Does Older Age have an Impact on Rituximab Efficacy and Safety? Results from the NOR-DMARD Register.

OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to compare the efficacy and safety of rituximab in older vs younger patients with rheumatoid arthritis. METHODS: Data on 367 patients with rheumatoid arthritis treated with rituximab in the Norwegian Disease-Modifying Antirheumatic Drug (NOR-DMARD) register were analysed, comparing patients aged ≥ 65 years (n = 91) with patients aged < 65 years (n = 276). Drug survival was compared using a Kaplan-Meier analysis and Cox proportional hazard models. Disease activity, as assessed by the Disease Activity Score based on 28 joints and erythrocyte sedimentation rate (DAS28-ESR) and the Simplified Disease Activity Index, was analysed with linear mixed models. The occurrence of adverse events was analysed by quasi-Poisson regression models. RESULTS: Drug survival was similar in the two age groups. The proportion of patients who remained taking rituximab over 2 years was 72% in those under aged 65 years vs 74% in those aged ≥ 65 years. No statistically significant association with age was found for drug survival in either the unadjusted (hazard ratio 1.13, p = 0.65) or adjusted Cox proportional hazard analyses for the model with DAS28-ESR as a confounder (effect size 1.11, p = 0.73). Models including the Simplified Disease Activity Index instead of DAS28-ESR yielded similar results. Age was furthermore not significantly associated with disease activity over time, although there was a tendency towards a poorer response in older patients. In the older age group, there was a higher incidence of pneumonia (107 vs 51 per 1000 patient-years) and other serious infections (142 vs 66 per 1000 patient-years). CONCLUSIONS: Rituximab is a reasonable therapeutic option for older patients with rheumatoid arthritis although vigilance is needed with regard to the infection profile. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01581294.

No excess risks in offspring with paternal preconception exposure to disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs.

OBJECTIVE: To examine pregnancy outcomes in the partners of male patients with inflammatory joint disease who were or were not exposed to disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs) before conception compared with the outcomes in reference subjects from the general population. METHODS: Linkage of data from a longitudinal observational study of patients with inflammatory joint disease (the Norwegian Disease-Modifying Antirheumatic Drug [NOR-DMARD] registry study) and the Medical Birth Registry of Norway (MBRN) enabled a comparison of pregnancy outcomes in the partners of men with inflammatory joint disease. Outcomes of pregnancies in which the father was exposed to DMARDs within 12 weeks of conception and those in which the father was never exposed to DMARDs were analyzed separately and compared with the outcomes in reference subjects. Potential associations between DMARD exposure and adverse pregnancy outcomes were assessed by logistic regression analysis. RESULTS: A total of 1,796 men with inflammatory joint disease were associated with 2,777 births in the MBRN. In 110 of these births, the father had been exposed to DMARDs within 12 weeks before conception, and in 230 births the father had never been exposed to DMARDs before conception. The DMARDs (monotherapy or combination treatment) to which the fathers were exposed most frequently within 12 weeks of conception were methotrexate (n = 49), sulfasalazine (n = 17), and tumor necrosis factor inhibitors (n = 57). Neither adverse pregnancy outcomes nor occurrence of congenital malformations differed between patients and reference subjects in either group. CONCLUSION: Preconception paternal exposure to DMARDs was not associated with an increase in adverse pregnancy outcomes. Importantly, no increased risk of congenital malformations was observed.