Discontinuation of tofacitinib and TNF inhibitors in patients with rheumatoid arthritis: analysis of pooled data from two registries in Canada.

OBJECTIVES: The similarity in retention of tumour necrosis factor inhibitors (TNFi) and tofacitinib (TOFA) was previously reported separately by the Ontario Best Practices Research Initiative and the Quebec cohort Rhumadata. However, because of small sample sizes in each registry, we aimed to confirm the findings by repeating the analysis of discontinuation of TNFi compared with TOFA, using pooled data from both these registries. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. SETTING: Pooled data from two rheumatoid arthritis (RA) registries in Canada. PARTICIPANTS: Patients with RA starting TOFA or TNFi between June 2014 and December 2019 were included. A total of 1318 patients were included TNFi (n=825) or TOFA (n=493). OUTCOME MEASURES: Time to discontinuation was assessed using Kaplan-Meier survival and Cox proportional hazards regression analysis. Propensity score (PS) stratification (deciles) and PS weighting were used to estimate treatment effects. RESULTS: The mean disease duration in the TNFi group was shorter (8.9 years vs 13 years, p<0.001). Prior biological use (33.9% vs 66.9%, p<0.001) and clinical disease activity index (20.0 vs 22.1, p=0.02) were lower in the TNFi group.Discontinuation was reported in 309 (37.5%) and 181 (36.7%) TNFi and TOFA patients, respectively. After covariate adjustment using PS, there was no statistically significant difference between the two groups in discontinuation due to any reason HR=0.96 (95% CI 0.78 to 1.19, p=0.74)) as well as discontinuation due to ineffectiveness only HR=1.08 (95% CI 0.81 to 1.43, p=0.61)).TNFi users were less likely to discontinue due to adverse events (AEs) (adjusted HRs: 0.46, 95% CI 0.29 to 0.74; p=0.001). Results remained consistent for firstline users. CONCLUSIONS: In this pooled real-world data study, the discontinuation rates overall were similar. However, discontinuation due to AEs was higher in TOFA compared with TNFi users.

Predictors of Influenza Vaccination in Early Rheumatoid Arthritis 2017-2021: Results From the Canadian Early Arthritis Cohort.

OBJECTIVE: Adults with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) are at a higher risk for infections, including influenza and related complications. We identified influenza vaccination coverage in adults newly diagnosed with RA and examined sociodemographic RA characteristics and attitudes associated with vaccination. METHODS: We used data from patients enrolled in the Canadian Early Arthritis Cohort between September 2017 and February 2021. At enrollment, participants reported their vaccination status in the previous year and completed the Beliefs About Medicines Questionnaire (BMQ). Clinical data were obtained from medical records. Logistic regression was used to identify predictors of vaccination in the year after RA diagnosis. RESULTS: The baseline analytic sample of 431 patients were mostly White (80%) women (67%) with a mean age of 56 (SD 14) years. Prediagnosis, influenza vaccine coverage was 38%, increasing to 46% post diagnosis in the longitudinal sample (n = 229). Participants with previous influenza vaccination (odds ratio [OR] 15.33; 95% confidence interval [CI] 6.37-36.90), on biologics or JAKs (OR 5.42; 95% CI 1.72-17.03), and with a higher change in BMQ Necessity-Concerns Differential scores (OR 1.08; 95% CI 1.02-1.15) had greater odds, whereas women (OR 0.32; 95% CI 0.14-0.71), participants with a non-White racial background (OR 0.13; 95% CI 0.04-0.51), and participants currently smoking (OR 0.09; 95% CI 0.02-0.37) had lower odds of influenza vaccine coverage. CONCLUSION: Influenza vaccination coverage in patients with early RA remains below national targets in adults living with a chronic condition. Discussing vaccine history and medication attitudes at initial clinic visits with new patients with RA may enhance vaccine acceptance and uptake.

Physician- and Patient-reported Effectiveness Are Similar for Tofacitinib and TNFi in Rheumatoid Arthritis: Data From a Rheumatoid Arthritis Registry.

OBJECTIVE: Tofacitinib (TOF) is an oral, small-molecule drug used for rheumatoid arthritis (RA) treatment and is one of several alternative treatments to tumor necrosis factor inhibitors (TNFi). We evaluated physician- and patient-reported effectiveness of TNFi compared to TOF, using real-world data from the Ontario Best Practices Research Initiative (OBRI). METHODS: Patients enrolled in the OBRI initiating TOF or TNFi between 2014 and 2019 were included. Patients were required to have physician- and patient-reported effectiveness outcome data, including Clinical Disease Activity Index (CDAI) and RA Disease Activity Index (RADAI), available at treatment initiation and 6 (± 2) months later. To deal with confounding by indication, we estimated propensity scores (PS) for covariates. RESULTS: Four hundred nineteen patients were included. Of those, 226 initiated a TNFi and 193 TOF, and had a mean (SD) disease duration of 8.0 (8.7) and 12.6 (9.6) years, respectively. In addition, the TNFi group was less likely to have prior biologic use (21.7%) compared to the TOF group (67.9%). The proportion of patients in CDAI low disease activity (LDA)/remission (REM) at 6 months was 36.7% and 33.2% in the TNFi and TOF groups, respectively. The generalized linear mixed models adjusting for PS quantile showed that there was no significant difference in CDAI LDA/REM (odds ratio [OR] 0.85, 95% CI 0.51-1.43) and RADAI coefficient (OR 0.48, 95% CI -0.18 to 1.14) between the 2 groups (ref: TOF). CONCLUSION: In patients with RA, physician- and patient-reported effectiveness are similar in the TNFi and TOF groups 6 months after treatment.

