Effectiveness of four dynamic treatment strategies in patients with anticitrullinated protein antibody-negative rheumatoid arthritis: a randomised trial

Autoantibody-negative rheumatoid arthritis: still a challenge for the rheumatologist

Increased research over the past 30 years has greatly improved the understanding of the pathophysiological mechanisms and clinical aspects of autoantibody-positive rheumatoid arthritis, resulting in improved management and outcomes. In contrast, the subset of rheumatoid arthritis that does not have autoantibodies (such as rheumatoid factor and anti-citrullinated protein autoantibodies) remains less well defined in its pathogenic mechanisms. Autoantibody-negative rheumatoid arthritis continues to pose diagnostic challenges, might respond differently to therapies, and appears to be burdened with different comorbidities and outcomes. The clear separation of rheumatoid arthritis according to serotypes is still a subject of uncertainty and controversy, and studies specifically focused on comparing rheumatoid arthritis and rheumatoid arthritis-like arthritides that do not have autoantibodies remain scarce. The purpose of this Review is to summarise the peculiarities that make autoantibody-negative rheumatoid arthritis different from its autoantibody-positive counterpart, with the aim of generating debate and stimulating further research on this challenging condition.

Long-Term Efficacy of Tumor Necrosis Factor Inhibitors for the Treatment of Methotrexate-Naïve Rheumatoid Arthritis: Systematic Literature Review and Meta-Analysis

INTRODUCTION

Synthesis of evidence on the long-term use of first-line biologic therapy in patients with early rheumatoid arthritis (RA) is required. We compared the efficacy of up to 5 years' treatment with first-line tumor necrosis factor inhibitors (TNFis) versus other treatment strategies in this population.

METHODS

Previous systematic reviews, PubMed and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) involving treatment of methotrexate-naïve RA patients with first-line TNFis. Literature was synthesized qualitatively, and a meta-analysis conducted to evaluate American College of Rheumatology (ACR) responses, clinical remission defined by any standard measure, and Health Assessment Questionnaire Disability Index (HAQ) at Years 2 and/or 5.

RESULTS

Ten RCTs involving 4306 patients [first-line TNFi, n = 2234; other treatment strategies (control), n = 2072] were included in the meta-analysis. Three studies were double-blind for the first 2 years, while seven were partly/completely open label during this period. Five studies reported data at Year 5; all were open label at this time point. At Year 2, ACR50 response, ACR70 response and remission rates were significantly improved with first-line TNFi versus control in double-blind RCTs [log-odds ratio (OR) 0.32 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.02, 0.62; p = 0.035], log-OR 0.48 (95% CI 0.20, 0.77; p = 0.001), and log-OR 0.44 (95% CI 0.13, 0.74; p = 0.005), respectively], but not in open-label studies. No significant between-group differences were observed in mean HAQ at Year 2 in double-blind or open-label RCTs or in ACR response or remission outcomes at Year 5.

CONCLUSION

In double-blind studies, 2-year efficacy outcomes were significantly improved with first-line TNFi versus other treatment strategies in patients with MTX-naïve RA. No significant differences in these outcomes were observed when data from open-label RCTs were considered on their own. Further data on the efficacy of TNFi therapy over ≥ 2 years in patients with methotrexate-naïve RA are required. Plain language summary available for this article.

Efficacy and Safety of Combined Therapy With Synthetic Disease-modifying Antirheumatic Drugs in Rheumatoid Arthritis: Systematic Literature Review

OBJECTIVE

1) To systematically and critically review the evidence of combined therapy with synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARD) in rheumatoid arthritis (RA); 2) To design practical recommendations on their use.

METHODS

A systematic literature review (SLR) was performed with a sensitive bibliographic search strategy in Medline, EMBASE and Cochrane Library. We selected randomized clinical trials that analyzed the efficacy and/or safety of 1) combined therapy of synthetic compared with sequential therapy of synthetic DMARD in early RA; and 2) combination of methotrexate+leflunomide or triple therapy with synthetic DMARD in established RA refractory to synthetic DMARD. Two reviewers made the first selection by title and abstract and 11 performed the selection after detailed review of the articles and data collection. The quality of the studies was evaluated with the Jadad scale. Based on the results, related recommendations were agreed upon in a nominal group meeting.

RESULTS

Ultimately, no articles were included in the SLR. The analysis of the reviewed articles demonstrated the effectiveness of the treatment with synthetic DMARD following a "treat to target" strategy in early RA patients, and of combination therapy of synthetic DMARD in established RA refractory to synthetic DMARD. This resulted in 6 recommendations concerning combination therapy with synthetic DMARD.

