Long-term clinical and radiological effectiveness and safety of ultralow doses of rituximab in rheumatoid arthritis: observational extension of the REDO trial.

BACKGROUND: The REDO trial (REtreatment with Rituximab in RhEmatoid arthritis: Disease Outcome after Dose Optimisation) showed similar disease activity for retreatment with ultralow doses (200 mg and 500 mg per 6 months) compared with standard low-dose rituximab (RTX, 1000 mg per 6 months). We performed an observational extension study of the REDO trial to assess long-term effectiveness. METHODS: Patients from the REDO trial were followed from start of the trial to censoring in April 2021. RTX use was at the discretion of patient and rheumatologist using treat to target. The primary outcome was disease activity (disease activity score in 28 joints C-reactive protein (DAS28-CRP)), analysed using a longitudinal mixed model by original randomisation and time-varying RTX dose. The original DAS28-CRP non-inferiority (NI) margin of 0.6 was used. RTX dose and persistence, safety and radiological outcomes were also assessed. FINDINGS: Data from 126 of 142 REDO patients was collected from 15 December 2016, up to 30 April 2021. Drop-outs continued treatment elsewhere (n=3) or did not consent (n=13).Disease activity did not differ by original randomisation group: 1000 mg mean DAS28-CRP (95% CI) of 2.2 (2.0 to 2.5), 500 mg 2.3 (2.1 to 2.4) and 200 mg 2.4 (2.2 to 2.5). Lower time-varying RTX dose was associated with higher DAS28-CRP (0.22 (95% CI 0.05 to 0.40) higher for 200 mg/6 months compared with 1000 mg/6 months), but remained within the NI-margin. RTX persistence was 93%. Median RTX dose was 978 mg (IQR 684-1413) per year, and no association was found between RTX dose and adverse events or radiological damage. INTERPRETATION: Long-term use of ultralow doses of RTX is effective in patients with rheumatoid arthritis responding to standard dose RTX.

Disease activity-guided dose optimisation including discontinuation of TNF-inhibitors in rheumatoid arthritis is effective for up to 10 years: an observational follow-up of the DRESS study.

OBJECTIVES: To investigate safety and effectiveness of disease activity-guided dose optimisation of TNF-inhibitors in rheumatoid arthritis over 10 years. METHODS: Observational long-term extension of a randomised study of participants who completed the 3-year extension of the DRESS-study. After the randomised phase (month 0-18), disease activity-guided dose optimisation was allowed for all. Main outcomes were mean time-weighted DAS28-CRP; biological and targeted synthetic anti-rheumatic drug (b/tsDMARD) use per year as proportion of daily defined dose; proportion of patients reaching discontinuation; durability, effectiveness of subsequent dose reduction attempts; and radiographic progression between 3 and 10 years using the Sharp-van der Heijde score. RESULTS: 170 patients were included of whom 127 completed 10-year follow-up. The mean disease activity remained low (DAS28-CRP 2.13, 95% confidence interval 2.10-2.16), whilst the b/tsDMARD dose reduced from 97% at baseline (95%CI 96% to 99%, n = 170)% to56% at year 10 (49% to 63%, n = 127). 119 of 161 participants (74%) with an optimisation attempt reached discontinuation, with a median duration of 7 months (interquartile range 3-33 months), and 25 participants never had to restart their b/tsDMARD (21%, 14% to 29%). The mean dose reduction after dose optimisation was 48% (n = 159) for the first optimisation attempt and 33% for subsequent attempt (n = 86). 48% (41/86) of participants had radiographic progression exceeding the smallest detectable change (5.7 units), and progression was associated with disease activity, not b/tsDMARD use. CONCLUSION: Long-term disease activity-guided dose optimisation of TNF-inhibitors in rheumatoid arthritis, including discontinuation and multiple tapering attempts, remains safe and effective.

Effectiveness of longstanding exercise therapy compared with usual care for people with rheumatoid arthritis and severe functional limitations: a randomised controlled trial.

