Certolizumab pegol plus methotrexate provides broad relief from the burden of rheumatoid arthritis: analysis of patient-reported outcomes from the RAPID 2 trial

Efficacy of pharmacological interventions: a systematic review informing the 2023 EULAR recommendations for the management of fatigue in people with inflammatory rheumatic and musculoskeletal diseases

OBJECTIVE

To identify the best evidence on the efficacy of pharmacological interventions in reducing fatigue in people with inflammatory rheumatic and musculoskeletal diseases (I-RMDs) and to summarise their safety in the identified studies to inform European Alliance of Associations for Rheumatology recommendations for the management of fatigue in people with I-RMDs.

METHODS

Systematic review of adults with I-RMDs conducted according to the Cochrane Handbook. Search strategy ran in Medline, Embase, Cochrane Library, CINAHL Complete, PEDro, OTseeker and PsycINFO. Only randomised controlled trials (RCTs) or controlled clinical trials were eligible. Assessment of risk of bias, data extraction and synthesis performed by two reviewers independently and in duplicate. Data pooled in statistical meta-analyses.

RESULTS

From 4151 records, 455 were selected for full-text review, 99 fulfilled the inclusion criteria and 19 RCTs were included in meta-analyses. Adalimumab was superior to placebo in reducing fatigue at 12 and 52 weeks in rheumatoid arthritis (RA) (n=3 and 2 RCTs; mean difference (MD)= -3.03, p<0.001; MD=-2.25, p=0.03, respectively). Golimumab (n=2 RCTs; 24 weeks: MD=-5.27, p<0.001), baricitinib (n=2 RCTs; 24 weeks: MD=-4.06, p<0.001), sarilumab (n=2 RCTs; 24 weeks: MD=-3.15, p<0.001), tocilizumab (n=3 RCTs; 24 weeks: MD=-3.69, p<0.001) and tofacitinib (n=3 RCTs; 12 weeks: MD=-4.44, p<0.001) were also superior to placebo in reducing fatigue in RA. A dose/effect relationship was observed for sarilumab, tocilizumab and tofacitinib. In spondyloarthritis (excluding psoriatic arthritis), secukinumab was superior to placebo in reducing fatigue at 16 weeks (n=2 RCTs; MD=-4.15, p<0.001), with a dose/effect relationship also observed. The narrative results of the RCTs not included in the meta-analysis indicated that several other pharmacological interventions were efficacious in reducing fatigue, with reassuring safety results.

CONCLUSIONS

Several pharmacological interventions are efficacious and generally safe for managing fatigue in people with I-RMDs.

Achieving comprehensive remission or low disease activity in rheumatoid patients and its impact on workability - Saudi Rheumatoid Arthritis Registry

Purpose

Ability to work is an important endpoint in rheumatoid arthritis (RA). It is not clear what outcome measures should be used to guide treatment in order to maximize workability. This study addressed the impact of RA on workability in a Saudi population and examined the correlation between objective measures of disease activity and reduced workability. This will allow better understanding of treatment targets that will translate into improved workability.

Patients and methods

Data were collected through a digital patient record keeper: The Rheumatoid Arthritis Saudi Database. Male and female patients, ≥18 years of age, that met the American College for Rheumatology criteria for diagnosis of RA, were recruited, regardless of treatment. Demographic and disease-specific data were collected. Disease Activity Score-28 (DAS-28) was used to define patients as low (DAS-28 ≤3.2) vs high (DAS-28 >3.2) disease activity. Health assessment questionnaire (HAQ) score, visual analog scale (VAS) score, and musculoskeletal ultrasound 7 joint score were documented also. The work productivity and activity impairment (WPAI) score was used to measure absenteeism, presenteeism, overall work impairment, and activity impairment. DAS-28 score was correlated with WPAI score and linear regression used to identify the demographic and measures of treatment response that predict improvement in WPAI score.

Results

Higher absenteeism and more activity impairment were seen for patients with persistent DAS-28 >3.2 (non-achievers). HAQ and VAS scores correlated with presenteeism, overall work impairment, and activity impairment.

Conclusion

Disease activity, as defined by DAS-28 score, correlates with absenteeism and work impairment in a Saudi population. However, on linear regression analysis, HAQ and VAS scores were the only measures predictive of work impairment. These scores should be used to monitor response to treatment regimens that aim to maximize work potential for Saudi individuals.

Superiority of a Treat-to-Target Strategy over Conventional Treatment with Fixed csDMARD and Corticosteroids: A Multi-Center Randomized Controlled Trial in RA Patients with an Inadequate Response to Conventional Synthetic DMARDs, and New Therapy with Certolizumab Pegol

Background: Treatment of rheumatoid arthritis (RA) includes the use of conventional (cs), biologic (b) disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs (DMARDs) and oral, intramuscularly, intravenous, or intraarticular (IA) glucocorticoids (GCs). In this paper, we analysed whether a treat-to-target (T2T) strategy optimizing csDMARD, oral, and IA-GC treatment as an adjunct new therapy to a new certolizumab pegol (CZP) therapy improves the effectivity in RA patients. Methods: 43 patients with active RA (≥6 tender, ≥6 swollen joints, ESR ≥ 20 mm/h or CRP ≥ 7mg/L) despite csDMARD treatment for ≥ 3 months and naïve to bDMARDs were randomized to CZP (200 mg/2 weeks after loading with 400 mg at weeks 0–2–4) plus a treat-to-target strategy (T2T, n = 21), or to CZP added to the established csDMARD therapy (fixed regimen, n = 22). The T2T strategy consisted of changing the baseline csDMARD therapy (1) SC-methotrexate (dose: 15 ≥ 20 ≥ 25 mg/week, depending on the initial dose) ≥ leflunomide (20 mg/d) ≥ sulphasalazine (2 × 1000 mg/d) plus (2) oral GCs (prednisolone 20–15–12.5–10–7.5–5–2.5–0 mg/d tapered every five days) and (3) injections of ≤5 affected joints with triamcinolone. DMARD modification and an addition of oral GCs were initiated, depending on the achievement of low disease activity (DAS 28 < 3.2). The primary objective was defined as the ACR 50 response at week 24. Results: ACR 50 was achieved in 76.2% of the T2T, as compared to 36.4% of the fixed regimen patients (p = 0.020). ACR 20 and 70 responses were achieved in 90.5% and 71.4% of the T2T patients and 59.1% and 27.3% of the fixed regimen patients, respectively (p = 0.045 and p = 0.010, respectively). The adverse event rate was similar for both groups (T2T n = 51; fixed regimen n = 55). Conclusion: Treat-to-target management with the optimization of csDMARDs, oral, and IA-GCs of RA patients in parallel to a newly established CZP treatment was safe and efficacious in comparison to a fixed regimen of csDMARDs background therapy.

Tofacitinib or adalimumab versus placebo: patient-reported outcomes from OPAL Broaden-a phase III study of active psoriatic arthritis in patients with an inadequate response to conventional synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs

Objectives

Tofacitinib is an oral Janus kinase inhibitor for treatment of psoriatic arthritis (PsA). We evaluated patient-reported outcomes (PROs) in patients with PsA refractory to ≥1 conventional synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drug (csDMARD-IR) and tumour necrosis factor inhibitor-naïve in a 12-month, phase III randomised controlled trial (OPAL Broaden [NCT01877668]).

Methods

Patients (N=422) received tofacitinib 5 mg or 10 mg twice daily, adalimumab 40 mg subcutaneously every 2 weeks or placebo advancing to tofacitinib 5 mg or 10 mg twice daily at month 3. Least squares mean changes from baseline and percentages of patients reporting improvements ≥minimum clinically important differences (MCID); and scores ≥normative values in: Patient Global Assessment of disease activity (PtGA), Pain, Patient Global Joint and Skin Assessment (PGJS), Short Form-36 Health Survey version 2 (SF-36v2), Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy-Fatigue (FACIT-Fatigue), EuroQol 5-Dimensions-3-level questionnaire (EQ-5D-3L) and Ankylosing Spondylitis Quality of Life (ASQoL) were determined. Nominal p values were cited without multiple comparison adjustments.

Results

At month 3, PtGA, Pain, PGJS, FACIT-Fatigue, EQ-5D-3L, ASQoL and SF-36v2 Physical Component Summary (PCS), physical functioning (PF), bodily pain (BP) and vitality domain scores exceeded placebo with both tofacitinib doses (p≤0.05); SF-36v2 social functioning with 5 mg twice daily (p≤0.05). Percentages reporting improvements ≥MCID in PtGA, Pain, PGJS, FACIT-Fatigue, ASQoL and SF-36v2 PCS, PF, BP and general health scores exceeded placebo with both tofacitinib doses (p≤0.05) and were similar with adalimumab.

Conclusion

csDMARD-IR patients with active PsA reported statistically and clinically meaningful improvements in PROs with tofacitinib compared with placebo at Month 3.

Impact of Stopping Tumor Necrosis Factor Inhibitors on Rheumatoid Arthritis Patients' Burden of Disease

OBJECTIVE

To determine the impact of stopping tumor necrosis factor inhibitor (TNFi) treatment on patient-reported outcomes (PROs) of physical and mental health status, health utility, pain, disability, and fatigue in patients with established rheumatoid arthritis (RA).

METHODS

In the pragmatic, 12-month POET trial, 817 RA patients with ≥6 months of remission or stable low disease activity were randomized 2:1 to stopping or continuing TNFi. In case of flare, TNFi was restarted at the discretion of the rheumatologist. PROs were assessed every 3 months.

