Body mass index and treatment survival in patients with RA starting treatment with TNFalpha-inhibitors: long-term follow-up in the real-life METEOR registry

OBJECTIVES: To study whether there is an association between body mass index (BMI) category and survival of various tumour necrosis factor inhibitors (TNFi) in rheumatoid arthritis (RA) patients in a real-life longitudinal international registry. METHODS: Data from 5230 patients with RA starting treatment with any TNFi were selected from the METEOR registry. Patients were divided into six BMI categories: 3.7% underweight, BMI \u3c 18.5 kg/m(2); 46% normal weight, BMI 18.5-25 kg/m(2); 32% pre-obesity, BMI 25-30 kg/m(2); 13% obesity class I, BMI 30-35 kg/m(2); 3.4% obesity class II, BMI 35-40 kg/m(2); and 1.6% obesity class III, BMI \u3e 40 kg/m(2). Time on treatment in the different BMI categories was compared for all TNFi combined and for the infliximab, adalimumab and etanercept separately, using Kaplan-Meier curves and Cox regression analyses. Cox regression analyses were adjusted for potential confounders, with follow-up censored at 5000 days. RESULTS: Patients in obesity class II (HR 1.28, 95% CI 1.06 to 1.54) and III (HR 1.67, 95% CI 1.29 to 2.18) and underweight patients (HR 1.30, 95% CI 1.07 to 1.58) showed statistically significantly shorter TNFi survival than normal weight patients. The effect in underweight patients was strongest for infliximab (HR 1.82, 95% CI 1.20 to 2.76), the effect in overweight patients was strongest for infliximab (category II (HR 1.49, 95% CI 0.98 to 2.26); category III (HR 1.46, 95% CI 0.79 to 2.71)) and etanercept (category II (HR 1.27 95% CI 0.98 to 1.65); category III (HR 1.79, 95% CI 1.25 to 2.55)). No significant effect modification from reported pain was found. CONCLUSION: Both underweight and overweight patients discontinued TNFi treatment earlier than normal weight patients, without evidence of reported pain as the main determinant. It remains uncertain what determines TNFi survival in individual patients

Increasing the etanercept dose in a treat-to-target approach in juvenile idiopathic arthritis:does it help to reach the target? A post-hoc analysis of the BeSt for Kids randomised clinical trial

Background: Etanercept has been studied in doses up to 0.8 mg/kg/week (max 50 mg/week) in juvenile idiopathic arthritis (JIA) patients. In clinical practice higher doses are used off-label, but evidence regarding the relation with outcomes is lacking. We describe the clinical course of JIA-patients receiving high-dose etanercept (1.6 mg/kg/week; max 50 mg/week) in the BeSt for Kids trial. Methods: 92 patients with oligoarticular JIA, RF-negative polyarticular JIA or juvenile psoriatic arthritis were randomised across three treat-to-target arms: (1) sequential DMARD-monotherapy (sulfasalazine or methotrexate (MTX)), (2) combination-therapy MTX + 6 weeks prednisolone and (3) combination therapy MTX + etanercept. In any treatment-arm, patients could eventually escalate to high-dose etanercept alongside MTX 10mg/m2/week. Results: 32 patients received high-dose etanercept (69% female, median age 6 years (IQR 4–10), median 10 months (7–16) from baseline). Median follow-up was 24.6 months. Most clinical parameters improved within 3 months after dose-increase: median JADAS10 from 7.2 to 2.8 (p = 0.008), VAS-physician from 12 to 4 (p = 0.022), VAS-patient/parent from 38.5 to 13 (p = 0.003), number of active joints from 2 to 0.5 (p = 0.12) and VAS-pain from 35.5 to 15 (p = 0.030). Functional impairments (CHAQ-score) improved more gradually and ESR remained stable. A comparable pattern was observed in 11 patients (73% girls, median age 8 (IQR 6–9)) who did not receive high-dose etanercept despite eligibility (comparison group). In both groups, 56% reached inactive disease at 6 months. No severe adverse events (SAEs) occurred after etanercept dose-increase. In the comparison group, 2 SAEs consisting of hospital admission occurred. Rates of non-severe AEs per subsequent patient year follow-up were 2.27 in the high-dose and 1.43 in the comparison group. Conclusions: Escalation to high-dose etanercept in JIA-patients who were treated to target was generally followed by meaningful clinical improvement. However, similar improvements were observed in a smaller comparison group who did not escalate to high-dose etanercept. No SAEs were seen after escalation to high-dose etanercept. The division into the high-dose and comparison groups was not randomised, which is a potential source of bias. We advocate larger, randomised studies of high versus regular dose etanercept to provide high level evidence on efficacy and safety. Trial registration: Dutch Trial Register; NTR1574; 3 December 2008; https://onderzoekmetmensen.nl/en/trial/26585.</p

