Vol 10 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Nobunori Takahashi ◽  
Shuji Asai ◽  
Tomonori Kobayakawa ◽  
Atsushi Kaneko ◽  
Tatsuo Watanabe ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Rheumatoid Arthritis ◽  
Clinical Practice ◽  
Disease Activity ◽  
Retention Rate ◽  
Oral Prednisone ◽  
Multivariate Logistic Regression Analysis ◽  
Jak Inhibitors ◽  
Short Term ◽  
History Of ◽  
Multicenter Registry

AbstractThis study aimed to evaluate the short-term effectiveness and safety profiles of baricitinib and explore factors associated with improved short-term effectiveness in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) in clinical settings. A total of 113 consecutive RA patients who had been treated with baricitinib were registered in a Japanese multicenter registry and followed for at least 24 weeks. Mean age was 66.1 years, mean RA disease duration was 14.0 years, 71.1% had a history of use of biologics or JAK inhibitors (targeted DMARDs), and 48.3% and 40.0% were receiving concomitant methotrexate and oral prednisone, respectively. Mean DAS28-CRP significantly decreased from 3.55 at baseline to 2.32 at 24 weeks. At 24 weeks, 68.2% and 64.1% of patients achieved low disease activity (LDA) and moderate or good response, respectively. Multivariate logistic regression analysis revealed that no previous targeted DMARD use and lower DAS28-CRP score at baseline were independently associated with achievement of LDA at 24 weeks. While the effectiveness of baricitinib was similar regardless of whether patients had a history of only one or multiple targeted DMARDs use, patients with previous use of non-TNF inhibitors or JAK inhibitors showed lower rates of improvement in DAS28-CRP. The overall retention rate for baricitinib was 86.5% at 24 weeks, as estimated by Kaplan–Meier analysis. The discontinuation rate due to adverse events was 6.5% at 24 weeks. Baricitinib significantly improved RA disease activity in clinical practice. Baricitinib was significantly more effective when used as a first-line targeted DMARDs.

scholarly journals Risk of venous thromboembolism associated with Janus kinase inhibitors for rheumatoid arthritis: case presentation and literature review

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Shunsuke Mori ◽  
Fumihiko Ogata ◽  
Ryusuke Tsunoda
Keyword(s):  
Rheumatoid Arthritis ◽  
Diabetes Mellitus ◽  
Risk Factors ◽  
Pulmonary Embolism ◽  
Venous Thromboembolism ◽  
Disease Activity ◽  
Janus Kinase ◽  
Advanced Age ◽  
Jak Inhibitors ◽  
Increased Risk

AbstractJanus kinase (JAK) inhibitors have been developed as disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs. Despite the positive therapeutic impacts of JAK inhibitors, concerns have been raised regarding the risk of venous thromboembolism (VTE), such as deep vein thrombosis (DVT) and pulmonary embolism (PE). A recent post hoc safety analysis of placebo-controlled trials of JAK inhibitors in rheumatoid arthritis (RA) reported an imbalance in the incidence of VTE for a 4-mg daily dose of baricitinib versus placebo. In a recent postmarketing surveillance trial for RA, a significantly higher incidence of PE was reported in treatment with tofacitinib (10 mg twice daily) compared with tofacitinib 5 mg or tumor necrosis factor inhibitors. We also experienced a case of massive PE occurring 3 months after starting baricitinib (4 mg once daily) for multiple biologic-resistant RA. Nevertheless, the evidence to support the role of JAK inhibitors in VTE risk remains insufficient. There are a number of predisposing conditions and risk factors for VTE. In addition to the known risk factors that can provoke VTE, advanced age, obesity, diabetes mellitus, hypertension, hyperlipidemia, and smoking can also contribute to its development. Greater VTE risk is noted in patients with chronic inflammatory conditions, particularly RA patients with uncontrolled disease activity and any comorbidity. Prior to the initiation of JAK inhibitors, clinicians should consider both the number and strength of VTE risk factors for each patient. In addition, clinicians should advise patients to seek prompt medical help if they develop clinical signs and symptoms that suggest VTE/PE. Key Points• Patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) are at increased risk of venous thromboembolism (VTE), especially those with uncontrolled, high disease activity and those with comorbidities.• In addition to the well-known risk factors that provoke VTE events, advanced age and cardiovascular risk factors, such as obesity, diabetes mellitus, hypertension, hyperlipidemia, and smoking, should be considered risk factors for VTE.• Although a signal of VTE/pulmonary embolism (PE) risk with JAK inhibitors has been noted in RA patients who are already at high risk, the evidence is currently insufficient to support the increased risk of VTE during RA treatment with JAK inhibitors.• If there are no suitable alternatives, clinicians should prescribe JAK inhibitors with caution, considering both the strength of individual risk factors and the cumulative weight of all risk factors for each patient.

