OBJECTIVE: The study objective was to investigate responsiveness according to whether patients satisfy eligibility criteria from randomized controlled trials of tumor necrosis factor (TNF) antagonists in a multicentered US cohort. METHODS: Biologic-naive patients with rheumatoid arthritis who were prescribed TNF antagonists (n=465) in the Consortium of Rheumatology Researchers of North America registry were included. Patients were stratified by whether they met eligibility criteria from 3 major TNF antagonist trials. Two cohorts were examined: Cohort A (n=336) included patients with complete American College of Rheumatology response criteria except acute phase reactants, and cohort B (n=129) included patients with complete response criteria. Study outcomes included modified American College of Rheumatology 20% and 50% improvement responses (cohort A) and standard American College of Rheumatology improvement (cohort B). RESULTS: A minority of patients (5.4%-19.4%) prescribed TNF antagonists met trial eligibility criteria and predominantly had high disease activity (78.5%-100%). For patients who met eligibility criteria in cohort A, rates of 20% improvement (52.3%-63.6%) and 50% improvement (30.8%-45.5%) were achieved. Among patients failing to meet eligibility criteria, rates of 20% improvement (16.2%-20.4%) and 50% improvement (8.9%-10.8%) were consistently inferior (P<.05 all comparisons). For cohort B, similar differences were observed. CONCLUSION: This multicentered US cohort study demonstrates that the majority of patients receiving TNF antagonists would not meet trial eligibility criteria and achieve lower clinical responses. These findings highlight the tradeoff between defining treatment responsive populations and achieving results that can be generalized for broader patient populations.
OBJECTIVE: The study objective was to investigate responsiveness according to whether patients satisfy eligibility criteria from randomized controlled trials of tumor necrosis factor (TNF) antagonists in a multicentered US cohort. METHODS: Biologic-naive patients with rheumatoid arthritis who were prescribed TNF antagonists (n=465) in the Consortium of Rheumatology Researchers of North America registry were included. Patients were stratified by whether they met eligibility criteria from 3 major TNF antagonist trials. Two cohorts were examined: Cohort A (n=336) included patients with complete American College of Rheumatology response criteria except acute phase reactants, and cohort B (n=129) included patients with complete response criteria. Study outcomes included modified American College of Rheumatology 20% and 50% improvement responses (cohort A) and standard American College of Rheumatology improvement (cohort B). RESULTS: A minority of patients (5.4%-19.4%) prescribed TNF antagonists met trial eligibility criteria and predominantly had high disease activity (78.5%-100%). For patients who met eligibility criteria in cohort A, rates of 20% improvement (52.3%-63.6%) and 50% improvement (30.8%-45.5%) were achieved. Among patients failing to meet eligibility criteria, rates of 20% improvement (16.2%-20.4%) and 50% improvement (8.9%-10.8%) were consistently inferior (P<.05 all comparisons). For cohort B, similar differences were observed. CONCLUSION: This multicentered US cohort study demonstrates that the majority of patients receiving TNF antagonists would not meet trial eligibility criteria and achieve lower clinical responses. These findings highlight the tradeoff between defining treatment responsive populations and achieving results that can be generalized for broader patient populations.
Authors: R Maini; E W St Clair; F Breedveld; D Furst; J Kalden; M Weisman; J Smolen; P Emery; G Harriman; M Feldmann; P Lipsky Journal: Lancet Date: 1999-12-04 Impact factor: 79.321
Authors: W Kievit; J Fransen; A J M Oerlemans; H H Kuper; M A F J van der Laar; D J R A M de Rooij; C M A De Gendt; K H Ronday; T L Jansen; P C M van Oijen; H L M Brus; E M Adang; P L C M van Riel Journal: Ann Rheum Dis Date: 2007-04-10 Impact factor: 19.103
Authors: Michael E Weinblatt; Edward C Keystone; Daniel E Furst; Larry W Moreland; Michael H Weisman; Charles A Birbara; Leah A Teoh; Steven A Fischkoff; Elliot K Chartash Journal: Arthritis Rheum Date: 2003-01
Authors: Jeffrey R Curtis; Archana Jain; Johan Askling; S Louis Bridges; Loreto Carmona; William Dixon; Axel Finckh; Kimme Hyrich; Jeffrey D Greenberg; Joel Kremer; Joachim Listing; Kaleb Michaud; Ted Mikuls; Nancy Shadick; Daniel H Solomon; Michael E Weinblatt; Fred Wolfe; Angela Zink Journal: Semin Arthritis Rheum Date: 2010-08 Impact factor: 5.532
Authors: Jessica D Murillo-Saich; Cesar Diaz-Torne; M Angeles Ortiz; Roxana Coras; Paulo Gil-Alabarse; Anders Pedersen; Hector Corominas; Silvia Vidal; Monica Guma Journal: Metabolomics Date: 2021-08-16 Impact factor: 4.747
Authors: Jeffrey D Greenberg; Leslie R Harrold; Mary J Bentley; Joel Kremer; George Reed; Vibeke Strand Journal: Rheumatology (Oxford) Date: 2009-04-24 Impact factor: 7.580
Authors: Jeffrey R Curtis; John W Baddley; Shuo Yang; Nivedita Patkar; Lang Chen; Elizabeth Delzell; Ted R Mikuls; Kenneth G Saag; Jasvinder Singh; Monika Safford; Grant W Cannon Journal: Arthritis Res Ther Date: 2011-09-20 Impact factor: 5.156