Rivaroxaban in antiphospholipid syndrome (RAPS) protocol: a prospective, randomized controlled phase II/III clinical trial of rivaroxaban versus warfarin in patients with thrombotic antiphospholipid syndrome, with or without SLE

Introduction: The current mainstay of the treatment of thrombotic antiphospholipid syndrome (APS) is long-term anticoagulation with vitamin K antagonists (VKAs) such as warfarin. Non-VKA oral anticoagulants (NOACs), which include rivaroxaban, have been shown to be effective and safe compared with warfarin for the treatment of venous thromboembolism (VTE) in major phase III prospective, randomized controlled trials (RCTs), but the results may not be directly generalizable to patients with APS. Aims: The primary aim is to demonstrate, in patients with APS and previous VTE, with or without systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE), that the intensity of anticoagulation achieved with rivaroxaban is not inferior to that of warfarin. Secondary aims are to compare rates of recurrent thrombosis, bleeding and the quality of life in patients on rivaroxaban with those on warfarin. Methods: Rivaroxaban in antiphospholipid syndrome (RAPS) is a phase II/III prospective non-inferiority RCT in which eligible patients with APS, with or without SLE, who are on warfarin, target international normalized ratio (INR) 2.5 for previous VTE, will be randomized either to continue warfarin (standard of care) or to switch to rivaroxaban. Intensity of anticoagulation will be assessed using thrombin generation (TG) testing, with the primary outcome the percentage change in endogenous thrombin potential (ETP) from randomization to day 42. Other TG parameters, markers of in vivo coagulation activation, prothrombin fragment 1.2, thrombin antithrombin complex and D-dimer, will also be assessed. Discussion: If RAPS demonstrates i) that the anticoagulant effect of rivaroxaban is not inferior to that of warfarin and ii) the absence of any adverse effects that cause concern with regard to the use of rivaroxaban, this would provide sufficient supporting evidence to make rivaroxaban a standard of care for the treatment of APS patients with previous VTE, requiring a target INR of 2.5

Rivaroxaban versus warfarin to treat patients with thrombotic antiphospholipid syndrome, with or without systemic lupus erythematosus (RAPS): a randomised, controlled, open-label, phase 2/3, non-inferiority trial.

BACKGROUND: Rivaroxaban is established for the treatment and secondary prevention of venous thromboembolism, but whether it is useful in patients with antiphospholipid syndrome is uncertain. METHODS: This randomised, controlled, open-label, phase 2/3, non-inferiority trial, done in two UK hospitals, included patients with antiphospholipid syndrome who were taking warfarin for previous venous thromboembolism, with a target international normalised ratio of 2·5. Patients were randomly assigned 1:1 to continue with warfarin or receive 20 mg oral rivaroxaban daily. Randomisation was done centrally, stratified by centre and patient type (with vs without systemic lupus erythematosus). The primary outcome was percentage change in endogenous thrombin potential (ETP) from randomisation to day 42, with non-inferiority set at less than 20% difference from warfarin in mean percentage change. Analysis was by modified intention to treat. Other thrombin generation parameters, thrombosis, and bleeding were also assessed. Treatment effect was measured as the ratio of rivaroxaban to warfarin for thrombin generation. This trial is registered with the ISRCTN registry, number ISRCTN68222801. FINDINGS: Of 116 patients randomised between June 5, 2013, and Nov 11, 2014, 54 who received rivaroxaban and 56 who received warfarin were assessed. At day 42, ETP was higher in the rivaroxaban than in the warfarin group (geometric mean 1086 nmol/L per min, 95% CI 957-1233 vs 548, 484-621, treatment effect 2·0, 95% CI 1·7-2·4, p<0·0001). Peak thrombin generation was lower in the rivaroxaban group (56 nmol/L, 95% CI 47-66 vs 86 nmol/L, 72-102, treatment effect 0·6, 95% CI 0·5-0·8, p=0·0006). No thrombosis or major bleeding were seen. Serious adverse events occurred in four patients in each group. INTERPRETATION: ETP for rivaroxaban did not reach the non-inferiority threshold, but as there was no increase in thrombotic risk compared with standard-intensity warfarin, this drug could be an effective and safe alternative in patients with antiphospholipid syndrome and previous venous thromboembolism

Rivaroxaban limits complement activation compared with warfarin in antiphospholipid syndrome patients with venous thromboembolism

