Persistencia a largo plazo de agentes biológicos en el tratamiento de pacientes con Artritis Reumatoidea: una revisión sistemática de la literatura

La persistencia en el tratamiento es un marcador subrogante de éxito de tratamiento a largo plazo. Objetivo: evaluar la persistencia de los agentes biológicos utilizados para el tratamiento de pacientes con artritis reumatoidea (AR) a un tiempo de 5 años y determinar las principales causas asociadas a persistencia o discontinuación.  Material y métodos: se realizó una revisión sistemática de la literatura (RSL), según las recomendaciones PRISMA, en las bases de datos Pubmed, Cochrane y Lilacs, y estudios presentados en los congresos ACR, EULAR, PANLAR (2018/2019) hasta enero 2020. Dos revisoras independientes, evaluaron todas las publicaciones identificadas, por título y abstract y por full text, de acuerdo a la metodología PICO. Los criterios de elegibilidad fueron estudios de pacientes ≥ 18 años con diagnóstico de AR, en tratamiento con agentes biológicos, que midieran persistencia/discontinuación en un período de tiempo igual o superior a 5 años y que estuvieran en idioma inglés o español. En el caso de falta de acuerdo entre las dos revisoras, un tercer revisor fue consultado. La información extraída fue analizada mediante estadística descriptiva, se calculó el porcentaje promedio de persistencia de cada agente biológico a los 5 años.

Effect of nocturnal ventilation on the occurrence of Botrytis cinerea in Mediterranean unheated tomato greenhouses

Botrytis cinerea is the causal agent of grey mould disease which is one of the most important diseases affecting tomato crops in unheated greenhouses. Nocturnal ventilation is a technique that can be used to reduce relative humidity inside unheated greenhouses. The main objectives of this research were to investigate the effect of ventilation management on the environmental conditions and on the disease severity, to develop and validate a model which could predict disease severity and to present a warning system. Experiments were conducted in two plastic greenhouses. Two natural ventilation treatments were randomly assigned to the greenhouses. One was nocturnal ventilation (NV), with the vents open during the day and night, while the other was classical ventilation (CV), in which the vents were open during the day and closed during the night. A tomato crop was grown directly in the soil between the end of February and the end of July during two crop seasons. Climatic data were measured with three meteorological stations, averaged and recorded on an hourly basis. The number of diseased leaflets were counted and removed from the greenhouse. In the NV greenhouse a significant reduction of air humidity and disease appearance was observed. A warning system was developed and can be a useful tool for helping to decide on appropriate actions and the correct timing to avoid conditions that favour disease development. For a more practical application, disease risk levels were defined as a function of the duration of periods with RH > 90%

Metabolic and crystal arthropathies: 112. Rapid Improvement in Health-Related Quality of Life in Gouty Arthritis Patients Treated with Canakinumab (ACZ885) Compared to Triamcinolone Acetonide

Background: Canakinumab, a fully human anti-IL-1β antibody has been shown to control inflammation in gouty arthritis. This study evaluated changes in health-related quality of life (HRQoL) in patients treated with canakinumab or triamcinolone acetonide (TA). Methods: An 8-wk, dose-ranging, active controlled, single-blind study in patients (≥18 to ≤80 years) with acute gouty arthritis flare, refractory to or contraindicated to NSAlDs and/or colchicine, were randomized to canakinumab 10, 25, 50, 90, 150 mg sc or TA 40 mg im. HRQoL was assessed using patient reported outcomes evaluating PCS and MCS, and subscale scores of SF-36® [acute version 2]) and functional disability (HAQ-DI©). Results: In canakinumab 150 mg group, the most severe impairment at baseline was reported for physical functioning and bodily pain; levels of 41.5 and 36.0, respectively, which improved in 7 days to 80.0 and 72.2 (mean increases of 39.0 and 35.6) and at 8 wks improved to 86.1 and 86.6 (mean increases of 44.6 and 50.6); these were higher than levels seen in the general US population. TA group, showed less improvement in 7 days (mean increases of 23.3 and 21.3 for physical function and bodily pain). Functional disability scores, measured by the HAQ-DI© decreased in both treatment groups (Table 1). Conclusions: Gouty arthritis patients treated with canakinumab showed a rapid improvement in physical and mental well-being based on SF-36® scores. In contrast to the TA group, patients treated with canakinumab showed improvement in 7 days in physical function and bodily pain approaching levels of the general population. Disclosure statement: U.A., A.F., V.M., D.R., P.S. and K.S. are employees and shareholders of Novartis Pharma AG. A.P. has received research support from Novartis Pharma AG. N.S. has received research support and consultancy fees from Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation, has served on advisory boards for Novartis, Takeda, Savient, URL Pharma and EnzymeRx, and is/has been a member of a speakers' bureau for Takeda. A.S. has received consultation fees from Novartis Pharma AG, Abbott, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Essex, Pfizer, MSD, Roche, UCB and Wyeth. All other authors have declared no conflicts of interes