CONCLUSIONS

These recommendations aim to facilitate decision-making with the use of combined therapy with DMARD in RA.

Cancer chemotherapeutics in rheumatoid arthritis: A convoluted connection

Chemotherapy is one of the most popular therapeutic strategies to treat cancer. However, cancer chemotherapeutics have often been associated with impairment of the immune system, which might consequently lead to an augmented risk of autoimmune disorders, such as rheumatoid arthritis. Though the accurate mechanistic facets of rheumatoid arthritis induction have not been interpreted yet, a conglomeration of genetic and environmental factors might promote its etiology. What makes the scenario more challenging is that patients with rheumatoid arthritis are at a significantly elevated risk of developing various types of cancer. It is intriguing to note that diverse cancer chemotherapy drugs are also commonly used to treat symptoms of rheumatoid arthritis. However, a colossal multitude of such cancer therapeutics has demonstrated highly varied results in rheumatoid arthritis patients, including both beneficial and adverse effects. Herein, we attempt to present a holistic account of the variegated modalities of this complex tripartite cross-talk between cancer, rheumatoid arthritis and chemotherapy drugs in order to decode the sinuous correlation between these two appalling pathological conditions.

Estimating Effects of Dynamic Treatment Strategies in Pharmacoepidemiologic Studies with Time-varying Confounding: A Primer

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Pharmacoepidemiologists are often interested in estimating the effects of dynamic treatment strategies, where treatments are modified based on patients' evolving characteristics. For such problems, appropriate control of both baseline and time-varying confounders is critical. Conventional methods that control confounding by including time-varying treatments and confounders in an outcome regression model may not have a causal interpretation, even when all baseline and time-varying confounders are measured. This problem occurs when time-varying confounders are, themselves, affected by past treatment. We review alternative analytic approaches that can produce valid inferences in the presence of such confounding. We focus on the parametric g-formula and inverse probability weighting of marginal structural models, two examples of Robins' g-methods.

RECENT FINDINGS

Unlike standard outcome regression methods, the parametric g-formula and inverse probability weighting of marginal structural models can estimate the effects of dynamic treatment strategies and appropriately control for measured time-varying confounders affected by prior treatment. Few applications of g-methods exist in the pharmacoepidemiology literature, primarily due to the common use of administrative claims data, which typically lack detailed measurements of time-varying information, and the limited availability of or familiarity with tools to help perform the relatively complex analysis. These barriers may be overcome with the increasing availability of data sources containing more detailed time-varying information and more accessible learning tools and software.

SUMMARY

With appropriate data and study design, g-methods can improve our ability to make causal inferences on dynamic treatment strategies from observational data in pharmacoepidemiology.

Triple Oral Therapy Versus Antitumor Necrosis Factor Plus Methotrexate (MTX) in Patients with Rheumatoid Arthritis and Inadequate Response to MTX: A Systematic Literature Review

OBJECTIVE

For patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) who have an inadequate response to methotrexate (MTX), the relative effectiveness of the combination of conventional disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARD) compared with the combination of tumor necrosis factor (TNF) inhibitors and MTX, as second-line therapy, is uncertain. The aim of this study was to compare the efficacy and tolerance of triple oral DMARD therapy versus anti-TNF agents associated with MTX in patients with RA after MTX failure.

METHODS

We performed a systematic search of the literature up to November 2015 in MEDLINE, Embase, the Cochrane library, and abstracts from the American College of Rheumatology (ACR) and the European League Against Rheumatism (EULAR) meetings from 2006 to 2015. Articles were included if they were of randomized controlled trials of patients receiving triple oral combination therapy (TT; MTX + sulfasalazine + hydroxychloroquine) compared with anti-TNF agents plus MTX. Treatment effects were examined by disease activity [Disease Activity Score in 28 joints (DAS28)], ACR and EULAR response criteria, structural damage by the modified total Sharp score, and functional disability by the Health Assessment Questionnaire (HAQ).

RESULTS

Our search identified 263 articles; only 5 fulfilled the selection criteria. Analysis of ACR and EULAR response criteria, DAS28, and modified Sharp scores favored anti-TNF agents combined with MTX. Functional disability (HAQ) and rates of adverse events did not differ between treatments.

CONCLUSION

In patients with RA in whom MTX has failed, the addition of a TNF antagonist to MTX may be a valid option, with better clinical outcomes and better radiographic results in the presence of poor prognostic factors. In the absence of poor prognostic factors and/or with contraindications to biologic agents, TT retains its place in the therapeutic strategy for RA in a currently restricted economic context.

