scholarly journals Treatment patterns and achievement of the treat-to-target goals in a real-life rheumatoid arthritis patient cohort: data from 1317 patients

2020 ◽  
Vol 12 ◽  
pp. 1759720X2093713
Author(s):  
Konstantinos Thomas ◽  
Argiro Lazarini ◽  
Evripidis Kaltsonoudis ◽  
Alexandros Drosos ◽  
Ioannis Papalopoulos ◽  
...  

Background: Data regarding the real-life predictors of low disease activity (LDA) in rheumatoid arthritis (RA) patients are limited. Our aim was to evaluate the rate and predictors of LDA and treatment patterns in RA. Methods: This was a multicenter, prospective, RA cohort study where patients were evaluated in two different time points approximately 12 months apart. Statistical analysis was performed in order to identify predictors of LDA while patterns of disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drug [DMARDs; conventional synthetic (csDMARD) or biologic (bDMARD)] and glucocorticoid (GC) use were also recorded. Results: The total number of patients included was 1317 (79% females, mean age: 62.9 years, mean disease duration: 10.3 years). After 1 year, 57% had achieved LDA (DAS28ESR<3.2) while 43% did not (34%: moderate disease activity: DAS28ESR ⩾3.2 to <5.1, 9%: high disease activity, DAS28ESR ⩾5.1). By multivariate analysis, male sex was positively associated with LDA [odds ratio (OR) = 2.29 p < 0.001] whereas advanced age (OR = 0.98, p = 0.005), high Health Assessment Questionnaire (HAQ) score (OR = 0.57, p < 0.001), use of GCs (OR = 0.75, p = 0.037) or ⩾2 bDMARDs (OR = 0.61, p = 0.002), high co-morbidity index (OR = 0.86, p = 0.011) and obesity (OR = 0.62, p = 0.002) were negative predictors of LDA. During follow-up, among active patients (DAS28ESR >3.2), 21% initiated (among csDMARDs users) and 22% switched (among bDMARDs users) their bDMARDs. Conclusion: In a real-life RA cohort, during 1 year of follow-up, 43% of patients do not reach treatment targets while only ~20% of those with active RA started or switched their bDMARDs. Male sex, younger age, lower HAQ, body mass index and co-morbidity index were independent factors associated with LDA while use of GCs or ⩾2 bDMARDs were negative predictors.

2021 ◽  
Vol 80 (Suppl 1) ◽  
pp. 872.1-872
Author(s):  
F. Ingegnoli ◽  
A. F. Luppino ◽  
G. Cincinelli ◽  
E. Favalli ◽  
R. Caporali