RESULTS

TNFi was restarted within 12 months in 252 of 531 patients (47.5%) in the stop group. At 3 months, mean PRO scores were significantly worse in the stop group, and a larger proportion of patients experienced a minimum clinically important difference (MCID) on all PROs. Effect sizes (ES) were strongest for health utility (ES -0.24) and pain (ES -0.30). Mean scores improved again after this point, but disability scores remained significantly different at 12 months. After 12 months, the relative risk of experiencing an MCID ranged from 1.16 for mental health status to 1.58 for fatigue. Mean PRO scores for patients restarting TNFi within 6 months were no longer significantly different from those that did not restart TNFi at 12 months.

CONCLUSION

Stopping TNFi had a significant negative short-term impact on a broad range of PROs. Long-term negative consequences appeared to be limited, and outcomes in patients needing to restart TNFi within the first 6 months tended to be restored at 12 months.

Efficacy and safety of various anti-rheumatic treatments for patients with rheumatoid arthritis: a network meta-analysis

INTRODUCTION

Biologics and traditional disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs (DMARDs) are generally used in treating patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA). Previous studies have presented abundant data and information about the efficacy of such treatments, but the results were incomplete and inconclusive. This network meta-analysis was conducted to compare and assess the efficacy and safety of 15 therapies employing biologics and DMARDs for RA patients.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Six outcomes (American College of Rheumatology 20% response rate (ACR20), ACR50, ACR70, remission, adverse events (AEs) and serious adverse events (SAEs)) were used to evaluate the efficacy and safety of different treatments. The node-splitting method was used to assess the inconsistency, and the rank probabilities of the therapies were estimated by surface under the cumulative ranking curve. Besides, Jadad scale was used to evaluate the methodological quality of eligible studies.

RESULTS

A total of 67 randomized controlled trials with 20,898 patients met the inclusion criteria. Most of the therapies presented better performance than conventional DMARDs (cDMARDs) and placebo in ACR20, ACR50 and ACR70. Conversely, the safety of cDMARDs and placebo seemed to be superior in AEs and SAEs. Also, tocilizumab (TCZ) and TCZ + methotrexate (MTX) showed better remission in pain compared to other treatments. Overall, certolizumab pegol (CZP) + MTX and TCZ + MTX had higher probability than the other treatments in efficacy outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS

We recommend CZP + MTX as the optimal drug therapy because it has the highest ranking in efficacy outcomes and relatively low risk of adverse events. TCZ + MTX is recommended as an alternative. Abatacept (ABT) and cDMARDs are not recommended due to their low efficacy.

Optimal search strategies for identifying moderators and predictors of treatment effects in PubMed

BACKGROUND

Treatment effects differ across patients. To guide selection of treatments for patients, it is essential to acknowledge these differences and identify moderators or predictors. Our aim was to generate optimal search strategies (commonly known as filters) for PubMed to retrieve papers identifying moderators and predictors of treatment effects.

METHODS

Six journals were hand-searched for articles on moderators or predictors. Selected articles were randomly allocated to a development and validation set. Search terms were extracted from the development set and tested for their performance. Search filters were created from combinations of these terms and tested in the validation set.

RESULTS

Of 4407 articles, 198 were considered to be relevant. The most sensitive filter in the development set '("Epidemiologic Methods" [MeSH] OR assign* OR control*[tiab] OR trial*[tiab]) AND therapy*[sh]' yielded in the validation set a sensitivity of 89% [88%-90%] and a specificity of 80% [79%-82%].

CONCLUSIONS

The search filters created in this study can help to efficiently retrieve evidence on moderators and predictors of treatment effect. Testing of the filters in multiple domains should reveal robustness across disciplines. These filters can facilitate the retrieval of evidence on moderators and predictors of treatment effects, helping the implementation of stratified or personalised health care.

Functional disability and its predictors in systemic sclerosis: a study from the DeSScipher project within the EUSTAR group

Objectives

The multisystem manifestations of SSc can greatly impact patients' quality of life. The aim of this study was to identify factors associated with disability in SSc.

Methods

SSc patients from the prospective DeSScipher cohort who had completed the scleroderma health assessment questionnaire (SHAQ), a disability score that combines the health assessment questionnaire and five visual analogue scales, were included in this analysis. The effect of factors possibly associated with disability was analysed with multiple linear regressions.

Results

The mean SHAQ and HAQ scores of the 944 patients included were 0.87 (s.d. = 0.66) and 0.92 (s.d. = 0.78); 59% of the patients were in the mild to moderate difficulty SHAQ category (0 ⩽ SHAQ < 1), 34% in the moderate to severe disability category (1 ⩽ SHAQ < 2) and 7% in the severe to very severe disability category (2 ⩽ SHAQ ⩽ 3). The means of the visual analogue scales scores were in order of magnitude: overall disease severity (37 mm), RP (31 mm), pulmonary symptoms (24 mm), gastrointestinal symptoms (20 mm) and digital ulcers (19 mm). In multiple regression, the main factors associated with high SHAQ scores were the presence of dyspnoea [modified New York Heart Association (NYHA) class IV (regression coefficient B = 0.62), modified NYHA class III (B = 0.53) and modified NYHA class II (B = 0.21; all vs modified NYHA class I)], FM (B = 0.37), muscle weakness (B = 0.27), digital ulcers (B = 0.20) and gastrointestinal symptoms (oesophageal symptoms, B = 0.16; stomach symptoms, B = 0.15; intestinal symptoms, B = 0.15).

Conclusion

SSc patients perceive dyspnoea, pain, digital ulcers, muscle weakness and gastrointestinal symptoms as the main factors driving their level of disability, unlike physicians who emphasize objective measures of disability.

Certolizumab pegol (CDP870) for rheumatoid arthritis in adults

BACKGROUND

Tumour necrosis factor (TNF)-alpha inhibitors are beneficial for the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis (RA) for reducing the risk of joint damage, improving physical function and improving the quality of life. This review is an update of the 2014 Cochrane Review of the treatment of RA with certolizumab pegol.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the clinical benefits and harms of certolizumab pegol (CZP) in people with RA who have not responded well to conventional disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs (DMARDs).

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL: Cochrane Library 2016, Issue 9), MEDLINE, Embase, Web of Knowledge, reference lists of articles, clinicaltrials.gov and ICTRP of WHO. The searches were updated from 2014 (date of the last search for the previous version) to 26 September 2016.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials that compared certolizumab pegol with any other agent, including placebo or methotrexate (MTX), in adults with active RA, regardless of current or prior treatment with conventional disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs (DMARDs), such as MTX.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently checked search results, extracted data and assessed trial quality. We resolved disagreements by discussion or referral to a third review author.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 14 trials in this update, three more than previously. Twelve trials (5422 participants) included measures of benefit. We pooled 11 of them, two more than previously. Thirteen trials included information on harms, (5273 participants). The duration of follow-up varied from 12 to 52 weeks and the range of doses of certolizumab pegol varied from 50 to 400 mg given subcutaneously. In Phase III trials, the comparator was placebo plus MTX in seven trials and placebo in five. In the two Phase II trials the comparator was only placebo.The approved dose of certolizumab pegol, 200 mg every other week, produced clinically important improvements at 24 weeks for the following outcomes:- American College of Rheumatology (ACR) 50% improvement (pain, function and other symptoms of RA): 25% absolute improvement (95% confidence interval (CI) 20% to 33%); number need to treat for an additional beneficial outcome (NNTB) of 4 (95% CI 3 to 5); risk ratio (RR) 3.80 (95% CI 2.42 to 5.95), 1445 participants, 5 studies.- The Health Assessment Questionnaire (HAQ): -12% absolute improvement (95% CI -9% to -14%); NNTB of 8 (95% CI 7 to 11); mean difference (MD) - 0.35 (95% CI -0.43 to -0.26; 1268 participants, 4 studies) (scale 0 to 3; lower scores mean better function).- Proportion of participants achieving remission (Disease Activity Score (DAS) < 2.6) absolute improvement 10% (95% CI 8% to 16%); NNTB of 8 (95% CI 6 to 12); risk ratio (RR) 2.94 (95% CI 1.64 to 5.28), 2420 participants, six studies.- Radiological changes: erosion score (ES) absolute improvement -0.29% (95% CI -0.42% to -0.17%); NNTB of 6 (95% CI 4 to 10); MD -0.67 (95% CI -0.96 to -0.38); 714 participants, two studies (scale 0 to 230), but not a clinically important difference.-Serious adverse events (SAEs) were statistically but not clinically significantly more frequent for certolizumab pegol (200 mg every other week) with an absolute rate difference of 3% (95% CI 1% to 4%); number needed to treat for an additional harmful outcome (NNTH) of 33 (95% CI 25 to 100); Peto odds ratio (OR) 1.47 (95% CI 1.13 to 1.91); 3927 participants, nine studies.There was a clinically significant increase in all withdrawals in the placebo groups (for all doses and at all follow-ups) with an absolute rate difference of -29% (95% CI -16% to -42%), NNTH of 3 (95% CI 2 to 6), RR 0.47 (95% CI 0.39 to 0.56); and there was a clinically significant increase in withdrawals due to adverse events in the certolizumab groups (for all doses and at all follow-ups) with an absolute rate difference of 2% (95% CI 0% to 3%); NNTH of 58 (95% CI 28 to 329); Peto OR 1.45 (95% CI 1.09 to 1.94) 5236 participants Twelve studies.We judged the quality of evidence to be high for ACR50, DAS remission, SAEs and withdrawals due to adverse events, and moderate for HAQ and radiological changes, due to concerns about attrition bias. For all withdrawals we judged the quality of evidence to be moderate, due to inconsistency.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The results and conclusions did not change from the previous review. There is a moderate to high certainty of evidence from randomised controlled trials that certolizumab pegol, alone or combined with methotrexate, is beneficial in the treatment of RA for improved ACR50 and health-related quality of life, an increased chance of remission of RA, and reduced joint damage as seen on x-ray. Fewer people stopped taking their treatment, but most of these who did stopped due to serious adverse events. Adverse events were more frequent with active treatment. We found a clinically but not statistically significant risk of serious adverse events.

