De-intensifying treatment in established rheumatoid arthritis (RA): Why, how, when and in whom can DMARDs be tapered?

Predicting Flare in Patients With Rheumatoid Arthritis in Biologic Induced Remission, on Tapering, and on Stable Therapy

OBJECTIVE

The tapering of biologic disease-modifying antirheumatic drug (b-DMARD) therapy for patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) in stable remission is frequently undertaken, but specific guidance on how to successfully taper is lacking. The objective of this study is to identify predictors of flare in patients in stable b-DMARD-induced clinical remission, who did or did not follow structured b-DMARD tapering.

METHODS

Patients with RA receiving b-DMARD treatment who had achieved sustained remission according to a Disease Activity Score in 28 joints using the C-reactive protein level (DAS28-CRP) <2.6 for ≥6 months were offered tapering. Clinical, ultrasound (US) (total power Doppler [PD]/grayscale abnormalities), CD4+ T cell subsets, and patient-reported outcomes (PROs) were collected at inclusion. The primary endpoint was the occurrence of flare (loss of DAS28-CRP remission) over 12 months. Logistic regression analyses identified predictors of flare. Dichotomization into high/low-risk groups was based on 80% specificity using the area under the receiving operator curve (AUROC).

RESULTS

Of 63 patients choosing tapering, 23 (37%) flared compared with 12 of 60 (20%) on stable treatment (P = 0.043). All patients who flared regained remission upon reinstating treatment. In the tapering group, flare was associated with lower regulatory T cell (Treg) (P < 0.0001) and higher CRP levels (P < 0.0001), erythrocyte sedimentation rate (P < 0.035), and inflammation-related cells (IRCs) (P = 0.054); stepwise modeling selected Tregs (odds ratio [OR] = 0.350, P = 0.004), IRCs (OR = 1.871, P = 0.007), and CRP level (OR = 1.577, P = 0.004) with 81.7% accuracy and AUROC = 0.890. In the continued therapy group, modeling retained the tender joint count, total PD, and visual analog scale pain score, with 82.1% accuracy and AUROC = 0.899. Most patients in the study were considered low risk of flare (80 of 123 patients [65%]). Only 5 of 37 (13.5%) of the low-risk patients who tapered flared, which was notable compared with the continued therapy group (20% flare).

CONCLUSION

Flare on tapering b-DMARDs was predicted by lower Tregs and elevated inflammation biomarkers (IRCs/CRP level); flare on continued b-DMARDs was associated with raised pain parameters and US inflammation. Knowledge of these biomarkers should improve outcomes by targeted selection for tapering, and by increased monitoring of those on continued therapy predicted to flare.

Towards the Lowest Efficacious Dose: Results From a Multicenter Noninferiority Randomized Open-Label Controlled Trial Assessing Tocilizumab or Abatacept Injection Spacing in Rheumatoid Arthritis in Remission

OBJECTIVE

We assess the clinical and structural impact at two years of progressively spacing tocilizumab (TCZ) or abatacept (ABA) injections versus maintenance at full dose in patients with rheumatoid arthritis in sustained remission.

METHODS

This multicenter open-label noninferiority (NI) randomized clinical trial included patients with established rheumatoid arthritis in sustained remission receiving ABA or TCZ at a stable dose. Patients were randomized to treatment maintenance (M) at full dose (M-arm) or progressive injection spacing (S) driven by the Disease Activity Score in 28 joints every 3 months up to biologics discontinuation (S-arm). The primary end point was the evolution of disease activity according to the Disease Activity Score in 44 joints during the 2-year follow-up analyzed per protocol with a linear mixed-effects model, evaluated by an NI test based on the one-sided 95% confidence interval (95% CI) of the slope difference (NI margin 0.25). Other end points were flare incidence and structural damage progression.

RESULTS

Overall, 202 of the 233 patients included were considered for per protocol analysis (90 in S-arm and 112 in M-arm). At the end of follow-up, 16.2% of the patients in the S-arm could discontinue their biologic disease-modifying antirheumatic drug, 46.9% tapered the dose and 36.9% returned to a full dose. NI was not demonstrated for the primary outcome, with a slope difference of 0.10 (95% CI 0.10-0.31) between the two arms. NI was not demonstrated for flare incidence (difference 42.6%, 95% CI 30.0-55.1) or rate of structural damage progression at two years (difference 13.9%, 95% CI -6.7 to 34.4).

CONCLUSION

The Towards the Lowest Efficacious Dose trial failed to demonstrate NI for the proposed ABA or TCZ tapering strategy.

The Humira in Ocular Inflammations Taper (HOT) Study

PURPOSE

To assess factors that impact the risk of relapse in patients with noninfectious uveitis (NIU) who undergo adalimumab tapering after achieving remission.

DESIGN

Retrospective study.

METHODS

In this multicenter study, patients with NIU were treated with adalimumab and subsequently tapered. Patient demographics, type of NIU, onset and duration of disease, the period of inactivity before tapering adalimumab, and the tapering schedule were collected. The primary outcome measures were independent predictors of the rate of uveitis recurrence after adalimumab tapering.

RESULTS

Three hundred twenty-eight patients were included (54.6% female) with a mean age of 34.3 years. The mean time between disease onset and initiation of adalimumab therapy was 35.2 ± 70.1 weeks. Adalimumab tapering was commenced after a mean of 100.8 ± 69.7 weeks of inactivity. Recurrence was observed in 39.6% of patients at a mean of 44.7 ± 61.7 weeks. Patients who experienced recurrence were significantly younger than those without recurrence (mean 29.4 years vs 37.5 years, P = .0005), and the rate of recurrence was significantly higher in younger subjects (hazard ratio [HR] = 0.88 per decade of increasing age, P = .01). The lowest rate of recurrence was among Asian subjects. A faster adalimumab taper was associated with an increased recurrence rate (HR = 1.23 per unit increase in speed, P < .0005). Conversely, a more extended period of remission before tapering was associated with a lower rate of recurrence (HR = 0.97 per 10-weeks longer period of inactivity, P = .04).