OBJECTIVES: To compare the effectiveness of longstanding (>52 weeks), supervised exercise therapy with usual care in adults with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) and severe functional limitations. METHODS: Participants were randomised 1:1 to the intervention (individualised goal-setting, active exercises, education and self-management regarding physical activity) or usual care. Primary endpoint was the change in the Patient-Specific Complaints activity ranked 1 (PSC1, 0-10) at 52 weeks. Secondary endpoints included the PSC activities ranked 2 and 3 (PSC2, PSC3), Health Assessment Questionnaire-Disability Index (HAQ-DI), Rheumatoid Arthritis Quality of Life Questionnaire (RAQoL), 6-minute walk test (6MWT), Patient Reported Outcome Measurement Information System Physical Function-10 (PROMIS PF-10) and the Short Form-36 Physical and Mental Component Summary Scales (SF-36 PCS and MCS). (Serious) Adverse events (AEs) were recorded. Measurements were done by blinded assessors. Analyses at 52 weeks were based on the intention-to-treat principle. RESULTS: In total, 217 people (90% female, age 58.8 (SD 12.9) years) were randomised (n=104 intervention, n=98 usual care available for analyses). At 52 weeks, the improvement of the PSC1 was significantly larger in the intervention group (mean difference (95% CI) -1.7 (-2.4, -1.0)). Except for the SF-36 MCS, all secondary outcomes showed significantly greater improvements favouring the intervention (PSC2 -1.8 (-2.4, -1.1), PSC3 -1.7 (-2.4, -1.0), PROMIS PF-10 +3.09 (1.80, 4.38), HAQ-DI -0.17 (-0.29, -0.06), RAQoL -2.03 (-3.39, -0.69), SF-36 PCS +3.83 (1.49, 6.17) and 6MWT +56 (38, 75) m). One mild, transient AE occurred in the intervention group. CONCLUSION: Longstanding, supervised exercise therapy was more effective than usual care in people with RA and severe functional limitations. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: Netherlands Trial Register (NL8235), included in the International Clinical Trial Registry Platform (https://trialsearch.who.int/Trial2.aspx?TrialID=NL8235).

Treat-to-target vs fixed interval retreatment strategy with rituximab in rheumatoid arthritis: a retrospective cohort study.

To compare the effectiveness of retreatment of rheumatoid arthritis (RA) patients with rituximab (RTX) following the treat-to-target retreatment (TTr) or fixed interval retreatment (FIr) strategy. RA patients starting RTX treatment between January 2008 and June 2016, and receiving at least three infusion cycles were grouped by strategy (TTr, FIr or both). Primary outcome (between strategy difference in DAS28-CRP (Disease Activity Score in 28 joints calculated with C-reactive protein)) and secondary outcomes (flares, use of co-medication and mean yearly dose of RTX) were analyzed by group using linear mixed models to account for different strategies within patients. A total of 213 patients, 59 TTr (of whom 32 switched from TTr to FIr) and 186 FIr were included. No between-group difference in mean DAS28-CRP was found (0.10 DAS28-CRP point (95% CI - 0.07 to 0.26)). The TTr strategy did not result in more flares (IRR 1.13, 95%CI 0.87 to 1.47), conventional synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drug use (difference - 11.7%, 95%CI - 26.3% to 2.9%), or lower mean yearly RTX dose (difference 172 mg/yr, 95%CI - 355 to 11.7 mg/yr). RTX retreatment with either a TTr or FIr strategy does not seem to lead to better disease control and/or less drug use when used in a DAS28-CRP treat-to-target context. Choice of either strategy can, therefore, be made based on patient and physician preferences and logistical context.

Functional limitations of people with rheumatoid arthritis or axial spondyloarthritis and severe functional disability: a cross-sectional descriptive study.

