scholarly journals Sustained Remission in Tumor Necrosis Factor Inhibitor–treated Patients with Rheumatoid Arthritis: A Population-based Cohort Study

2015 ◽  
Vol 42 (5) ◽  
pp. 741-748 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jon Thorkell Einarsson ◽  
Pierre Geborek ◽  
Tore Saxne ◽  
Meliha C. Kapetanovic
Keyword(s):  
Rheumatoid Arthritis ◽  
Tumor Necrosis Factor ◽  
Tumor Necrosis ◽  
Health Assessment ◽  
Tumor Necrosis Factor Inhibitor ◽  
Population Based ◽  
Joint Disease ◽  
Sustained Remission ◽  
Reference Drug ◽  
Necrosis Factor

Objective.To study frequency, possible baseline predictors, timing, and duration of sustained remission [SR; defined as 28-joint Disease Activity Score (DAS28) < 2.6 for at least 6 mos] in patients with established rheumatoid arthritis (RA) treated with different tumor necrosis factor (TNF) inhibitors [etanercept (ETN), infliximab (IFX), adalimumab (ADA)]. In addition, the aim was to compare (head-to-head) the effectiveness of individual drugs in patients receiving their first anti-TNF treatment.Methods.All anti-TNF–treated patients with RA included in the observational South Swedish Arthritis Group register were eligible. We identified the patients’ first SR periods (time between first visit after treatment initiation with DAS28 < 2.6 and subsequent visit with DAS28 ≥ 2.6). Baseline predictors of SR in biologic-naive patients were studied using multivariate regression models. Remission duration and timing of remission start was estimated with Kaplan-Meier curves.Results.Of the 2416 patients included, 382 (15.8%) fulfilled the criteria for SR. Median estimated duration of SR was 5.25 years. Predictors for SR were male sex, low Health Assessment Questionnaire, low DAS28, methotrexate (MTX) treatment, and the calendar year of treatment start. OR for achieving SR within the first 12 months of treatment were 1.86 for ETN (95% CI 1.33–2.61) compared to IFX. HR for 4 years of SR were 1.32 for ETN (95% CI 1.01–1.74) and 1.84 for ADA (95% CI 1.23–2.78), with IFX as the reference drug.Conclusion.SR was uncommon in patients with RA treated with anti-TNF in clinical practice. However, patients remained in SR for a substantial period of time. Concomitant MTX treatment predicts remission. ETN and ADA were more likely in reaching SR.

Canadian Variation by Province in Rheumatoid Arthritis Initiating Anti–Tumor Necrosis Factor Therapy: Results from the Optimization of Adalimumab Trial

2010 ◽  
Vol 37 (12) ◽  
pp. 2469-2474 ◽  
Author(s):  
CHRISTOPHER PEASE ◽  
JANET E. POPE ◽  
CARTER THORNE ◽  
BOULOS PAUL HARAOUI ◽  
DON TRUONG ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Rheumatoid Arthritis ◽  
Tumor Necrosis Factor ◽  
Tumor Necrosis ◽  
Health Assessment ◽  
Provincial Government ◽  
Joint Disease ◽  
Tender Joint Count ◽  
Tender Joint ◽  
Canadian Provinces ◽  
Necrosis Factor

Objective.We compared variations among Canadian provinces in rheumatoid arthritis (RA) initiating anti-tumor necrosis factor (TNF) therapy.Methods.Data were obtained from the Optimization of Humira trial (OH) and from the Ontario Biologics Research Initiative (OBRI). Baseline characteristics were compared between regions: Ontario (ON), Quebec (QC), and other provinces (OTH). We compared Ontario OH to OBRI patients who were initiating anti-TNF therapy.Results.In 300 OH patients, mean age was 54.8 years (13.3). There were 151 (50.3%) ON patients, 57 from QC (19%), and 92 from OTH (30.7%). Regional differences were seen in the number of disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARD) ever taken (ON: 3.8 ± 1.4, QC: 3.1 ± 1.1, OTH: 3.3 ± 1.4; p < 0.001); swollen joint count (SJC; ON: 10.9 ± 5.9, QC: 9.0 ± 4.4, OTH: 11.3 ± 5.6; p = 0.033); tender joint count (TJC; ON: 12.2 ± 7.5, QC: 10.3 ± 5.7, OTH: 14.4 ± 7.6; p = 0.003); 28-joint Disease Activity Score (DAS28; ON: 5.8 ± 1.2, QC: 5.6 ± 1.0, OTH: 6.0 ± 1.1; p = 0.076); and Health Assessment Questionnaire (ON: 1.4 ± 0.7, QC: 1.7 ± 0.7, OTH: 1.5 ± 0.7; p = 0.060). DMARD-ever use differed: methotrexate (ON: 94.7%, QC: 93%, OTH: 84.8%; p = 0.025); leflunomide (ON: 74.8%, QC: 21.1%, OTH: 51.1%; p < 0.001); sulfasalazine (ON: 51%, QC: 38.6%, OTH: 25%; p < 0.001); myochrysine (ON: 9.3%, QC: 0%, OTH: 15.2%; p = 0.008); and hydroxychloroquine (ON: 67.5%, QC: 86%, OTH: 66.3%; p = 0.018). In comparison to ON OH patients, 95 OBRI patients initiating first anti-TNF had lower SJC (p = 0.017), TJC (p = 0.008), and DAS28 (p = 0.05).Conclusion.In Quebec, where access to anti-TNF is less restrictive, patients had lower SJC and TJC. ON used more DMARD, especially leflunomide, as mandated by the provincial government. Both provincial funding criteria and prescribing habits may contribute to differences. Canadian rheumatologists may vary in treatment decisions, but patients generally have similar DAS28 when initiating anti-TNF therapy.

