scholarly journals Treatment of Rheumatoid Arthritis with Marine and Botanical Oils: An 18-Month, Randomized, and Double-Blind Trial

2014 ◽  
Vol 2014 ◽  
pp. 1-9 ◽  
Author(s):  
George W. Reed ◽  
Katherine Leung ◽  
Ronald G. Rossetti ◽  
Susan VanBuskirk ◽  
John T. Sharp ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Rheumatoid Arthritis ◽  
Disease Activity ◽  
Seed Oil ◽  
Gamma Linolenic Acid ◽  
Double Blind ◽  
Dmard Therapy ◽  
Treatment Groups ◽  
Clinical Responses ◽  
Activity Measures ◽  
Trends Over Time

Objective. To determine whether a combination of borage seed oil rich in gamma linolenic acid (GLA) and fish oil rich in eicosapentaenoic acid (EPA) and docosahexaenoic acid (DHA) is superior to either oil alone for treatment of rheumatoid arthritis (RA).Methods. Patients were randomized into a double-blind, 18-month trial. Mixed effects models compared trends over time in disease activity measures.Results. No significant differences were observed in changes in disease activity among the three randomized groups. Each group exhibited significant reductions in disease activity (DAS28) at 9 months (fish: −1.56[−2.16, −0.96], borage: −1.33[−1.83, −0.84], combined: −1.18[−1.83, −0.54]) and in CDAI (fish: −16.95[−19.91, −13.98], borage: −11.20[−14.21, −8.19], and combined: −10.31[−13.61, −7.01]). There were no significant differences in change of RA medications among the three groups. Reduced disease activity in study patients was similar to matched patients from an RA registry, and reduction in DMARD use was greater (P<0.03) in study patients.Conclusion. All 3 treatment groups exhibited similar meaningful clinical responses after 9 months, improvements which persisted for 18 months, and a response similar to matched patients from an RA registry. Study patients were able to reduce DMARD therapy given in combination with TNF antagonists to a greater extent than registry patients.

SAT0046 MODIFIED DISEASE ACTIVITY SCORE AT 3 MONTHS IS A SIGNIFICANT PREDICTOR FOR RAPID RADIOGRAPHIC PROGRESSION AT 12 MONTHS COMPARED WITH OTHER MEASURES

2020 ◽  
Vol 79 (Suppl 1) ◽  
pp. 954.1-954
Author(s):  
M. Movahedi ◽  
D. Weber ◽  
P. Akhavan ◽  
E. Keystone
Keyword(s):  
Rheumatoid Arthritis ◽  
Disease Activity ◽  
Disease Activity Score ◽  
Radiographic Progression ◽  
Activity Score ◽  
Controlled Study ◽  
Tender Joint Count ◽  
Double Blind ◽  
Activity Measures ◽  
Disease Activity Measures