scholarly journals POS0674 DIRECT COMPARISON OF EFFECTIVENESS AND SAFETY OF TOFACITINIB AND BARICITINIB IN PATIENTS WITH RHEUMATOID ARTHRITIS IN REAL-WORLD SETTINGS

2021 ◽  
Vol 80 (Suppl 1) ◽  
pp. 581.3-581
Author(s):  
N. Iwamoto ◽  
T. Suzuki ◽  
A. Okada ◽  
K. Fujikawa ◽  
T. Aramaki ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Rheumatoid Arthritis ◽  
Propensity Score ◽  
Disease Activity ◽  
Clinical Response ◽  
Treatment Response ◽  
Real World ◽  
Jak Inhibitors ◽  
Low Disease Activity ◽  
Real World Setting ◽  
Significant Difference

Background:Tofacitinib is a non-selective first-generation JAK inhibitor and baricitinib was approved for the treatment of Rheumatoid arthritis several years after approve of tofacitinib. Randomized controlled trials have shown good treatment response for RA in these two drugs. However, the evaluation of these two drugs in real-world setting have been rarely reported, moreover, until now, no published data of a direct comparison among JAK inhibitors in RA have been available.Objectives:To compare the efficacy and safety of the JAK inhibitors tofacitinib and baricitinib in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) by using propensity score matching in a real-world setting.Methods:A total of 242 patients with RA who were treated with tofacitinib (n=161) or baricitinib (n=81) were enrolled. To avoid confounding, we performed propensity score matching based on multiple baseline characteristic variables, and then 80 baricitinib-treated patients and 57 tofacitinib-treated patients were extracted for the direct comparison. A mixed effect model with a repeated measures analysis of variance (ANOVA) was performed to ascertain whether there were significant differences in clinical efficacy between the two treatment groups during the treatment period.Finally, We evaluated the predictive factor of clinical responses by performing univariate and multivariable logistic regression analyses.Results:The mean delta disease activity scores (DAS)28-ESR from baseline to 6 months were −1.60 (tofacitinib) and −1.46 (baricitinib). The remission rate defined by the DAS28-ESR at 24 weeks were 21.1% (tofacitinib) and 25.0% (baricitinib). There was no significant difference in the clinical response between the baricitinib-treated and tofacitinib-treated groups. Although there was no significant difference, the concomitant use of methotrexate (MTX) showed better clinical efficacy in the cases of baricitinib treatment as compared with in the case of tofacitinib treatment. In both groups, the most common AE was herpes zoster infection, and the AE rates were similar between the two groups. However, the predictive factors contributing to clinical response differed. The concomitant use of oral steroid was independently associated with the achievement of DAS-low disease activity in both groups, whereas in the baricitinib group, the number of biological and/or targeted synthetic DMARDs previously used and the DAS28-ESR at the time of initiation were associated with DAS-low disease activity.Conclusion:This study indicate that tofacitinib and baricitinib had comparable efficacies and safety profiles in a real-world setting. However, the influence of clinical characteristics on the treatment response differed between these two drugs. Direct comparison between two JAK inhibitors provide useful information to optimal use of JAK inhibitors in real-world settings.Disclosure of Interests:None declared

scholarly journals POS0677 THE ROLE OF MUSCULOSKELETAL ULTRASOUND IN PREDICTING THE RESPONSE TO JAK INHIBITORS: RESULTS FROM A LARGE MONOCENTRIC COHORT

