Unmet need in rheumatology: reports from the Advances in Targeted Therapies meeting, 2023.

The Advances in Targeted Therapies meets annually, convening experts in the field of rheumatology to both provide scientific updates and identify existing scientific gaps within the field. To review the major unmet scientific needs in rheumatology. The 23rd annual Advances in Targeted Therapies meeting convened with more than 100 international basic scientists and clinical researchers in rheumatology, immunology, infectious diseases, epidemiology, molecular biology and other specialties relating to all aspects of immune-mediated inflammatory diseases. We held breakout sessions in five rheumatological disease-specific groups including: rheumatoid arthritis (RA), psoriatic arthritis (PsA), axial spondyloarthritis (axSpa), systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE), systemic sclerosis (SSc) and vasculitis, and osteoarthritis (OA). In each group, experts were asked to identify and prioritise current unmet needs in clinical and translational research. An overarching theme across all disease states is the continued need for clinical trial design innovation with regard to therapeutics, endpoint and disease endotypes. Within RA, unmet needs comprise molecular classification of disease pathogenesis and activity, pre-/early RA strategies, more refined pain profiling and innovative trials designs to deliver on precision medicine. Continued scientific questions within PsA include evaluating the genetic, immunophenotypic, clinical signatures that predict development of PsA in patients with psoriasis, and the evaluation of combination therapies for difficult-to-treat disease. For axSpA, there continues to be the need to understand the role of interleukin-23 (IL-23) in pathogenesis and the genetic relationship of the IL-23-receptor polymorphism with other related systemic inflammatory diseases (eg, inflammatory bowel disease). A major unmet need in the OA field remains the need to develop the ability to reliably phenotype and stratify patients for inclusion in clinical trials. SLE experts identified a number of unmet needs within clinical trial design including the need for allowing endpoints that reflect pharmacodynamic/functional outcomes (eg, inhibition of type I interferon pathway activation; changes in urine biomarkers). Lastly, within SSc and vasculitis, there is a lack of biomarkers that predict response or disease progression, and that allow patients to be stratified for therapies. There remains a strong need to innovate clinical trial design, to identify systemic and tissue-level biomarkers that predict progression or response to therapy, endotype disease, and to continue developing therapies and therapeutic strategies for those with treatment-refractory disease. This document, based on expert consensus, should provide a roadmap for prioritising scientific endeavour in the field of rheumatology.

Incidence and prevalence of vaccine preventable infections in adult patients with autoimmune inflammatory rheumatic diseases (AIIRD): a systemic literature review informing the 2019 update of the EULAR recommendations for vaccination in adult patients with AIIRD.

Objectives: The aims of this study were to update the evidence on the incidence and prevalence rates of vaccine preventable infections (VPI) in patients with autoimmune inflammatory rheumatic diseases (AIIRD) and compare the data to the general population when available. Methods: A literature search was performed using Medline, Embase and Cochrane library (October 2009 to August 2018). The primary outcome was the incidence or prevalence of VPI in the adult AIIRD population. Meta-analysis was performed when appropriate. Results: Sixty-three publications out of 3876 identified records met the inclusion criteria: influenza (n=4), pneumococcal disease (n=7), hepatitis B (n=10), herpes zoster (HZ) (n=29), human papillomavirus (HPV) infection (n=13). An increased incidence of influenza and pneumococcal disease was reported in patients with AIIRD. HZ infection-pooled incidence rate ratio (IRR) was 2.9 (95% CI 2.4 to 3.3) in patients with AIIRD versus general population. Among AIIRD, inflammatory myositis conferred the highest incidence rate (IR) of HZ (pooled IRR 5.1, 95% CI 4.3 to 5.9), followed by systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) (pooled IRR 4.0, 95% CI 2.3 to 5.7) and rheumatoid arthritis (pooled IRR 2.3, 95% CI 2.1 to 2.6). HPV infection-pooled prevalence ratio was 1.6, 95% CI 0.7 to 3.4 versus general population, based on studies mainly conducted in the SLE population in Latin America and Asia. Pooled prevalence of hepatitis B surface antigen and hepatitis B core antibody in patients with AIIRD was similar to the general population, 3%, 95% CI 1% to 5% and 15%, 95% CI 7% to 26%, respectively. Conclusion: Current evidence shows an increased risk of VPI in patients with AIIRD, emphasising that prevention of infections is essential in these patients.