Background:Progressive rheumatoid arthritis (RA) is responsible for joint damage causing disabilities with no agreement on which disease measures best predict radiographic progressionObjectives:We aimed to determine which disease activity measures including disease activity score (DAS), modified (M) DAS28 (CRP), clinical disease activity index (CDAI), and health assessment questionnaire disability index (HAQ-DI) best predict rapid radiographic progression (RRP) in early RA patients at baseline (BL) and 3 months.Methods:PREMIER data, a 2-year, multicenter, double-blind active comparator–controlled study with methotrexate (MTX) naïve RA patients and active disease <3 years, were used. Only patients in the MTX arm were analyzed. RRP was defined as change in modified total Sharp (mTSS) > 3.5 at month 12. Logistic regression analysis assessed impact of measures at BL and 3 months on RRP at 12 months. Best cut-off points of M-DAS28(CRP) was also estimated using area under the receiver operating characteristic curve.Results:149 patients were included: female (n=113; 75.8%), positive RF (n=127; 85.2%), mean (SD) age 52.9 (13.3) years, disease duration 0.8 (0.9) year, DAS28(CRP) 6.3 (0.9). After adjusting for potential confounders, only M-DAS28(CRP) at BL (adjOR=3.29; 95% CI: 1.70-6.36) and 3 months (adjOR=2.56; 95% CI: 1.43-4.56) strongly predicted RRP at 12 months. M-DAS28(CRP) 4.5 and 2.6 at BL and 3 months maximized sensitivity and specificity for prediction of RRP.Conclusion:M-DAS28(CRP) was a stronger predictor at BL and 3 months for RRP compared with other disease activity measures. Removing tender joint count and patient global assessment from DAS28(CRP) improves prediction of RRP.References:[1] Breedveld FC, Weisman MH, Kavanaugh AF, Cohen SB, Pavelka K, van Vollenhoven R, et al. The PREMIER study: A multicenter, randomized, double-blind clinical trial of combination therapy with adalimumab plus methotrexate versus methotrexate alone or adalimumab alone in patients with early, aggressive rheumatoid arthritis who had not had previous methotrexate treatment. Arthritis and rheumatism. 2006;54(1):26-37.Acknowledgments :The authors wish to knowledge AbbVie Canada Inc. for providing patients data.Disclosure of Interests:Mohammad Movahedi Consultant of: Allergan, Deborah Weber: None declared, Pooneh Akhavan: None declared, Edward Keystone Grant/research support from: AbbVie; Amgen; Gilead Sciences, Inc; Lilly Pharmaceuticals; Merck; Pfizer Pharmaceuticals; PuraPharm; Sanofi, Consultant of: AbbVie; Amgen; AstraZeneca Pharma; Bristol-Myers Squibb Company; Celltrion; F. Hoffman-La Roche Ltd.; Genentech, Inc; Gilead Sciences, Inc.; Janssen, Inc; Lilly Pharmaceuticals; Merck; Myriad Autoimmune; Pfizer Pharmaceuticals, Sandoz, Sanofi-Genzyme, Samsung Bioepsis., Speakers bureau: AbbVie; Amgen; Bristol-Myers Squibb; Celltrion; F. Hoffman-La Roche Ltd, Janssen, Inc; Merck; Pfizer Pharmaceuticals; Sanofi-Genzyme; UCB

scholarly journals POS0086 ANALYSIS OF DISEASE ACTIVITY MEASURES IN THE CONTEXT OF A METHOTREXATE WITHDRAWAL STUDY AMONG PATIENTS WITH RHEUMATOID ARTHRITIS TREATED WITH TOFACITINIB 11 MG ONCE DAILY + METHOTREXATE: POST HOC ANALYSIS OF DATA FROM ORAL SHIFT

2021 ◽  
Vol 80 (Suppl 1) ◽  
pp. 251.2-251
Author(s):  
R. Fleischmann ◽  
B. Haraoui ◽  
M. H. Buch ◽  
D. Gold ◽  
G. Sawyerr ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Disease Activity ◽  
Research Support ◽  
Open Label ◽  
Double Blind ◽  
Once Daily ◽  
Treatment Groups ◽  
Post Hoc Analysis ◽  
Activity Measures ◽  
Post Hoc ◽  
Disease Activity Measures