Background:Despite significant improvement in the RA management, up to twenty percent of patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) have a difficult-to-treat (D2T) disease. The COVID-19 related mitigation policies, for instance quarantine, and consequent difficult access to in-person visits, laboratory and imaging investigations, adversely affected the follow up of rheumatic patients. Although pandemic-imposed limitations could have negatively influenced disease management particularly in D2T patients, to what degree these restrictions affected the treat-to target (T2T) and tight-control strategy in this subgroup of RA patients has not been investigated yet.Objectives:To evaluate whether the switch to telehealth imposed by COVID-19 pandemic was effective in the management of D2T RA patients treated with targeted therapies.Methods:This observational retrospective real-life study was conducted from November 2019 through September 2020. Among RA patients treated with targeted therapies, RA D2T patients according to EULAR definition (1) were identified. Clinical Disease Activity Index (CDAI) of these patients was analysed retrospectively before, during and after lockdown (LD). During LD period, patients could choose whether to receive home drug delivery or to maintain their face-to-face consultations, and in the former rheumatologists provided virtual care. To evaluate the effect of LD on the percentage of patients in remission, logistic mixed effects regression models were fitted, with CDAI remission as response variable.Results:Data were extracted from a longitudinal observational registry, and at baseline, 52 patients treated with targeted therapies were classified as D2T RA. Among them, during pre-LD, LD, and post-LD 11.54% (N=6), 53.49% (N=23), and 46.15% (N=24) had CDAI remission/low disease activity, while 46 (88.46%), 20 (46.51%) and 28 (53.85%) had CDAI moderate/high. All the patients completed the follow-up. Median values of CDAI during pre-LD, LD, and post-LD were 14.5 [IQR 12-21], 9 [IQR 5.5-16], and 11 [IQR 6-19.2] respectively (see Figure 1 below).Conclusion:Telephone-based tight control strategy ensured satisfactory management of D2T RA treated with targeted therapies. This temporary approach has been a feasible compensation for the decline of face-to-face visits also in this challenging group of RA patients, thus reassuring for future months before the end of pandemic.References:[1]Nagy G, et al. EULAR definition of difficult-to-treat rheumatoid arthritis. Ann Rheum Dis 2021;80(1):31-35.Disclosure of Interests:Francesca Ingegnoli: None declared, Angela Flavia Luppino: None declared, Gilberto Cincinelli: None declared, Ennio Favalli Speakers bureau: AbbVie, Sanofi-Genzyme, Lilly, UCB, Pfizer, Novartis, Janssen, Paid instructor for: Roche, MSD, Consultant of: Lilly, Galapagos, Roberto Caporali Speakers bureau: Abbvie, Amgen, BMS, Celltrion, Galapagos, Gilead, Lilly, Pfizer, Roche, UCB, Sanofi, Fresenius Kabi, Samsung bioepis, MSD, Consultant of: Galapagos, Gilead, Lilly,Janssen, MSD.


2020 ◽  
Vol 79 (Suppl 1) ◽  
pp. 1463.2-1464
Author(s):  
S. Bayat ◽  
K. Tascilar ◽  
V. Kaufmann ◽  
A. Kleyer ◽  
D. Simon ◽  
...  

Background:Recent developments of targeted treatments such as targeted synthetic DMARDs (tsDMARDs) increase the chances of a sustained low disease activity (LDA) or remission state for patients suffering rheumatoid arthritis (RA). tsDMARDs such as baricitinib, an oral inhibitor of the Janus Kinases (JAK1/JAK2) was recently approved for the treatment of RA with an inadequate response to conventional (cDMARD) and biological (bDMARD) therapy. (1, 2).Objectives:Aim of this study is to analyze the effect of baricitinb on disease activity (DAS28, LDA) in patients with RA in real life, to analyze drug persistance and associate these effects with various baseline characteristics.Methods:All RA patients were seen in our outpatient clinic. If a patient was switched to a baricitinib due to medical reasons, these patients were included in our prospective, observational study which started in April 2017. Clinical scores (SJC/TJC 76/78), composite scores (DAS28), PROs (HAQ-DI; RAID; FACIT), safety parameters (not reported in this abstract) as well as laboratory biomarkers were collected at each visit every three months. Linear mixed effects models for repeated measurements were used to analyze the time course of disease activity, patient reported outcomes and laboratory results. We estimated the probabilities of continued baricitinib treatment and the probabilities of LDA and remission by DAS-28 as well as Boolean remission up to one year using survival analysis and explored their association with disease characteristics using multivariable Cox regression. All patients gave informed consent. The study is approved by the local ethics.Results:95 patients were included and 85 analyzed with available follow-up data until November 2019. Demographics are shown in table 1. Mean follow-up duration after starting baricitinib was 49.3 (28.9) weeks. 51 patients (60%) were on monotherapy. Baricitinib survival (95%CI) was 82% (73% to 91%) at one year. Cumulative number (%probability, 95%CI) of patients that attained DAS-28 LDA at least once up to one year was 67 (92%, 80% to 97%) and the number of patients attaining DAS-28 and Boolean remission were 31 (50%, 34% to 61%) and 12(20%, 9% to 30%) respectively. Median time to DAS-28 LDA was 16 weeks (Figure 1). Cox regression analyses did not show any sufficiently precise association of remission or LDA with age, gender, seropositivity, disease duration, concomitant DMARD use and number of previous bDMARDs. Increasing number of previous bDMARDs was associated with poor baricitinib survival (HR=1.5, 95%CI 1.1 to 2.2) while this association was not robust to adjustment for baseline disease activity. Favorable changes were observed in tender and swollen joint counts, pain-VAS, patient and physician disease assessment scores, RAID, FACIT and the acute phase response.Conclusion:In this prospective observational study, we observed high rates of LDA and DAS-28 remission and significant improvements in disease activity and patient reported outcome measurements over time.References:[1]Keystone EC, Taylor PC, Drescher E, Schlichting DE, Beattie SD, Berclaz PY, et al. Safety and efficacy of baricitinib at 24 weeks in patients with rheumatoid arthritis who have had an inadequate response to methotrexate. Annals of the rheumatic diseases. 2015 Feb;74(2):333-40.[2]Genovese MC, Kremer J, Zamani O, Ludivico C, Krogulec M, Xie L, et al. Baricitinib in Patients with Refractory Rheumatoid Arthritis. The New England journal of medicine. 2016 Mar 31;374(13):1243-52.Figure 1.Cumulative probability of low disease activity or remission under treatment with baricitinib.Disclosure of Interests:Sara Bayat Speakers bureau: Novartis, Koray Tascilar: None declared, Veronica Kaufmann: None declared, Arnd Kleyer Consultant of: Lilly, Gilead, Novartis,Abbvie, Speakers bureau: Novartis, Lilly, David Simon Grant/research support from: Else Kröner-Memorial Scholarship, Novartis, Consultant of: Novartis, Lilly, Johannes Knitza Grant/research support from: Research Grant: Novartis, Fabian Hartmann: None declared, Susanne Adam: None declared, Axel Hueber Grant/research support from: Novartis, Lilly, Pfizer, EIT Health, EU-IMI, DFG, Universität Erlangen (EFI), Consultant of: Abbvie, BMS, Celgene, Gilead, GSK, Lilly, Novartis, Speakers bureau: GSK, Lilly, Novartis, Georg Schett Speakers bureau: AbbVie, BMS, Celgene, Janssen, Eli Lilly, Novartis, Roche and UCB