2021 ◽  
Vol 80 (Suppl 1) ◽  
pp. 583-583
Author(s):  
C. Garufi ◽  
F. Ceccarelli ◽  
F. R. Spinelli ◽  
S. Mancuso ◽  
C. Pirone ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Rheumatoid Arthritis ◽  
Disease Activity ◽  
Structural Damage ◽  
Power Doppler ◽  
Response To Treatment ◽  
Jak Inhibitors ◽  
Inflammatory Score ◽  
Inflammatory Status

Background:In the management of chronic arthritis, such as Rheumatoid Arthritis (RA), Ultrasound (US) assessment can provide relevant information about the joint inflammatory status in the diagnostic phase and even more in the monitoring of disease activity and structural damage1,2.Objectives:In this longitudinal study, we aimed to assesse the role of US in predicting the efficacy of JAK-inhibitors (JAKi) in RA patients.Methods:We enrolled RA patients starting baricitinib or tofacitinib. All patients were evaluated at baseline and after 4, 12, 24, 48 weeks. Disease activity was calculated by DAS28CRP. US examination in 22 joints (I–V MCPs and PIPs, wrists) aimed at evaluating inflammatory features (synovial effusion and hypertrophy, power Doppler-PD), through a semi-quantitative scale (0-3). The total US (0-198) and PD (0-66) scores were calculated. We scanned bilateral flexor (I–V fingers of hands) and extensor compartments (1-6) tendons: tenosynovitis was scored as absent/present (0/1), resulting in a total score (0-22).Results:We studied 102 patients (M/F 15/87; median age 59.2 years, IQR 17.75; median disease duration 144 months, IQR 126), 61 treated with baricitinib and 41 with tofacitinib. At baseline, the median total US score was 18 (IQR 19) and the median PD score 2 (4). We observed a significant reduction in both total and PD US scores at all time-points (p<0.0001) (Figure 1). At baseline, 75.4% of patients showed tenosynovitis involving at least one tendon, with a median score of 2 (IQR 3.5) significantly decreasing after 24 weeks (p=0.02). Multivariate analysis, adjusted for baseline DAS28CRP and other concomitant treatments (including glucocorticoids and methotrexate treatment), confirmed the independent association between baseline US (PD and tenosynovitis) scores and the reduction of disease activity at follow-up evaluations.Conclusion:The present study confirmed the early efficacy of JAKi in RA patients by using US evaluation. Furthermore, power doppler and tenosynovitis scores could play a predictive role in response to treatment.References:[1]MUELLER RB, HASLER C, POPP F, et al. Effectiveness, Tolerability, and Safety of Tofacitinib in Rheumatoid Arthritis: A Retrospective Analysis of Real-World Data from the St. Gallen and Aarau Cohorts. J Clin Med. 2019;8(10):1548.[2]COLEBATCH AN, EDWARDS CJ, ØSTERGAARD M, et al. EULAR recommendations for the use of imaging of the joints in the clinical management of rheumatoid arthritis. Ann Rheum Dis. 2013;72(6):804-14.Figure 1.Ultrasound inflammatory score (a) and Ultrasound Power Doppler (PD) score (b) at baseline and follow-up.Table 1.Baseline characteristics of 414 RA patients.WEEKS04122448US inflammatory score18 (19)11 (15.5)9.5 (11.7)7.5 (8)6 (11)US PD score2 (4)0 (2)0 (1)0 (1)0 (0.7)Disclosure of Interests:Cristina Garufi: None declared, Fulvia Ceccarelli: None declared, Francesca Romana Spinelli Speakers bureau: Abbvie, Eli Lilly, Consultant of: Gilead/Galapagos, Eli Lilly, Grant/research support from: Pfizer, Silvia Mancuso: None declared, Carmelo Pirone: None declared, Fabrizio Conti Speakers bureau: Abbvie, Eli Lilly, Sanofi, Pfizer, Consultant of: Gilead/Galapagos