Background:The Phase 3b/4 study ORAL Shift demonstrated sustained efficacy and safety of tofacitinib modified-release (MR) 11 mg once daily (QD) following methotrexate (MTX) withdrawal that was non-inferior to continued tofacitinib + MTX use (per DAS28-4[ESR]), in patients (pts) with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) who achieved CDAI-defined low disease activity (LDA) with tofacitinib + MTX at Week (W)24.1Objectives:To assess the performance of alternative disease activity measures at W24 (randomisation) and W48 (study endpoint) in ORAL Shift.Methods:ORAL Shift (NCT02831855) enrolled pts aged ≥18 years with moderate to severe RA and an inadequate response to MTX. Pts received open-label tofacitinib MR 11 mg QD + MTX for 24 weeks. Achievement of CDAI LDA (≤10) at W24 was set as the criteria for entry to the 24-week double-blind MTX withdrawal phase, with pts randomised 1:1 to receive tofacitinib MR 11 mg QD + placebo (PBO) (ie blinded MTX withdrawal) or continue tofacitinib + MTX. In this post hoc analysis, efficacy analyses were performed in 8 subgroups defined by achievement of various disease activity criteria at W24: DAS28-4(ESR) remission (<2.6) or LDA (≤3.2); DAS28-4(CRP) <2.6 or ≤3.2; RAPID3 remission (≤3) or LDA (≤6); CDAI remission (≤2.8); and SDAI remission (≤3.3). For each subgroup, the proportion of pts who achieved the corresponding disease activity criterion at W48 was calculated, with a 95% confidence interval (CI) estimated using the normal approximation to the binomial distribution. The change (Δ) from W24 to W48 in least squares (LS) mean DAS28-4(ESR) and DAS28-4(CRP) was also calculated in each subgroup, with a 95% CI for the difference between treatment groups estimated using a mixed model with repeated measures. Nominal p values were calculated and are presented with no formal statistical hypothesis testing formulated.Results:Overall, 694 pts entered the open-label phase of ORAL Shift, and 530 were randomised and received treatment in the double-blind phase; 264 and 266 pts received tofacitinib + PBO and tofacitinib + MTX, respectively (Figure 1a). Considering those pts who were randomised and treated, the proportion of pts achieving each disease activity criterion at W24 varied, but was similar between treatments within each subgroup (Figure 1a). Among pts who met each disease activity criterion at W24, generally the majority of pts in both treatment groups also met the same criterion at W48 (Figure 1b). Numerically more pts receiving tofacitinib + MTX vs tofacitinib + PBO continued to meet the corresponding criterion at W48. Regardless of the disease activity criterion met at W24, differences between treatment groups in LS mean ΔDAS28-4(ESR) (Figure 1c) and ΔDAS28-4(CRP) (data not shown) from W24 to W48 favoured tofacitinib + MTX vs tofacitinib + PBO.Conclusion:This post hoc analysis of data from pts randomised and treated in ORAL Shift demonstrated that, regardless of the disease activity state criterion met at W24, generally a majority of pts receiving tofacitinib maintained achievement of the corresponding disease activity criterion at W48, with or without continued MTX. Differences between treatment groups in LS mean ΔDAS28-4(ESR) from W24 to W48, as defined by achievement of LDA or remission with a variety of disease activity measures, were less than a change of 1.2, which is considered to be the threshold for a minimal clinically important improvement.2References:[1]Cohen et al. Lancet Rheumatol 2019; 1: E23-34.[2]Ward et al. Ann Rheum Dis 2015; 74: 1691-1696.Acknowledgements:Study sponsored by Pfizer Inc. Medical writing support was provided by Gemma Turner, CMC Connect, and funded by Pfizer Inc.Disclosure of Interests:Roy Fleischmann Speakers bureau: Pfizer Inc, Consultant of: AbbVie, Amgen, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Celltrion, Eli Lilly, GlaxoSmithKline, Janssen, Novartis, Pfizer Inc, Sanofi-Aventis, UCB, Grant/research support from: AbbVie, Amgen, AstraZeneca, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Celltrion, Eli Lilly, Genentech, GlaxoSmithKline, Janssen, Novartis, Pfizer Inc, Samumed, Sanofi-Aventis, UCB, VORSO, Boulos Haraoui Speakers bureau: Amgen, Pfizer Inc, UCB, Consultant of: AbbVie, Amgen, Eli Lilly, Merck, Pfizer Inc, UCB, Grant/research support from: AbbVie, Maya H Buch Speakers bureau: AbbVie, Consultant of: AbbVie, Eli Lilly, Gilead, MSD, Pfizer Inc, Roche, Sanofi, Grant/research support from: Pfizer Inc, Roche, UCB, David Gold Shareholder of: Pfizer Inc, Employee of: Pfizer Inc, Gosford Sawyerr Consultant of: Pfizer Inc, Employee of: Syneos Health Inc, Harry Shi Shareholder of: Pfizer Inc, Employee of: Pfizer Inc, Annette Diehl Shareholder of: Pfizer Inc, Employee of: Pfizer Inc, Kristen Lee Shareholder of: Pfizer Inc, Employee of: Pfizer Inc.

