Similar efficacy and safety of initial COBRA-light and COBRA therapy in rheumatoid arthritis: 4-year results from the COBRA-light trial.

Objective: To assess the efficacy and safety of initial COBRA-light vs COBRA therapy in RA patients after a 4-year follow-up period. Methods: In the COBRA-light trial, 162 consecutive patients with recent-onset RA were randomized to either COBRA-light (prednisolone and MTX) or COBRA therapy (prednisolone, MTX and SSZ) for 1 year. After 1 year, treatment was continued without protocol, and adjusted by the treating physician according to clinical judgement, preferably with a treat-to-target strategy. Four years after trial initiation, all patients were invited to participate in the COBRA-light extension study, in which patients were interviewed and physically examined, patient reported outcomes were assessed, radiographs were made and clinical records were examined for comorbidities and medication use. Results: In the extension study, 149 out of 162 (92%) original trial patients participated: 72 COBRA-light and 77 COBRA patients. Initial COBRA-light and COBRA therapy showed similar effect on disease activity, physical functioning, radiological outcome and Boolean remission over the 4-year follow-up period. In addition, both treatment groups showed similar survival and major comorbidities, although the power to detect differences was limited. Besides protocolled differences in prednisolone, MTX and SSZ use, the use of other synthetic and biologic DMARDs and intra-articular and intramuscular glucocorticoid injections was similar in both treatment groups over the 4-year period. Conclusion: Early RA patients initially treated with COBRA-light or COBRA therapy had similar efficacy and safety outcomes over a 4-year follow-up period.

The short-term effects of two high-dose, step-down prednisolone regimens on body composition in early rheumatoid arthritis.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate the effect of two different high-dose, step-down prednisolone regimens on body composition in early RA patients after 26 weeks of treatment. METHODS: Prednisolone-naive patients with recent-onset RA (n = 108) were randomized to either COBRA (prednisolone 60 mg/day, tapered to 7.5 mg/day in 6 weeks; MTX and SSZ) or COBRA-light therapy (prednisolone 30 mg/day, tapered to 7.5 mg/day in 8 weeks and MTX). Body composition was assessed at baseline (before or soon after start of treatment) and after 26 weeks with DXA, and recorded as total body mass (TBM), total fat mass (FM), total lean mass (LM) and trunk/peripheral fat ratio. Log-ratio analyses assessed the proportional distribution of TBM (between LM, FM and bone mass) and FM (between trunk, extremities and head). The subgroup of patients with a DXA before start of treatment (n = 38) was analysed separately. RESULTS: In the subgroup of patients with a DXA before start of treatment, TBM increased by 1.6 kg (P < 0.001) and total FM by 1.3 kg (P < 0.001). The trunk/peripheral fat ratio and the proportional distribution of TBM and FM remained stable over time. There were no differences between the treatment groups. Similar results were obtained in the study population as a whole. CONCLUSION: Both high-dose, step-down prednisolone regimens caused increases in TBM, mainly caused by an increase in FM, but we found no fat redistribution from peripheral to central tissues. This absence in fat redistribution contradicts the widely held assumption of rapid adverse effects of prednisolone on body composition in RA. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTNregistry, http://www.isrctn.com, ISRCTN55552928.

Intensive combination treatment regimens, including prednisolone, are effective in treating patients with early rheumatoid arthritis regardless of additional etanercept: 1-year results of the COBRA-light open-label, randomised, non-inferiority trial.

BACKGROUND: Recently, we documented the likely non-inferiority of Combinatietherapie Bij Reumatoïde Artritis (COBRA)-light therapy (methotrexate increased to 25 mg/week with initial prednisolone 30 mg/day) compared with the original COBRA therapy (methotrexate 7.5 mg/week, sulfasalazine 2 g/day, with initial prednisolone 60 mg/day) after 26 weeks in patients with early active rheumatoid arthritis (RA). OBJECTIVE: To assess the non-inferiority of COBRA-light versus COBRA after 1 year in terms of disease activity (DAS44), functional outcome (Health Assessment Questionnaire (HAQ)) and radiographic progression (Sharp/van der Heijde score (SHS)), and to assess the effect of adding etanercept. METHODS: An open-label, randomised controlled, non-inferiority trial of 162 patients with active early RA, following a treat-to-target protocol incorporating the addition of etanercept if DAS44 ≥1.6 at weeks 26 or 39. RESULTS: Both groups showed major improvements in DAS44 after 52 weeks: mean (SD) -2.41 (1.2) in the COBRA and -2.02 (1.0) in the COBRA-light group (p=ns). In both groups, functional ability improved and radiological progression of joints was minimal. At least one adverse event was reported in 96% of the patients in both groups. In total, 25 serious adverse events occurred: 9 vs 16 in COBRA and COBRA-light, respectively. Treatment actually instituted was often less intensive than required by the protocol: of the total population, 108 patients (67%) required etanercept (more in the COBRA-light group), but only 67 of these (62%) actually received it. CONCLUSIONS: Intensive COBRA or COBRA-light therapy has major, comparably favourable effects on disease activity, functional ability and radiological outcome after 1 year in patients with early RA. Protocolised addition of etanercept was often not implemented by treating rheumatologists, and patients receiving it appeared to have limited added benefit, probably because of low disease activity levels at its initiation. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ISRCTN55552928.