Comparative efficacy of biological agents in methotrexate-refractory rheumatoid arthritis patients: a Bayesian mixed treatment comparison

BACKGROUND/AIMS

Biological agents (biologics) targeting proinflammatory signaling have emerged as an important treatment option in rheumatoid arthritis (RA). Despite the clinical effectiveness of biologics for patients with RA who do not respond to 'traditional' disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs (DMARDs), there are concerns regarding their cost and long-term safety. In this study, we aimed to compare the efficacy of various biologics and traditional DMARDs in RA patients refractory to methotrexate (MTX).

METHODS

Four DMARDs (hydroxychloroquine, sulfasalazine, MTX, lef lunomide) and five anti-tumor necrosis factor drugs (adalimumab, etanercept, golimumab, inf liximab, and certolizumab) were selected. A systematic search of published studies was performed from inception through July 2013. Randomized trials of adults with MTX-refractory RA comparing two or more of the selected medications were included. Among 7,938 titles identified, in total, 16 head-to-head trials were selected. Two reviewers independently abstracted the study data and assessed methodological quality using the Cochrane Risk of Bias. Comparative efficacy was analyzed using a Bayesian mixed treatment comparison (MTC).

RESULTS

In total, 9, 4, and 11 studies were included for the outcome measures of the Health Assessment Questionnaire (HAQ), Disease Activity Score 28-erythrocyte sedimentation rate (DAS28-ESR) < 2.6 (remission), and American College of Rheumatology (ACR) 70 response, respectively. The treatments with the highest efficacy for each outcome measure were certolizumab combined with MTX, golimumab combined with MTX, and certolizumab combined with MTX, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Based on MTC analysis, using data from published randomized controlled trials, certolizumab and golimumab combined with MTX showed the highest efficacy in the three outcome measures (HAQ, DAS28-ESR < 2.6, and ACR 70 response) in MTX-refractory RA patients.

Sarilumab improves patient-reported outcomes in rheumatoid arthritis patients with inadequate response/intolerance to tumour necrosis factor inhibitors

Objective

To evaluate effects of the anti-interleukin-6 receptor monoclonal antibody sarilumab administered with conventional synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (csDMARDs) on patient-reported outcomes (PROs) in the TARGET trial in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) with inadequate response or intolerance to tumour necrosis factor inhibitors (TNF-IR).

Methods

546 patients (81.9% female, mean age 52.9 years) were randomised to placebo, sarilumab 150 or 200 mg subcutaneously every 2 weeks + csDMARDs. PROs included patient global assessment (PtGA); pain and morning stiffness visual analogue scales; Health Assessment Questionnaire Disability Index (HAQ-DI); Short Form-36 Health Survey (SF-36); FACIT-Fatigue (FACIT-F); Work Productivity Survey-Rheumatoid Arthritis (WPS-RA) and Rheumatoid Arthritis Impact of Disease (RAID). Changes from baseline at weeks 12 and 24 were analysed using a mixed model for repeated measures; post hoc analyses included percentages of patients reporting improvements ≥ minimum clinically important differences (MCID) and scores ≥ normative values.

Results

Sarilumab + csDMARDs doses resulted in improvements from baseline at week 12 vs placebo + csDMARDs in PtGA, pain, HAQ-DI, SF-36 and FACIT-F that were maintained at week 24. Sarilumab improved morning stiffness and reduced the impact of RA on work, family, social/leisure activities participation (WPS-RA) and on patients' lives (RAID). Percentages of patients reporting improvements ≥MCID and ≥ normative scores were greater with sarilumab than placebo.

Conclusions

In patients with TNF-IR RA, 150 and 200 mg sarilumab + csDMARDs resulted in clinically meaningful patient-reported benefits on pain, fatigue, function, participation and health status at 12 and 24 weeks that exceeded placebo + csDMARDs, and were consistent with the clinical profile previously reported.

Trial registration number

NCT01709578; Results.

Certolizumab Pegol: A Review in Inflammatory Autoimmune Diseases

Certolizumab pegol (Cimzia^®) is a subcutaneously administered polyethylene glycolylated (PEGylated) antigen-binding fragment of a recombinant human monoclonal antibody that selectively neutralizes TNFα. The drug is indicated for a variety of inflammatory autoimmune diseases, including Crohn's disease (CD), rheumatoid arthritis (RA), psoriatic arthritis (PsA) and axial spondyloarthritis (axSpA), based on its benefit in these settings in well-designed clinical trials. In these studies, certolizumab pegol (as first- or subsequent-line therapy) reduced the severity of CD when used as an induction or maintenance therapy, and improved the signs/symptoms and slowed the radiographic progression of RA (with or without concomitant methotrexate), PsA and axSpA. Certolizumab pegol is generally well tolerated, with upper respiratory tract infections, rash and urinary tract infections being among the most frequent adverse reactions. Thus, certolizumab pegol is an effective option for the management of these autoimmune diseases.

Systematic review and network meta-analysis of the efficacy and safety of tumour necrosis factor inhibitor-methotrexate combination therapy versus triple therapy in rheumatoid arthritis

OBJECTIVE

Clinical trials have not consistently demonstrated differences between tumour necrosis factor inhibitor (TNFi) plus methotrexate and triple therapy (methotrexate plus hydroxychloroquine plus sulfasalazine) in rheumatoid arthritis (RA). The study objective was to estimate the efficacy, radiographic benefits, safety and patient-reported outcomes of TNFi-methotrexate versus triple therapy in patients with RA.

METHODS

A systematic review and network meta-analysis (NMA) of randomised controlled trials of TNFi-methotrexate or triple therapy as one of the treatment arms in patients with an inadequate response to or who were naive to methotrexate was conducted. American College of Rheumatology 70% response criteria (ACR70) at 6 months was the prespecified primary endpoint to evaluate depth of response. Data from direct and indirect comparisons between TNFi-methotrexate and triple therapy were pooled and quantitatively analysed using fixed-effects and random-effects Bayesian models.

RESULTS

We analysed 33 studies in patients with inadequate response to methotrexate and 19 in patients naive to methotrexate. In inadequate responders, triple therapy was associated with lower odds of achieving ACR70 at 6 months compared with TNFi-methotrexate (OR 0.35, 95% credible interval (CrI) 0.19 to 0.64). Most secondary endpoints tended to favour TNFi-methotrexate in terms of OR direction; however, no clear increased likelihood of achieving these endpoints was observed for either therapy. The odds of infection were lower with triple therapy than with TNFi-methotrexate (OR 0.08, 95% CrI 0.00 to 0.57). There were no differences observed between the two regimens in patients naive to methotrexate.

CONCLUSIONS

In this NMA, triple therapy was associated with 65% lower odds of achieving ACR70 at 6 months compared with TNFi-methotrexate in patients with inadequate response to methotrexate. Although secondary endpoints numerically favoured TNFi-methotrexate, no clear differences were observed. The odds of infection were greater with TNFi-methotrexate. No differences were observed for patients naive to methotrexate. These results may help inform care of patients who fail methotrexate first-line therapy.

Patient-reported outcomes from a randomised phase III study of baricitinib in patients with rheumatoid arthritis and an inadequate response to biological agents (RA-BEACON)

Objectives

To assess baricitinib on patient-reported outcomes (PROs) in patients with moderately to severely active rheumatoid arthritis, who had insufficient response or intolerance to ≥1 tumour necrosis factor inhibitors (TNFis) or other biological disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (bDMARDs).

Methods

In this double-blind phase III study, patients were randomised to once-daily placebo or baricitinib 2 or 4 mg for 24 weeks. PROs included the Short Form-36, EuroQol 5-D, Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy-Fatigue (FACIT-F), Health Assessment Questionnaire-Disability Index (HAQ-DI), Patient's Global Assessment of Disease Activity (PtGA), patient's assessment of pain, duration of morning joint stiffness (MJS) and Work Productivity and Activity Impairment Questionnaire-Rheumatoid Arthritis. Treatment comparisons were performed with logistic regression for categorical measures or analysis of covariance for continuous variables.

Results

527 patients were randomised (placebo, 176; baricitinib 2 mg, 174; baricitinib 4 mg, 177). Both baricitinib-treated groups showed statistically significant improvements versus placebo in most PROs. Improvements were generally more rapid and of greater magnitude for patients receiving baricitinib 4 mg than 2 mg and were maintained to week 24. At week 24, more baricitinib-treated patients versus placebo-treated patients reported normal physical functioning (HAQ-DI <0.5; p≤0.001), reductions in fatigue (FACIT-F ≥3.56; p≤0.05), improvements in PtGA (p≤0.001) and pain (p≤0.001) and reductions in duration of MJS (p<0.01).

Conclusions

Baricitinib improved most PROs through 24 weeks compared with placebo in this study of treatment-refractory patients with previously inadequate responses to bDMARDs, including at least one TNFi. PRO results aligned with clinical efficacy data for baricitinib.

Trial registration number

NCT01721044; Results.

Sarilumab plus methotrexate improves patient-reported outcomes in patients with active rheumatoid arthritis and inadequate responses to methotrexate: results of a phase III trial

Background

Sarilumab is a human monoclonal antibody directed against the alpha subunit of the interleukin-6 receptor complex. In the MOBILITY phase III randomized controlled trial (RCT), sarilumab + methotrexate (MTX) treatment resulted in clinical improvements at 24 weeks that were maintained at 52 weeks in adults with rheumatoid arthritis (RA), who have inadequate response to MTX (MTX-IR). These analyses indicate the effects of sarilumab + MTX versus placebo on patient-reported outcomes (PROs) in this RCT.

