Long-Term Maintenance of Certolizumab Pegol Safety and Efficacy, in Combination with Methotrexate and as Monotherapy, in Rheumatoid Arthritis Patients

Low dose, add-on prednisolone in patients with rheumatoid arthritis aged 65+: the pragmatic randomised, double-blind placebo-controlled GLORIA trial

Background

Low-dose glucocorticoid (GC) therapy is widely used in rheumatoid arthritis (RA) but the balance of benefit and harm is still unclear.

Methods

The GLORIA (Glucocorticoid LOw-dose in RheumatoId Arthritis) pragmatic double-blind randomised trial compared 2 years of prednisolone, 5 mg/day, to placebo in patients aged 65+ with active RA. We allowed all cotreatments except long-term open label GC and minimised exclusion criteria, tailored to seniors. Benefit outcomes included disease activity (disease activity score; DAS28, coprimary) and joint damage (Sharp/van der Heijde, secondary). The other coprimary outcome was harm, expressed as the proportion of patients with ≥1 adverse event (AE) of special interest. Such events comprised serious events, GC-specific events and those causing study discontinuation. Longitudinal models analysed the data, with one-sided testing and 95% confidence limits (95% CL).

Results

We randomised 451 patients with established RA and mean 2.1 comorbidities, age 72, disease duration 11 years and DAS28 4.5. 79% were on disease-modifying treatment, including 14% on biologics. 63% prednisolone versus 61% placebo patients completed the trial. Discontinuations were for AE (both, 14%), active disease (3 vs 4%) and for other (including covid pandemic-related disease) reasons (19 vs 21%); mean time in study was 19 months. Disease activity was 0.37 points lower on prednisolone (95% CL 0.23, p<0.0001); joint damage progression was 1.7 points lower (95% CL 0.7, p=0.003). 60% versus 49% of patients experienced the harm outcome, adjusted relative risk 1.24 (95% CL 1.04, p=0.02), with the largest contrast in (mostly non-severe) infections. Other GC-specific events were rare.

Conclusion

Add-on low-dose prednisolone has beneficial long-term effects in senior patients with established RA, with a trade-off of 24% increase in patients with mostly non-severe AE; this suggests a favourable balance of benefit and harm.

Trial registration number

NCT02585258.

Certolizumab Can Also Be Effective in Monotherapy for the Treatment of Rheumatoid Arthritis Patients

OBJECTIVE

Although it is known that methotrexate (MTX) increases the effectiveness of biological drugs (mainly anti-TNFs) in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA), in real life, it is known that many patients using anti-TNFs are on monotherapy due to many causes. This article compares the effectiveness of certolizumab as monotherapy as combined with MTX or leflunomide (LFN) in RA patients with failure to conventional synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (csDMARDs) in a real-world setting.

METHODS

A retrospective observational cohort study was conducted at a specialized centre for RA management in Colombia. Patients treated with certolizumab as monotherapy or in combination with MTX, LFN, or MTX+LFN, between 2011 and 2020 with a minimum 3-month follow-up were included. Demographics and RA clinical characteristics were recorded; effectiveness was assessed as the improvement in Disease Activity Score (DAS28) getting remission or low disease activity at 3, 6, and 12 months of treatment.

RESULTS

A total of 181 patients were included, 24 received certolizumab as monotherapy, 62 certolizumab plus MTX, 47 certolizumab plus LFN and 48 certolizumab plus MTX+LFN. At 3 months of follow-up, 80% of the patients showed decreased disease activity, with no significant differences between groups; at 12 months of treatment, response in certolizumab monotherapy group was 94.4% compared to 81.8% in combination with MTX, 80.5% in combination with LFN and 51.4% in combination with MTX+LFN. Response at 3 months (OR 4.04; 95% CI 1.28-12.69) and positive anti-CCP (OR 3.83; 95% CI 1.11-13.21) were associated with 12-month response.

CONCLUSION

Certolizumab seems to be effective as monotherapy in the treatment of RA patients with failure to csDMARDs.

An open-label randomized controlled trial of DMARD withdrawal in RA patients achieving therapeutic response with certolizumab pegol combined with DMARDs

OBJECTIVES

The objective of this trial was to compare effectiveness of certolizumab pegol added to conventional synthetic DMARDs (csDMARDs) in RA patients, followed by continuing vs discontinuing background csDMARDs after treatment response.

METHODS

Patients with active RA who had certolizumab pegol added to their existing csDMARD regimen due to inadequate response were eligible. At 3 or 6 months, patients who achieved a change (Δ) in DAS28 of ⩾1.2 were randomized to continue combination therapy (COMBO) or withdraw csDMARD therapy (MONO) (unblinded). The primary outcome was non-inferiority of stopping vs continuing csDMARD(s) in terms of maintaining ΔDAS28 ⩾ 1.2 or achieving DAS28 low disease activity at 18 months (non-inferiority margin: 15 percentile units).

