Long-Term Retention Rate of Tofacitinib in Rheumatoid Arthritis: An Italian Multicenter Retrospective Cohort Study.

Background: Tofacitinib (TOFA) was the first Janus kinase inhibitor (JAKi) to be approved for the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis (RA). However, data on the retention rate of TOFA therapy are still far from definitive. Objective: The goal of this study is to add new real-world data on the TOFA retention rate in a cohort of RA patients followed for a long period of time. Methods: A multicenter retrospective study of RA subjects treated with TOFA as monotherapy or in combination with conventional synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (csDMARDs) was conducted in 23 Italian tertiary rheumatology centers. The study considered a treatment period of up to 48 months for all included patients. The TOFA retention rate was assessed with the Kaplan-Meier method. Hazard ratios (HRs) for TOFA discontinuation were obtained using Cox regression analysis. Results: We enrolled a total of 213 patients. Data analysis revealed that the TOFA retention rate was 86.5% (95% CI: 81.8-91.5%) at month 12, 78.8% (95% CI: 78.8-85.2%) at month 24, 63.8% (95% CI: 55.1-73.8%) at month 36, and 59.9% (95% CI: 55.1-73.8%) at month 48 after starting treatment. None of the factors analyzed, including the number of previous treatments received, disease activity or duration, presence of rheumatoid factor and/or anti-citrullinated protein antibody, and presence of comorbidities, were predictive of the TOFA retention rate. Safety data were comparable to those reported in the registration studies. Conclusions: TOFA demonstrated a long retention rate in RA in a real-world setting. This result, together with the safety data obtained, underscores that TOFA is a viable alternative for patients who have failed treatment with csDMARD and/or biologic DMARDs (bDMARDs). Further large, long-term observational studies are urgently needed to confirm these results.

Therapeutic Effects of Apremilast on Enthesitis and Dactylitis in Real Clinical Setting: An Italian Multicenter Study.

INTRODUCTION: Enthesitis and dactylitis are difficult-to-treat features of psoriatic arthritis (PsA), leading to disability and affecting quality of life. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study is to evaluate enthesitis (using the Leed enthesitis index (LEI)) and dactylitis at 6 and 12 months in patients treated with apremilast. METHODS: Patients affected by PsA from fifteen Italian rheumatological referral centers were screened. The inclusion criteria were: (a) enthesitis or dactylitisphenotype; (b) treatment with apremilast 30 mg bid. Clinical and treatment history, including PsA disease activity, were recorded. Mann-Whitney and chi-squared tests were used to assess the differences between independent groups, and Wilcoxon matched pairs signed-rank test assessed the differences between dependent samples. A p-value of <0.05 was considered statistically significant. RESULTS: The Eph cohort consisted of 118 patients (median LEI 3); the Dph cohort included 96 patients with a median dactylitis of 1 (IQR 1-2). According to an intention to treat analysis, 25% and 34% of patients with enthesitis achieved remission (i.e., LEI = 0) in T1 and T2. The remission of dactylitis was 47% in T1 and 44% in T2. The per protocol analysis (patients observed for at least 12 months) showed that both dactylitis and LEI significantly improved in T1 (median LEI 1 (IQR 1-3)) and T2 (median LEI 0 (IQR 1-2)). CONCLUSION: Eph and Dph PsA patients treated with apremilast experienced a significant improvement in enthesitis and dactylitis activity. After 1 year, enthesitis and dactylitis remission was achieved in more than one-third of patients.

Predictors of DAPSA Response in Psoriatic Arthritis Patients Treated with Apremilast in a Retrospective Observational Multi-Centric Study.

BACKGROUND: To date, only a few real-world-setting studies evaluated apremilast effectiveness in psoriatic arthritis (PsA). The aims of this retrospective observational study are to report long-term Disease Activity Index for Psoriatic Arthritis (DAPSA) response of apremilast in PsA patients and to analyze the predictors of clinical response. METHODS: All PsA consecutive patients treated with apremilast in fifteen Italian rheumatological referral centers were enrolled. Anamnestic data, treatment history, and PsA disease activity (DAPSA) at baseline, 6 months, and 12 months were recorded. The Mann-Whitney test and chi-squared tests assessed the differences between independent groups, whereas the Wilcoxon matched pairs signed-rank test assessed the differences between dependent samples. Logistic regressions verified if there were factors associated with achievement of DAPSA low disease activity or remission at 6 and 12 months. RESULTS: DAPSA low disease activity or remission rates at 6 and 12 months were observed, respectively, in 42.7% (n = 125) and 54.9% (n = 161) patients. Baseline DAPSA was inversely associated with the odds of achieving low disease activity or remission at 6 months (odds ratio (OR) 0.841, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.804-0.879; p < 0.01) and at 12 months (OR 0.911, 95% CI 0.883-0.939; p < 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: Almost half of the PsA patients receiving apremilast achieved DAPSA low disease activity or remission at 6 and 12 months. The only factor associated with achievement of low disease activity or remission at both 6 and 12 months was baseline DAPSA.

Apremilast retention rate in clinical practice: observations from an Italian multi-center study.

