bDMARD Monotherapy Research Articles

A retrospective study of efficacy of tofacitinib combined with bDMARDs in the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis patients with inadequate response to bDMARDs.

Rheumatoid arthritis (RA) is a chronic systemic autoimmune disease characterized by synovial inflammation, joint swelling, and pain involving multiple joints. While biologic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (bDMARDs) and targeted synthetic DMARDs (tsDMARDs) are popular treatments for RA, there is limited research on their combined use. This study examined a cohort of RA patients who demonstrated inadequate response to bDMARDs and subsequently initiated combination therapy with tofacitinib and bDMARDs, assessing both the efficacy and safety profile of this therapeutic approach. In this study, we retrospectively collected the electronic medical records (EMR) of 62 adult patients with RA who were admitted to the Fourth Affiliated Hospital Zhejiang University School of Medicine between August 2018 and December 2022. All patients had received at least one bDMARD treatment for more than 3 months and still exhibited moderate-to-high disease activity. Tofacitinib 5 mg bid was added to their original biological treatment in 28 cases, and other 34 cases switched to another bDMARD or tsDMARD as control group. Treatment was continued for 24 weeks following the initiation of combination therapy. Changes in DAS28-ESR and ACR20, 50, 70 response rates at week 24 were collected and analyzed from baseline, while changes in C-reactive protein (CRP) and erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR) at weeks 4, 8, 12, 24 were also collected and analyzed. After 24 weeks of treatment, the DAS28-ESR score in combined treatment group decreased significantly from a baseline of 5.26 ± 0.90 (3.87-8.31) to 2.67 ± 0.86 (1.41-5.11), with remission achieved by 19 patients (67.9%) and low disease activity achieved by five patients (17.9%). The DAS28-ESR in the control group exhibited a decrease from 5.20 ± 0.77 (3.87-7.23) at baseline to 3.25 ± 1.29 (1.54-5.69). In all, 13 patients (38.2%) achieved remission, while another 11 patients (32.4%) achieved low disease activity. The ACR20, 50, 70 response rates were 85.71%, 75%, and 39.29% in the combined treatment group, whereas it were 75.0%, 53.57%, 21.43% in the control group. Additionally, both ESR and CRP levels decreased significantly during the course of treatment without any reported adverse events leading to discontinuation. Our findings offer some evidence, supporting the effectiveness and safety of combining bDMARD with JAKi tofacitinib in RA patients who have an inadequate response to bDMARD monotherapy. This combination effectively manages disease activity while maintaining a relatively low and manageable incidence of adverse events. Further prospective randomized controlled trials with large sample sizes are anticipated to provide evidence-based medical support.

Impact of treatment of rheumatoid arthritis on periodontal disease: A review.

Numerous studies support a bidirectional association between rheumatoid arthritis (RA), a chronic autoimmune degenerative inflammatory joint disease, and periodontitis, a chronic inflammatory disease caused by the immune reaction to bacteria organized in biofilms. RA and periodontitis are both multifactorial chronic inflammatory diseases that share common modifiable and non-modifiable risk factors. There is no cure for RA; treatment is based on lifestyle modifications and a variety of medications: nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAID), glucocorticoids, and disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs, e.g., conventional synthetic DMARDs [csDMARDs]; biological DMARDs [bDMARD] and targeted synthetic DMARDs). There are molecular pathways of inflammation that are common to both RA and periodontitis. Thus, there is a potential effect of RA treatments on periodontitis. This systematic review aims to assess the impact of antirheumatic agents on periodontal conditions of patients suffering from both RA and periodontitis. PubMed/MEDLINE, Cochrane Library, and Embase online databases were systematically explored, and a manual search was performed to identify relevant studies published until January 2023. This review is registered in the PROSPERO database (CRD42023409006). A total of 2827 articles were identified, and 35 fulfilled the inclusion criteria. The included studies generally show a consensus that, at normal dosage, NSAID and corticosteroids have negligible impact on periodontium. Similarly, csDMARD alone or in combination with other csDMARD demonstrated no adverse effect on periodontium. Monotherapy with bDMARD had a positive effect on periodontal pocket depths and gingival inflammation in the longitudinal studies up to 6 months but showed negligible effect on the periodontium in interventional studies with a longer follow-up (9 months and 15.1 months). However, the combination of tumor necrosis factor (TNF)-α inhibitors+methotrexate (MTX) was associated with a rise in gingival inflammation. Due to the considerable heterogeneity of the study designs, a meta-analysis could not reasonably be performed. Within the limitations of the available studies, there is evidence to suggest that bDMARD monotherapy may improve the periodontal condition of RA patients with periodontal disease to a certain extent; the concomitant medication of TNF inhibitor+MTX could worsen gingival inflammation. More data are required to understand the impact of RA therapies on periodontal health.