Efficacy, immunogenicity and safety of vaccination in adult patients with autoimmune inflammatory rheumatic diseases: a systematic literature review for the 2019 update of EULAR recommendations.

Aim: To present a systematic literature review (SLR) on efficacy, immunogenicity and safety of vaccination in adult patients with autoimmune inflammatory rheumatic diseases (AIIRD), aiming to provide a basis for updating the EULAR evidence-based recommendations. Methods: An SLR was performed according to the standard operating procedures for EULAR-endorsed recommendations. Outcome was determined by efficacy, immunogenicity and safety of vaccination in adult patients with AIIRD, including those receiving immunomodulating therapy. Furthermore, a search was performed on the effect of vaccinating household members of patients with AIIRD on the occurrence of vaccine-preventable infections in patients and their household members (including newborns). The literature search was performed using Medline, Embase and the Cochrane Library (October 2009 to August 2018). Results: While most investigated vaccines were efficacious and/or immunogenic in patients with AIIRD, some were less efficacious than in healthy control subjects, and/or in patients receiving immunosuppressive agents. Adverse events of vaccination were generally mild and the rates were comparable to those in healthy persons. Vaccination did not seem to lead to an increase in activity of the underlying AIIRD, but insufficient power of most studies precluded arriving at definite conclusions. The number of studies investigating clinical efficacy of vaccination is still limited. No studies on the effect of vaccinating household members of patients with AIIRD were retrieved. Conclusion: Evidence on efficacy, immunogenicity and safety of vaccination in patients with AIIRD was systematically reviewed to provide a basis for updated recommendations.

Long-term use of adalimumab as monotherapy after attainment of low disease activity with adalimumab plus methotrexate in patients with rheumatoid arthritis.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate long-term clinical, functional and radiographic outcomes in an open-label extension (OLE) study in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) receiving adalimumab monotherapy or adalimumab+methotrexate following attainment of low disease activity (LDA) with adalimumab+methotrexate. METHODS: Methotrexate-naive patients with early RA were randomised to adalimumab, methotrexate or adalimumab +methotrexate in a double-blind, 2-year study. Patients who completed the study and achieved LDA (28-joint Disease Activity Score using C reactive protein (DAS28(CRP)<3.2) could receive adalimumab monotherapy for up to 8 additional years in the OLE; open-label methotrexate could be added per investigator's discretion. This post hoc analysis included data up to OLE year 3 (study year 5) from patients receiving adalimumab+methotrexate who achieved LDA at year 2 followed by adalimumab monotherapy or methotrexate reinitiation. Normal physical function was defined as Disability Index of the Health Assessment Questionnaire <0.5 and radiographic non-progression as change in modified total Sharp score ≤0.5. RESULTS: Of 140 patients initiating adalimumab monotherapy, 84 (60%) received adalimumab only (methotrexate non-use) and 56 (40%) reinitiated methotrexate (methotrexate use) during OLE treatment. Median (IQR) time to first methotrexate use was 5.1 (0.1-31.4) weeks. Among methotrexate users, 61% retained LDA, 48% achieved DAS28(CRP) <2.6, 45% had normal physical function and 46% had no radiographic progression at year 5; for non-users, 63%, 50%, 58% and 50%, respectively, achieved these milestones. Adverse event rates were similar between methotrexate non-use and use patients. CONCLUSIONS: Adalimumab monotherapy effectively maintained good clinical, functional and radiographic outcomes for up to 3 additional years in ≥50% of patients who attained LDA after 2 years of adalimumab+methotrexate therapy. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT00195663; Post-results.

Consensus-based recommendations for the use of biosimilars to treat rheumatological diseases.

The study aimed to develop evidence-based recommendations regarding the evaluation and use of biosimilars to treat rheumatological diseases. The task force comprised an expert group of specialists in rheumatology, dermatology and gastroenterology, and pharmacologists, patients and a regulator from ten countries. Four key topics regarding biosimilars were identified through a process of discussion and consensus. Using a Delphi process, specific questions were then formulated to guide a systematic literature review. Relevant English-language publications through November 2016 were searched systematically for each topic using Medline; selected papers and pertinent reviews were examined for additional relevant references; and abstracts presented at the 2015 and 2016 American College of Rheumatology (ACR) and European League Against Rheumatism (EULAR) annual scientific meetings were searched for those about biosimilars. The experts used evidence obtained from these studies to develop a set of overarching principles and consensus recommendations. The level of evidence and grade of recommendation were determined for each. By the search strategy, 490 references were identified. Of these, 29 full-text papers were included in the systematic review. Additionally, 20 abstracts were retrieved from the ACR and EULAR conference abstract databases. Five overarching principles and eight consensus recommendations were generated, encompassing considerations regarding clinical trials, immunogenicity, extrapolation of indications, switching between bio-originators and biosimilars and among biosimilars, and cost. The level of evidence and grade of recommendation for each varied according to available published evidence. Five overarching principles and eight consensus recommendations regarding the evaluation and use of biosimilars to treat rheumatological diseases were developed using research-based evidence and expert opinion.