Significant pain decrease in children with non-systemic Juvenile Idiopathic Arthritis treated to target:results over 24 months of follow up

Background: The aim of this study was to compare pain-scores in three targeted treatment-strategies in JIA-patients and to identify characteristics predicting persistent pain. Methods: In the BeSt-for-Kids-study 92 DMARD-naïve JIA-patients were randomized in 3 treatment-strategies: 1) initial sequential DMARD-monotherapy 2) initial methotrexate (MTX)/prednisolone-bridging or 3) initial MTX/etanercept. Potential differences in VAS pain scores (0-100 mm) over time between treatment-strategies were compared using linear mixed models with visits clustered within patients. A multivariable model was used to assess the ability of baseline characteristics to predict the chance of high pain-scores during follow-up. Results: Pain-scores over time reduced from mean 55.3 (SD 21.7) to 19.5 (SD 25.3) mm after 24 months. On average, pain-scores decreased significantly with β -1.37 mm (95% CI -1.726; -1.022) per month. No significant difference was found between treatment-strategies (interaction term treatment arm*time (months) β (95% CI) arm 1: 0.13 (-0.36; 0.62) and arm 2: 0.37 (-0.12; 0.86) compared to arm 3). Correction for sex and symptom duration yielded similar results. Several baseline characteristics were predictive for pain over time. Higher VAS pain [β 0.44 (95% CI 0.25; 0.65)] and higher active joint count [0.77 (0.19; 1.34)] were predictive of higher pain over time, whereas, low VAS physician [-0.34 (-0.55; -0.06)], CHQ Physical [-0.42 (-0.72; -0.11)] and Psychosocial summary Score [-0.42 (-0.77; -0.06)] were predictive of lower pain. Conclusions: Treatment-to-target seems effective in pain-reduction in non-systemic JIA-patients irrespective of initial treatment-strategy. Several baseline-predictors for pain over time were found, which could help to identify patients with a high risk for development of chronic pain. Trial registration: Dutch Trial Registry number 1574.</p

Effectiveness of TNF-inhibitors, abatacept, IL6-inhibitors and JAK-inhibitors in 31 846 patients with rheumatoid arthritis in 19 registers from the 'JAK-pot' collaboration

Background JAK-inhibitors (JAKi), recently approved in rheumatoid arthritis (RA), have changed the landscape of treatment choices. We aimed to compare the effectiveness of four current second-line therapies of RA with different modes of action, since JAKi approval, in an international collaboration of 19 registers. Methods In this observational cohort study, patients initiating tumour necrosis factor inhibitors (TNFi), interleukin-6 inhibitors (IL-6i), abatacept (ABA) or JAKi were included. We compared the effectiveness of these treatments in terms of drug discontinuation and Clinical Disease Activity Index (CDAI) response rates at 1 year. Analyses were adjusted for patient, disease and treatment characteristics, including lines of therapy and accounted for competing risk. Results We included 31 846 treatment courses: 17 522 TNFi, 2775 ABA, 3863 IL-6i and 7686 JAKi. Adjusted analyses of overall discontinuation were similar across all treatments. The main single reason of stopping treatment was ineffectiveness. Compared with TNFi, JAKi were less often discontinued for ineffectiveness (adjusted HR (aHR) 0.75, 95% CI 0.67 to 0.83), as was IL-6i (aHR 0.76, 95% CI 0.67 to 0.85) and more often for adverse events (aHR 1.16, 95% CI 1.03 to 1.33). Adjusted CDAI response rates at 1 year were similar between TNFi, JAKi and IL-6i and slightly lower for ABA. Conclusion The adjusted overall drug discontinuation and 1 year response rates of JAKi and IL-6i were similar to those observed with TNFi. Compared with TNFi, JAKi were more often discontinued for adverse events and less for ineffectiveness, as were IL-6i.Peer reviewe