The efficacy of tofacitinib combined with bDMARDs in the treatment of ankylosing spondylitis patients with inadequate response to bDMARDs: a retrospective study

IntroductionAnkylosing spondylitis(AS) is a chronic inflammatory rheumatic disease primarily affecting the spine and sacroiliac joints. While biologic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs(bDMARDs) and targeted synthetic DMARDs(tsDMARDs) are popular treatments for AS, there is limited research on their combined use. This study examined a cohort of AS patients who demonstrated inadequate response to bDMARDs and subsequently initiated combination therapy with tofacitinib in conjunction with bDMARDs, assessing both the efficacy and safety profile of this therapeutic approach.MethodsIn this study, we retrospectively collected the electronic medical records (EMR) of 15 adult patients with AS who were admitted to the Fourth Affiliated Hospital Zhejiang University School of Medicine between January 2018 and June 2022. All patients had received at least one bDMARD treatment for more than three months and still exhibited moderate to high disease activity. Tofacitinib 5 mg bid was added to their original biological treatment. Treatment was continued for a minimum of 12 weeks following the initiation of combination therapy. Changes in ASDAS-CRP and BASDAI scores at week 12 were collected and analyzed from baseline, while changes in C-reactive protein (CRP) and erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR) at weeks 4, 8, and 12 were also collected and analyzed.ResultsAfter 12 weeks of treatment, the overall ASDAS-CRP score decreased significantly from a baseline of 3.82 ± 1.47 (2.83 ~ 4.99) to 1.47 ± 0.48 (0.75 ~ 2.44), with remission achieved by 7 patients (46.7%) and low disease activity achieved by 5 patients (33.3%). The overall BASDAI score also showed significant improvement, decreasing from a baseline of 5.11 ± 1.42 (3.25 ~ 7 0.75) to 1.28 ± 0.70(0.20 ~ 2.55). Additionally, both ESR and CRP levels decreased significantly during the course of treatment without any reported adverse events leading to discontinuation.ConclusionTo a certain extent, our findings provide some evidence supporting the efficacy and safety of the combination of bDMARD and JAK inhibitor tofacitinib in AS patients with inadequate response to bDMARD monotherapy. It effectively controls disease activity while maintaining a relatively low and manageable incidence of adverse events. Further prospective randomized controlled trials with large sample sizes are anticipated to provide evidence-based medical support.

Comparison of Biological Agent Monotherapy and Associations Including Disease-Modifying Antirheumatic Drugs for Rheumatoid Arthritis: Literature Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Trials

Update the available evidence comparing biologic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (bDMARDs) in combination with conventional synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (CsDMARDs) to bDMARDs in monotherapy in patients with rheumatoid arthritis. Research was limited to randomized controlled trials. Major outcome: ACR 20 response criteria at 24 weeks. clinical and radiographic criteria at week 24, 52 and 104. 23 trials (6358 patients), including seven bDMARDs and one other molecule: Anbainuo (anti-TNF-R). No study satisfied our search criteria for anakinra, certolizumab and infliximab. Compared to bDMARD monotherapy, combination therapy gives a better ACR 20 at 24 weeks (RR: 0.88 (0.84-0.94)) in fixed and random effect models, and this result is sustained at 52 and 104 weeks. The results were mostly similar for all other outcomes without increasing the risk of adverse effects. This meta-analysis confirms the superiority of combination therapy over monotherapy in rheumatoid arthritis, in accordance to the usual guidelines.

Increased radiographic progression of distal hand osteoarthritis occurring during biologic DMARD monotherapy for concomitant rheumatoid arthritis

