The durability of abatacept as a first and subsequent biologic and improvement in HAQ from a large multi-site real-world study

Retention rate of abatacept in rheumatoid arthritis patients in a real-life setting: results from a monocentric cohort

OBJECTIVE

Data from trials demonstrated that abatacept (ABA) has a good safety and efficacy profile in treating rheumatoid arthritis. We have studied the retention rate of ABA in a real-life cohort of patients with rheumatoid arthritis.

METHODS

This is a monocentric, retrospective study including patients with rheumatoid arthritis classified by the American College of Rheumatology/European League Against Rheumatism 2010 criteria who started treatment with ABA. The Kaplan-Meier method was applied to evaluate the ABA retention rate.

RESULTS

This analysis was conducted on 161 patients [male/female 21/140, median age 65 years, interquartile range (IQR) 18.7, median disease duration 169 months, IQR 144.0]. 111 patients (68.9%) received ABA subcutaneously. ABA was associated with methotrexate in 61.9% of patients and was the first biological disease-modifying antirheumatic drug in 41%. We observed a median ABA survival of 66 months [95% confidence interval (CI) 57.3-74.7], with a retention rate of 88% at 6 months and 50.9% at 5 years. Drug survival was significantly higher in patients treated with ABA subcutaneously and in male patients (p=0.039 and p=0.018, respectively). Adjusted for main confounders, female gender was the main predictor of withdrawal (hazard ratio 5.1, 95% CI 1.2-21.3).

CONCLUSIONS

Our study shows that better survival is associated with subcutaneous administration and male gender, confirming ABA effectiveness.

Immune-Mediated Diseases from the Point of View of Psychoneuroimmunoendocrinology

Simple Summary

Immune-mediated inflammatory diseases (IMIDs) are growing in prevalence and relevance in our society, entailing notable consequences for the individual and healthcare systems. These medical conditions are associated with a systemic inflammatory milieu and an aberrant functioning of the immune system, establishing a bidirectional interplay with other organs and systems of the body. Psychoneuroimmunoendocrinology (PNIE) is an area of great interest relating the immune system with the individual’s psyche, nervous, and endocrine system. As compelling evidence supports the pivotal role of PNIE in the understanding and clinical management of IMIDs, the aim of the present review is to deepen the current basic and clinical knowledge in this field.

Abstract

Immune-mediated inflammatory diseases (IMIDs) represent a large group of diseases (Crohn’s, ulcerative colitis, psoriasis, lupus, and rheumatoid arthritis) evidenced by systemic inflammation and multiorgan involvement. IMIDs result in a reduced quality of life and an economic burden for individuals, health care systems, and countries. In this brief descriptive review, we will focus on some of the common biological pathways of these diseases from the point of view of psychoneuroimmunoendocrinology (PNIE). PNIE consists of four medical disciplines (psychology, nervous system, immune system, and endocrine system), which are key drivers behind the health–disease concept that a human being functions as a unit. We examine these drivers and emphasize the need for integrative treatments that addresses the disease from a psychosomatic point of view.

Outcomes in rheumatoid arthritis patients treated with abatacept: a UK multi-centre observational study

BACKGROUND

Rheumatoid arthritis (RA) is an inflammatory autoimmune disease that causes chronic synovitis, resulting in progressive joint destruction and functional disability and affects approximately 400,000 people in the UK. This real-world study aimed to describe the characteristics, treatment patterns and clinical outcomes of patients who received abatacept in UK clinical practice.

METHODS

This was a multi-centre, retrospective, observational study of patients with RA treated with abatacept at four UK centres between 01 January 2013 and 31 December 2017. Data were collected from medical records of each patient from the index date (date of first bDMARD initiation) until the most recent visit, death or end of study (31 December 2017).

RESULTS

In total, 213 patients were included in the study. Patients received up to eight lines of therapy (LOTs). Treatment with abatacept, or any other bDMARD, was associated with reductions in DAS28-ESR and DAS28-CRP scores at 6 and 12 months. The distribution of EULAR responses (good/moderate/no response) tended to be more favourable for patients when receiving abatacept than when receiving other bDMARDs (22.8%/41.3%/35.9% versus 16.6%/41.4%/42.1% at 6 months, and 27.9%/36.1%/36.1% versus 21.2%/34.5%/44.2% at 12 months). Patients receiving abatacept at LOT1 (n = 68) spent significantly longer on treatment compared with patients receiving other bDMARDs (53.4 vs. 17.4 months; p< 0.01); a similar trend was observed for LOT2. Among patients who discontinued after 6 months, a greater proportion experienced infection requiring antibiotics when receiving other bDMARDs compared to those receiving abatacept.

CONCLUSIONS

RA patients who received bDMARDs, including abatacept, experienced reduced disease activity. When receiving abatacept as first or second line of therapy, patients persisted with treatment significantly longer than those receiving other bDMARDs.

