Efficacy, tolerability and safety of biologic therapy in rheumatoid disease: patient considerations

Rheumatoid arthritis (RA) is a systemic inflammatory disease in which chronic inflammation leads to joint destruction and extra-articular complications. Early and effective inhibition of inflammation is critical in order to prevent the progressive joint damage that occurs rapidly after onset of the disease. In the past, treatment for this purpose was limited to conventional disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs), which were often suboptimal. Within the last decade however, the development of biologic therapies, targeted against cytokines and cells involved in the inflammatory process, has revolutionized the management of RA. Disease remission is now an achievable goal in newly diagnosed patients. Since the advent of the first tumor necrosis factor-α inhibitor in 1999, other biologics have proved necessary as individuals respond to varying degrees with different therapies. Several are now available for the treatment of patients with RA that remains active despite DMARD treatment. This article reviews the evidence, over the last decade, of the efficacy and safety of biologic therapies used in this context, and the recent clinical data supporting the use of biologic therapy earlier in the disease process as first-line therapy

Abatacept in the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis

T-cell biology has regained importance in the pathogenesis of rheumatoid arthritis. Despite the significant improvements associated with the introduction of tumor necrosis factor-α blockade, reasonable proportions of failures and suboptimal responses have been reported, necessitating a search for alternative targeted therapies. This has included drug therapy designed to interrupt T-cell activation via the co-stimulation pathway. Abatacept is a recombinant fusion protein that blocks the co-stimulatory signal mediated by the CD28-CD80/86 pathway, which is required for T-cell activation. Several clinical trials have confirmed the safety and efficacy of this drug in the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis. This review summarizes the clinical data supporting this line of treatment and considers the safety and efficacy data from phase II and III trials

Discordance between the predictors of clinical and imaging remission in patients with early rheumatoid arthritis in clinical practice: implications for the use of ultrasound within a treatment to target strategy

Objective: To assess the prevalence, relationship between and predictors of clinical and imaging remission in early rheumatoid arthritis (RA), achieved with treat-to-target management in clinical practice. Methods: A prospective observational study was conducted in patients with new-onset RA. The treatment target was remission by disease activity score (DAS28-CRP<2.6). Twelve month outcomes included DAS28-CRP remission, DAS44-CRP remission, ACR/EULAR Boolean remission (BR) and absent or absent/minimal power Doppler activity (PDA) on ultrasound (US) of 26 joints (total PDA score=0 or ≤1, respectively). Logistic regression was conducted to identify baseline predictors of these outcomes. Results: Of 105 patients with complete 12-month data, the rate of DAS28-CRP remission was 43%, DAS44-CRP remission was 39%, BR was 14%, absent PDA was 40% and absent/minimal PDA was 57%. Amongst patients achieving clinical remission defined by DAS28-CRP, DAS44-CRP or BR, absence of PDA was observed in 42%, 44% and 40%, respectively; absent/minimal PDA was detected in 62%, 66% and 67%, respectively. On multivariable analysis, shorter symptom duration, male gender, fewer tender joints and lower disability were associated with the clinical remission definitions. Lack of osteoarthritis predicted absence of PDA and lower total baseline PDA predicted absent/minimal PDA. Conclusion: DAS28-CRP remission and absence of PDA were observed in almost half of patients, but less than a quarter achieved both. Achievement of BR was rare. The low agreement between any of the clinical and imaging outcomes and differences in their predictors highlight the complex interaction between symptoms and synovitis, with implications for treat-to-target management. Long-term follow-up should determine the most appropriate target

Efficacy and safety of filgotinib in methotrexate-naive patients with rheumatoid arthritis with poor prognostic factors: post hoc analysis of FINCH 3

OBJECTIVE: This analysis evaluated efficacy and safety of filgotinib, a Janus-associated kinase 1-preferential inhibitor, in methotrexate (MTX)-naive patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) with multiple poor prognostic factors (PPFs). METHODS: This was a post hoc analysis of the phase III, randomised, double-blind, active-controlled, FINCH 3 study (clinicaltrials.gov NCT02886728). Patients received once-daily oral filgotinib 200 or 100 mg plus once-weekly oral MTX ≤20 mg (FIL200 + MTX and FIL100 + MTX), filgotinib 200 mg monotherapy (FIL200), or oral MTX monotherapy (MTX-mono) for up to 52 weeks. PPFs investigated were seropositivity for rheumatoid factor or anticyclic citrullinated peptide antibodies, high-sensitivity C reactive protein (CRP) ≥4 mg/L, Disease Activity Score in 28 joints with CRP (DAS28(CRP)) >5.1, and presence of erosions. Filgotinib efficacy and safety in patients with all four PPFs at baseline were explored versus MTX-mono within this subgroup and compared informally with the overall population. RESULTS: Of 1249 patients in FINCH 3, 510 (40.8%) had all PPFs. Efficacy of FIL200 + MTX among these patients was comparable to the overall population, with higher rates of 20%/50%/70% improvement from baseline by American College of Rheumatology criteria, DAS28(CRP) <2.6, and remission; greater improvement in physical function and pain; and better inhibition of structural damage relative to MTX-mono. FIL100 + MTX and FIL200 were not consistently more efficacious versus MTX-mono. Safety of filgotinib in patients with PPFs was comparable to the overall population; no new safety signals were observed. CONCLUSION: FIL200 + MTX efficacy and safety in patients with multiple PPFs were similar to the overall population

