Biologic-free remission of established rheumatoid arthritis after discontinuation of abatacept: a prospective, multicentre, observational study in Japan

Treatment Patterns of Biologic Disease-Modifying Antirheumatic Drugs and Janus Kinase Inhibitors in Patients with Rheumatoid Arthritis in Japan: A Claims-Based Cohort Study

BACKGROUND

Reports on treatment patterns of biologic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (bDMARDs)/Janus kinase inhibitors (JAKi) for rheumatoid arthritis (RA) in clinical practice are still sparse in Japan, especially in combination with conventional synthetic DMARDs (csDMARDs).

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this study was to investigate treatment patterns of bDMARD/JAKi in the treatment of RA in real-world clinical practice in Japan.

METHOD

A retrospective cohort study was conducted using the Japanese Medical Data Vision health claims database. The inclusion criteria required a recorded diagnosis of RA, defined by ICD-10 codes, in patients aged 18 years and older on the index date. We analyzed 39,903 RA patients treated with DMARDs from 2008 to 2020.

RESULTS

Among analyzed subjects, 10,196 patients (25.6%) were prescribed bDMARDs/JAKi in combination with csDMARDs, and 3067 patients (7.7%) were prescribed these drugs without csDMARDs. Among the bDMARDs/JAKi, tumor necrosis factor inhibitors (TNFi) were the most commonly prescribed DMARD overall, and also the most common first-line therapy, accounting for 60.0% or 45.5% of patients prescribed these drugs in combination with or without csDMARDs, respectively. Switching, temporary discontinuation (restarting with the same agents), and discontinuation of bDMARDs/JAKi were observed in 3150 (30.9%), 1379 (13.5%), and 2025 (19.9%) patients with csDMARDs, and in 849 (27.7%), 513 (16.7%), and 833 (27.2%) patients without csDMARDs, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Real-world treatment trajectories of bDMARDs/JAKi with and without csDMARDs was analyzed in RA patients in Japan between 2008 and 2020. TNFi were the predominant first-line therapy, and likely to be switched to different classes. Understanding the current treatment patterns, including discontinuation, is important to find an optimal treatment strategy for RA patients.

Patient-individual tapering of DMARDs in rheumatoid arthritis patients in a real-world setting

OBJECTIVE

We aim to provide real-world evidence on the effectiveness of patient-individual tapering of DMARDs for patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) in daily clinical practice using medical records and claims data.

METHODS

We utilize data obtained through a controlled prospective cohort study in Germany conducted from July 2018 to March 2021. Participants consist of RA patients in sustained remission (>6 months) who were eligible for tapering at enrolment. Patients treated with individual tapering based on shared decision making (n = 200) are compared with patients without any dose-reduction (n = 237). The risk of loss of remission and the risk of flare is assessed with risk-adjusted Kaplan-Meier estimators and Cox-Regressions. We evaluate differences in costs one year before and after baseline based on claims data for the subgroup of patients insured at one major sickness fund in Germany (n = 76).

RESULTS

The risk of flare (HR 0.88 95%-CI: 0.59-1.30) or loss of remission (HR 1.04 95%-CI: 0.73, 1.49) was not statistically different between the individual tapering group and the continuation group. Minor increases of disease activity and decreases of quality of life were observed 12 months after baseline, again with no statistically significant difference. Drug costs decreased by 1,017€in the individual tapering group while increased by 1,151€in the continuation group (p< 0.01).

CONCLUSION

Individual tapering of DMARDs does not increase the average risk of experiencing flares or loss of remission. Encouraging rheumatologists and patients to apply tapering in shared decision may be a feasible approach to allow individualisation of treatment in RA.

Discontinuation of biologic DMARDs in a real-world population of patients with rheumatoid arthritis in remission: outcome and risk factors

OBJECTIVES

Data from randomized controlled trials have shown the feasibility of discontinuation of bDMARD therapy in patients with RA that have reached remission. Criteria for selecting patients that are likely to remain in remission are still incompletely defined.We aimed to identify predictors of successful discontinuation of bDMARD therapy in the Swiss Clinical Quality Management (SCQM) registry, a real-world cohort of RA patients.

