K Chatzidionysiou1, R F van Vollenhoven. 1. Unit for Clinical Research Therapy, Inflammatory Diseases-ClinTRID, Karolinska Institute, Stockholm, Sweden. aikaterini.chatzidionysiou@karolinska.se
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to characterize and compare responses in patients who had failed one tumour necrosis factor (TNF) inhibitor when switching to another TNF inhibitor or rituximab (RTX). METHODS: The Stockholm TNF follow-up registry (STURE) was used. Treatment results at 6 months were analysed by (i) the biologic used, (ii) the type of anti-TNF switch, and (iii) the reason for discontinuation (inefficacy or intolerance). RESULTS: A total of 328 patients who failed an anti-TNF switched to an alternative biologic, 69 to RTX, 161 to an anti-TNF monoclonal antibody (mAb), and 98 to etanercept (ETA). Significant reductions in the 28-joint Disease Activity Score (DAS28) at 6 months were observed for all groups. The mean ± SD reduction in DAS28 was 1.70 ± 1.18 for RTX, 1.40 ± 1.51 for ETA, and 0.67 ± 1.36 for mAb, the difference being statistically significant between RTX and mAb (p < 0.0001). For patients who had failed ETA, RTX led to significantly greater DAS28 reductions than mAb (p = 0.01). When the reason for discontinuation of the previous anti-TNF was intolerance or secondary inefficacy, RTX led to significantly greater DAS28 reduction compared to mAb and ETA (p = 0.01 and p = 0.03, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: In this observational cohort, patients who failed one anti-TNF had better overall results when treated with RTX than with a subsequent anti-TNF mAb. Having failed ETA, RTX yielded greater DAS28 reductions and European League Against Rheumatism (EULAR) responses than mAb. The advantage of RTX was most clearly seen in patients who had failed anti-TNF because of intolerance or secondary inefficacy.
OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to characterize and compare responses in patients who had failed one tumour necrosis factor (TNF) inhibitor when switching to another TNF inhibitor or rituximab (RTX). METHODS: The Stockholm TNF follow-up registry (STURE) was used. Treatment results at 6 months were analysed by (i) the biologic used, (ii) the type of anti-TNF switch, and (iii) the reason for discontinuation (inefficacy or intolerance). RESULTS: A total of 328 patients who failed an anti-TNF switched to an alternative biologic, 69 to RTX, 161 to an anti-TNF monoclonal antibody (mAb), and 98 to etanercept (ETA). Significant reductions in the 28-joint Disease Activity Score (DAS28) at 6 months were observed for all groups. The mean ± SD reduction in DAS28 was 1.70 ± 1.18 for RTX, 1.40 ± 1.51 for ETA, and 0.67 ± 1.36 for mAb, the difference being statistically significant between RTX and mAb (p < 0.0001). For patients who had failed ETA, RTX led to significantly greater DAS28 reductions than mAb (p = 0.01). When the reason for discontinuation of the previous anti-TNF was intolerance or secondary inefficacy, RTX led to significantly greater DAS28 reduction compared to mAb and ETA (p = 0.01 and p = 0.03, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: In this observational cohort, patients who failed one anti-TNF had better overall results when treated with RTX than with a subsequent anti-TNF mAb. Having failed ETA, RTX yielded greater DAS28 reductions and European League Against Rheumatism (EULAR) responses than mAb. The advantage of RTX was most clearly seen in patients who had failed anti-TNF because of intolerance or secondary inefficacy.
Authors: Machaon M K Bonafede; Donna McMorrow; Clare Proudfoot; Shraddha Shinde; Andreas Kuznik; Chieh-I Chen Journal: Am Health Drug Benefits Date: 2018-06
Authors: Nadia M T Roodenrijs; Attila Hamar; Melinda Kedves; György Nagy; Jacob M van Laar; Désirée van der Heijde; Paco M J Welsing Journal: RMD Open Date: 2021-01
Authors: György Nagy; Nadia M T Roodenrijs; Désirée van der Heijde; Jacob M van Laar; Paco M J Welsing; Melinda Kedves; Attila Hamar; Marlies C van der Goes; Alison Kent; Margot Bakkers; Polina Pchelnikova; Etienne Blaas; Ladislav Senolt; Zoltan Szekanecz; Ernest H Choy; Maxime Dougados; Johannes Wg Jacobs; Rinie Geenen; Johannes Wj Bijlsma; Angela Zink; Daniel Aletaha; Leonard Schoneveld; Piet van Riel; Sophie Dumas; Yeliz Prior; Elena Nikiphorou; Gianfranco Ferraccioli; Georg Schett; Kimme L Hyrich; Ulf Mueller-Ladner; Maya H Buch; Iain B McInnes Journal: Ann Rheum Dis Date: 2021-08-18 Impact factor: 19.103
Authors: Diana S Novikova; Tatiana V Popkova; Galina V Lukina; Elena L Luchikhina; Dmitry E Karateev; Alexander V Volkov; Alexander A Novikov; Elena N Aleksandrova; Evgeny L Nasonov Journal: J Korean Med Sci Date: 2016-01-14 Impact factor: 2.153