Access to the next wave of biologic therapies (Abatacept and Tocilizumab) for the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis in England and Wales: Addressing treatment outside the current NICE guidance

Patients in England and Wales with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) receive treatment from the National Health Service (NHS) with therapies approved by the European Medicines Agency (EMA), under guidance from the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE). This document overviews the current NICE guidelines for the treatment of RA and identifies scenarios when such guidance may not represent the optimum management strategy for individual patients. Specifically, we consider the use of tocilizumab or abatacept as the most appropriate treatments for some patients. In such scenarios, it may be possible for the clinician to secure access to the required therapy through an application procedure known as an ‘individual funding request’, the process of which is described in detail here. At present, it is unclear the extent to which the proposed reform of the NHS will affect the role of NICE in providing guidance and setting standards of care. Until the full impact of the proposed changes are realized, individual funding requests will remain a valuable way of securing the optimal treatment for all patients suffering from RA

The PREdictor of MAlnutrition in Systemic Sclerosis (PREMASS) Score:A Combined Index to Predict 12 Months Onset of Malnutrition in Systemic Sclerosis

Objective: Malnutrition is a severe complication in Systemic Sclerosis (SSc) and it is associated with significant mortality. Notwithstanding, there is no defined screening or clinical pathway for patients, which is hampering effective management and limiting the opportunity for early intervention. Here we aim to identify a combined index predictive of malnutrition at 12 months using clinical data and specific serum adipokines. Methods: This was an international, multicentre observational study involving 159 SSc patients in two independent discovery (n = 98) and validation (n = 61) cohorts. Besides routine clinical and serum data at baseline and 12 months, Malnutrition Universal Screening Tool (MUST) score and serum concentration of leptin and adiponectin were measured for each participant at baseline. The endpoint of malnutrition was defined according to European Society of Clinical Nutrition and Metabolism (ESPEN) recommendation. Significant parameters from univariate analysis were tested in logistic regression analysis to identify the predictive index of malnutrition in the derivation cohort. Results: The onset of malnutrition at 12 months correlated with adiponectin, leptin and their ratio (A/L), MUST, clinical subset, disease duration, Scl70 and Forced Vital Capaciy (FVC). Logistic regression analysis defined the formula: −2.13 + (A/L*0.45) + (Scl70*0.28) as the best PREdictor of MAlnutrition in SSc (PREMASS) (AUC = 0.96; 95% CI 0.93, 0.99). PREMASS 62% and negative predictive value (NPV) > 97% for malnutrition at 12 months. Conclusion: PREMASS is a feasible index which has shown very good performance in two independent cohorts for predicting malnutrition at 12 months in SSc. The implementation of PREMASS could aid both in clinical management and clinical trial stratification/enrichment to target malnutrition in SSc

Prevalence of comorbidities in rheumatoid arthritis and evaluation of their monitoring: results of an international, cross-sectional study (COMORA)

Background: Patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) are at increased risk of developing comorbid conditions.&lt;p&gt;&lt;/p&gt; Objectives: To evaluate the prevalence of comorbidities and compare their management in RA patients from different countries worldwide.&lt;p&gt;&lt;/p&gt; Methods Study design: international, cross-sectional. Patients: consecutive RA patients. Data collected: demographics, disease characteristics (activity, severity, treatment), comorbidities (cardiovascular, infections, cancer, gastrointestinal, pulmonary, osteoporosis and psychiatric disorders).&lt;p&gt;&lt;/p&gt; Results: Of 4586 patients recruited in 17 participating countries, 3920 were analysed (age, 56±13 years; disease duration, 10±9 years (mean±SD); female gender, 82%; DAS28 (Disease Activity Score using 28 joints)–erythrocyte sedimentation rate, 3.7±1.6 (mean±SD); Health Assessment Questionnaire, 1.0±0.7 (mean±SD); past or current methotrexate use, 89%; past or current use of biological agents, 39%. The most frequently associated diseases (past or current) were: depression, 15%; asthma, 6.6%; cardiovascular events (myocardial infarction, stroke), 6%; solid malignancies (excluding basal cell carcinoma), 4.5%; chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, 3.5%. High intercountry variability was observed for both the prevalence of comorbidities and the proportion of subjects complying with recommendations for preventing and managing comorbidities. The systematic evaluation of comorbidities in this study detected abnormalities in vital signs, such as elevated blood pressure in 11.2%, and identified conditions that manifest as laboratory test abnormalities, such as hyperglycaemia in 3.3% and hyperlipidaemia in 8.3%.&lt;p&gt;&lt;/p&gt; Conclusions: Among RA patients, there is a high prevalence of comorbidities and their risk factors. In this multinational sample, variability among countries was wide, not only in prevalence but also in compliance with recommendations for preventing and managing these comorbidities. Systematic measurement of vital signs and laboratory testing detects otherwise unrecognised comorbid conditions.&lt;p&gt;&lt;/p&gt