METHODS

RA patients in DAS28-ESR remission who stopped bDMARD/tsDMARD treatment were included. Loss of remission was defined as a DAS28-ESR > 2.6 or restart of a bDMARD/tsDMARD. Time to loss of remission was the main outcome. Kaplan-Meier methods were applied and cox regression was used for multivariable analyses adjusting for confounding factors. Missing data were imputed using multiple imputation.

RESULTS

318 patients in a bDMARD/tsDMARD-free remission were followed between 1997 and 2017. 241 patients (76%) lost remission after a median time of 0.9 years (95%CI 0.7-1.0). The time to loss of remission was shorter in women, in patients with a longer disease duration >4yrs and in patients who did not meet CDAI remission criteria at baseline. Remission was longer in patients with csDMARD therapy during b/tsDMARD free remission (HR 0.8, p= 0.05, 95%CI 0.6-1.0).

CONCLUSION

In a real-world patient population the majority of patients who discontinued b/tsDMARD treatment lost remission within <1 year. Our study confirms that fulfilment of more rigorous remission criteria and csDMARD treatment increases the chance of maintaining b/tsDMARD free remission.

Prediction of disease flare by biomarkers after discontinuing biologics in patients with rheumatoid arthritis achieving stringent remission

To elucidate the disease-flare process in rheumatoid arthritis (RA) after discontinuing biological disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (bDMARDs), we first focused on RA-flare prediction after achieving stringent remission criteria. Patients with RA who maintained a simplified disease activity index ≤ 3.3 for ≥ 3 months during November 2014-January 2018 in our medical centre in Tokyo, Japan, were eligible. The primary endpoint was flare (disease activity score 28-erythrocyte sedimentation rate ≥ 3.2 with increase from baseline > 0.6) within 2 years after bDMARD discontinuation. Comprehensive clinical assessments, ultrasonographic evaluation of 40 joints, and blood sampling for 12 biomarkers were performed every 2-3 months for 2 years unless patients experienced flare. Flare-positive and flare-negative patients were compared using univariate and Kaplan-Meier analyses. Thirty-six patients (80.6% female, median disease duration, 5.2 years; median treatment period with discontinued bDMARD, 2 years; median remission duration, 18 months) were enrolled. Twenty patients (55.6%) experienced RA flare 43-651 (median, 115) days after the first skipped date of bDMARDs. Two patients who withdrew without disease flare were excluded from the comparison. Clinical and ultrasonographic evaluations did not show significant between-group differences; Kaplan-Meier analysis showed that higher baseline soluble tumour necrosis factor receptor 1 (sTNFR1) concentration impacted subsequent disease flare (p = 0.0041); higher baseline interleukin (IL)-2 concentration was exclusively beneficial to patients with lower sTNFR1 (p = 0.0058), resulting in remission maintenance in 83.3% of patients with lower sTNFR1 and higher IL-2. We demonstrated the usefulness of combined biomarker evaluation for predicting sustained remission after bDMARD discontinuation in RA.

Successful discontinuation of biological disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs in patients with rheumatoid arthritis in real-world settings

OBJECTIVES

To analyze the proportion of successful biological disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (bDMARDs) discontinuation and related factors in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) in clinical settings.

METHODS

Among 1775 RA patients who started bDMARDs between 2003 and 2012, 43 patients with DAS28-ESR <3.2 at the time of bDMARD discontinuation were extracted. Patients were divided into two groups (bio-free success: BS and bio-free failure: BF groups) based on bDMARD usage and disease activity 1 year after discontinuation. We evaluated the proportion of bio-free success and assessed factors related to bio-free success.

RESULTS

Twenty-five patients (58.1%: BS group) maintained discontinuation of bDMARDs and DAS28-ESR <3.2 at 1 year after discontinuation. The median DAS28-ESR at bDMARD initiation was lower in the BS group than in the BF group (3.95 vs 5.04; p = .04). The BS group experienced a larger decrease in average glucocorticoid (GC) dose during bDMARD use than the BF group (-3.0 mg/day vs 0 mg/day; p = .01).

CONCLUSION

bDMARDs were discontinued without flare up of RA in 58.1% of patients with RA in clinical settings. A lower DAS28-ESR at initiation and reduction of GC dose before discontinuation of bDMARD were important factors associated with bio-free success.