CONCLUSIONS

When tapering adalimumab, factors that should be considered include patient age, race, and duration of disease remission on adalimumab. A slow tapering schedule is advisable.

Prevalence and predictors of sustained remission/low disease activity after discontinuation of induction or maintenance treatment with tumor necrosis factor inhibitors in rheumatoid arthritis: a systematic and scoping review

BACKGROUND

To determine the prevalence of sustained remission/low disease activity (LDA) in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) after discontinuation of tumor necrosis factor inhibitors (TNFi), separately in induction treatment and maintenance treatment studies, and to identify predictors of successful discontinuation.

METHODS

We performed a systematic literature review of studies published from 2005 to May 2022 that reported outcomes after TNFi discontinuation among patients in remission/LDA. We computed prevalences of successful discontinuation by induction or maintenance treatment, remission criterion, and follow-up time. We performed a scoping review of predictors of successful discontinuation.

RESULTS

Twenty-two induction-withdrawal studies were identified. In pooled analyses, 58% (95% confidence interval (CI) 45, 70) had DAS28 < 3.2 (9 studies), 52% (95% CI 35, 69) had DAS28 < 2.6 (9 studies), and 40% (95% CI 18, 64) had SDAI ≤ 3.3 (4 studies) at 37-52 weeks after discontinuation. Among patients who continued TNFi, 62 to 85% maintained remission. Twenty-two studies of maintenance treatment discontinuation were also identified. At 37-52 weeks after TNFi discontinuation, 48% (95% CI 38, 59) had DAS28 < 3.2 (10 studies), and 47% (95% CI 33, 62) had DAS28 < 2.6 (6 studies). Heterogeneity among studies was high. Data on predictors in induction-withdrawal studies were limited. In both treatment scenarios, longer duration of RA was most consistently associated with less successful discontinuation.

CONCLUSIONS

Approximately one-half of patients with RA remain in remission/LDA for up to 1 year after TNFi discontinuation, with slightly higher proportions in induction-withdrawal settings than with maintenance treatment discontinuation.

The effective threshold dose of etanercept in patients with methotrexate-resistant rheumatoid arthritis

INTRODUCTION

The therapy of rheumatoid arthritis (RA) was advanced by biological agents, yet costly. This study aims to identify the effective threshold dose of etanercept (ENT) and cost-effectiveness in methotrexate (MTX)-resistant RA in real world.

METHODS

Eligible patients had an inadequate response (DAS28-ESR > 3.2) to initial MTX monotherapy, and subsequently received etanercept. The effective cut-off value of cumulative dose was identified to maintain remission response (DAS28-ESR < 2.6) at month 24 by using restricted cubic splines. Remission rate, low disease activity (LDA) rate, glucocorticoid exposure, safety, and cost-effectiveness were compared between the saturated and non-saturated dose groups divided by the cut-off dose.

RESULTS

Seventy-eight (14.2%) of 549 enrolled patients were eligible, and 72 patients completed follow-up. The 2-year cumulative cut-off dose that maintained remission response at 24 months was 1975 mg. And the recommended threshold dosing strategy of etanercept was twice weekly (BIW) for the first 6 months, every week (QW) for the next 6 months, and every 2 weeks (Q2W) and every month (QM) for the second year. Greater net changes in DAS28-ESR score were observed in the ENT saturated dose group than in the non-saturated dose group (average change 0.569, 95%CI 0.236-0.901, p = 0.001). The proportion of patients achieving remission (27.8% vs 72.2%, p < 0.001) and LDA (58.3% vs 83.3%, p = 0.020) in the non-saturated group was both significantly lower than that in the saturated group at 24 months. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of the saturated group referred to the non-saturated group was 5791.2 $/QALY.

CONCLUSIONS

In refractory RA patients, the effective cumulative cut-off dose of etanercept for sustained remission at 24 months was calculated as 1975 mg, and receiving saturated dose was more effective and cost-effective than with non-saturated dose. Key Points • The effective cumulative cut-off dose of etanercept for sustained remission at 24 months in RA patients is calculated as 1975 mg. • Receiving saturated dose of etanercept is more effective and cost-effective than with non-saturated dose in refractory RA patients.

Tapering or discontinuation of biological disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs in axial spondyloarthritis: A review of the literature and discussion on current practice

Biological disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (bDMARDs) have taken up an important role in the management of axial spondyloarthritis. Once stable remission or low disease activity has been achieved with bDMARDs, it may be possible to maintain this state with lower levels of these drugs. Studies consistently demonstrate that tapering of tumor necrosis factor alpha inhibitors (TNFi) is not inferior to full-dose continuation in terms of maintaining treatment response, while data for tapering of interleukin-17 inhibitors (IL-17i) is lacking. Complete discontinuation of TNFi and IL-17i, however, often results in relapse and should not be recommended at this moment. Clear safety benefits of tapering or discontinuation have not been shown, although studies were typically not designed to address this. Current evidence does not support specific tapering or discontinuation strategies, although stepwise disease activity-guided regimens do allow for a more personalized approach and might be preferred. The definition of what constitutes an appropriate disease state to initiate tapering or discontinuation is unclear, and requires further study. Also, reliable predictors of successful tapering and discontinuation have not yet been identified. Fortunately, if tapering or discontinuation fails, most patients are able to regain disease control when reverted to the original bDMARD regimen. Finally, most patients indicate that, when asked, they would be willing to try tapering if the rationale is clear and if it is in their best interests. The decision to taper or discontinue should be made through shared decision-making, as this could improve the likelihood of success.

Efficacy and safety of progressively reducing biologic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs in patients with rheumatoid arthritis in persistent remission: a study protocol for a non-inferiority randomized, controlled, single-blind trial

Background

To compare the effects of two biologic disease-modifying antirheumatic drug (bDMARD) administration strategies on the maintenance effect and safety of patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) in remission, to analyze the effects of gradual drug reduction and dose maintenance treatment on clinical outcomes in patients who have achieved remission with different types of bDMARDs, to search and screen out people who may benefit from drug reduction strategies, and to provide references for drug reduction strategies and treatment options for patients with RA in remission, so as to help improve the safety of the treatment and reduce the economic burden.