Patient-reported outcomes for tofacitinib with and without methotrexate, or adalimumab with methotrexate, in rheumatoid arthritis: A phase IIIB/IV trial

© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2019. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ. Objective To provide the first direct comparison of patient-reported outcomes (PROs) following treatment with tofacitinib monotherapy versus tofacitinib or adalimumab (ADA) in combination with methotrexate (MTX) in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) with inadequate response to MTX (MTX-IR). Methods ORAL Strategy (NCT02187055), a phase IIIB/IV, head-to-head, randomised controlled trial, assessed non-inferiority between tofacitinib 5 mg two times per day monotherapy, tofacitinib 5 mg two times per day+MTX and ADA 40 mg every other week+MTX. PROs assessed included the following: Patient Global Assessment of disease activity (PtGA), Pain, Health Assessment Questionnaire-Disability Index, Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy-Fatigue and 36-Item Short-Form Health Survey (SF-36) summary and domain scores. Results Substantial improvements from baseline were reported across all PROs in all treatment arms, which, in the majority, met or exceeded minimum clinically important differences. Compared with tofacitinib monotherapy, tofacitinib+MTX combination treatment conferred significantly greater improvements in PtGA, Pain and SF-36 physical component summary scores at month 6. Statistically or numerically greater improvements were often, but not uniformly, reported for combination treatments compared with tofacitinib monotherapy at other time points. Conclusion Treatment with tofacitinib+MTX, ADA+MTX and tofacitinib monotherapy resulted in clinically meaningful improvements in PROs in MTX-IR patients with RA. These were comparatively greater with combination treatments versus tofacitinib monotherapy, although differences between treatment arms were small, limiting our ability to confer clinical meaning. Trial registration number NCT02187055

Upadacitinib in Rheumatoid Arthritis: A Benefit–Risk Assessment Across a Phase III Program

Treating to a target of clinical remission or low disease activity is an important principle for managing rheumatoid arthritis (RA). Despite the availability of biologic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (bDMARDs), a substantial proportion of patients with RA do not achieve these treatment targets. Upadacitinib is a once-daily, oral Janus kinase (JAK) inhibitor with increased selectivity for JAK1 over JAK2, JAK3, and tyrosine kinase 2. The SELECT phase III upadacitinib clinical program comprised five pivotal trials of approximately 4400 patients with RA, including inadequate responders (IR) to conventional synthetic (cs)DMARDs or bDMARDs. This review aims to provide insights into the benefit–risk profile of upadacitinib in patients with RA. Upadacitinib 15 mg once daily, in combination with csDMARDs or as monotherapy, achieved all primary and ranked secondary endpoints in the five pivotal trials across csDMARD-naïve, csDMARD-IR, and bDMARD-IR populations. Upadacitinib 15 mg also demonstrated significantly higher rates of remission and low disease activity in all five pivotal trials, compared with placebo, methotrexate, or adalimumab. Labeled warnings of JAK inhibitors include serious infections, herpes zoster, malignancies, major cardiovascular events, and venous thromboembolic events. Short- and long-term integrated analyses showed that upadacitinib 15 mg was associated with increased risk of herpes zoster and creatine phosphokinase elevations compared with methotrexate and adalimumab but otherwise had comparable safety with these active comparators. This review suggests that upadacitinib 15 mg had a favorable benefit–risk profile. The safety of upadacitinib will continue to be monitored in long-term extensions and post-marketing studies