Systematic Literature Review of Residual Symptoms and an Unmet Need in Patients With Rheumatoid Arthritis

Objective

To evaluate the nature and burden of residual disease in rheumatoid arthritis (RA) in patients who meet treatment targets. Second, for those who did not meet targets, to evaluate how much is due to patient symptoms.

Methods

Prospective and retrospective studies were searched in Medline, Embase, and Cochrane Library in the English language from January 1, 2008 to April 18, 2018; conference abstracts (from January 2016 to April 2018) and reference lists of relevant studies were also screened.

Results

Of 8,339 records identified, 55 were included in the review; 53 were unique studies, including 10 randomized controlled trials. Of these, 48 reported on patients who achieved low disease activity (LDA) or remission. Studies varied in population, treatment goals, and outcome reporting. The proportions of patients with residual symptoms in these studies varied by the definitions used for LDA or remission and were more often reported in patients with LDA than those in remission. The most commonly reported outcome measures were functional disability (n = 34 studies), tender or swollen joints (n = 18), pain (n = 17), patient global assessment (n = 15), and fatigue (n = 14). However, few studies reported the percentage of patients achieving a specific threshold, which could then be used to easily define the presence of residual symptoms.

Conclusion

Residual symptoms are present in some patients despite their achieving LDA or remission, highlighting an unmet need, especially with respect to improving pain, fatigue, and function. Standardized reporting in future observational studies would facilitate better understanding of this issue in defined RA populations.

Predictors of successful discontinuation of biologic and targeted synthetic DMARDs in patients with rheumatoid arthritis in remission or low disease activity: a systematic literature review

OBJECTIVE

To systematically review possible predictors of successful discontinuation of biologic or targeted synthetic DMARDs (b/tsDMARDs) in RA patients in remission or low disease activity.

METHODS

MEDLINE database and Cochrane Library were scanned for studies that discontinued b/tsDMARDs in remission/low disease activity and searched for predictors of successful discontinuation. Additionally, EULAR and ACR meeting abstracts were hand searched.

RESULTS

Thirty-four studies with a total of 5724 patients were included. Predictors of successful b/tsDMARD discontinuation were (number of studies): low disease activity (n = 13), better physical function (n = 6), low or absence of rheumatoid factor (n = 5) or ACPA (n = 3), low levels of CRP (n = 3) or ESR (n = 3), shorter disease duration (n = 3), low signals of disease activity by ultrasound (n = 3). Only one study with high risk of bias was identified on tsDMARD discontinuation.

CONCLUSION

Several predictors of successful bDMARD discontinuation were identified. Although studies are heterogeneous, these predictors may inform clinical decision making in patients who are considered for a potential bDMARD discontinuation.

Biologic discontinuation strategies and outcomes in patients with rheumatoid arthritis

Introduction: Rheumatoid arthritis (RA) is a chronic, systemic autoimmune disease, which affects joints as well as extra-articular tissues. In the last decades, increasing targeted therapeutic options dramatically improved RA management by doubling the rate of patients achieving clinical remission. Currently, there is a need for management strategies aimed at limiting treatment-related adverse events and costs in good responders.Areas covered: Data on de-escalation of biologic drugs (especially for anti-TNF agents) are mainly available from post-hoc analyses of randomized controlled trials and from registry-based observational studies. This narrative review illustrates the rationales for dose tapering and expands to provide an overview of the efficacy of the different available strategies for reducing the exposure to biologic drugs in patients achieving a sustained clinical response. Selected studies are discussed as illustrative examples.Expert opinion: Withdrawal of biologic therapy might be attempted in limited patients with very early RA; conversely, established RA is more suitably managed with a progressive decrease of drug regimen, by either dose reduction or injection/infusion spacing. Further studies investigating potential factors predicting post-tapering disease relapse are warranted, in order to better identify the best candidates for a decreased-dose approach.