Methods

The study will be a 24-month non-inferiority randomized, controlled, single-blind trial and is planned to be launched in our hospital from September 2021 to August 2023. Patients will be randomized in a ratio of 2:1 to two groups: maintenance or injection spacing by 50%/gradual reduction of dosage every 3 months up to complete stop. When the patient relapses, return to the last effective dose. If the remission can be maintained, the medication of bDMARDs can be stopped 9 months after enrollment. The primary outcome will be the persistent flare rate.

Discussion

Our study may provide a reference for the selection of drug reduction strategies and treatment options for patients with RA in remission, so as to help improve the safety of the treatment and reduce the economic burden.

Trial registration

Chinese Clinical Trial Registry ChiCTR2100044751. Registered on 26 March 2021

A Population-Based Study Evaluating Retention in Rheumatology Care Among Patients With Rheumatoid Arthritis

Objective

The study objective was to assess adherence to system‐level performance measures measuring retention in rheumatology care and disease modifying anti‐rheumatic drug (DMARD) treatment in rheumatoid arthritis (RA).

Methods

We used a validated health administrative data case definition to identify individuals with RA in Ontario, Canada, between 2002 and 2014 who had at least 5 years of potential follow‐up prior to 2019. During the first 5 years following diagnosis, we assessed whether patients were seen by a rheumatologist yearly and the proportion dispensed a DMARD yearly (in those aged ≥66 for whom medication data were available). Multivariable logistic regression analyses were used to estimate the odds of remaining under rheumatologist care.

Results

The cohort included 50,883 patients with RA (26.1% aged 66 years and older). Over half (57.7%) saw a rheumatologist yearly in all 5 years of follow‐up. Sharp declines in the percentage of patients with an annual visit were observed in each subsequent year after diagnosis, although a linear trend to improved retention in rheumatology care was seen over the study period (P < 0.0001). For individuals aged 66 years or older (n = 13,293), 82.1% under rheumatologist care during all 5 years after diagnosis were dispensed a DMARD annually compared with 31.0% of those not retained under rheumatology care. Older age, male sex, lower socioeconomic status, higher comorbidity score, and having an older rheumatologist decreased the odds of remaining under rheumatology care.

Conclusion

System‐level improvement initiatives should focus on maintaining ongoing access to rheumatology specialty care. Further investigation into causes of loss to rheumatology follow‐up is needed.

Healthcare Professionals' Compliance with the Standard Management Guidelines towards the Use of Biological Disease-Modifying Anti-Rheumatic Drugs in Rheumatoid Arthritis Patients

Treatment of rheumatoid arthritis (RA) is complicated, with numerous aspects influencing decision-making, including disease severity, comorbidities, and patient preferences. The present study aimed to evaluate healthcare professionals' (HCPs) knowledge of biological disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs (bDMARDs) and their compliance with the standard management guidelines for assuring optimal RA therapy. The cross-sectional, survey-based study was performed in various healthcare and academic settings in Karachi, Pakistan to probe HCPs' knowledge of bDMARDs and their compliance with the European League against Rheumatism (EULAR) recommendations for the management of RA patients. Overall, n = 413 questionnaires were included in our study (response rate: 82.6%). The physicians were further well-informed about the indications (n = 276, 91.3%, p = 0.001) and monitoring requirements (n = 258, 85.4%, p = 0.004). The pharmacists were more knowledgeable about the drug targets (n = 96, 86.4%, p = 0.029) and their mechanisms of action (n = 80, 72.0%, p = 0.013). Male respondents as compared with females (41.3% vs. 35.6%, p = 0.04), and physicians as compared with pharmacists (40.7% vs. 37.8%, p = 0.012), were more confident in using bDMARDs than conventional treatment in RA patients. Our findings show that the respondents were familiar with the attributes of bDMARDs and the standard management guidelines for RA care. Our results may be relevant in creating new methods, guidelines, and treatments to enhance RA treatment adherence, satisfaction, and health outcomes.

Tapering of Etanercept is feasible in patients with Rheumatoid Arthritis in sustained remission: a pragmatic randomized controlled trial

Objective: In patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) in sustained remission, tapering of biological disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs can be considered. Tapering has already been investigated, but its feasibility remains to be determined. Therefore, we explored the feasibility of tapering etanercept in RA in a setting close to practice.Method: Patients with RA in 28-joint Disease Activity Score (DAS28) remission (≥ 6 months) and treated with etanercept 50 mg weekly (≥ 1 year) were included in the pragmatic 1 year open-label multicentre randomized controlled TapERA (Tapering Etanercept in Rheumatoid Arthritis) trial. Patients were assigned to continue etanercept weekly or to taper to every other week (EOW). Patients who lost remission [DAS28-C-reactive protein (CRP) ≥ 2.6] were re-escalated to etanercept weekly. The primary outcome was the proportion of patients maintaining DAS28-CRP remission for 6 months.Results: Sixty-six patients were randomized to etanercept weekly (n = 34) or EOW (n = 32). After 6 months, 26/34 patients (76%) in the weekly and 19/32 (59%) in the EOW group maintained disease control (p = 0.136). In the EOW group, 20/32 patients (63%) remained on their tapered treatment during the trial. Two patients reintroduced weekly etanercept themselves. Ten patients were re-escalated to etanercept weekly by the rheumatologist, after a median (interquartile range) interval of 3.0 (2.0-6.0) months. Among these patients, 7/10 regained remission after re-escalation, four of them at the next study visit.Conclusions: Although non-inferiority could not be demonstrated, tapering of etanercept to EOW appeared feasible in patients in sustained remission.

