Browse

Search for: rheumatoid arthritis    methotrexate    autoimmune disease    biomarker    gene expression    GWAS    HLA genes    non-HLA genes   

ID PMID Title PublicationDate abstract
25228842 Efficacy and safety of tofacitinib for active rheumatoid arthritis with an inadequate resp 2014 Sep BACKGROUND/AIMS: The aim of this study was to assess the efficacy and safety of tofacitinib (5 and 10 mg twice daily) in patients with active rheumatoid arthritis (RA). METHODS: A systematic review of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that examined the efficacy and safety of tofacitinib in patients with active RA was performed using the Medline, Embase, and Cochrane Controlled Trials Register databases as well as manual searches. RESULTS: Five RCTs, including three phase-II and two phase-III trials involving 1,590 patients, met the inclusion criteria. The three phase-II RCTs included 452 patients with RA (144 patients randomized to 5 mg of tofacitinib twice daily, 156 patients randomized to 10 mg of tofacitinib twice daily, and 152 patients randomized to placebo) who were included in this meta-analysis. The American College of Rheumatology 20% response rate was significantly higher in the tofacitinib 5- and 10-mg groups than in the control group (relative risk [RR], 2.445; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.229 to 4.861; p = 0.011; and RR, 2.597; 95% CI, 1.514 to 4.455; p = 0.001, respectively). The safety outcomes did not differ between the tofacitinib 5- and 10-mg groups and placebo groups with the exception of infection in the tofacitinib 10-mg group (RR, 2.133; 95% CI, 1.268 to 3.590; p = 0.004). The results of two phase-III trials (1,123 patients) confirmed the findings in the phase-II studies. CONCLUSIONS: Tofacitinib at dosages of 5 and 10 mg twice daily was found to be effective in patients with active RA that inadequately responded to methotrexate or disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs, and showed a manageable safety profile.
23108887 Tocilizumab in the treatment of the adult-onset Still's disease: current clinical evidence 2013 Jan This study aimed to review and analyze the effectiveness and safety of tocilizumab in the treatment of patients with adult-onset Still's disease (AOSD). We report on two patients with AOSD who were successfully treated with tocilizumab. All published information on the use of tocilizumab in this disease was also retrieved through a systematic review of the English-language literature. Including our cases, 35 patients were given tocilizumab for AOSD (8 mg/kg/month in 22 patients). The main clinical manifestations were arthritis in all 35 patients and systemic symptoms such as fever or skin rash in 28 (80 %). Thirty-three (94 %) patients had unsuccessfully tried other immunosuppressive agents such as methotrexate, tumor necrosis factor-α blockers, or anakinra. Most of the patients achieved a response with tocilizumab, such as a prompt articular improvement in 30/35 (86 %) patients and a disappearance of systemic symptoms in 27/28 (96 %). Twenty-eight (80 %) patients tapered their steroid intakes, including seven (20 %) who were able to discontinue them. Four (11 %) patients relapsed, and two were successfully retreated with tocilizumab. Regarding safety, tocilizumab is a well-tolerated treatment, but severe side effects such as macrophage activation syndrome or cytomegalovirus reactivation are possible and require ongoing vigilance. Our findings suggest that tocilizumab should probably be proposed in refractory AOSD, as it allows for remission to be induced and the dose of steroid intakes to be reduced. It is a well-tolerated treatment that can be administered according to the therapeutic sequence of rheumatoid arthritis. Further prospective studies are required to assess the better use of this treatment (dosage and duration) and its place among other conventional treatments.
24026258 Tofacitinib in combination with nonbiologic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs in patie 2013 Aug 20 BACKGROUND: Many patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) do not achieve adequate and safe responses with disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs). Tofacitinib is a novel, oral, Janus kinase inhibitor that treats RA. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of tofacitinib in combination with nonbiologic DMARDs. DESIGN: 1-year, double-blind, randomized trial (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT00856544). SETTING: 114 centers in 19 countries. PATIENTS: 792 patients with active RA despite nonbiologic DMARD therapy. INTERVENTION: Patients were randomly assigned 4:4:1:1 to oral tofacitinib, 5 mg or 10 mg twice daily, or placebo advanced to tofacitinib, 5 mg or 10 mg twice daily. MEASUREMENTS: Primary end points were 20% improvement in American College of Rheumatology (ACR20) criteria; Disease Activity Score for 28-joint counts based on the erythrocyte sedimentation rate (DAS28-4[ESR]) of less than 2.6; DAS28-4(ESR)-defined remission, change in Health Assessment Questionnaire Disability Index (HAQ-DI) score, and safety assessments. RESULTS: Mean treatment differences for ACR20 response rates (month 6) for the 5-mg and 10-mg tofacitinib groups compared with the combined placebo groups were 21.2% (95% CI, 12.2% to 30.3%; P < 0.001) and 25.8% (CI, 16.8% to 34.8%; P < 0.001), respectively. The HAQ-DI scores (month 3) and DAS28-4(ESR) less than 2.6 response rates (month 6) were also superior in the tofacitinib groups versus placebo. The incidence rates of serious adverse events for patients receiving 5-mg tofacitinib, 10-mg tofacitinib, or placebo were 6.9, 7.3, or 10.9 events per 100 patient-years of exposure, respectively. In the tofacitinib groups, 2 cases of tuberculosis, 2 cases of other opportunistic infections, 3 cardiovascular events, and 4 deaths occurred. Neutrophil counts decreased, hemoglobin and low- and high-density lipoprotein cholesterol levels increased, and serum creatinine levels had small increases in the tofacitinib groups. LIMITATIONS: Placebo groups were smaller and of shorter duration. Patients received primarily methotrexate. The ability to assess drug combinations other than tofacitinib plus methotrexate was limited. CONCLUSION: Tofacitinib improved disease control in patients with active RA despite treatment with nonbiologic DMARDs, primarily methotrexate. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE: Pfizer.