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

The aim of this study was to assess abatacept in rheumatoid arthritis (RA) patient. Patients (20 men, 89 women, aged 61.9 ± 10.4 y) who responded inadequately to conventional synthetic disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drug were treated with abatacept for 24-months. Disease activity score in 28 joints (DAS28-CRP) was evaluated. Of 109 patients, 82 (75.2%) were on methotrexate (MTX; mean dosage 9.0 ± 2.7 mg/week); 48 (44.0%) were naive to biologics and 61 (56.0%) had failed biologics. The 1- and 2-year retention rates were 77% and 53%, respectively. At 24-months, the DAS28-CRP remission rates were 54.5% in the biologic-naïve patients, and 28.2% in the biologic-failure patients (p < .01), while the structural remission rates were 83.9% and 73.1%, respectively (p = .461). Abatacept was equally effective in RA patients who were and were not on concomitant MTX. Biologic-naïve was associated with better clinical outcome. Abatacept was effective in patients who showed decreasing anti-CCP antibody titers or serum MMP-3 levels during treatment. Infection was the most frequent adverse effect of abatacept therapy. In conclusion, abatacept is more effective in biologic-naïve than in biologic-failure RA patients with or without concomitant use of MTX. Abatacept is more effective in RA patients with than without decreasing serum MMP-3 or anti-CCP antibody titers during treatment.

Dose reduction of baricitinib in patients with rheumatoid arthritis achieving sustained disease control: results of a prospective study

Objectives

This study investigated the effects of dose step-down in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) who achieved sustained disease control with baricitinib 4 mg once a day.

Methods

Patients who completed a baricitinib phase 3 study could enter a long-term extension (LTE). In the LTE, patients who received baricitinib 4 mg for ≥15 months and maintained CDAI low disease activity (LDA) or remission (REM) were blindly randomised to continue 4 mg or taper to 2 mg. Patients could rescue (to 4 mg) if needed. Efficacy and safety were assessed through 48 weeks.

Results

Patients in both groups maintained LDA (80% 4 mg; 67% 2 mg) or REM (40% 4 mg; 33% 2 mg) over 48 weeks. However, dose reduction resulted in small, statistically significant increases in disease activity at 12, 24 and 48 weeks. Dose reduction also produced earlier and more frequent relapse (loss of step-down criteria) over 48 weeks compared with 4 mg maintenance (23% 4 mg vs 37% 2 mg, p=0.001). Rescue rates were 10% for baricitinib 4 mg and 18% for baricitinib 2 mg. Dose reduction was associated with a numerically lower rate of non-serious infections (30.6 for baricitinib 4 mg vs 24.9 for 2 mg). Rates of serious adverse events and adverse events leading to discontinuation were similar across groups.

Conclusions

In a large randomised, blinded phase 3 study, maintenance of RA control following induction of sustained LDA/REM with baricitinib 4 mg was greater with continued 4 mg than after taper to 2 mg. Nonetheless, most patients tapered to 2 mg could maintain LDA/REM or recapture with return to 4 mg if needed.

Tocilizumab discontinuation after attaining remission in patients with rheumatoid arthritis who were treated with tocilizumab alone or in combination with methotrexate: results from a prospective randomised controlled study (the second year of the SURPRISE study)

Objective

To evaluate the sustained remission and low disease activity after discontinuation of tocilizumab in patients with rheumatoid arthritis who were treated with tocilizumab alone or in combination with methotrexate.

Methods

The SURPRISE study was a 2-year, open-label randomised controlled study. Among patients who had been randomised to additional tocilizumab (ADD-ON) or switch to tocilizumab (SWITCH) in the first year, those who achieved remission based on the disease activity score for 28 joints (DAS28-ESR<2.6) discontinued tocilizumab at week 52 and were observed for the following 52 weeks. The endpoint of the second year included tocilizumab-free remission and low disease-activity rates, functional outcome, radiological outcomes assessed with the modified total Sharp score (mTSS) and safety. The efficacy of reinstituted tocilizumab/methotrexate was also evaluated.

Results

A total of 105 patients who achieved remission at week 52 discontinued tocilizumab; 51 in ADD-ON continued methotrexate and 54 in SWITCH received no disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs. Sustained DAS28 low disease-activity rates were significantly higher in ADD-ON than in SWITCH (55%vs27%, p=0.005). Sustained remission rates at week 104 were 24% for ADD-ON and 14% for SWITCH (p=0.29). Radiological progression was comparable between both groups (mTSS; 0.37vs0.64, p=0.36). The restart of tocilizumab induced remission in all except two patients after 36 weeks, irrespective of concomitant methotrexate.

Conclusion

Sustained low disease activity after tocilizumab discontinuation could be maintained with continued methotrexate in more than half of the patients. Retreatment with tocilizumab led to remission in more than 90% of patients.