Filgotinib versus placebo or adalimumab in patients with rheumatoid arthritis and inadequate response to methotrexate: a phase III randomised clinical trial.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of the Janus kinase-1-preferential inhibitor filgotinib versus placebo or tumour necrosis factor-α inhibitor therapy in patients with active rheumatoid arthritis (RA) despite ongoing treatment with methotrexate (MTX). METHODS: This 52-week, multicentre, double-blind, placebo-controlled and active-controlled phase III trial evaluated once-daily oral filgotinib in patients with RA randomised 3:3:2:3 to filgotinib 200 mg (FIL200) or filgotinib 100 mg (FIL100), subcutaneous adalimumab 40 mg biweekly, or placebo (through week 24), all with stable weekly background MTX. The primary endpoint was the proportion of patients achieving 20% improvement in American College of Rheumatology criteria (ACR20) at week 12. Additional efficacy outcomes were assessed sequentially. Safety was assessed from adverse events and laboratory abnormalities. RESULTS: The proportion of patients (n=1755 randomised and treated) achieving ACR20 at week 12 was significantly higher for FIL200 (76.6%) and FIL100 (69.8%) versus placebo (49.9%; treatment difference (95% CI), 26.7% (20.6% to 32.8%) and 19.9% (13.6% to 26.2%), respectively; both p<0.001). Filgotinib was superior to placebo in key secondary endpoints assessing RA signs and symptoms, physical function and structural damage. FIL200 was non-inferior to adalimumab in terms of Disease Activity Score in 28 joints with C reactive protein ≤3.2 at week 12 (p<0.001); FIL100 did not achieve non-inferiority. Adverse events and laboratory abnormalities were comparable among active treatment arms. CONCLUSIONS: Filgotinib improved RA signs and symptoms, improved physical function, inhibited radiographic progression and was well tolerated in patients with RA with inadequate response to MTX. FIL200 was non-inferior to adalimumab. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT02889796.

Radiographic progression based on baseline characteristics from TNF inhibitor biosimilar studies in patients with rheumatoid arthritis.

OBJECTIVE: Phase III clinical trials of the tumour necrosis factor inhibitors SB4, SB2, and SB5 (biosimilars to etanercept, infliximab, and adalimumab, respectively) have demonstrated efficacy in moderate-to-severe rheumatoid arthritis (RA). Data from these trials were used to identify baseline characteristics associated with radiographic progression and to build a matrix risk model for its prediction. METHODS: Patients with radiographic progression and baseline demographic and disease characteristic data were pooled across the 3 phase III studies of each biosimilar and its reference product. Baseline demographics and disease characteristics were evaluated for their relationship with radiographic progression (1-year mean change in mTSS > 0); 3 factors were selected based on strongest Pearson's correlation coefficient with the change in modified Total Sharp Score. Univariate logistic regression was performed to assess the association between each baseline factor and the rate of radiographic progression, with subsequent matrix model development performed using multivariate logistic regression. RESULTS: A total of 1371 patients were included in the analysis, with a radiographic progression rate of 27.4%. The 3 baseline predictors of radiographic progression, based on Pearson's correlation coefficient, were 28 swollen joint count (SJC28), C-reactive protein (CRP), and physician global assessment (PhGA). A matrix model showed that the predicted risk of radiographic progression was higher with the increased level of SJC28, CRP, and PhGA (P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: In this pooled analysis of phase III clinical trial data of biosimilars for RA, identifiable baseline factors (SJC28, CRP, and PhGA) associated with radiographic progression were similar to those described in prior studies. Even though radiographic progression was minimal, a small number of patients who have increased SJC28, CRP, and PhGA at baseline should be closely monitored and follow treat-to-target approach. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBERS: EudraCT 2012-005026-30. Registered 30 April 2013, https://www.clinicaltrialsregister.eu/ctr-search/trial/2012-005026-30/results EudraCT 2012-005733-37. Registered 10 July 2013, https://www.clinicaltrialsregister.eu/ctr-search/trial/2012-005733-37/results EudraCT 2013-005013-13. Registered 01 April 2014, https://www.clinicaltrialsregister.eu/ctr-search/trial/2013-005013-13/results.