scholarly journals THU0207 SUSTAINABILITY OF RESPONSE TO UPADACITINIB AS MONOTHERAPY OR IN COMBINATION AMONG PATIENTS WITH RHEUMATOID ARTHRITIS AND PRIOR INADEQUATE RESPONSE TO CONVENTIONAL SYNTHETIC DMARDS

2020 ◽  
Vol 79 (Suppl 1) ◽  
pp. 327.1-328
Author(s):  
A. Kavanaugh ◽  
M. H. Buch ◽  
B. Combe ◽  
L. Bessette ◽  
I. H. Song ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Rheumatoid Arthritis ◽  
Disease Activity ◽  
Inadequate Response ◽  
Research Support ◽  
Two Phase ◽  
First Occurrence ◽  
Activity Measures ◽  
Disease Activity Measures

Background:The primary treatment goal for patients (pts) with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) is a state of sustained clinical remission (REM) or low disease activity (LDA).1,2Objectives:To assess the long-term sustainability of responses to upadacitinib (UPA), a JAK inhibitor, with or without background csDMARD(s) in pts with RA.Methods:Data are from two phase 3 randomized, controlled trials of UPA in RA pts with roughly similar baseline disease characteristics: SELECT-NEXT enrolled pts with an inadequate response (IR) to csDMARD(s) on background stable csDMARD(s) receiving UPA 15 mg or 30 mg once daily or placebo for 12 weeks (wks); SELECT-MONOTHERAPY enrolled methotrexate (MTX)-IR pts receiving UPA 15 mg or 30 mg monotherapy or blinded MTX for 14 wks. After 12/14 wks, pts could enter a blinded long-term extension and receive UPA 15 mg or 30 mg for up to 5 years. This post hoc analysis evaluated clinical REM (CDAI ≤2.8; SDAI ≤3.3), LDA (CDAI≤10; SDAI≤11), and DAS28(CRP) <2.6/≤3.2 at first occurrence before Wk 84; additionally, these measures were evaluated at 3, 6, and 12 months after the first occurrence for the total number of pts randomized to UPA 15 mg. Sustainability of response was evaluated by Kaplan-Meier only for those pts who achieved REM/LDA and was defined as time to the earliest date of losing response at two consecutive visits or discontinuation of study drug. The predictive ability of time to clinical REM/LDA was assessed using Harrell’s concordance (c)-index (for reference, an index ~ 0.5, indicates no ability to predict; an index of 1 or -1 would be a perfect prediction). The last follow up dates were 22 March, 2018 (SELECT-NEXT) and 25 May, 2019 (SELECT-MONOTHERAPY), when all pts had reached the Wk 84 visit.Results:Through Wk 84, the percent of treated pts achieving CDAI REM/LDA was 43%/79% for those receiving UPA 15 mg with background csDMARD(s) (SELECT-NEXT) and 37%/76% for those receiving UPA 15 mg without background csDMARD(s) (SELECT-MONOTHERAPY). 35%/25% of pts randomized to UPA 15 mg with background csDMARD(s) and 27%/23% of pts randomized to UPA 15 mg without background csDMARD(s) achieved sustained CDAI REM through 6/12 months after the first occurrence. 