A Pilot Dose-Finding Study of Etanercept in Rheumatoid Arthritis.

A randomized, parallel-dose study assessed the pharmacokinetics (PK) and pharmacodynamics (PD) of etanercept in 61 patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) who received doses from 10 mg once-weekly to 50 mg twice-weekly for 4 weeks. Empiric application of a maximal-effect (Emax ) model to pooled steady-state concentrations (Css ) and PD markers provided half-maximal-effect concentration estimates of 567, 573, 465, 87, and 159 ng/mL for change from baseline in number of swollen joints, number of painful joints, erythrocyte sedimentation rate, interleukin-6, and matrix metalloproteinase-3, respectively. Css >∼2,000 ng/mL did not appear to offer additional benefit. It was concluded that the middle doses, 10 mg twice-weekly, 50 mg every 2 weeks, and 50 mg once-weekly, would provide Css in the target range of 500-2,000 ng/mL. The revised US Food and Drug Administration guideline for development of medicines for treatment of RA encourages a study design incorporating PK/PD assessment to inform later studies.

Achieving comprehensive disease control in patients with early and established rheumatoid arthritis treated with adalimumab plus methotrexate versus methotrexate alone.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the achievement of comprehensive disease control (CDC) following 1 year of treatment with adalimumab+methotrexate versus methotrexate alone and whether early achievement of remission (at week 24 or 26) is associated with CDC at week 52 in patients with either early or established rheumatoid arthritis (RA). METHODS: Post hoc analyses were conducted in three clinical studies assessing treatment with adalimumab+methotrexate: DE019 (NCT00195702) enrolled patients with established RA who were methotrexate inadequate responders; OPTIMA (NCT00420927) and PREMIER (NCT00195663) enrolled methotrexate-naive patients with early RA. In OPTIMA, patients not achieving stable low disease activity at weeks 22 and 26 in the placebo+methotrexate group could receive open-label adalimumab+methotrexate for 52 weeks (Rescue ADA arm). CDC was defined as the simultaneous achievement of clinical remission (DAS28(CRP)<2.6), normal function (HAQ-DI<0.5) and absence of radiographic progression (ΔmTSS≤0.5). RESULTS: Regardless of disease duration, significantly more patients receiving adalimumab+methotrexate achieved CDC compared with methotrexate alone. In the adalimumab+methotrexate group, a numerically greater proportion of patients with early RA (~25%) versus established RA (14%) achieved CDC at 1 year; achievement of CDC was notably greater among patients who met criteria for remission at week 24 or 26 (~50% of patients with early RA and 39% with established RA). CONCLUSION: Treatment with adalimumab+methotrexate increases the likelihood of achieving CDC in patients with either early or established RA. Clinical remission at week 24 or 26 is associated with achievement of CDC at week 52. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: DE019 (NCT00195702), OPTIMA (NCT00420927), PREMIER (NCT00195663); Post-results.

Treating rheumatoid arthritis to target: 2014 update of the recommendations of an international task force.