RESULTS

A total of 125 patients were enrolled, 88 randomized to COMBO (n = 43) or MONO (n = 45). No significant differences were observed between groups in baseline age, gender, race, RF status or prior biologics (16% vs 11%). Although the rate of ΔDAS28 ⩾ 1.2 and/or DAS28 low disease activity achievement at 18 months was clinically comparable between the two groups (72% vs 69%), non-inferiority assumptions were not met [absolute risk difference (upper limit of 90% CI): 2.6% (19.1%)]. Similar baseline-adjusted improvements were seen in DAS28 (COMBO vs MONO: -2.3 vs -2.1; P = 0.49) and all endpoints were not statistically different including 59% vs 56% achieved DAS28 low disease activity, 69% vs 59% ΔDAS28 ⩾ 1.2, and 41% each remission.

CONCLUSION

Among RA patients achieving a therapeutic response on combination therapy with certolizumab pegol and csDMARDs, withdrawing csDMARDs was not non-inferior to maintaining csDMARDs but improvements were sustained in both groups at 18 months.

Targeting co-stimulatory molecules in autoimmune disease

Therapeutic targeting of immune checkpoints has garnered significant attention in the area of cancer immunotherapy, in which efforts have focused in particular on cytotoxic T lymphocyte antigen 4 (CTLA4) and PD1, both of which are members of the CD28 family. In autoimmunity, these same pathways can be targeted to opposite effect: to curb the over-exuberant immune response. The CTLA4 checkpoint serves as an exemplar, whereby CTLA4 activity is blocked by antibodies in cancer immunotherapy and augmented by the provision of soluble CTLA4 in autoimmunity. Here, we review the targeting of co-stimulatory molecules in autoimmune diseases, focusing in particular on agents directed at members of the CD28 or tumour necrosis factor receptor families. We present the state of the art in co-stimulatory blockade approaches, including rational combinations of immune inhibitory agents, and discuss the future opportunities and challenges in this field.

Current Therapeutic Options in the Treatment of Rheumatoid Arthritis

Rheumatoid arthritis (RA) is a systemic autoimmune disease characterized by chronic inflammation of the joints. Untreated RA leads to a destruction of joints through the erosion of cartilage and bone. The loss of physical function is the consequence. Early treatment is important to control disease activity and to prevent joint destruction. Nowadays, different classes of drugs with different modes of action are available to control the inflammation and to achieve remission. In this review, we want to discuss differences and similarities of these different drugs.

Turkish League Against Rheumatism (TLAR) Recommendations for the Pharmacological Management of Rheumatoid Arthritis: 2018 Update Under Guidance of Current Recommendations

Objectives

This study aims to report the assessment of the Turkish League Against Rheumatism (TLAR) expert panel on the compliance and adaptation of the European League Against Rheumatism (EULAR) 2016 recommendations for the management of rheumatoid arthritis (RA) in Turkey.

Patients and methods

The EULAR 2016 recommendations for the treatment of RA were voted by 27 specialists experienced in this field with regard to participation rate for each recommendation and significance of items. Afterwards, each recommendation was brought forward for discussion and any alteration gaining ≥70% approval was accepted. Also, Turkish version of each item was rearranged. Last version of the recommendations was then revoted to determine the level of agreement. Levels of agreement of the two voting rounds were compared with Wilcoxon signed-rank test. In case of significant difference, the item with higher level of agreement was accepted. In case of no difference, the changed item was selected.

Results

Four overarching principles and 12 recommendations were assessed among which three overarching principles and one recommendation were changed. The changed overarching principles emphasized the importance of physical medicine and rehabilitation specialists as well as rheumatologists for the care of RA patients in Turkey. An alteration was made in the eighth recommendation on treatment of active RA patients with unfavorable prognostic indicators after failure of three conventional disease modifying anti-rheumatic drugs. Remaining principles were accepted as the same although some alterations were suggested but could not find adequate support to reach significance.

Conclusion

Expert opinion of the TLAR for the treatment of RA was composed for practices in Turkish rheumatology and/or physical medicine and rehabilitation clinics.

Treatment of Rheumatoid Arthritis with Certolizumab Pegol: Results from PROACTIVE, a Non-Interventional Study in the UK and Ireland

Introduction

The objective of this non-interventional study was to investigate the long-term safety and effectiveness of certolizumab pegol (CZP) in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) in the UK and Ireland.