Toward Defining Primary and Secondary Nonresponse in Rheumatoid Arthritis Patients Treated with Anti-TNF: Results from the BioTRAC and OBRI Registries.

OBJECTIVE: Although most patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) respond to anti-tumor necrosis factor (anti-TNF) treatment, some present with initial nonresponse (1ry nonresponse) or lose initial responsiveness (2ry nonresponse). We compared the rate of real-world "nonresponse" to first anti-TNF as reported by treating physicians to the nonresponse rate per accepted definitions and recommended treat-to-target strategies. METHODS: Patients were included from the Biologic Treatment Registry Across Canada (BioTRAC) and Ontario Best Practices Research Initiative (OBRI) registries who were taking their first anti-TNF, with ≥ 1 followup visit. Posthoc reclassification of physician-reported nonresponse was based on prior achievement of 28-joint count Disease Activity Score based on erythrocyte sedimentation rate (DAS28-ESR) low disease activity (LDA), Clinical Disease Activity Index (CDAI) LDA, or good/moderate European League Against Rheumatism (EULAR) response, and actual time of physician-reported nonresponse. RESULTS: Among 736 BioTRAC and 640 OBRI patients, 13.7% and 18%, respectively, discontinued their anti-TNF because of physician-reported nonresponse. Based on reclassification using disease activity, 65.6% (BioTRAC) and 87.2% (OBRI) of 1ry nonresponders did not achieve DAS28-ESR LDA, 65.6%/90.7% CDAI LDA, and 46.9%/61.5% good/moderate EULAR response. Among 2ry nonresponders, 50.7%/47.8% did not achieve DAS28-ESR LDA, 37.7%/52.9% CDAI LDA, and 15.9%/19.6% good/moderate EULAR response before treatment discontinuation. Regarding actual time of nonresponse, 18.8% of BioTRAC and 60.8% of OBRI 1ry nonresponders discontinued at ≤ 6 months. In both registries, a high proportion of 2ry nonresponders discontinued their anti-TNF after 12 months (87.0% BioTRAC, 60.9% OBRI). CONCLUSION: Physician-reported 1ry nonresponse was more correlated with non-achievement of DAS28-ESR LDA or CDAI LDA, whereas 2ry nonresponse with actual time of discontinuation. Further work is needed to confirm the importance of response and type of response to the initial anti-TNF in identifying patients most likely to benefit from a second biologic agent treatment.

Safety and Efficacy of Baricitinib Through 128 Weeks in an Open-label, Longterm Extension Study in Patients with Rheumatoid Arthritis.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the safety and efficacy of baricitinib in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) up to 128 weeks in a phase IIb study (NCT01185353). METHODS: After a 24-week blinded period, eligible patients entered an initial 52-week open-label extension (OLE); patients receiving 8 mg once daily (QD) continued with that dose and all others received 4 mg QD. Doses could be escalated to 8 mg QD at 28 or 32 weeks at investigator discretion when ≥ 6 tender and ≥ 6 swollen joints were present. Patients completing the first OLE were eligible to enter a second 52-week OLE and receive 4 mg QD regardless of previous dose. RESULTS: In the 4-mg (n = 108) and 8-mg (n = 93) groups, treatment-emergent adverse events (AE) occurred in 63% and 67%, serious AE in 16% and 13%, infections in 35% and 40%, and serious infections in 5% and 3% of patients, respectively. Exposure-adjusted incidence rates for AE for all baricitinib groups in the second OLE were similar to or lower than rates observed in the first OLE. No opportunistic infections, tuberculosis cases, or lymphomas were observed through 128 weeks; 1 death occurred during the first OLE. Among all patients in both OLE, the proportions who achieved disease improvement at Week 24 were similar or increased at weeks 76 and 128. CONCLUSION: In a phase IIb study in RA, the safety and tolerability profile of baricitinib, up to 128 weeks, remained consistent with earlier observations, without unexpected late signals. Clinical improvements seen in the 24-week blinded period were maintained during the OLE.

Overweight, Obesity, and the Likelihood of Achieving Sustained Remission in Early Rheumatoid Arthritis: Results From a Multicenter Prospective Cohort Study.

