19 research outputs found

    Utility of a simplified ultrasonography scoring system among patients with rheumatoid arthritis: A multicenter cohort study

    Get PDF
    ABSTRACT: We aimed to evaluate the utility of a simplified ultrasonography (US) scoring system, which is desired in daily clinical practice, among patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) receiving biological/targeted synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs).A total of 289 Japanese patients with RA who were started on tumor necrosis factor inhibitors, abatacept, tocilizumab, or Janus kinase inhibitors between June 2013 and April 2019 at one of the 15 participating rheumatology centers were reviewed. We performed US assessment of articular synovia over 22 joints among bilateral wrist and finger joints, and the 22-joint (22j)-GS and 22-joint (22j)-PD scores were evaluated as an indicator of US activity using the sum of the GS and PD scores, respectively.The top 6 most affected joints included the bilateral wrist and second/third metacarpophalangeal joints. Therefore, 6-joint (6j)-GS and -PD scores were defined as the sum of the GS and PD scores from the 6 synovial sites over the aforementioned 6 joints, respectively. Although the 22j- or 6j-US scores were significantly correlated with DAS28-ESR or -CRP scores, the correlations were weak. Conversely, 6j-US scores were significantly and strongly correlated with 22j-US scores not only at baseline but also after therapy initiation.Using a multicenter cohort data, our results indicated that a simplified US scoring system could be adequately tolerated during any disease course among patients with RA receiving biological/targeted synthetic DMARDs

    Tofacitinib versus tocilizumab in the treatment of biological-naïve or previous biological-failure patients with methotrexate-refractory active rheumatoid arthritis

    No full text
    Objectives To compare effectiveness between tofacitinib and tocilizumab treatments for biological disease-modifying antirheumatic drug (bDMARD)-naïve patients or previous bDMARD-failure patients with active rheumatoid arthritis (RA) refractory to methotrexate (MTX).Methods We used two ongoing real-world registries of patients with RA who had first started tofacitinib or tocilizumab between August 2013 and February 2019 at our institutions. Clinical disease activity index (CDAI)-based improvements at 12 months were used for comparisons between tofacitinib and tocilizumab treatments, separately for bDMARD-naïve and previous bDMARD-failure patients.Results A total of 464 patients with RA with high or moderate CDAI were enrolled (247 with tofacitinib and 217 with tocilizumab). After adjustments for treatment-selection bias by propensity score matching, we showed that tofacitinib was more likely to induce and maintain ≥85% improvement in CDAI (CDAI85), CDAI70 and remission at 12 months compared with tocilizumab in bDMARD-naïve patients. After adjusting for concurrent use of MTX and prednisolone, the ORs of tofacitinib versus tocilizumab were 3.88 (95% CI 1.87 to 8.03) for CDAI85, 2.89 (95% CI 1.43 to 5.84) for CDAI70 and 3.31 (95% CI 1.69 to 6.48) for remission. These effects were not observed in bDMARD-failure patients. In tofacitinib treatment for bDMARD-failure patients, the number of previously failed bDMARD classes was not associated with CDAI-based improvements. The rate of overall adverse events was similar between both treatments. Similar ORs were obtained from patients adjusted by inverse probability of treatment weighting.Conclusions Compared with tocilizumab, tofacitinib can induce greater improvements during the first 12-month treatment in bDMARD-naïve patients, but this difference was not observed in previous bDMARD-failure patients

    Factors Associated with Myelosuppression Related to Low-Dose Methotrexate Therapy for Inflammatory Rheumatic Diseases.