Methods

Patients (n = 1197) were randomized to receive placebo, sarilumab 150 or 200 mg subcutaneously + MTX every 2 weeks for 52 weeks; after 16 weeks, patients without ≥20 % improvement from baseline in swollen or tender joint counts on two consecutive assessments were offered open-label treatment. PROs included patient global assessment of disease activity (PtGA), pain, health assessment questionnaire disability index (HAQ-DI), Short Form-36 Health Survey (SF-36), and functional assessment of chronic illness therapy-fatigue (FACIT-F). Changes from baseline at weeks 24 and 52 were analyzed using a mixed model for repeated measures. Post hoc analyses included percentages of patients reporting improvements equal to or greater than minimal clinically important differences (MCID) and normative values in the FACIT-F and SF-36. Pearson correlation between observed PRO scores and clinical measures of disease activity was tested at week 24.

Results

Both doses of sarilumab + MTX vs placebo + MTX resulted in improvement from baseline by week 24 in PtGA, pain, HAQ-DI, SF-36 and FACIT-F scores (p < 0.0001) that was clinically meaningful, and persisted until week 52. In post hoc analyses, the percentages of patients with improvement equal to or greater than the MCID across all PROs were greater with sarilumab than placebo (p < 0.05), with differences ranging from 11.6 to 26.2 %, as were those reporting equal to or greater than normative scores.

Conclusions

In this RCT in patients with MTX-IR RA, sarilumab + MTX resulted in sustained improvement in PROs that were clinically meaningful, greater than placebo + MTX, and complement the previously reported clinical efficacy and safety of sarilumab.

Trial registration

ClinicalTrials.gov. NCT01061736. February 2, 2010

Methotrexate monotherapy and methotrexate combination therapy with traditional and biologic disease modifying anti-rheumatic drugs for rheumatoid arthritis: A network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Methotrexate is considered the preferred disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drug (DMARD) for the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis, but controversy exists on the additional benefits and harms of combining methotrexate with other DMARDs.

OBJECTIVES

To compare methotrexate and methotrexate-based DMARD combinations for rheumatoid arthritis in patients naïve to or with an inadequate response (IR) to methotrexate.

METHODS

We systematically identified all randomised controlled trials with methotrexate monotherapy or in combination with any currently used conventional synthetic DMARD , biologic DMARDs, or tofacitinib. Three major outcomes (ACR50 response, radiographic progression and withdrawals due to adverse events) and multiple minor outcomes were evaluated. Treatment effects were summarized using Bayesian random-effects network meta-analyses, separately for methotrexate-naïve and methotrexate-IR trials. Heterogeneity was explored through meta-regression and subgroup analyses. The risk of bias of each trial was assessed using the Cochrane risk of bias tool, and trials at high risk of bias were excluded from the main analysis. The quality of evidence was evaluated using the GRADE approach. A comparison between two treatments was considered statistically significant if its credible interval excluded the null effect, indicating >97.5% probability that one treatment was superior.

MAIN RESULTS

158 trials with over 37,000 patients were included. Methotrexate-naïve: Several treatment combinations with methotrexate were statistically superior to oral methotrexate for ACR50 response: methotrexate + sulfasalazine + hydroxychloroquine ("triple therapy"), methotrexate + several biologics (abatacept, adalimumab, etanercept, infliximab, rituximab, tocilizumab), and tofacitinib. The estimated probability of ACR50 response was similar between these treatments (range 56-67%, moderate to high quality evidence), compared with 41% for methotrexate. Methotrexate combined with adalimumab, etanercept, certolizumab, or infliximab was statistically superior to oral methotrexate for inhibiting radiographic progression (moderate to high quality evidence) but the estimated mean change over one year with all treatments was less than the minimal clinically important difference of five units on the Sharp-van der Heijde scale. Methotrexate + azathioprine had statistically more withdrawals due to adverse events than oral methotrexate, and triple therapy had statistically fewer withdrawals due to adverse events than methotrexate + infliximab (rate ratio 0.26, 95% credible interval: 0.06 to 0.91). Methotrexate-inadequate response: In patients with an inadequate response to methotrexate, several treatments were statistically significantly superior to oral methotrexate for ACR50 response: triple therapy (moderate quality evidence), methotrexate + hydroxychloroquine (low quality evidence), methotrexate + leflunomide (moderate quality evidence), methotrexate + intramuscular gold (very low quality evidence), methotrexate + most biologics (moderate to high quality evidence), and methotrexate + tofacitinib (high quality evidence). There was a 61% probability of an ACR50 response with triple therapy, compared to a range of 27% to 64% for the combinations of methotrexate + biologic DMARDs that were statistically significantly superior to oral methotrexate. No treatment was statistically significantly superior to oral methotrexate for inhibiting radiographic progression. Methotrexate + cyclosporine and methotrexate + tocilizumab (8 mg/kg) had a statistically higher rate of withdrawals due to adverse events than oral methotrexate and methotrexate + abatacept had a statistically lower rate of withdrawals due to adverse events than several treatments.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

We found moderate to high quality evidence that combination therapy with methotrexate + sulfasalazine+ hydroxychloroquine (triple therapy) or methotrexate + most biologic DMARDs or tofacitinib were similarly effective in controlling disease activity and generally well tolerated in methotrexate-naïve patients or after an inadequate response to methotrexate. Methotrexate + some biologic DMARDs were superior to methotrexate in preventing joint damage in methotrexate-naïve patients, but the magnitude of these effects was small over one year.

Relationship between clinical and patient-reported outcomes in a phase 3 trial of tofacitinib or MTX in MTX-naïve patients with rheumatoid arthritis

OBJECTIVE

To compare the relationship between clinical measures and patient-reported outcomes (PROs) in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) treated with tofacitinib or methotrexate (MTX).

METHODS

In a phase 3 randomised controlled trial, patients (N=956) who were MTX-naïve or had received ≤3 doses were randomised and received tofacitinib 5 or 10 mg twice daily or MTX titrated to 20 mg/week. Outcomes included: per cent of patients achieving American College of Rheumatology 70% responses (ACR70), ACR50, low disease activity (LDA) by Simplified Disease Activity Index (SDAI ≤11) and Clinical Disease Activity Index (CDAI ≤10), remission by SDAI (≤3.3) and CDAI (≤2.8), patient-reported Health Assessment Questionnaire-Disability Index (HAQ-DI scores <0.5), pain and global assessment of disease activity.

RESULTS

At month 6, most patients who achieved LDA/remission by one definition achieved LDA/remission with others; however, discordance between measures was greater with MTX than with tofacitinib. As expected, concordance between CDAI and SDAI responses was high. Overall, patients achieving LDA or ACR50 responses reported less improvement in PROs (HAQ-DI, pain and patient global assessment) compared with clinical measures (tender and swollen joint counts).

CONCLUSIONS

Variability in levels of responses between clinical outcomes and PROs should be considered when setting treat-to-target goals in patients with RA.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT01039688; Post-results.

Tofacitinib or adalimumab versus placebo: patient-reported outcomes from a phase 3 study of active rheumatoid arthritis

Objective. To evaluate effects of tofacitinib or adalimumab on patient-reported outcomes (PROs) in patients with moderate to severe RA and inadequate responses to MTX.

Methods. In this 12-month, phase 3, randomized controlled trial (ORAL Standard), patients (n = 717) receiving background MTX were randomized to tofacitinib 5 or 10 mg twice daily (BID), adalimumab 40 mg once every 2 weeks or placebo. PROs included HAQ-Disability Index, Patient Global Assessment of Arthritis, Patient Assessment of Arthritis Pain, health-related quality of life (Short Form-36 [SF-36]), fatigue (Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy-Fatigue) and sleep (Medical Outcomes Study-Sleep).

Results. At month 3, tofacitinib 10 mg BID treatment resulted in significant changes from baseline vs placebo across all PROs, sustained to month 12, with the highest number of patients reporting improvements ⩾minimum clinically important differences vs placebo (P < 0.05). Changes from baseline at month 3 with tofacitinib 5 mg BID and adalimumab were similar and statistically significant vs placebo across most PROs, excluding SF-36 Mental Component Score and Social Functioning, Role Emotional, and Mental Health domains, with significantly more patients reporting improvements ⩾minimum clinically important differences. Numbers Needed to Treat were lowest for tofacitinib 10 mg BID and similar between tofacitinib 5 mg BID and adalimumab.

Conclusion. Patients with moderate to severe RA and inadequate responses to MTX reported improvements across a broad range of PROs with tofacitinib 5 and 10 mg BID and adalimumab that were significantly superior to placebo.

Impact of Certolizumab Pegol on Patient-Reported Outcomes in Patients With Axial Spondyloarthritis

Objective

Patient‐reported outcomes (PROs) provide an opportunity to collect important information relating to patient well‐being, which is often difficult for physicians to measure (e.g., quality of life, pain, fatigue, and sleep). Here we evaluate the effects of certolizumab pegol (CZP) on PROs during the 24‐week, double‐blind phase of the RAPID axial spondyloarthritis (SpA) trial, a phase 3 trial of axial SpA patients, including both ankylosing spondylitis (AS) and nonradiographic axial SpA patients.

Methods

A total of 325 patients with active axial SpA were randomized 1:1:1 to placebo, CZP 200 mg every 2 weeks, or CZP 400 mg every 4 weeks. The primary end point was the Assessment of SpondyloArthritis International Society criteria for 20% improvement in disease activity response at week 12, and has been reported previously. PROs included total back pain, nocturnal back pain, a daily pain diary, the Sleep Problems Index II (SPI) domain of the Medical Outcomes Study (MOS) Sleep Scale, fatigue, the Ankylosing Spondylitis Quality of Life (ASQOL) measure, and the Short Form 36‐item (SF‐36) health survey physical component summary (PCS), mental component summary (MCS), and domains.