Effectiveness of Tumor Necrosis Factor Inhibitors in Combination with Various csDMARD in the Treatment of Rheumatoid Arthritis: Data from the DREAM Registry

2016 ◽  
Vol 43 (10) ◽  
pp. 1787-1794 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sofie H.M. Manders ◽  
Wietske Kievit ◽  
Tim L.T.A. Jansen ◽  
Jan N. Stolk ◽  
Henk Visser ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Rheumatoid Arthritis ◽  
Tumor Necrosis Factor ◽  
Tumor Necrosis ◽  
Cox Regression ◽  
Tumor Necrosis Factor Inhibitor ◽  
Added Value ◽  
Joint Disease ◽  
Drug Survival ◽  
Necrosis Factor ◽  
Over Time

Objective.To analyze and compare the effectiveness and drug survival in patients with rheumatoid arthritis, as measured by 28-joint Disease Activity Score (DAS28) and Health Assessment Questionnaire–Disability Index (HAQ-DI), of tumor necrosis factor inhibitor (TNFi) monotherapy, TNFi + leflunomide (LEF), TNFi + sulfasalazine (SSZ), TNFi + other conventional synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (csDMARD), and TNFi + methotrexate (MTX) therapy, in daily practice.Methods.Data were collected from the DREAM registry. Patients beginning their first TNFi treatment were included in the study: TNFi monotherapy (n = 320), TNFi + SSZ (n = 103), TNFi + LEF (n = 80), TNFi + other csDMARD (n = 99), TNFi + MTX alone (n = 919), TNFi + MTX + other csDMARD (n = 412). Treatment effectiveness was analyzed using DAS28 and HAQ-DI with linear mixed models and the TNFi drug survival was analyzed using Kaplan-Meier curves and Cox regression. All analyses have been corrected for confounders.Results.The patients who received TNFi + MTX had significantly better DAS28 and HAQ-DI values over time (both p < 0.001) and longer TNFi drug survival than TNFi monotherapy (p < 0.001). TNFi + SSZ and TNFi + other csDMARD had significantly better DAS28 values over time (p = 0.001) and longer drug survival (p = 0.001) versus TNFi monotherapy. TNFi + LEF was not significantly better compared to monotherapy. Adding other csDMARD to the TNFi + MTX combination provided no added value.Conclusion.Preferably, TNFi should be prescribed together with MTX. If this is not possible, we advise the use of other csDMARD.

Effectiveness of a second biologic after failure of a non-tumor necrosis factor inhibitor as first biologic in rheumatoid arthritis

2021 ◽  
pp. jrheum.201467
Author(s):  
Katerina Chatzidionysiou ◽  
Merete Lund Hetland ◽  
Thomas Frisell ◽  
Daniela Di Giuseppe ◽  
Karin Hellgren ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Rheumatoid Arthritis ◽  
Tumor Necrosis Factor ◽  
Disease Activity ◽  
Tumor Necrosis ◽  
Tumor Necrosis Factor Inhibitor ◽  
Primary Response ◽  
Low Disease Activity ◽  
Factor Inhibitor ◽  
Disease Modifying ◽  
Necrosis Factor

Objective In Rheumatoid Arthritis (RA), evidence regarding the effectiveness of a second biologic Disease Modifying Anti-Rheumatic Drugs (bDMARDs) in patients whose first ever bDMARD was a non-tumor-necrosis-factor-inhibitor (TNFi) bDMARD is limited. The objective of this study was therefore to assess the outcome of the second bDMARD (non-TNFi [rituximab, abatacept or tocilizumab, separately] and TNFi) after failure of a non-TNFi bDMARD as first bDMARD. Methods We identified RA patients from the five Nordic biologics registers started treatment with a non-TNFi as first ever bDMARD but switched to a second bDMARD. For the second bDMARD, we assessed survival-on-drug (at 6 and 12 months), and primary response (at 6 months). Results We included 620 patients starting a second bDMARD (ABA 86, RTX 40, TCZ 67 and TNFi 427) following failure of a first non-TNFI bDMARD. At 6 and 12 months after start of their second bDMARD, around 70% and 50%, respectively, remained on treatment, and at 6 months less than one third of patients were still on their second bDMARD and had reached low disease activity or remission according to DAS28. For those patients whose second bMDARD was a TNFI, the corresponding proportion was slightly higher (40%). Conclusion The survival-on-drug and primary response of a second bDMARD in RA patients switching due to failure of a non-TNFi bDMARD as first bDMARD is modest. Some patients may benefit from TNFi when used after failure of a non-TNFi as first bDMARD.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document