OBJECTIVE: Obesity is implicated in rheumatoid arthritis (RA) development, severity, outcomes, and treatment response. We estimated the independent effects of overweight and obesity on ability to achieve sustained remission (sREM) in the 3 years following RA diagnosis. METHODS: Data were from the Canadian Early Arthritis Cohort, a multicenter observational trial of early RA patients treated by rheumatologists using guideline-based care. sREM was defined as Disease Activity Score in 28 joints (DAS28) <2.6 for 2 consecutive visits. Patients were stratified by body mass index (BMI) as healthy (18.5-24.9 kg/m2 ), overweight (25-29.9 kg/m2 ), and obese (≥30 kg/m2 ). Cox regression was used to estimate the effect of the BMI category on the probability of achieving sREM over the first 3 years, controlling for age, sex, race, education, RA duration, smoking status, comorbidities, baseline DAS28, Health Assessment Questionnaire disability index, C-reactive protein level, and initial treatment. RESULTS: Of 982 patients, 315 (32%) had a healthy BMI, 343 (35%) were overweight, and 324 (33%) were obese; 355 (36%) achieved sREM within 3 years. Initial treatment did not differ by BMI category. Compared to healthy BMI, overweight patients (hazard ratio [HR] 0.75 [95% confidence interval (95% CI) 0.58-0.98]) and obese patients (HR 0.53 [95% CI 0.39-0.71]) were significantly less likely to achieve sREM. CONCLUSION: Rates of overweight and obesity were high (69%) in this early RA cohort. Overweight patients were 25% less likely, and obese patients were 47% less likely, to achieve sREM in the first 3 years, despite similar initial disease-modifying antirheumatic drug treatment and subsequent biologic use. This is the largest study demonstrating the negative impact of excess weight on RA disease activity and supports a call to action to better identify and address this risk in RA patients.

Baricitinib versus Placebo or Adalimumab in Rheumatoid Arthritis.

BACKGROUND: Baricitinib is an oral, reversible inhibitor of the Janus kinases JAK1 and JAK2 that may have therapeutic value in patients with rheumatoid arthritis. METHODS: We conducted a 52-week, phase 3, double-blind, placebo- and active-controlled trial in which 1307 patients with active rheumatoid arthritis who were receiving background therapy with methotrexate were randomly assigned to one of three regimens in a 3:3:2 ratio: placebo (switched to baricitinib after 24 weeks), 4 mg of baricitinib once daily, or 40 mg of adalimumab (an anti-tumor necrosis factor α monoclonal antibody) every other week. End-point measures evaluated after adjustment for multiplicity included 20% improvement according to the criteria of the American College of Rheumatology (ACR20 response) (the primary end point), the Disease Activity Score for 28 joints (DAS28), the Health Assessment Questionnaire-Disability Index, and the Simplified Disease Activity Index at week 12, as well as radiographic progression of joint damage as measured by the van der Heijde modification of the total Sharp score (mTSS) (range, 0 to 448, with higher scores indicating greater structural joint damage) at week 24. RESULTS: More patients had an ACR20 response at week 12 with baricitinib than with placebo (primary end point, 70% vs. 40%, P<0.001). All major secondary objectives were met, including inhibition of radiographic progression of joint damage, according to the mTSS at week 24 with baricitinib versus placebo (mean change from baseline, 0.41 vs. 0.90; P<0.001) and an increased ACR20 response rate at week 12 with baricitinib versus adalimumab (70% vs. 61%, P=0.014). Adverse events, including infections, were more frequent through week 24 with baricitinib and adalimumab than with placebo. Cancers were reported in five patients (two who received baricitinib and three who received placebo). Baricitinib was associated with reductions in neutrophil counts and increases in levels of creatinine and low-density lipoprotein cholesterol. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with rheumatoid arthritis who had had an inadequate response to methotrexate, baricitinib was associated with significant clinical improvements as compared with placebo and adalimumab. (Funded by Eli Lilly and Incyte; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01710358 .).

A Phase IIb Study of ABT-494, a Selective JAK-1 Inhibitor, in Patients With Rheumatoid Arthritis and an Inadequate Response to Anti-Tumor Necrosis Factor Therapy.

OBJECTIVE: To compare the efficacy and safety of ABT-494, a novel selective JAK-1 inhibitor, with placebo in patients with moderate-to-severe rheumatoid arthritis (RA) and an inadequate response or intolerance to at least 1 anti-tumor necrosis factor (anti-TNF) agent. METHODS: In this 12-week, double-blind, placebo-controlled, dose-ranging study, 276 RA patients receiving a stable dose of methotrexate (MTX) who had previously received treatment with at least 1 anti-TNF agent were randomized equally to receive immediate-release ABT-494 at 3, 6, 12, or 18 mg twice daily or matching placebo twice daily. The primary end point was the proportion of patients meeting the American College of Rheumatology 20% improvement criteria (achieving an ACR20 response) at week 12. RESULTS: At week 12, significantly more patients receiving ABT-494 (53-71%) than those receiving placebo (34%) achieved an ACR20 response (by nonresponder imputation analysis) (P < 0.05), with a dose-response relationship among all ABT-494 doses (P < 0.001). ACR50 and ACR70 response rates were significantly higher in those receiving ABT-494 (36-42% and 22-26%, respectively) than in those receiving placebo (16% and 4%, respectively). Changes from baseline in the Disease Activity Score in 28 joints using the C-reactive protein level (DAS28-CRP) were significantly greater for all doses of ABT-494 than for placebo (P ≤ 0.01). Onset of action of ABT-494 was rapid, with significant differences from placebo at week 2 both in ACR20 response rate (for 12 and 18 mg) and in change in the DAS28-CRP (P < 0.001 for 6-18 mg). The most frequent adverse events (AEs) were headache, nausea, upper respiratory tract infection, and urinary tract infection. Infection rates were higher at higher doses of ABT-494, but no infections were serious. No deaths were reported among those receiving ABT-494. CONCLUSION: In patients with an inadequate response or intolerance to anti-TNF agents, ABT-494 added to MTX showed rapid, dose-dependent improvements in RA signs and symptoms, with safety and tolerability similar to those of other drugs of this class. No new AEs were identified.