2019 ◽  
Vol 8 (10) ◽  
pp. 1548 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mueller ◽  
Hasler ◽  
Popp ◽  
Mattow ◽  
Durmisi ◽  
...  

: Introduction: Tofacitinib is an oral JAK inhibitor indicated for the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis (RA). The efficacy and safety of tofacitinib have been shown in several randomized clinical trials. The study presented here aimed to assess the clinical tolerability and effectiveness of tofacitinib among RA patients in real life. Methods: Consecutive patients between January 2015 and April 2017 with RA who fulfilled the American College of Rheumatology (ACR)/European League Against Rheumatism (EULAR) 2010 criteria were included in a prospectively designed analysis of retrospective data. Patients were initiated on tofacitinib 5 mg bid. The primary objective was to analyze the safety of tofacitinib in a real-life cohort. Safety was assessed by the reasons to stop tofacitinib during follow up and changes of liver enzymes, hemoglobin, and creatinine. The secondary outcome was to analyze the frequency of and time to achieve low disease activity (LDA) and remission as defined by 28 joint count disease activity score (DAS28). Results: A total of 144 patients were treated with tofacitinib. A total of 84.9% of patients were pre-exposed to at least one biological agent. The average DAS28 at the initiation of tofacitinib was 4.43. A total of 50.0% of patients were positive for rheumatoid factor and 49.0% for ACPA. The mean follow up was 1.22 years (range 10d–3.7a) after initiation of tofacitinib treatment. A total of 94 (64.4%) patients remained on tofacitinib during follow-up. The average time to stop tofacitinib was 190.0 days. Reasons to stop tofacitinib were: insufficient response (n = 23), gastrointestinal symptoms (n = 18), infection (n = 5), myalgia (n = 2), remission (n = 2), headache (n = 2), cough, blue finger syndrome, intolerance, heartburn, psoriasis, and increased liver enzymes (all n = 1). Increased alanine amino transferase (ALAT) or aspartate amino transferase (ASAT) > 2× upper limit of normal (ULN) were detected in 3.3% and 4.4% of patients, respectively. Hemoglobin decrease of >10% was detected in 15.1% of the patients and decreased lymphocytes <500/μL in 3.4%. An increase of creatinine >20% was detected in 9.4% of patients. A total of 62.9% and 50.0% of the patients achieved low disease activity (LDA) or remission after a median of 319 and 645 days, respectively. These rates were significantly higher in patients naïve to biologic agents as compared to patients pre-exposed to biologics (LDA: naïve 100% 92 d, pre-exposed 57.0% 434 d, p ≤ 0.001; remission: naïve 86.7% 132 d, pre-exposed 44.1%, 692 d, p = 0.001). Conclusions: Tofacitinib is a safe and effective treatment option for patients with RA. Tofacitinib may induce high rates of LDA and remission in patients with active disease, even after the use of one or more biologics, though the rate appeared higher in patients naïve to biologics. Tofacitinib may be a valuable option in a treat-to-target approach. Our data demonstrate that Janus kinase (JAK) inhibitors are safe and efficacious in real life patients.