24951881 Teaching methotrexate self-injection with a web-based video maintains patient care while r 2015 Jan The aim of the study was to compare standard nurse-led methotrexate self-injection patient education to a web-based methotrexate self-injection education video in conjunction with standard teaching on patient self-confidence for self-injection, as well as patient satisfaction, patient knowledge and teaching time. Consecutive rheumatology patients seen for methotrexate self-injection education were enrolled. Prior to education, patient self-confidence for self-injection, age, gender and education were recorded. Patients were randomized 1:1 to standard teaching or the intervention: a 12-min methotrexate self-injection education video followed by further in-person nurse education. Patients recorded their post-education confidence for self-injection, satisfaction with the teaching process and answered four specific questions testing knowledge on methotrexate self-injection. The time spent providing direct education to the patient was recorded. Twenty-nine patients participated in this study: 15 had standard (C) teaching and 14 were in the intervention group (I). Average age, gender and education level were similar in both groups. Both groups were satisfied with the quality of teaching. There was no difference in pre-confidence (C = 5.5/10 vs. I = 4.7/10, p = 0.44) or post-confidence (C = 8.8, I = 8.8, p = 0.93) between the groups. There was a trend toward improved patient knowledge in the video group versus the standard group (C = 4.7/6, I = 5.5/6, p = 0.15). Nurse teaching time was less in the video group (C = 60 min, I = 44 min, p = 0.012), with men requiring longer education time than women across all groups. An education video may be a good supplement to standard in-person nurse teaching for methotrexate self-injection. It equals the standard teaching practise with regard to patient satisfaction, confidence and knowledge while decreasing teaching time by 25 %.
22679301 Induction therapy with a combination of DMARDs is better than methotrexate monotherapy: fi 2013 Jan OBJECTIVE: To determine the most effective induction disease-modifying antirheumatic drug (DMARD) strategy in early rheumatoid arthritis (RA), second to compare one single dose of intramuscular glucocorticoids (GCs) with daily oral GCs during the induction phase. METHODS: The 3-month data of a single-blinded clinical trial in patients with recent-onset arthritis (tREACH) were used. Patients were included who had a high probability (>70%) of progressing to persistent arthritis, based on the prediction model of Visser. Patients were randomised into three induction therapy strategies: (A) combination therapy (methotrexate (MTX) + sulfasalazine + hydroxychloroquine) with GCs intramuscularly; (B) combination therapy with an oral GC tapering scheme and (C) MTX with oral GCs similar to B. A total of 281 patients were randomly assigned to strategy (A) (n=91), (B) (n=93) or (C) (n=97). RESULTS: The Disease Activity Score (DAS) after 3 months was lower in patients receiving initial combination therapy than in those receiving MTX monotherapy (0.39 (0.67 to 0.11, 95% CI)). DAS did not differ between the different GC bridging treatments. After 3 months 50% fewer biological agents were prescribed in the combination therapy groups. Although the proportion of patients with medication adjustments differed significantly between the treatment arms, no differences were seen in these adjustments due to adverse events after stratification for drug. CONCLUSION: Triple DMARD induction therapy is better than MTX monotherapy in early RA. Furthermore, no differences were seen in medication adjustments due to adverse events after stratification for drug. Intramuscular and oral GCs are equally effective as bridging treatments and both can be used.
23661492 Periarticular and generalised bone loss in patients with early rheumatoid arthritis: influ 2014 Jun OBJECTIVES: The aims of this study were to investigate the influence of alendronate and intra-articular betamethasone treatment on bone mineral density (BMD) changes in hand, lumbar spine and femoral neck during 1 year of a treat-to-target study (Cyclosporine, Methotrexate, Steroid in RA (CIMESTRA)). PATIENTS AND METHODS: A hundred and sixty patients with early, active rheumatoid arthritis (RA) received methotrexate, intra-articular betamethasone and ciclosporin /placebo-ciclosporin. Patients with Z-score ≤0 also started alendronate 10 mg/day. BMD of the hand (digital x-ray radiogrammetry (DXR-BMDhand)), BMD of lumbar spine and femoral neck (dual x-ray absorptiometry (DXA-BMDlumbar spine and DXA-BMDfemoral neck)) and x-rays of hands, wrists and forefeet (modified Sharp-van der Heijde score) were measured at baseline and 1 year, with complete data available in 107 patients. RESULTS: The change in BMD in hand, lumbar spine and femoral neck was negatively associated with the dose of intra-articular betamethasone (p<0.01 for all), but the bone loss in hand was modest and in the axial skeleton comparable with that of healthy individuals. Alendronate did not influence changes in DXR-BMDhand, which averaged -2.8%, whereas significant changes were observed in DXA-BMDlumbar spine and DXA-BMDfemoral neck in alendronate-treated patients (1.8% and 0.8%) compared with untreated patients (-1.8% and -2.2%) (p<0.01 and 0.02). Alendronate did not affect the radiographic progression (alendronate-treated patients: 0 (range 0-19), non-alendronate: 0 (0-18)). CONCLUSIONS: In early active RA, intra-articular betamethasone injections added to disease-modifying antirheumatic drug (DMARD) treatment led to minimal loss of hip and lumbar BMD, and the loss could be prevented by treatment with alendronate. Alendronate treatment did not affect radiographic progression.