Trial registration number

NCT01120366; Results.

Mental health, fatigue and function are associated with increased risk of disease flare following TNF inhibitor tapering in patients with rheumatoid arthritis: an exploratory analysis of data from the Optimizing TNF Tapering in RA (OPTTIRA) trial

Background

Tapering of anti-tumour necrosis factor (TNF) therapy appears feasible, safe and effective in selected patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA). Depression is highly prevalent in RA and may impact on flare incidence through various mechanisms. This study aims to investigate if psychological states predict flare in patients' dose tapering their anti-TNF therapy.

Methods

This study is a post-hoc analysis of the Optimizing TNF Tapering in RA trial, a multicentre, randomised, open-label study investigating anti-TNF tapering in RA patients with sustained low disease activity. Patient-reported outcomes (Health Assessment Questionnaire, EuroQol 5-dimension scale, Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy fatigue scale (FACIT-F), 36-Item Short Form Survey (SF-36)) were collected at baseline. The primary outcome was flare, defined as an increase in 28-joint count Disease Activity Score (DAS28) ≥0.6 and ≥1 swollen joint. Discrete-time survival models were used to identify patient-reported outcomes that predict flare.

Results

Ninety-seven patients were randomised to taper their anti-TNF dose by either 33% or 66%. Forty-one patients flared. Higher baseline DAS28 score was associated with flare (adjusted HR 1.96 (95% CI 1.18 to 3.24), p=0.01). Disability (SF-36 physical component score), fatigue (FACIT-F) and mental health (SF-36 mental health subscale (MH)) predicted flare in unadjusted models. In multivariate analyses, only SF-36 MH remained a statistically significant predictor of flare (adjusted HR per 10 units 0.74 (95% CI 0.60 to 0.93), p=0.01).

Conclusions

Baseline DAS28 and mental health status are independently associated with flare in patients who taper their anti-TNF therapy. Fatigue and function also associate with flare but the effect disappears when adjusting for confounders. Given these findings, mental health and functional status should be considered in anti-TNF tapering decisions in order to optimise the likelihood of success.

Trial registration numbers

EudraCT Number: 2010-020738-24; ISRCTN: 28955701; Post-results.

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.

Risk of losing remission, low disease activity or radiographic progression in case of bDMARD discontinuation or tapering in rheumatoid arthritis: systematic analysis of the literature and meta-analysis

Objectives

To assess the risk of losing remission, low disease activity (LDA) or radiographic progression in the case of (1) discontinuing or (2) tapering doses of biological disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (bDMARDs) compared with continuation of the initial treatment regimen in rheumatoid arthritis (RA) patients with remission or LDA.

Materials and methods

A systematic literature analysis was carried out through May 2017 on the PubMed, Embase, Cochrane and international congress databases, selecting controlled trials comparing bDMARDs discontinuation/tapering versus continuation in RA patients with remission or LDA. The meta-analysis assessed the risk ratio (RR) and 95% CI of losing remission or LDA and the risk of radiographic progression after (1) discontinuing and (2) tapering doses of bDMARDs versus continuing the initial treatment.

Results

The meta-analysis comparing bDMARDs discontinuation versus continuation performed on nine trials showed an increased risk of losing remission (RR (95% CI)=1.97(1.43 to 2.73), P<0.0001) or LDA (RR (95% CI)=2.24(1.52 to 3.30), P<0.0001) and an increased risk of radiographic progression (RR (95% CI)=1.09(1.02 to 1.17), P=0.01) in case of bDMARD discontinuation. The meta-analysis comparing bDMARDs tapering versus continuation performed on 11 trials showed an increased risk of losing remission (RR (95% CI)=1.23(1.06 to 1.42), P=0.006) but no increased risk of losing LDA (RR (95% CI)=1.02 (0.85 to 1.23), P=0.81) nor any increased risk of radiographic progression (RR (95% CI)=1.09(0.94 to 1.26), P=0.26) in case of bDMARD tapering.

Conclusion

Discontinuation of bDMARDs leads to an increased risk of losing remission or LDA and radiographic progression, while tapering doses of bDMARDs does not increase the risk of relapse (LDA) or radiographic progression, even though there is an increased risk of losing remission.