EULAR recommendations for the management of rheumatoid arthritis with synthetic and biological disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs: 2019 update

Objectives: To provide an update of the European League Against Rheumatism (EULAR) rheumatoid arthritis (RA) management recommendations to account for the most recent developments in the field. Methods: An international task force considered new evidence supporting or contradicting previous recommendations and novel therapies and strategic insights based on two systematic literature searches on efficacy and safety of disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs) since the last update (2016) until 2019. A predefined voting process was applied, current levels of evidence and strengths of recommendation were assigned and participants ultimately voted independently on their level of agreement with each of the items. Results: The task force agreed on 5 overarching principles and 12 recommendations concerning use of conventional synthetic (cs) DMARDs (methotrexate (MTX), leflunomide, sulfasalazine); glucocorticoids (GCs); biological (b) DMARDs (tumour necrosis factor inhibitors (adalimumab, certolizumab pegol, etanercept, golimumab, infliximab), abatacept, rituximab, tocilizumab, sarilumab and biosimilar (bs) DMARDs) and targeted synthetic (ts) DMARDs (the Janus kinase (JAK) inhibitors tofacitinib, baricitinib, filgotinib, upadacitinib). Guidance on monotherapy, combination therapy, treatment strategies (treat-to-target) and tapering on sustained clinical remission is provided. Cost and sequencing of b/tsDMARDs are addressed. Initially, MTX plus GCs and upon insufficient response to this therapy within 3 to 6 months, stratification according to risk factors is recommended. With poor prognostic factors (presence of autoantibodies, high disease activity, early erosions or failure of two csDMARDs), any bDMARD or JAK inhibitor should be added to the csDMARD. If this fails, any other bDMARD (from another or the same class) or tsDMARD is recommended. On sustained remission, DMARDs may be tapered, but not be stopped. Levels of evidence and levels of agreement were mostly high. Conclusions: These updated EULAR recommendations provide consensus on the management of RA with respect to benefit, safety, preferences and cost

2022 update

Funding Information: This study was funded by European League Against Rheumatism. Publisher Copyright: © Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2022. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.Objectives: To provide an update of the EULAR rheumatoid arthritis (RA) management recommendations addressing the most recent developments in the field. Methods: An international task force was formed and solicited three systematic literature research activities on safety and efficacy of disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs) and glucocorticoids (GCs). The new evidence was discussed in light of the last update from 2019. A predefined voting process was applied to each overarching principle and recommendation. Levels of evidence and strengths of recommendation were assigned to and participants finally voted on the level of agreement with each item. Results: The task force agreed on 5 overarching principles and 11 recommendations concerning use of conventional synthetic (cs) DMARDs (methotrexate (MTX), leflunomide, sulfasalazine); GCs; biological (b) DMARDs (tumour necrosis factor inhibitors (adalimumab, certolizumab pegol, etanercept, golimumab, infliximab including biosimilars), abatacept, rituximab, tocilizumab, sarilumab and targeted synthetic (ts) DMARDs, namely the Janus kinase inhibitors tofacitinib, baricitinib, filgotinib, upadacitinib. Guidance on monotherapy, combination therapy, treatment strategies (treat-to-target) and tapering in sustained clinical remission is provided. Safety aspects, including risk of major cardiovascular events (MACEs) and malignancies, costs and sequencing of b/tsDMARDs were all considered. Initially, MTX plus GCs is recommended and on insufficient response to this therapy within 3-6 months, treatment should be based on stratification according to risk factors; With poor prognostic factors (presence of autoantibodies, high disease activity, early erosions or failure of two csDMARDs), any bDMARD should be added to the csDMARD; after careful consideration of risks of MACEs, malignancies and/or thromboembolic events tsDMARDs may also be considered in this phase. If the first bDMARD (or tsDMARD) fails, any other bDMARD (from another or the same class) or tsDMARD (considering risks) is recommended. With sustained remission, DMARDs may be tapered but should not be stopped. Levels of evidence and levels of agreement were high for most recommendations. Conclusions: These updated EULAR recommendations provide consensus on RA management including safety, effectiveness and cost.publishersversionepub_ahead_of_prin

