Comparative effectiveness and safety of rituximab versus subsequent anti-tumor necrosis factor therapy in patients with rheumatoid arthritis with prior exposure to anti-tumor necrosis factor therapies in the United States Corrona registry

INTRODUCTION: Patients with active rheumatoid arthritis (RA) despite anti-tumor necrosis factor(anti-TNF)agent treatment can switch to either a subsequent anti-TNF agent or a biologic with an alternative mechanism of action, such as rituximab; however, there are limited data available to help physicians decide between these 2 strategies. The objective of this analysis was to examine the effectiveness and safety of rituximab versus a subsequent anti-TNF agent in anti-TNF-experienced patients with RA using clinical practice data from the Corrona registry. METHODS: Rituximab-naive patients from the Corrona registry with prior exposure to \u3e /=1 anti-TNF agent who initiated rituximab or anti-TNF agents (2/28/2006-10/31/2012) were included. Two cohorts were analyzed: the trimmed population (excluding patients who fell outside the propensity score distribution overlap) and the stratified-matched population (stratified by 1 vs \u3e /=2 anti-TNF agents, then matched based on propensity score). The primary effectiveness outcome was achievement of low disease activity (LDA)/remission (Clinical Disease Activity Index \u3c /=10) at 1 year. Secondary outcomes included achievement of modified American College of Rheumatology (mACR) 20/50/70 responses and meaningful improvement ( \u3e /=0.25) in modified Health Assessment Questionnaire (mHAQ) score at 1 year. New cardiovascular, infectious and cancer events were reported. RESULTS: Estimates for LDA/remission, mACR response and mHAQ improvement were consistently better for rituximab than for anti-TNF agent users in adjusted analyses. The odds ratio for likelihood of LDA/remission in rituximab versus anti-TNF patients was 1.35 (95 % CI, 0.95-1.91) in the trimmed population and 1.54 (95 % CI, 1.01-2.35) in the stratified-matched population. Rituximab patients were significantly more likely than anti-TNF patients to achieve mACR20/50 and mHAQ improvement in the trimmed population and mACR20 and mHAQ in the stratified-matched population. The rate of new adverse events per 100 patient-years was similar between groups. CONCLUSIONS: In anti-TNF-experienced patients with RA, rituximab was associated with an increased likelihood of achieving LDA/remission, mACR response and physical function improvement, with a comparable safety profile, versus subsequent anti-TNF agent users. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01402661. Registered 25 July 2011

Impact of rituximab on patient-reported outcomes in patients with rheumatoid arthritis from the US Corrona Registry

To evaluate the impact of rituximab on patient-reported outcomes (PROs) in a US-based observational cohort of patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA). Patients with active RA, prior exposure to \u3e /=1 tumor necrosis factor inhibitor (TNFi) and who newly initiated rituximab were identified. Changes in PROs were assessed 1 year after rituximab initiation. PRO measures included Clinical Disease Activity Index (CDAI); patient global disease activity, pain and fatigue (visual analog score; 0-100); morning stiffness (hours); modified Health Assessment Questionnaire (mHAQ; 0-3); and EuroQoL EQ-5D. Of the 667 patients who newly initiated rituximab, baseline PRO and clinical measures indicated that patients were substantially impacted by their RA disease and quality of life; 54% of patients had high disease activity. One year after rituximab initiation, 49.0, 47.1, 49.8, and 23.2% of patients reported clinically meaningful improvements in patient global, pain, fatigue, and mHAQ, respectively. Morning stiffness and EuroQol EQ-5D domains improved in 48 and 19-32% of patients, respectively. These real-world registry data demonstrated that patients with long-standing, refractory RA experienced improvements in PROs 1 year after initiating rituximab

Effectiveness of Rituximab for the Treatment of Rheumatoid Arthritis in Patients with Prior Exposure to Anti-TNF: Results from the CORRONA Registry

