Multicenter, observational clinical study of abatacept in Japanese patients with rheumatoid arthritis

Abatacept retention and clinical effectiveness in patients with rheumatoid arthritis in a real-world setting in Taiwan

AIM

To evaluate real-world abatacept retention and clinical outcomes in patients with rheumatoid arthritis in Taiwan.

METHODS

This prospective, observational study enrolled patients with rheumatoid arthritis aged ≥20 years who received abatacept in real-world practice. The primary endpoint was the abatacept retention rate at 24 months. Patients were categorized into subgroups based on abatacept treatment status and previous biological disease-modifying antirheumatic drug (bDMARD) therapy. Risk factors affecting abatacept retention were determined by regression analysis.

RESULTS

A total of 212 patients were enrolled. The overall abatacept retention rate at 24 months among all patients was 59.9% (95% confidence interval 53.0%-66.6%). Patients who were ongoing users of abatacept and bDMARD-naïve had the highest retention rate (76.3%); of these, 31.6% achieved low disease activity or remission after 2 years. Previous treatment with bDMARDs was associated with an increased risk of abatacept discontinuation (hazard ratio 1.99; p = .002). The most common reasons for abatacept discontinuation were drug switch (11.3%) and loss to follow-up (6.1%). Abatacept was well-tolerated with no new safety signals.

CONCLUSION

The 24-month retention rate of abatacept was 59.9%; abatacept was associated with improved clinical outcomes and was well-tolerated in the real-world setting in Taiwan.

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.

T-cell receptor signaling modulated by the co-receptors: Potential targets for stroke treatment

Stroke is a severe and life-threatening disease, necessitating more research on new treatment strategies. Infiltrated T lymphocytes, an essential adaptive immune cell with extensive effector function, are crucially involved in post-stroke inflammation. Immediately after the initiation of the innate immune response triggered by microglia/macrophages, the adaptive immune response associated with T lymphocytes also participates in the complex pathophysiology of stroke and partially informs the outcome of stroke. Preclinical and clinical studies have revealed the conflicting roles of T cells in post-stroke inflammation and as potential therapeutic targets. Therefore, exploring the mechanisms that underlie the adaptive immune response associated with T lymphocytes in stroke is essential. The T-cell receptor (TCR) and its downstream signaling regulate T lymphocyte differentiation and activation. This review comprehensively summarizes the various molecules that regulate TCR signaling and the T-cell response. It covers both the co-stimulatory and co-inhibitory molecules and their roles in stroke. Because immunoregulatory therapies targeting TCR and its mediators have achieved great success in some proliferative diseases, this article also summarizes the advances in therapeutic strategies related to TCR signaling in lymphocytes after stroke, which can facilitate translation. DATA AVAILABILITY: No data was used for the research described in the article.

Retention of subcutaneous abatacept for the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis: real-world results from the ASCORE study: an international 2-year observational study

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate retention, efficacy, and safety of subcutaneous (SC) abatacept over 2 years in patients with moderate-to-severe RA in the Abatacept SubCutaneOus in Routine clinical practicE (ASCORE) study.

METHODS

Patients with RA who initiated SC abatacept 125 mg once weekly were enrolled in the international, observational, prospective multicentre ASCORE study into biologic-naïve or ≥ 1 prior biologic failure cohorts.

PRIMARY ENDPOINT

abatacept retention rate at 2 years. Secondary endpoints: proportion of patients with good/moderate EULAR response rates based on DAS28 (ESR), low disease activity and/or remission according to DAS28 (ESR; ≤ 3.2/ < 2.6), SDAI (≤ 11/ ≤ 3.3), CDAI (≤ 10/ ≤ 2.8), and Boolean criteria. Retention rate by baseline serostatus was evaluated post hoc.

RESULTS

Overall, 47% of patients remained on abatacept for 2 years, irrespective of treatment line. Higher abatacept retention rates were associated with lower prior biologic exposure. Generally, clinical outcomes showed that the proportion of patients with low disease activity/remission was higher in biologic-naïve patients (vs biologic-failure) and similar in those with 1 and ≥ 2 prior biologic failures. In patients on treatment at 2 years, good/moderate EULAR response rates of ~ 80% were consistently noted irrespective of prior biologic exposure. Across treatment lines, retention was greater in patients with seropositive (vs seronegative) RA. Patients with rheumatoid factor/anti-citrullinated protein antibody single-positive RA who were bio-naïve had higher retention than patients who were bio-experienced.