23755969 Therapies for active rheumatoid arthritis after methotrexate failure. 2013 Jul 25 BACKGROUND: Few blinded trials have compared conventional therapy consisting of a combination of disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs with biologic agents in patients with rheumatoid arthritis who have active disease despite treatment with methotrexate--a common scenario in the management of rheumatoid arthritis. METHODS: We conducted a 48-week, double-blind, noninferiority trial in which we randomly assigned 353 participants with rheumatoid arthritis who had active disease despite methotrexate therapy to a triple regimen of disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (methotrexate, sulfasalazine, and hydroxychloroquine) or etanercept plus methotrexate. Patients who did not have an improvement at 24 weeks according to a prespecified threshold were switched in a blinded fashion to the other therapy. The primary outcome was improvement in the Disease Activity Score for 28-joint counts (DAS28, with scores ranging from 2 to 10 and higher scores indicating more disease activity) at week 48. RESULTS: Both groups had significant improvement over the course of the first 24 weeks (P=0.001 for the comparison with baseline). A total of 27% of participants in each group required a switch in treatment at 24 weeks. Participants in both groups who switched therapies had improvement after switching (P<0.001), and the response after switching did not differ significantly between the two groups (P=0.08). The change between baseline and 48 weeks in the DAS28 was similar in the two groups (-2.1 with triple therapy and -2.3 with etanercept and methotrexate, P=0.26); triple therapy was noninferior to etanercept and methotrexate, since the 95% upper confidence limit of 0.41 for the difference in change in DAS28 was below the margin for noninferiority of 0.6 (P=0.002). There were no significant between-group differences in secondary outcomes, including radiographic progression, pain, and health-related quality of life, or in major adverse events associated with the medications. CONCLUSIONS: With respect to clinical benefit, triple therapy, with sulfasalazine and hydroxychloroquine added to methotrexate, was noninferior to etanercept plus methotrexate in patients with rheumatoid arthritis who had active disease despite methotrexate therapy. (Funded by the Cooperative Studies Program, Department of Veterans Affairs Office of Research and Development, and others; CSP 551 RACAT ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00405275.)
24287449 A combination of sinomenine and methotrexate reduces joint damage of collagen induced arth 2014 Jan OBJECTIVE: To analyze the combination therapy of Sinomenine (SIN) and Methotrexate (MTX) in rheumatoid arthritis (RA), we herein demonstrated the combination effect of SIN and MTX on collagen-induced arthritis (CIA) in rats through their modulation on osteoclast-related cytokines. METHODS: CIA was induced by the immunization of type II collagen (CII) in SD rats. SIN and MTX were administrated alone or in combination after the onset of arthritis. Arthritis index and histological analysis were used to evaluate the effect of treatments. Effects of SIN and MTX on expression of receptor activator of NF-κB ligand (RANKL) and osteopontin (OPN) in synovial tissues were assayed by immunohistochemistry. RANKL, osteoprotegerin (OPG), IL-6, IL-17 and matrix metalloproteinases (MMPs) in rat serum were measured by ELISA. The expression of osteoclast-related cytokines in fibroblast-like synoviocytes (FLS) from RA patients was assayed by RT-PCR. RESULTS: SIN and MTX combination additively reduced the inflammatory symptoms and joint damage in CIA. Combination of SIN and MTX significantly repressed synovial RANKL and OPN production. SIN and MTX exhibited complementary and synergistic effect upon down-regulating RANKL, IL-6, IL-17 and MMPs in rat serum. SIN and MTX also modulated the expression of RANKL and OPG in RA-FLS. CONCLUSION: SIN and MTX have additive effects, decreasing inflammation and joint damage in CIA rats by modulating osteoclast-related cytokines. These results are indicative of the combined effect of SIN and MTX for anti-arthritic treatment in RA.
24916606 Methotrexate for treating rheumatoid arthritis. 2014 Jun 10 BACKGROUND: Methotrexate is a folic acid antagonist widely used for the treatment of neoplastic disorders. Methotrexate inhibits the synthesis of deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA), ribonucleic acid (RNA) and proteins by binding to dihydrofolate reductase. Currently, methotrexate is among the most commonly used drugs for the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis (RA). This is an update of the previous Cochrane systematic review published in 1997. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate short term benefits and harms of methotrexate for treating RA compared to placebo. SEARCH METHODS: The Cochrane Musculoskeletal Group Trials Register, The Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE and EMBASE were searched from 1966 to 1997 and then updated to November 2013. The search was complemented with a bibliography search of the reference lists of trials retrieved from the electronic search. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomized controlled trials and controlled clinical trials comparing methotrexate (MTX) monotherapy against placebo alone in people with RA. Any trial duration and MTX doses were included. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently determined which studies were eligible for inclusion, extracted data and assessed risk of bias. Outcomes were pooled using mean differences (MDs) for continuous variables or standardized mean differences (SMDs) when different scales were used to measure the same outcome. Pooled risk ratio (RR) was used for dichotomous variables. Fixed-effect models were used throughout, although random-effects models were used for outcomes showing heterogeneity. MAIN RESULTS: Five trials with 300 patients were included in the original version of the review. An additional two trials with 432 patients were added to the 2013 update of the review for a total of 732 participants. The trials were generally of unclear to low risk of bias with a follow-up duration ranging from 12 to 52 weeks. All trials included patients who have failed prior treatment (for example, gold therapy, D-penicillamine, azathioprine or anti-malarials); mean disease duration that ranged between 1 and 14 years with six trials reporting more than 4 years; and weekly doses that ranged between 5 mg and 25 mg. BENEFITS: Statistically significant and clinically important differences were observed for most efficacy outcomes. MTX monotherapy showed a clinically important and statistically significant improvement in the American College of Rheumatology (ACR) 50 response rate when compared with placebo at 52 weeks (RR 3.0, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.5 to 6.0; number needed to treat (NNT) 7, 95% CI 4 to 22). Fifteen more patients out of 100 had a major improvement in the ACR 50 outcome compared to placebo (absolute treatment benefit (ATB) 15%, 95% CI 8% to 23%).Statistically significant improvement in physical function (scale of 0 to 3) was also observed in patients receiving MTX alone compared with placebo at 12 to 52 weeks (MD -0.27, 95% CI -0.39 to -0.16; odds ratio (OR) 2.8, 95% CI 0.23 to 32.2; NNT 4, 95% CI 3 to 7). Nine more patients out of 100 improved in physical function compared to placebo (ATB -9%, 95% CI -13% to -5.3%). Similarly, the proportion of patients who improved at least 20% on the Short Form-36 (SF-36) physical component was higher in the MTX-treated group compared with placebo at 52 weeks (RR 1.5, 95% CI 1.0 to 2.1; NNT 9, 95% CI 4 to 539). Twelve more patients out of 100 showed an improvement of at least 20% in the physical component of the quality of life measure compared to placebo (ATB 12%, 95% CI 1% to 24%). No clinically important or statistically significant differences were observed in the SF-36 mental component.Although no statistically significant differences were observed in radiographic scores (that is, Total Sharp score, erosion score, joint space narrowing), radiographic progression rates (measured by an increase in erosion scores of more than 3 units on a scale ranging from 0 to 448) were statistically significantly lower for patients in the MTX group compared with placebo-treated patients (RR 0.31, 95% CI 0.11 to 0.86; NNT 13, 95% CI 10 to 60). Eight more patients out of 100 showed less damage to joints measured by an increase in erosion scores compared to placebo (ATB -8%, 95% CI -16% to -1%). In the one study measuring remission, no participants in either group met the remission criteria. These are defined by at least five of (≥ 2 months): morning stiffness of < 15 minutes, no fatigue, no joint pain by history, no joint tenderness, no joint swelling, and Westergren erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR) of < 20 mm/hr in men and < 30 mm/hr in women. HARMS: Patients in the MTX monotherapy group were twice as likely to discontinue from the study due to adverse events compared to patients in the placebo group, at 12 to 52 weeks (16% versus 8%; RR 2.1, 95% CI 1.3 to 3.3; NNT 13, 95% CI 6 to 44). Compared to placebo, nine more people out of 100 who took MTX withdrew from the studies because of side effects (ATB 9%, 95% CI 3% to 14%). Total adverse event rates at 12 weeks were higher in the MTX monotherapy group compared to the placebo group (45% versus 15%; RR 3.0, 95% CI 1.4 to 6.4; NNT 4, 95% CI 2 to 17). Thirty more people out of 100 who took MTX compared to those who took placebo experienced any type of side effect (common or rare) (ATB 30, 95% CI 13% to 47%). No statistically significant differences were observed in the total number of serious adverse events between the MTX group and the placebo group at 27 to 52 weeks. Three people out of 100 who took MTX alone experienced rare but serious side effects compared to 2 people out of 100 who took a placebo (3% versus 2%, respectively). AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Based on mainly moderate to high quality evidence, methotrexate (weekly doses ranging between 5 mg and 25 mg) showed a substantial clinical and statistically significant benefit compared to placebo in the short term treatment (12 to 52 weeks) of people with RA, although its use was associated with a 16% discontinuation rate due to adverse events.
22911089 Detection of Legionella pneumophila serogroup 1 in blood cultures from a patient treated w 2013 Feb A 65-year-old man was admitted to our hospital with a temperature of 39.3 °C, cough, sputum, and pharyngeal discomfort that had persisted for 3 days. He had been treated with methotrexate and adalimumab (a tumor necrosis factor-alpha [TNF-α] inhibitor) for rheumatoid arthritis for 2 years, and he had also been treated with S-1 (tegafur, gimeracil, and oteracil potassium) for pancreatic metastasis of gastric cancer for 2 months. Regardless of the underlying pathologies, his general condition was good and he had worked as an electrician until 2 days before admission. However, his appetite had suddenly decreased from the day before admission, and high fever and hypoxia were also evident upon admission. A chest X-ray and computed tomography scan revealed left pleural effusion and consolidation in both lungs. The pneumonia severity index score was 165 and the risk class was V. Accordingly, we started to treat the pneumonia with a combination of levofloxacin and meropenem. Thereafter, we received positive urinary antigen test findings for Legionella pneumophila. After hospitalization, hypoxia was progressed and hypotension was emerged. Despite the application of appropriate antibiotics, vasopressors, and oxygenation, the patient died 8 h after admission. Even after his death, blood cultures were continued to consider the possibility of bacterial co-infection. Although no bacteria were detected from blood cultures, Gimenez staining revealed pink bacteria in blood culture fluids. Subsequent blood fluid culture in selective medium revealed L. pneumophila serogroup 1. Recently, TNF-α inhibitors have been described as a risk factor for Legionnaires' disease. In consideration of the increased frequency of TNF-α inhibitors, we may need to recognize anew that L. pneumophila might be a pathogen of severe community-acquired pneumonia.
