Long-term treatment response in rheumatoid arthritis patients starting adalimumab or etanercept with or without concomitant methotrexate

To observe long-term clinical response and drug survival in a prospective two-year cohort study in rheumatoid arthritis (RA) patients starting adalimumab or etanercept treatment, with or without methotrexate (MTX), after failure of conventional DMARD therapy, including MTX. Disease activity score of 28 joints (DAS28) and Health Assessment Questionnaire (HAQ) were collected of 873 consecutive RA patients, treated with adalimumab or etanercept, prospectively at baseline, 4, 16, 28, 40, 52, 78 and 104 weeks of biological therapy. Sustained minimal disease activity (MDA), DAS28 <2.6 for at least 24 consecutive weeks, biological discontinuation, ΔHAQ and ΔDAS28 were compared between patients treated with or without concomitant MTX for etanercept and adalimumab separately. More patients treated with adalimumab and MTX (42%) achieved sustained MDA than patients without MTX (18%). The hazard ratio (HR) was 2.3 [1.4-3.9]. No significant difference was found in etanercept treatment (with MTX 33% vs. 28% without MTX), HR 1.1 [0.8-1.6]. More patients treated without MTX discontinued treatment than patients with MTX co-treatment in adalimumab (HR 2.1 [1.5-3.0]) and etanercept (HR 1.9 [1.0-3.4]). The mean decrease in DAS28 over time was higher for patients treated with MTX in adalimumab (regression coefficient (RC): 0.57, p <0.001), but was not significantly different in etanercept treatment (RC 0.05, p=0.427). No significant differences were found in ΔHAQ. Treatment discontinuation is lower in patients treated with MTX in both adalimumab and etanercept treatment. However, considering good clinical response, in contrast to etanercept, a synergetic effect of MTX is observed only in adalimumab treatmen

Anti-adalimumab antibodies and adalimumab concentrations in psoriatic arthritis; an association with disease activity at 28 and 52 weeks of follow-up

Objectives To investigate the relationship between antidrug antibodies (ADA), adalimumab concentrations and clinical response in patients with psoriatic arthritis (PsA) during 52 weeks of follow-up. Methods This prospective cohort study included 103 consecutive patients with PsA. Disease Activity Score of 28 joints (DAS28), Erythrocyte Sedimentation Rate, C reactive protein and Psoriasis Area and Severity Index were assessed. Adalimumab concentrations and ADA were measured in serum trough samples, using an ELISA and a radio immunoassay, respectively. Results Adalimumab concentrations were significantly lower at 28 and 52 weeks in patients with detectable ADA compared with patients without detectable ADA (at week 28: 1.3 mg/L (IQR 0.0-3.2) versus 8.7 mg/L (IQR 5.7-11.5), p <0.001; at week 52: 0.9 mg/L (IQR 0.0-2.9) vs 9.4 mg/L (IQR 5.7-12.1), p=0.0001). DAS28 at 28 weeks (2.16 vs 2.95, p=0.023) and 52 weeks (2.19 vs 2.95, p=0.024) showed a significant difference; patients with detectable ADA had a poorer clinical outcome than patients without. Conclusions Patients with detectable ADA had lower adalimumab concentrations and a significantly poorer clinical outcome compared with patients in whom ADA were not detecte

The effect of methotrexate on tumour necrosis factor concentrations in etanercept-treated rheumatoid arthritis patients

Recently, we demonstrated that early low concentrations of circulating, adalimumab-bound TNF in RA patients treated with adalimumab was associated with future anti-drug antibody formation. Furthermore, low TNF was associated with less frequent baseline MTX use. This is remarkable, because of the anti-inflammatory effects of MTX and a potential inhibiting effect on cytokine production. We hypothesized an indirect effect of non-MTX use on low TNF concentrations via immunogenicity. To investigate the effect of MTX on TNF concentrations independent of anti-drug antibody formation, we measured TNF in RA patients treated with etanercept, a drug with low immunogenicity. Methods: TNF was quantified in 186 consecutive etanercept-treated RA patients at baseline and at weeks 4, 16 and 28. The dynamics of TNF during etanercept treatment were compared with dynamics recently published for adalimumab. Results: We demonstrated that TNF concentrations at week 4 did not associate with baseline MTX or remission after 28 weeks. Furthermore, median (interquartile range) TNF increased from <112 (<112-<112) pg/ml at baseline to 548 (344-688) pg/ml at week 4 and remained stable at week 16 and 28 [598 (442-756) and 568 (444-755) pg/ml, respectively]. Conclusion: Circulating TNF did not associate with MTX usage in etanercept-treated patients. This implies that MTX does not have a direct effect on TNF concentrations in circulation and that the association between early low TNF and non-use of MTX for adalimumab is thus most likely due to anti-drug antibody formation

The effect of certolizumab drug concentration and anti-drug antibodies on TNF neutralisation