OBJECTIVE: There are few real-world setting studies focused on apremilast effectiveness (i.e., retention rate) in psoriatic arthritis (PsA). The main aim of this retrospective observational study is the assessment of apremilast 3-year retention rate in real-world PsA patients. Moreover, the secondary objective is to report the reasons of apremilast discontinuation and the factors related to treatment persistence. METHODS: In fifteen Italian rheumatological referral centers, all PsA consecutive patients who received apremilast were enrolled. Anamnestic data, treatment history, and PsA disease activity (DAPSA) at baseline were recorded. The Kaplan-Meier curve and the Cox analysis computed the apremilast retention rate and treatment persistence-related risk factors. A p-value < 0.05 was considered statistically significant. RESULTS: The 356 enrolled patients (median age 60 [interquartile range IQR 52-67] yrs; male prevalence 42.7%) median observation period was 17 [IQR 7-34] months (7218 patients-months). The apremilast retention rate at 12, 24, and 36 months was, respectively, 85.6%, 73.6%, and 61.8%. The main discontinuation reasons were secondary inefficacy (34% of interruptions), gastro-intestinal intolerance (24%), and primary inefficacy (19%). Age and oligo-articular phenotype were related to treatment persistence (respectively hazard ratio 0.98 IQR 0.96-0.99; p = 0.048 and 0.54 IQR 0.31-0.95; p = 0.03). CONCLUSION: Almost three-fifths of PsA patients receiving apremilast were still in treatment after 3 years. This study confirmed its effectiveness and safety profile. Apremilast appears as a good treatment choice in all oligo-articular PsA patients and in those ones burdened by relevant comorbidities. Key Points • Apremilast retention rates in this real-life cohort and trials are comparable. • The oligo-articular phenotype is associated with long-lasting treatment (i.e., 3 years). • No different or more prevalent adverse events were observed.

Adalimumab and ABP 501 in the Treatment of a Large Cohort of Patients with Inflammatory Arthritis: A Real Life Retrospective Analysis.

The recent introduction of ABP 501, an adalimumab biosimilar, in the treatment of rheumatic diseases was supported by a comprehensive comparability exercise with its originator. On the other hand, observational studies comparing adalimumab and ABP 501 in inflammatory arthritis are still lacking. The main aim of this study is to compare the clinical outcomes of the treatment with adalimumab, both the originator and ABP 501, in a large cohort of patients affected by autoimmune arthritis in a real life setting. We retrospectively analysed the baseline characteristics and the retention rate in a cohort of patients who received at least a course of adalimumab (originator or ABP 501) from January 2003 to December 2020. We stratified the study population according to adalimumab use: naive to original (oADA), naive to ABP 501 (bADA) and switched from original to ABP 501 (sADA). The oADA, bADA and sADA groups included, respectively, 724, 129 and 193 patients. In each group, the majority of patients had a diagnosis of rheumatoid arthritis. The total observation period was 9805.6 patient-months. The 18-month retentions rate in oADA, bADA and sADA was, respectively, 81.5%, 84.0% and 88.0% (p > 0.05). The factors influencing the adalimumab retention rate were an axial spondylarthritis diagnosis (Hazard Ratio (HR) 0.70; p = 0.04), switch from oADA to ABP 501 (HR 0.53; p = 0.02) and year of prescription (HR 1.04; p = 0.04). In this retrospective study, patients naive to the adalimumab originator and its biosimilar ABP 501 showed the same retention rate. Patients switching from the originator to biosimilar had a higher retention rate, even though not statistically significant, when compared to naive.

Efficacy and Drug Survival after Switching from Etanercept to the Biosimilar SB4: A Real-Life Long-Term Study.

We evaluated the 3-year drug survival and efficacy of the biosimilar SB4/Benepali in rheumatoid arthritis (RA), psoriatic arthritis (PsA) and ankylosing spondylitis (AS) patients, previously treated with etanercept (ETA). Drug survival rate was calculated using the Kaplan-Meier method and Cox proportional hazard models were developed to examine predictors of SB4 discontinuation. 236 patients (120 RA, 80 PsA and 36 AS), aged 60.7 ± 13.8 years and with an ETA duration of 4.1 ± 3.4 years were included. The 3-year retention rate for SB4 was 94.4%, 88% and 86% in AS, RA and PsA patients, respectively, with no difference between groups. Patients without comorbid disease had higher retention rates vs. patients with comorbid disease (90% vs. 60%, p < 0.0001). Disease activity, as measured by DAS28, DAPSA and BASDAI remained stable over the 3 years. Comorbid disease (hazard ratio; HR: 4.06, p < 0.0001) and HAQ at baseline (HR: 2.42, p = 0.0024) significantly increased the risk of SB4 discontinuation, while previous ETA duration was negatively associated with SB4 discontinuation (HR: 0.97, p = 0.0064). Forty-one (17.4%) patients left the study due to the interruption of the SB4 treatment, 31 (75.6%) discontinued due to inefficacy and 10 (24.4%) due to adverse events. This real-life study confirms the similar efficacy profile of ETA with long-term retention and a good safety profile in inflammatory arthritis patients.