Reduction in Serum Uric Acid May Be Related to Methotrexate Efficacy in Early Rheumatoid Arthritis: Data from the Canadian Early Arthritis Cohort (CATCH).

OBJECTIVES: The mechanism of action of methotrexate in rheumatoid arthritis (RA) is complex. It may increase adenosine levels by blocking its conversion to uric acid (UA). This study was done to determine if methotrexate lowers UA in early RA (ERA). METHODS: Data were obtained from Canadian Early Arthritis Cohort, an incident ERA cohort. All ERA patients with serial UA measurements were included, comparing those with methotrexate use vs. no methotrexate exposure (controls). Analyses were exploratory. Patients with concomitant gout or taking UA-lowering therapies were excluded. RESULTS: In total, 49 of the 2,524 ERA patients were identified with data available for both pre-methotrexate UA levels and post-methotrexate UA levels (300 µmol/L and 273 µmol/L, respectively; P = 0.035). The control group not taking methotrexate had a mean baseline UA level of 280 µmol/L and a follow-up level of 282 µmol/L (P = 0.448); mean change in UA with methotrexate was -26.8 µmol/L vs. 2.3 µmol/L in the no methotrexate group (P = 0.042). Methotrexate users with a decrease in UA had a disease activity score of 2.37 for 28 joints when compared with the controls (3.26) at 18 months (P = 0.042). Methotrexate users with decreased UA had a lower swollen joint count (SJC) of 0.9 at 18 months, whereas methotrexate users without lowering of UA had an SJC of 4.5 (P = 0.035). Other analyses were not significant. CONCLUSIONS: Methotrexate response is associated with lowering of serum UA in ERA compared to nonusers. This may be due to changes in adenosine levels. Methotrexate response is associated with lower UA and fewer swollen joints compared to nonresponders.

Safety and Efficacy of Subcutaneous Golimumab in Patients with Active Rheumatoid Arthritis despite Methotrexate Therapy: Final 5-year Results of the GO-FORWARD Trial.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the safety and efficacy of golimumab (GOL), a human antitumor necrosis factor antibody, in patients with active rheumatoid arthritis (RA) despite methotrexate (MTX) therapy through 5 years in the GO-FORWARD trial. METHODS: Patients with active RA despite MTX therapy were randomly assigned to receive placebo + MTX (Group 1), GOL 100 mg + placebo (Group 2), GOL 50 mg + MTX (Group 3), or GOL 100 mg + MTX (Group 4). Patients in groups 1, 2, and 3 with inadequate response could enter early escape at Week 16 to GOL 50 mg + MTX or GOL 100 mg + MTX, and all remaining Group 1 patients crossed over to GOL 50 mg + MTX at Week 24. The blind was maintained through the 52-week database lock, after which treatment adjustments were permitted. Adverse events (AE) were monitored through Week 268. Efficacy was evaluated using the American College of Rheumatology (ACR) 20/50/70 responses and a 28-joint Disease Activity Score using C-reactive protein (DAS28-CRP). Response rates at Week 256 were analyzed by an intent-to-treat analysis. RESULTS: A total of 444 patients were randomized, and 313 received GOL through Week 252; 301 patients completed the safety followup through Week 268. Infections were the most common type of AE; 172 patients (39.6%) had ≥ 1 serious AE. No unexpected safety signals were observed. At Week 256, ACR20/50/70 responses were achieved by 63.1%, 40.8%, and 24.1%, respectively, of all randomized patients. About 78% of all patients achieved a good or moderate DAS28-CRP response. CONCLUSION: Improvements in the signs and symptoms of RA were maintained through 5 years. AE through 5 years were consistent with earlier reports of the GO-FORWARD trial; no apparent increased risk was observed over time.

Certolizumab Pegol Efficacy Across Methotrexate Regimens: A Pre-Specified Analysis of Two Phase III Trials.