Reduction of biologics in rheumatoid arthritis: a systematic review and meta-analysis

The effects of dose reduction or spacing of all types of biologics in rheumatoid arthritis has not been consistently assessed in systematic reviews. We aimed to assess the effects of biologics reduction compared with dose maintenance in patients with rheumatoid arthritis in low disease activity or remission. We performed a systematic review with meta-analysis according to a previously registered protocol (PROSPERO registration: CRD42017069080); and searched MEDLINE, Embase, Scopus, Cochrane Library and trial registers up to July, 2020. Two researchers selected, extracted and assessed the risk of bias of controlled trials that randomized patients to reduction/spacing or dose maintenance of biologics. Low disease activity, disability and other clinically important outcomes were summarized in random effect meta-analyses. We rated the certainty of evidence according to the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation approach. We included ten studies (n = 1331 patients), which assessed reduction or spacing of abatacept, adalimumab, certolizumab pegol, etanercept, or tocilizumab. Risk of bias was high in over half of trials, mainly due to lack of blinding. No statistically significant difference was found in low disease activity (RR = 0.90; 95% CI 0.78-1.04; I² = 60%, very low certainty), and other outcomes. Subgroup analysis of blinded studies led to homogeneous results, which remained heterogeneous in open-label studies. Reduction or spacing biologics did not affect disease activity and other important outcome. Changes in the doses regimen should consider patient preferences, considering the low certainty of evidence.

Natural products action on pathogenic cues in autoimmunity: Efficacy in systemic lupus erythematosus and rheumatoid arthritis as compared to classical treatments

Systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) and rheumatoid arthritis (RA), which are characterized by self-perpetuating inflammation and tissue/organ damage, resulting from the failure of lymphocyte auto-tolerance, cause morbidity and mortality worldwide. The current drugs or therapies including conventional non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) and disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs (DMARDs), as well as several biologic therapies such as B cell-targeted, T cell-targeted, cytokines-targeted and cytokines receptors-targeted therapy, cannot completely cure SLE and RA, and are always accompanied by unexpected side effects. Therefore, more studies have explored new methods for therapy and found that the herbal medicine as well as its natural products (NPs) exhibited promising therapeutic value through exerting effects of immunomodulation, anti-inflammation, anti-oxidation, and anti-apoptosis, etc. via regulating abnormal responses in kidney, innate and adaptive immune systems, intestine, synoviocytes, as well as bone system including chondrocytes, osteoclasts, joints and paw tissues. In the present review, we will elucidate the current mainstream drugs and therapies for SLE and RA, and summarize the efficacy and mechanisms of NPs in the treatment of SLE and RA based on available findings including in vitro and in vivo animal models, as well as clinical studies, and further analyze the existing challenges, in order to provide comprehensive evidence for improvement of SLE and RA therapy by NPs and to promote management of these two autoimmune diseases.

Adalimumab dose tapering in patients with rheumatoid arthritis who are in long-standing clinical remission: results of the phase IV PREDICTRA study

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the association between baseline disease activity and the occurrence of flares after adalimumab tapering or withdrawal in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) in sustained remission.

METHODS

The PREDICTRA phase IV, randomised, double-blind (DB) study (ImPact of Residual Inflammation Detected via Imaging TEchniques, Drug Levels, and Patient Characteristics on the Outcome of Dose TaperIng of Adalimumab in Clinical Remission Rheumatoid ArThritis (RA) Patients) enrolled patients with RA receiving adalimumab 40 mg every other week who were in sustained remission ≥6 months. After a 4-week, open-label lead-in (OL-LI) period, patients were randomised 5:1 to DB adalimumab taper (every 3 weeks) or withdrawal (placebo) for 36 weeks. The primary endpoint was the association between DB baseline hand and wrist MRI-detected inflammation with flare occurrence.

RESULTS

Of 146 patients treated during the OL-LI period, 122 were randomised to taper (n=102) or withdrawal (n=20) arms. Patients had a mean 12.9 years of active disease and had received adalimumab for a mean of 5.4 years (mean 2.2 years in sustained remission). Overall, 37 (36%) and 9 (45%) patients experienced a flare in the taper and withdrawal arms, respectively (time to flare, 18.0 and 13.3 weeks). None of the DB baseline disease characteristics or adalimumab concentration was associated with flare occurrence after adalimumab tapering. Approximately half of the patients who flared regained clinical remission after 16 weeks of open-label rescue adalimumab. The safety profile was consistent with previous studies.

CONCLUSIONS

Approximately one-third of patients who tapered adalimumab versus half who withdrew adalimumab experienced a flare within 36 weeks. Time to flare was numerically longer in the taper versus withdrawal arm. Baseline MRI inflammation was not associated with flare occurrence.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT02198651, EudraCT 2014-001114-26.

The impact of a disease flare during tapering of DMARDs on the lives of rheumatoid arthritis patients

OBJECTIVES

To determine the impact of a disease flare on patient reported outcome measures (PROMs) in rheumatoid arthritis (RA) patients, who are tapering treatment.

METHODS

Data were used from the TARA trial; a multicenter, randomized controlled trial in which RA patients, with a well-controlled disease (DAS≤2.4 and SJC≤1) for at least 6 months, gradually tapered their DMARDs. PROMs of patients with a flare (DAS>2.4 and/or SJC>1) were compared every three months before and after a flare with their own norm values. Linear Mixed Models were used to investigate whether a disease flare influenced functional ability (HAQ-DI), fatigue (BRAF-MDQ), quality of life (EQ-5D and SF36), anxiety and depression (HADS), morning stiffness, general health (GH) and worker productivity, and if so, the duration was determined. For unemployment and sick leave we used descriptive statistics.

RESULTS

A flare negatively influenced GH, morning stiffness, HAQ-DI, EQ-5D, BRAF-MDQ, and the SF36 physical component scale and this effect lasted >3 months. Except for the HAQ-DI, effect sizes exceeded the minimum clinically important differences (MCIDs). For the physical outcomes effects lasted >6 months. Worker productivity was not significantly affected by a flare.

CONCLUSION

A disease flare influenced patients' lives, the largest effect was seen in the physical outcomes, and lasted 6 months. Although on a group level effect sizes for the separate PROMs were not always significant or larger than specific MCIDs, a disease flare can still be of great importance for individual patients.