The objective of the study is to describe the nature of functional limitations in activities and participation in people with Rheumatoid Arthritis (RA) or axial SpondyloArthritis (axSpA) with severe functional disability. Baseline data from people with RA (n = 206) or axSpA (n = 155) and severe functional disability participating in an exercise trial were used. Their three most limited activities were derived from the Patient Specific Complaint (PSC) instrument and linked to the International Classification of Functioning and Health (ICF). The frequencies of ICF categories were calculated and compared with Activities and Participation items of the ICF Core Sets for RA (32 second-level categories) and Ankylosing Spondylitis (AS) (24 second-level categories). In total 618 and 465 PSC activities were linked to 909 (72 unique in total; 25 unique second-level) and 759 (57 unique in total; 23 unique second-level) ICF categories in RA and axSpA. Taking into account all three prioritized activities, the five most frequent limited activities concerned the ICF chapter "Mobility", and included "Walking" (RA and axSpA 2 categories), "Changing basic body position" (RA and axSpA 1 category), "Stair climbing"(RA) and "Grasping" (RA),"Lifting" (axSpA) and "Maintaining a standing position" (axSpA). In RA, 21/32 (66%) and in axSpA 14/24 (58%) unique second-level categories identified in the prioritized activities are present in the Comprehensive Core Sets. Most limitations of people with RA or axSpA and severe functional disability were seen in the ICF chapter "Mobility". Most of the identified ICF categories were covered by the corresponding items of the ICF RA and AS Core Sets.

Therapy with JAK inhibitors or bDMARDs and the risk of cardiovascular events in the Dutch rheumatoid arthritis population.

OBJECTIVE: Caution has been advocated recently when using Janus kinase inhibitors (JAKi) in rheumatoid arthritis (RA) patients with an unfavorable cardiovascular risk profile. We aimed to compare the incidences in cardiovascular events between JAKi or bDMARDs in a large population of RA patients. METHODS: RA patients starting a new bDMARD or JAKi between August 1st 2018 and January 31st 2022 have been selected from IQVIA's Dutch Real-World Data Longitudinal Prescription database, covering about 63% of outpatient prescriptions in the Netherlands. Study outcome was a cardiovascular event, defined as the start of platelet aggregation inhibitors during study period. The incidence densities of cardiovascular events were compared between JAKi and bDMARDs using multilevel Poisson regression, adjusted for exposition time and confounders. RESULTS: 15 191 unique patients were included, with 28 481 patient-years on treatment with either JAKi (2,373) or bDMARDs (26 108). Most patients were female (72%) and median age was 62 years. We found 36 cardiovascular events (1.52 events/100 patient years) during therapy with JAKi and 383 events (1.47 events/100 patient years) during therapy with bDMARDs, respectively, resulting in an adjusted incidence rate ratio (IRR) of 0.99 for JAKi compared with bDMARDs (95% confidence interval (CI), 0.70-1.41). Sub-analyses in patients >65 years, by sex, or separately for tofacitinib and baricitinib, yielded similar results. CONCLUSION: In a large Dutch general RA population, the risk of cardiovascular events seems not different between JAKi users and those using bDMARDs, although a small increase in higher risk patients cannot be excluded.

Infection incidence, timing, and dose dependency in rheumatoid arthritis patients treated with rituximab: a retrospective cohort study.

OBJECTIVES: Rituximab (RTX) is a safe and effective treatment for rheumatoid arthritis (RA). However, there are some concerns about infection risk and preliminary data suggest dose and time dependency. This study aims to determine the infection incidence in a large real-life population of RA patients using RTX, with special focus on (ultra-)low dosing and time since last infusion. METHODS: RA patients treated with 1000, 500 or 200 mg RTX per cycle between 2012 and 2021 at the Sint Maartenskliniek were included in a retrospective cohort study. Patient-, disease-, treatment- and infection characteristics were retrieved from electronic health records. Infection incidence rates, dose and time relations with RTX infusion were analysed using mixed-effects Poisson regression. RESULTS: Among 490 patients, we identified 819 infections in 1254 patient years. Most infections were mild and respiratory tract infections were most common. Infection incidence rates were 41, 54 and 71 per 100 patient years for doses of 200, 500 and 1000 mg. Incidence rate ratio (IRR) was significantly lower for 200 mg compared to 1000 mg (adjusted IRR 0.35, 95% CI 0.17-0.72, p = 0.004). In patients receiving 1000 or 500 mg RTX, infections seemed to occur more frequently within the first two months after infusion compared to later on in the treatment cycle, suggesting an association with peak concentration. CONCLUSION: Ultra-low dosing (200 mg) of RTX is associated with a lower risk of infections in RA. Future interventions focusing on ultra-low dosing and slow release of RTX (e.g. by subcutaneous administration) may lower infection risk.

Non-Medical Switching from Tocilizumab to Sarilumab in Rheumatoid Arthritis Patients with Low Disease Activity, an Observational Study.