ObjectivesA considerable proportion of patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) also suffer from hand osteoarthritis (OA). We here assess the association between conventional synthetic (cs) and biological (b) disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs) and radiographic distal interphalangeal-(DIP) OA in patients with RA.MethodsAdult RA patients from a longitudinal Swiss registry of rheumatic diseases who had ≥ 2 hand radiographs were included at the first radiograph and followed until the outcome or the last radiograph. Patients were grouped into two cohorts based on whether DIP OA was present or absent at cohort entry (cohorts 1 and 2, respectively). Modified Kellgren-Lawrence scores (KLS) were obtained by evaluating DIP joints for the severity of osteophytes, joint space narrowing, subchondral sclerosis, and erosions. KLS ≥ 2 in ≥ 1 DIP joint indicated incident or existing OA, and increase of ≥ 1 in KLS in ≥ 1 DIP joint indicated progression in existing DIP OA. Time-varying Cox regression and generalized estimating equation (GEE) analyses were performed. We estimated hazard ratios (HRs) and odds ratios (ORs) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) of DIP OA incidence (cohort 2), or progression (cohort 1), in bDMARD monotherapy, bDMARD/csDMARD combination therapy, and past or never DMARD use, when compared to csDMARD use. In post hoc analyses, we descriptively and analytically assessed the individual KLS features in cohort 1.ResultsAmong 2234 RA patients with 5928 radiographs, 1340 patients had DIP OA at baseline (cohort 1). Radiographic progression of DIP OA was characterized by new or progressive osteophyte formation (666, 52.4%), joint space narrowing (379, 27.5%), subchondral sclerosis (238, 17.8%), or erosions (62, 4.3%). bDMARD monotherapy had an increased risk of radiographic DIP OA progression compared to csDMARD monotherapy (adjusted HR 1.34 [95% CI 1.07–1.69]). The risk was not significant in csDMARD/bDMARD combination users (HR 1.12 [95% CI 0.96–1.31]), absent in past DMARD users (HR 0.96 [95% CI 0.66–1.41]), and significantly lower among never DMARD users (HR 0.54 [95% CI 0.33–0.90]). Osteophyte progression (HR 1.74 [95% CI 1.11–2.74]) was the most significantly increased OA feature with bDMARD use compared to csDMARD use. In 894 patients without initial DIP OA (cohort 2), the risk of incident OA did not differ between the treatment groups. The results from GEE analyses corroborated all findings.ConclusionsThese real-world RA cohort data indicate that monotherapy with bDMARDs is associated with increased radiographic progression of existing DIP OA, but not with incident DIP OA.

Prescribing Trends of Biologic Disease-Modifying Anti-rheumatic Drugs Using a Claims Database from 6 Million People in Japan.

We conducted a descriptive epidemiological study from 2012 to 2018 using the JMDC Claims Database, a nationwide claims database, and described the annual changes based on the number of patients prescribed bDMARDs. Anti-rheumatic drugs were identified based on the Anatomical Therapeutic Chemical codes, including methotrexate, glucocorticoids, non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs and bDMARDs. From the database including 6,862,244 people, the data of 6407 patients with rheumatoid arthritis were extracted. The present study demonstrated that the proportion of patients prescribed bDMARDs was 1.0 per 1000 people, with those aged ≥ 65 years being the most common age group. The proportion of patients with rheumatoid arthritis who were prescribed bDMARDs increased significantly over time (p < 0.0001). Additionally, the concomitant proportions of methotrexate (p < 0.0001), non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (p < 0.0001) and glucocorticoids (p = 0.0001) prescribed with bDMARDs decreased significantly over time. The increase in bDMARD monotherapy may be attributed to the new bDMARDs that have been launched sequentially; furthermore, physicians have come to recognise monotherapy as the mainstay of treatment. Future studies must accumulate evidence on the long-term efficacy and safety of bDMARDs.

Genetic Polymorphisms of GGH and ABCC2 Are Associated with Methotrexate Intolerance in Patients with Rheumatoid Arthritis.

Objective: to identify new single-nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) in genes encoding proteins involved in methotrexate (MTX) metabolism and to evaluate the associations of these SNPs with MTX toxicity or intolerance in a southern Spanish cohort of patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA). Methods: An observational, retrospective, and multicenter study was conducted at three participating hospitals in southern Spain. The main variable was intolerance to MTX (i.e., bDMARD monotherapy), defined as an interruption of treatment due to adverse events or toxicity. Patients being treated with MTX and bDMARDs (combined treatment) at the time of the study visit were considered “tolerant” of MTX. Ten polymorphisms were selected for sequencing in our patients according to a literature review. Each polymorphism was classified according to three possible genotypes (e.g., two homozygous (AA or GG) and one heterozygous (AG)), and the association of these combinations with MTX intolerance was evaluated. Results: A total of 227 patients were included in the final analysis (107 intolerant of MTX and 120 tolerant). A significant association was observed between MTX intolerance and the GGH-T401C AA/AG genotype (OR 2.13, 95% CI 1.06–4.29) in comparison with the GG genotype. On the other hand, an inverse association was observed between the ABCC2-C24T TT/TC genotype and intolerance to MTX (OR 0.59, 95% CI 0.35–1.00) in comparison with the CC genotype. Conclusion: This study provides new data on the association between genetic polymorphisms and MTX intolerance, which may contribute to the development of new biomarkers and personalized medicine in patients with RA.

