Randomised prospective trial to assess the clinical utility of multianalyte assay panel with complement activation products for the diagnosis of SLE

Objective

We compared the physician-assessed diagnostic likelihood of SLE resulting from standard diagnosis laboratory testing (SDLT) to that resulting from multianalyte assay panel (MAP) with cell-bound complement activation products (MAP/CB-CAPs), which reports a two-tiered index test result having 80% sensitivity and 86% specificity for SLE.

Methods

Patients (n=145) with a history of positive antinuclear antibody status were evaluated clinically by rheumatologists and randomised to SDLT arm (tests ordered at the discretion of the rheumatologists) or to MAP/CB-CAPs testing arm. The primary endpoint was based on the change in the physician likelihood of SLE on a five-point Likert scale collected before and after testing. Changes in pharmacological treatment based on laboratory results were assessed in both arms. Statistical analysis consisted of Wilcoxon and Fisher’s exact tests.

Results

At enrolment, patients randomised to SDLT (n=73, age=48±2 years, 94% females) and MAP/CB-CAPs testing arms (n=72, 50±2 years, 93% females) presented with similar pretest likelihood of SLE (1.42±0.06 vs 1.46±0.06 points, respectively; p=0.68). Post-test likelihood of SLE resulting from randomisation in the MAP/CB-CAPs testing arm was significantly lower than that resulting from randomisation to SDLT arm on review of test results (−0.44±0.10 points vs −0.19±0.07 points) and at the 12-week follow-up visit (−0.61±0.10 points vs −0.31±0.10 points) (p<0.05). Among patients randomised to the MAP/CB-CAPs testing arm, two-tiered positive test results associated significantly with initiation of prednisone (p=0.034).

Conclusion

Our data suggest that MAP/CB-CAPs testing has clinical utility in facilitating SLE diagnosis and treatment decisions.

Safety, pharmacokinetics, and pharmacodynamics of RSLV-132, an RNase-Fc fusion protein in systemic lupus erythematosus: a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study

Blood-borne RNA circulating in association with autoantibodies is a potent stimulator of interferon production and immune system activation. RSLV-132 is a novel fully human biologic Fc fusion protein that is comprised of human RNase fused to the Fc domain of human IgG1. The drug is designed to remain in circulation and digest extracellular RNA with the aim of preventing activation of the immune system via Toll-like receptors and the interferon pathway. The present study describes the first clinical study of nuclease therapy in 32 subjects with systemic lupus erythematosus. The drug was well tolerated with a very favorable safety profile. The approximately 19-day serum half-life potentially supports once monthly dosing. There were no subjects in the study that developed anti-RSLV-132 antibodies. Decreases in B-cell activating factor correlated with decreases in disease activity in a subset of patients.

Comparison of Tripterygium wilfordii Hook F versus sulfasalazine in the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis: a randomized trial

BACKGROUND

Extracts of the medicinal plant Tripterygium wilfordii Hook F (TwHF) have been used in China for centuries to treat a spectrum of inflammatory diseases.

OBJECTIVE

To compare the benefits and side effects of TwHF extract with those of sulfasalazine for the treatment of active rheumatoid arthritis.

DESIGN

Randomized, controlled trial. A computer-generated code with random, permuted blocks was used to assign treatment.

SETTING

2 U.S. academic centers (National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland, and University of Texas, Dallas, Texas) and 9 rheumatology subspecialty clinics (in Dallas and Austin, Texas; Tampa and Fort Lauderdale, Florida; Arlington, Virginia; Duncanville, Pennsylvania; Wheaton and Greenbelt, Maryland; and Lansing, Michigan).

PATIENTS

121 patients with active rheumatoid arthritis and 6 or more painful and swollen joints.

INTERVENTION

TwHF extract, 60 mg 3 times daily, or sulfasalazine, 1 g twice daily. Patients could continue stable doses of oral prednisone or nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs but had to stop taking disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs at least 28 days before randomization.

MEASUREMENTS

The primary outcome was the rate of achievement of 20% improvement in the American College of Rheumatology criteria (ACR 20) at 24 weeks. Secondary end points were safety; radiographic scores of joint damage; and serum levels of interleukin-6, cholesterol, cortisol, and adrenocorticotropic hormone.