Tocilizumab and sarilumab are IL-6-receptor antagonists registered for rheumatoid arthritis (RA), with equal effectiveness and safety. Switching from tocilizumab to sarilumab could be a strategy to reduce injection burden, in case of drug shortages, and to reduce costs. This study therefore aims to investigate the effectiveness and safety of switching patients with RA with well-controlled disease under tocilizumab treatment to sarilumab. Patients with RA with low Disease Activity Score 28 (DAS28;-CRP < 2.9 or < 3.5 with clinical judgment), on stable dose tocilizumab (> 6 months) were offered to switch to sarilumab. Patients who switched and consented were followed for 6 months. Sarilumab was started at 200 mg and double the last tocilizumab interval. Co-primary outcomes at 6 months were (i) the 90% confidence interval (CI) of DAS28-CRP change from baseline compared with the non-inferiority margin of 0.6 and (ii) the 90% CI of the proportion of patients persisting with sarilumab, compared with a prespecified minimum of 70%. Of 50 invited patients, 25 agreed to switch to sarilumab, and 23 patients switched and were included. One patient was lost to follow-up immediately after inclusion, therefore 22 patients are included in the analyses. At 6 months, mean change in DAS28-CRP was 0.48 (90% CI: 0.11-0.87), compared with the non-inferiority margin of 0.6. Sarilumab persistence was 68% (90% CI: 51-82%, 15 out of 22 patients), compared with the prespecified minimum of 70%. Non-medical switching from tocilizumab to sarilumab in patients doing well on tocilizumab failed to show non-inferiority regarding disease activity and drug persistence.

What is the best target in a treat-to-target strategy in rheumatoid arthritis? Results from a systematic review and meta-regression analysis.

OBJECTIVES: A treat-to-target (T2T) strategy has been shown to be superior to usual care in rheumatoid arthritis (RA), but the optimal target remains unknown. Targets are based on a disease activity measure (eg, Disease Activity Score-28 (DAS28), Simplified Disease Activity Indices/Clinical Disease Activity Indices (SDAI/CDAI), and a cut-off such as remission or low disease activity (LDA). Our aim was to compare the effect of different targets on clinical and radiographic outcomes. METHODS: Cochrane, Embase and (pre)MEDLINE databases were searched (1 June 2022) for randomised controlled trials and cohort studies after 2003 that applied T2T in RA patients for ≥12 months. Data were extracted from individual T2T study arms; risk of bias was assessed with the Cochrane Collaboration tool. Using meta-regression, we evaluated the effect of the target used on clinical and radiographic outcomes, correcting for heterogeneity between and within studies. RESULTS: 115 treatment arms were used in the meta-regression analyses. Aiming for SDAI/CDAI-LDA was statistically superior to targeting DAS-LDA regarding DAS-remission and SDAI/CDAI/Boolean-remission outcomes over 1-3 years. Aiming for SDAI/CDAI-LDA was also significantly superior to DAS-remission regarding both SDAI/CDAI/Boolean-remission (over 1-3 years) and mean SDAI/CDAI (over 1 year). Targeting DAS-remission rather than DAS-LDA only improved the percentage of patients in DAS-remission, and only statistically significantly after 2-3 years of T2T. No differences were observed in Health Assessment Questionnaire and radiographic progression. CONCLUSIONS: Targeting SDAI/CDAI-LDA, and to a lesser extent DAS-remission, may be superior to targeting DAS-LDA regarding several clinical outcomes. However, due to the risk of residual confounding and the lack of data on (over)treatment and safety, future studies should aim to directly and comprehensively compare targets. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42021249015.

Urate-lowering therapy following a treat-to-target continuation strategy compared to a treat-to-avoid-symptoms discontinuation strategy in gout patients in remission (GO TEST Finale): study protocol of a multicentre pragmatic randomized superiority trial.