OBJECTIVE: Anti-tumor necrosis factor (anti-TNF) agents are frequently used in combination with methotrexate (MTX) to treat rheumatoid arthritis (RA). We investigated the effect of a background MTX dose, in combination with anti-TNF certolizumab pegol (CZP), on treatment efficacy and safety in RA patients. METHODS: A pre-specified subgroup analysis comparing 2 MTX dosage categories (<15 mg/week and ≥15 mg/week) was carried out using data pooled from phase III clinical trials, Rheumatoid Arthritis Prevention of Structural Damage 1 (RAPID 1) and RAPID 2, according to treatment group: CZP 200 mg, CZP 400 mg, or placebo, every 2 weeks. Inclusion criteria required MTX dosage ≥10 mg/week. Efficacy end points included week 24 American College of Rheumatology criteria for 20%, 50%, and 70% improvement (ACR20/50/70) responses analyzed by logistic regression, and changes from baseline in the Disease Activity Score in 28 joints using the erythrocyte sedimentation rate (DAS28-ESR) and the modified Sharp/van der Heijde score (SHS) were analyzed by analysis of covariance. Incidence rates of treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) were categorized by baseline MTX dose. Post hoc sensitivity analysis investigated 3 MTX dose categories: ≤10 mg/week, >10 and ≤15 mg/week, and >15 mg/week. RESULTS: A total of 638, 635, and 325 patients received CZP 200 mg, CZP 400 mg, and placebo, respectively. At week 24, treatment responses in both CZP groups were uninfluenced by baseline MTX dose category, and were superior to the placebo group for all investigated end points: ACR20/50/70, DAS28-ESR, and SHS. TEAE incidence rates were higher in patients receiving MTX ≥15 mg/week for most TEAE types across treatment groups. CONCLUSION: CZP efficacy was not affected by background MTX dose category. It can be hypothesized that to minimize TEAEs, background MTX doses could be tailored to individual patient tolerance without affecting CZP efficacy.

Missing Anticitrullinated Protein Antibody Does Not Affect Short-term Outcomes in Early Inflammatory Arthritis: From the Canadian Early Arthritis Cohort.

OBJECTIVE: Anticitrullinated protein antibody (ACPA) is as sensitive as, but more specific than, rheumatoid factor (RF) and is detected earlier in rheumatoid arthritis (RA). Although part of the RA classification criteria, ACPA testing is not routinely paid for/accessible in all jurisdictions. The effect of missing ACPA testing was studied to determine whether failure to perform ACPA testing could cause a care gap in early inflammatory arthritis. METHODS: Nearly 2000 patients (n = 1998) recruited to an early inflammatory arthritis cohort were allocated into 3 groups: (1) seropositive (either RF+ or ACPA+), (2) seronegative (RF- and ACPA-), and (3) missing ACPA and RF-. Analyses were adjusted for age, sex, symptom duration, and smoking status if p < 0.1. Disease Activity Score at 28 joints (DAS28) at 3 months was studied, because beyond then, disease activity is expected to determine ongoing treatment. RESULTS: More seropositive patients fulfilled the 2010 American College of Rheumatology/European League Against Rheumatism RA criteria than seronegative patients. Group 3 was slightly older and had a smaller percentage of females, as well as shorter symptom duration and less smoking. At 3 months, group 3 was treated with fewer disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs and methotrexate (p < 0.00002) than groups 1 and 2, but there were no significant differences in DAS28, Health Assessment Questionnaire-Disability Index (HAQ-DI), proportion receiving corticosteroids, or physician's/patient's global assessments. CONCLUSION: There was no care gap in the RF-negative, unknown ACPA group because there were no significant differences in the DAS28, 3-month change in DAS28, or HAQ-DI, despite less treatment. Cost-effectiveness of ensuring ACPA testing availability in suspected RA is unknown because early outcomes did not differ, whether or not ACPA was available.

Effect of age at menopause on disease presentation in early rheumatoid arthritis: results from the Canadian Early Arthritis Cohort.

OBJECTIVE: Studies suggest that hormonal states affect disease characteristics in women with rheumatoid arthritis (RA). This study investigated how age at menopause affects disease in women presenting with early RA. METHODS: This was a cross-sectional study of postmenopausal women with early RA under age 65 years at time of enrollment in the Canadian Early Arthritis Cohort. RA-related disease characteristics in women who had early age at menopause (EM; age at menopause <45 years) were compared to those who had usual age at menopause (age at menopause ≥45 years). The t-test was applied to continuous variables and the chi-square test to categorical variables. Multivariate logistic regression analysis was used to adjust for age at menopause, smoking, and use of exogenous hormones. RESULTS: A total of 534 women were included; 93 were in the EM group. The age at RA onset was similar between groups. The EM group had higher mean patient global and pain scores and was more likely to be rheumatoid factor (RF) positive and meet the 1987 American College of Rheumatology criteria for RA. Using multivariate logistic regression, the EM group was more likely to be RF positive (odds ratio 2.2 [95% confidence interval 1.3-3.8], P = 0.005). Symptom duration, joint counts, Disease Activity Score in 28 joints, Health Assessment Questionnaire scores, and inflammatory markers did not differ between groups. CONCLUSION: These data suggest that early age at menopause, compared to usual age at menopause, is associated with seropositivity in women with early RA.