RESULTS

Outcome data were available for only 62 patients at 24 weeks. In a mixed-model analysis that imputed data for patients who dropped out, 65.0% (95% CI, 51.6% to 76.9%) of the TwHF group and 32.8% (CI, 21.3% to 46.0%) of the sulfasalazine group met the ACR 20 response criteria (P=0.001). Patients receiving TwHF also had significantly higher response rates for ACR 50 and ACR 70 in mixed-model analyses. Analyses of only completers showed similar significant differences between the treatment groups. Significant improvement was demonstrated in all individual components of the ACR response, including the Health Assessment Questionnaire disability score. Interleukin-6 levels rapidly and significantly decreased in the TwHF group. Although not statistically significant, radiographic progression was lower in the TwHF group. The frequency of adverse events was similar in both groups.

LIMITATIONS

Only 62% and 41% of patients continued receiving TwHF extract and sulfasalazine, respectively, during the 24 weeks of the study. Long-term outcome data were not collected on participants who discontinued treatment.

CONCLUSION

In patients who continued treatment for 24 weeks and could also use stable oral prednisone and nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, attainment of the ACR 20 response criteria was significantly greater with TwHF extract than with sulfasalazine.

Abatacept in biologic-naïve patients and TNF inadequate responders: clinical data in focus

BACKGROUND

Advances in the understanding of rheumatoid arthritis (RA) immunopathogenesis support the hypothesis for a 'window of opportunity' for therapeutic intervention in RA and the need for rapid and effective treatment strategies, with the ultimate goal of alleviating symptoms and halting progressive joint damage. Biologic therapies targeting pro-inflammatory cytokines have significantly improved the outlook for patients with RA; however, some patients still experience inadequate treatment responses. Recently, therapeutic agents targeting alternative pathways have been developed. One such therapy--abatacept--targets T-cell activation and is approved in the United States for treatment of moderate-to-severe RA and juvenile idiopathic arthritis.

OBJECTIVE

To overview the efficacy and safety of abatacept in the treatment of adult patients with active RA and an inadequate response to methotrexate (MTX) or tumor necrosis factor (TNF) antagonists. SEARCH METHODOLOGY: A comprehensive literature search was performed using the National Library of Medicine (MEDLINE), EMBASE and BIOSIS databases (restricted to articles in the English language posted between January 2000 and February 2007). The search terms 'CTLA-4Ig', 'abatacept' and 'ORENCIA' were used, and data from randomized clinical trials were summarized.

RESULTS

Abatacept provided clinically meaningful improvements in the signs and symptoms of RA in both MTX and TNF antagonist inadequate responders in Phase II and III studies. Health-related quality of life was also improved with abatacept, which demonstrated an acceptable safety and tolerability profile in both patient populations. Additionally, when assessed in patients with an inadequate response to MTX, abatacept inhibited structural damage progression.

CONCLUSION

Although longer-term data are required and differing study designs preclude direct comparisons with other RA therapies, results of clinical trials to date suggest that abatacept has an acceptable safety profile and is an effective treatment option for patients with RA, whether treating biologic-naïve patients or those who have already had an inadequate response to TNF antagonists.

Improved health-related quality of life for rheumatoid arthritis patients treated with abatacept who have inadequate response to anti-TNF therapy in a double-blind, placebo-controlled, multicentre randomized clinical trial

OBJECTIVE

Rheumatoid arthritis (RA) patients who have inadequate response to anti-tumour necrosis factor (TNF) therapy currently have treatment options that are limited and less than optimal in their risk-to-benefit ratio. Abatacept provides a new generation of RA medications that has previously been demonstrated to have positive clinical outcomes with this population. The current study sought to demonstrate the efficacy of abatacept on quality of life (QoL) for RA patients with inadequate response to anti-TNF therapy.

METHODS

Patients were entered into a double-blind, placebo-controlled, multicentre randomized clinical trial, with 258 patients randomized to abatacept + disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs (DMARDs) and 133 patients randomized to placebo + DMARDS. The QoL was measured with the Short Form Health Survey (SF-36), Health Assessment Questionnaire (HAQ) and fatigue visual analogue scale, and was analysed with basic (ANOVA, chi-square) and multigroup growth curve techniques to assess differential change over time.

RESULTS

Treatment group QoL improved significantly more than placebo on the HAQ and fatigue indices, as well as seven of the eight SF-36 scales and SF-36 physical and mental summary scores. Improvement rate was faster for abatacept than for placebo on the QoL measures, and the improvements from abatacept related to normal levels of QoL on many domains.

CONCLUSION

Clinically relevant benefits of abatacept over placebo are discussed regarding improving QoL. Importantly, the larger rate of change for abatacept over placebo provides clinicians with a medication that can lead to meaningful changes in a patient's life within a few weeks, even when the patient previously failed anti-TNF therapy.