24161161 Assessment of disease-drug-drug interaction between single-dose tocilizumab and oral contr 2014 Jan OBJECTIVES: The objective of this study was to evaluate the effect of a single intravenous dose of tocilizumab (TCZ) on pharmacokinetics (PK) of oral contraceptive (OC; norethindrone (NE) and ethinyl estradiol (EE)) and on sex hormone levels (progesterone (PG), luteinizing hormone (LH), and follicle-stimulating hormone (FSH)) in subjects with active rheumatoid arthritis (RA) who were on stable doses of methotrexate. METHODS: This was an open-label, nonrandomized, multicenter, two-parallel group, one-sequence crossover study. In Group 1, Cycle 1 was a baseline cycle to determine the PK of OC and levels of sex hormones. At the start of Cycle 2, patients continued to receive OC and single TCZ dosing on Day 1. In Cycle 2, we determined the PK of OC and levels of sex hormones when OC and TCZ were combined. In Cycle 3, we determined the PK of OC and the levels of sex hormones after TCZ treatment was stopped. PK for EE and NE were analyzed serially on Day 7 when maximum TCZ effect on inflammation as indicated by C-reactiv protein (CRP) was expected. Hormone levels (PG, LH and FSH) were measured mid-cycle (cycle Days 12 - 16 and Day 21) during each cycle. Group 2 (healthy subjects) was studied to compare the levels of OC PK exposures with those in each cycle of Group 1 (RA subjects). RESULTS: Levels of PG, LH and FSH were not affected by the combination of TCZ/OC treatment in RA patients studied. No breakthrough bleeding was attributed to the initiation of TCZ treatment in subjects receiving OCs. PK exposures of EE and NE were similar between RA and healthy subjects at baseline and were not affected by single-dose TCZ. Administration of OC with or without a single dose of TCZ was well tolerated. CONCLUSIONS: Data from this study indicated that the PK and sex hormone levels were not affected in RA subjects who had active disease and were on a stable regimen of methotrexate.
25351370 Randomised controlled trial of tumour necrosis factor inhibitors against combination inten 2014 Oct BACKGROUND: Rheumatoid arthritis (RA) is initially treated with methotrexate and other disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs). Active RA patients who fail such treatments can receive tumour necrosis factor inhibitors (TNFis), which are effective but expensive. OBJECTIVE: We assessed whether or not combination DMARDs (cDMARDs) give equivalent clinical benefits at lower costs in RA patients eligible for TNFis. DESIGN: An open-label, 12-month, pragmatic, randomised, multicentre, two-arm trial [Tumour necrosis factor inhibitors Against Combination Intensive Therapy (TACIT)] compared these treatment strategies. We then systematically reviewed all comparable published trials. SETTING: The TACIT trial involved 24 English rheumatology clinics. PARTICIPANTS: Active RA patients eligible for TNFis. INTERVENTIONS: The TACIT trial compared cDMARDs with TNFis plus methotrexate or another DMARD; 6-month non-responders received (a) TNFis if in the cDMARD group; and (b) a second TNFi if in the TNFi group. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The Heath Assessment Questionnaire (HAQ) was the primary outcome measure. The European Quality of Life-5 Dimensions (EQ-5D), joint damage, Disease Activity Score for 28 Joints (DAS28), withdrawals and adverse effects were secondary outcome measures. Economic evaluation linked costs, HAQ changes and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs). RESULTS: In total, 432 patients were screened; 104 started on cDMARDs and 101 started on TNFis. The initial demographic and disease assessments were similar between the groups. In total, 16 patients were lost to follow-up (nine in the cDMARD group, seven in the TNFi group) and 42 discontinued their intervention but were followed up (23 in the cDMARD group and 19 in the TNFi group). Intention-to-treat analysis with multiple imputation methods used for missing data showed greater 12-month HAQ score reductions with initial cDMARDs than with initial TNFis [adjusted linear regression coefficient 0.15, 95% confidence interval (CI) -0.003 to 0.31; p = 0.046]. Increases in 12-month EQ-5D scores were greater with initial cDMARDs (adjusted linear regression coefficient -0.11, 95% CI -0.18 to -0.03; p = 0.009) whereas 6-month changes in HAQ and EQ-5D scores and 6- and 12-month changes in joint damage were similar between the initial cDMARD group and the initial TNFi group. Longitudinal analyses (adjusted general estimating equations) showed that the DAS28 was lower in the initial TNFi group in the first 6 months (coefficient -0.63, 95% CI -0.93 to -0.34; p < 0.001) but there were no differences between the groups in months 6-12. In total, 36 patients in the initial cDMARD group and 44 in the initial TNFi group achieved DAS28 remission. The onset of remission did not differ between groups (p = 0.085 on log-rank test). In total, 10 patients in the initial cDMARD group and 18 in the initial TNFi group experienced serious adverse events; stopping therapy because of toxicity occurred in 10 and six patients respectively. Economic evaluation showed that the cDMARD group had similar or better QALY outcomes than TNFi with significantly lower costs at 6 and 12 months. In the systematic reviews we identified 32 trials (including 20-1049 patients) on early RA and 19 trials (including 40-982 patients) on established RA that compared (1) cDMARDs with DMARD monotherapy; (2) TNFis/methotrexate with methotrexate monotherapy; and (3) cDMARDs with TNFis/methotrexate. They showed that cDMARDs and TNFis had similar efficacies and toxicities. CONCLUSIONS: Active RA patients who have failed methotrexate and another DMARD achieve equivalent clinical benefits at a lower cost from starting cDMARDs or from starting TNFis (reserving TNFis for non-responders). Only a minority of patients achieve sustained remission with cDMARDs or TNFis; new strategies are needed to maximise the frequency of remission. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Current Control Trials ISRCTN37438295. FUNDING: This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 18, No. 66. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.