BACKGROUND: Long-term gout treatment is based on reducing serum urate levels using urate-lowering therapy (ULT). Most guidelines recommend using a lifelong continuation treat-to-target (T2T) strategy, in which ULT is dosed or combined until a serum urate target has been reached and maintained. However, a frequently used alternative strategy in clinical practice is a treat-to-avoid-symptoms (T2S) ULT discontinuation strategy, with the possibility of restarting the medication. This latter strategy aims at an acceptable symptom state, regardless of serum urate levels. High-quality evidence to support either strategy for patients in prolonged remission while using ULT is lacking. METHODS: We developed an investigator-driven pragmatic, open-label, multicentre, randomized, superiority treatment strategy trial (GO TEST Finale). At least 278 gout patients using ULT who are in remission (>12 months, preliminary gout remission criteria) will be randomized 1:1 to a continued T2T strategy (treatment target serum urate < 0.36 mmol/l) or switched to a T2S discontinuation strategy in which ULT is tapered to stop and restarted in case of (persistent or recurrent) flaring. The primary outcome is the between-group difference in the proportion of patients not in remission during the last 6 months of 24 months follow-up and will be analyzed using a two proportion z test. Secondary outcomes are group differences in gout flare incidence, reintroduction or adaptation of ULT, use of anti-inflammatory drugs, serum urate changes, occurrence of adverse events (with a special interest in cardiovascular and renal events), and cost-effectiveness. DISCUSSION: This study will be the first clinical trial comparing two ULT treatment strategies in patients with gout in remission. It will contribute to more specific and unambiguous guideline recommendations and improved cost-effectiveness of long-term gout treatment. It also paves the way (exploratory) to individualized long-term ULT treatment. In this article, we elaborate on some of our trial design choices and their clinical and methodological consequences. TRIAL REGISTRATION: International Clinical Trial Registry Platform (ICTRP) NL9245. Registered on 2 February 2021 (METC Oost-Nederland NL74350.091.20); EudraCT EUCTR2020-005730-15-NL. Registered on 11 January 2021.

[Methotrexate to prevent progression to rheumatoid arthritis?] / Methotrexaat om reumatoïde artritis te voorkomen?

The TREAT EARLIER was aimed at testing whether methotrexate could prevent the evolution from clinically suspect arthralgia to Rheumatoid Arthritis. Although the primary outcome was negative, symptoms did improve during and after use of methotrexate. Here we discuss how to interpret these findings, and place the study in the existing evidence.

Points to consider for cost-effective use of biological and targeted synthetic DMARDs in inflammatory rheumatic diseases: results from an umbrella review and international Delphi study.

OBJECTIVES: To develop evidence-based points to consider for cost-effective use of biological and targeted synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (b/tsDMARDs) in the treatment of inflammatory rheumatic diseases, specifically rheumatoid arthritis, psoriatic arthritis and axial spondyloarthritis. METHODS: Following EULAR procedures, an international task force was formed, consisting of 13 experts in rheumatology, epidemiology and pharmacology from seven European countries. Twelve strategies for cost-effective use of b/tsDMARDs were identified through individual and group discussion. For each strategy, PubMed and Embase were systematically searched for relevant English-language systematic reviews and, for six strategies, additionally for randomised controlled trials (RCTs). Thirty systematic reviews and 21 RCTs were included. Based on the evidence, a set of overarching principles and points to consider was formulated by the task force using a Delphi procedure. Level of evidence (1a-5) and grade (A-D) were determined for each point to consider. Individual voting on the level of agreement (LoA; between 0 (completely disagree) and 10 (completely agree)) was performed anonymously. RESULTS: The task force agreed on five overarching principles. For 10 of 12 strategies, the evidence was sufficient to formulate one or more points to consider, leading to 20 in total, regarding response prediction, drug formulary use, biosimilars, loading doses, low-dose initial therapy, concomitant conventional synthetic DMARD use, route of administration, medication adherence, disease activity-guided dose optimisation and non-medical drug switching. Ten points to consider (50%) were supported by level 1 or 2 evidence. The mean LoA (SD) varied between 7.9 (1.2) and 9.8 (0.4). CONCLUSION: These points to consider can be used in rheumatology practices and complement inflammatory rheumatic disease treatment guidelines to incorporate cost-effectiveness in b/tsDMARD treatment.

Exploring the perspective of patients with immune-mediated inflammatory diseases and care providers on the use of immunomodulatory drugs in infections: an interview study.