Results

Patients treated with CZP reported significant improvements from week 1 for nocturnal back pain (placebo −0.6, CZP 200 mg every 2 weeks −1.9, and CZP 400 mg every 4 weeks −1.6; P < 0.001) and ASQOL (placebo −1.0, CZP 200 mg every 2 weeks −2.3, and CZP 400 mg every 4 weeks −1.9; P < 0.05) compared with placebo, while significant improvements in total back pain were seen from day 2. Patients treated with both CZP dosing regimens also had significantly greater improvements in fatigue, MOS‐SPI, SF‐36 PCS, MCS, and domains compared with placebo. Improvements were similar in both AS and nonradiographic axial SpA patients.

Conclusion

Both CZP dosing schedules rapidly improved patient well‐being, as measured by PROs, including pain, fatigue, sleep, SF‐36, and ASQOL in both AS and nonradiographic axial SpA patients.

Impact of certolizumab pegol on patient-reported outcomes in rheumatoid arthritis and correlation with clinical measures of disease activity

INTRODUCTION

The effect of certolizumab pegol (CZP) on patient-reported outcomes (PROs) was investigated in 1063 patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) from the REALISTIC trial (double-blind, placebo-controlled to week 12, open-label to week 28; randomized 4:1 [CZP:placebo]). Correlations between PROs and RA signs and symptoms, and the relative efficacy of these measures, were examined.

METHODS

Adults with RA and an inadequate response to at least one disease-modifying antirheumatic drug were enrolled. PROs assessed included physical function (using the Health Assessment Questionnaire-Disability Index), pain, fatigue, sleep disturbance, Patient Global Assessment of Disease Activity (PtGA), Routine Assessment of Patient Index Data 3 (RAPID3), and Rheumatoid Arthritis Disease Activity Index (RADAI).

RESULTS

Early significant and clinically meaningful improvements in all PROs were observed to week 12 with CZP vs. placebo and were maintained to the end of the trial (week 28). At week 12, up to one-third more CZP patients showed improvements compared with placebo that were greater than or equal to the minimal clinically important difference (MCID) in fatigue, sleep problems, pain, PtGA, RADAI, and RAPID3. The changes in PROs were correlated with clinical measures of disease activity, including the Disease Activity Score in 28 joints using C-reactive protein as well as tender and swollen joint counts.

CONCLUSIONS

Rapid improvements in PROs were seen in patients with RA treated with CZP. The magnitude of improvement exceeded the MCID in multiple domains and demonstrated that CZP improves aspects of health-related quality of life that are meaningful to patients and superior to placebo. PROs provide information complementary to clinical outcomes in assessment of treatment benefits.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT00717236 . Registered on 15 July 2008.

Determinants of Disability in Rheumatoid Arthritis: A Community-Based Cohort Study

Longitudinal care of a community-based cohort of patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) was evaluated retrospectively. Candidate determinants of disability included visual analog scales (VAS) for patient global assessment and pain, comorbidities, and medications. The outcome was the 'patient-acceptable symptom state' for disability as defined by the Health Assessment Questionnaire (HAQ) disability index, using a cutoff of <1.04. Two-sample t tests and multivariable logistic regression were used to determine odds ratios (OR) for associations between predictor variables and disability. Out of a total of 99 patients, 28 (28%) patients had HAQ ≥1.04 at their last visit. The greatest odds of not attaining the patient-acceptable symptom state in a multivariable model was associated with corticosteroids (OR: 5.1; p=0.02), antidepressants (OR: 5.3; p=0.02), and female sex (OR: 6.5; p=0.05). In the era of biologic therapy, female sex, corticosteroids, and antidepressants remain profound determinants of disability highlighting the need to understand the underlying mechanisms.

Probiotics Improve Inflammation-Associated Sickness Behavior by Altering Communication between the Peripheral Immune System and the Brain

Patients with systemic inflammatory diseases (e.g., rheumatoid arthritis, inflammatory bowel disease, chronic liver disease) commonly develop debilitating symptoms (i.e., sickness behaviors) that arise from changes in brain function. The microbiota-gut-brain axis alters brain function and probiotic ingestion can influence behavior. However, how probiotics do this remains unclear. We have previously described a novel periphery-to-brain communication pathway in the setting of peripheral organ inflammation whereby monocytes are recruited to the brain in response to systemic TNF-α signaling, leading to microglial activation and subsequently driving sickness behavior development. Therefore, we investigated whether probiotic ingestion (i.e., probiotic mixture VSL#3) alters this periphery-to-brain communication pathway, thereby reducing subsequent sickness behavior development. Using a well characterized mouse model of liver inflammation, we now show that probiotic (VSL#3) treatment attenuates sickness behavior development in mice with liver inflammation without affecting disease severity, gut microbiota composition, or gut permeability. Attenuation of sickness behavior development was associated with reductions in microglial activation and cerebral monocyte infiltration. These events were paralleled by changes in markers of systemic immune activation, including decreased circulating TNF-α levels. Our observations highlight a novel pathway through which probiotics mediate cerebral changes and alter behavior. These findings allow for the potential development of novel therapeutic interventions targeted at the gut microbiome to treat inflammation-associated sickness behaviors in patients with systemic inflammatory diseases.

SIGNIFICANCE STATEMENT

This research shows that probiotics, when eaten, can improve the abnormal behaviors (including social withdrawal and immobility) that are commonly associated with inflammation. Probiotics are able to cause this effect within the body by changing how the immune system signals the brain to alter brain function. These findings broaden our understanding of how probiotics may beneficially affect brain function in the context of inflammation occurring within the body and may open potential new therapeutic alternatives for the treatment of these alterations in behavior that can greatly affect patient quality of life.

Perioperative Treatment of Patients with Rheumatoid Arthritis

Rheumatoid arthritis is an autoimmune disease mediated by a widespread chronic systematic inflammatory process that causes joint deterioration, which leads to pain, disability, and poor quality of life. The increased use of disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs has been shown to markedly slow disease progression, which has translated into a decrease in the need for orthopaedic intervention in this population. However, a substantial percentage of patients with the disease fail optimal pharmacologic treatment and still require surgical intervention. A thorough understanding of medical considerations in these patients and improved knowledge of the medical complications caused by the disease process and the pharmacologic therapy used to treat it may lead to improved preoperative planning and medical clearance, which may ultimately improve the overall postoperative outcome.

Tofacitinib with methotrexate in third-line treatment of patients with active rheumatoid arthritis: patient-reported outcomes from a phase III trial

OBJECTIVE

To assess patient-reported outcomes (PROs) for tofacitinib, an oral JAK inhibitor for the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis (RA), in a 6-month, phase III, randomized controlled trial.

METHODS

Patients ages ≥18 years with active RA with an inadequate response to ≥1 tumor necrosis factor inhibitor (TNFi) and receiving stable background methotrexate were randomized 2:2:1:1 to tofacitinib 5 mg or 10 mg twice daily, or placebo advanced to tofacitinib 5 mg or 10 mg twice daily at month 3. PROs measured at month 3 included patient global assessment of disease activity (PtGA), pain, Health Assessment Questionnaire (HAQ) disability index (DI), Medical Outcomes Study (MOS) Short Form 36 Health Survey version 2 (SF-36v2; acute), Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy-Fatigue (FACIT-F), and MOS Sleep Scale.

RESULTS

Patients received tofacitinib 5 mg (n = 133) or 10 mg (n = 134) or placebo advanced to tofacitinib 5 mg (n = 66) or 10 mg (n = 66). HAQ DI (reported previously), PtGA (P < 0.0001), and SF-36v2 physical and mental component summary (P < 0.05) scores were improved for both tofacitinib doses versus placebo. Furthermore, improvements greater than or equal to the minimum clinically important difference were more frequently reported by tofacitinib-treated patients versus placebo for PtGA (P < 0.05), pain (P < 0.0001), HAQ DI (P < 0.05), SF-36v2 physical and mental component summary scores (P < 0.05), and FACIT-F (P < 0.001 for 5 mg twice daily). No statistical differences were observed in the MOS Sleep Scale.

CONCLUSION

Tofacitinib treatment resulted in significant, clinically meaningful improvements in multiple PROs versus placebo over 3 months of treatment in patients with active RA and a previous inadequate response to TNFi.

Health-related quality of life in patients with long-standing rheumatoid arthritis in the era of biologics: data from the German biologics register RABBIT

Objective. To compare the 24-month course of health-related quality of life (HRQoL) in patients with long-standing RA treated with a conventional synthetic (cs) or a first, second or third biologic (b) DMARD in daily rheumatological care.

Methods. Patients enrolled in the German biologics register RABBIT who were observed over at least 12 months were stratified according to the nth bDMARD started at enrolment. HRQoL was captured by the SF36 health survey. Within strata of sequential bDMARD therapy, we examined patients’ HRQoL at baseline and at follow-ups in comparison with the general population, the 24-month course of HRQoL of different bDMARDs and the proportion of patients exceeding the minimal detectable improvement of physical and mental health sum scores.

Results. All patients reported remarkably lower scores of physical and mental health than the general population at baseline and month 12. In each stratum of sequential bDMARD therapy, patients improved significantly by month 12 and remained stable until month 24. The improvement of HRQoL was not attributable to a particular bDMARD. The following proportions of patients exceeded the minimal detectable improvement of at least 17.85 Physical Component Scale scores or 22.18 Mental Component Scale score points: csDMARD (n = 1113) 31.1%/22.3%, first bDMARD (n = 1352) 39.9%/29.7%, second bDMARD (n = 730) 37.3%/26.2% and third bDMARD (n = 680) 34.2%/30.9%.