Cost-effectiveness of five different anti-tumour necrosis factor tapering strategies in rheumatoid arthritis: a modelling study

Objective: To investigate the cost-effectiveness of five different tumour necrosis factor inhibitor tapering strategies in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) and stable low disease activity, using a modelling design.Method: Using Markov models based on data from the DRESS and STRASS randomized controlled trials, and the Nijmegen RA cohort, five tapering strategies for etanercept and adalimumab were tested against continuation: 1, four-step tapering (DRESS strategy); 2, five-step tapering; 3, tapering without withdrawal; 4, use of a stricter flare criterion; and 5, use of a theoretical predictor for successful tapering. We also examined how well a biomarker should be able to predict in order for strategy 5 to become cost-effective compared to the other strategies.Results: All examined tapering strategies were cost saving (range: EUR 5128 to 7873) but yielded more short-lived flares compared to continuation. The change in utilities compared to continuation was minimal and not clinically relevant (range: -0.005 to 0.007 quality-adjusted life-years). Strategy 1 was cost-effective compared to all other strategies [highest incremental net monetary benefit (iNMB)]. However, there was a large overlap in credible intervals, especially between strategies 1 and 2. Scenario analyses showed that 50% reduction of drug prices would result in the highest iNMB for strategy 2. A biomarker only becomes cost-effective when it is inexpensive and has a sensitivity and specificity of at least 84%.Conclusion: Because our study showed a comparable iNMB for tapering in four or five steps (including discontinuation), we recommend a choice between these strategies, based on shared decision making.

Down-titration and discontinuation strategies of tumour necrosis factor-blocking agents for rheumatoid arthritis in patients with low disease activity

BACKGROUND

Anti-tumour necrosis factor (TNF) agents are effective in treating people with rheumatoid arthritis (RA), but are associated with (dose-dependent) adverse effects and high costs. To prevent overtreatment, several trials have assessed the effectiveness of down-titration compared with continuation of the standard dose. This is an update of a Cochrane Review published in 2014.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the benefits and harms of down-titration (dose reduction, discontinuation, or disease activity-guided dose tapering) of anti-TNF agents on disease activity, functioning, costs, safety, and radiographic damage compared with usual care in people with RA and low disease activity.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched MEDLINE, Embase, Web of Science and CENTRAL (29 March 2018) and four trial registries (11 April 2018) together with reference checking, citation searching, and contact with study authors to identify additional studies. We screened conference proceedings (American College of Rheumatology and European League Against Rheumatism 2005-2017).

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and controlled clinical trials (CCTs) comparing down-titration (dose reduction, discontinuation, disease activity-guided dose tapering) of anti-TNF agents (adalimumab, certolizumab pegol, etanercept, golimumab, infliximab) to usual care/no down-titration in people with RA and low disease activity.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard Cochrane methodology.

MAIN RESULTS

One previously included trial was excluded retrospectively in this update because it was not an RCT/CCT. We included eight additional trials, for a total of 14 studies (13 RCTs and one CCT, 3315 participants in total) reporting anti-TNF down-titration. Six studies (1148 participants) reported anti-TNF dose reduction compared with anti-TNF continuation. Eight studies (2111 participants) reported anti-TNF discontinuation compared with anti-TNF continuation (three studies assessed both anti-TNF discontinuation and dose reduction), and three studies assessed disease activity-guided anti-TNF dose tapering (365 participants). These studies included data on all anti-TNF agents, but primarily adalimumab and etanercept. Thirteen studies were available in full text, one was available as abstract. We assessed the included studies generally at low to moderate risk of bias; our main concerns were bias due to open-label treatment and unblinded outcome assessment. Clinical heterogeneity between the trials was high. The included studies were performed at clinical centres around the world and included people with early as well as established RA, the majority of whom were female with mean ages between 47 and 60. Study durations ranged from 6 months to 3.5 years.We found that anti-TNF dose reduction leads to little or no difference in mean disease activity score (DAS28) after 26 to 52 weeks (high-certainty evidence, mean difference (MD) 0.06, 95% confidence interval (CI) -0.11 to 0.24, absolute risk difference (ARD) 1%) compared with continuation. Also, anti-TNF dose reduction does not result in an important deterioration in function after 26 to 52 weeks (Health Assessment Questionnaire Disability Index (HAQ-DI)) (high-certainty evidence, MD 0.09, 95% CI 0.00 to 0.19, ARD 3%). Next to this, anti-TNF dose reduction may slightly reduce the proportion of participants switched to another biologic (low-certainty evidence), but probably slightly increases the proportion of participants with minimal radiographic progression after 52 weeks (moderate-certainty evidence, risk ratio (RR) 1.22, 95% CI 0.76 to 1.95, ARD 2% higher). Anti-TNF dose reduction may cause little or no difference in serious adverse events, withdrawals due to adverse events and proportion of participants with persistent remission (low-certainty evidence).Results show that anti-TNF discontinuation probably slightly increases the mean disease activity score (DAS28) after 28 to 52 weeks (moderate-certainty evidence, MD 0.96, 95% CI 0.67 to 1.25, ARD 14%), and that the RR of persistent remission lies between 0.16 and 0.77 (low-certainty evidence). Anti-TNF discontinuation increases the proportion participants with minimal radiographic progression after 52 weeks (high-certainty evidence, RR 1.69, 95% CI 1.10 to 2.59, ARD 7%) and may lead to a slight deterioration in function (HAQ-DI) (low-certainty evidence). It is uncertain whether anti-TNF discontinuation influences the number of serious adverse events (due to very low-certainty evidence) and the number of withdrawals due to adverse events after 28 to 52 weeks probably increases slightly (moderate-certainty evidence, RR 1.46, 95% CI 0.75 to 2.84, ARD 1% higher).Anti-TNF disease activity-guided dose tapering may result in little or no difference in mean disease activity score (DAS28) after 72 to 78 weeks (low-certainty evidence). Furthermore, anti-TNF disease activity-guided dose tapering results in little or no difference in the proportion of participants with persistent remission after 18 months (high-certainty evidence, RR 0.89, 95% CI 0.75 to 1.06, ARD -9%) and may result in little or no difference in switching to another biologic (low-certainty evidence). Anti-TNF disease activity-guided dose tapering may slightly increase proportion of participants with minimal radiographic progression (low-certainty evidence) and probably leads to a slight deterioration of function after 18 months (moderate-certainty evidence, MD 0.2 higher, 0.02 lower to 0.42 higher, ARD 7% higher), It is uncertain whether anti-TNF disease activity-guided dose tapering influences the number of serious adverse events due to very low-certainty evidence.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