scholarly journals AB0304 IMMUNOGENICITY OF BIOLOGIC DRUGS IN THE CLINICAL PRACTICE IN THE BULGARIAN POPULATION OF PATIENTS SUFFERING FROM RHEUMATOID ARTHRITIS

2020 ◽  
Vol 79 (Suppl 1) ◽  
pp. 1451.3-1451
Author(s):  
K. Kraev ◽  
M. Geneva-Popova ◽  
S. Popova
Keyword(s):  
Rheumatoid Arthritis ◽  
Clinical Practice ◽  
Disease Activity ◽  
Clinical Response ◽  
Neutralizing Antibodies ◽  
Tnf Alpha ◽  
Drug Bioavailability ◽  
Drug Induced ◽  
Etanercept Treatment ◽  
Markers Of Inflammation

Background:Biological drugs are protein derivatives that, as such, are highly immunogenic. In recent years there have been many conflicting opinions about the role of drug immunogenicity in clinical practice.Objectives:To evaluate the drug immunogenicity of TNF-alpha blocking drugs (etanercept and adalimumab) used to treat patients with rheumatoid arthritis. To determine whether their presence can alter the effect of treatment and to evaluate their role in the clinical practice of rheumatologists.Methods:121 patients with rheumatoid arthritis, as well as 31 healthy controls, similar in sex and age, were examined. They were all monitored at 0, 6, 12 and 24 months from the start of TNF-alpha blocker treatment. Demographics, vital signs, markers of inflammation such as C-reactive protein (CRP), erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR) and disease activity indices were examined at each visit, respectively. Drug-induced neutralizing antibodies, as well as drug bioavailability in patients treated with adalimumab, were examined by ELISA.Results:Drug-induced neutralizing antibodies to adalimumab were detected in 11.57% of patients at 6 month, in 17.64% of patients at 12 month, and 24.8% at 24 month. Drug-induced neutralizing antibodies to etanercept were not detected at 6 months, at 7.77% at 12 months, at 9.63% of patients at 24 months. Of the adalimumab patients who were having drug-induced antibodies, 92.59% had low drug bioavailability, while the remaining 7.41% of patients showed normal drug bioavailability despite the presence of drug-induced neutralizing antibodies. In terms of worsening of the disease activity, a positive correlation was found with the presence of drug antibodies - Pearson Correlation = 0.701, p = 0.001. Patients with poor clinical response and available drug antibodies receiving adalimumab were slightly more than those treated with etanercept at 12 and 24 months but the difference is non-significant-U = 0.527, p> 0.05 and U = 0.623, p> 0.05, respectively.Conclusion:Presence of drug-induced neutralizing antibodies in patients treated with adalimumab and etanercept has been associated with poor clinical response and worsening of the patient’s condition. Testing of drug-induced neutralizing antibodies as well as the drug bioavailability of the drug used can be used as reliable biomarkers in clinical rheumatology.References:[1]Benucci M., F.Li Gobbi, M. Meacii et al., “Antidrug antibodies against TNF-blocking agents: correlations between disese activity, hypersensitivity reactions, and different classes of immunoglobulins”, Biologics and Targets and Therapy, 2015: 9 7 -2.[2]Chen D., Y. Chen, W. Tsai et al., “ Significant associations of antidrug antibody levels with serum drug trough levels and therapeutic response of adalimumab and etanercept treatment in rheumatoid arthritis”, Ann Rheum Dis. 2015 Mar; 74 (3).[3]Kalden J. and H. Schulze-Koops, “ Immunogenicity and loss of response to TNF inhibitors: implications for rheumatoid arthritis treatment ”, Nature Reviews Rheumatology, 2017 volume 13, 707–718.[4]Wolf-Henning Boehnck, N. Brembilla, “ Immunogenicity of biological therapies: causes and consequences, ” Expert Review of Clinical Immunology, Vol 14, 2018, Issue 6, 513-523Disclosure of Interests:None declared

scholarly journals Switching first-line targeted therapy after not reaching low disease activity within 6 months is superior to conservative approach: a propensity score-matched analysis from the ATTRA registry