Conclusion. Lasting improvement of both physical and mental health is achievable even for severely affected RA patients with a history of more than one bDMARD failure. Nevertheless, impairment of HRQoL in RA patients is enormous compared with the general population.

Are patient-reported outcome instruments for ankylosing spondylitis fit for purpose for the axial spondyloarthritis patient? A qualitative and psychometric analysis

OBJECTIVES

Several patient-reported outcome (PRO) instruments have been validated in AS. This study aims to evaluate several measurement properties of such PROs in a broad axial SpA (axSpA) population, including both AS and non-radiographic axSpA (nr-axSpA) subpopulations.

METHODS

PROs assessed were total and nocturnal back pain, patient global assessment of disease activity, BASDAI, BASFI and the 36-item Short Form Health Survey. A literature review and both clinician and patient qualitative interviews provided information on instrument content validity. Reliability (test-retest and internal consistency), construct validity (PROs, clinical-outcome correlations and known-groups validity) and PRO responsiveness were assessed. Data from the RAPID-axSpA trial (NCT01087762) investigating certolizumab pegol efficacy in axSpA, including relevant subpopulations, were utilized.

RESULTS

Concepts identified for the broad axSpA population by both clinician and patient interviews were consistent with those identified through literature review of AS. All PROs demonstrated reliability in the RAPID-axSpA population (n = 325), with test-retest intraclass correlation coefficients and internal consistency Cronbach's α >0.8. Validity was supported by agreement between PROs and clinician-rated measures; except for the 36-item Short Form Health Survey Mental Components Summary, correlations between PROs and physician global assessment of disease activity ranged from 0.28 to 0.42 for week 0 and from 0.53 to 0.65 for week 24. PRO measures showed good sensitivity to change (effect size >0.8) at weeks 12 and 24 for responders. No variations in measurement properties were noted between the subpopulations.

CONCLUSION

This study indicates that both content validity and measurement properties of PRO instruments utilized in AS are preserved in the broad axSpA population.

Renal and Gastrointestinal Considerations in Joint Replacement Surgery

Renal and gastrointestinal diseases affect a significant portion of the general population. The process of decision making regarding surgical clearance and pre-operative management of the various complexities and medical conditions associated with these diseases hence becomes crucial. To optimize postoperative outcomes, the considerations for the care of this patient population revolve around effective management of hemostasis and electrolyte status. This subset of conditions is uniquely important with regard to the negative impact of improper administration of medications and perioperative care on patients' prognoses. A thorough understanding and knowledge of standards of care and treatment guidelines for patients with renal dysfunction and gastrointestinal disease assures comprehensive preoperative planning and surgical clearance. This may ultimately lead to improvement of surgical outcomes and potential decrease in postoperative morbidity and mortality.

The comparative safety of tumor necrosis factor inhibitors in rheumatoid arthritis: a meta-analysis update of 44 trials

OBJECTIVE

The study objective was to evaluate and update the safety data from randomized controlled trials of tumor necrosis factor inhibitors in patients treated for rheumatoid arthritis.

METHODS

A systematic literature search was conducted from 1990 to May 2013. All studies included were randomized, double-blind, controlled trials of patients with rheumatoid arthritis that evaluated adalimumab, certolizumab pegol, etanercept, golimumab, or infliximab treatment. The serious adverse events and discontinuation rates were abstracted, and risk estimates were calculated by Peto odds ratios (ORs).

RESULTS

Forty-four randomized controlled trials involving 11,700 subjects receiving tumor necrosis factor inhibitors and 5901 subjects receiving placebo or traditional disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs were included. Tumor necrosis factor inhibitor treatment as a group was associated with a higher risk of serious infection (OR, 1.42; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.13-1.78) and treatment discontinuation due to adverse events (OR, 1.23; 95% CI, 1.06-1.43) compared with placebo and traditional disease-modifying antirheumatic drug treatments. Specifically, patients taking adalimumab, certolizumab pegol, and infliximab had an increased risk of serious infection (OR, 1.69, 1.98, and 1.63, respectively) and showed an increased risk of discontinuation due to adverse events (OR, 1.38, 1.67, and 2.04, respectively). In contrast, patients taking etanercept had a decreased risk of discontinuation due to adverse events (OR, 0.72; 95% CI, 0.55-0.93). Although ORs for malignancy varied across the different tumor necrosis factor inhibitors, none reached statistical significance.

CONCLUSIONS

These meta-analysis updates of the comparative safety of tumor necrosis factor inhibitors suggest a higher risk of serious infection associated with adalimumab, certolizumab pegol, and infliximab, which seems to contribute to higher rates of discontinuation. In contrast, etanercept use showed a lower rate of discontinuation. These data may help guide clinical comparative decision making in the management of rheumatoid arthritis.

The efficacy and safety of certolizumab pegol (CZP) in the treatment of active rheumatoid arthritis (RA): a meta-analysis from nine randomized controlled trials

OBJECTIVE

Certolizumab pegol (CZP) is a novel anti-TNF agent that is used for patients with moderate to severe active rheumatoid arthritis (RA). However, the efficacy of CZP in RA remains controversial. Thus, we performed this meta-analysis to assess the efficacy and safety of CZP in the treatment of RA patients.

METHODS

Eligible studies were randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that evaluated the efficacy and safe of CZP in the patients with active RA. The primary outcome was American College of Rheumatology 20% (ACR20), and secondary outcome were ACR50, ACR70, disease activity, patient-reported outcomes (PROs), and adverse events. A fixed-effect model or random-effect model was used to pool the estimates, depending on the absence or presence of heterogeneity among the included studies.

RESULTS

Nine RCTs with a total of 5228 patients were included in this meta-analysis, and all of the patients were administered CZP or placebo. The pooled results showed that CZP significantly improved the ACR20, ACR50, ACR70 response rates, and physical function. CZP was associated with a statistically significant reduction in Disease Activity Score in 28 joints-Erythrocyte sedimentation rate, arthritis pain, and fatigue. Patients who received CZP treatment did not have a higher incidence of treatment-related adverse events, no matter in any intensity.

CONCLUSIONS

CZP 200 or 400mg in the treatment of active RA significantly reduced the RA signs and symptoms, and improved physical function as compared with the placebo. More large-scale RCTs are needed to evaluate the long-term efficacy and safety of CZP in the treatment of active RA.

Certolizumab pegol (CDP870) for rheumatoid arthritis in adults

BACKGROUND

Tumour necrosis factor (TNF)-alpha inhibitors are beneficial for the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis (RA) in terms of reducing the risk of joint damage, improving physical function and improving quality of life. This Cochrane review is an update of a review of the treatment of RA with certolizumab pegol that was first published in 2011.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the clinical benefits and harms of certolizumab pegol (CDP870) in patients with RA who have not responded well to conventional disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs (DMARDs).

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (The Cochrane Library 2014, Issue 5), MEDLINE, EMBASE, Scopus, TOXLINE, Web of Knowledge; websites of the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and European Medicines Evaluation Agency (EMEA); reference lists of articles; and searched http/clinicaltrials.gov. The searches were updated from 2009 (date of last search for the original review) to 5 June 2014.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials that compared certolizumab pegol with any other agent including placebo or methotrexate (MTX) in adult patients with active RA despite current or prior treatment with conventional disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs (DMARDs), such as MTX.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors independently assessed search results, trial quality and extracted data. Disagreements were resolved by discussion or referral to a third author.

MAIN RESULTS

Eleven trials were included in this update. Ten (4324 patients) were included in the pooled analysis for benefits, five more than previously, and 10 (3711 patients) in the pooled analysis for harms, four more trials (1930 patients) than previously. The duration of follow-up varied from 12 to 52 weeks and the range of doses of certolizumab pegol varied from 50 to 400 mg given subcutaneously (sc). In phase III trials, the control was placebo plus MTX in five trials and placebo in four trials. The risk of bias of the included studies was assessed as low but there may have been a risk of attrition bias.Statistically significant improvements were observed at 24 weeks with the approved dose of 200 mg certolizumab pegol every other week, in 1) American College of Rheumatology (ACR) 50% improvement: 27% absolute improvement (95% CI 20% to 33%), NNT of 4 (95% CI 3 to 8), risk ratio (RR) 3.80 (95% CI 2.42 to 5.95); 2) the Health Assessment Questionnaire (HAQ): -12% absolute improvement (95% CI -9% to -14%), NNT of 6 (95% CI 5 to 8), mean difference (MD) - 0.35 (95% CI -0.43 to -0.26) (scale 0 to 3); 3) Disease Activity Score (DAS) remission improvement: absolute improvement 11% (95% CI 8% to 15%), NNT of 9 (95% CI 4 to 20), RR 8.47 (95% CI 4.15-17.28); and 4) radiological changes: erosion score (ES) absolute improvement -0.29% (95% CI -0.42% to -0.17%), NNT of 6 (95% CI 4 to 10), MD -0.67 (95% CI -0.96 to -0.38) (scale 0 to 230). Serious adverse events were statistically significantly more frequent for certolizumab pegol (200 mg every other week) with an absolute rate difference of 4% (95% CI 2% to 6%), NNTH of 32 (95% CI 17 to 88), Peto odds ratio (OR) 1.77 (95% CI 1.27 to 2.46). There was a statistically significant increase in all withdrawals in the placebo groups (for all doses and all follow-ups) with an absolute rate difference of -34% (95% CI -18% to -50%), NNTH of 4 (95% CI 3 to 5), NNTH of 4 (95% CI 3 to 5), RR 0.42 (95% CI 0.36 to 0.50); and there was a statistically significant increase in all withdrawals due to adverse events in the certolizumab groups (for all doses and all follow-up) with an absolute rate difference of 2% (95% CI 1% to 3%), NNTH of 55 (95% CI 27 to 238), Peto OR 1.66 (95% CI 1.15 to 2.37).The risk of bias was low and the quality of evidence was downgraded to moderate because of high rates of dropouts (> 20%) in most of the trials. We did not find any problems with inconsistency, indirectness, imprecision or publication bias.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The results and conclusions did not change from the previous review. There is moderate-level evidence from randomised controlled trials that certolizumab pegol alone or combined with methotrexate is beneficial in the treatment of RA. Adverse events were more frequent with active treatment. We found a potential risk of serious adverse events.