64%/56% of pts randomized to UPA 15 mg with background csDMARD(s) and 61%/56% of pts randomized to UPA 15 mg without background csDMARD(s) achieved sustained CDAI LDA through 6/12 months after the first occurrence (Figure 1). Time to initial clinical REM/LDA did not appear to be associated with sustained disease control. The c-indices (95%CI) for CDAI REM in the UPA 15 mg with background csDMARD(s) and UPA 15 mg without background csDMARD(s) groups were 0.541 (0.47, 0.62) and 0.568 (0.49, 0.65) and that of LDA were 0.521 (0.46, 0.58) and 0.498 (0.43, 0.56), respectively. Through last follow-up visit, 55% of pts receiving UPA 15 mg with background csDMARD(s) and 62% of pts receiving UPA 15 mg without background csDMARD(s) remained in CDAI REM while 72% and 70% of pts remained in CDAI LDA, respectively (Figure 2). Similar results were observed across other disease activity measures (SDAI REM/LDA and DAS28(CRP) <2.6/≤3.2).Conclusion:More than a quarter and more than a half of pts with RA and prior IR to csDMARD(s) receiving UPA with or without background csDMARD therapy achieved sustained clinical REM and LDA, respectively, across disease activity measures. Sustainability of responses appeared comparable among pts receiving UPA with or without background csDMARDs through up to 84 wks.References:[1]EULAR: Smolen JS, et al. Ann Rheum Dis 2017;76:960–977.[2]ACR: Singh et al. Arthritis & Rheumatology Vol. 68, No. 1, January 2016, pp 1–26.Disclosure of Interests: :Arthur Kavanaugh Grant/research support from: Abbott, Amgen, AstraZeneca, BMS, Celgene Corporation, Centocor-Janssen, Pfizer, Roche, UCB – grant/research support, Maya H Buch Grant/research support from: Pfizer, Roche, and UCB, Consultant of: Pfizer; AbbVie; Eli Lilly; Gilead Sciences, Inc.; Merck-Serono; Sandoz; and Sanofi, Bernard Combe Grant/research support from: Novartis, Pfizer, Roche-Chugai, Consultant of: AbbVie; Gilead Sciences, Inc.; Janssen; Eli Lilly and Company; Pfizer; Roche-Chugai; Sanofi, Speakers bureau: Bristol-Myers Squibb; Gilead Sciences, Inc.; Eli Lilly and Company; Merck Sharp & Dohme; Pfizer; Roche-Chugai; UCB, 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, In-Ho Song Shareholder of: AbbVie Inc., Employee of: AbbVie Inc., Yanna Song Shareholder of: AbbVie Inc., Employee of: AbbVie Inc., Jessica Suboticki Shareholder of: AbbVie Inc., Employee of: AbbVie Inc., Peter Nash Grant/research support from: AbbVie, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Celgene, Eli Lilly and Company, Gilead, Janssen, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer Inc, Roche, Sanofi, UCB, Consultant of: AbbVie, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Celgene, Eli Lilly, Gilead, Janssen, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer Inc, Roche, Sanofi, UCB, Speakers bureau: AbbVie, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Celgene, Eli Lilly, Gilead, Janssen, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer Inc, Roche, Sanofi, UCB

scholarly journals Olokizumab, a monoclonal antibody against interleukin 6, in combination with methotrexate in patients with rheumatoid arthritis inadequately controlled by methotrexate: efficacy and safety results of a randomised controlled phase III study

2021 ◽  
pp. annrheumdis-2021-219876
Author(s):  
Evgeniy Nasonov ◽  
Saeed Fatenejad ◽  
Eugen Feist ◽  
Mariana Ivanova ◽  
Elena Korneva ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Rheumatoid Arthritis ◽  
Disease Activity ◽  
Activity Index ◽  
Disease Activity Index ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Double Blind Study ◽  
Efficacy And Safety ◽  
Serious Adverse Events ◽  
Double Blind ◽  
Acr20 Response