Real-world evaluation of effectiveness, persistence, and usage patterns of monotherapy and combination therapy tofacitinib in treatment of rheumatoid arthritis in Australia

ObjectiveThis study aimed to describe the real-world effectiveness and treatment persistence among patients with rheumatoid arthritis treated with monotherapy and combination therapy tofacitinib and biologic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (bDMARDs).MethodsThis was a post hoc analysis of a retrospective, non-interventional study that extracted data for patients treated with tofacitinib or bDMARDs from the Australian OPAL dataset between March 2015 and September 2018. Monotherapy tofacitinib and bDMARDs and combination therapy tofactinib and bDMARDs were propensity score matched and treatment effectiveness and persistence of the groups were evaluated.ResultsIn the bDMARD and tofacitinib monotherapy and combination therapy matched populations there were 1300 bDMARD initiators (n = 564 monotherapy) and 650 tofacitinib initiators (n = 282 monotherapy). In the bDMARD and tofacitinib monotherapy matched groups, 62.9% and 66.7% were in DAS-28 CRP disease remission after 18 months of treatment, respectively. In the combination therapy bDMARD and tofacitinib groups, 50% and 58.9% were in DAS-28 CRP disease remission after 18 months, respectively. The median treatment persistence was similar between the monotherapy bDMARD and tofacitinib treatment groups (36.7 months (95% CI 27.4 to “not reached’) and 34.2 months (95%CI 30.3 to “not reached”) respectively) as well as the combination therapy bDMARD and tofacitinib groups (32.2 months (95% CI 25.7 to 34.4) and 32.7 months (95%CI 28.7 to “not reached”, respectively).ConclusionsPatients receiving combination therapy with tofacitinib or bDMARDs had higher disease activity scores at index than patients receiving monotherapy. Monotherapy with tofacitinib or bDMARDs, and combination therapy with tofacitinib or bDMARDs demonstrated similar treatment effectiveness and persistence, respectively.Key Points• This study provides real-world evidence regarding effectiveness, treatment persistence, and treatment patterns, among patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) treated with monotherapy or combination therapy tofacitinib.• The study suggests that monotherapy and combination therapy tofacitinib is an effective intervention in RA with persistence and effectiveness comparable to bDMARDs.

Persistence on biologic DMARD monotherapy after achieving rheumatoid arthritis disease control on combination therapy: retrospective analysis of corrona registry data

Biological disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (bDMARDs) monotherapy may enhance adherence and decrease adverse events compared to combination therapy with conventional synthetic DMARDs (csDMARDs); however, persistence with bDMARD monotherapy has not been extensively studied. We explore persistence of etanercept monotherapy and monotherapy with other tumor necrosis factor inhibitors (TNFis) among patients first achieving remission/low disease activity (LDA) while on combination therapy with csDMARDs and a TNFi. Using Corrona registry data, the percentage of patients persistent with the index TNFi (etanercept versus other TNFis) over 6 and 12 months was determined. Factors influencing persistence and treatment patterns at 6 and 12 months were examined. Among 617 eligible patients, 56% of 182 patients on etanercept and 45% of 435 patients on other TNFis persisted with monotherapy at 6 months, 46% and 33%, respectively, at 12 months. Across first-line and subsequent biologic DMARDs, etanercept persistence was greater than other TNFi persistence by 10.8% (95% CI 2.1%, 19.6%) at 6 months and 11.4% (95% CI 0.9%, 21.9%) at 12 months. Patients on other TNFis were more likely to require reintroduction of csDMARD after 6 months (45% versus 35% for etanercept). Remission was the key predictor of persistence for both etanercept and other TNFi monotherapies. This retrospective, cohort study of registry data reflecting real-world practice indicates patients who achieve remission/LDA with combination csDMARD and TNFi therapy may successfully transition to TNFi monotherapy. Patients on etanercept monotherapy experienced greater persistence and less frequent reintroduction of a csDMARD than was observed for patients on other TNFi monotherapies.

Clinical characteristics, disease activity, functional status, and quality of life results of patients with psoriatic arthritis using biological and conventional synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs.