Dosing down with biologic therapies: a systematic review and clinicians' perspective

The effectiveness of biologic therapies now means that remission or low disease activity are realistic targets for treatment. However, after achieving remission/low disease activity, the next steps remain unclear. The aim of this publication was to conduct a broad systematic literature review to evaluate dosing down of biologics. After screening papers and abstracts for relevance and application of inclusion/exclusion criteria, a structured extraction process was used to collect information on the included studies. Fifty-two papers were included in the analysis across rheumatic disease. In patients who discontinue therapy, remission is not typically sustained, with reported rates of relapse and flare across early RA (48-54%), established RA (2-84%), axial spondyloarthritis (11-53%) and PsA (44.9%). In many cases, an acceptable disease activity can be regained upon retreatment. More research is needed to understand the long-term impacts of these strategies on efficacy, safety and cost.

Little Evidence for Usefulness of Biomarkers for Predicting Successful Dose Reduction or Discontinuation of a Biologic Agent in Rheumatoid Arthritis: A Systematic Review

OBJECTIVE

To systematically review studies addressing prediction of successful dose reduction or discontinuation of a biologic agent in rheumatoid arthritis (RA).

METHODS

PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library databases were searched for studies that examined the predictive value of biomarkers for successful dose reduction or discontinuation of a biologic agent in RA. Two reviewers independently selected studies, and extracted data and assessed the risk of bias. A biomarker was classified as a "potential predictor" if the univariate association was either strong (odds ratio or hazard ratio >2.0 or <0.5) or statistically significant. For biomarkers that were studied multiple times, qualitative best-evidence synthesis was performed separately for the prediction of successful dose reduction and discontinuation. Biomarkers that were defined in ≥75% of the studies as potential predictors were regarded as "predictor" for the purposes of our study.

RESULTS

Of 3,029 nonduplicate articles initially searched, 16 articles regarding 15 cohorts were included in the present study. Overall, 17 biomarkers were studied multiple times for the prediction of successful dose reduction, and 33 for the prediction of successful discontinuation of a biologic agent. Three predictors were identified: higher adalimumab trough level for successful dose reduction and lower Sharp/van der Heijde erosion score and shorter symptom duration at the start of a biologic agent for successful discontinuation.

CONCLUSION

The predictive value of a wide variety of biomarkers for successful dose reduction or discontinuation of biologic treatment in RA has been investigated. We identified only 3 biomarkers as predictors, in just 2 studies. The strength of the evidence is limited by the low quality of the included studies and the likelihood of reporting bias and multiple testing.

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.

[Treatment reduction in well-controlled rheumatoid arthritis. State of knowledge]

Nowadays, the excellent treatment options available for rheumatoid arthritis (RA) result in ambitious therapeutic goals, such as remission, which can actually be achieved for many RA patients. In a state of sustained remission many patients request reduction in drug treatment and this as well as economic reasons makes treatment reduction or even drug-free remission a reasonable target. Increasingly successful reduction of disease-modifying antirheumatic drug (DMARD) treatment has been shown in studies for approximately 30-60 % of patients in sustained remission, at least for some period of time. Because flare retreatment is successful in nearly all cases, the risk of treatment de-escalation can be minimized, so long as patients are continuously monitored after reduction or termination of drug treatment. No study has yet shown an elevated risk for unfavorable long-term outcome in cases of controlled treatment reduction. Current treatment recommendations are that glucocorticoids should first be withdrawn followed by reduction and termination of biologics and in cases of sustained remission finally, conventional DMARDs, such as methotrexate should be reduced and possibly terminated to achieve the defined target of drug-free remission. Factors facilitating success of tapering antirheumatic drugs are low disease activity at initiation, negative serological tests and short disease duration after starting DMARD treatment. A joint decision between rheumatologists and patients as well as continuous remission for at least 6 months are prerequisites for drug reduction.

Are there dangers in biologic dose reduction strategies?