2020 ◽  
Vol 79 (Suppl 1) ◽  
pp. 1456.1-1457
Author(s):  
D. Iacono ◽  
I. Pantano ◽  
D. Birra ◽  
G. Scalise ◽  
M. A. Coscia ◽  
...  

Background:EULAR recommendations focus the importance of Methotrexate (MTX) therapy as a key element in the treatment of patients with Rheumatoid Arthritis (RA), alone as first line therapy and in combination with biological Disease Modifying Anti-rheumatic Drug (bDMARDs). Abatacept (CTLA4-Ig) in Europe is approved for the treatment of moderate to severe active RA in combination with MTX. Several patients, however, discontinue MTX for intolerance, side effects or contraindications, and real-life data demonstrate how, even in patients receiving therapy with MTX, compliance could be suboptimal. The only data on the use of abatacept in monotherapy come from the ORA-Registry, where a worse performance is observed in monotherapy patients.Objectives:To evaluate a multicenter cohort of RA patients treated with Abatacept in patients underwent combined MTX therapy vs monotherapy.Methods:We retrospectively evaluated RA patients, referring to 2 Italian rheumatology centers, treated with Abatacept monotherapy or in combination with MTX. We compared both persistence in therapy and the rate of remission/low disease activity according to Clinical Disease Activity Index (CDAI) between the 2 groups.Results:We enrolled 147 patients, out of them 66 patients were on monotherapy with Abatacept due to intolerance or controindications and 81 in therapy with Abatacept plus MTX. The two cohorts appeared homogeneous in age, gender, disease duration and baseline activity indexes, with the only difference being higher baseline Physician Global assessment (PhGA) values in monotherapy patients. During the follow-up (median duration 24±14 months), the retention rate of Abatacept treatment was 71.2% in MTX patients (median duration 27–15.6 months) and 62.1% in monotherapy patients (median duration 25.2–17.5; p=ns). No differences between the two groups in terms of retention rate, low-disease activity and CDAI remission (log rank p=ns), Breslow p=ns) were detected.Conclusion:In patients with RA with intolerance or contraindication to MTX use, Abatacept monotherapy could be an efficient and safe option even in the long term follow-up.References:[1]Abatacept monotherapy compared with abatacept plus disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs in rheumatoid arthritis patients: data from the ORA registry.Truchetet ME et al. Arthritis Res Ther. 2016 Mar 30;18:72.Disclosure of Interests:DANIELA IACONO Speakers bureau: PFIZER, BRISTOL MAYERS SQUIBB, SANOFI, Ilenia Pantano: None declared, domenico birra: None declared, GIUSEPPE SCALISE: None declared, Melania Alessia Coscia: None declared, VALENTINA MESSINITI: None declared, Gabriella Loi: None declared, Anna Merchionda: None declared, Paolo Moscato: None declared, francesco ciccia Grant/research support from: pfizer, novartis, roche, Consultant of: pfizer, novartis, lilly, abbvie, Speakers bureau: pfizer, novartis, lilly, abbvie