CONCLUSIONS

In the ASCORE study, SC abatacept retention was 47% at 2 years with good clinical outcomes and was well-tolerated in the real-world setting. Abatacept retention and clinical response rates were higher in patients who received abatacept as an earlier- versus later-line biologic drug treatment and in those with seropositive RA.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02090556.

Toward Overcoming Treatment Failure in Rheumatoid Arthritis

Rheumatoid arthritis (RA) is an autoimmune disorder characterized by inflammation and bone erosion. The exact mechanism of RA is still unknown, but various immune cytokines, signaling pathways and effector cells are involved. Disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs) are commonly used in RA treatment and classified into different categories. Nevertheless, RA treatment is based on a "trial-and-error" approach, and a substantial proportion of patients show failed therapy for each DMARD. Over the past decades, great efforts have been made to overcome treatment failure, including identification of biomarkers, exploration of the reasons for loss of efficacy, development of sequential or combinational DMARDs strategies and approval of new DMARDs. Here, we summarize these efforts, which would provide valuable insights for accurate RA clinical medication. While gratifying, researchers realize that these efforts are still far from enough to recommend specific DMARDs for individual patients. Precision medicine is an emerging medical model that proposes a highly individualized and tailored approach for disease management. In this review, we also discuss the potential of precision medicine for overcoming RA treatment failure, with the introduction of various cutting-edge technologies and big data.

Long-term safety and effectiveness of abatacept in Japanese patients with rheumatoid arthritis: 3-year follow-up of a postmarketing surveillance

OBJECTIVES

To analyse the long-term safety and effectiveness of abatacept for rheumatoid arthritis using real-world, Japanese, postmarketing surveillance data, focusing on serious infections and malignancies as priority events.

METHODS

This 3-year, multicentre surveillance registered patients undergoing abatacept treatment by intravenous infusion between July 2011 and October 2012.

RESULTS

The safety and effectiveness analysis sets included 647 and 596 patients, respectively. The total observation period for the safety analysis was 1280 patient-years. Over the 3-year follow-up, the incidence rates of adverse drug reactions (ADRs) and serious ADRs were 19.92 per 100 patient-years (22.87% of patients) and 4.06 per 100 patient-years (6.65% of patients), respectively. Infections and infestations were the most common ADRs (14.68%), followed by respiratory, thoracic, and mediastinal disorders (3.09%). Incidence rates of serious infections as ADRs and malignancy as adverse events were 1.95 and 1.02 per 100 patient-years, respectively. Retention rates at 1 and 3 years were 67.4% and 43.9%, respectively. Significant decreases from baseline were observed in Disease Activity Score (DAS) 28-erythrocyte sedimentation rate and DAS28-C-reactive protein, as well as Health Assessment Questionnaire-Disability Index (HAQ-DI) and modified HAQ scores.

CONCLUSIONS

No new safety signals were detected during the 3-year observation period and effectiveness was maintained over time.

Abatacept is Efficacious in the Treatment of Older Patients with csDMARD-Refractory Rheumatoid Arthritis: A Prospective, Multicenter, Observational Study

INTRODUCTION

Abatacept efficacy in older patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) has been primarily demonstrated via retrospective comparisons with younger patients. The objective of this study was to compare efficacy of abatacept in older vs. younger patients with RA, and efficacy of abatacept with that of conventional synthetic disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs (csDMARDs) in both age groups.

METHODS

This prospective, multicenter, observational study (UMIN000014913) enrolled csDMARD-refractory patients without previous biological DMARD treatment. Abatacept (A) or csDMARDs (C) were administered at the treating physician's discretion to older (O, ≥ 65 years) and younger (Y, 20-64 years) patients, producing AO, AY, CO, and CY groups. Clinical efficacy after 24 weeks was evaluated using European League Against Rheumatism (EULAR) erythrocyte sedimentation rate response criteria.

RESULTS

Overall, 202 patients were evaluated. Compared with the CO group, more patients in the AO group achieved a EULAR good or moderate response (p < 0.0001). Compared with the CY group, more patients in the AY group achieved a EULAR good or moderate response (p < 0.01). Similar proportions of patients in the AO and AY groups achieved a EULAR good response or a good or moderate response. Few adverse events were reported.

CONCLUSIONS

This prospective study demonstrated that abatacept is efficacious and safe in older patients with RA and a history of being refractory to csDMARDs. Abatacept was shown to be more efficacious than adding or switching to a new csDMARD in both younger and older csDMARD-refractory patients with RA.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

UMIN000014913.