Biologic dose reduction strategies, for patients with inflammatory rheumatic diseases, have been assessed in multiple studies to assess outcomes compared to ongoing maintenance dosing. Whilst cessation in established disease usually leads to disease flare, dose tapering approaches for those achieving low disease activity often appear to be successful in the short term. However, tapering can be associated with a higher risk of losing disease control and rates of recapture of disease control using the original biologic dose vary between studies. Over relatively short periods of follow-up, a number of studies have shown no statistical difference in radiographic progression in patients tapering or discontinuing biologics. However, a Cochrane review found that radiographic and functional outcomes may be worse after TNF inhibitor discontinuation, and over long-term disease follow-up flares have been associated with radiographic progression and worse patient reported outcomes. To date, no studies of biological therapy dose reduction have specifically investigated the risk of increased immunogenicity or the effects on cardiovascular risk and other co-morbidities, although these remain important potential risks. In addition, whether there are greater dangers in certain dose reduction approaches such as a reduction in dose at the same frequency or a spacing of doses is not established.

Treating rheumatoid arthritis to target: 2014 update of the recommendations of an international task force

BACKGROUND

Reaching the therapeutic target of remission or low-disease activity has improved outcomes in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) significantly. The treat-to-target recommendations, formulated in 2010, have provided a basis for implementation of a strategic approach towards this therapeutic goal in routine clinical practice, but these recommendations need to be re-evaluated for appropriateness and practicability in the light of new insights.

OBJECTIVE

To update the 2010 treat-to-target recommendations based on systematic literature reviews (SLR) and expert opinion.

METHODS

A task force of rheumatologists, patients and a nurse specialist assessed the SLR results and evaluated the individual items of the 2010 recommendations accordingly, reformulating many of the items. These were subsequently discussed, amended and voted upon by >40 experts, including 5 patients, from various regions of the world. Levels of evidence, strengths of recommendations and levels of agreement were derived.

RESULTS

The update resulted in 4 overarching principles and 10 recommendations. The previous recommendations were partly adapted and their order changed as deemed appropriate in terms of importance in the view of the experts. The SLR had now provided also data for the effectiveness of targeting low-disease activity or remission in established rather than only early disease. The role of comorbidities, including their potential to preclude treatment intensification, was highlighted more strongly than before. The treatment aim was again defined as remission with low-disease activity being an alternative goal especially in patients with long-standing disease. Regular follow-up (every 1-3 months during active disease) with according therapeutic adaptations to reach the desired state was recommended. Follow-up examinations ought to employ composite measures of disease activity that include joint counts. Additional items provide further details for particular aspects of the disease, especially comorbidity and shared decision-making with the patient. Levels of evidence had increased for many items compared with the 2010 recommendations, and levels of agreement were very high for most of the individual recommendations (≥9/10).

CONCLUSIONS

The 4 overarching principles and 10 recommendations are based on stronger evidence than before and are supposed to inform patients, rheumatologists and other stakeholders about strategies to reach optimal outcomes of RA.

Incidence and Predictors of Biological Antirheumatic Drug Discontinuation Attempts among Patients with Rheumatoid Arthritis in Remission: A CORRONA and NinJa Collaborative Cohort Study

Objective.

We conducted a longitudinal observational study of biological disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (bDMARD) to describe the proportions of patients with rheumatoid arthritis in remission who discontinued these agents, and to assess the potential predictors of the decision to discontinue.

Methods.

We used data from the US COnsortium of Rheumatology Researchers Of North America (CORRONA) and the Japanese National Database of Rheumatic Diseases by iR-net in Japan (NinJa) registries, and ran parallel analyses. Patients treated with bDMARD who experienced remission (defined by the Clinical Disease Activity Index ≤ 2.8) were included. The outcome of interest was the occurrence of bDMARD discontinuation while in remission. The predictors of discontinuation were assessed in the Cox regression models. Frailty models were also used to examine the effects of individual physicians in the discontinuation decision.

Results.

The numbers of eligible patients who were initially in remission were 6263 in the CORRONA and 744 in the NinJa. Among these patients, 10.0% of patients in CORRONA and 11.8% of patients in NinJa discontinued bDMARD while in remission over 5 years, whereas many of the remaining patients lost remission before discontinuing bDMARD. Shorter disease duration was associated with higher rates of discontinuation in both cohorts. In CORRONA, methotrexate use and lower disease activity were also associated with discontinuation. In frailty models, physician random effects were significant in both cohorts.

Conclusion.

