Effects of COVID-19 vaccination on disease activity in patients with rheumatoid arthritis and psoriatic arthritis on targeted therapy in the COVIDSER study.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate the influence of COVID-19 vaccination on disease activity in rheumatoid arthritis (RA) and psoriatic arthritis (PsA) patients under targeted therapies. PATIENTS AND METHODS: 1765 vaccinated patients COVID-19, 1178 (66.7%) with RA and 587 (33.3%) with PsA from the COVID-19 registry in patients with rheumatic diseases (COVIDSER) project, were included. Demographics, disease characteristics, Disease Activity Score in 28 joints (DAS28) and targeted treatments were collected. DAS28-based flare rates and categorised disease activity distribution prevaccination and post vaccination were analysed by log-linear regression and contingency analyses, respectively. The influence of vaccination on DAS28 variation as a continuous measure was evaluated using a random coefficient model. RESULTS: The distribution of categorised disease activity and flare rates was not significantly modified by vaccination. Log-linear regression showed no significant changes in the rate of flares in the 6-month period after vaccination compared with the same period prior to vaccination in neither patients with RA nor patients with PsA. When DAS28 variations were analysed using random coefficient models, no significant variations in disease activity were detected after vaccination for both groups of patients. However, patients with RA treated with Janus kinase inhibitors (JAK-i) (1) and interleukin-6 inhibitor (IL-6-i) experienced a worsening of disease activity (1.436±0.531, p=0.007, and 1.201±0.550, p=0.029, respectively) in comparison with those treated with tumour necrosis factor inhibitor (TNF-i). Similarly, patients with PsA treated with interleukin-12/23 inhibitor (IL-12/23-i) showed a worsening of disease activity (4.476±1.906, p=0.019) compared with those treated with TNF-i. CONCLUSION: COVID-19 vaccination was not associated with increased rate of flares in patients with RA and PsA. However, a potential increase in disease activity in patients with RA treated with JAK-i and IL-6-i and in patients with PsA treated with IL-12/23-i warrants further investigation.

Factors associated with long-term retention of treatment with golimumab in a real-world setting: an analysis of the Spanish BIOBADASER registry.

The retention rate of a biological drug (percentage of patients remaining on treatment over time) provides an index of a drug's overall effectiveness. The golimumab retention rate as first-line biological therapy was high in clinical trial extensions lasting 5 years. Real-world studies also indicate good retention rates but have been of shorter duration. The probability of retention with golimumab treatment was assessed, as any line of anti-tumor necrosis factor-alpha therapy, for up to 5 years in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA), axial spondyloarthritis (SpA) or psoriatic arthritis (PsA), associated factors were analyzed. A retrospective database analysis of the Spanish registry of patients with rheumatic disorders receiving biological drugs (BIOBADASER) was performed. Among 353 patients, 29.8% had RA, 41.6% SpA and 28.6% PsA. Golimumab was the first biological drug in 40.1% of patients, second in 30.1% and third/later in 29.8%. The overall probability of retention of golimumab at years 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 was 85.9% (95% confidence interval 81.4-89.5%), 73.7% (67.1-79.1%), 68.5% (60.5-75.1%), 60.6% (50.2-69.5%) and 57.1% (44.9-67.5%), respectively. Retention was similar across indications (p = 0.070) but was greater when golimumab was used as the first biological agent compared with later therapy lines (p < 0.001). Factors associated with higher retention of golimumab treatment (Cox regression) were use as a first-line biological and concomitant methotrexate treatment; corticosteroid need was associated with lower retention. The long-term probability of golimumab retention was high in this real-world study of patients with rheumatic diseases, especially when used as the first biological drug.

Persistence and adverse events of biological treatment in adult patients with juvenile idiopathic arthritis: results from BIOBADASER.

BACKGROUND: Biologic therapy has changed the prognosis of patients with juvenile idiopathic arthritis (JIA). The aim of this study was to examine the pattern of use, drug survival, and adverse events of biologics in patients with JIA during the period from diagnosis to adulthood. METHODS: All patients included in BIOBADASER (Spanish Registry for Adverse Events of Biological Therapy in Rheumatic Diseases), a multicenter prospective registry, diagnosed with JIA between 2000 and 2015 were analyzed. Proportions, means, and SDs were used to describe the population. Incidence rates and 95% CIs were calculated to assess adverse events. Kaplan-Meier analysis was used to compare the drug survival rates. RESULTS: A total of 469 patients (46.1% women) were included. Their mean age at diagnosis was 9.4 ± 5.3 years. Their mean age at biologic treatment initiation was 23.9 ± 13.9 years. The pattern of use of biologics during their pediatric years showed a linear increase from 24% in 2000 to 65% in 2014. Biologic withdrawal for disease remission was higher in patients who initiated use biologics prior to 16 years of age than in those who were older (25.7% vs 7.9%, p < 0.0001). Serious adverse events had a total incidence rate of 41.4 (35.2-48.7) of 1000 patient-years. Patients younger than 16 years old showed significantly increased infections (p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Survival and suspension by remission of biologics were higher when these compounds were initiated in patients with JIA who had not yet reached 16 years of age. The incidence rate of serious adverse events in pediatric vs adult patients with JIA treated with biologics was similar; however, a significant increase of infection was observed in patients under 16 years old.