2020 ◽  
Vol 79 (Suppl 1) ◽  
pp. 1438.2-1438
Author(s):  
V. Boyadzhieva ◽  
N. Stoilov ◽  
E. Kurteva ◽  
R. Stoilov

Background:Assessment of disease activity and quality of life are one of the main indicators for determining the effectiveness of treatment with disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs. In recent years, a new group has entered the market - target synthetic DMARDS, which prove their effectiveness in treating RA comparable to that of biological products.Objectives:The aim of this study is to evaluate the disease activity and quality of life of patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) treated with biological agents in comparison with Tofacitinib (real life data from Bulgarian population) and determine whether or not the benefits of different therapies were sustained over a follow up period of 1 year.Methods:164 patients were selected with a mean age 55.34 ± 16SD years, meeting the 1987 ACR and /or ACR/ EULAR (2010) classification criteria for Rheumatoid arthritis (RA). Patients were arranged according to treatment regimens: Tocilizumab (TCL) 30 patients, Certolizumab (CZP) 16, Golimumab (GOL) 22, Etanercept (ETN) 20, Adalimumab (ADA) 20, Rituximab (RTX) 16, Infliximab (INF) 20, Tofacitinib (TOF) 20. Disease activity and quality of life was the primary concern. Independent joint assessor evaluated 28 joints on baseline, 6th and 12th month’s thereafter. CRP was used to measure the inflammatory process.DAS28-CRP, clinical disease activity index (CDAI) and simplified disease activity index (SDAI)were calculated. On baseline all of the patients’ groups had severe disease activity (mean DAS28-CRP > 5.2, mean CDAI > 22, mean SDAI > 26. The quality of life was evaluated via EQ-5D.All of the patients were on stable therapy according to the inclusion criteria, and didn’t interrupt any of the medications including biological or target synthetic treatment.Results:Significant clinical improvement and statistically significant reduction in disease activity were observed in patients treated with bDMARDS and tsDMARDS within 6 months (p <0.005) of treatment and after 12 months of follow-up (p=0.039). The mean value of DAS28-CRP after one year follow up showed an non-inferior effect of Tofacitnib (3.04± 0.81) in comparison to biological treatment (TCL: 3.07 ± 0.73; CZP: 3.06 ± 0.65; GOL: 2.49 ± 0.76; ETN: 2.85 ± 0.55; ADA: 3.15 ± 0.82; RTX: 2.90 ± 0.70; INF: 3.14; ± 0.61; TOF: 3.04± 0.81). An improvement was also observed for the 6 to 12 months of follow-up as we did not detect a significant difference in the activity of the disease assessed by CDAI among the different drug groups.The mean values showing the change of the SDAI over the study period also outline comparable profiles. All of the treatment groups achieved a rapid reduction in disease activity that continued to decrease through the 6 and 12 months period, respectively, as supported by changes in SDAI.The quality of life evaluated with EQ-5D revealed significant improvement on the 6-th month of follow up as well as after 12th month (p<0.005) without significant difference between the observed groups.Conclusion:Real-life data show that patients on biological treatment as well as those on Tofacitinib therapy achieve a significant decrease in disease activity after one year of follow-up. This gives us reason to accept the importance of non-inferior effect of jak-inhibitors and their place in treatment of Rheumatoid arthritis.Disclosure of Interests:Vladimira Boyadzhieva: None declared, Nikolay Stoilov: None declared, Ekaterina Kurteva: None declared, Rumen Stoilov Grant/research support from: R-Pharm


2020 ◽  
Vol 79 (Suppl 1) ◽  
pp. 1388.2-1388
Author(s):  
R. Hassan ◽  
M. Cheikh ◽  
H. Almoallim ◽  
H. Faruqui ◽  
R. Alquraa ◽  
...  