OBJECTIVE: To characterize the real-world effectiveness of rituximab (RTX) in patients with rheumatoid arthritis. METHODS: Clinical effectiveness at 12 months was assessed in patients who were prescribed RTX based on the Clinical Disease Activity Index (CDAI). Change in CDAI was calculated (CDAI at 12 mos minus at initiation). Achievement of remission or low disease activity (LDA; CDAI \u3c /= 10) among those with moderate/high disease activity at the time of RTX initiation was compared based on prior anti-tumor necrosis factor agent (anti-TNF) use (1 vs \u3e /= 2) using logistic regression models. RESULTS: Patients (n = 265) were followed for 12 months with a mean change in CDAI of -8.1 (95% CI -9.8 - -6.4). Of the 218 patients with moderate/high disease activity at baseline, patients with 1 prior anti-TNF (baseline CDAI 25.0) demonstrated a mean change in CDAI of -10.1 (95% CI -13.2 - -7.0); patients with \u3e /= 2 prior anti-TNF (baseline CDAI 30.0) demonstrated a mean change of -10.5 (95% CI -12.9 - -8.0). The unadjusted OR for achieving LDA/remission in patients with moderate/high disease activity at baseline exposed to \u3e /= 2 versus 1 prior anti-TNF was 0.40 (95% CI 0.22-0.73), which was robust to 4 different adjusted models (OR range 0.38-0.44). CONCLUSION: A good clinical response was observed in all patients; however, patients previously treated with 1 anti-TNF, who had lower baseline CDAI and a greater opportunity for clinical improvement compared with patients previously treated with \u3e /= 2 anti-TNF, were more likely to achieve LDA/remission

Impact of Tocilizumab Monotherapy on Clinical and Patient-Reported Quality-of-Life Outcomes in Patients with Rheumatoid Arthritis

INTRODUCTION: Tocilizumab (TCZ) monotherapy has been proven as an effective treatment for rheumatoid arthritis (RA) in clinical trials. However, there are limited data available regarding the effectiveness of TCZ monotherapy in real-world clinical settings in the United States. The objective of this study was to evaluate the impact of TCZ monotherapy on disease activity and patient-reported outcomes (PROs) in a US-based observational cohort of patients with RA seen in routine clinical practice. METHODS: Eligible patients had active RA, no prior use of TCZ, and initiated TCZ as monotherapy. Changes in disease activity and PROs were assessed 1 year after TCZ initiation for the overall cohort and stratified by number of prior tumor necrosis factor inhibitors (TNFis; 0, 1, or \u3e /=2). Primary outcomes were change in Clinical Disease Activity Index (CDAI); change in patient global disease activity, pain, fatigue; and the proportions of patients with improvement in modified Health Assessment Questionnaire (mHAQ), morning stiffness, and EQ-5D. RESULTS: Of 255 eligible TCZ monotherapy initiators, 9.4% were TNFi naive, 36.5% had one prior TNFi, and 54.1% had \u3e /=2 prior TNFis. Clinical and PRO measures indicated that patients were substantially impacted by their disease at baseline. The median decrease in CDAI from baseline to 1 year was 9.8 and median patient global and pain scores improved by 10 mm, indicative of clinically meaningful improvement; the median fatigue score improved by 5 mm. Approximately 26% of patients reported clinically meaningful improvement in mHAQ, 54% experienced improvement in morning stiffness, and 20% to 36% experienced improvement in EQ-5D domains (walking, self-care, usual activities, pain/discomfort, and anxiety/depression). Improvements were similar across TNFi groups. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with active, refractory RA who initiated TCZ monotherapy experienced improvements in both composite disease activity scores and PROs at 1 year, regardless of prior TNFi exposure. FUNDING: Corrona, LLC and Genentech

The rheumatoid arthritis treat-to-target trial: a cluster randomized trial within the Corrona rheumatology network

