The persistence of golimumab compared to other tumour necrosis factor-α inhibitors in daily clinical practice for the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis, ankylosing spondylitis and psoriatic arthritis: observations from the Slovenian nation-wide longitudinal registry of patients treated with biologic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs—BioRx.si

2018 ◽  
Vol 38 (2) ◽  
pp. 297-305 ◽  
Author(s):  
Žiga Rotar ◽  
◽  
Matija Tomšič ◽  
Sonja Praprotnik
RMD Open ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 5 (1) ◽  
pp. e000798 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ernest Choy ◽  
Nick Freemantle ◽  
Clare Proudfoot ◽  
Chieh-I Chen ◽  
Laurence Pollissard ◽  
...  

ObjectiveTo compare efficacy and safety of subcutaneous sarilumab 200 mg and 150 mg every 2 weeks plus conventional synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (+csDMARDs) versus other targeted DMARDs+csDMARDs and placebo+csDMARDs, in inadequate responders to csDMARDs (csDMARD-IR) or tumour necrosis factor α inhibitors (TNFi-IR).MethodsSystematic literature review and network meta-analyses (NMA) conducted on 24 week efficacy and safety outcomes: Health Assessment Questionnaire Disability Index, modified total sharp score (mTSS, including 52 weeks), American College of Rheumatology (ACR) 20/50/70, European League Against Rheumatism Disease Activity Score 28-joint count erythrocyte sedimentation rate (DAS28)<2.6; serious infections/serious adverse events (including 52 weeks).Results53 trials were selected for NMA. csDMARD-IR: Sarilumab 200 mg+csDMARDs and 150 mg+csDMARDs were superior versus placebo+csDMARDs on all outcomes. Against most targeted DMARDs, sarilumab 200 mg showed no statistically significant differences, except superiority to baricitinib 2 mg, tofacitinib and certolizumab on 24 week mTSS. Sarilumab 150 mg was similar to all targeted DMARDs. TNFi-IR: Sarilumab 200 mg was similar to abatacept, golimumab, tocilizumab 4 mg and 8 mg/kg intravenously and rituximab on ACR20/50/70, superior to baricitinib 2 mg on ACR50 and DAS28<2.6 and to abatacept, golimumab, tocilizumab 4 mg/kg intravenously and rituximab on DAS28<2.6. Sarilumab 150 mg was similar to targeted DMARDs but superior to baricitinib 2 mg and rituximab on DAS28<2.6 and inferior to tocilizumab 8 mg on ACR20 and DAS28<2.6. Serious adverse events, including serious infections, appeared similar for sarilumab versus comparators.ConclusionsResults suggest that in csDMARD-IR and TNFi-IR (a smaller network), sarilumab+csDMARD had superior efficacy and similar safety versus placebo+csDMARDs and at least similar efficacy and safety versus other targeted DMARDs+csDMARDs.


2021 ◽  
Vol 80 (Suppl 1) ◽  
pp. 1151.2-1152
Author(s):  
M. Kamiya ◽  
D. Togawa ◽  
S. Mori ◽  
K. Yamazaki

Background:In clinical practice, when refractory rheumatoid arthritis (RA) is present, of which the definition implies previous use of at least two biologic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (bDMARDs) (generally tumour necrosis factor inhibitors (TNFis)), the next treatment choice often made is a bDMARD of another class (non-TNFis) [1]. However, patients who are inadequately responding to bDMARDs need new treatment options because subsequent bDMARDs treatment reduces their response [2]. Janus Kinase inhibitors (JAKis) are the first targeted synthetic DMARDs (tsDMARD) licensed for the treatment of RA with comparable efficacy to bDMARDs. Unlike the single cytokine targeting approach of bDMARDs, JAKis are specifically designed to inhibit intracellular signalling molecules common to the receptors of multiple inflammatory cytokines implicated in RA pathogenesis. The choice of therapeutic agents for refractory RA is increasing, and its efficacy is expected. On the other hand, it is also true that some patients discontinued JAKis at a rate that cannot be overlooked because of insufficient efficacy. Difficult-to-treat (D2T) RA is defined as refractory to two or more b/ts DMARDs with different mechanisms of action, with active and progressive disease, as published by Eular(3)Objectives:To evaluate real world efficacy of approved JAKis switching in patients with D2T RA who were unable to control their disease activity due to insufficient efficacy despite the sequential use of multiple bDMARDs and JAKis, focusing on the drug retention rate.Methods:In our hospital, RA was diagnosed according to the 1987 or 2010 classification criteria, and when two or more bDMARDs (including both TNFis and non-TNFis) were inadequately effective, it was defined as D2T RA. We retrospectively investigated patients who switched to JAKis for D2T RA. The drug retention rate was investigated by the Kaplan-Meier method, and the difference was tested by the Logrank test.Results:The 1-year retention rate of JAKis for D2T RA was 50.8% in TOF 38 cases [28 women, age average 70.2 years, disease duration average 12.4 years, past bDMARDs use average 3.5 drugs, MTX combination 9 cases, DAS28 ESR average 4.11] and 66.3% in BAR 35 cases [26 cases, 73.0 years old, 14.8 years, 4.17 agents, 9 cases, 3.68], and there was no significant difference (P = 0.30). Among them, there were 17 cases [11 cases, 70.6 years old, 13.5 years, 4.18 drugs, 2 cases, 3.65] of switching between JAKis, all of which were switching from TOF to BAR. The 1-year retention rate was 45.8% [reason for discontinuation: insufficient effect in 3 cases, adverse events in 6 cases], which was not significantly different but tended to be lower than 72.7% [reason for discontinuation: insufficient effect in 1 case, adverse event in 2 cases, patient’s convenience in 1 case] in 16 patients [13 cases, 76.3 years old, 17.1 years, 3.19 drugs, 7 cases, 3.69] who received BAR as the first JAKi for D2T RA patients (P = 0.089).Conclusion:Although the number of cases is small in the retrospective survey, it is suggested that the retention rate of BAR switched to D2T RA may be slightly lower in patients with a history of TOF discontinuation due to insufficient efficacy than in JAKi naive patients. It is expected that the number of new JAKi usage cases will increase in the future, and it is necessary to consider switching between other JAKis in addition to switching from BAR to TOF.References:[1]Smolen JS, Landewe R, Bijlsma J et al. EULAR recommendations for the management of rheumatoid arthritis with synthetic and biological disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs: 2016 update. Ann Rheum Dis 2017;76:960_77.[2]Rendas-Baum R, Wallenstein GV, Koncz T et al. Evaluating the efficacy of sequential biologic therapies for rheumatoid arthritis patients with an inadequate response to tumor necrosis factor-α inhibitors. Arthritis Res Ther 2011;13:R25.[3]Nagy G, et al. EULAR definition of difficult-to-treat rheumatoid arthritis. Ann Rheum Dis 2021;80:31–35. doi:10.1136/annrheumdis-2020-217344.Disclosure of Interests:None declared


2015 ◽  
Vol 75 (10) ◽  
pp. 1757-1762 ◽  
Author(s):  
Theresa Wampler Muskardin ◽  
Priyanka Vashisht ◽  
Jessica M Dorschner ◽  
Mark A Jensen ◽  
Beverly S Chrabot ◽  
...  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document