Comparative efficacy of biologics as monotherapy and in combination with methotrexate on patient reported outcomes (PROs) in rheumatoid arthritis patients with an inadequate response to conventional DMARDs--a systematic review and network meta-analysis

Objective

To compare biologics as monotherapy or in combination with methotrexate (MTX) in terms of patient reported outcomes (PROs) in RA patients with an inadequate response to conventional DMARDs (DMARD-IR).

Methods

With a systematic literature review 17 RCTs were identified that evaluated adalimumab, certolizumab pegol, etanercept, golimumab, infliximab, abatacept, anakinra or tocilizumab. Treatment effects in terms of pain (0-100 mm), patient’s global assessment of disease activity (PGA; 0-100 mm), Health Assessment-Questionnaire (HAQ) disability index (DI; 0–3), and the physical component summary (PCS) of the SF36 Health Survey (0–100) at 24 weeks were combined by means of Bayesian network meta-analyses.

Results

With tocilizumab monotherapy, greater improvements in pain (difference = -11.1; (95% Credible Interval -21.3, -0.1)) and PGA (-10.3 (-20.4, 0.8)) were observed than with aTNF monotherapy. Tocilizumab was at least as efficacious as aTNF in HAQ-DI improvements (-0.16; (-0.37, 0.05)). aTNF + MTX (-17.9 (-23.1, -13.0) & -19.1 (-24.2, -14.4)), abatacept + MTX (-23.0 (-47.3, 1. 5) & -13.6 (-28.4, 2.0)) and tocilizumab + MTX (-16.0 (-26.3, -6.3) & -15.1 (-25.1, -5.7)) showed comparable reductions in pain and PGA relative to MTX. Efficacy of anakinra + MTX was much smaller as compared to other biologics. The greatest improvements in HAQ-DI relative to MTX were observed with aTNF + MTX (-0.30 (-0.37, -0.22)) and tocilizumab + MTX (-0.27 (-0.42, -0.12)), followed by abatacept + MTX (-0.21 (-0.37, -0.05)) and anakinra + MTX (-0.11 (-0.26, 0.05)). The improvements in SF36-PCS with abatacept + MTX, aTNF + MTX and tocilizumab + MTX were comparable. There is a >90% probability that aTNF + MTX results in a greater improvement in pain (-12.4), PGA (-16.1) and HAQ-DI (-0.21) than aTNF as monotherapy. Efficacy of tocilizumab + MTX showed comparable improvements in PROs as tocilizumab monotherapy.

Conclusions

Based on a network meta-analysis involving indirect comparison of trial findings, the following observations were made for DMARD-IR patients. In monotherapy, tocilizumab was associated with a greater improvement in pain and self-reported disease activity than aTNF, and was at least as efficacious regarding functional ability. The improvements in PROs with aTNF, abatacept and tocilizumab in combination with MTX were comparable. Improvements in PROs with tocilizumab as monotherapy were similar to that of tocilizumab + MTX, whereas aTNF as monotherapy was likely to be less efficacious than aTNF + MTX.

Clinical, laboratory and health-related quality of life correlates of Systemic Lupus Erythematosus Responder Index response: a post hoc analysis of the phase 3 belimumab trials

Objective

Correlates of systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) Responder Index (SRI) response with clinical trial end points were examined using pooled data from the Study of Belimumab in Subjects with SLE (BLISS) trials (N=1684).

Methods

Changes in clinical, laboratory and health-related quality of life measures from baseline at 52 weeks were compared between SRI responders (n=761) and non-responders (n=923).

Results

More SRI responders than non-responders had ≥4-point (100% vs 3.8%) and ≥7-point (40.3% vs 1.3%) Safety of Estrogens in Lupus Erythematosus National Assessment-Systemic Lupus Erythematosus Disease Activity Index reductions, no new British Isles Lupus Assessment Group (BILAG) A and ≤1 new B scores (91.9% vs 35.9%), and a 25% reduction in corticosteroid dose decrease of 25% from >7.5 mg/d to ≤7.5 mg/d (25.5% vs 13.9%), and fewer had a corticosteroid increase from ≤7.5 mg/d to >7.5 mg/d (4.1% vs 21.3%; all p<0.001). More responders than non-responders had improved organ domains: Safety of Estrogens in Lupus Erythematosus National Assessment-Systemic Lupus Erythematosus Disease Activity Index (mean 1.45 vs 0.40), BILAG (2.00 vs 0.39), and greater improvement in Physician's Global Assessment (all p<0.001). Risks for developing any SLE flare or severe flare were reduced in responders by 42% and 87%, respectively (p<0.001). Responders reported greater improvements in Medical Outcomes Survey Short Form version 2 Physical and Mental Components and all domain scores, and Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy-Fatigue score compared with non-responders (all p<0.001).

Conclusion

Overall, SRI response in patients with active, autoantibody-positive SLE was associated with improvements in clinical, laboratory and patient-reported outcome measures, indicating that SRI response was associated with a global benefit.

Trial registration number

NCT00424476; NCT00410384.

Secukinumab treatment in rheumatoid arthritis is associated with incremental benefit in the clinical outcomes and HRQoL improvements that exceed minimally important thresholds

Background

The primary aim of rheumatoid arthritis (RA) treatment is to induce remission, the absence of disease activity. The objective of this study was to explore the association between clinical endpoints used to gauge RA treatment efficacy and patient-reported outcomes of health-related quality of life, fatigue, and physical function in RA patients treated with secukinumab in a phase 2 randomized controlled trial (RCT).

Method

Adult RA patients (n = 237) with incomplete responses to methotrexate were randomized equally to receive monthly s.c. injections of secukinumab 25 mg, 75 mg, 150 mg, 300 mg or placebo. Clinical endpoints used in this study included the ACR response criteria and its components and simplified disease activity score. Patient-reported outcomes (PRO) included Health Assessment Questionnaire-Disability Index (HAQ-DI), Medical Outcomes Study Short Form-36 [SF-36] Survey, and Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy-Fatigue (FACIT-Fatigue). Patients were categorized into mutually exclusive groups according to the magnitude and direction of change from baseline to week 16 in each clinical endpoint. Definitions of minimal important differences [MID] in each clinical endpoint were used to categorize patients, as well as thresholds beyond MID. Mean changes from baseline to week 16 were computed for each PRO and analyses of variance to test the differences in PRO changes observed across groups of patients that differed in each clinical endpoint. Analyses were limited to patients randomized to secukinumab treatment. All dose groups were combined (n = 187).

Results

Mean changes from baseline in each PRO differed significantly across groups of patients in the expected direction. With few exceptions, there was considerable agreement between clinical endpoints and PROs concerning the magnitude of change defined as clinically meaningful. More importantly, results demonstrated that greater improvements in clinical endpoints were associated with incrementally better improvements in HRQoL, fatigue, and physical function.

Conclusion

Results of this study show considerable agreement between minimal thresholds of improvement established for PROs and clinical outcome measures used in RA treatment studies and provide thresholds to be considered in gauging the importance of a treatment effect that goes beyond what is considered as minimally important for PRO measures.

Is tightly controlled disease activity possible with online patient-reported outcomes?

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the performance of patient-reported outcomes (PRO) as primary indices for identification and prediction of a 28-joint Disease Activity Score (DAS28)>3.2 among patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA).

METHODS

Patients with RA completed monthly online PRO [Health Assessment Questionnaire (HAQ), Rheumatoid Arthritis Disease Activity Index (RADAI), visual analog scale (VAS) fatigue] and were clinically assessed every 3 months using the DAS28. Simple descriptive statistics, logistic regression, and the Bayesian joint modeling approach were used to analyze the data. The Bayesian joint model combines the scores and changes in the scores of 3 PRO to predict a DAS28>3.2 at the subsequent timepoint.

RESULTS

A group of 159 patients with RA participated. Stratified summaries of the PRO by DAS28 categories at baseline provided incremental values of the PRO for more active disease. However, on an individual level, the DAS28 and the PRO fluctuated over time. The prediction of subsequent DAS score by a single instrument at single timepoints resulted in moderate sensitivity and specificity. Using the intercept and slope of the combined PRO of the first 3 measurements to predict the DAS28 state at 3 months resulted in a sensitivity of 0.81 and a specificity of 0.92. After 10-fold cross validation, the model had a sensitivity of 0.61 and specificity of 0.75 to identify patients with a DAS28>3.2.

CONCLUSION

PRO showed fluctuating levels of disease activity over time, while on a group level disease activity stayed the same. Using the changes in RADAI, HAQ, and VAS fatigue over time to predict future DAS28>3.2 resulted in moderate performance after the internal cross-validation of the model (sensitivity 0.61, specificity 0.75).

Certolizumab pegol in rheumatoid arthritis patients with low to moderate activity: the CERTAIN double-blind, randomised, placebo-controlled trial

Objectives

This 52-week, randomised, double-blind phase IIIb study assessed efficacy and safety of certolizumab pegol (CZP) as add-on therapy to non-biologic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs) in rheumatoid arthritis (RA) patients with low to moderate disease activity, and stopping therapy in patients in sustained remission.