BACKGROUND: Reaching the therapeutic target of remission or low-disease activity has improved outcomes in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) significantly. The treat-to-target recommendations, formulated in 2010, have provided a basis for implementation of a strategic approach towards this therapeutic goal in routine clinical practice, but these recommendations need to be re-evaluated for appropriateness and practicability in the light of new insights. OBJECTIVE: To update the 2010 treat-to-target recommendations based on systematic literature reviews (SLR) and expert opinion. METHODS: A task force of rheumatologists, patients and a nurse specialist assessed the SLR results and evaluated the individual items of the 2010 recommendations accordingly, reformulating many of the items. These were subsequently discussed, amended and voted upon by >40 experts, including 5 patients, from various regions of the world. Levels of evidence, strengths of recommendations and levels of agreement were derived. RESULTS: The update resulted in 4 overarching principles and 10 recommendations. The previous recommendations were partly adapted and their order changed as deemed appropriate in terms of importance in the view of the experts. The SLR had now provided also data for the effectiveness of targeting low-disease activity or remission in established rather than only early disease. The role of comorbidities, including their potential to preclude treatment intensification, was highlighted more strongly than before. The treatment aim was again defined as remission with low-disease activity being an alternative goal especially in patients with long-standing disease. Regular follow-up (every 1-3 months during active disease) with according therapeutic adaptations to reach the desired state was recommended. Follow-up examinations ought to employ composite measures of disease activity that include joint counts. Additional items provide further details for particular aspects of the disease, especially comorbidity and shared decision-making with the patient. Levels of evidence had increased for many items compared with the 2010 recommendations, and levels of agreement were very high for most of the individual recommendations (≥9/10). CONCLUSIONS: The 4 overarching principles and 10 recommendations are based on stronger evidence than before and are supposed to inform patients, rheumatologists and other stakeholders about strategies to reach optimal outcomes of RA.

Evidence for treating rheumatoid arthritis to target: results of a systematic literature search update.

OBJECTIVE: A systematic literature review (SLR; 2009-2014) to compare a target-oriented approach with routine management in the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis (RA) to allow an update of the treat-to-target recommendations. METHODS: Two SLRs focused on clinical trials employing a treatment approach targeting a specific clinical outcome were performed. In addition to testing clinical, functional and/or structural changes as endpoints, comorbidities, cardiovascular risk, work productivity and education as well as patient self-assessment were investigated. The searches covered MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane databases and Clinicaltrial.gov for the period between 2009 and 2012 and separately for the period of 2012 to May of 2014. RESULTS: Of 8442 citations retrieved in the two SLRs, 176 articles underwent full-text review. According to predefined inclusion/exclusion criteria, six articles were included of which five showed superiority of a targeted treatment approach aiming at least at low-disease activity versus routine care; in addition, publications providing supportive evidence were also incorporated that aside from expanding the evidence provided by the above six publications allowed concluding that a target-oriented approach leads to less comorbidities and cardiovascular risk and better work productivity than conventional care. CONCLUSIONS: The current study expands the evidence that targeting low-disease activity or remission in the management of RA conveys better outcomes than routine care.

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.

EULAR recommendations for the management of rheumatoid arthritis with synthetic and biological disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs: 2013 update.

In this article, the 2010 European League against Rheumatism (EULAR) recommendations for the management of rheumatoid arthritis (RA) with synthetic and biological disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (sDMARDs and bDMARDs, respectively) have been updated. The 2013 update has been developed by an international task force, which based its decisions mostly on evidence from three systematic literature reviews (one each on sDMARDs, including glucocorticoids, bDMARDs and safety aspects of DMARD therapy); treatment strategies were also covered by the searches. The evidence presented was discussed and summarised by the experts in the course of a consensus finding and voting process. Levels of evidence and grades of recommendations were derived and levels of agreement (strengths of recommendations) were determined. Fourteen recommendations were developed (instead of 15 in 2010). Some of the 2010 recommendations were deleted, and others were amended or split. The recommendations cover general aspects, such as attainment of remission or low disease activity using a treat-to-target approach, and the need for shared decision-making between rheumatologists and patients. The more specific items relate to starting DMARD therapy using a conventional sDMARD (csDMARD) strategy in combination with glucocorticoids, followed by the addition of a bDMARD or another csDMARD strategy (after stratification by presence or absence of adverse risk factors) if the treatment target is not reached within 6 months (or improvement not seen at 3 months). Tumour necrosis factor inhibitors (adalimumab, certolizumab pegol, etanercept, golimumab, infliximab, biosimilars), abatacept, tocilizumab and, under certain circumstances, rituximab are essentially considered to have similar efficacy and safety. If the first bDMARD strategy fails, any other bDMARD may be used. The recommendations also address tofacitinib as a targeted sDMARD (tsDMARD), which is recommended, where licensed, after use of at least one bDMARD. Biosimilars are also addressed. These recommendations are intended to inform rheumatologists, patients, national rheumatology societies and other stakeholders about EULAR's most recent consensus on the management of RA with sDMARDs, glucocorticoids and bDMARDs. They are based on evidence and expert opinion and intended to improve outcome in patients with RA.

Consensus statement on blocking the effects of interleukin-6 and in particular by interleukin-6 receptor inhibition in rheumatoid arthritis and other inflammatory conditions.