We found that fixed-dose reduction of anti-TNF, after at least three to 12 months of low disease activity, is comparable to continuation of the standard dose regarding disease activity and function, and may be comparable with regards to the proportion of participants with persistent remission. Discontinuation (also without disease activity-guided adaptation) of anti-TNF is probably inferior to continuation of treatment with respect to disease activity, the proportion of participants with persistent remission, function, and minimal radiographic damage. Disease activity-guided dose tapering of anti-TNF is comparable to continuation of treatment with respect to the proportion of participants with persistent remission and may be comparable regarding disease activity.Caveats of this review are that available data are mainly limited to etanercept and adalimumab, the heterogeneity between studies, and the use of superiority instead of non-inferiority designs.Future research should focus on the anti-TNF agents infliximab and golimumab; assessment of disease activity, function, and radiographic outcomes after longer follow-up; and assessment of long-term safety, cost-effectiveness, and predictors for successful down-titration. Also, use of a validated flare criterion, non-inferiority designs, and disease activity-guided tapering instead of fixed-dose reduction or discontinuation would allow researchers to better interpret study findings and generalise to clinical practice.

Update of the Mexican College of Rheumatology Guidelines for the Pharmacological Treatment of Rheumatoid Arthritis, 2018

Therapeutic advances in rheumatoid arthritis require periodic review of treatment guidelines.

OBJECTIVE

To update the Mexican College of Rheumatology guidelines on the pharmacological treatment of rheumatoid arthritis.

METHOD

Board certified rheumatologists from different health institutions and regions of the country participated. Work teams were formed that reviewed the previous guidelines, elaborated new questions, reviewed the literature, and scored the evidence that was presented and discussed in plenary session. The conclusions were presented to infectologists, gynaecologists and patients. Recommendations were based on levels of evidence according to GRADE methodology.

RESULTS

Updated recommendations on the use of available medications for rheumatoid arthritis treatment in Mexico up to 2017 are presented. The importance of adequate and sustained control of the disease is emphasized and relevant safety aspects are described. Bioethical conflicts are included, and government action is invited to strengthen correct treatment of the disease.

CONCLUSIONS

The updated recommendations of the Mexican College of Rheumatology on the pharmacological treatment of rheumatoid arthritis incorporate the best available information to be used in the Mexican health care system.

Gradual tapering TNF inhibitors versus conventional synthetic DMARDs after achieving controlled disease in patients with rheumatoid arthritis: first-year results of the randomised controlled TARA study

Objectives

The aim of this study is to evaluate the effectiveness of two tapering strategies after achieving controlled disease in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA), during 1 year of follow-up.

Methods

In this multicentre single-blinded (research nurses) randomised controlled trial, patients with RA were included who achieved controlled disease, defined as a Disease Activity Score (DAS) ≤ 2.4 and a Swollen Joint Count (SJC) ≤ 1, treated with both a conventional synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (csDMARD) and a TNF inhibitor. Eligible patients were randomised into gradual tapering csDMARDs or TNF inhibitors. Medication was tapered if the RA was still under control, by cutting the dosage into half, a quarter and thereafter it was stopped. Primary outcome was proportion of patients with a disease flare, defined as DAS > 2.4 and/or SJC > 1. Secondary outcomes were DAS, European Quality of Life-5 Dimensions (EQ5D) and functional ability (Health Assessment Questionnaire Disability Index [HAQ-DI]) after 1 year and over time.

Results

A total of 189 patients were randomly assigned to tapering csDMARDs (n = 94) or tapering anti-TNF (n = 95). The cumulative flare rates in the csDMARD and anti-TNF tapering group were, respectively, 33 % (95% CI,24% to 43 %) and 43 % (95% CI, 33% to 53 % (p = 0.17). Mean DAS, HAQ-DI and EQ-5D did not differ between tapering groups after 1 year and over time.

Conclusion

Up to 9 months, flare rates of tapering csDMARDs or TNF inhibitors were similar. After 1 year, a non-significant difference was found of 10 % favouring csDMARD tapering. Tapering TNF inhibitors was, therefore, not superior to tapering csDMARDs. From a societal perspective, it would be sensible to taper the TNF inhibitor first, because of possible cost reductions and less long-term side effects.

Trial registration number

NTR2754

Impact of Cost-Sharing Increases on Continuity of Specialty Drug Use: A Quasi-Experimental Study

OBJECTIVE

To examine the impact of cost-sharing increases on continuity of specialty drug use in Medicare beneficiaries with multiple sclerosis (MS) or rheumatoid arthritis (RA).

DATA SOURCES/STUDY SETTING

Five percent Medicare claims data (2007-2010).

STUDY DESIGN

Quasi-experimental study examining changes in specialty drug use among a group of Medicare Part D beneficiaries without low-income subsidies (non-LIS) as they transitioned from a 5 percent cost-sharing preperiod to a ≥25 percent cost-sharing postperiod, as compared to changes among a disease-matched contemporaneous control group of patients eligible for full low-income subsidies (LIS), who faced minor cost sharing (≤$6.30 copayment) in both the pre- and postperiods.

DATA COLLECTION/EXTRACTION METHODS

Key variables were extracted from Medicare data.

PRINCIPAL FINDINGS

Relative to the LIS group, the non-LIS group had a greater increase in incidence of 30-day continuous gaps in any Part D treatment from the lower cost-sharing period to the higher cost-sharing period (MS, absolute increase = 10.1 percent, OR = 1.61, 95% CI 1.19-2.17; RA, absolute increase = 21.9 percent, OR = 2.75, 95% CI 2.15-3.51). The increase in Part D treatment gaps was not offset by increased Part B specialty drug use.

CONCLUSIONS

Cost-sharing increases due to specialty tier-level cost sharing were associated with interruptions in MS and RA specialty drug treatments.