Background:National Registries are essential to direct current practice and design appropriate management strategies1. Rheumatoid arthritis (RA) registries in the middle east and north Africa remain scarcely represented2.Objectives:Our objective is to describe the Saudi RA population and to compare the findings to internationally reported data.Methods:This is a cross sectional, analytical study that was conducted at Doctor Soliman Fakeeh Hospital (DSFH). The study ran from December of 2014 and concluded in December of 2018 using a pool of 433 patients. Inclusion criteria included adults older than 18 years of age who fulfilled the 2010 American College of Rheumatology criteria for diagnosis of RA3. Data were collected from patients and entered in a specially designed program for this registry. They included main demographic details,, lag times to final disease diagnosis. Disease Activity Score-28-C Reactive Protein (DAS-28-CRP) was calculated on presentation and on subsequent visits with intervals ranging from three to six months between them. Multiple regression model was used to assess the predictors of disease activity. We charted the lines of medications given, including conventional and biologic disease modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs), following treat to target strategies4.Results:Out of 430 patients, 76.68% were female, while only 23.32% were male and the mean age was found to be 49.26 years with SD±11.At initial presentation, 45.5% had demonstrated active disease (moderate or high disease activity) based on DAS-28-CRP scores while 54.5% were in remission or low disease activity. Out of the total number of clinic visitors, 330 had regular follow ups for more than 1 year while 103 patients were either irregularly visiting the rheumatology clinic or had lost follow up. The remission rates after 1 year had increased to 79.7% (263 patients), while 9.7% (32 patients) had low disease activity and no patients had sustained high disease activity at the end of follow up. It was also found that the female gender, higher Health Assessment Questionnaire-Disability Index (HAQ-DI) and a longer lag1/lag2 period were associated with higher disease activity in our population. Biologic medications had been used by 129 patients (29.7%) while conventional DMARDs were given to 304 patients (70.3%).Conclusion:We described a population of RA patients in a single center in SA. We detected higher remission rates at one year of follow up. This could be attributed to many factors, including good referral systems and treat to target strategies with easier access to biologic medications.References:[1]Singh JA, Saag KG, Bridges SL Jr, Akl EA, Bannuru RR, Sullivan MC, Vaysbrot E, McNaughton C, Osani M, Shmerling RH, Curtis JR, Furst DE, Parks D, Kavanaugh A, O’Dell J, King C, Leong A, Matteson EL, Schousboe JT, Drevlow B, Ginsberg S, Grober J, St Clair EW, Tindall E, Miller AS, McAlindon T. 2015 American College of Rheumatology Guideline for the Treatment of Rheumatoid Arthritis.Arthritis Rheumatol.2016 Jan;68(1):1-26.[2]Smolen, Josef S., et al. “EULAR recommendations for the management of rheumatoid arthritis with synthetic and biological disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs: 2013 update.”Annals of the rheumatic diseases73.3 (2014): 492-509.[3]Saag KG, Teng GG, Patkar NM, Anuntiyo J, Finney C, Curtis JR, et al. American College of Rheumatology 2008 recommendations for the use of nonbiologic and biologic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs in rheumatoid arthritis.Arthritis Rheum2008;59: 762–84.[4]Hussain W, Noorwali A, Janoudi N. From symptoms to diagnosis: an observational study of the journey of rheumatoid arthritis patients in Saudi Arabia.Oman Med J.2016;31(1):29.Disclosure of Interests:Rola Hassan Grant/research support from: Pfizer pharmaceuticals, Mohamed Cheikh Grant/research support from: Pfizer pharmaceuticals, Hani Almoallim Grant/research support from: Pfizer pharmaceuticals, Hanan Faruqui Grant/research support from: Pfizer pharmaceuticals, Reem AlQuraa Grant/research support from: Pfizer pharmaceuticals, Ayman Eissa Grant/research support from: Pfizer pharmaceuticals, Aous Alhazmi Grant/research support from: Pfizer pharmaceuticals, Nahid Janoudi Grant/research support from: Pfizer pharmaceuticals


2021 ◽  
Vol 80 (Suppl 1) ◽  
pp. 1140-1141
Author(s):  
A. Yazici ◽  
Ö. Özdemir Işik ◽  
E. Dalkiliç ◽  
S. S. Koca ◽  
Y. Pehlivan ◽  
...  