Background: Complement activation may play a major role in the pathogenesis of thrombotic antiphospholipid syndrome (APS). Coagulation proteases such as factor Xa can activate complement proteins. Aims: To establish whether rivaroxaban, a direct factor Xa inhibitor, limits complement activation compared to warfarin in APS patients with previous venous thromboembolism (VTE). Methods: 111 APS patients with previous VTE, on warfarin target INR 2.5, had blood samples taken at baseline and at day 42 after randomisation in the RAPS (Rivaroxaban in Antiphospholipid Syndrome) trial. Fifty-six patients remained on warfarin and 55 switched to rivaroxaban. Fifty-five normal controls (NC) were also studied. Markers of complement activation (C3a, C5a, terminal complement complex (SC5b-9) and Bb fragment), were assessed. Results APS patients had significantly higher complement activation markers compared to NC at both time points irrespective of the anticoagulant. There were no differences between the two patient groups at baseline, or patients remaining on warfarin at day 42. In 55 patients randomised to rivaroxaban, C3a, C5a and SC5b-9 were significantly lower at day 42; median (ng/mL) [confidence interval] 64 [29-125] vs 83 [35-147], 9 [2–15] vs 12 [4 -18] and 171 [56-245] vs 201 [66-350] respectively, but levels of Bb were unchanged. There were no correlations between rivaroxaban levels and complement activation markers. Conclusions: APS patients with previous VTE on warfarin exhibit significantly increased complement activation, which is likely to occur via the classical pathway, and is decreased by rivaroxaban administration. Rivaroxaban may therefore potentially provide benefit additional to its anticoagulant effect in this patient group by limiting complement activation

Pregnancy and reproduction in autoimmune rheumatic diseases

Despite evidence for the important role of oestrogens in the aetiology and pathophysiology of chronic immune/inflammatory diseases, the previous view of an unequivocal beneficial effect of oestrogens on RA compared with a detrimental effect on SLE has to be reconsidered. Likewise, the long-held belief that RA remits in the majority of pregnant patients has been challenged, and shows that only half of the patients experience significant improvement when objective disease activity measurements are applied. Pregnancies in patients with SLE are mostly successful when well planned and monitored interdisciplinarily, whereas a small proportion of women with APS still have adverse pregnancy outcomes in spite of the standard treatment. New prospective studies indicate better outcomes for pregnancies in women with rare diseases such as SSc and vasculitis. Fertility problems are not uncommon in patients with rheumatic disease and need to be considered in both genders. Necessary therapy, shortly before or during the pregnancy, demands taking into account the health of both mother and fetus. Long-term effects of drugs on offspring exposed in utero or during lactation is a new area under study as well as late effects of maternal rheumatic disease on childre

Numerical scoring for the Classic BILAG index

Objective. To develop an additive numerical scoring scheme for the Classic BILAG index

Understanding the information needs of women with rheumatoid arthritis concerning pregnancy, post-natal care and early parenting: A mixed-methods study

© 2015 Ackerman et al. Background: Although women with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) face a number of challenges in negotiating the journey to parenthood, no studies have explored the information needs of women with RA in relation to their childbearing years. This study aimed to determine the need for (and preferred mode/s of delivery of) information regarding pregnancy, post-natal care and early parenting among women with RA. Methods: Interviews and focus groups were conducted with 27 women with RA who were pregnant in the last 5 years, currently pregnant or planning pregnancy. Verbatim transcripts were analysed using both inductive and deductive approaches. Two validated instruments were used to quantify information needs and preferences: the Educational Needs Assessment Tool (ENAT, range 0-156, higher scores indicate higher educational needs) and the Autonomy Preference Index (API, range 0-100, higher scores indicate stronger preferences). Results: Lack of information about medication safety, access to physical/emotional support services and practical strategies for coping with daily challenges related to parenting were the most prominent of the six key themes identified. Rheumatologists were the primary source for information regarding treatment decisions while arthritis consumer organisations were perceived as critical 'resource hubs'. There was strong preference for information delivered electronically, especially among rural participants. Quantitative outcomes supported the qualitative findings; on average, participants reported high educational needs (mean ENAT score 97.2, SD 30.8) and API scores indicated that desire for information (mean 89.8, SD 5.6) was greater than the need for involvement in treatment decision-making (mean 68.4, SD 8.2). Conclusions: Many women with RA struggle to find adequate information on pregnancy planning, pregnancy and early parenting in relation to their chronic condition, and there is a clear need to develop accessible information that is consumer-focused and evidence-based. Although most participants trusted their rheumatologist as their primary information source, there was consistent demand for more information, particularly regarding the safety of RA medications during pregnancy and breastfeeding, and the importance of learning from other women's personal experiences was strongly emphasised