Objectives: Immunomodulatory agents are safe and effective as treatment for various immune-mediated inflammatory diseases (IMIDs), but are associated with a slightly increased infection risk. It is uncertain whether, in the event of an infection, continuation or temporary interruption of immunomodulatory agents leads to better outcomes. Owing to this uncertainty, it is of importance to explore the perspectives of health-care providers (HCPs) and patients on this topic. In this study, we set out to identify and provide an overview of reasons for both treatment strategies. Methods: Semi-structured interviews were conducted with HCPs involved in the pharmacological treatment of IMIDs and with IMID patients using one or more immunomodulatory agent. Purposive sampling was used to enrich data variation. Interviews were conducted until data saturation was reached and subsequently analysed using qualitative content analysis. Results: In total, 13 HCPs and 19 IMID patients were interviewed. A wide range of reasons for both treatment strategies were identified, categorized into 10 overarching themes, including IMID characteristics, infection characteristics and the patient-HCP relationship. Conclusion: In this interview study, we identified various reasons for continuation or temporary interruption of immunomodulatory agents during infections for both IMID patients and HCPs. We found overlapping themes, such as IMID characteristics; however, the content and interpretation of these themes might differ between HCPs and patients. Both HCPs and patients mentioned that the decision for a treatment strategy is often about weighing benefits against risks (e.g. infection severity vs disease flare).

Genome-wide Association Study of Methotrexate-Induced Liver Injury in Rheumatoid Arthritis Patients.

Hepatotoxicity is a serious adverse drug reaction related to methotrexate (MTX). However, the cause of drug-induced liver injury (DILI) is still unclear and unpredictable. Genetic risk factors may predispose for MTX-DILI. Therefore, we conducted a nested case-control genome-wide association study to explore genetic risk factors associated with MTX-DILI. Seven international groups contributed blood samples and data of patients with rheumatoid arthritis who used MTX. MTX-DILI was defined as an alanine aminotransferase (ALT) level of at least three times the upper limit of normal (ULN), to increase contrast controls ALT levels did not raise above two times the ULN. Per study site, control subjects and patients with MTX-DILI (ratio 3:1) were matched for age, gender, and duration of MTX use. Patients were genotyped using Illumina GSA MD-24v1-0 and data were imputed using the 1000 Genomes reference panel. Single-nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) were analyzed using an additive genetic model, corrected for sex, country, and age. A P-value of ≤ 5 × 10-8 was considered significant, whereas a  P-value of ≤ 5 × 10-6 was considered suggestive. A total of 108 MTX-DILI cases and 311 controls were included for association analysis. None of the SNPs were significantly associated with MTX-DILI. However, we found seven suggestive genetic variants associated with MTX-DILI (P-values 7.43 × 10-8 to 4.86 × 10-6 ). Of those, five SNPs were in the intronic protein-coding regions of FTCDNL1, BCOR, FGF14, RBMS3, and PFDN4/DOK5. Investigation of candidates SPATA9 (rs72783407), PLCG2 (rs60427389), RAVER2 (rs72675408), JAK1 (rs72675451), PTPN2 (rs2476601), MTHFR C677T (rs1801133), and into the HLA region did not show significant findings. No genetic variants associated with MTX-DILI were found, whereas suggestive SNPs need further investigation.

The mode of delivery and content of communication strategies used in mandatory and non-mandatory biosimilar transitions: a systematic review with meta-analysis.

Effective patient-provider communication is crucial to promote shared decision-making. However, it is unclear how to explain treatment changes to ensure patient acceptance, such as when transitioning from a bio-originator to a biosimilar. This review investigates communication strategies used to educate patients on transitioning to biosimilars and explores whether the willingness to transition and treatment persistence differs for the delivery (verbal or written) and the amount of information provided. MEDLINE, Embase, Scopus, and relevant conference databases were systematically searched. Communication strategies from 33 studies (88% observational cohort studies) published from 2012 to 2020 were synthesized and willingness to transition, persistence, and subjective adverse events explored. Patients only received information verbally in 11 studies. The remaining 22 studies also provided written information. Cost-saving was the main reason provided for the transition. Patients were most willing to transition when receiving written and verbal information (χ2 = 5.83, p = .02) or written information that only addressed a few (3-5) concerns (χ2 = 16.08, p < .001). There was no significant difference for persistence or subjective adverse events (p's > .05). Few randomized controlled trials have been conducted. Available data shows more willingness to transition when patients received written and verbal information. Initial documents should contain basic information and consultations or telephone calls used to address concerns.