BACKGROUND: Since approval of tocilizumab (TCZ) for treatment of rheumatoid arthritis (RA) and juvenile idiopathic arthritis (JIA), interleukin 6 (IL-6) pathway inhibition was evaluated in trials of TCZ and other agents targeting the IL-6 receptor and ligand in various RA populations and other inflammatory diseases. This consensus document informs on interference with the IL-6 pathway based on evidence and expert opinion. METHODS: Preparation of this document involved international experts in RA treatment and RA patients. A systematic literature search was performed that focused on TCZ and other IL6-pathway inhibitors in RA and other diseases. Subsequently, incorporating available published evidence and expert opinion, the steering committee and a broader expert committee (both including RA patients) formulated the current consensus statement. RESULTS: The consensus statement covers use of TCZ as combination- or monotherapy in various RA populations and includes clinical, functional and structural aspects. The statement also addresses the second approved indication in Europe JIA and non-approved indications. Also early phase trials involving additional agents that target the IL-6 receptor or IL-6 were evaluated. Safety concerns, including haematological, hepatic and metabolic issues as well as infections, are addressed likewise. CONCLUSIONS: The consensus statement identifies points to consider when using TCZ, regarding indications, contraindications, screening, dose, comedication, response evaluation and safety. The document is aimed at supporting clinicians and informing patients, administrators and payers on opportunities and limitations of IL-6 pathway inhibition.

Blocking the effects of interleukin-6 in rheumatoid arthritis and other inflammatory rheumatic diseases: systematic literature review and meta-analysis informing a consensus statement.

BACKGROUND: Suppression of the immunoinflammatory cascade by targeting interleukin 6 (IL-6) mediated effects constitutes a therapeutic option for chronic inflammatory diseases. Tocilizumab is the only IL-6 inhibitor (IL-6i) licensed for rheumatoid arthritis (RA) and juvenile idiopathic arthritis (JIA), but also other agents targeting either IL-6 or its receptor are investigated in various indications. OBJECTIVE: To review published evidence on safety and efficacy of IL-6i in inflammatory diseases. METHODS: We performed systematic literature searches in Medline and Cochrane, screened EULAR and American College of Rheumatology meeting-abstracts, and accessed http://www.clinicaltrials.gov. RESULTS: Comprehensive evidence supports the efficacy of tocilizumab in RA in DMARD-naïve patients, and after DMARD- and TNFi-failure. Randomised comparisons demonstrate superiority of tocilizumab in JIA, but not ankylosing spondylitis (AS). Other indications are currently investigated. Additional IL-6i show similar efficacy; safety generally appears acceptable. CONCLUSIONS: IL-6i is effective and safe in RA and JIA, but not in AS. Preliminary results in other indications need substantiation.

Treating Rheumatoid Arthritis to Target: multinational recommendations assessment questionnaire.

AIM: To measure the level of agreement and application of 10 international recommendations for treating rheumatoid arthritis (RA) to a target of remission/low disease activity. METHODS: A 10-point Likert scale (1=fully disagree, 10=fully agree) measured the level of agreement with each of 10 recommendations. A 4-point Likert scale (never, not very often, very often, always) assessed the degree to which each recommendation was being applied in current daily practice. If respondents answered 'never' or 'not very often', they were asked whether they would change their practice according to the particular recommendation. RESULTS: A total of 1901 physicians representing 34 countries participated. Both agreement with and application of recommendations was high. With regard to application of recommendations in daily practice, the majority of responses were 'always' and 'very often'. A significant percentage of participants who were currently not applying these recommendations in clinical practice were willing to change their practice according to the recommendations. CONCLUSION: The results of this survey demonstrated great support of 'Treating RA to Target' recommendations among the international rheumatology community. Additional efforts may be needed to encourage application of the recommendations among certain clinicians who are resistant to changing their practice.

Understanding emerging treatment paradigms in rheumatoid arthritis.

Treatment strategies for rheumatoid arthritis (RA) will continue to evolve as new drugs are developed, as new data become available, and as our potential to achieve greater and more consistent outcomes becomes more routine. Many patients will find both symptom relief and modest control of their disease with disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs), yet this course of therapy is clearly not effective in all patients. In fact, despite strong evidence that intensive treatment in the early stages of RA can slow or stop disease progression and may prevent disability, many patients continue to be managed in a stepwise manner and are treated with an ongoing monotherapy regimen with DMARDs. There is now a large body of evidence demonstrating the success of treating RA patients with anti-TNF therapy, usually in combination with methotrexate. As a result of the increased use of anti-TNF therapy, treatment paradigms have changed - and our practice is beginning to reflect this change. In the present review, we summarize the salient points of several recently proposed and emerging treatment paradigms with an emphasis on how these strategies may impact future practice.

