BACKGROUND: Tumour necrosis factor (TNF)-inhibiting therapy increases the risk of serious infections in rheumatoid arthritis (RA). However, it is not clear whether this risk differs between TNF inhibitors. OBJECTIVE: To analyse whether the risk of serious infections in patients with RA treated with an anti-TNF inhibitor is different for adalimumab, infliximab and etanercept. METHODS: Data from the Dutch RA monitoring registry were used. Incidence rates were calculated from the observed number of first serious infections and follow-up time up to 5 years. A Cox proportional hazards model with time-to-first-serious infection was used to estimate risk differences among the anti-TNF treatment groups, with correction for confounders. RESULTS: The unadjusted incidence rate of a first serious infection in patients with RA per 100 patient-years was 2.61 (95% CI 2.21 to 3.00) for adalimumab, 3.86 (95% CI 3.33 to 4.40) for infliximab and 1.66 (95% CI 1.09 to 2.23) for etanercept. Age, year of starting anti-TNF therapy, comorbidities at baseline and disease activity score 28 over time were included as confounders. No difference in risk for serious infections was found between adalimumab and infliximab with an adjusted HR (adjHR) of 0.90 (95% CI 0.55 to 1.48). The risk of serious infections was significantly lower in etanercept than in both infliximab (adjHR=0.49 (95% CI 0.29 to 0.83)) and adalimumab (adjHR=0.55 (95% CI 0.44 to 0.67)). CONCLUSIONS: The risk of serious infections in patients with RA treated with adalimumab or infliximab was similar, while the risk of serious infections in patients with RA treated with etanercept was lower than with both adalimumab and infliximab.
BACKGROUND:Tumour necrosis factor (TNF)-inhibiting therapy increases the risk of serious infections in rheumatoid arthritis (RA). However, it is not clear whether this risk differs between TNF inhibitors. OBJECTIVE: To analyse whether the risk of serious infections in patients with RA treated with an anti-TNF inhibitor is different for adalimumab, infliximab and etanercept. METHODS: Data from the Dutch RA monitoring registry were used. Incidence rates were calculated from the observed number of first serious infections and follow-up time up to 5 years. A Cox proportional hazards model with time-to-first-serious infection was used to estimate risk differences among the anti-TNF treatment groups, with correction for confounders. RESULTS: The unadjusted incidence rate of a first serious infection in patients with RA per 100 patient-years was 2.61 (95% CI 2.21 to 3.00) for adalimumab, 3.86 (95% CI 3.33 to 4.40) for infliximab and 1.66 (95% CI 1.09 to 2.23) for etanercept. Age, year of starting anti-TNF therapy, comorbidities at baseline and disease activity score 28 over time were included as confounders. No difference in risk for serious infections was found between adalimumab and infliximab with an adjusted HR (adjHR) of 0.90 (95% CI 0.55 to 1.48). The risk of serious infections was significantly lower in etanercept than in both infliximab (adjHR=0.49 (95% CI 0.29 to 0.83)) and adalimumab (adjHR=0.55 (95% CI 0.44 to 0.67)). CONCLUSIONS: The risk of serious infections in patients with RA treated with adalimumab or infliximab was similar, while the risk of serious infections in patients with RA treated with etanercept was lower than with both adalimumab and infliximab.
Authors: Allison S Dobry; Charles P Quesenberry; G Thomas Ray; Jamie L Geier; Maryam M Asgari Journal: J Am Acad Dermatol Date: 2017-09-13 Impact factor: 11.527
Authors: Huifeng Yun; Fenglong Xie; Elizabeth Delzell; Lang Chen; Emily B Levitan; James D Lewis; Kenneth G Saag; Timothy Beukelman; Kevin Winthrop; John W Baddley; Jeffrey R Curtis Journal: Ann Rheum Dis Date: 2014-03-07 Impact factor: 19.103
Authors: Gabriela D Colpo; Marion Leboyer; Robert Dantzer; Mahdukar H Trivedi; Antonio L Teixeira Journal: Expert Rev Neurother Date: 2017-11-27 Impact factor: 4.618