Objectives This study aims to compare the clinical characteristics, disease activity, and quality of life (QoL) of patients with psoriatic arthritis (PsA) who use biological and conventional synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs) in a nationwide cohort throughout Turkey.Patients and methods A total of 961 patients (346 males, 615 females; mean age 46.9±12.2 years; range, 18 to 81 years) with PsA according to the classification criteria for PsA were included in the study. The patients’ demographic and clinical characteristics, physical examination results, Disease Activity Score 28, Disease Activity Index for Psoriatic Arthritis and Bath Ankylosing Spondylitis Disease Activity Index (BASDAI), Psoriasis Area and Severity Index, Bath Ankylosing Spondylitis Functional Index, Bath Ankylosing Spondylitis Metrology Index, Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale, Health Assessment Questionnaire, Psoriatic Arthritis Quality of Life (PsAQoL), and short form-36 scores were all recorded.Results Of the patients, 23% underwent biological DMARD (bDMARD) monotherapy, 42% underwent conventional synthetic DMARD (csDMARD) monotherapy, 10% underwent a csDMARD combination therapy, and 10% underwent a combination bDMARD and csDMARD treatment. The visual analog scale (VAS pain), patient global assessment, physician global assessment, and BASDAI scores were found to be lower among patients using combination treatment of csDMARD and bDMARD, while the swollen joint count was found to be lower among patients using bDMARD. The PsAQoL score was found to be the lowest among patients not using any medication and the highest among those using bDMARD.ConclusionIn our study, patients with PsA were successfully treated with both csDMARD and bDMARD monotherapy. When the biological treatments used for PsA were compared with csDMARD, it was found that biological treatments had a positive effect on both disease activity and the QoL. Combinations of csDMARDs and bDMARDs were preferred in cases in which the disease activity was still high or increased. Because of the highest efficacy of the combined treatment, we highly suggest increasing the number of patients on combined treatment.

THU0163 USE OF BIOLOGICAL AGENT IN MONOTHERAPY IN RHEUMATOID ARTHRITIS IN COMPARISON TO THE ASSOCIATIONS WITH D(ISEASE) M(ODIFIING) A(NTI) R(HEUMATIC) D(RUGS): REVIEW OF LITERATURE AND META-ANALYSIS OF RANDOMIZED TRIALS.

Background:Biologic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (bDMARDs) extend the treatment choices for rheumatoid arthritis (RA) patients with suboptimal response or intolerance to conventional synthetic DMARDs (CsDMARDs). Currently, 9 biologic agents are approved in the RA treatment: and among them, three anti TNF agents are also approved in monotherapy (adalimumab, certolizumab and etanercept), but also abatacept, anakinra and tocilizumab. Registries of routine clinical practice treatment indicate that approximately one third of RA patients are being treated with a bDMARD in monotherapy and analyses from health care claims suggest that when methotrexate (MTX) is prescribed in combination with a bDMARD, more than half of the patients do not collect the MTX prescription and overall patients seem to taper MTX intake over time. So it is important to evaluate the benefit and harm associated with use of biological agents as monotherapy, and not only the traditional combination therapy strategies.Objectives:To compare the efficacy and safety of the individual biological agents used in monotherapy in patients with RA than the combination therapy strategy with CsDMARD + bDMARD.Methods:We used The Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), EMBASE, and MEDLINE in order to carry out our research, for published reports from inception of each database through December 2019. Search results were limited to randomised controlled trials (RCTs), with our two arms: biological agent in monotherapy and combination strategie (with any CsDMARDs). Major outcome was the ACR 20 reponse criteria at 24 week. The secondary outcomes were: the ACR 20 at 52 week, ACR 50, 70, 90 reponse criteria, the DAS 28 remission (with CRP and/or ESR), the score sharps modified non progressor, the proportion of patients who withdrawals the study due to adverse events, the proportion of patients who withdrawals the study due to lack of efficacy, the HAQ improvement &gt; 0,22, CDAI and SDAI remission at week 24 and 52 if the data were available. The study of tolerance was also made. To estimate the relative efficacy of treatments whilst preserving the randomized comparisons within each trial, a Bayesian network meta-analysis was conducted in R (version 3.6.1) using fixed and random-effects.Results:The systematic review identified 2566 citations. The analysis comprises 22 trials (6358 patients), including six biological agents approved for RA (abatacept, adalimumab, etanercept, golimumab, rituximab and tocilizumab) as well as two other molecules: Clazakizumab, a humanized monoclonal antibody that binds to the interleukin-6 (IL-6) cytokine and Anbainuo, recombinant human TNFRII:Fc fusion protein. No study satisfyies our search criteria for anakinra, certolizumab and infliximab. Compared to combination therapy with CsDMARD+bDMARD, bDMARD monotherapy has less probability to give a ACR20 response at 24 weeks (RR: 0,92 [0,89 – 0,96]) in fixed or random effect model and this result is similar at 52 weeks (RR: 0,94 [0,89 – 0,99]). For all other outcome mesures, we can see an increased of ACR50–70 and 90 responses, an improve of the DAS 28 remission score, an increase of the proportion of sharp’s score non progressors (&lt;0,5) as well as a decrease of withdrawals for inefficacy without increase of withdrawals for toxicity.Conclusion:Evidence from this meta-analysis suggests that combinaison strategy with bDMARD+CsDMARD remains the most efficacious option, being more effective than the use of biologics in monotherapy. The interest from this point of view is to sensitize prescribers to the use of other CsDMARDs when there is a contraindication or intolerance to MTX, but also to make patients aware of the superiority of the association of biological agents with CsDMARDs.figureDisclosure of Interests:Célia DELPECH: None declared, François-Xavier LABORNE: None declared, Pascal Hilliquin Consultant of: BMS, MSD, Novartis, Roche-Shugai.