Body mass index and clinical response to intravenous or subcutaneous abatacept in patients with rheumatoid arthritis

This post hoc analysis of ACQUIRE (NCT00559585) explored the effect of baseline body mass index (BMI) on the pharmacokinetics of and clinical response to subcutaneous (SC) or intravenous (IV) abatacept in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA). ACQUIRE was a phase 3b, 6-month, double-blind, double-dummy study in which patients with RA were randomized (1:1) to SC (fixed - dose; 125 mg/week) or IV (weight-tiered; ~ 10 mg/kg/month) abatacept plus methotrexate. In this analysis, minimum abatacept plasma concentration (Cmin) was measured at 3 and 6 months, and clinical remission over 6 months was assessed by Disease Activity Score 28 (C-reactive protein; DAS28 [CRP], < 2.6), Simplified Disease Activity Index (SDAI, 64 3.3), and Clinical Disease Activity Index (CDAI, 64 2.8). Data were stratified by baseline BMI (underweight/normal, < 25 kg/m2; overweight, 25 to < 30 kg/m2; obese, 65 30 kg/m2) and administration route. Of the 1456/1457 patients for whom baseline BMIs were available, 526 (36%; SC 265, IV 261) patients were underweight/normal, 497 (34%; SC 249, IV 248) were overweight, and 433 (30%; SC 221, IV 212) were obese. Median Cmin abatacept concentration was 65 10 \u3bcg/mL (efficacy threshold) at 3 and 6 months in > 90% of patients across BMI groups with both administration routes. DAS28 (CRP), SDAI, and CDAI remission rates at 6 months were similar across BMI groups and 95% confidence intervals overlapped at all time points in both separate and pooled SC/IV analyses. Therapeutic concentrations of abatacept and clinical remission rates using stringent criteria were similar across patient BMIs and administration routes

The efficacy and safety of subcutaneous clazakizumab in patients with moderate-to-severe rheumatoid arthritis and an inadequate response to methotrexate: results from a multinational, phase IIb, randomized, double-blind, placebo/active-controlled, dose-ranging study.

Objective Clazakizumab is a humanized monoclonal antibody that binds to the interleukin-6 (IL-6) cytokine. This study was undertaken to evaluate the efficacy and safety of clazakizumab in combination with methotrexate (MTX) or clazakizumab monotherapy versus MTX alone in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) and an inadequate response to MTX. Methods In this multinational, phase IIb, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, dose-ranging study, patients were randomized to receive 1) once-monthly subcutaneous (SC) clazakizumab at 25, 100, or 200 mg plus MTX, 2) once-monthly SC clazakizumab at 100 mg or 200 mg as monotherapy, or 3) MTX plus placebo (i.e., MTX alone). Adalimumab (40 mg) plus MTX was included as an active reference. The primary end point was the American College of Rheumatology 20% (ACR20) improvement response rate at week 12. Secondary end points included ACR20, ACR50, and ACR70 response rates as well as protocol-defined remission rates and Health Assessment Questionnaire disability index scores at weeks 12 and 24. Results In total, 418 patients were randomized, and baseline characteristics were balanced across the treatment groups. Patients receving clazakizumab had significantly greater ACR20 response rates at week 12 compared with patients receiving MTX alone (76.3%, 73.3%, and 60.0% of patients in the clazakizumab 25, 100, and 200 mg plus MTX groups, respectively, and 55.0% and 61.0% of patients in the clazakizumab 100 and 200 mg monotherapy groups, respectively, versus 39.3% of patients receiving MTX alone; P < 0.05 for all comparisons). At week 24, all clazakizumab groups had higher ACR20, ACR50, and ACR70 response rates and higher remission rates compared with MTX alone. Rates of serious adverse events ranged from 8.3% to 13.6% in the clazakizumab treatment groups, compared with 3.3% in the MTX alone group. Changes in laboratory data were consistent with the pharmacologic effects of IL-6 blockade. Conclusion In patients with RA and an inadequate response to MTX, treatment with clazakizumab in combination with MTX or clazakizumab monotherapy was well tolerated, and patients achieved significant improvements in disease activity, including higher rates of remission, as compared with patients receiving MTX alone