2021 ◽  
Vol 23 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Lucie Nekvindová ◽  
Jiří Vencovský ◽  
Karel Pavelka ◽  
Pavel Horák ◽  
Zlatuše Křístková ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Practice ◽  
Targeted Therapy ◽  
Propensity Score ◽  
Disease Activity ◽  
Treatment Response ◽  
Daily Clinical Practice ◽  
Current Therapy ◽  
First Line ◽  
Treatment Target ◽  
Low Disease Activity

Abstract Background Treat-to-target (T2T) is a widely accepted strategy for patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA). It recommends attaining a goal of at least low disease activity (LDA) within 6 months; otherwise, the current therapy should be modified. We aimed to investigate whether switching a first-line targeted therapy (TT) in patients not reaching LDA within 6 months leads to a higher probability of meeting LDA at the 12-month visit in daily clinical practice using data from Czech registry ATTRA. Methods We included patients with RA starting the first-line TT from 1 January 2012 to 31 January 2017 with at least 1-year follow-up. We created four mutually exclusive cohorts based on (1) switching to another TT within the first year and (2) reaching a treatment target (DAS28-ESR ≤ 3.2) at the 6-month visit. The primary outcome was the comparison of odds for reaching remission (REM) or LDA at the 12-month visit between patients switching and not switching TT after not reaching treatment target at 6 months. Before using logistic regression to estimate the odds ratio, we employed the propensity score to match patients at the 6-month visit. Results A total of 1275 patients were eligible for the analysis. Sixty-two patients switched within the first 5 months of the treatment before evaluating treatment response at the 6-month visit (C1); 598 patients reached the treatment target within 6 months of therapy (C2); 124 patients did not reach treatment response at 6-month visit and switched to another therapy (C3), and 491 patients continued with the same treatment despite not reaching LDA at the 6-month visit (C4). We matched 75 patients from cohort C3 and 75 patients from C4 using the propensity score. Patients following the T2T principle (C3) showed 2.8 (95% CI 1.4–5.8; p = 0.005) times increased likelihood of achieving REM/LDA at the 12-month visit compared to patients not following the T2T strategy (C4). Conclusions In daily clinical practice, the application of the T2T strategy is underused. Switching TT after not reaching REM/LDA within the first 6 months leads to a higher probability of achieving REM/LDA in RA patients at the 12-month visit.

scholarly journals AB0337 TOFACITINIB MONOTHERAPY OR COMBINED WITH METHOTREXATE IN PATIENTS WITH RHEUMATOID ARTHRITIS SHOW SIMILAR RETENTION OVER FOUR YEARS. REPORT FROM RHUMADATA ®

2020 ◽  
Vol 79 (Suppl 1) ◽  
pp. 1467.1-1467
Author(s):  
D. Choquette ◽  
L. Bessette ◽  
L. Choquette Sauvageau ◽  
I. Ferdinand ◽  
B. Haraoui ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Rheumatoid Arthritis ◽  
Disease Activity ◽  
Real World ◽  
Treatment Initiation ◽  
Retention Rate ◽  
Janus Kinase ◽  
P Value ◽  
Research Support ◽  
Medication Discontinuation ◽  
Kaplan Meier