Real-world evaluation of effectiveness, persistence, and usage patterns of tofacitinib in treatment of rheumatoid arthritis in Australia.

The aim of this study was to describe the real-world evidence for effectiveness, treatment persistence, and treatment patterns among patients in the community with rheumatoid arthritis treated with the JAK inhibitor tofacitinib. This was a retrospective, non-interventional cohort study that extracted data for new users of tofacitinib or biologic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (bDMARDs) from the Australian Optimizing Patient outcomes in Australian RheumatoLogy (OPAL) dataset between March 2015 and September 2018. Patients were propensity score matched at a 1:2 tofacitinib to bDMARD ratio based on age, sex, and selected baseline treatment combinations. Treatment effectiveness was evaluated using disease status measures. Treatment persistence was calculated and the percentage of patients receiving monotherapy or combination therapy at treatment initiation was evaluated. Data from 2810 patients were extracted and 1950 patients were included in the matched population (1300 bDMARD initiators and 650 tofacitinib initiators). Patients were predominantly aged 55 to 74years (57.8%) and female (81.2%). After 18months of treatment, 52.4% and 57.8% of patients had achieved disease activity score (DAS) remission in the bDMARD and tofacitinib groups, respectively. The median treatment persistence for tofacitinib was similar to that for bDMARDs: 34.2months (95% CI 32.2 to not reached) and 33.8months (95% CI 28.8 to 40.4), respectively. In the overall population, more patients were prescribed tofacitinib as monotherapy (43.4%) compared with bDMARD monotherapy (33.4%). Tofacitinib demonstrated treatment effectiveness and persistence similar to bDMARDs. Overall, there was a trend for more use of tofacitinib as monotherapy than bDMARDs. Key Points • This study provides real-world evidence regarding effectiveness, treatment persistence, and treatment patterns, among patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) in the community being treated with tofacitinib. • The study suggests that tofacitinib is an effective and enduring intervention in RA with tofacitinib persistence and effectiveness comparable to bDMARDs.

Effect of Concomitant Disease-modifying Antirheumatic Drugs and Methotrexate Administration Route on Biologic Treatment Durability in Rheumatoid Arthritis: OBRI Cohort Results.

Prior studies have suggested that concurrent conventional synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drug (csDMARD) therapy enhances the efficacy of biologic DMARD (bDMARD). Here, we assessed the effect of concomitant csDMARD use and methotrexate (MTX) route of administration on time to bDMARD discontinuation in a large Canadian (Ontario), observational, rheumatoid arthritis (RA) cohort. Patients from the Ontario Best Practices Research Initiative (OBRI) who initiated bDMARD therapy and had ≥ 1 followup assessment were included. The effect of concomitant csDMARD use (primary analysis) and MTX route of administration (secondary analysis) on bDMARD discontinuation owing to (1) any reason, (2) ineffectiveness, (3) adverse events (AE), and (4) both (2) and (3), were assessed with multivariate Cox regression. Among the 814 patients included, 153 (18.8%) received bDMARD monotherapy and 661 (81.2%) combination csDMARD/bDMARD therapy. Over a mean followup of 1.9 years, bDMARD were discontinued in 38.7% of patients. In multivariate analysis, there was a nonsignificant trend toward lower discontinuation for the csDMARD/bDMARD group compared to bDMARD monotherapy for any reason (HR 0.76, 95% CI 0.55-1.05) and owing to ineffectiveness/AE (HR 0.73, 95% CI 0.50-1.06). Further, patients taking combination therapy had significantly lower risk of bDMARD discontinuation due to AE (HR 0.43, 95% CI 0.24-0.76). In the secondary analysis, no statistical association between MTX dose or route of administration and bDMARD durability was observed. Concomitant csDMARD use was associated with a significantly lower hazard for bDMARD discontinuation due to AE among patients with RA followed in routine clinical practice in Ontario, Canada. Neither MTX route of administration nor dose were significant predictors of bDMARD durability.

Cotreatment with methotrexate in routine care patients with rheumatoid arthritis receiving biological treatment yields better outcomes over time

ObjectivesWe aimed to evaluate the effects of methotrexate (MTX) comedication added to biological disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (bDMARD) on disease activity measures in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) in routine care.MethodsPatients...