Abatacept in rheumatoid arthritis: survival on drug, clinical outcomes, and their predictors-data from a large national quality register

BACKGROUND

There are limited data regarding efficacy of abatacept treatment for rheumatoid arthritis (RA) outside clinical trials. Quality registers have been useful for observational studies on tumor necrosis factor inhibition in clinical practice. The aim of this study was to investigate clinical efficacy and tolerability of abatacept in RA, using a national register.

METHODS

RA patients that started abatacept between 2006 and 2017 and were included in the Swedish Rheumatology Quality register (N = 2716) were investigated. Survival on drug was estimated using Kaplan-Meier analysis. The European League Against Rheumatism (EULAR) good response and Health Assessment Questionnaire (HAQ) response (improvement of ≥ 0.3) rates (LUNDEX corrected for drug survival) at 6 and at 12 months were assessed. Predictors of discontinuation were investigated by Cox regression analyses, and predictors of clinical response by logistic regression. Significance-based backward stepwise selection of variables was used for the final multivariate models.

RESULTS

There was a significant difference in drug survival by previous biologic disease-modifying antirheumatic drug (bDMARD) exposure (p < 0.001), with longer survival in bionaïve patients. Men (hazard ratio (HR) 0.86, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.74-0.98) and methotrexate users (HR 0.85, 95% CI 0.76-0.95) were less likely to discontinue abatacept, whereas a high pain score predicted discontinuation (HR 1.14 per standard deviation, 95% CI 1.07-1.20). The absence of previous bDMARD exposure, male sex, and a low HAQ score were independently associated with LUNDEX-corrected EULAR good response. The absence of previous bDMARD exposure also predicted LUNDEX-corrected HAQ response.

CONCLUSIONS

In this population-based study of RA, bDMARD naïve patients and male patients were more likely to remain on abatacept with a major clinical response.

Co-stimulation Therapy in Rheumatoid Arthritis: Today and Tomorrow

Abatacept is the only T cell co-stimulation modulator approved thus far for the treatment of moderate-to-severe rheumatoid arthritis (RA) and is licensed for use in patients with an inadequate response to methotrexate (MTX) and/or anti-tumor necrosis factor (anti-TNF) therapy. The upstream mechanism of action of abatacept leads to downstream effects in a variety of cell types associated with the production of autoantibodies and pro-inflammatory cytokines implicated in RA. Accumulating data also suggest effects on other cells involved in the pathogenesis of RA, including regulatory T cells and osteoclasts. Clinical trials have demonstrated that abatacept is an effective and well-tolerated treatment in RA. More recently, evidence from the Assessing Very Early Rheumatoid arthritis Treatment (AVERT) trial showed that complete drug-free remission following treatment with abatacept may be a possibility in some patients with early RA, indicating that the disease course could be altered by early intervention. Equivalent efficacy and onset of action of abatacept and anti-TNF therapy have also been demonstrated in patients with an inadequate response to MTX in the Abatacept versus adaliMumab comParison in bioLogic-naïvE rheumatoid arthritis subjects with background methotrexate (AMPLE) trial. Together, these findings support the use of abatacept in early and established RA.

Abatacept improves whole-body insulin sensitivity in rheumatoid arthritis: an observational study

Rheumatoid arthritis (RA) is characterized by increased insulin resistance, a well-known risk factor for diabetes and cardiovascular diseases. The aim of the present study was to evaluate the effect of abatacept on insulin sensitivity in RA patients with moderate to severe disease despite treatment with methotrexate. Fifteen RA patients were recruited for the present study. Patients were evaluated at time 0 and after 6 months of the treatment with i.v. abatacept at the dosage recommended for weight range. Evaluation included oral glucose tolerance test (OGTT) at both time points. Insulin sensitivity was estimated with insulin sensitivity index (ISI) by Matsuda, a measure of whole-body insulin sensitivity. ISI significantly increased after the treatment with abatacept from 3.7 ± 2.6 to 5.0 ± 3.2 (P = 0.003) with a mean difference of 1.23. Analysis of glucose and insulin values during OGTT revealed a reduction of both glucose (303.9 ± 73.4 mg/dL min versus 269.2 ± 69.5 mg/dL min, P = 0.009) and insulin (208.4 ± 119.7 mg/dL min versus 158.0 ± 95.3 mg/dL min, P = 0.01) area under the curves (AUCs). Accordingly also glycated hemoglobin significantly improved (5.5 ± 0.4% versus 5.3 ± 0.3%, P = 0.04). No significant differences were found for measures of β-cell function insulinogenic index (1.11 ± 1.19 versus 1.32 ± 0.82, P = 0.77) and oral disposition index (2.0 ± 5.4 versus 6.0 ± 6.0, P = 0.25). Treatment with abatacept seems to be able to improve whole-body insulin sensitivity in RA patients without affecting β-cell function.