Background:Since the introduction of biologic agents around the turn of the century, the scientific evidence shows that the majority of agents, independent of the therapeutic target, have a better outcome when used in combination with methotrexate (MTX). In 2014, tofacitinib (TOFA), an agent targeting Janus kinase 1 and 3, has reached the Canadian market with data showing that the combination with MTX may not be necessary [1,2].Objectives:To evaluate the efficacy and retention rate of TOFA in real-world patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA).Methods:Two cohorts of patients prescribed TOFA was created. The first cohort was formed of patients who were receiving MTX concomitantly with TOFA (COMBO) and the other of patients using TOFA in monotherapy (MONO). MONO patients either never use MTX or were prescribed MTX post-TOFA initiation for at most 20% of the time they were on TOFA. COMBO patients received MTX at the time of TOFA initiation or were prescribed MTX post-TOFA initiation for at least 80% of the time. For all those patients, baseline demographic data definitions. Disease activity score and HAQ-DI were compared from the initiation of TOFA to the last visit. Time to medication discontinuation was extracted, and survival was estimated using Kaplan-Meier calculation for MONO and COMBO cohorts.Results:Overall, 194 patients were selected. Most were women (83%) on average younger than the men (men: 62.6 ± 11.0 years vs. women: 56.9 ± 12.1 years, p-value=0.0130). The patient’s assessments of global disease activity, pain and fatigue were respectively 5.0 ± 2.7, 5.2 ± 2.9, 5.1 ± 3.1 in the COMBO group and 6.2 ± 2.5, 6.5 ± 2.6, 6.3 ± 2.8 in the MONO group all differences being significant across groups. HAQ-DI at treatment initiation was 1.3 ± 0.7 and 1.5 ± 0.7 in the COMBO and MONO groups, respectively, p-value=0.0858. Similarly, the SDAI score at treatment initiation was 23.9 ± 9.4 and 25.2 ± 11.5, p-value=0.5546. Average changes in SDAI were -13.4 ± 15.5 (COMBO) and -8.9 ± 13.5 (MONO), p-value=0.1515, and changes in HAQ -0.21 ± 0.63 and -0.26 ± 0.74, p-value 0.6112. At treatment initiation, DAS28(4)ESR were 4.4 ± 1.4 (COMBO) and 4.6 ± 1.3 (MONO), p-value 0.5815, with respective average changes of -1.06 ± 2.07 and -0.70 ± 1.96, p-value=0.2852. The Kaplan-Meier analysis demonstrated that the COMBO and MONO retention curves were not statistically different (log-rank p-value=0.9318).Conclusion:Sustainability of TOFA in MONO or COMBO are not statistically different as are the changes in DAS28(4)ESR and SDAI. Despite this result, some patients may still benefit from combination with MTX.References:[1]Product Monograph - XELJANZ ® (tofacitinib) tablets for oral administration Initial U.S. Approval: 2012.[2] Reed GW, Gerber RA, Shan Y, et al. Real-World Comparative Effectiveness of Tofacitinib and Tumor Necrosis Factor Inhibitors as Monotherapy and Combination Therapy for Treatment of Rheumatoid Arthritis [published online ahead of print, 2019 Nov 9].Rheumatol Ther. 2019;6(4):573–586. doi:10.1007/s40744-019-00177-4.Disclosure of Interests:Denis Choquette Grant/research support from: Rhumadata is supported by grants from Pfizer, Amgen, Abbvie, Gylead, BMS, Novartis, Sandoz, eli Lilly,, Consultant of: Pfizer, Amgen, Abbvie, Gylead, BMS, Novartis, Sandoz, eli Lilly,, Speakers bureau: Pfizer, Amgen, Abbvie, Gylead, BMS, Novartis, Sandoz, eli Lilly,, Louis Bessette Grant/research support from: AbbVie, Amgen, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Celgene, Eli Lilly, Janssen, Merck, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, Sanofi, UCB Pharma, Consultant of: AbbVie, Amgen, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Celgene, Eli Lilly, Janssen, Merck, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, Sanofi, UCB Pharma, Speakers bureau: AbbVie, Amgen, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Celgene, Eli Lilly, Janssen, Merck, Novartis, Pfizer, Sanofi, Loïc Choquette Sauvageau: None declared, Isabelle Ferdinand Consultant of: Pfizer, Abbvie, Amgen, Novartis, Speakers bureau: Pfizer, Amgen, Boulos Haraoui Grant/research support from: Abbvie, Amgen, Pfizer, UCB, Grant/research support from: AbbVie, Amgen, BMS, Janssen, Pfizer, Roche, and UCB, Consultant of: Abbvie, Amgen, Lilly, Pfizer, Sandoz, UCB, Consultant of: AbbVie, Amgen, BMS, Celgene, Eli Lilly, Janssen, Merck, Pfizer, Roche, and UCB, Speakers bureau: Pfizer, Speakers bureau: Amgen, BMS, Janssen, Pfizer, and UCB, Frédéric Massicotte Consultant of: Abbvie, Janssen, Lilly, Pfizer, Speakers bureau: Janssen, Jean-Pierre Pelletier Shareholder of: ArthroLab Inc., Grant/research support from: TRB Chemedica, Speakers bureau: TRB Chemedica and Mylan, Jean-Pierre Raynauld Consultant of: ArthroLab Inc., Marie-Anaïs Rémillard Consultant of: Abbvie, Amgen, Eli Lilly, Novartis, Pfizer, Sandoz, Paid instructor for: Abbvie, Amgen, Eli Lilly, Novartis, Pfizer, Sandoz, Speakers bureau: Abbvie, Amgen, Eli Lilly, Novartis, Pfizer, Sandoz, Diane Sauvageau: None declared, Édith Villeneuve Consultant of: Abbvie, Amgen, BMS, Celgene, Pfizer, Roche, Sanofi-Genzyme,UCB, Paid instructor for: Abbvie, Speakers bureau: AbbVie, BMS, Pfizer, Roche, Louis Coupal: None declared