Assessments of the unmet need in the management of patients with rheumatoid arthritis: analyses from the NOR-DMARD registry.

ObjectiveTo describe the outcomes of MTX and biologic DMARD (bDMARD) treatment in patients with RA and assess unmet needs in patients who fail treatment, using real-world data from the Norwegian DMARD (NOR-DMARD) registry.MethodsData included RA treatment courses from January 2007 until July 2016. Patients received MTX monotherapy (in MTX-naïve patients), bDMARD monotherapy, bDMARDs + MTX, or bDMARDs + other conventional synthetic DMARDs (csDMARDs). DAS28-4(ESR) was used to measure remission (<2.6) and inadequate response (>3.2) across all groups at Months 6 and 12. Estimated ACR20/50/70 and EULAR good and good/moderate response rates (based on DAS28-4[ESR] score) for bDMARDs were modelled at Months 6 and 12 using logistic mixed regression. DAS28-4(ESR) scores and changes from baseline, and rates and reasons for discontinuation, were evaluated for all groups over 24 months.ResultsThe 2778 treatment courses in this analysis included 714 MTX monotherapy, 396 bDMARD monotherapy, 1460 bDMARDs + MTX and 208 bDMARDs + other csDMARDs. Of patients with DAS28-4(ESR) data at Months 6 and 12 (25.0–34.1%), 33.9–47.2% did not switch treatment and were inadequate-responders at Month 12. There were no significant differences in efficacy between bDMARD groups (bDMARD monotherapy, or bDMARDs + MTX or other csDMARDs). Lack of efficacy was the most common reason for stopping treatment across all groups (13.7–22.1% over 24 months).ConclusionAn unmet treatment need exists for patients still experiencing inadequate response to MTX monotherapy and bDMARDs as monotherapy or in combination with MTX/other csDMARDs after 12 months.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov, https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT01581294.

Comparative effectiveness of first-line biological monotherapy use in rheumatoid arthritis: a retrospective analysis of the RECord-linkage On Rheumatic Diseases study on health care administrative databases

ObjectiveThese analyses aim to comparatively evaluate the persistence on treatment of different biological disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (bDMARDs) when administered in monotherapy compared with combination with conventional synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs...

Psoriatic arthritis treatment regimens, therapy duration and reasons for cessation in the biologics era: a multi-centre Australian study.

To describe the treatment regimens, duration of therapy and reasons for disease-modifying antirheumatic drug (DMARD) cessation in a large psoriatic arthritis (PsA) cohort. A retrospective non-interventional multi-centre study using Audit4 electronic medical records, with de-identified, routinely collected clinical data from rheumatology practices in the OPAL consortium (Optimising Patient outcomes in Australian rheumatoLogy) during November 2015. Baseline characteristics, type and duration of conventional and biologic DMARDs (cDMARD and bDMARD, respectively), disease activity (Disease Activity Score of 28 joints C-reactive protein [DAS28-CRP]), and reasons for treatment cessation were recorded. A total of 3422 rheumatologist-diagnosed PsA patients were included: 60% female, mean age 54 years and disease duration 10 years. Of patients with treatment recorded (n = 2948), 46% were on cDMARD monotherapy, 19% bDMARD monotherapy, 13% combination bDMARD and cDMARDs, 11% combination cDMARDs and 10% no DMARDs. Of those with DAS28-CRP results (n = 494), the highest mean DAS28-CRP was 3.32 on combination cDMARDs, and the lowest was 2.19 on bDMARD monotherapy. Median duration on cDMARD monotherapy was 33.5 months (n = 2232), on bDMARD monotherapy 110.1 months (n = 751), on combination bDMARD and cDMARDs 68.5 months (n = 559). The most common reasons for cessation of cDMARD monotherapy was adverse reactions (41%), for bDMARD monotherapy lack of efficacy (26%), and for combination bDMARD and cDMARDs treatment completed or no longer required (37%). Most PsA patients were prescribed DMARD therapies with a large proportion receiving cDMARDs. Patients on combination cDMARD therapies had the highest DAS28-CRP results. Adverse reactions were the most common reason for cessation of cDMARD monotherapy, whereas for bDMARD monotherapy it was lack of efficacy.

EQ-5D utility, response and drug survival in rheumatoid arthritis patients on biologic monotherapy: A prospective observational study of patients registered in the south Swedish SSATG registry.

