Investigation of treatment continuity, usefulness, and nocebo effect in switching from the original etanercept to its biosimilar in patients with rheumatoid arthritis: A JET observational study in Japanese clinical practice.

OBJECTIVES: To assess the usefulness and onset of nocebo effects after switching from the original etanercept (ETN) to a biosimilar (BS) in routine clinical practice at rheumatology clinics in Japan (13 sites). METHODS: A total of 165 patients (87.0% women, age = 57.88 ± 15.07 years, and disease duration = 10.32 ± 7.71 years), whose low disease activity was maintained with the original ETN for ≥12 weeks, and who agreed to switch treatment to its BS, were included. The end-points were disease activity score 28 (DAS28)-C-reactive protein and DAS28-erythrocyte sedimentation rate. RESULTS: No significant difference was observed between the changes in DAS28-C-reactive protein and DAS28-erythrocyte sedimentation rate >12 weeks before switching and >12 weeks after switching (P = 0.132 and 0.334, respectively). The treatment continuation rate during the 52 weeks after switching to BS was 97.3%. During this period, BS was discontinued in only four patients, and no nocebo effects were suspected in these four patients. CONCLUSION: Switching from ETN to BS was effective even in routine clinical practice at rheumatology clinics in Japan, and no nocebo effects were observed. Sufficient explanations to patients by rheumatologists and the additional payment for drug costs between patients at hospital visits effectively improved the continuation rate without any nocebo effect.

Long-term safety and efficacy of treatment with subcutaneous abatacept in Japanese patients with rheumatoid arthritis who are methotrexate inadequate responders.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the long-term safety, immunogenicity, and efficacy of subcutaneous (SC) abatacept in combination with methotrexate (MTX) in Japanese patients with rheumatoid arthritis who were MTX inadequate responders, in a long-term extension (LTE) to a double-dummy, double-blind study (NCT01001832). METHODS: Patients, who had previously received SC or intravenous (IV) abatacept with MTX (6-8 mg/week) for 24 weeks, received SC abatacept (125 mg/week) with MTX for an additional 52 weeks. Safety, immunogenicity, and efficacy were assessed. RESULTS: The LTE included 112 patients. SC abatacept was generally well tolerated in the LTE, with no new safety signals. American College of Rheumatology 20, 50, and 70 response rates, disease activity score 28 (C-reactive protein) remission rates (< 2.6), and Health Assessment Questionnaire-Disability Index response rates (≥ 0.3 improvement from baseline) achieved at the end of the double-blind period were maintained over the LTE and were comparable in patients who received SC or IV abatacept in the double-blind period. Seropositivity for immunogenicity occurred in 4 (3.6%) patients. Self-injection of SC abatacept was well controlled and not associated with additional safety events. CONCLUSIONS: SC abatacept had acceptable safety and was well tolerated and effective over the LTE (76 weeks in total), with low rates of immunogenicity in Japanese patients.

Efficacy, safety, pharmacokinetics and immunogenicity of abatacept administered subcutaneously or intravenously in Japanese patients with rheumatoid arthritis and inadequate response to methotrexate: a Phase II/III, randomized study.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate efficacy and safety of subcutaneous (SC) and intravenous (IV) abatacept and background methotrexate (MTX) in Japanese patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) and inadequate response to MTX (MTX-IR). METHODS: Double-dummy, double-blind study (NCT01001832); 118 adults with ≥ 10 swollen joints, ≥ 12 tender joints and C-reactive protein (CRP) ≥ 0.8 mg/dL randomized 1:1 to SC abatacept (125 mg weekly) with IV loading (∼10 mg/kg on Day 1), or IV abatacept (∼10 mg/kg monthly) for 169 days, both also receiving MTX (6-8 mg/week). Primary endpoint was Day 169 American College of Rheumatology (ACR)20 response; other efficacy endpoints, safety and immunogenicity were assessed. RESULTS: Similar proportions of patients achieved ACR20 responses at Day 169 with SC (91.5% [95% CI 81.3, 97.2]) and IV abatacept (83.1% [71.0, 91.6]). ACR50/70 responses, adjusted mean changes from baseline in Health Assessment Questionnaire-Disability Index scores and remission rates (28-joint Disease Activity Score [CRP] < 2.6) were also comparable between groups. Serious adverse event frequencies (5.1% vs. 3.4%) were similar with both formulations. One patient per group tested seropositive for immunogenicity. Weekly SC abatacept dosing achieved mean serum concentrations > 10 µg/mL (minimum therapeutic target). CONCLUSIONS: SC abatacept demonstrated comparable efficacy and safety to IV abatacept, with low immunogenicity rates, in MTX-IR Japanese patients with RA.

An investigation of the correlation between blood concentration of mizoribine and its efficacy in treatment of rheumatoid arthritis based on indices of drug survival and improvement in DAS28-CRP.

OBJECTIVES: The efficacy of mizoribine (MZR) in treatment of rheumatoid arthritis (RA) was retrospectively investigated in terms of drug survival, improvement in Disease Activity Score-28 (DAS28)-C-reactive protein (CRP), and blood MZR concentration obtained 3 h after dosing (MZR-C3). METHODS: To compare the efficacy of MZR administered via different regimens, the subjects were divided into 2 groups: those receiving a single dose of MZR at 100-150 mg every other day (group A) and those receiving 2 or 3 divided doses of the drug on consecutive days, which is the usual dosing method of the drug (group B). RESULTS: Group A had significantly higher MZR-C3 levels compared with group B, as well as significantly greater improvement in DAS28-CRP. Moreover, drug survival was significantly longer in group A. The primary regression equation suggested that the effective blood MZR concentration in RA treatment is MZR-C3 of 1.47 µg/mL or more. CONCLUSIONS: The results of the present study indicate that it is possible to increase the efficacy of MZR in a blood concentration-dependent manner, and also to control RA over a prolonged period, using single administration of MZR on alternate days at an increased dose.