scholarly journals Measures of Rheumatoid Arthritis Disease Activity in Australian Clinical Practice

2011 ◽  
Vol 2011 ◽  
pp. 1-7 ◽  
Author(s):  
Andrew Taylor ◽  
Hanish Bagga
Keyword(s):  
Rheumatoid Arthritis ◽  
Clinical Practice ◽  
Disease Activity ◽  
Disease Process ◽  
Biological Agent ◽  
Rheumatoid Arthritis Disease Activity ◽  
Retrospective Audit ◽  
Rheumatoid Arthritis Disease ◽  
Activity Measures ◽  
Disease Activity Measures

Objectives. To investigate which rheumatoid arthritis (RA) disease activity measures are being collected in patients receiving glucocorticoids, non-biologic or biologic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs) in Australian rheumatology practice. Methods. A retrospective audit of medical records was conducted from eight rheumatology practices around Australia. Each rheumatologist recruited 30 consecutive eligible patients into the review, 10 of whom must have been receiving a biological agent for rheumatoid arthritis. Disease activity measures and radiographic assessments were collected from each patient's last consultation. For biologic patients, disease activity measures were also collected from when the patient was first initiated on the biological agent. Results. At last consultation, the disease measures that were recorded most often were ESR (89.2%), haemoglobin (87.5%), and CRP (84.2%). DAS28 was infrequently recorded (16.3%). The rate of recording disease activity measures for patients receiving biologic DMARDs decreased over time (mean 27 months). Conclusion. This review has shown inconsistency of RA activity measures being recorded in Australian rheumatology clinical practice. An accurate assessment of the disease process is necessary to effectively target rheumatoid arthritis patients to treat in order to achieve optimal outcomes.

scholarly journals POS0578 CORRELATION BETWEEN EXPRESSION LEVELS OF MIR-155 AND MIR-223 IN SYNOVIAL FLUID AND ULTRASOUND SCORES FOR ACTIVE SYNOVITIS IN RHEUMATOID ARTHRITIS PATIENTS