2022 update

Funding Information: This study was funded by European League Against Rheumatism. Publisher Copyright: © Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2022. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.Objectives: To provide an update of the EULAR rheumatoid arthritis (RA) management recommendations addressing the most recent developments in the field. Methods: An international task force was formed and solicited three systematic literature research activities on safety and efficacy of disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs) and glucocorticoids (GCs). The new evidence was discussed in light of the last update from 2019. A predefined voting process was applied to each overarching principle and recommendation. Levels of evidence and strengths of recommendation were assigned to and participants finally voted on the level of agreement with each item. Results: The task force agreed on 5 overarching principles and 11 recommendations concerning use of conventional synthetic (cs) DMARDs (methotrexate (MTX), leflunomide, sulfasalazine); GCs; biological (b) DMARDs (tumour necrosis factor inhibitors (adalimumab, certolizumab pegol, etanercept, golimumab, infliximab including biosimilars), abatacept, rituximab, tocilizumab, sarilumab and targeted synthetic (ts) DMARDs, namely the Janus kinase inhibitors tofacitinib, baricitinib, filgotinib, upadacitinib. Guidance on monotherapy, combination therapy, treatment strategies (treat-to-target) and tapering in sustained clinical remission is provided. Safety aspects, including risk of major cardiovascular events (MACEs) and malignancies, costs and sequencing of b/tsDMARDs were all considered. Initially, MTX plus GCs is recommended and on insufficient response to this therapy within 3-6 months, treatment should be based on stratification according to risk factors; With poor prognostic factors (presence of autoantibodies, high disease activity, early erosions or failure of two csDMARDs), any bDMARD should be added to the csDMARD; after careful consideration of risks of MACEs, malignancies and/or thromboembolic events tsDMARDs may also be considered in this phase. If the first bDMARD (or tsDMARD) fails, any other bDMARD (from another or the same class) or tsDMARD (considering risks) is recommended. With sustained remission, DMARDs may be tapered but should not be stopped. Levels of evidence and levels of agreement were high for most recommendations. Conclusions: These updated EULAR recommendations provide consensus on RA management including safety, effectiveness and cost.publishersversionepub_ahead_of_prin

Three handy tips and a practical guide to improve your propensity score models

Real-world data are increasingly available to investigate real-world' safety and efficacy. However, since treatment in observational studies is not randomly allocated, confounding by indication may occur, in which differences in patient characteristics may influence both treatment choices and treatment responses. A popular method to adjust for this type of bias is the use of propensity scores (PS). The PS is a score between 0 and 1 that reflects the likelihood per patient of receiving one of the treatment categories of interest conditional on a set of variables. At least in theory, in patients with similar PS, the treatment prescribed will be independent of these variables (pseudorandomisation). But researchers using PS sometimes fail to recognise important methodological flaws which can lead to spurious conclusions. These include perfect prediction of treatment allocation, untied observations and lack of generalisability due to oversimplification of complex clinical scenarios. In this viewpoint we will discuss the most commonly encountered flaws and provide a stepwise description on the estimation and use of PS, such that in future publications these flaws can be avoided.publishersversionpublishe

