38 research outputs found
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
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
Rheumatoid arthritis patients with continued low disease activity have similar outcomes over 10 years, regardless of initial therapy
The association between increased body mass index and response to conventional synthetic disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drug treatment in rheumatoid arthritis: results from the METEOR database
BACKGROUND: Few data exist on the association between increased BMI and response to conventional synthetic DMARDs (csDMARDs) in RA. We aimed to explore the association between increased (overweight or obese) BMI on csDMARD prescribing, MTX dose and disease activity over 12 months. METHODS: Participants in an international RA database were stratified into early (<1 year post-diagnosis) and established RA. EULAR response, 28-joint DAS (DAS28) remission and treatments were recorded at baseline, 6 months and 12 months. Increased BMI was explored in early and established RA as predictors of good EULAR response, DAS28 remission, number of csDMARDs and MTX dose, using logistic and linear regression. RESULTS: Data from 1313 patients, 44.3% with early RA, were examined. In early RA, increased BMI was not significantly associated with remission. In established RA, obese patients on monotherapy were significantly less likely to achieve good EULAR response or DAS28 remission at 6 months and more likely to be treated with combination csDMARDs compared with normal BMI. In patients taking MTX, overweight and obese patients with early and established RA were exposed to higher MTX doses (mono- and combination therapy), with a mean dose of 20 mg/week, compared with 15 mg/week in those of normal BMI. CONCLUSION: We observed that compared with patients with normal BMI, overweight and obese individuals experienced more intensive csDMARD exposures. Similar response rates were observed in early RA but increased BMI was associated with reduced response in established RA. Optimization of targeted RA treatment remains important, particularly in those with increased BMI where response in established disease may be attenuated