Development of EULAR recommendations for the reporting of clinical trial extension studies in rheumatology

Objectives: Our initiative aimed to produce recommendations on post-randomised controlled trial (RCT) trial extension studies (TES) reporting using European League Against Rheumatism (EULAR) standard operating procedures in order to achieve more meaningful output and standardisation of reports. Methods: We formed a task force of 22 participants comprising RCT experts, clinical epidemiologists and patient representatives. A two-stage Delphi survey was conducted to discuss the domains of evaluation of a TES and definitions. A ‘0–10’ agreement scale assessed each domain and definition. The resulting set of recommendations was further refined and a final vote taken for task force acceptance. Results: Seven key domains and individual components were evaluated and led to agreed recommendations including definition of a TES (100% agreement), minimal data necessary (100% agreement), method of data analysis (agreement mean (SD) scores ranging between 7.9 (0.84) and 9.0 (2.16)) and reporting of results as well as ethical issues. Key recommendations included reporting of absolute numbers at each stage from the RCT to TES with reasons given for drop-out at each stage, and inclusion of a flowchart detailing change in numbers at each stage and focus (mean (SD) agreement 9.9 (0.36)). A final vote accepted the set of recommendations. Conclusions: This EULAR task force provides recommendations for implementation in future TES to ensure a standardised approach to reporting. Use of this document should provide the rheumatology community with a more accurate and meaningful output from future TES, enabling better understanding and more confident application in clinical practice towards improving patient outcomes

Abatacept in individuals at high risk of rheumatoid arthritis (APIPPRA): a randomised, double-blind, multicentre, parallel, placebo-controlled, phase 2b clinical trial

Background: Individuals with serum antibodies to citrullinated protein antigens (ACPA), rheumatoid factor, and symptoms, such as inflammatory joint pain, are at high risk of developing rheumatoid arthritis. In the arthritis prevention in the pre-clinical phase of rheumatoid arthritis with abatacept (APIPPRA) trial, we aimed to evaluate the feasibility, efficacy, and acceptability of treating high risk individuals with the T-cell co-stimulation modulator abatacept. // Methods: The APIPPRA study was a randomised, double-blind, multicentre, parallel, placebo-controlled, phase 2b clinical trial done in 28 hospital-based early arthritis clinics in the UK and three in the Netherlands. Participants (aged ≥18 years) at risk of rheumatoid arthritis positive for ACPA and rheumatoid factor with inflammatory joint pain were recruited. Exclusion criteria included previous episodes of clinical synovitis and previous use of corticosteroids or disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs. Participants were randomly assigned (1:1) using a computer-generated permuted block randomisation (block sizes of 2 and 4) stratified by sex, smoking, and country, to 125 mg abatacept subcutaneous injections weekly or placebo for 12 months, and then followed up for 12 months. Masking was achieved by providing four kits (identical in appearance and packaging) with pre-filled syringes with coded labels of abatacept or placebo every 3 months. The primary endpoint was the time to development of clinical synovitis in three or more joints or rheumatoid arthritis according to American College of Rheumatology and European Alliance of Associations for Rheumatology 2010 criteria, whichever was met first. Synovitis was confirmed by ultrasonography. Follow-up was completed on Jan 13, 2021. All participants meeting the intention-to-treat principle were included in the analysis. This trial was registered with EudraCT (2013–003413–18). // Findings: Between Dec 22, 2014, and Jan 14, 2019, 280 individuals were evaluated for eligibility and, of 213 participants, 110 were randomly assigned to abatacept and 103 to placebo. During the treatment period, seven (6%) of 110 participants in the abatacept group and 30 (29%) of 103 participants in the placebo group met the primary endpoint. At 24 months, 27 (25%) of 110 participants in the abatacept group had progressed to rheumatoid arthritis, compared with 38 (37%) of 103 in the placebo group. The estimated proportion of participants remaining arthritis-free at 12 months was 92·8% (SE 2·6) in the abatacept group and 69·2% (4·7) in the placebo group. Kaplan–Meier arthritis-free survival plots over 24 months favoured abatacept (log-rank test p=0·044). The difference in restricted mean survival time between groups was 53 days (95% CI 28–78; p<0·0001) at 12 months and 99 days (95% CI 38–161; p=0·0016) at 24 months in favour of abatacept. During treatment, abatacept was associated with improvements in pain scores, functional wellbeing, and quality-of-life measurements, as well as low scores of subclinical synovitis by ultrasonography, compared with placebo. However, the effects were not sustained at 24 months. Seven serious adverse events occurred in the abatacept group and 11 in the placebo group, including one death in each group deemed unrelated to treatment. // Interpretation: Therapeutic intervention during the at-risk phase of rheumatoid arthritis is feasible, with acceptable safety profiles. T-cell co-stimulation modulation with abatacept for 12 months reduces progression to rheumatoid arthritis, with evidence of sustained efficacy beyond the treatment period, and with no new safety signals. // Funding: Bristol Myers Squibb