Seroconversion after a third COVID-19 vaccine is affected by rituximab dose but persistence is not in patients with rheumatoid arthritis.

OBJECTIVES: In patients with RA treated with (ultra-)low-dose rituximab (RTX), we investigated the association of dosing and timing of RTX on seroconversion after a third coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccination and the persistence of humoral response after a two-dose vaccination. MATERIAL AND METHODS: In this monocentre observational study, patients from the COVAC cohort were included in the third vaccine analysis if humoral response was obtained 2-6 weeks after a third vaccination in previous non-responders and in the persistence analysis if a follow-up humoral response was obtained before a third vaccination in previous responders. Dichotomization between positive and negative response was based on the assay cut-off. The association between the latest RTX dose before first vaccination, timing between the latest RTX dose and vaccination and response was analysed with univariable logistic regression. RESULTS: Of the 196 patients in the cohort, 98 were included in the third vaccine analysis and 23 in the persistence analysis. Third vaccination response was 19/98 (19%) and was higher for 200 mg RTX users [5/13 (38%)] than for 500 and 1000 mg users [7/37 (19%) and 7/48 (15%), respectively]. Non-significant trends were seen for higher response with lower dosing [200 vs 1000 mg: odds ratio (OR) 3.66 (95% CI 0.93, 14.0)] and later timing [per month since infusion: OR 1.16 (95% CI 0.97, 1.35)]. Humoral response persisted in 96% (22/23) and 89% (8/9) of patients who received RTX between the two measurements. CONCLUSIONS: Repeated vaccination as late as possible after the lowest RTX dose possible seems the best vaccination strategy. A once positive humoral response after COVID-19 vaccination persists irrespective of intercurrent RTX infusion. Study registration. Netherlands Trial Registry (https://www.trialregister.nl/), NL9342.

The added value of predictive biomarkers in treat-to-target strategies for rheumatoid arthritis patients: a conceptual modelling study.

OBJECTIVES: To quantify the additional value of a hypothetical biomarker predicting response to treatment for RA regarding efficacy and costs by using a modelling design. METHODS: A Markov model was built comparing a usual care T2T strategy with a biomarker-steered strategy for RA patients starting biologic therapy. Outcome measures include time spent in remission or low disease activity (LDA) and costs. Four additional scenario analyses were performed by varying biomarker or clinical care characteristics: (i) costs of the biomarker; (ii) sensitivity and specificity of the biomarker; (iii) proportion of eligible patients tapering; and (iv) medication costs. RESULTS: In the base model, patients spent 2.9 months extra in LDA or remission in the biomarker strategy compared with usual care T2T over 48 months. Total costs were €43 301 and €42 568 for, respectively, the usual care and biomarker strategy, and treatment costs accounted for 91% of total costs in both scenarios. Cost savings were driven due to patients in the biomarker strategy experiencing remission or LDA earlier, and starting tapering sooner. Cost-effectiveness was not so much driven by costs or test characteristics of the biomarker (scenario 1/2), but rather by the level of early and proactive tapering and drug costs (scenarios 3/4). CONCLUSIONS: The use of a biomarker for prediction of response to b/tsDMARD treatment in RA can be of added value to current treat-to-target clinical care. However, gains in efficacy are modest and cost gains are depending on a combination of early proactive tapering and high medication costs.

EULAR recommendations for the management of rheumatoid arthritis with synthetic and biological disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs: 2022 update.