23897769 Insights into the efficacy of golimumab plus methotrexate in patients with active rheumato 2014 Oct OBJECTIVE: Evaluate golimumab in patients with active rheumatoid arthritis (RA) and previous tumour necrosis factor-α (TNF) inhibitor use. METHODS: Patients (n=461) previously receiving ≥1 TNF inhibitor were randomised to subcutaneous injections of placebo, golimumab 50 mg or golimumab 100 mg q4 weeks. Primary endpoint (≥20% improvement in American College of Rheumatology (ACR20) criteria at week 14) findings have been reported for all patients in the trial. Reported herein are further assessments of efficacy/safety among patients receiving golimumab+methotrexate (MTX). RESULTS: Among efficacy-evaluable patients who received MTX at baseline, more receiving golimumab+MTX (n=201) than placebo+MTX (n=103) achieved ACR20 (40.8% vs 14.6%), ACR50 (20.9% vs 3.9%), and ACR70 (11.4% vs 2.9%) responses at week 24. Among the 137 patients who had received only one prior TNF inhibitor (adalimumab, n=33; etanercept, n=47; and infliximab, n=57), week 24 ACR20 rates were 30.3%, 46.8% and 50.9%, respectively, and thus lowest among those who previously used adalimumab. ACR20 response rates were 44.5% (61/137), 36.2% (17/47) and 23.5% (4/17) among patients who had received one, two or three TNF inhibitors, respectively. Adverse event (AE) rates were comparable across type/number of prior anti-TNF agents, but appeared somewhat higher among patients who discontinued previous TNF inhibitor(s) due to intolerance (37/49, 75.5%) versus lack of efficacy (LOE, 113/191, 59.2%). CONCLUSIONS: Patients with active RA previously treated with ≥1 TNF inhibitor had clinically relevant improvement with golimumab+MTX, which appeared somewhat enhanced among those who received only etanercept or infliximab as their prior TNF inhibitor. Golimumab+MTX safety appeared similar across patients, regardless of TNF inhibitor(s) previously used, with fewer AEs occurring among patients who discontinued prior therapy for LOE.
23728649 Etanercept for the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis. 2013 May 31 BACKGROUND: Etanercept is a soluble tumour necrosis factor alpha-receptor disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drug (DMARD) for the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis (RA). OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this review was to update the previous Cochrane systematic review published in 2003 assessing the benefits and harms of etanercept for the treatment of RA. In addition, we also evaluated the benefits and harms of etanercept plus DMARD compared with DMARD monotherapy in those people with RA who are partial responders to methotrexate (MTX) or any other traditional DMARD. SEARCH METHODS: Five electronic databases were searched from 1966 to February 2003 with no language restriction. The search was updated to January 2012. Attempts were made to identify other studies by contact with experts, searching reference lists and searching trial registers. SELECTION CRITERIA: All controlled trials (minimum 24 weeks' duration) comparing four possible combinations: 1) etanercept (10 mg or 25 mg twice weekly) plus a traditional DMARD (either MTX or sulphasalazine) versus a DMARD, 2) etanercept plus DMARD versus etanercept alone, 3) etanercept alone versus a DMARD or 4) etanercept versus placebo. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently extracted data and assessed the risk of bias of the trials. MAIN RESULTS: Three trials were included in the original version of the review. An additional six trials, giving a total of 2842 participants, were added to the 2012 update of the review. The trials were generally of moderate to low risk of bias, the majority funded by pharmaceutical companies. Follow-up ranged from six months to 36 months.BenefitAt six to 36 months the American College of Rheumatology (ACR) 50 response rate was statistically significantly improved with etanercept plus DMARD treatment when compared with a DMARD in those people who had an inadequate response to any traditional DMARD (risk ratio (RR) 2.0; 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.3 to 2.9, absolute treatment benefit (ATB) 38%; 95% CI 13% to 59%) and in those people who were partial responders to MTX (RR 11.7; 95% CI 1.7 to 82.5, ATB 36%). Similar results were observed when pooling data from all participants (responders or not) (ACR 50 response rates at 24 months: RR 1.9; 95% CI 1.3 to 2.8, ATB 29%; 36 months: RR 1.6; 95% CI 1.3 to 1.9, ATB 24%). Statistically significant improvement in physical function and a higher proportion of disease remission were observed in combination-treated participants compared with DMARDs alone ((mean difference (MD) -0.36; 95% CI -0.43 to -0.28 in a 0-3 scale) and (RR 1.92; 95% CI 1.60 to 2.31), respectively) in those people who had an inadequate response to any traditional DMARD. All changes in radiographic scores were statistically significantly less with combination treatment (etanercept plus DMARD) compared with MTX alone for all participants (responders or not) (Total Sharp Score (TSS) (scale = 0 to 448): MD -2.2, 95% CI -3.0 to -1.4; Erosion Score (ES) (scale = 0 to 280): MD -1.6; 95% CI -2.4 to -0.9; Joint Space Narrowing Score (JSNS) (scale = 0 to 168): MD -0.7; 95% CI -1.1 to -0.2), and with combination treatment compared with etanercept alone (TSS: MD -1.1; 95% CI -1.8 to -0.5; ES: MD -0.7; 95% CI -1.1 to -0.2; JSNS: MD -0.5, 95% CI -0.7 to -0.2). The estimate of irreversible physical disability over 10 years given the radiographic findings was 0.45 out of 3.0.When etanercept monotherapy was compared with DMARD monotherapy, there was generally no evidence of a difference in ACR50 response rates when etanercept 10 mg or 25 mg was used; at six months etanercept 25 mg was significantly more likely to achieve ACR50 than DMARD monotherapy but this difference was not found at 12, 24 or 36 months. TSS and ES radiographic scores were statistically significantly improved with etanercept 25 mg monotherapy compared with DMARD (TSS: MD -0.7; 95% CI -1.4 to 0.1; ES: MD -0.7; 95% CI -1.0 to -0.3) but there was no evidence of a statistically significant difference between etanercept 10 mg monotherapy and MTX.HarmsThere was no evidence of statistically significant differences in infections or serious infections between etanercept plus DMARD and DMARD alone at any point in time. Infection rates were higher in people receiving etanercept monotherapy compared with DMARD; however, there were no differences regarding serious infections. For those participants who had an inadequate response to DMARDs, the rate of total withdrawals was lower for the etanercept plus DMARD group compared with DMARD alone (RR 0.53; 95% CI 0.36 to 0.77, ATB 18%). No other statistically significant differences were observed in any of the assessed comparisons. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Etanercept 25 mg administered subcutaneously twice weekly together with MTX was more efficacious than either etanercept or MTX monotherapy for ACR50 and it slowed joint radiographic progression after up to three years of treatment for all participants (responders or not). There was no evidence of a difference in the rates of infections between groups.