ObjectivesBiologic agents have dramatically changed treatment of rheumatoid arthritis (RA). To date only scarce head-to-head data exist especially when the biological therapies are given as monotherapy without concomitant disease modifying drugs (DMARDs). Thus the objective of the current study is to evaluate treatment response of all available biological therapies with special focus on utility (EQ-5D-3L) and drug survival of biologic DMARDs (bDMARDs) prescribed as monotherapy in RA patients in southern Sweden.Materials and methodsAll RA patients registered in a regional database as initiating bDMARD as monotherapy, i.e. without concomitant conventional synthetic DMARDs (csDMARDs), from 1st of January 2006 through 31st of December 2012, were included. Patients were followed from initiation of the first dose of bDMARD monotherapy treatment until withdrawal from treatment, loss of follow-up or 31st of December 2012. Descriptive statistics for utility (EQ-5D-3L), effectiveness, and drug survival of bDMARD monotherapy were calculated.ResultsDuring the study period, a total of 554 patients were registered in SSATG as initiating bDMARD monotherapy. Most of the patients were women (81%), with a mean age of 57 years. The average disease duration was more than 12 years, and on average the patients had previously been treated with approximately four different csDMARDs. Fifty-five percent of the patients were initiating their first bDMARD, 26% their second, and 19% their third or more. At baseline the average EQ-5D-3L was 0.34. Most patients had moderate to high disease activity, with a mean DAS28 of 5.0, and were substantially disabled, with an average HAQ score of 1.4. At 6 months´ follow-up, the EQ-5D-3L in patients still on the biologic drug had increased by mean 0.23 (SD 0.4) with no differences between type of bDMARD (p = 0.49). The mean change in EQ-5D-3L ranged from 0.11 (rituximab and infliximab) to 0.42 (tocilizumab). Although the changes were numerically different, no distinct pattern favored any particular bDMARD for EQ-5D-3L (p = 0.49) or other clinical outcomes. Overall, DAS28 defined remission and low disease activity were achieved in 20% and 43% of patients, respectively. Drug survival rates were statistically significantly different between bDMARDs (p = 0.01), with the highest rates observed for rituximab, followed by etanercept. After failing first course of anti-TNF, patients switching to another mode of action had significantly higher drug survival than those switching to a second course of anti-TNF therapy (p = 0.02).ConclusionsUtility (EQ-5D-3L) increased after 6 months of all bDMARD treatments in monotherapy, indicating improvement of patients’ quality of life. After failure of anti-TNF treatment in monotherapy, switching to another mode of action may be associated with better drug survival than starting a second TNF-inhibitor.

No impact of concomitant methotrexate use on serious adverse event and serious infection risk in patients with rheumatoid arthritis treated with bDMARDs: a systematic literature review and meta-analysis

ObjectivesTo compare the risk of serious adverse events, serious infections and death caused by methotrexate and biological disease-modifying antirheumatic drug (bDMARD) combination therapy versus a bDMARD prescribed as monotherapy in...

The usage of biological DMARDs and clinical remission of rheumatoid arthritis in China: a real-world large scale study

The aims of this study are to characterize the biological disease-modifying antirheumatic drug (bDMARD) usage patterns in real-life and examine the remission rate of rheumatoid arthritis (RA) patients receiving bDMARDs in routine clinical practice in China. Consenting RA patients (≥18 years) from 15 teaching hospitals and receiving marketed bDMARDs were included. In total, 802 patients (81.3 % women, 49.0 ± 13.9 years) were included; 89.5 % were receiving a combination of bDMARDs and conventional synthetic DMARDs (csDMARDS), whereas 10.5 % were receiving bDMARD monotherapy. Etanercept (including Enbrel® and local brand Yi Sai Pu® and Qiangke®), tocilizumab, adalimumab, and infliximab were used by 66.6 %, 17.0 %, 7.5 %, and 6.6 % patients, respectively. Etanercept was used at a mean weekly dose of 38.2 ± 15.6 mg for 25.5 ± 47.0 weeks and tocilizumab at 94.5 ± 21.9 mg for 4.7 ± 7.5 weeks. Overall rate of remission was 12.6 %, 5.4 % , and 3.5 % based on DAS28, CDAI, and SDAI scores, respectively. Compared with patients receiving bDMARDs for <3 months, those receiving bDMARDs for ≥3 months exhibited significantly lower DAS28 scores (p < 0.0001), and a significantly higher proportion of patients who received bDMARDs for ≥12 months achieved the treatment goal (remission or low disease activity, 62.5 % vs. 18.3 %, p < 0.0001). Patients receiving combination therapy with csDMARDs exhibited lower DAS28 scores than patients receiving bDMARD monotherapy (4.3 vs. 4.8, p = 0.011). This large-scale real-world study showed that bDMARD usage patterns in routine clinical practice in China were in accordance with international guidelines for RA management despite the short treatment duration. Longer duration of bDMARD usage and combination therapy showed a favored outcome of RA.