A phase III, multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group study of 2 dosing regimens of fostamatinib in patients with rheumatoid arthritis with an inadequate response to a tumor necrosis factor-α antagonist.

OBJECTIVE: Our 24-week study (NCT01197755; OSKIRA-3) compared the efficacy and safety of fostamatinib versus placebo in patients taking background methotrexate treatment with active rheumatoid arthritis (RA) and an inadequate response to a single tumor necrosis factor-α antagonist. METHODS: Adult patients were randomized (1:1:1) to fostamatinib [100 mg bid for 24 weeks (n=105; Group A)], or 100 mg bid for 4 weeks, then 150 mg qd (n=108; Group B), or to placebo (n=110; Group C) for 24 weeks. Nonresponders at Week 12 could enter a longterm extension study. The primary endpoint was the proportion of patients achieving an American College of Rheumatology 20% (ACR20) response at Week 24. RESULTS: Baseline characteristics were well balanced. Significantly more patients in fostamatinib Group A (36.2%; p=0.004), but not B (27.8%; p=0.168), achieved ACR20 at Week 24 versus placebo (21.1%). Frequently reported adverse events were diarrhea, hypertension, and headache. Elevated blood pressure (≥140/90 mm Hg) at ≥1 visit was observed in 46.7%, 51.9%, and 26.6% of patients, respectively. There were 2 deaths in the study, 1 in Group B and 1 in the placebo group. CONCLUSION: Fostamatinib 100 mg bid, but not fostamatinib 100 mg bid for 4 weeks then 150 mg qd, achieved statistical improvements in ACR20 at 24 weeks versus placebo. Because of efficacy and safety results from the phase III clinical program, the companies developing fostamatinib have decided not to study it further in RA at this time.

Continued benefit of tocilizumab plus disease-modifying antirheumatic drug therapy in patients with rheumatoid arthritis and inadequate clinical responses by week 8 of treatment.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate whether patients with rheumatoid arthritis who did not respond sufficiently to tocilizumab (TCZ) plus disease-modifying antirheumatic drug (DMARD) treatment by Week 8 responded at later timepoints when continuing to take their original dose of TCZ. METHODS: In this posthoc analysis of data from phase III randomized controlled trials of inadequate responders (IR) to DMARD or tumor necrosis factor-α inhibitors (anti-TNF), percentages of patients meeting early response criteria were calculated by randomized treatment arm (TCZ 4 mg/kg, 8 mg/kg, or placebo in combination with DMARD). Percentages of patients achieving certain disease activity thresholds at later timepoints were calculated for patients who had/had not achieved response by Week 8. RESULTS: In DMARD-IR early nonresponders, 29.0%, 17.2%, and 3.7% of TCZ 8 mg/kg-randomized, TCZ 4 mg/kg-randomized, and placebo-randomized patients, respectively, achieved 28-joint Disease Activity Score (DAS28) ≤ 3.2 by Week 24. Among anti-TNF-IR patients without early response, 26.5%, 8.5%, and 1.9% of TCZ 8 mg/kg-randomized, TCZ 4 mg/kg-randomized, and placebo-randomized patients, respectively, achieved DAS28 ≤ 3.2 at Week 24. CONCLUSION: A substantial number of DMARD-IR patients taking TCZ 4 or 8 mg/kg and anti-TNF-IR patients taking TCZ 8 mg/kg who failed to respond by 8 weeks benefited from continued TCZ treatment in combination with DMARD. In contrast, the anti-TNF-IR patients without early responses who continued to take TCZ 4 mg/kg were unlikely to experience a cumulative benefit. ClinicalTrials.gov registration numbers: NCT00106548, NCT00106574, NCT00106535, NCT00106522.

The Canadian methotrexate and etanercept outcome study: a randomised trial of discontinuing versus continuing methotrexate after 6 months of etanercept and methotrexate therapy in rheumatoid arthritis.