Abatacept for rheumatoid arthritis refractory to tumor necrosis factor alpha inhibition

BACKGROUND

A substantial number of patients with rheumatoid arthritis have an inadequate or unsustained response to tumor necrosis factor alpha (TNF-alpha) inhibitors. We conducted a randomized, double-blind, phase 3 trial to evaluate the efficacy and safety of abatacept, a selective costimulation modulator, in patients with active rheumatoid arthritis and an inadequate response to at least three months of anti-TNF-alpha therapy.

METHODS

Patients with active rheumatoid arthritis and an inadequate response to anti-TNF-alpha therapy were randomly assigned in a 2:1 ratio to receive abatacept or placebo on days 1, 15, and 29 and every 28 days thereafter for 6 months, in addition to at least one disease-modifying antirheumatic drug. Patients discontinued anti-TNF-alpha therapy before randomization. The rates of American College of Rheumatology (ACR) 20 responses (indicating a clinical improvement of 20 percent or greater) and improvement in functional disability, as reflected by scores for the Health Assessment Questionnaire (HAQ) disability index, were assessed.

RESULTS

After six months, the rates of ACR 20 responses were 50.4 percent in the abatacept group and 19.5 percent in the placebo group (P<0.001); the respective rates of ACR 50 and ACR 70 responses were also significantly higher in the abatacept group than in the placebo group (20.3 percent vs. 3.8 percent, P<0.001; and 10.2 percent vs. 1.5 percent, P=0.003). At six months, significantly more patients in the abatacept group than in the placebo group had a clinically meaningful improvement in physical function, as reflected by an improvement from baseline of at least 0.3 in the HAQ disability index (47.3 percent vs. 23.3 percent, P<0.001). The incidence of adverse events and peri-infusional adverse events was 79.5 percent and 5.0 percent, respectively, in the abatacept group and 71.4 percent and 3.0 percent, respectively, in the placebo group. The incidence of serious infections was 2.3 percent in each group.

CONCLUSIONS

Abatacept produced significant clinical and functional benefits in patients who had had an inadequate response to anti-TNF-alpha therapy.

Improvement in health-related quality of life in systemic lupus erythematosus patients enrolled in a randomized clinical trial comparing LJP 394 treatment with placebo

In a 76-week, randomized controlled trial, patients received 100 mg LJP 394 or placebo weekly for 16 weeks followed by three 12-week treatment cycles of 50 mg LJP 394 or placebo weekly each separated by eight-week periods when no therapy was administered. Health-related quality of life (HRQOL) was assessed using SF-36 at baseline, 16 weeks and every 12 weeks thereafter. Analyses populations included intent to treat (ITT) (n = 179) and patients with high-affinity anti-dsDNA antibody binding (HA): 157/179; 85% active, 90% placebo. In the ITT population, there were improvements in role emotional (RE) (+7.3 versus -8.2), social functioning (SF) (+4.3 versus +0.7), and role physical (RP) (+11.3 versus +6.0) domains in the active treatment group when compared with placebo, with similar changes observed in the HA population. In 37 patients with data pre- and post-renal flares, those receiving LJP 394 reported stabilization or improvement in all but one domain compared with deterioration in all domains with placebo. Changes in RE domain scores following a flare differed by 22.7 points between the two treatment groups, favouring LJP 394 treatment. Patients receiving LJP 394 reported stable or improved HRQOL with active treatment following renal flares compared with deterioration in placebo. Differences between treatment groups in RE and SF domains are clinically important and were replicated irrespective of the protocol population analysed.

Efficacy of tacrolimus in rheumatoid arthritis patients who have been treated unsuccessfully with methotrexate: a six-month, double-blind, randomized, dose-ranging study

OBJECTIVE

To assess the efficacy, safety, and optimal dose of tacrolimus monotherapy in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA).

METHODS

This phase II, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled monotherapy study was set in 12 community sites and 9 university-based sites. Two hundred sixty-eight patients with RA who were resistant to or intolerant of methotrexate (mean dose 15.2 mg/week) and had active disease for at least 6 months (mean tender joint count 28.2, mean erythrocyte sedimentation rate 46.5 mm/hour) were randomized to receive treatment after discontinuation of methotrexate. Those who received at least 1 dose of tacrolimus were analyzed; 141 completed the study. Stable dosages of nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drugs and low-dose prednisone were allowed during treatment. All patients were given 1, 3, or 5 mg of tacrolimus or placebo once daily for 24 weeks. The American College of Rheumatology definition of 20% improvement (ACR20) and the tender and swollen joint counts at the end of treatment were the primary outcomes.