Background:Tocilizumab (TCZ) is a human anti-interleukin (IL)-6 receptor antibody approved in Turkey for the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis (RA).Objectives:In this study our purpose was to describe the disease activity, quality of life (QoL), and retention rate in RA patients who were prescribed TCZ as first-line biologic treatment in a real-world setting.Methods:Anonymized patient registry of TURKBIO was used based in a national, multicenter, and retrospective context. We conducted a search in the registry between years 2013 and 2020 and included adult RA patients who were prescribed with TCZ as their first-line biologic treatment with a post-TCZ follow-up of at least 6 months. CDAI, DAS28-(ESR), and HAQ-DI scores in 6, 12, and 24 months were obtained. Pairwise comparison was carried out for survey scores across baseline and timepoints. Subgroup analysis for route of TCZ administration was performed. EULAR response criteria were used for response evaluation. Retention of TCZ was evaluated by Kaplan-Meier analysis.Results:Overall,130 patients with a mean RA duration of14 years were included in the study. 87.7% of the patients were female and mean age was53 (SD; 15.0). Median duration of follow-up was 18.5 months. Majority (90.8%) of patients were given tocilizumab via intravenous route at baseline. Number of patients with ongoing TCZ treatment and follow-up at 6, 12, and 24 months were 121 (93%), 85 (65%), and 46 (35%), respectively. Remission rates at 6, 12, and 24 months per CDAI (<2.8) and DAS28-(ESR) (<2.6) scores were 61.5%, 44.6%, 30%, and 54.6%, 40.8%, 27.7%, respectively. CDAI, DAS28-(ESR) and HAQ-DI survey scores significantly improved at 6, 12 and 26 months, respectively (p<0.001) (Table 1) in both IV and SC TCZ subgroups. At 6, 12 and 24months 74.8%, 82.5% and 86.4% of patients achieved a EULAR good response respectively. Twenty-three patients (17.6%) discontinued TCZ at 24 months. Of these, 19 patients discontinued due to unsatisfactory response. Retention rates of TCZ at 6, 12, and 24 months were 93%, 84.3%, and 72.2%, respectively (Figure 1).Conclusion:TCZ as a first-line biologic treatment was found to be clinically effective in this real-world study with a high retention rate. These results are in line with the results gathered from previous TCZ controlled and real-life studies in which TCZ was found clinically safe and effective.References:[1]Haraoui B, Casado G, Czirjak L, Taylor A, Dong L, Button P, Luder Y, Caporali R. Tocilizumab Patterns of Use, Effectiveness, and Safety in Patients with Rheumatoid Arthritis: Final Results from a Set of Multi-National Non-Interventional Studies. Rheumatol Ther. 2019 Jun;6(2):231-243.[2]Favalli EG, Raimondo MG, Becciolini A, Crotti C, Biggioggero M, Caporali R. The management of first-line biologic therapy failures in rheumatoid arthritis: Current practice and future perspectives. Autoimmun Rev. 2017 Dec;16(12):1185-1195.[3]Haraoui B, Jamal S, Ahluwalia V, Fung D, Manchanda T, Khraishi M. Real-World Tocilizumab Use in Patients with Rheumatoid Arthritis in Canada: 12-Month Results from an Observational, Noninterventional Study. Rheumatol Ther. 2018 Dec; 5(2): 551–565.Disclosure of Interests:Ayten Yazici Speakers bureau: PFIZER, AbbVie, NOVARTIS, Özlem Özdemir Işik: None declared, Ediz Dalkiliç Speakers bureau: AbbVie, UCB Pharma, PFIZER, Roche, MSD, NOVARTIS, Süleyman Serdar Koca Speakers bureau: MSD, NOVARTIS, GILEAD, PFIZER, ABDI IBRAHIM, UCB Pharma, AMGEN, SANOFİ, Yavuz Pehlivan Speakers bureau: PFIZER, NOVARTIS, MSD, CELLTRION, Consultant of: PFIZER, Soner Şenel: None declared, Nevsun Inanc Speakers bureau: NOVARTIS, PFIZER, ABDI IBRAHIM, JANNSEN, Paid instructor for: NOVARTIS, PFIZER, ABDI IBRAHIM, JANNSEN, Consultant of: NOVARTIS, PFIZER, ABDI IBRAHIM, JANNSEN, Grant/research support from: NOVARTIS, PFIZER, ABDI IBRAHIM, JANNSEN, Servet Akar Speakers bureau: LILLY, MSD, NOVARTIS, GILEAD, PFIZER, ABDI IBRAHIM, JANNSEN, UCB Pharma, AMGEN, Paid instructor for: LILLY, NOVARTIS, GILEAD, PFIZER, ABDI IBRAHIM, UCB, AMGEN, Grant/research support from: PFIZER, Sema Yilmaz: None declared, Özgül Soysal Gündüz: None declared, Ayse Cefle Speakers bureau: UCB Pharma, PFIZER, MSD, AbbVie, AMGEN, NOVARTIS, Fatos Onen Speakers bureau: AbbVie, LILLY, MSD, NOVARTIS, GILEAD, PFIZER, ABDI IBRAHIM, JANNSEN, UCB Pharma, AMGEN, İbrahim Etem-MENARINI, Paid instructor for: AbbVie, LILLY, NOVARTIS, GILEAD, PFIZER, ABDI IBRAHIM, UCB Pharma, AMGEN, İbrahim Etem-MENARINI, Grant/research support from: PFIZER