Safety and retention rate of off-label uses of TNF antagonists in rheumatic conditions: data from the Spanish registry BIOBADASER 2.0.

OBJECTIVE: To compare the safety and retention rate of TNF antagonists used in approved indications (AIs) and non-AIs. METHODS: Analysis of the Spanish registry BIOBADASER 2.0 (February 2000 to October 2009). Patients were classified into AIs and off-label uses (OUs), according to the European Medicines Agency approval. Retention rates, incidence rates (IRs) and IR ratios (IRRs) of adverse events (AEs) with 95% CI were compared between uses, by log-rank test, cause-specific Cox regression models and generalized linear models with Poisson's distribution. RESULTS: First treatment with TNF antagonist was available in 5150 patients, of whom 4594 (89%) were AIs (2854 RA, 882 AS and 858 PsA) and 556 (11%) were OUs [437 chronic arthropathies in the spectrum of SpAs (CA) and 119 chronic immune-mediated diseases (CIDs)]. The IR of AE was largest in CID (649 events per 1000 patient-years) and lowest in PsA (250 events per 1000 patient-years). The occurrence of AEs was significantly associated with OU [IRR of CA vs RA 1.33 (95% CI 1.19, 1.49); IRR of CID vs RA 1.94 (95% CI 1.62, 2.31). The largest hazard ratio for discontinuation was for CID vs RA (1.33; 95% CI 1.02, 1.71) and especially vs AS (2.18; 95% CI 1.63, 2.90). CONCLUSIONS: OUs of TNF antagonists need a very close ascertainment of risk/benefit. The safety and retention pattern for CID is similar to that for RA and the pattern for CA resembles that of AS. This study shows an additional value of a national registry.

DAS-28-based EULAR response and HAQ improvement in rheumatoid arthritis patients switching between TNF antagonists.

INTRODUCTION: No definitive data are available regarding the value of switching to an alternative TNF antagonist in rheumatoid arthritis patients who fail to respond to the first one. The aim of this study was to evaluate treatment response in a clinical setting based on HAQ improvement and EULAR response criteria in RA patients who were switched to a second or a third TNF antagonist due to failure with the first one. METHODS: This was an observational, prospective study of a cohort of 417 RA patients treated with TNF antagonists in three university hospitals in Spain between January 1999 and December 2005. A database was created at the participating centres, with well-defined operational instructions. The main outcome variables were analyzed using parametric or non-parametric tests depending on the level of measurement and distribution of each variable. RESULTS: Mean (+/- SD) DAS-28 on starting the first, second and third TNF antagonist was 5.9 (+/- 2.0), 5.1 (+/- 1.5) and 6.1 (+/- 1.1). At the end of follow-up, it decreased to 3.3 (+/- 1.6; Delta = -2.6; p > 0.0001), 4.2 (+/- 1.5; Delta = -1.1; p = 0.0001) and 5.4 (+/- 1.7; Delta = -0.7; p = 0.06). For the first TNF antagonist, DAS-28-based EULAR response level was good in 42% and moderate in 33% of patients. The second TNF antagonist yielded a good response in 20% and no response in 53% of patients, while the third one yielded a good response in 28% and no response in 72%. Mean baseline HAQ on starting the first, second and third TNF antagonist was 1.61, 1.52 and 1.87, respectively. At the end of follow-up, it decreased to 1.12 (Delta = -0.49; p < 0.0001), 1.31 (Delta = -0.21, p = 0.004) and 1.75 (Delta = -0.12; p = 0.1), respectively. Sixty four percent of patients had a clinically important improvement in HAQ (defined as > or = -0.22) with the first TNF antagonist and 46% with the second. CONCLUSION: A clinically significant effect size was seen in less than half of RA patients cycling to a second TNF antagonist.

All-cause and cause-specific mortality in rheumatoid arthritis are not greater than expected when treated with tumour necrosis factor antagonists.

BACKGROUND: Mortality is increased in rheumatoid arthritis (RA), mainly because of cardiovascular (CV) events, cancer and infections. Recent data suggest that treatment with tumour necrosis factor (TNF) antagonists may affect this trend. OBJECTIVE: To assess whether treatment with TNF antagonists is associated with reduction in CV events, cancer and infection rates, and in mortality in patients with RA treated and not treated with TNF antagonists. METHODS: BIOBADASER is a registry for active long-term follow-up of safety of biological treatments in patients with RA. It includes 4459 patients with RA treated with TNF antagonists. EMECAR is an external RA cohort (n = 789) established to define the characteristics of the disease in Spain and to assess comorbidity. The incidence density (ischaemic heart disease) of CV events, cancer and infections was estimated and compared. The standardised mortality ratio was compared with the rate in the general population. A propensity score was used to match cohorts by the probability of being treated. RESULTS: Rates of CV and cancer events are significantly higher in EMECAR than in BIOBADASER (RR 5-7 for different CV events, and RR 2.9 for cancer), whereas the rate of serious infections is significantly higher in BIOBADASER (RR 1.6). Mortality ratio of BIOBADASER by EMECAR is 0.32 (0.20-0.53) for all causes of death, 0.58 (0.24-1.41) for CV events, 0.52 (0.21-1.29) for infection and 0.36 (0.10-1.30) for cancer-related deaths. CONCLUSION: Morbidity, other than infection, and mortality are not higher than expected in patients with RA treated with TNF antagonists.