Among patients who initially experienced remission while receiving bDMARD, around 10% remained in remission and then discontinued bDMARD in both registries. Several factors were associated with more frequent discontinuation while in remission. Physician preference likely is also an important correlate of bDMARD discontinuation, indicating the need for standardization of practice.

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

As more patients with established rheumatoid arthritis (RA) achieve remission or low disease activity, strategies such as tapering and withdrawal of disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs) are being investigated. In several trials, DMARD discontinuation was associated with a higher risk of relapse, ranging from 56% to 87% at 1 year. Tapering, either by dose reduction or by injection spacing, may limit the risk of relapse. Half-dose etanercept (ETN) versus full-dose continuation was not associated with an increased relapse risk at 1 year in two trials. Progressive antitumor necrosis factor injection spacing was shown to be equivalent to full regimen continuation in terms of persistent flare and disease activity at 18 months in one trial, but not in another one. Reintroduction of a DMARD at previous dose/regimen was usually associated with remission re-induction. The risk of relevant structural damage progression was not increased. Safety improvement has not yet been demonstrated. The annual cost reduction when tapering biologic DMARDs (bDMARDs) was 3500-6000 €/patient. Research questions to be addressed include defining flare that requires reinitiation of treatment, such that patients facilitate the maintenance of remission during tapering by timely communication with their rheumatology team.

Flare Rate in Patients with Rheumatoid Arthritis in Low Disease Activity or Remission When Tapering or Stopping Synthetic or Biologic DMARD: A Systematic Review

Objective.

To evaluate the risk of having a disease flare in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) with low disease activity (LDA) or in remission when deescalating (tapering or stopping) disease-modifying antirheumatic drug (DMARD) therapy.

Methods.

A search in medical databases including publications from January 1950 to February 2015 was performed. Included were trials and observational studies in adults with RA who were in LDA or remission, evaluating ≥ 20 patients tapering or stopping DMARD. Flare rates had to have been reported. A metaanalysis was performed on studies deescalating tumor necrosis factor (TNF) blockers.

Results.

Four studies evaluated synthetic DMARD. Flare rates ranged from 8% at 24 weeks to 63% at 4 months after deescalation. Fifteen studies reported on TNF blockers. Estimated flare rates by metaanalysis on studies tapering or stopping TNF blockers were 0.26 (95% CI 0.17–0.39) and 0.49 (95% CI 0.27–0.73) for good-quality and moderate-quality studies, respectively. Flare rates in 3 studies stopping tocilizumab were 41% after 6 months, 55% at 1 year, and 87% at 1 year. Flare rates in 3 studies deescalating abatacept were 34% at 1 year, 41% at 1 year, and 72% at 6 months. Five studies evaluating radiographic progression in patients deescalating treatment all found limited to no progression.

Conclusion.

Results suggest that more than one-third of patients with RA with LDA or in remission may taper or stop DMARD treatment without experiencing a disease flare within the first year. Dose reduction of TNF blockers results in lower flare rates than stopping and may be noninferior to continuing full dose. Radiological progression after treatment deescalation remains low, but may increase slightly.

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.

Intensive intervention can lead to a treatment holiday from biological DMARDs in patients with rheumatoid arthritis

Rheumatoid arthritis (RA) is a systemic autoimmune disease characterized by inflammation and joint destruction that causes significant morbidity and mortality. However, the combined use of methotrexate (MTX), a synthetic disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drug (sDMARD) and biological DMARDs (bDMARDs) has revolutionized treatment of RA and clinical remission or low disease activity (LDA) are now realistic targets, achieved by a large proportion of RA patients. We are now in a position to evaluate if it is possible to maintain remission or LDA while at the same time reducing the burden of treatment on the patient and healthcare system. Data are emerging from large, well-conducted studies designed to answer this question, shedding light on which patient populations and treatment algorithms can survive treatment discontinuation or tapering with low risk of disease flare. For early RA, approximately half of early RA patients could discontinue TNF-targeted bDMARDs without clinical flare and functional impairment after obtaining clinical remission by bDMARDs with MTX. In contrast, for established RA, fewer patients sustained remission or LDA after the discontinuation of bDMARDs and "deep remission" at the discontinuation was a key factor to maintain the treatment holiday of bDMARDs. Thus, this article provides a brief outline on withdrawing or tapering bDMARDs once patients have achieved remission or LDA in RA.