24068485 Leukoencephalopathy due to oral methotrexate. 2014 Feb Methotrexate (MTX) is considered the main agent for the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis (RA). Neurotoxicity is often mild, but severe encephalopathy can develop, especially with intrathecal or intravenous administration. In rare cases, this syndrome has been observed in patients on long-term low-dose oral administration. A 68-year-old male was diagnosed with RA and on treatment with oral MTX 25 mg weekly for 4 years. The patient started with progressive dysarthria, ataxia and cognitive dysfunction. Complementary tests were normal. Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) showed hyperintense lesions in both cerebellar hemispheres on T2-weighted and FLAIR images with a diffusion restriction on diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI) and on the apparent diffusion coefficient map (ADC). On postgadolinium T1-weighted images, there were mild enhancements. Spectroscopy showed a demyelinating pattern. A pharmacogenetics determination was made, showing a heterozygous genotype in the MTHFR and ABCB1 genes. Medication with antirheumatic drug was stopped immediately on admission, and the patient gradually improved. MTX-induced leukoencephalopathy can occur even with low-dose administration. The exact pathogenic mechanism is still unknown, but it is hypothesised that it could be the result of a cumulative toxic effect on the blood-brain barrier. The nature of the relationship between the polymorphism and CNS toxicity is still unclear, and thus, further studies are warranted. Often located in the occipital lobes, the involvement of the cerebellum is quite rare. Early recognition of the condition and withdrawal of the drug lead to a better prognosis.
23406906 Regulatory effect of calcineurin inhibitor, tacrolimus, on IL-6/sIL-6R-mediated RANKL expr 2013 Feb 13 INTRODUCTION: This study investigated whether the calcineurin inhibitor, tacrolimus, suppresses receptor activator of NF-κB ligand (RANKL) expression in fibroblast-like synoviocytes (FLS) through regulation of IL-6/Janus activated kinase (JAK2)/signal transducer and activator of transcription-3 (STAT3) and suppressor of cytokine signaling (SOCS3) signaling. METHODS: The expression of RANKL, JAK2, STAT3, and SOCS3 proteins was assessed by western blot analysis, real-time PCR and ELISA in IL-6 combined with soluble IL-6 receptor (sIL-6R)-stimulated rheumatoid arthritis (RA)-FLS with or without tacrolimus treatment. The effects of tacrolimus on synovial inflammation and bone erosion were assessed using mice with arthritis induced by K/BxN serum. Immunofluorescent staining was performed to identify the effect of tacrolimus on RANKL and SOCS3. The tartrate-resistant acid phosphatase staining assay was performed to assess the effect of tacrolimus on osteoclast differentiation. RESULTS: We found that RANKL expression in RA FLS is regulated by the IL-6/sIL-6R/JAK2/STAT3/SOCS3 pathway. Inhibitory effects of tacrolimus on RANKL expression in a serum-induced arthritis mice model were identified. Tacrolimus inhibits RANKL expression in IL-6/sIL-6R-stimulated FLS by suppressing STAT3. Among negative regulators of the JAK/STAT pathway, such as CIS1, SOCS1, and SOCS3, only SOCS3 is significantly induced by tacrolimus. As compared to dexamethasone and methotrexate, tacrolimus more potently suppresses RANKL expression in FLS. By up-regulating SOCS3, tacrolimus down-regulates activation of the JAK-STAT pathway by IL-6/sIL-6R trans-signaling, thus decreasing RANKL expression in FLS. CONCLUSIONS: These data suggest that tacrolimus might affect the RANKL expression in IL-6 stimulated FLS through STAT3 suppression, together with up-regulation of SOCS3.
23179002 Clinical outcome in patients with rheumatoid arthritis switched to tocilizumab after etane 2013 Feb The present study retrospectively assessed the efficacy of tocilizumab in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) who failed to respond to treatment with etanercept or infliximab. A retrospective study of 33 RA patients who did not respond to etanercept or infliximab was conducted. Responses of subjects switching from etanercept to tocilizumab (n = 17) were compared with those switching from infliximab to tocilizumab (n = 16). Treatment with disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs before the switch, especially methotrexate (MTX), was maintained. Disease activity was assessed by the Disease Activity Score 28-C Reactive Protein (DAS28-CRP), the Simplified Disease Activity Index (SDAI), and the Clinical Disease Activity Index (CDAI). Patients who switched from etanercept were significantly less likely to have used MTX and were significantly older than patients who switched from infliximab. In both groups, there was a significant reduction from baseline in DAS28-CRP, SDAI, and CDAI values at 24 weeks with no significant differences between groups. However, at week 52, DAS28-CRP, SDAI, and CDAI values in the group switched from etanercept were significantly worse than those in the group switched from infliximab. All patients switched from infliximab were using MTX. In the evaluation between patients who switched from etanercept monotherapy, etanercept plus MTX, and infliximab plus MTX, a significant improvement from baseline was seen in DAS28-CRP, SDAI, and CDAI for all patients at 24 weeks with no significant differences between groups. Disease activity was maintained at 52 weeks in the group that switched from etanercept plus MTX and infliximab plus MTX. However, the efficacy of tocilizumab was decreased in the group that switched from etanercept monotherapy. Switching from etanercept plus MTX or from infliximab plus MTX to tocilizumab plus MTX improved response to therapy, but switching from etanercept monotherapy to tocilizumab monotherapy did not improve response to therapy.