A non-inferiority trial of an attenuated combination strategy ('COBRA-light') compared to the original COBRA strategy: clinical results after 26 weeks.

BACKGROUND: Early, intensive treatment of rheumatoid arthritis (RA) with the combination of (initially high dose) prednisolone, methotrexate and sulfasalazine (COBRA therapy) considerably lowers disease activity and suppresses radiological progression, but is infrequently prescribed in daily practice. Attenuating the COBRA regimen might lessen concerns about side effects, but the efficacy of such strategies is unknown. OBJECTIVE: To compare the 'COBRA-light' strategy with only two drugs, comprising a lower dose of prednisolone (starting at 30 mg/day, tapered to 7.5 mg/day in 9 weeks) and methotrexate (escalated to 25 mg/week in 9 weeks) to COBRA therapy (prednisolone 60 mg/day, tapered to 7.5 mg/day in 6 weeks, methotrexate 7.5 mg/week and sulfasalazine 2 g/day). METHOD: An open, randomised controlled, non-inferiority trial in 164 patients with early active RA, all treated according to a treat to target strategy. RESULTS: At baseline patients had moderately active disease: mean (SD) 44-joint disease activity score (DAS44) 4.13 (0.81) for COBRA and 3.95 (0.9) for COBRA-light. After 6 months, DAS44 significantly decreased in both groups (-2.50 (1.21) for COBRA and -2.18 (1.10) for COBRA-light). The adjusted difference in DAS44 improvement between the groups, 0.21 (95% CI -0.11 to 0.53), was smaller than the predefined clinically relevant difference of 0.5. Minimal disease activity (DAS44 <1.6) was reached in almost half of patients in both groups (49% and 41% in COBRA and COBRA-light, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: At 6 months COBRA-light therapy is most likely non-inferior to COBRA therapy. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: 55552928.

Metabolic effects of high-dose prednisolone treatment in early rheumatoid arthritis: balance between diabetogenic effects and inflammation reduction.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate the dose-related effects of glucocorticoid treatment on glucose tolerance, beta cell function, and insulin sensitivity in patients with early active rheumatoid arthritis (RA). METHODS: A randomized, controlled, single-blind trial was conducted in 41 patients with early active RA. At the beginning of the trial patients had not been treated for their RA, and were randomized to begin treatment with prednisolone at 60 mg/day or 30 mg/day. Before and at the end of 1 week of treatment, a frequently sampled oral glucose tolerance test was performed. The glucose area under the curve (AUC(G) ) was calculated. In addition, beta cell function and insulin sensitivity parameters were computed. RESULTS: Patients (mean ± SD age 55.5 ± 14.8 years and 54.2 ± 12.6 years in the prednisone 60 mg/day and prednisone 30 mg/day groups, respectively; body mass index 24.5 ± 4.1 kg/m(2) and 25.4 ± 4.2 kg/m(2) , respectively) had active disease at baseline (mean ± SD Disease Activity Score in 44 joints 4.1 ± 0.7 and 4.0 ± 0.8, respectively; median C-reactive protein [CRP] level 14 mg/liter [interquartile range 6-34] and 19 mg/liter [interquartile range 3-39], respectively). In addition, 56% of the patients had impaired glucose tolerance at baseline, and 7% were found to have previously unrecognized type 2 diabetes mellitus (DM). Associations of the AUC(G) with erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ß = 2.430 [95% confidence interval 0.179-4.681], P = 0.04) and with CRP level (ß = 2.358 [95% confidence interval 0.210-4.506], P = 0.03) were demonstrated. Treatment with prednisolone at both dosages reduced CRP levels significantly. The incidence of type 2 DM increased to 24% (P < 0.001) (evenly distributed across the groups). The mean AUC(G) did not change in either treatment arm. Beta cell function improved during prednisone treatment at 60 mg/day (P = 0.02) and at 30 mg/day (P = 0.04). Disease duration was associated with changes in the AUC(G) (ß = 3.626 [95% confidence interval 1.077-6.174], P = 0.007) and with deterioration of the glucose state (odds ratio 1.068 [95% confidence interval 1.017-1.122], P = 0.009). CONCLUSION: In this study, short-term treatment with prednisolone 60 mg or 30 mg per day improved disease activity without deterioration of glucose tolerance in patients with active RA. However, due to individual differences, monitoring is recommended.

