Literature DB >> 12913927

Toward a definition and method of assessment of treatment failure and treatment effectiveness: the case of leflunomide versus methotrexate.

Frederick Wolfe1, Kaleb Michaud, Barbara Stephenson, Joseph Doyle.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: Time to treatment discontinuation (TTD) is an accepted method of assessing treatment effectiveness in the community, but is susceptible to channeling bias and secular and cohort effects. In addition, TTD does not consider the addition of new disease modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARD) to insufficiently effective therapies. We expand the definition of treatment failure to include discontinuation or addition of a second DMARD (1) to examine leflunomide (LEF) versus methotrexate (MTX) effectiveness in clinical practice; (2) to obtain an estimate of overall clinical effectiveness; and (3) to identify factors associated with treatment successes and failure. In addition, (4) we test the feasibility of performing a clinical trial using a longitudinal data bank.
METHODS: Using the National Data Bank for Rheumatic Diseases longitudinal data bank, 1431 patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) who began taking LEF or MTX as part of their routine medical care were followed from 1998 through 2001. None of the 1431 patients had received either treatment previously. Patients were assessed at 6 month intervals for periods up to 36 months by mailed questionnaires concerning DMARD therapy and demographic and RA severity factors. Kaplan-Meier survivor functions and Cox regression analyses were used to assess treatment failure, defined as time to discontinuation or to the addition of a second DMARD.
RESULTS: For 756 patients taking LEF, the failure rate was 55.5 per 100 patient-years, and the median time to failure was 15 (95% CI 13, 17) months. For 675 patients taking MTX the failure rate was 57.3 per 100 patient-years, and the median failure time was 14 (95% CI 12, 18) months. These differences were not statistically significant. The overall rate of discontinuation was 68.7% of the failure rate. Discontinuation was predicted by adverse effects [hazard ratio 1.76 (95% CI 1.51, 2.04)] and by clinical status prior to starting DMARD, and these results were not affected by specific DMARD treatment. Discontinuation was more common with LEF, and addition of a second DMARD was more common with MTX. More than 77% of treatment failures, defined by use of additional therapy, resulted in starting anti-tumor necrosis factor treatment rather than a conventional DMARD.
CONCLUSION: In an observational clinical trial using a contemporary longitudinal data bank, with time to treatment failure as the outcome, LEF and MTX had equal effectiveness as measured by time to treatment failure. Treatment failure rates were substantially greater than noted historically. Given the availability of many efficacious additional treatment options, this increase in failure rate appears to reflect a greater propensity to discontinue and/or add therapy.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2003        PMID: 12913927

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Rheumatol        ISSN: 0315-162X            Impact factor:   4.666


  9 in total

1.  Evidence for differential acquired drug resistance to anti-tumour necrosis factor agents in rheumatoid arthritis.

Authors:  A Finckh; J F Simard; C Gabay; P-A Guerne
Journal:  Ann Rheum Dis       Date:  2005-12-08       Impact factor: 19.103

2.  Clinical effectiveness and safety of leflunomide in inflammatory arthritis: a report from the RAPPORT database with supporting patient survey.

Authors:  Morgan Schultz; Stephanie O Keeling; Steven J Katz; Walter P Maksymowych; Dean T Eurich; Jill J Hall
Journal:  Clin Rheumatol       Date:  2017-05-27       Impact factor: 2.980

3.  Leflunomide in the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis. An analysis of predictors for treatment continuation.

Authors:  E N van Roon; M Hoekstra; H Tobi; T L Th A Jansen; H J Bernelot Moens; J R B J Brouwers; M A F J van de Laar
Journal:  Br J Clin Pharmacol       Date:  2005-09       Impact factor: 4.335

4.  Leflunomide in active rheumatoid arthritis: a prospective study in daily practice.

Authors:  E N Van Roon; T L Th A Jansen; L Mourad; P M Houtman; G A W Bruyn; E N Griep; B Wilffert; H Tobi; J R B J Brouwers
Journal:  Br J Clin Pharmacol       Date:  2004-08       Impact factor: 4.335

5.  Leflunomide in active rheumatoid arthritis: a prospective study in daily practice.

Authors:  E N Van Roon; T L Th A Jansen; L Mourad; P M Houtman; G A W Bruyn; E N Griep; B Wilffert; H Tobi; J R B J Brouwers
Journal:  Br J Clin Pharmacol       Date:  2004-06       Impact factor: 4.335

6.  Preliminary evaluation in rheumatoid arthritis activity in patients treated with TNF-alpha blocker plus methotrexate versus methotrexate or leflunomide alone.

Authors:  Margaret Wisłowska; Danuta Jakubicz
Journal:  Rheumatol Int       Date:  2007-01-18       Impact factor: 3.580

7.  Switching TNF antagonists in patients with chronic arthritis: an observational study of 488 patients over a four-year period.

Authors:  Juan J Gomez-Reino; Loreto Carmona
Journal:  Arthritis Res Ther       Date:  2006-01-06       Impact factor: 5.156

8.  Clinical outcomes of low-dose leflunomide for rheumatoid arthritis complicated with Hepatitis B virus carriage and safety observation.

Authors:  Hua Ming-Xu; Meng Chen; Yun Cai; Hui Yan-Jia
Journal:  Pak J Med Sci       Date:  2015 Mar-Apr       Impact factor: 1.088

Review 9.  Reappraisal of the clinical use of leflunomide in rheumatoid arthritis and psoriatic arthritis.

Authors:  Peter Bb Jones; Douglas Hn White
Journal:  Open Access Rheumatol       Date:  2010-11-03
  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.