RHEUMATOID ARTHRITIS: THE PROBLEMS OF REMISSION AND THERAPY RESISTANCE

Rheumatoid arthritis (RA) is an immunoinflammatory (autoimmune) rheumatic disease of unknown etiology, which is characterized by chronic erosive arthritis and systemic visceral organ damage that results in early disability and shorter patient survival. Despite RA treatment advances associated with the design of novel drugs and the improvement of treatment strategies to achieve remission in many patients, there are still many theoretical and clinical problems concerning both the definition of the concept of remission, its characteristics and types and approaches to the optimum policy of symptomatic and pathogenetic drug therapy at different stages of the disease, the use of which will be able to rapidly induce and maintain remission in the long-term. Further investigations are needed to study the nature of heterogeneity of pathogenetic mechanisms of RA and approaches to early diagnosis, to improve methods for monitoring disease activity and biomarkers for the efficiency of and resistance to therapy and, finally, to develop differentiation therapy, including those related to a search for new therapeutic targets.

Abatacept and tocilizumab tapering in rheumatoid arthritis patients: results of SONATA-a retrospective, exploratory cohort study

Objectives

As data on disease-activity-guided dose optimization of abatacept and tocilizumab are scarce, we explored the feasibility, effectiveness and safety of dose optimization of these biological DMARDs in RA patients in daily practice.

Methods

RA patients who had been treated with abatacept or tocilizumab for ≥6 months, with DAS28 <3.2, were included. Four groups were identified: abatacept dose reduction (DR) and usual care (UC), and tocilizumab DR and UC. Successful DR and discontinuation entailed being on a lower dose than at baseline or having discontinued abatacept or tocilizumab, while maintaining disease activity score with ESR using 28 joint count (DAS28) <3.2. Proportions of patients with successful DR or discontinuation at 12 months were described. Maintenance of DR was investigated using Kaplan-Meier curves. Between-group differences in mean DAS28 and Health assessment questionnaire disability index (HAQ-DI) change (Δ) over 6 and 12 months were estimated.

Results

One hundred and nineteen patients were included. DR was attempted in 13 of 28 (46%; 95% CI: 28, 66%) abatacept and 64 of 91 (70%; 95% CI: 60, 79%) tocilizumab patients. At 12 months, 3 of 11 (27%; 95% CI: 6, 61%) abatacept and 20 of 48 (42%; 95% CI: 28, 57%) tocilizumab patients were successfully tapered. One of 11 (9%; 95% CI: 0, 41%) abatacept and 5 of 48 (10%; 95% CI: 3, 23%) tocilizumab patients were successfully discontinued. Mean ΔDAS28 and ΔHAQ-DI at months 6 and 12 were not significantly different between DR and UC. For tocilizumab, DAS28 was significantly higher in the DR compared with the UC group at 6 months. Adverse events were comparable between groups.

Conclusion

Abatacept and tocilizumab DR appears to be feasible and safe in clinical practice. No benefits in terms of fewer adverse events in the DR group were observed. Furthermore, DR was suboptimal, because all patients were eligible for DR, but in a substantial number of patients no DR was attempted.

Defining and characterizing sustained remission in patients with rheumatoid arthritis

The objective of this study is to characterize stability and clinical features of patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) in sustained remission. Combination therapy with methotrexate and tumor necrosis factor inhibitors (TNFi) has increased remission rates in RA but optimal regimens to maintain remission are unknown. We describe Study of Etanercept And Methotrexate in Combination or as Monotherapy in Subjects with Rheumatoid Arthritis (SEAM-RA) and data from a run-in period of longitudinal observation. Patients in Simplified Disease Activity Index (SDAI) remission (score ≤ 3.3) receiving etanercept and methotrexate were screened and had to maintain remission over 3 run-in visits/24 weeks before randomization to combination therapy or withdrawal of etanercept or methotrexate. Baseline characteristics were examined for predictive factors for maintaining remission. As of November 2016, 141 patients have enrolled; of these, 64 have been randomized, 34 were ineligible after run-in, and 43 are in run-in period; 70% have completed run-in. Enrolled and randomized patients, respectively, had mean (standard deviation [SD]) disease duration 11.0 (8.6) and 12.6 (9.7) years; mean (SD) duration of etanercept use 4.2 (3.8) and 4.9 (4.2) years; mean (SD) methotrexate dose 15.9 (4.8) and 15.5 (4.9) mg/week; and mean (SD) SDAI scores 1.5 (0.9) and 1.4 (0.8). At enrollment, 73% and 63% were in Boolean remission based on 28 joints and 66/68 joints, respectively. No enrollment characteristic predicted successful completion of run-in. Two-thirds of patients considered to be in remission at enrollment sustained remission through 24 weeks. Baseline characteristics of enrolled patients and those who completed run-in were comparable.

Content and Construct Validity, Reliability, and Responsiveness of the Rheumatoid Arthritis Flare Questionnaire: OMERACT 2016 Workshop Report

OBJECTIVE

The Outcome Measures in Rheumatology (OMERACT) Rheumatoid Arthritis (RA) Flare Group was established to develop a reliable way to identify and measure RA flares in randomized controlled trials (RCT). Here, we summarized the development and field testing of the RA Flare Questionnaire (RA-FQ), and the voting results at OMERACT 2016.

METHODS

Classic and modern psychometric methods were used to assess reliability, validity, sensitivity, factor structure, scoring, and thresholds. Interviews with patients and clinicians also assessed content validity, utility, and meaningfulness of RA-FQ scores.

RESULTS

People with RA in observational trials in Canada (n = 896) and France (n = 138), and an RCT in the Netherlands (n = 178) completed 5 items (11-point numerical rating scale) representing RA Flare core domains. There was moderate to high evidence of reliability, content and construct validity, and responsiveness. Factor analysis supported unidimensionality. Rasch analysis showed acceptable fit to the Rasch model, with items and people covering a broad measurement continuum and evidence of appropriate targeting of items to people, ordered thresholds, minimal differential item functioning by language, sex, or age. A summative score across items is defensible, yielding an interval score (0-50) where higher scores reflect worsening flare. The RA-FQ received endorsement from 88% of attendees that it passed the OMERACT Filter 2.0 "Eyeball Test" for instrument selection.