Methods

Patients were randomised 1:1 to CZP (400 mg at weeks 0, 2 and 4, then 200 mg every 2 weeks) or placebo (every 2 weeks) plus current non-biologic DMARDs. At week 24, patients who achieved the primary endpoint of Clinical Disease Activity Index (CDAI) remission at both weeks 20 and 24 stopped study treatment and continued in the study until week 52.

Results

Of 194 patients (CZP=96; placebo=98), >90% had moderate disease activity at baseline. Significantly more CZP patients met the primary endpoint than placebo patients (week 20 and 24 CDAI remission rates: 18.8% vs 6.1%; p≤0.05). At week 24, 63.0% vs 29.7% of CZP versus placebo patients (p<0.001) achieved LDA. Disease activity score (ESR) based on 28-joint count and Simplified Disease Activity Index remission rates were also significantly higher with CZP versus placebo (19.8% vs 3.1%; p≤0.01 and 14.6% vs 4.1%; p≤0.05). CZP patients reported improvements in physical function versus placebo (mean Health Assessment Questionnaire-Disability-Index change from baseline: CZP, −0.25 vs placebo, −0.03; p≤0.01). During the period following withdrawal of CZP or placebo, only 3/17 prior CZP patients and 2/6 prior placebo patients maintained CDAI remission until week 52, but CZP reinstitution allowed renewed improvement. Adverse and serious adverse event rates were comparable between CZP and placebo groups.

Conclusions

Addition of CZP to non-biologic DMARDs is an effective treatment in RA patients with predominantly moderate disease activity, allowing low-disease activity or remission to be reached in a majority of the patients. However, the data suggest that CZP cannot be withdrawn in patients achieving remission.

Trial registration number

NCT00674362.

Epratuzumab for patients with moderate to severe flaring SLE: health-related quality of life outcomes and corticosteroid use in the randomized controlled ALLEVIATE trials and extension study SL0006

Objective. To evaluate health-related quality of life (HRQOL) and corticosteroid use in patients with moderate to severely active SLE enrolled in two international, multicentre, randomized controlled trials of epratuzumab (ALLEVIATE-1 and -2) and a long-term extension study (SL0006).

Methods. Ninety ALLEVIATE patients (43% BILAG A, mean BILAG score 13.2) were randomized to receive 360 mg/m² (n = 42) or 720 mg/m² (n = 11) epratuzumab or placebo (n = 37), plus standard of care, in 12-week cycles. Corticosteroid use, patient and physician global assessments of disease activity (PtGA and PGA) and 36-item Medical Outcomes Survey Short Form (SF-36) results were recorded at baseline and every 4 weeks. Both trials were prematurely discontinued due to a drug supply interruption; patients followed for ≥6 months were analysed. Twenty-nine patients continued in SL0006, with interim analysis at a median exposure of 120 (range 13–184) weeks.

Results. At week 12, proportions of patients with a PGA ≥20% above baseline or with a PtGA improvement greater than or equal to the minimum clinically important difference were higher in the epratuzumab arms than the placebo arm. PGA and PtGA improvements were sustained but did not reach statistical significance. At week 24, mean cumulative corticosteroid doses with epratuzumab 360 and 720 mg/m² were 1051 and 1973 mg less than placebo (P = 0.034 and 0.081, respectively). At week 48, SF-36 scores approached or exceeded US age- and gender-matched norms in five domains with the 360 mg/m² treatment. Improvements were maintained in SL0006 over ∼2 years.

Conclusion. Epratuzumab treatment produced clinically meaningful and sustained improvements in PGA, PtGA and HRQOL and reductions in corticosteroid doses.

Burden of disease in treated rheumatoid arthritis patients: going beyond the joint

OBJECTIVE

The disease burden in rheumatoid arthritis (RA) extends beyond the joint. This article evaluates the physical and psychosocial extra-articular burden of treated RA and relationships among diverse disease manifestations.

METHODS

MEDLINE searches identified papers published in English from January 2003 to December 2012 that evaluated systemic complications and psychosocial aspects associated with RA. Preference was given to studies with randomized cohorts and large (>100) sample sizes. Of 378 articles identified in the initial search, 118 were selected for inclusion.

RESULTS

RA is associated with multiple comorbidities and psychosocial impairments, including cardiovascular disease, osteoporosis, interstitial lung disease, infection, malignancies, fatigue, depression, cognitive dysfunction, reduced work performance, work disability, and decreased health-related quality of life. The etiology of the extra-articular burden may reflect the systemic inflammation and immune system alteration associated with RA, metabolic imbalances and side effects related to treatment, or the influence of comorbidities. Strategies that may help to reduce the extra-articular disease burden include personalized medicine and the potential introduction of treatments with new mechanisms of action.

CONCLUSION

Despite improvements in treating joint disease, the extra-articular burden in RA remains substantial, encompassing multiple comorbidities and psychosocial impairments.

Improvements in health-related quality of life after treatment with tocilizumab in patients with rheumatoid arthritis refractory to tumour necrosis factor inhibitors: results from the 24-week randomized controlled RADIATE study

Objective. To investigate the effect of tocilizumab on patient-reported outcomes (PROs) in RA patients with inadequate responses to TNF inhibitors (TNFis).

Methods. In a Phase III randomized controlled trial, 489 patients received 4 or 8 mg/kg tocilizumab or placebo every 4 weeks plus MTX for 24 weeks. Mean changes from baseline over time and proportions of patients reporting improvements greater than or equal to minimum clinically important differences (MCIDs) in PROs were analyzed.

Results. At week 24, 8 mg/kg resulted in significantly greater improvements vs placebo in pain, global assessment of disease activity (P = 0.001), Health Assessment Questionnaire-Disability Index (HAQ-DI; P < 0.0001), Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy-Fatigue (P = 0.0150) and Medical Outcomes Survey Short Form 36 (SF-36 v2) Physical Component Summary (PCS; P = 0.0003) scores, all greater than MCID; 4 mg/kg resulted in greater improvements in pain (P = 0.0100), HAQ-DI (P = 0.0030) and SF-36 PCS (P = 0.0020) scores. Tocilizumab-associated improvements were evident as early as week 2. At week 24, more tocilizumab-treated than control patients reported improvements greater than or equal to MCID in SF-36 domain scores and related PROs (50.9–84.9% vs 35.0–51.7%) and achieved ACR50 responses and/or Disease Activity Score 28 (DAS28) remission with PRO improvements greater than or equal to MCID (36.2–51.2% vs 10–20.7% and 10.7–37.5% vs 0.0–3.4%, respectively).

Conclusion. Tocilizumab treatment in patients with inadequate responses to TNFis resulted in rapid and sustained improvements in multiple PROs that were statistically significant and clinically meaningful, consistent with previous efficacy reports.

Trial Registration. ClinicalTrials.gov, http://clinicaltrials.gov/, NCT00106522.

Cellular and humoral mechanisms involved in the control of tuberculosis

Mycobacterium tuberculosis (Mtb) infection is a major international public health problem. One-third of the world's population is thought to have latent tuberculosis, a condition where individuals are infected by the intracellular bacteria without active disease but are at risk for reactivation, if their immune system fails. Here, we discuss the role of nonspecific inflammatory responses mediated by cytokines and chemokines induced by interaction of innate receptors expressed in macrophages and dendritic cells (DCs). We also review current information regarding the importance of several cytokines including IL-17/IL-23 in the development of protective cellular and antibody-mediated protective responses against Mtb and their influence in containment of the infection. Finally, in this paper, emphasis is placed on the mechanisms of failure of Mtb control, including the immune dysregulation induced by the treatment with biological drugs in different autoimmune diseases. Further functional studies, focused on the mechanisms involved in the early host-Mtb interactions and the interplay between host innate and acquired immunity against Mtb, may be helpful to improve the understanding of protective responses in the lung and in the development of novel therapeutic and prophylactic tools in TB.

Certolizumab in the long-term treatment of rheumatoid arthritis

Rheumatoid arthritis is the most common inflammatory arthritis and continues to have major long-term effects on quality of life. Early and intensive treatment has now become the norm in clinical practice with changes of medication dictated by measuring the presence of continued disease activity. Biologics, particular tumor necrosis factor inhibitors, have a crucial role in the management of very severe disease. Certolizumab is a relatively new tumor necrosis factor inhibitor which uses a novel strategy to neutralize TNF-alpha - the conjugation of tumor necrosis factor specific Fab antibody fragments to polyethylene glycol. Two Phase II and three Phase III randomized controlled trials have evaluated the efficacy and toxicity of certolizumab. More than 2000 patients were enrolled, and followed from 12-52 weeks. The number of patients achieving significant improvements with certolizumab, was indicated by the American College of Rheumatology with a 50% response rate. The risk ratios of achieving this response at 24 weeks was 6.01 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 3.84-9.40). At 52 weeks the risk ratio was 5.27 (95% CI: 3.19-8.71). The number of patients needed to treat, to obtain this benefit at 24 weeks was 4 (95% CI: 3-5). Certolizumab also had important clinical benefits in reducing erosive damage to joints, limiting disability, and enhancing other outcomes of importance to patients such as fatigue. The patient-related benefits were present from the early weeks of treatment. The clinical trials showed serious adverse events, including infections, which were more frequent for certolizumab. The most common adverse events comprised upper respiratory tract infections, hypertension, and nasopharyngitis. The balance of evidence suggests that certolizumab is equivalent to other tumor necrosis factor inhibitors, though no head-to-head trials have been undertaken. Having several effective treatments available, benefits patient choice, because the frequency and route of administration of these treatments varies. Furthermore, as intolerance and antibody development against existing biologics is not uncommon, having several agents allows opportunities to switch from one inhibitor to another.