11 research outputs found

    A comparative clinical study of PF-06410293, a candidate adalimumab biosimilar, and adalimumab reference product (Humira®) in the treatment of active rheumatoid arthritis

    No full text
    Abstract Background This double-blind, randomized, 78-week study evaluated the efficacy, safety, immunogenicity, pharmacokinetics, and pharmacodynamics of PF-06410293, a candidate adalimumab biosimilar, versus adalimumab reference product (Humira®) sourced from the EU (adalimumab-EU) in biologic-naïve patients with active rheumatoid arthritis (RA) despite methotrexate (MTX) (10–25 mg/week). We report results for the first 26 weeks of treatment. Methods Patients with active RA (N = 597) were randomly assigned (1:1) to PF-06410293 or adalimumab-EU, while continuing with MTX treatment. The primary endpoint was American College of Rheumatology 20% improvement (ACR20) at week 12. Therapeutic equivalence was concluded if the two-sided 95% confidence interval (CI) for the ACR20 difference between the two arms was entirely contained within the symmetric equivalence margin (±14%). Additionally, a two-sided 90% CI was calculated by using an asymmetric equivalence margin (−12%, 15%). Secondary efficacy endpoints to week 26 included ACR20/50/70, change from baseline Disease Activity Score based on high-sensitivity C-reactive protein [DAS28–4(CRP)], European League Against Rheumatism (EULAR) response, DAS28–4(CRP) of less than 2.6, and ACR/EULAR remission. QuantiFERON-TB testing was performed at screening and week 26. Results Patients (78.7% of whom were female and whose mean age was 52.5 years) had a mean baseline RA duration of 6.8 years. The mean baseline DAS28–4(CRP) values were 5.9 (PF-06410293) and 6.1 (adalimumab-EU). The observed week-12 ACR20 values were 68.7% (PF-06410293) and 72.7% (adalimumab-EU) in the intention-to-treat population. With non-responder imputation, the treatment difference in week-12 ACR20 was −2.98% and corresponding CIs—95% CI (−10.38%, 4.44%) and 90% CI (−9.25%, 3.28%)—were entirely contained within the equivalence margins (symmetric and asymmetric, respectively). The secondary efficacy endpoints were similar between arms. Over 26 weeks, injection-site reactions occurred in 1.7% versus 2.0%, hypersensitivity events in 4.4% versus 8.4%, pneumonia in 0.7% versus 2.0%, and opportunistic infections in 2.4% versus 1.7% in the PF-06410293 and adalimumab-EU arms, respectively. One death due to myocardial infarction occurred (adalimumab-EU arm). Rates of anti-drug antibody incidence were 44.4% (PF-06410293) and 50.5% (adalimumab-EU). Conclusions The study results demonstrate that efficacy, safety, and immunogenicity of PF-06410293 and adalimumab-EU were similar during the first 26 weeks of treatment in patients with active RA on background MTX. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02480153. First posted on June 24, 2015; EU Clinical Trials Register EudraCT number: 2014-000352-29. Start date: October 27, 2014

    ERN ReCONNET points to consider for treating patients living with autoimmune rheumatic diseases with antiviral therapies and anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibody products

    No full text
    © Copyright Clinical and Experimental Rheumatology 2023Recent studies have shown that people who are immunocompromised may inadvertently play a role in spurring the mutations of the virus that create new variants. This is because some immunocompromised individuals remain at risk of getting COVID-19 despite vaccination, experience more severe disease, are susceptible to being chronically infected and remain contagious for longer if they become infected and considering that immunocompromised individuals represent approximately 2% of the overall population, this aspect should be carefully considered. So far, some autoimmune rheumatic disease (ARD) patients with COVID-19 have been treated with antiviral therapies or anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibody products. However, there is no homogeneous approach to these treatment strategies. This issue was addressed within the European Reference Network (ERN) on Rare and Complex Connective Tissue and Musculoskeletal Diseases (ReCONNET) in a discussion among experts and patient's representatives in the context of the rare and complex connective tissue diseases (rCTDs) covered by the Network. ERN ReCONNET is one of the 24 ERNs launched by the European Commission in 2017 with the aim of tackling low prevalence and rare diseases that require highly specialised treatment and promoting concentration of knowledge and resources through virtual networks involving healthcare providers (HCPs) across the European Union (EU). Considering the urgent need to provide guidance not only to the rCTDs community, but also to the whole ARDs community, a multidisciplinary Task Force, including expert clinicians and European Patient Advocacy Group (ePAG) Advocates, was created in the framework of ERN ReCONNET with the aim of developing overarching principles (OP) and points-to-consider (PtC) on a homogenous approach to treat immunocompromised patients with ARDs (with a particular focus on CTDs) affected by COVID-19 using antiviral therapies and anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibody products. The present work reports the final OP and PtC agreed by the Task Force.info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersio

    The added value of a European Reference Network on rare and complex connective tissue and musculoskeletal diseases: insights after the first 5 years of the ERN ReCONNET.