2021 ◽  
Vol 80 (Suppl 1) ◽  
pp. 522.3-523
Author(s):  
R. Shumnalieva ◽  
D. Kachakova ◽  
R. Kaneva ◽  
Z. Kolarov ◽  
S. Monov
Keyword(s):  
Rheumatoid Arthritis ◽  
Gene Expression ◽  
Clinical Practice ◽  
Synovial Fluid ◽  
Disease Activity ◽  
Power Doppler ◽  
Joint Inflammation ◽  
Expression Levels ◽  
Ultrasound Features ◽  
Local Expression

Background:MicroRNAs (miRNAs) are a class of small, non-coding RNAs that negatively regulate gene expression at posttranscriptional level. In rheumatoid arthritis studies have shown that miRNA are differentially expressed systemically as well as locally in the inflamed joints [1,2]. The correlation between their systemic or local expression levels and scores for disease activity and progression in RA make them possible candidate for biomarkers in the clinical practice.Objectives:To analyze the expression levels of miR-155 and miR-223 in synovial fluid (SF) from RA patients in regard to the ultrasound scores for disease activity.Methods:A total number of 48 RA patients according to the 1987 ACR criteria were included in the study. Expression levels of miR-155 and miR-223 SF were determined by qPCR (SybrGreen technology) and compared to healthy controls (HCs). Relative changes of gene expression levels of the studied miRNAs were calculated by 2-ΔΔCt method. Musculoskeletal ultrasound (MSUS) examination was performed by two independent examiners on ESAOTE, MyLab60 using both grey scale and power Doppler technic. A semi-quantitative assessment of the peripheral joints was performed for detecting joint inflammation and determining the grade of synovial thickening and the degree of vascularization. Ultrasound features for active disease were correlated to the local expression of the studied miRNAs. SPSS was used for statistical analysis.Results:RA SF showed overexpression of miR-155 (in 79.17%, p=1.63x10-4) and of miR-223 (in 79.17%, p=1.64x10-3) when compared to HCs and both miRNAs could be used to differentiate RA patients from HCs (р=8.0х10-5 and р=2.8х10-4, respectively). When we analyzed the correlation between the diagnosis, the expression of miRNAs and the changes on the musculoskeletal ultrasound examination we found a statistically significant correlation between the presence of synovitis and the degree of the power Doppler signal on MSUS and the local expression of miR-223 (p=6.19 x 10-4 and p=0.003, respectively). SF levels of miR-223 correlated also with the degree of synovial hypertrophy on MSUS (p=0.013). The results for miRNA-155 were not statistically significant.Conclusion:The correlation between the local expression of miR-223 and the ultrasound features of active joint inflammation shows that this miRNA might be a better candidate for local disease biomarker than miR-155. Further analysis with larger sets is needed to confirm if altered local miRNA expression could be used in the clinical practice as biomarker for disease activity especially in cases with subclinical synovitis.References:[1]Filková M, Aradi B, Šenolt L, et al. Association of circulating miR-223 and miR-16 with disease activity in patients with early rheumatoid arthritis. ARD, 2014; 73: 1898-1904.[2]Kriegsmann, M., Randau, T.M., Gravius, S. et al. Expression of miR-146a, miR-155, and miR-223 in formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded synovial tissues of patients with rheumatoid arthritis and osteoarthritis. Virchows Arch, 2016; 469, 93–100.Acknowledgements:The study was supported by Grant 14-D/2012 and Grant 60/2013 funded by Medical University-Sofia.Disclosure of Interests:Russka Shumnalieva: None declared, Darina Kachakova: None declared, Radka Kaneva: None declared, Zlatimir Kolarov Speakers bureau: Amgen, Pfizer, Novartis, Abbvie, Roche, Astra-Zeneka, Simeon Monov Speakers bureau: Amgen, Pfizer, Novartis, Abbvie, Roche, Astra-Zeneka

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document