    No full text
    OBJECTIVE:Severe myelosuppression is a serious concern in the management of rheumatic disease patients receiving methotrexate (MTX) therapy. This study was intended to explore factors associated with the development of MTX-related myelosuppression and its disease severity. METHODS:We retrospectively examined a total of 40 cases of MTX-related myelosuppression that had been filed in the registries of participating rheumatology and hematology divisions. Data before onset were compared with those of 120 controls matched for age and sex. Cytopenia was graded according to the National Cancer Institute criteria for adverse events. Data before and at onset were compared between the severe and non-severe groups. RESULTS:Non-use of folic acid supplements, concurrent medications, and low renal function were significantly associated with the development of myelosuppression (p < 0.001, p < 0.001, and p = 0.002, respectively). In addition, significantly lower MTX dosages, higher blood cell counts, and lower hemoglobin levels were seen in the myelosuppression group (p < 0.001). No patients exhibited leukocytopenia, neutropenia, or thrombocytopenia in routine blood monitoring taken within the past month. One-fourth developed myelosuppression within the first two months (an early-onset period). Myelosuppression was severe in approximately 40% of patients. Hypoalbuminemia and non-use of folic acid supplements were significantly associated with the severity of pancytopenia (p = 0.001 and 0.008, respectively). Besides these two factors, early onset and the use of lower doses of MTX were significantly associated with the severity of neutropenia (p = 0.003, 0.007, 0.003, and 0.002, respectively). CONCLUSIONS:Myelosuppression can occur abruptly at any time during low-dose MTX therapy, but severe neutropenia is more likely to occur in the early-onset period of this therapy. Contrary to our expectations, disease severity was not dependent on MTX doses. Serum albumin levels and folic acid supplementation are the important factors affecting the severity of MTX-related pancytopenia and neutropenia

    Comparative risk of hospitalized infection between biological agents in rheumatoid arthritis patients: A multicenter retrospective cohort study in Japan.

    No full text
    OBJECTIVE:Knowing the risk of hospitalized infection associated with individual biological agents is an important factor in selecting the best treatment option for patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA). This study examined the comparative risk of hospitalized infection between biological agents in a routine care setting. METHODS:We used data for all RA patients who had first begun biological therapy at rheumatology divisions of participating community hospitals in Japan between January 2009 and December 2014. New treatment episodes with etanercept, infliximab, adalimumab, abatacept, or tocilizumab were included. Patients were allowed to contribute multiple treatment episodes with different biological agents. Incidence rates (IRs) of hospitalized infection during the first year of follow-up were examined. Cox regression analysis was used to calculate hazard ratios (HRs) for overall hospitalized infection and for pulmonary hospitalized infection, adjusting for possible confounders. RESULTS:A total of 1596 new treatment episodes were identified. The incidence of overall hospitalized infection during the first year was 86 with 1239 person-years (PYs), yielding a crude IR of 6.9 per 100 PYs (95% confidence interval [CI], 5.6-8.6). After correction for confounders, no significant difference in risk of hospitalized infection was observed between treatment groups: adjusted HRs (95% CI) were 1.54 (0.78-3.04) for infliximab, 1.72 (0.88-3.34) for adalimumab, 1.11 (0.55-2.21) for abatacept, and 1.02 (0.55-1.87) for tocilizumab compared with etanercept. Patient-specific factors such as age, RA functional class, body mass index (BMI), prednisolone use, and chronic lung disease contributed more to the risk of hospitalized infection than specific biological agents. The incidence of pulmonary hospitalized infection was 50 and a crude IR of 4.0 per 100 PYs (95% CI, 3.1-5.3). After adjustment for confounders, adalimumab had a significantly higher HR for pulmonary hospitalized infection compared with tocilizumab: an adjusted HR (95% CI) was 4.43 (1.72-11.37) for adalimumab. BMI, prednisolone use, diabetes mellitus, and chronic lung disease were also significant factors associated with the risk of pulmonary hospitalized infection. CONCLUSIONS:The magnitude of the risk of overall hospitalized infection was not determined by the type of biological agents, and patient-specific risk factors had more impact on the risk of hospitalized infection. For pulmonary hospitalized infections, the use of adalimumab was significantly associated with a greater risk of this complication than tocilizumab use
    corecore