Diagnosis, prognosis and classification of early arthritis: results of a systematic review informing the 2016 update of the EULAR recommendations for the management of early arthritis

OBJECTIVE

To update the evidence pertaining to the diagnosis, prognosis and classification of patients with early arthritis (EA), and to inform the 2016 European League Against Rheumatism (EULAR) recommendations for the management of patients with EA.

METHODS

MEDLINE, EMBASE and Cochrane databases were searched up to October 2015. The first part of the systematic literature review (SLR) involved a search for studies investigating the recognition and referral of EA. The second part involved a search for studies to identify the place of laboratory and imaging tests in establishing a diagnosis and a prognosis in patients with EA.

RESULTS

Regarding the issue of referral of patients with EA (1643 hits), 4 studies were included. These studies were in support of early referral for patients with EA. Regarding the issue of diagnosis and prognosis of patients with EA (11 435 hits), 88 studies were included, evaluating mainly the value of rheumatoid factor (RF) and anticitrullinated-peptide antibodies (ACPAs). Sensitivity of these antibodies for a RA diagnosis in patients with EA was moderate (40-80%). Specificity was higher, notably for ACPAs (frequently >80%). ACPAs also showed better prognostic performance than RF (negative predictive values around 80%). We confirmed that structural damage on baseline X-rays is predictive of further radiographic progression in patients with EA. Regarding other imaging modalities, data are sparse.

CONCLUSIONS

This SLR highlights the importance of early referral for patients with EA and confirms that RF and mainly ACPAs as well as a search for structural X-rays changes may help in the diagnosis and prognosis of patients with EA.

2016 update of the EULAR recommendations for the management of early arthritis

OBJECTIVES

Since the 2007 recommendations for the management of early arthritis have been presented, considerable research has been published in the field of early arthritis, mandating an update of the 2007 European League Against Rheumatism (EULAR) recommendations for management of early arthritis.

METHODS

In accordance with the 2014 EULAR Standardised Operating Procedures, the expert committee pursued an approach that was based on evidence in the literature and on expert opinion. The committee involved 20 rheumatologists, 2 patients and 1 healthcare professional representing 12 European countries. The group defined the focus of the expert committee and target population, formulated a definition of 'management' and selected the research questions. A systematic literature research (SLR) was performed by two fellows with the help of a skilled librarian. A set of draft recommendations was proposed on the basis of the research questions and the results of the SLR. For each recommendation, the categories of evidence were identified, the strength of recommendations was derived and the level of agreement was determined through a voting process.

RESULTS

The updated recommendations comprise 3 overarching principles and 12 recommendations for managing early arthritis. The selected statements involve the recognition of arthritis, referral, diagnosis, prognostication, treatment (information, education, pharmacological and non-pharmacological interventions), monitoring and strategy. Eighteen items were identified as relevant for future research.

CONCLUSIONS

These recommendations provide rheumatologists, general practitioners, healthcare professionals, patients and other stakeholders with an updated EULAR consensus on the entire management of early arthritis.

2016 update of the EULAR recommendations for the management of early arthritis

OBJECTIVES

Since the 2007 recommendations for the management of early arthritis have been presented, considerable research has been published in the field of early arthritis, mandating an update of the 2007 European League Against Rheumatism (EULAR) recommendations for management of early arthritis.

METHODS

In accordance with the 2014 EULAR Standardised Operating Procedures, the expert committee pursued an approach that was based on evidence in the literature and on expert opinion. The committee involved 20 rheumatologists, 2 patients and 1 healthcare professional representing 12 European countries. The group defined the focus of the expert committee and target population, formulated a definition of 'management' and selected the research questions. A systematic literature research (SLR) was performed by two fellows with the help of a skilled librarian. A set of draft recommendations was proposed on the basis of the research questions and the results of the SLR. For each recommendation, the categories of evidence were identified, the strength of recommendations was derived and the level of agreement was determined through a voting process.

RESULTS

The updated recommendations comprise 3 overarching principles and 12 recommendations for managing early arthritis. The selected statements involve the recognition of arthritis, referral, diagnosis, prognostication, treatment (information, education, pharmacological and non-pharmacological interventions), monitoring and strategy. Eighteen items were identified as relevant for future research.

CONCLUSIONS

These recommendations provide rheumatologists, general practitioners, healthcare professionals, patients and other stakeholders with an updated EULAR consensus on the entire management of early arthritis.