2021 ◽  
Vol 23 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Philip J. Mease ◽  
Scott Stryker ◽  
Mei Liu ◽  
Bob Salim ◽  
Sabrina Rebello ◽  
...  

Abstract Background Understanding the evolving treatment patterns in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) is important for rheumatologists to make the best practice decisions and optimize treatment. Here, we describe treatment patterns among patients newly initiated on biologic and/or nonbiologic RA therapy over time after enrollment in the US Corrona RA registry. Methods This was a retrospective, cohort study of adult patients with RA enrolled in the Corrona RA registry. Patients were included in this study if they initiated therapy with conventional synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drug (csDMARD) monotherapy, TNF inhibitor (TNFi) monotherapy, other (non-TNFi) biologic monotherapy, or combination therapy (index therapy); initiated therapy between January 1, 2004, and December 31, 2015 (index date), after enrollment in the Corrona RA registry; had at least 6 months of follow-up time after the index date; and had at least one follow-up visit. Time periods of interest were based on the year of index therapy initiation: 2004–2007, 2008–2011, and 2012–2015. Results This study included 8027 patients. csDMARD monotherapy and TNFi + csDMARD combination therapy were the most common index therapies in the registry (39.9% and 44.9%, respectively, in the 2004–2007 period; 38.6% and 38.2%, respectively, in the 2008–2011 period; and 35.2% for both in the 2012–2015 period). At therapy initiation, a higher proportion of patients who initiated other biologics, whether as monotherapies (54.0%) or in combination with csDMARD (49.9%), had high disease activity than those who initiated csDMARD monotherapy (28.4%). For 2012–2015 vs 2004–2007 and 2008–2011 periods, persistence on a given therapy appeared to decrease for the TNFi monotherapy cohort (48.2% vs 64.3% and 52.4%) and other biologic monotherapy cohort (52.3% vs 71.4% and 54.5%) over 12 months; switching from one therapy to another was common in the Corrona RA registry. Conclusions Increased switching from one therapy to another and decreased time on a given therapy was observed in the Corrona RA registry in the 2012–2015 period. This observation is most likely due to the increased availability of additional treatment options and/or the change in clinical focus, particularly the emphasis on achievement of treat-to-target goals of remission or low disease activity along with more aggressive treatment.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document