Updated consensus statement on the use of rituximab in patients with rheumatoid arthritis.

BACKGROUND: Since initial approval for the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis (RA), rituximab has been evaluated in clinical trials involving various populations with RA. Information has also been gathered from registries. This report therefore updates the 2007 consensus document on the use of rituximab in the treatment of RA. METHODS: Preparation of this new document involved many international experts experienced in the treatment of RA. Following a meeting to agree upon the core agenda, a systematic literature review was undertaken to identify all relevant data. Data were then interrogated by a drafting committee, with subsequent review and discussion by a wider expert committee leading to the formulation of an updated consensus statement. These committees also included patients with RA. RESULTS: The new statement covers wide-ranging issues including the use of rituximab in earlier RA and impact on structural progression, and aspects particularly pertinent to rituximab such as co-medication, optimal dosage regimens, repeat treatment cycles and how to manage non-response. Biological therapy following rituximab usage is also addressed, and safety concerns including appropriate screening for hepatitis, immunoglobulin levels and infection risk. This consensus statement will support clinicians and inform patients when using B-cell depletion in the management of RA, providing up-to-date information and highlighting areas for further research. CONCLUSION: New therapeutic strategies and treatment options for RA, a chronic destructive and disabling disease, have expanded over recent years. These have been summarised in general strategic suggestions and specific management recommendations, emphasising the importance of expedient disease-modifying antirheumatic drug implementation and tight disease control. This consensus statement is in line with these fundamental principles of management.

Recommendations for an update of 2003 European regulatory requirements for registration of drugs to be used in the treatment of RA.

Since 2003, the European Medicines Agency (EMA) document, 'Points to consider on clinical investigation of medicinal products other than NSAIDs (nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs) for the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis' has provided guidance for the clinical development of both biologic and non-biologic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs). In the last few years, several new products have been developed or are in development for the treatment of RA, which offer significant efficacy with regard to disease control, including prevention of structural damage and disability. Concurrently, novel insights have been gained with respect to the assessment of disease activity, joint damage and disability. New treatment strategies have been established which relate to early therapy, tight control and rapid switching of medication. Accordingly, several new EULAR/ACR recommendations have been or are being developed. Several important additions and changes are needed in the 2003 guidance to incorporate the current scientific knowledge into clinical trial design for the development of future products. Under the auspices of the Group for the Respect of Ethics and Excellence in Science (GREES), a group of experts in the field of RA and clinical trial design met to provide a consensus recommendation for an update to the 2003 EMA guidance document.

Disease activity, physical function, and radiographic progression after longterm therapy with adalimumab plus methotrexate: 5-year results of PREMIER.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of initial combination treatment with adalimumab (ADA) and methotrexate (MTX) versus monotherapy with ADA or MTX during an open-label extension of PREMIER. METHODS: Patients with early rheumatoid arthritis (RA) received blinded ADA plus MTX, ADA alone, or MTX alone for 2 years in PREMIER. At Year 2, patients could enroll in an open-label extension and receive ADA monotherapy; MTX could be added at the investigator's discretion. Longterm efficacy results are presented as observed data. RESULTS: In the open-label period, 497 of the original 799 randomized patients had ≥ 1 dose of ADA (by original randomization: ADA plus MTX, n = 183; ADA, n = 159; MTX, n = 155). In the completers cohort [patients with available Year-5 ACR responses and modified total Sharp scores (mTSS)], the Year-5 mean change from baseline in mTSS for the ADA+MTX arm (n = 124) was 2.9, compared with 8.7 and 9.7 in the ADA (n = 115) and MTX (n = 115) arms. Comprehensive disease remission, defined as the combination of DAS28 remission, normal function (Health Assessment Questionnaire ≤ 0.5), and radiographic nonprogression (ΔmTSS ≤ 0.5), was achieved by more patients in the initial ADA+MTX arm (35%) than in the ADA (13%) or MTX (14%) arms. CONCLUSION: Initial combination treatment with ADA plus MTX, followed by open-label ADA, led to better longterm clinical, functional, and radiographic outcomes than either initial ADA or MTX monotherapy during 5 years of treatment.