Efficacy and safety of abatacept in biologic-naïve patients with active rheumatoid arthritis by background methotrexate dose: post hoc analysis of a randomized, placebo-controlled, phase 4 study

OBJECTIVES

The objective of this study is to evaluate efficacy and safety of abatacept in biologic-naïve, anti-citrullinated protein antibody (ACPA)-positive Japanese patients with active rheumatoid arthritis (RA) by background methotrexate (MTX) dose.

METHODS

In this post hoc analysis of a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled phase 4 study (NCT01758198), patients received intravenous abatacept (∼10 mg/kg) or placebo both with MTX (≥6 mg/week). Efficacy (Disease Activity Score 28 using C-reactive protein [DAS28 (CRP)] and Health Assessment Questionnaire-Disability Index [HAQ-DI]) was assessed by baseline MTX dosage (≤8 and >8 mg/week) to week 16; safety was assessed by MTX dosage ≤8 and >8 mg/week. Change from baseline in DAS28 (CRP) and HAQ-DI was assessed using longitudinal repeated measures analysis.

RESULTS

Overall, 101 and 102 patients received abatacept + MTX ≤8 and >8 mg/week, while 96 and 106 patients received placebo + MTX ≤8 and >8 mg/week, respectively. Regardless of baseline MTX dose received, mean changes from baseline in DAS28 (CRP) and HAQ-DI in abatacept groups were similar; repeated measures analysis showed similar trends in changes from baseline in DAS28 (CRP) and HAQ-DI. Abatacept safety profile was consistent with previous observations.

CONCLUSIONS

Post hoc analysis demonstrated similar efficacy and safety of abatacept in biologic-naïve ACPA-positive Japanese patients with RA regardless of baseline MTX dose.

Safety Profile of Biologics Used in Rheumatology: An Italian Prospective Pharmacovigilance Study

Post-marketing surveillance activities are essential to detect the risk/benefit profile of biologic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (bDMARDs) in inflammatory arthritis. The aim of this study was to evaluate adverse events (AEs) in patients treated with bDMARDs in rheumatology during a prospective pharmacovigilance study from 2016 to 2018. Descriptive statistical analyses were performed to evaluate bDMARDs-related variables of patients without AEs/failures vs patients with AEs and failures. The risk profile among biologics was assessed by comparing patients treated with each bDMARD to patients treated with etanercept. A total of 1155 patients were enrolled, mostly affected by rheumatoid arthritis (46.0%). AEs and failures were experienced by 8.7% and 23.3%, respectively. The number of comorbidities significantly influenced the onset of AEs, while anxiety-depressive, gastrointestinal disease, and fibromyalgia influenced onset of failures. The probability of developing an AE was significantly lower in patients treated with secukinumab, while the probability of developing treatment failure was significantly lower in patients treated with golimumab, secukinumab and tocilizumab. A total of 216 AEs were reported (25.5% serious), mostly regarding infections (21.8%), musculoskeletal (17.6%) and skin (16.2%) disorders. Serious AEs included neutropenia (12.7%), lymphocytosis (9.1%) and uveitis (7.3%). The obtained results revealed known AEs but real-world data should be endorsed for undetected safety concerns.

Update on the Pathomechanism, Diagnosis, and Treatment Options for Rheumatoid Arthritis

Rheumatoid arthritis (RA) is an autoimmune disease that involves multiple joints bilaterally. It is characterized by an inflammation of the tendon (tenosynovitis) resulting in both cartilage destruction and bone erosion. While until the 1990s RA frequently resulted in disability, inability to work, and increased mortality, newer treatment options have made RA a manageable disease. Here, great progress has been made in the development of disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs (DMARDs) which target inflammation and thereby prevent further joint damage. The available DMARDs are subdivided into (1) conventional synthetic DMARDs (methotrexate, hydrochloroquine, and sulfadiazine), (2) targeted synthetic DMARDs (pan-JAK- and JAK1/2-inhibitors), and (3) biologic DMARDs (tumor necrosis factor (TNF)-α inhibitors, TNF-receptor (R) inhibitors, IL-6 inhibitors, IL-6R inhibitors, B cell depleting antibodies, and inhibitors of co-stimulatory molecules). While DMARDs have repeatedly demonstrated the potential to greatly improve disease symptoms and prevent disease progression in RA patients, they are associated with considerable side-effects and high financial costs. This review summarizes our current understanding of the underlying pathomechanism, diagnosis of RA, as well as the mode of action, clinical benefits, and side-effects of the currently available DMARDs.