Rheumatoid arthritis patients with continued low disease activity have similar outcomes over 10 years, regardless of initial therapy

To compare 10-year disease outcomes of RA patients who have continuous low disease activity and are on MTX with or without initial combination therapy with infliximab or prednisone and SSZ. Recent-onset RA patients from the Behandel Strategieen (BeSt) (Dutch acronym for Treatment Strategies) study with 10 years of follow-up were analysed. Treatment was tightly controlled, targeted at DAS ⩽ 2.4. The selected patients had low disease activity from 6 months until 10 years and therefore did not intensify treatment. Patients were grouped into those receiving MTX monotherapy and those receiving initial combination therapy. Between-group differences over time were compared, using (generalized) linear mixed model analyses, for the outcomes DAS, HAQ, ESR, visual analogue scale patient global health, percentage of patients in (drug-free) remission and percentage of patients with Sharp/van der Heijde score progression ⩾5. At 10 years, 28/247 (11%) patients on MTX monotherapy (some tapered to drug free) had continued DAS ⩽ 2.4 compared with 68/261 (26%) patients on combination therapy (all tapered to monotherapy or drug free). No between-group differences in continuous responders were found over time, except for a higher percentage of patients in drug-free remission after MTX monotherapy. Significant group-time interactions were found for DAS, ESR and visual analogue scale patient global health, but the results seem clinically negligible. More patients achieved continuous low disease activity on initial prednisone or infliximab combination therapy than on initial MTX monotherapy, but there appeared to be no additional benefits. Regardless of induction therapy, patients with continuous low disease activity have similar long-term outcomes, with only a higher proportion of patients in drug-free remission after MTX monotherap

Similar short-term clinical response to high-dose versus low-dose methotrexate in monotherapy and combination therapy in patients with rheumatoid arthritis

Background: Aiming at rapid decrease of disease activity, there has been a trend to start with higher doses of methotrexate (MTX) in patients newly diagnosed with rheumatoid arthritis (RA), both as monotherapy and in combination with other antirheumatic drugs. We aimed to study the relationship between clinical response and MTX dose as monotherapy or combination therapy in patients with early RA. Methods: Disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drug (DMARD)-naive patients with early RA, from a large international observational database, the METEOR database, were selected if MTX was part of their initial treatment. Patients were divided into four groups: MTX monotherapy, MTX + convention synthetic (cs)DMARDs, MTX + glucocorticoids or MT

Sex-associated treatment differences and their outcomes in rheumatoid arthritis: Results from the METEOR register

Objective. To assess differences in initial treatment and treatment response in male and female patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) in daily clinical practice. Methods. The proportion of patients with RA starting different antirheumatic treatments (disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs; DMARD) and the response to treatment were compared in the international, observational METEOR register. All visits from start of the first DMARD until the first DMARD switch or the end of followup were selected. The effect of sex on time to switch from first to second treatment was calculated using Cox regression. Linear mixed model analyses were performed to assess whether men and women responded differently to treatments, as measured by Disease Activity Score (DAS) or Health Assessment Questionnaire. Results. Women (n = 4393) more often started treatment with hydroxychloroquine, as monotherapy or in combination with methotrexate (MTX) or a glucocorticoid, and men (n = 1142) more often started treatment with MTX and/or sulfasalazine. Time to switch DMARD was shorter for women than for men. Women had a statistically significantly higher DAS over time than men (DAS improvement per year β -0.69, 95% CI -0.75 to -0.62 for men and -0.58, 95% CI -0.62 to -0.55 for women). Subanalyses per DMARD group showed for the conventional synthetic DMARD combination therapy a slightly greater decrease in DAS over time in men (-0.89, 95% CI -1.07 to -0.71) compared to women (-0.59, 95% CI -0.67 to -0.51), but these difference between the sexes were clinically negligible. Conclusion. This worldwide observational study suggests that in daily practice, men and women with RA are prescribed different initial treatments, but there were no differences in response to treatment between the sexes