    Get PDF
    In order to address the main challenges related to the rare diseases (RDs) the European Commission launched the European Reference Networks (ERNs), virtual networks involving healthcare providers (HCPs) across Europe. The mission of the ERNs is to tackle low prevalence and RDs that require highly specialised treatment and a concentration of knowledge and resources. In fact, ERNs offer the potential to give patients and healthcare professionals across the EU access to the best expertise and timely exchange of lifesaving knowledge, trying to make the knowledge travelling more than patients. For this reason, ERNs were established as concrete European infrastructures, and this is particularly crucial in the framework of rare and complex diseases in which no country alone has the whole knowledge and capacity to treat all types of patients.It has been five years since their kick-off launch in Vilnius in 2017. The 24 ERNs have been intensively working on different transversal areas, including patient management, education, clinical practice guidelines, patients' care pathways and many other fundamental topics. The present work is therefore aimed not only at reporting a summary of the main activities and milestones reached so far, but also at celebrating the first 5 years of the ERN on Rare and Complex Connective Tissue and Musculo-skeletal Diseases (ReCONNET), in which the members of the network built together one of the 24 infrastructures that are hopefully going to change the scenario of rare diseases across the EU

    The added value of a European Reference Network on rare and complex connective tissue and musculoskeletal diseases: insights after the first 5 years of the ERN ReCONNET

    No full text
    : In order to address the main challenges related to the rare diseases (RDs) the European Commission launched the European Reference Networks (ERNs), virtual networks involving healthcare providers (HCPs) across Europe. The mission of the ERNs is to tackle low prevalence and RDs that require highly specialised treatment and a concentration of knowledge and resources. In fact, ERNs offer the potential to give patients and healthcare professionals across the EU access to the best expertise and timely exchange of lifesaving knowledge, trying to make the knowledge travelling more than patients. For this reason, ERNs were established as concrete European infrastructures, and this is particularly crucial in the framework of rare and complex diseases in which no country alone has the whole knowledge and capacity to treat all types of patients.It has been five years since their kick-off launch in Vilnius in 2017. The 24 ERNs have been intensively working on different transversal areas, including patient management, education, clinical practice guidelines, patients' care pathways and many other fundamental topics. The present work is therefore aimed not only at reporting a summary of the main activities and milestones reached so far, but also at celebrating the first 5 years of the ERN on Rare and Complex Connective Tissue and Musculo-skeletal Diseases (ReCONNET), in which the members of the network built together one of the 24 infrastructures that are hopefully going to change the scenario of rare diseases across the EU

    A comparison between nailfold capillaroscopy patterns in adulthood in juvenile and adult-onset systemic sclerosis: a EUSTAR exploratory study

    No full text
    Objective: Qualitative capillaroscopy patterns in juvenile- and adult-onset systemic sclerosis (SSc) were studied in adulthood using data from the EULAR Scleroderma Trials and Research (EUSTAR) database. Methods: Data collected between June 2004 and April 2013 were examined with focus on capillaroscopy. In this retrospective exploratory study, series of patients with juvenile-onset SSc were matched with series of adult-onset SSc having the same gender and autoantibody profile. Results: 30 of 123 patientswith juvenile-onset and 2108 of 7133with adult-onset SSc had data on capillaroscopy. Juvenile-onset SSc showed scleroderma pattern more frequently than adult-onset SSc (93.3% and 88%). The OR was 2.44 and 95% CI 0.57–10.41. An active scleroderma pattern was present in 58% of juvenile- and 61% of adult-onset SSc. The OR was 0.91 and 95% CI 0.28–2.93. The late scleroderma pattern was present in 61% of juvenile- and 55.5% of adult-onset SSc. The OR was 1.06 and 95% CI 0.34–3.56. Conclusion: This is the first exploratory study on the comparison of capillaroscopy between juvenile- and adult-onset SSc in adulthood. Juvenile-onset SSc had an increase prevalence of scleroderma pattern, but a similar distribution of the three patterns was suggested. Further studies are needed to define this issue. © 2015 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved

    Outcomes of patients with systemic sclerosis treated with rituximab in contemporary practice: a prospective cohort study.

    No full text
    Objective To assess the safety and efficacy of rituximab in systemic sclerosis (SSc) in clinical practice. Methods We performed a prospective study including patients with SSc from the European Scleroderma Trials and Research (EUSTAR) network treated with rituximab and matched with untreated patients with SSc. The main outcomes measures were adverse events, skin fibrosis improvement, lung fibrosis worsening and steroids use among propensity score-matched patients treated or not with rituximab. Results 254 patients were treated with rituximab, in 58% for lung and in 32% for skin involvement. After a median follow-up of 2 years, about 70% of the patients had no side effect. Comparison of treated patients with 9575 propensity-score matched patients showed that patients treated with rituximab were more likely to have skin fibrosis improvement (22.7 vs 14.03 events per 100 person-years; OR: 2.79 [1.47-5.32]; p=0.002). Treated patients did not have significantly different rates of decrease in forced vital capacity (FVC)>10% (OR: 1.03 [0.55-1.94]; p=0.93) nor in carbon monoxide diffusing capacity (DLCO) decrease. Patients having received rituximab were more prone to stop or decrease steroids (OR: 2.34 [1.56-3.53], p<0.0001). Patients treated concomitantly with mycophenolate mofetil had a trend for better outcomes as compared with patients receiving rituximab alone (delta FVC: 5.22 [0.83-9.62]; p=0.019 as compared with controls vs 3 [0.66-5.35]; p=0.012). Conclusion Rituximab use was associated with a good safety profile in this large SSc-cohort. Significant change was observed on skin fibrosis, but not on lung. However, the limitation is the observational design. The potential stabilisation of lung fibrosis by rituximab has to be addressed by a randomised trial
    corecore