Inactivating PSMB5 mutations and P-glycoprotein (multidrug resistance-associated protein/ATP-binding cassette B1) mediate resistance to proteasome inhibitors: ex vivo efficacy of (immuno)proteasome inhibitors in mononuclear blood cells from patients with rheumatoid arthritis.

Bortezomib (BTZ), a registered proteasome inhibitor (PI) for multiple myeloma, has also been proposed as a potential antirheumatic agent. Its reported side effects, however, make it unappealing for long-term administration, and resistance may also develop. To overcome this, second-generation PIs became available. Here, we investigated whether a novel class of peptide epoxyketone-based PIs, including carfilzomib, N-((S)-3-methoxy-1-(((S)-3-methoxy-1-(((S)-1-((R)-2-methyloxiran-2-yl)-1-oxo-3-phenylpropan-2-yl)amino)-1-oxopropan-2-yl)amino)-1-oxopropan-2-yl)-2-methylthiazole-5-carboxamide (ONX0912), and (S)-3-(4-methoxyphenyl)-N-((S)-1-((S)-2-methyloxiran-2-yl)-1-oxo-3-phenylpropan-2-yl)-2-((S)-2-(2-morpholinoacetamido)propanamido)propanamide (ONX0914), might escape two established BTZ-resistance mechanisms: 1) mutations in the proteasome ß5 subunit (PSMB5) targeted by these PIs, and 2) drug efflux mediated by ATP-binding cassette transporters. THP1 myeloid sublines with acquired resistance to BTZ (54- to 235-fold) caused by mutations in the PSMB5 gene displayed marked cross-resistance but less pronounced cross-resistance to carfilzomib (9- to 32-fold), ONX0912 (39- to 62-fold), and ONX0914 (27- to 97-fold). As for ATP-binding cassette transporter-mediated efflux, lymphoid CEM/VLB cells with P-glycoprotein (Pgp)/multidrug resistance 1 overexpression exhibited substantial resistance to carfilzomib (114-fold), ONX0912 (23-fold), and ONX0914 (162-fold), whereas less resistance to BTZ (4.5-fold) was observed. Consistently, ß5 subunit-associated chymotrypsin-like proteasome activity was significantly less inhibited in these CEM/VLB cells. Ex vivo analysis of peripheral blood mononuclear cells from therapy-naive patients with rheumatoid arthritis revealed that, although basal Pgp levels were low, P-glycoprotein expression compromised the inhibitory effect of carfilzomib and ONX0914. However, the use of P121 (reversin 121), a Pgp transport inhibitor, restored parental cell inhibitory levels in both CEM/VLB cells and peripheral blood mononuclear cells. These results indicate that the pharmacologic activity of these PIs may be hindered by drug resistance mechanisms involving PSMB5 mutations and PI extrusion via Pgp.

Advances in glucocorticoid-induced osteoporosis.

Glucocorticoid-induced osteoporosis (GIOP) is one of the most important side effects of glucocorticoid use, as it leads to an increased risk of fractures. Recently, many published studies have focused on the cellular and molecular mechanisms of bone metabolism, the pathophysiology of GIOP, and the intervention options to prevent GIOP. In this review, recent advances in GIOP are summarized, particularly recent progress in our understanding of the mechanisms of GIOP resulting in improved insight that might result in the development of new treatment options in the near future.

First Report of IgG4 Related Disease Primary Presenting as Vertebral Bone Marrow Lesions.