BACKGROUND: The treat-to-target (T2T) approach to the care of patients with rheumatoid arthritis involves using validated metrics to measure disease activity, frequent follow-up visits for patients with moderate to high disease activity, and escalation of therapy when patients have inadequate therapeutic response as assessed by standard disease activity scores. The study described is a newly launched cluster-randomized behavioral intervention to assess the feasibility and effectiveness of the T2T approach in US rheumatology practices. It is designed to identify patient and provider barriers to implementing T2T management. This initial paper focuses on the novel study design and methods created to provide these insights. METHODS/DESIGN: This trial cluster-randomizes rheumatology practices from the existing Corrona network of private and academic sites rather than patients within sites or individual investigators to provide either T2T or usual care (UC) for qualified patients who meet the 2010 revised American College of Rheumatology criteria for the diagnosis of rheumatoid arthritis and have moderate to high disease activity. Specific medication choices are left to the investigator and patient, rather than being specified in the protocol. Enrollment is expected to be completed by the end of 2013, with 30 practices randomized and enrolling a minimum of 530 patients. During the 12-month follow-up, visits are mandated as frequently as monthly in patients with active disease in the T2T group and every 3 months for the UC group. Safety data are collected at each visit. The coprimary endpoints include a comparison of the proportion of patients achieving low disease activity in the T2T and UC groups and assessment of the feasibility of implementing T2T in rheumatology practices, specifically assessment of the rates of treatment acceleration, frequency of visits, time to next visit conditional on disease activity, and probability of acceleration conditional on disease activity in the 2 groups. DISCUSSION: This cluster-randomized behavioral intervention study will provide valuable insights on the outcomes and feasibility of employing a T2T treatment approach in clinical practice in the United States. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT01407419

Cluster-Randomized Trial of a Behavioral Intervention to Incorporate a Treat-to-Target Approach to Care of US Patients With Rheumatoid Arthritis

OBJECTIVE: To assess the feasibility and efficacy of implementing a treat-to-target approach versus usual care in a US-based cohort of rheumatoid arthritis patients. METHODS: In this behavioral intervention trial, rheumatology practices were cluster-randomized to provide treat-to-target care or usual care. Eligible patients with moderate/high disease activity (Clinical Disease Activity Index [CDAI] score \u3e 10) were followed for 12 months. Both treat-to-target and usual care patients were seen every 3 months. Treat-to-target providers were to have monthly visits with treatment acceleration at a minimum of every 3 months in patients with CDAI score \u3e 10; additional visits and treatment acceleration were at the discretion of usual care providers and patients. Coprimary end points were feasibility, assessed by rate of treatment acceleration conditional on CDAI score \u3e 10, and achievement of low disease activity (LDA; CDAI score \u3c /=10) by an intent-to-treat analysis. RESULTS: A total of 14 practice sites per study arm were included (246 patients receiving treat-to-target and 286 receiving usual care). The groups had similar baseline demographic and clinical characteristics. Rates of treatment acceleration (treat-to-target 47% versus usual care 50%; odds ratio [OR] 0.92 [95% confidence interval (95% CI) 0.64, 1.34]) and achievement of LDA (treat-to-target 57% versus usual care 55%; OR 1.05 [95% CI 0.60, 1.84]) were similar between groups. Treat-to-target providers reported patient reluctance and medication lag time as common barriers to treatment acceleration. CONCLUSION: This study is the first to examine the feasibility and efficacy of a treat-to-target approach in typical US rheumatology practice. Treat-to-target care was not associated with increased likelihood of treatment acceleration or achievement of LDA, and barriers to treatment acceleration were identified

Data Assimilation Enhancements to Air Force Weathers Land Information System

The United States Air Force (USAF) has a proud and storied tradition of enabling significant advancements in the area of characterizing and modeling land state information. 557th Weather Wing (557 WW; DoDs Executive Agent for Land Information) provides routine geospatial intelligence information to warfighters, planners, and decision makers at all echelons and services of the U.S. military, government and intelligence community. 557 WW and its predecessors have been home to the DoDs only operational regional and global land data analysis systems since January 1958. As a trusted partner since 2005, Air Force Weather (AFW) has relied on the Hydrological Sciences Laboratory at NASA/GSFC to lead the interagency scientific collaboration known as the Land Information System (LIS). LIS is an advanced software framework for high performance land surface modeling and data assimilation of geospatial intelligence (GEOINT) information

2020 American College of Rheumatology Guideline for the Management of Gout

Peer Reviewedhttps://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/155484/1/art41247.pdfhttps://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/155484/2/art41247_am.pd

DEAR1 Is a Dominant Regulator of Acinar Morphogenesis and an Independent Predictor of Local Recurrence-Free Survival in Early-Onset Breast Cancer

Ann Killary and colleagues describe a new gene that is genetically altered in breast tumors, and that may provide a new breast cancer prognostic marker