RESULTS

ACR20 response rates demonstrated a clear dose response. The ACR20 response was observed in 15.5% of patients receiving placebo (95% confidence interval [95% CI] 7.1-23.9%), 29% of the 1 mg tacrolimus group (95% CI 18.3-39.7%) (P < 0.058); 34.4% of the 3 mg group (95% CI 22.7-46.0%) (P < 0.013), and 50% of the 5 mg group (95% CI 37.8-62.3%) (P < or = 0.001). The tender joint count improved statistically significantly in all tacrolimus groups. The swollen joint count, physical function, and patient-assessed pain improved statistically significantly in the 3 mg and 5 mg groups. The incidence of creatinine elevation > or =40% above baseline levels increased in a dose-dependent manner. Dropout rates were high (41-59%) and were more common for inefficacy in the placebo patients (71.4%), whereas they were more common for toxicity in the high-dose tacrolimus groups (31-33%). Discontinuation for creatinine elevation occurred in the 3 mg (3.1%) and 5 mg (10.9%) tacrolimus groups.

CONCLUSION

Tacrolimus improved disease activity in methotrexate-resistant or -intolerant patients with RA. A dose response was observed when efficacy and toxicity were assessed at different doses. The optimal dose of tacrolimus appears to be >1 mg but < or=3 mg daily.

A multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial of adjuvant methotrexate treatment for giant cell arteritis

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate treatment with methotrexate (MTX) in patients with newly diagnosed giant cell arteritis (GCA) to determine if MTX reduces GCA relapses and cumulative corticosteroid (CS) requirements and diminishes disease- and treatment-related morbidity.

METHODS

This was a multicenter, randomized, double-blind study. Over 4 years, 16 centers from the International Network for the Study of Systemic Vasculitides enrolled patients with unequivocal GCA. The initial treatment was 1 mg/kg/day (<or=60 mg every day) prednisone, plus either 0.15 mg/kg/week MTX (increased to 0.25 mg/kg/week, for a maximum weekly dosage of 15 mg) or placebo. Two physicians, both blinded to treatment allocation, evaluated each patient at every trial visit. One physician was responsible for providing global medical care. The other assessed GCA status according to a standard protocol. Treatment failure was defined as 2 distinct relapses or persistence of disease activity after the first relapse, in spite of increased CS therapy.

RESULTS

Ninety-eight patients were enrolled. No significant differences between treatment groups were noted with regard to age, frequency of positive findings on temporal artery biopsy (placebo 87%, MTX 79%), or comorbidities at the time of enrollment. The median dosage of MTX was 15 mg/week. The incidence of treatment failure was comparable between groups after 12 months: 57.5% in the MTX group failed treatment (95% confidence interval [95% CI] 41.6-73.4%) compared with 77.3% in the placebo group (95% CI 61.9-92.8%) (P = 0.26). In a Cox regression analysis, MTX was not associated with a reduced risk of treatment failure (relative risk 0.72; 95% CI 0.41-1.28). There were no significant differences between groups with regard to abnormal elevations of the erythrocyte sedimentation rate following initial remissions, serious morbidity due to GCA, cumulative CS dose, or treatment toxicity. In the MTX group, there were fewer cases of GCA relapse heralded by symptoms of isolated polymyalgia rheumatica (1 case versus 5 in the placebo group; P = 0.05).

CONCLUSION

The results of this randomized, multicenter trial do not support the adjunctive use of MTX to control disease activity or to decrease the cumulative dose and toxicity of CS in patients with GCA.

Comparative toxicity of total lymphoid irradiation and immunosuppressive drug treated patients with intractable rheumatoid arthritis

Outcomes were compared between consecutive patients who had received either total lymphoid irradiation (TLI) or immunosuppressant treatment for intractable rheumatoid arthritis (RA). There were 33 TLI and 32 immunosuppressive recipients; all patients had failed standard therapy. Average followup from the start of therapy was 2.7 years for TLI and 5.9 years for immunosuppressive recipients. Final disability levels were the same in both groups; mortality was equal in both groups as well. There were more hospitalizations for infections in the TLI group and the infecting organisms tended to be staphylococcus or gram negative organisms. Apart from infections, there were more adverse effects reported in the immunosuppressive therapy group.