Methods

Patients were prescribed CZP at their physicians’ discretion and followed during routine clinical practice for up to 88 weeks. DAS28(ESR) response (defined as at least a 1.2-point reduction from baseline) was measured in the full analysis set (FAS) at week 12, and patients were categorized by week 12 responder status in all subsequent analyses. The primary outcome was DAS28(ESR) response at week 78. Secondary outcomes included change from baseline in DAS28(ESR), HAQ-DI, and RADAI scores at week 78, and EULAR response at week 78. Adverse drug reactions (ADRs) were recorded for all patients who received at least one dose of CZP.

Results

A total of 149 patients were enrolled, of whom 111 (74.5%) formed the FAS. At week 12, 80 patients (72.1%) were DAS28(ESR) responders and 31 (27.9%) non-responders. Compared to non-responders, a greater proportion of week 12 responders had a DAS28(ESR) response at week 78 (43.8% versus 22.6%). Improvements in DAS28(ESR), HAQ-DI, and RADAI scores were also greater on average among week 12 responders, as was the proportion of patients meeting EULAR criteria. Overall, 9 patients (6.1%) experienced 13 ADRs during the study.

Conclusion

These data demonstrate the safety and effectiveness of CZP in adult patients with RA treated during routine clinical practice in the UK and Ireland.

Trial Registration

ClinicalTrials.gov identifier, NCT01288287.

Funding

UCB Pharma.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1007/s12325-018-0758-1) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Certolizumab pegol in a heterogeneous population of patients with moderate-to-severe rheumatoid arthritis

Aim:

To determine the efficacy and safety of certolizumab pegol for the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis in a real-world setting.

Materials & methods:

Patients with moderate-to-severe rheumatoid arthritis who initiated therapy with certolizumab were followed for 12 weeks. Response was assessed with Disease Activity Score of 28 joints, European Ligue Against Rheumatism criteria and Simplified Disease Activity Index. Predictors of response were analyzed with binary logistic regression models.

Results:

Statistically significant decreases in tender and swollen joint counts, laboratory parameters and use of corticosteroids and disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs were found. Disease activity also significantly diminished. Higher Disease Activity Score of 28 joints at baseline was the main predictor of response. No severe adverse events were reported.

Conclusion:

Certolizumab was effective and well tolerated, particularly in the subpopulation with higher inflammatory burden at baseline.

Rheumatoid arthritis (RA) is a chronic inflammatory disease that destroys cartilage and bone of joints. It is associated with progressive disability and reduced quality of life. However, new biological therapies have improved RA prognosis. Certolizumab pegol, a biological agent licensed for RA treatment, was administered to patients with moderate or severe RA. After 12 weeks, joint pain and inflammation significantly diminished and analytical parameters improved. Certolizumab was particularly effective in patients with higher inflammation at baseline.

Safety and maintenance of response for tofacitinib monotherapy and combination therapy in rheumatoid arthritis: an analysis of pooled data from open-label long-term extension studies

Objective

Tofacitinib is an oral Janus kinase inhibitor for the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis. This post hoc analysis evaluated patients receiving tofacitinib monotherapy or combination therapy, as well as those who switched from monotherapy to combination therapy (mono→combo) or vice versa (combo→mono) in long-term extension (LTE) studies.

Methods

Data were pooled from open-label LTE studies (ORAL Sequel (NCT00413699; ongoing; data collected 14 January 2016) and NCT00661661) involving patients who participated in qualifying index studies. Efficacy outcomes included American College of Rheumatology 20/50/70 rates, change from baseline in Disease Activity Score in 28 joints, erythrocyte sedimentation rate (DAS28-4(ESR)), Clinical Disease Activity Index (CDAI) and Health Assessment Questionnaire-Disability Index and DAS28-4(ESR) and CDAI low disease activity and remission. Safety was evaluated over 96 months.

Results

Of the 4967 patients treated, 35.4% initiated tofacitinib monotherapy, 64.6% initiated combination therapy, 2.6% were mono→combo switchers and 7.1% were combo→mono switchers. Patients who switched multiple times were excluded. Of those who initiated monotherapy and combination therapy, 87.8% (1543/1757) and 82.0% (2631/3210), respectively, remained on the same regimen throughout the study; efficacy was maintained. Incidence rates (IRs) for serious adverse events with tofacitinib 5 mg and 10 mg twice daily, respectively, were 9.42 and 8.41 with monotherapy and 8.36 and 10.75 with combination therapy; IRs for discontinuations due to AEs were 7.13 and 6.06 with monotherapy and 7.82 and 8.06 with combination therapy (overlapping CIs). For mono→combo and combo→mono switchers, discontinuations due to AEs were experienced by 0.8% and 0.9%, respectively, within 30 days of switching.

Conclusion

Tofacitinib efficacy as monotherapy or combination therapy was maintained through month 48 and sustained to month 72, with minimal switching of treatment regimens. Safety was consistent over 96 months.

Clinical trial registration

NCT00413699 (Pre-results) and NCT00661661 (Results).