23169319 Head-to-head comparison of subcutaneous abatacept versus adalimumab for rheumatoid arthrit 2013 Jan OBJECTIVE: There is a need for comparative studies to provide evidence-based treatment guidance for biologic agents in rheumatoid arthritis (RA). Therefore, this study was undertaken as the first head-to-head comparison of subcutaneous (SC) abatacept and SC adalimumab, both administered along with background methotrexate (MTX), for the treatment of RA. METHODS: Patients with active RA who were naive to treatment with biologic agents and had an inadequate response to MTX were randomly assigned to receive 125 mg SC abatacept weekly or 40 mg SC adalimumab biweekly, both given in combination with MTX, in a 2-year study. The primary end point was treatment noninferiority, assessed according to the American College of Rheumatology 20% improvement response (ACR20) at 1 year. RESULTS: Of the 646 patients who were randomized and treated, 86.2% receiving SC abatacept and 82% receiving SC adalimumab completed 12 months of treatment. At 1 year, 64.8% of patients in the SC abatacept group and 63.4% in the SC adalimumab group demonstrated an ACR20 response; the estimated difference between groups was 1.8% (95% confidence interval -5.6%, 9.2%), thus demonstrating the noninferiority of abatacept compared to adalimumab. All efficacy measures showed similar results and kinetics of response between treatments. The rate of radiographic nonprogression (defined as a total modified Sharp/van der Heijde score [SHS] less than or equal to the smallest detectable change) was 84.8% for SC abatacept-treated patients and 88.6% for SC adalimumab-treated patients, while the mean change from baseline in the total SHS was 0.58 and 0.38, respectively. In the SC abatacept and SC adalimumab groups, the incidence of serious adverse events (SAEs) was 10.1% and 9.1%, respectively, and the rate of serious infections was 2.2% and 2.7%, respectively. In patients treated with SC abatacept, the frequency of discontinuations due to AEs was 3.5% and discontinuations due to SAEs was 1.3%, while in patients treated with SC adalimumab, the frequencies were 6.1% and 3%, respectively. Injection site reactions occurred in 3.8% of patients receiving SC abatacept compared to 9.1% of patients receiving SC adalimumab (P=0.006). CONCLUSION: The results demonstrate that SC abatacept and SC adalimumab have comparable efficacy in patients with RA, as shown by similar kinetics of response and comparable inhibition of radiographic progression over 1 year of treatment. The safety was generally similar, other than the occurrence of significantly more local injection site reactions in patients treated with SC adalimumab.
23460074 Changes in lipoproteins associated with methotrexate or combination therapy in early rheum 2013 Jun OBJECTIVE: To study changes in lipid profiles at 24 weeks among patients with early rheumatoid arthritis (RA) participating in the Treatment of Early RA (TEAR) trial and randomized to receive methotrexate (MTX) plus etanercept, triple therapy (MTX plus sulfasalazine plus hydroxychloroquine), or aggressively titrated MTX monotherapy. METHODS: This TEAR substudy included 459 participants with biologic specimens. Serum levels of total cholesterol, low-density lipoprotein (LDL) cholesterol, and high-density lipoprotein (HDL) cholesterol were measured at 0 and 24 weeks. RESULTS: At 24 weeks, there were statistically significant increases in mean cholesterol levels in the MTX plus etanercept, triple therapy, and MTX monotherapy arms. The observed increases were 31.4 mg/dl, 28.7 mg/dl, and 30 mg/dl in LDL cholesterol, 19.3 mg/dl, 22.3 mg/dl, and 20.6 mg/dl in HDL cholesterol, and 56.8 mg/dl, 53 mg/dl, and 57.3 mg/dl in total cholesterol (P < 0.0001 versus baseline for each comparison). There was a statistically significant decrease in the ratio of total cholesterol to HDL cholesterol at 24 weeks in all 3 treatment groups versus baseline. There was no difference in any lipid changes between the 3 treatment arms. After multivariable adjustment, change in C-reactive protein, but not the Disease Activity Score in 28 joints, was associated with change in LDL cholesterol (P = 0.03) and total cholesterol (P = 0.01). Baseline glucocorticoid use was associated with changes in HDL cholesterol (P = 0.03) and total cholesterol (P = 0.02). CONCLUSION: Levels of total cholesterol, LDL cholesterol, and HDL cholesterol increased comparably shortly after initiation of MTX plus etanercept, triple therapy, and MTX monotherapy among patients with early RA with active disease participating in a clinical trial. The clinical relevance of short-term changes in traditional lipids on cardiovascular outcomes remains to be determined.
22923002 Adenosine A2A receptor and TNF-α regulate the circadian machinery of the human monocytic 2013 Feb Morning stiffness and increased symptoms of inflammatory arthritis are among the most common manifestations of rheumatoid arthritis (RA). Tumor necrosis alpha (TNF-α), an important mediator of inflammation in RA, regulates the circadian expression of clock proteins, and adenosine A(2A) receptors (A(2A)R) mediate many of the anti-inflammatory and antirheumatic actions of methotrexate, the cornerstone drug in the treatment of RA. We found that A(2A)R activation and TNF-α activated the clock core loop of the human monocytic THP-1 cell line. We further observed that interleukin (IL)-10, but not IL-12, mRNA expression fluctuates in a circadian fashion and that TNF-α and A(2A)R stimulation combined increased IL-10 expression. Interestingly, TNF-α, but not CGS21680, dramatically inhibited IL-12 mRNA expression. The demonstration that A(2A)R and TNF-α regulate the intrinsic circadian clock in immune cells provides an explanation for both the pathologic changes in circadian rhythms in RA and for the adverse circadian effects of methotrexate, such as fatigue.