ObjectiveTo evaluate the efficacy and safety of olokizumab (OKZ) in patients with active rheumatoid arthritis despite treatment with methotrexate (MTX).MethodsIn this 24-week multicentre, placebo-controlled, double-blind study, patients were randomised 1:1:1 to receive subcutaneously administered OKZ 64 mg once every 2 weeks, OKZ 64 mg once every 4 weeks, or placebo plus MTX. The primary efficacy endpoint was the proportion of patients achieving an American College of Rheumatology 20% (ACR20) response at week 12. The secondary efficacy endpoints included percentage of subjects achieving Disease Activity Score 28-joint count based on C reactive protein <3.2, Health Assessment Questionnaire Disability Index at week 12, ACR50 response and Clinical Disease Activity Index ≤2.8 at week 24. Safety and immunogenicity were assessed throughout the study.ResultsA total of 428 patients were randomised. ACR20 responses were more frequent with OKZ every 2 weeks (63.6%) and OKZ every 4 weeks (70.4%) than placebo (25.9%) (p<0.0001 for both comparisons). There were significant differences in all secondary efficacy endpoints between OKZ-treated arms and placebo. Treatment-emergent serious adverse events (TESAEs) were reported by more patients in the OKZ groups compared with placebo. Infections were the most common TESAEs. No subjects developed neutralising antidrug antibodies.ConclusionsTreatment with OKZ was associated with significant improvement in signs, symptoms and physical function of rheumatoid arthritis without discernible differences between the two regimens. Safety was as expected for this class of agents. Low immunogenicity was observed.Trial registration numberNCT02760368.

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.

Efficacy and Safety of Belimumab in Patients with Rheumatoid Arthritis: A Phase II, Randomized, Double-blind, Placebo-controlled, Dose-ranging Study

2013 ◽  
Vol 40 (5) ◽  
pp. 579-589 ◽  
Author(s):  
William Stohl ◽  
Joan T. Merrill ◽  
James D. McKay ◽  
Jeffrey R. Lisse ◽  
Z. John Zhong ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Rheumatoid Arthritis ◽  
Disease Activity ◽  
Phase Ii ◽  
B Lymphocyte ◽  
Tumor Necrosis Factor Inhibitor ◽  
Open Label ◽  
Double Blind ◽  
Acr20 Response ◽  
Link Type ◽  
American College Of Rheumatology

Objective.To evaluate the efficacy/safety of belimumab in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA).Methods.Patients fulfilling American College of Rheumatology (ACR) criteria for RA for ≥ 1 year who had at least moderate disease activity while receiving stable disease-modifying antirheumatic drug (DMARD) therapy and failed ≥ 1 DMARD were randomly assigned to placebo or belimumab 1, 4, or 10 mg/kg, administered intravenously on Days 1, 14, and 28, and then every 4 weeks for 24 weeks (n = 283). This was followed by an optional 24-week extension (n = 237) in which all patients received belimumab. Primary efficacy endpoint was the Week 24 ACR20 response.Results.Week 24 ACR20 responses with placebo and belimumab 1, 4, and 10 mg/kg were 15.9%, 34.7% (p = 0.010), 25.4% (p = 0.168), and 28.2% (p = 0.080), respectively. Patients taking any belimumab dose who continued with belimumab in the open-label extension had an ACR20 response of 41% at 48 weeks. A similar ACR20 response (42%) at 48 weeks was seen in patients taking placebo who switched in the extension to belimumab 10 mg/kg. Greater response rates were observed in patients who at baseline were rheumatoid factor-positive, anticitrullinated protein antibody-positive, or tumor necrosis factor inhibitor-naive, or had elevated C-reactive protein levels, Disease Activity Score 28 > 5.1, or low B lymphocyte stimulator levels (< 0.858 ng/ml). Adverse event rates were similar across treatment groups.Conclusion.In this phase II trial, belimumab demonstrated efficacy and was generally well tolerated in patients with RA who had failed previous therapies. [ClinicalTrials.gov identifier NCT00071812]

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document