CONCLUSION

The RA-FQ has been developed to identify and measure RA flares. Its review through OMERACT Filter 2.0 shows evidence of reliability, content and construct validity, and responsiveness. These properties merit its further validation as an outcome for clinical trials.

Clinical utility of therapeutic drug monitoring in biological disease modifying anti-rheumatic drug treatment of rheumatic disorders: a systematic narrative review

INTRODUCTION

Biological Disease Modifying Anti-Rheumatic Drugs (bDMARDs) have improved the treatment outcomes of inflammatory rheumatic diseases including Rheumatoid Arthritis and spondyloarthropathies. Inter-individual variation exists in (maintenance of) response to bDMARDs. Therapeutic Drug Monitoring (TDM) of bDMARDs could potentially help in optimizing treatment for the individual patient. Areas covered: Evidence of clinical utility of TDM in bDMARD treatment is reviewed. Different clinical scenarios will be discussed, including: prediction of response after start of treatment, prediction of response to a next bDMARD in case of treatment failure of the first, prediction of successful dose reduction or discontinuation in case of low disease activity, prediction of response to dose-escalation in case of active disease and prediction of response to bDMARD in case of flare in disease activity. Expert opinion: The limited available evidence does often not report important outcomes for diagnostic studies, such as sensitivity and specificity. In most clinical relevant scenarios, predictive value of serum (anti-) drug levels is absent, therefore the use of TDM of bDMARDs cannot be advocated. Well-designed prospective studies should be done to further investigate the promising scenarios to determine the place of TDM in clinical practice.

bDMARD Dose Reduction in Rheumatoid Arthritis: A Narrative Review with Systematic Literature Search

Introduction

Although bDMARDs are effective in the treatment of RA, they are associated with dose-dependent side effects, patient burden, and high costs. Recently, many studies have investigated the possibility of discontinuing or tapering bDMARDs when patients have reached their treatment goal. The aim of this review is to provide a narrative overview of the existing evidence on bDMARD dose reduction and to provide answers to specific dose-reduction-related questions that are of interest to clinicians.

Methods

We systematically searched for relevant studies in four scientific databases. Furthermore, we screened the references of reviews and relevant studies.

Results

Our searches resulted in 45 original studies of bDMARD dose reduction in RA patients (15 RCTs and 30 observational studies). Current evidence shows that bDMARD dose reduction can be considered in all RA patients who achieve stable (e.g., ≥6 months) low disease activity or remission. The best strategies seem to be disease-activity-guided dose optimization and fixed dose reduction, since direct bDMARD discontinuation (without restarting) results in a high flare rate, worse physical functioning, and more joint damage. When tapering the bDMARD treatment of a patient, disease activity should be monitored closely, and if a flare occurs, the dose should be increased to the lowest effective dose. Current evidence shows that restarting bDMARD treatment is effective and safe. Unfortunately, no clear predictors of successful dose reduction have been identified so far.

Conclusion

The current evidence and rising healthcare costs urge that dose reduction should be considered for eligible patients. However, the decision to start dose reduction should be made in shared decision-making. Future research should focus not only on a better understanding of the effects of dose reduction on clinical outcomes but also on the perspectives of patients and physicians as well as the implementation of this new treatment principle.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (doi:10.1007/s40744-017-0055-5) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Tapering biologics in rheumatoid arthritis: a pragmatic approach for clinical practice

Optimal rheumatoid arthritis (RA) therapy in daily clinical practice is based on the treat-to-target strategy. Quicker escalation of therapy and earlier introduction of biological disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs have led to improved outcomes in RA. However, chronic immunosuppressive therapy is associated with adverse events and higher costs. In addition, our patients frequently express a desire for lower dosing and drug holidays. Current clinical practice guidelines from the American College of Rheumatology and European League Against Rheumatism suggest that rheumatologists consider tapering treatment after achieving remission. However, the optimal approach for tapering therapy in RA, specifically de-escalation of biologics, remains unknown. This clinical review discusses biologic tapering strategies in RA. We draw our recommendations for everyday clinical practice from the most recent observational, pragmatic, and controlled clinical trials on de-escalation of biologics in RA. For each biologic, we highlight clinically relevant outcomes, such as flare rates, recapture of the disease control with retreatment, radiographic progression, side effects, and functional impact. We discuss the use of musculoskeletal ultrasound to select patients for successful tapering. In conclusion, we provide the reader with a practical guide for tapering biologics in the rheumatology clinic.

Phytoconstituents as pharmacotherapeutics in rheumatoid arthritis: challenges and scope of nano/submicromedicine in its effective delivery

Objectives

The present review explores the therapeutic application of herbals in rheumatoid arthritis (RA) therapy, and how nano/submicromedicine can be fit in the scope of its therapeutic delivery in RA has been addressed.

Key findings

Incorporation of bioactive such as polyphenols, thymoquinone, resveratrol, hesperidin, curcumin, celastrol and gambogic acid in a dose-dependent manner showed quite high efficacy for the treatment of RA. It can be attributed to their targeting ability against various inflammatory mediators including nitric oxide (NO), cytokines, chemokines, adhesion molecules, NF-kβ, lipoxygenase (LOXs) and arachidonic acid (AA). Despite the presence of significant merits, the use of these bioactives has several demerits such as poor bioavailability as a function of low aqueous solubility and higher first-pass metabolism upon oral administration. The impact of nano/submicromedicine in the delivery of these bioactives against RA has gained wider attention owing to bioavailability enhancement, higher stability and better efficacy.

Conclusion

Phytoconstituents possess immense potential in RA pharmacotherapy, but the obstacles for their effective delivery can be overcome using nano/submicrocarrier-based drug delivery technologies, which maximize the efficacy of these herbal antirheumatic drugs without any systemic adverse effects.

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.

Costs of drugs for treatment of rheumatic diseases

The cost of drugs is becoming an issue worldwide, in particular for inflammatory rheumatic diseases. In the current review, an overview of the scene is given with a specific emphasis on accessibility for those patients in real need of the available expensive treatments. The authors propose 7 principles for discussion that need to be addressed and are a responsibility for all stakeholders in rheumatology.