IgG4-related disease is a fibro-inflammatory disorder characterized by swelling of tissues and affected organs accompanied by the development of scar tissue (fibrosis) and infiltration by IgG4 positive plasma cells. Almost any organ can be affected, including, but rarely, bone marrowinvolvement. Here we present a case of a 76-year-old male with IgG4-related disease presenting primarily with vertebral bone marrow lesions. Histopathology showed the typical features of storiform fibrosis, and increased IgG4 positive plasma cells. Treatment with corticosteroids significantly improved wellbeing and resolved lesion size on MRI.

Do Short and Sustained Periods of American College of Rheumatology/European League Against Rheumatism Remission Predict Functional and Radiographic Outcome in Early Rheumatoid Arthritis Patients With Low Overall Damage Progression?

OBJECTIVE: To investigate whether remission at single and consecutive visits predicts good outcome in early rheumatoid arthritis (RA). METHODS: The presence of remission according to American College of Rheumatology (ACR)/European League Against Rheumatism (EULAR) and other criteria (Boolean clinical, Clinical Disease Activity Index, Disease Activity Score [DAS], DAS in 28 joints, and Routine Assessment of Patient Index Data 3) was assessed in early RA patients during the first year of the Combination Therapy for Rheumatoid Arthritis light trial. Likelihood ratios were used to assess whether meeting the remission criteria at single visits (13, 26, 39, or 52 weeks) and consecutive visits (13 and 26, 26 and 39, or 39 and 52 weeks) predicted good outcome in the second year (52-104 weeks). Good outcome was defined for function (Health Assessment Questionnaire score consistently ≤0.5 and no deterioration), radiographic damage progression (no deterioration in Sharp/van der Heijde scores), and both ("overall good outcome"). RESULTS: Of the original 164 trial patients, 144 had evaluable data. In the second year, good functional outcome was observed in 35%, good radiographic outcome in 79%, and both in 28% of the patients. Almost all criteria predicted good functional and good overall outcome, at both single and consecutive visits; only single DAS remission did not significantly predict good overall outcome (P = 0.07). Sustained remission periods resulted in higher likelihood ratios than remission at single visits. None of the criteria predicted good radiographic outcome. CONCLUSION: Early RA patients who reached remission according to ACR/EULAR and other criteria during short or sustained periods were likely to retain good physical function in the subsequent months. Sustained remission periods were a stronger predictor than remission at single visits. However, in the setting of low overall damage progression, (sustained) remission was not predictive of good radiographic outcome.

Cost-utility of COBRA-light versus COBRA therapy in patients with early rheumatoid arthritis: the COBRA-light trial.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate if COmbinatie therapie Bij Reumatoïde Artritis (COBRA)-light therapy is cost-effective in treating patients with early rheumatoid arthritis (RA) compared with COBRA therapy. METHODS: This economic evaluation was performed next to the open-label, randomised non-inferiority COBRA-light trial in 164 patients with early RA. Non-responders to COBRA or COBRA-light received etanercept (50 mg/week) for 3-6 months. The societal perspective analysis took medical direct, non-medical direct and indirect costs into account. Costs were measured with patient cost diaries for the follow-up period of 52 weeks. Bootstrapping techniques estimated uncertainty around the cost-effectiveness ratios, presented in cost-effectiveness planes. RESULTS: 164 patients were randomised to either COBRA or COBRA-light strategy. At week 52, COBRA-light proved to be non-inferior to COBRA therapy on all clinical outcome measures. The results of the base-case cost-utility analysis (intention-to-treat analyses) revealed that COBRA-light strategy is more expensive (k€9.3 (SD 0.9) compared with COBRA (k€7.2 (SD 0.8)), but the difference in costs were not significant (k€2.0; 95% CI -0.3 to 4.4). Also, both strategies produced similar quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs). The sensitivity analyses showed robustness of these results. In a per-protocol sensitivity analysis, in which costs of etanercept were assumed to be provided as prescribed according to protocol, both arms had much higher costs: COBRA-light: k€11.5 (8.3) compared with k€8.5 (6.8) for COBRA, and the difference in costs was significant (k€2.9; 0.6 to 5.3). CONCLUSIONS: In the base-case cost-utility analysis, the two strategies produced similar QALYs for similar costs. But it is anticipated that if protocol had been followed correctly, the COBRA-light strategy would have been more costly due to additional etanercept costs, for a limited health gain. Given the limited added benefit and high costs of starting etanercept in the presence of low disease activity in our trial, such a strategy needs better justification than is available now. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: 55552928, Results.