Literature DB >> 18304941

Treatment response to a second or third TNF-inhibitor in RA: results from the South Swedish Arthritis Treatment Group Register.

J A Karlsson1, L E Kristensen, M C Kapetanovic, A Gülfe, T Saxne, P Geborek.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: To study treatment response rates of RA patients undergoing second- and third-line anti-TNF therapy and to identify baseline predictors of response to second-line treatment.
METHODS: RA patients monitored in a prospective, observational study, having switched anti-TNF therapy once (first-time switchers, n = 337) or twice (second-time switchers, n = 36)--i.e. following failures with one antibody- and one receptor-type agent--between March 1999 and December 2006, were studied. Treatment responses at 3 months were assessed by the ACR and European League Against Rheumatism (EULAR) response criteria. Predictive potentials for response to second-line treatment of demographics, baseline disease activity measures, disease and treatment characteristics were analysed using logistic regression.
RESULTS: ACR20 response was met by 51% of first-time and 35% of second-time switchers. Corresponding ACR50 rates were 27 and 18%; EULAR overall rates (EULAR good or moderate response) 71 and 58%; EULAR good rates 25 and 9% and 28-joint disease activity score (DAS28) remission rates 16 and 6%. Identified baseline predictors of response to second-line treatment were lower age and HAQ scores, elevated DAS28 values and having ceased the former anti-TNF treatment due to adverse events rather than inefficacy. No variable was predictive for all examined response criteria.
CONCLUSIONS: Response rates of first-time anti-TNF switchers are somewhat below those of anti-TNF naïve RA patients, while the markedly inferior response rates of second-time switchers suggest other therapeutic options to be considered in this situation. Identified baseline predictors of response may be useful indicators to second-line anti-TNF therapy, but vary depending on the response criteria set studied.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2008        PMID: 18304941     DOI: 10.1093/rheumatology/ken034

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Rheumatology (Oxford)        ISSN: 1462-0324            Impact factor:   7.580


  43 in total

1.  NICE guidelines on anti-tumor necrosis factor therapy for RA.

Authors:  David L Scott; Sophia Steer
Journal:  Nat Clin Pract Rheumatol       Date:  2008-12-02

2.  Cost-effectiveness treatment with Rituximab in patients with rheumatoid arthritis in real life.

Authors:  Maurizio Benucci; Gianantonio Saviola; Paola Baiardi; Mariangela Manfredi
Journal:  Rheumatol Int       Date:  2010-05-16       Impact factor: 2.631

3.  [Switching within the active ingredient group or changing the mechanism of action. Data situation by failure of the first line biologic].

Authors:  A Rubbert-Roth
Journal:  Z Rheumatol       Date:  2015-06       Impact factor: 1.372

4.  Impact of prior biologic use on persistence of treatment in patients with psoriatic arthritis enrolled in the US Corrona registry.

Authors:  Leslie R Harrold; Bradley S Stolshek; Sabrina Rebello; David H Collier; Alex Mutebi; Sally W Wade; Wendi Malley; Jeffrey D Greenberg; Carol J Etzel
Journal:  Clin Rheumatol       Date:  2017-03-07       Impact factor: 2.980

Review 5.  To switch or to change class-the biologic dilemma in rheumatoid arthritis.

Authors:  Edith Villeneuve; Boulos Haraoui
Journal:  Nat Rev Rheumatol       Date:  2010-04-13       Impact factor: 20.543

Review 6.  Use of biologics in rheumatoid arthritis: current and emerging paradigms of care.

Authors:  Jeffrey R Curtis; Jasvinder A Singh
Journal:  Clin Ther       Date:  2011-06       Impact factor: 3.393

7.  Biologic agents-a panacea for inflammatory arthritis or not?

Authors:  J Ninan; Malcolm D Smith; M Dugar; Karen O'Brien; Michael Ahern
Journal:  Int J Rheumatol       Date:  2009-12-08

8.  Convergent Random Forest predictor: methodology for predicting drug response from genome-scale data applied to anti-TNF response.

Authors:  Jadwiga R Bienkowska; Gul S Dalgin; Franak Batliwalla; Normand Allaire; Ronenn Roubenoff; Peter K Gregersen; John P Carulli
Journal:  Genomics       Date:  2009-08-20       Impact factor: 5.736

9.  DAS-28-based EULAR response and HAQ improvement in rheumatoid arthritis patients switching between TNF antagonists.

Authors:  Federico Navarro-Sarabia; Dolores Ruiz-Montesinos; Blanca Hernandez; Victoria Navarro-Compán; Sara Marsal; Mireia Barcelo; Eva Perez-Pampín; Juan J Gómez-Reino
Journal:  BMC Musculoskelet Disord       Date:  2009-07-23       Impact factor: 2.362

10.  Which subgroup of patients with rheumatoid arthritis benefits from switching to rituximab versus alternative anti-tumour necrosis factor (TNF) agents after previous failure of an anti-TNF agent?

Authors:  A Finckh; A Ciurea; L Brulhart; B Möller; U A Walker; D Courvoisier; D Kyburz; J Dudler; C Gabay
Journal:  Ann Rheum Dis       Date:  2009-05-04       Impact factor: 19.103

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.