OBJECTIVES: Tumour necrosis factor (TNF) inhibitors like certolizumab, elicit an immunogenic response leading to the formation of anti-drug antibodies (ADAs). We sought to mechanistically investigate the relationship between certolizumab concentrations, ADAs, and the effective TNF neutralising capacity in sera of rheumatoid arthritis (RA) patients. TNF neutralising capacity of certolizumab was compared to the neutralising capacity of adalimumab. METHODS: Serum samples were collected from 40 consecutive certolizumab-treated RA patients at baseline and 4, 16, 28 and 52 weeks after treatment initiation [Dutch Trial Register NTR (Nederlands Trial Register) Trial NL2824 no. 2965]. Certolizumab concentration and ADA titre were measured with a certolizumab bridging enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) and a drug-tolerant radioimmunoassay (RIA), respectively. TNF neutralisation by certolizumab and adalimumab, in presence or absence of ADAs, was analysed with the TNF-sensitive WEHI bioassay. RESULTS: Despite a high incidence of ADAs during one year of follow-up (65%; 26/40 patients), certolizumab levels of >10 μg/ml were measured in most patients. The capacity for TNF neutralisation highly correlated with certolizumab serum concentration, whereas no association with ADAs was observed. Similar results were obtained for adalimumab. The relative in vitro neutralising potency was higher for certolizumab compared to adalimumab. CONCLUSIONS: Anti-certolizumab antibodies were detected in a large proportion of patients, but in most cases where ADAs were detected, certolizumab was also present in high concentrations, directly correlating with in vitro neutralising capacity. These results indicate that measurement of certolizumab drug levels, rather than ADAs, have direct clinical significance

Comparing a tapering strategy to the standard dosing regimen of TNF inhibitors in rheumatoid arthritis patients with low disease activity

The aim of this study is to compare clinical outcomes, incidence of flares and administered drug reduction between rheumatoid arthritis (RA) patients under TNF inhibitors (TNFi) tapering strategy and RA patients on standard regimen. Two groups of RA patients on TNFi with DAS28 <3.2 were compared: the tapering group (TG: 67 pts from Spain) and the control group with standard therapy regimen (CG: 77 pts from the Netherlands). DAS28 was measured at different time points: visit 0 (prior starting TNFi), visit 1 (prior to start tapering in TG and with DAS28 <3.2 in TG and CG), visit 2 (6 months after visit 1), visit 3 (1 year after visit 1), visit 4 (the last visit available after visit 1) and visit-flare (visit with the worst flare between visit 1 and visit 4). Despite the reduction of administered drug at visit 4 in the TG (interval elongation of 32.8% in infliximab, 52.9% in adalimumab and 52.6% in etanercept), the DAS28 remained similar between groups at the end of the study (DAS28: 2.7±0.9 in TG vs. 2.5±1 in CG, p=0.1). No differences were seen in the number of patients with flares [26/67 (38.9%) in the TG vs. 30/77 (39%) in the CG, p=0.324] and only nineteen out of 136 patients (14%) had anti-drug antibodies at the end of the study. The tapering strategy of TNFi in RA patients result in a reduction of the drug administered, while the disease control is not worse than patients on the standard regime

EULAR points to consider for therapeutic drug monitoring of biopharmaceuticals in inflammatory rheumatic and musculoskeletal diseases

Objective To develop EULAR points-to-consider for therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM) of biopharmaceuticals in inflammatory rheumatic and musculoskeletal diseases (RMDs). Methods The points-to-consider were developed in accordance with EULAR standardised operation procedures by a multidisciplinary task force from eight European countries, based on a systematic literature review and expert consensus. Level of evidence and strength of the points-to-consider were determined, and mean levels of agreement among the task force were calculated using a 10-point rating scale. Results Six overarching principles and 13 points-to-consider were formulated. The level of agreement among the task force for the overarching principles and points-to-consider ranged from 8.4 to 9.9.The overarching principles define TDM and its subtypes, and reinforce the underlying pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic principles, which are relevant to all biopharmaceutical classes. The points-to-consider highlight the clinical utility of the measurement and interpretation of biopharmaceutical blood concentrations and antidrug antibodies in specific clinical scenarios, including factors that influence these parameters. In general, proactive use of TDM is not recommended but reactive TDM could be considered in certain clinical situations. An important factor limiting wider adoption of TDM is the lack of both high quality trials addressing effectiveness and safety of TDM and robust economic evaluation in patients with RMDs. Future research should focus on providing this evidence, as well as on further understanding of pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic characteristics of biopharmaceuticals. Conclusion These points-to-consider are evidence-based and consensus-based statements for the use of TDM of biopharmaceuticals in inflammatory RMDs, addressing the clinical utility of TDM

EULAR points to consider for therapeutic drug monitoring of biopharmaceuticals in inflammatory rheumatic and musculoskeletal diseases

OBJECTIVE: To develop EULAR points-to-consider for therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM) of biopharmaceuticals in inflammatory rheumatic and musculoskeletal diseases (RMDs). METHODS: The points-to-consider were developed in accordance with EULAR standardised operation procedures by a multidisciplinary task force from eight European countries, based on a systematic literature review and expert consensus. Level of evidence and strength of the points-to-consider were determined, and mean levels of agreement among the task force were calculated using a 10-point rating scale. RESULTS: Six overarching principles and 13 points-to-consider were formulated. The level of agreement among the task force for the overarching principles and points-to-consider ranged from 8.4 to 9.9.The overarching principles define TDM and its subtypes, and reinforce the underlying pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic principles, which are relevant to all biopharmaceutical classes. The points-to-consider highlight the clinical utility of the measurement and interpretation of biopharmaceutical blood concentrations and antidrug antibodies in specific clinical scenarios, including factors that influence these parameters. In general, proactive use of TDM is not recommended but reactive TDM could be considered in certain clinical situations. An important factor limiting wider adoption of TDM is the lack of both high quality trials addressing effectiveness and safety of TDM and robust economic evaluation in patients with RMDs. Future research should focus on providing this evidence, as well as on further understanding of pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic characteristics of biopharmaceuticals. CONCLUSION: These points-to-consider are evidence-based and consensus-based statements for the use of TDM of biopharmaceuticals in inflammatory RMDs, addressing the clinical utility of TDM