Rituximab for induction and maintenance therapy of granulomatosis with polyangiitis: a single-centre cohort study on 114 patients.

OBJECTIVES: To assess efficacy and safety of rituximab (RTX) induction and maintenance therapy for granulomatosis with polyangiitis (GPA) in a single-centre cohort study. METHODS: All patients with active GPA, not enrolled in trials, who received ⩾1 RTX infusion(s) for induction were included. At remission, protocolized maintenance RTX infusions were given every 6 months for 18 months. Kaplan-Meier curves were used to estimate survival rates. Univariable analyses identified factors associated with remission failure and relapse, and Cox models retained independent predictors of relapse. RESULTS: One hundred and fourteen adults with relapsing (65%), refractory/grumbling (22%) or new-onset (13%) GPA received RTX for induction; 100 were given ⩾1 RTX maintenance infusion(s) and 90 received 500 mg every 6 months. Median daily prednisone induction dose was 30 mg; 76% of patients were still receiving a median daily prednisone dose of 5 mg at 2 years. Median follow-up was 3.6 years. Respective 2-year relapse-free survival and RTX retention rates were 85 and 78%. Serious infection and serious adverse event rates were 4.9 and 8.1 per 100 patient-years, respectively. Refractory/grumbling vs new-onset and/or relapsing GPA (P < 0.01 for each individually; P < 0.001 vs the latter two taken together), pachymeningitis (P < 0.05), pure granulomatous disease (P < 0.05) or estimated glomerular filtration rate ⩾60 ml/min (P < 0.01) were associated with remission failure. Multivariate analyses retained refractory/grumbling GPA (P = 0.05), subglottic stenosis (P < 0.005), ENT involvement (P = 0.01) and skin involvement (P < 0.0005) as independent predictors of relapse. CONCLUSION: RTX induction and low-dose preemptive maintenance can effectively and safely induce sustained remission in GPA in a real-life setting.

Systematic switch from innovator infliximab to biosimilar infliximab in inflammatory chronic diseases in daily clinical practice: The experience of Cochin University Hospital, Paris, France.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate effectiveness of systematic switching treatment from innovator infliximab to biosimilar infliximab, and its associated factors. METHODS: In this prospective observational study, all adult patients receiving maintenance therapy with innovator infliximab in Cochin University Hospital were systematically switched to biosimilar infliximab. Effectiveness was assessed by the retention rate of biosimilar infliximab at the time of the third infusion. Sensitivity analyses for effectiveness included changes of disease activity parameters and infliximab trough levels between baseline and the last visit as well as the occurrence of adverse events leading to drug discontinuation. Factors associated with biosimilar infliximab discontinuation at the last visit were explored. RESULTS: A total of 260 patients fulfilled the inclusion criteria, including 31 rheumatoid arthritis (RA), 131 axial spondyloarthritis (axSpA) and 64 inflammatory bowel diseases. The retention rate was 85% (221/260 patients) at the time of the third biosimilar infusion. Between baseline and the last visit (mean follow-up of 34 weeks), 59 patients (23%) discontinued biosimilar infliximab, mainly due to experienced inefficacy (n = 47, 80%). No clinical or biological factors were associated with biosimilar discontinuation. No serious adverse events occurred. No change in objective disease activity parameters or infliximab trough levels was detected. However, a significant increase of BASDAI (2.94 ± 2.20 vs. 3.18 ± 2.21, P = 0.046, before vs. after switch, respectively) was observed in patients with axSpA. Innovator infliximab was re-established in 47/59 patients (80%). CONCLUSION: No changes in drug trough levels or objective parameters were observed after the systematic switch to biosimilar infliximab in a real clinical practice setting. Only changes in patient-reported outcomes were observed, suggesting attribution effects rather than pharmacological differences.

Granulomatosis with polyangiitis according to geographic origin and ethnicity: clinical-biological presentation and outcome in a French population.

Objectives: Granulomatosis with polyangiitis (GPA) mainly affects white Europeans, but rarely GPA may also affect non-Europeans. This study aimed to describe GPA clinical-biological presentation and outcome in black sub-Saharan Africans and Afro-Caribbeans and in North Africans. Methods: Among 914 GPA patients included in the French Vasculitis Study Group database, geographic origin and ethnicity were known for 760. Clinical-biological presentations and outcomes of white Europeans vs black sub-Saharans and Afro-Caribbeans and vs North Africans were analysed. Results: Among the 760 patients, 689 (91%) were white Europeans, 33 (4.3%) were North Africans and 22 (2.9%) were sub-Saharans (n = 8) or Afro-Caribbeans (French West Indies, n = 14). Black sub-Saharans and Afro-Caribbeans, compared with white Europeans, were significantly younger at GPA diagnosis (P = 0.003), had more frequent central nervous system involvement (P = 0.02), subglottic stenosis (P = 0.002) and pachymeningitis (P = 0.009), and tended to have more frequent chondritis and retroorbital tumour. Median serum creatinine levels and Birmingham Vasculitis Activity Score were significantly lower in sub-Saharans and Afro-Caribbeans (P = 0.002 and P = 0.003, respectively). In contrast, in comparison with white Europeans, North Africans had only less frequent arthralgias (P = 0.004). Time to relapse was shorter for black sub-Saharans and Afro-Caribbeans compared with white Europeans [adjusted HR = 1.96 (95% CI: 1.09, 3.51) (P = 0.02)], and did not differ for North Africans. In contrast, overall survival was not significantly different according to ethnicity. Conclusion: Our findings indicated different GPA clinical presentations in white Europeans and sub-Saharans and Afro-Caribbeans, with black patients having more frequent severe granulomatous manifestations. In addition, time to relapse was significantly shorter for black sub-Saharans and Afro-Caribbeans compared with white Europeans.

Relative Added Value: What are the Tools to Evalue it?

The relative added value of a drug is currently evaluated in France by the Transparency Commission (TC) of the National Health Authority (HAS), by assigning a level of Improvement in Actual Benefit (IAB). IAB is based on two parameters, efficacy and safety of the product, in a defined target population, either as compared to one or more other drugs with similar indications, or within therapeutic strategy. The items used for evaluation, including the level of clinical effect, the relevance of the comparator, the choice of comparison criteria and the methodology used (indirect comparison, non-inferiority studies, etc.), have been reviewed by the working group in Giens with regard to an analysis of the opinion on TC issued between 2004 and 2007 in several therapeutic areas. First of all, this attempt at rationalisation based on the criteria used to assess the relative added value demonstrated the rareness of direct comparative data, and was followed by a discussion on the possible broadening of the evaluation criteria. The group discussed taking into account the Public Health Impact (PHI), which has now been incorporated into the assessment of Actual Benefit (AB). The group believes that PHI seems to be more related to the notion of IAB than to that of AB. Indeed, it is frequently the relative added value of a new drug that produces an impact in public health. Conversely, considering the comparative evaluation criteria of PHI, which are not systematically taken into account in IMSR (such as improvement in the health of the population, meeting a public health need or impact on the healthcare system), PHI could legitimately be included in the assessment of the relative added value of a drug. Other parameters such as compliance or impact on professional practice have been considered. Thus, the notion of relative added value, evaluated at initial registration, could be based on an expected improvement in medical service. The notion of expected medical service leads to the requirement of producing additional data in real life (post-registration studies), which would support the definitive notion of improvement in actual benefit at the time of renewed registration, while taking into account the place occupied by the drug in the therapeutic strategy.