OBJECTIVE: To determine if withdrawing methotrexate (MTX) after 6 months of combination etanercept (ETN)+MTX, in MTX-inadequate responders with active rheumatoid arthritis (RA), is non-inferior to continuing ETN+MTX. METHODS: Tumour necrosis factor-inhibitor naïve RA patients with disease activity score 28 (DAS28)≥3.2, swollen joint count≥3, despite stable MTX, were treated with ETN+MTX for 6 months, followed by randomisation to either continue ETN+MTX or switch to ETN monotherapy for an additional 18 months. The primary endpoint was change in DAS28 from 6-month randomisation to 12 months. The non-inferiority margin of change in DAS28 was 0.6, with prespecified analyses (DAS28<3.2 vs DAS28≥3.2). RESULTS: 205 patients were randomised. DAS28 was stable in patients on ETN+MTX and increased slightly in patients on ETN monotherapy from 6 to 12 months. Non-inferiority was not achieved, with an adjusted difference of 0.4 (0.1 to 0.7) between the ETN and the ETN+MTX groups, for the month 6-12 change in DAS28. However, patients who achieved low disease activity (LDA; DAS28<3.2) at 6 months had a similar disease activity at 12 months, whether on monotherapy or combination therapy (DAS28 change 0.7 ETN vs 0.57 ETN+MTX, p=0.8148). Conversely, for patients who did not reach LDA at 6 months, those on ETN monotherapy had increased disease activity at 12 months, while disease activity continued to decrease for patients on combination therapy, at 12 months (DAS28 change 0.4 ETN vs -0.4 ETN+MTX, p=0.0023). CONCLUSIONS: Non-inferiority was not achieved. Withdrawing MTX after 6 months of continuation ETN+MTX in MTX inadequate responders did not yield the same degree of improvement between 6 and 12 months compared with continuing ETN+MTX. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov-NCT00654368.

Longterm effect of delaying combination therapy with tumor necrosis factor inhibitor in patients with aggressive early rheumatoid arthritis: 10-year efficacy and safety of adalimumab from the randomized controlled PREMIER trial with open-label extension.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the longterm safety of adalimumab administered with or without methotrexate (MTX) and compare the efficacy of combination therapy initialization to adalimumab or MTX monotherapy initialization during the open-label extension (OLE) of the PREMIER trial (ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier:NCT00195663). METHODS: Patients with early rheumatoid arthritis (RA) were randomized to receive blinded adalimumab + MTX, adalimumab alone, or MTX alone for 2 years. Following the double-blinded period, patients enrolling in the OLE were given adalimumab for up to 8 additional years, beginning as monotherapy; investigators could add MTX at their discretion. Results for clinical, functional, and radiographic progression were collected for up to 10 years of treatment. RESULTS: During the PREMIER OLE, 250/497 patients (50.3%) completed the trial without new safety signals arising. Similar proportions of patients discontinued the trial early, although lack of efficacy was reported less often for patients initially randomized to the adalimumab + MTX arm (9.3%; 21.2%, and 23.7% for adalimumab and MTX monotherapies, respectively). Clinical and functional disease control was maintained throughout the trial. Patients initially randomized to adalimumab + MTX displayed better outcomes, particularly in prevention of radiographic progression (modified total Sharp score change = 4.0, 8.8, 11.0 at Year 10 for the initial adalimumab + MTX, adalimumab, and MTX arms, respectively). CONCLUSION: Intensive therapy with adalimumab + MTX combination in patients with early RA has longterm benefits compared to patients initiating with 2-year adalimumab or MTX monotherapy that persists up to 10 years following adalimumab OLE. No new safety findings were observed following longterm adalimumab treatment.

Clinical, functional, and radiographic implications of time to treatment response in patients with early rheumatoid arthritis: a posthoc analysis of the PREMIER study.

OBJECTIVE: Rheumatoid arthritis (RA) treatment recommendations suggest target attainment within the first 3 months of therapy, yet delayed clinical responses can occur. This analysis assessed the longterm clinical, functional, and radiographic outcomes associated with delayed responses to methotrexate (MTX) monotherapy or to the combination of adalimumab (ADA) + MTX. METHODS: In this posthoc analysis, patients with early RA who received MTX monotherapy or ADA + MTX in the PREMIER study were categorized based on clinical responses at 3 and 6 months [American College of Rheumatology response, 28-joint Disease Activity Score (DAS28)-C-reactive protein (CRP) improvement and targets]. "Month 3" responders met the clinical measure at both months 3 and 6, and "Month 6" responders met the clinical measure only at Month 6. The odds of achieving longterm outcomes [remission (DAS28-CRP < 2.6), normal function (Health Assessment Questionnaire-Disability Index < 0.5), or rapid radiographic progression (Δ modified total Sharp score > 3 U/yr)] were modeled using logistic regression, including treatment, response, and interaction. RESULTS: A delayed or low-level response was associated with poorer longterm outcomes. Generally, MTX Month 6 responders demonstrated worse clinical, functional, and radiographic outcomes than Month 3 MTX and Month 3 or 6 ADA + MTX responders. Although similar longterm benefit was observed for ADA + MTX responders, delayed (Month 6) responders exhibited downward trends in clinical, functional, and radiographic outcomes that were comparable with those experienced by Month 3 MTX responders. CONCLUSION: Response speed and magnitude predict longterm outcomes in patients with early RA treated with MTX or ADA + MTX. MTX-treated patients failing to demonstrate a Month 3 clinical response have less-favorable outcomes than other groups, while outcomes in ADA + MTX Month 3 and Month 6 responders tended to be comparable.