OBJECTIVES: To provide an update of the EULAR rheumatoid arthritis (RA) management recommendations addressing the most recent developments in the field. METHODS: An international task force was formed and solicited three systematic literature research activities on safety and efficacy of disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs) and glucocorticoids (GCs). The new evidence was discussed in light of the last update from 2019. A predefined voting process was applied to each overarching principle and recommendation. Levels of evidence and strengths of recommendation were assigned to and participants finally voted on the level of agreement with each item. RESULTS: The task force agreed on 5 overarching principles and 11 recommendations concerning use of conventional synthetic (cs) DMARDs (methotrexate (MTX), leflunomide, sulfasalazine); GCs; biological (b) DMARDs (tumour necrosis factor inhibitors (adalimumab, certolizumab pegol, etanercept, golimumab, infliximab including biosimilars), abatacept, rituximab, tocilizumab, sarilumab and targeted synthetic (ts) DMARDs, namely the Janus kinase inhibitors tofacitinib, baricitinib, filgotinib, upadacitinib. Guidance on monotherapy, combination therapy, treatment strategies (treat-to-target) and tapering in sustained clinical remission is provided. Safety aspects, including risk of major cardiovascular events (MACEs) and malignancies, costs and sequencing of b/tsDMARDs were all considered. Initially, MTX plus GCs is recommended and on insufficient response to this therapy within 3-6 months, treatment should be based on stratification according to risk factors; With poor prognostic factors (presence of autoantibodies, high disease activity, early erosions or failure of two csDMARDs), any bDMARD should be added to the csDMARD; after careful consideration of risks of MACEs, malignancies and/or thromboembolic events tsDMARDs may also be considered in this phase. If the first bDMARD (or tsDMARD) fails, any other bDMARD (from another or the same class) or tsDMARD (considering risks) is recommended. With sustained remission, DMARDs may be tapered but should not be stopped. Levels of evidence and levels of agreement were high for most recommendations. CONCLUSIONS: These updated EULAR recommendations provide consensus on RA management including safety, effectiveness and cost.

1-year results of treatment with rituximab in polymyalgia rheumatica: an extension study of a randomised double-blind placebo-controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Rituximab was effective for patients with polymyalgia rheumatica in the 21-week BRIDGE-PMR randomised controlled trial. Here, we aimed to assess rates of glucocorticoid-free remission up to 1 year after infusion in an extension of this trial. METHODS: BRIDGE-PMR was a randomised controlled proof-of-concept trial that enrolled participants with polymyalgia rheumatica according to 2012 European League Against Rheumatism-American College of Rheumatology classification criteria at the Sint Maartenskliniek, Nijmegen, Netherlands. Patients were randomly allocated in a 1:1 ratio to receive one intravenous dose of 1000 mg rituximab or placebo, with identical pre-medication and accelerated glucocorticoid tapering over 17 weeks. After the 21-week study, patients were followed in a double-blind extension until 1 year after infusion during which standard-of-care treatment was provided. The primary outcome after 52 weeks was between-group difference in glucocorticoid-free remission (ie, polymyalgia rheumatica activity score [PMR-AS] <10), assessed in all randomly allocated participants, with data imputed using a predictive mean matching model (provided data were missing at random). A sensitivity analysis restricted to patients with complete data (complete case analysis) was also done. This trial is registered with EudraCT (2018-002641-11) and the Dutch trial database (NL7414). FINDINGS: Between Dec 18, 2019 and June 8, 2021, 47 patients enrolled in the BRIDGE-PMR were followed up in this extension study (23 [11 women and 12 men] allocated rituximab and 24 [13 women and 11 men] allocated placebo), of who 38 had recently diagnosed polymyalgia rheumatica and nine had relapsing polymyalgia rheumatica. Mean (SD) age was 64 (10) years in the rituximab group and 66 (9) years in the placebo group. All participants were White. Missing data were imputed for six participants (four rituximab, two placebo); because the data were probably missing at random, a complete case analysis was added as sensitivity analyses. In the imputed analysis, the between-group absolute difference reached statistical significance (12 [52%] of 23 in the rituximab group in glucocorticoid-free remission vs five [21%] of 24 participants in the placebo group; absolute difference 31% [95% CI 5 to 57], RR 2·5 [1·0 to 6·0]; p=0·04). In the complete case analysis, nine (47%) of 19 patients in the rituximab group were in glucocorticoid-free remission 1 year after infusion compared with five (23%) of 22 in the placebo group (absolute difference 25% [95% CI -4 to 53], relative risk (RR) 2·1 [95% CI 0·8 to 5·2]; p=0·12). Eight (33%) patients in the placebo group and six (26%) in the rituximab group had adverse events. INTERPRETATION: After a single dose of rituximab (1000 mg), the proportion of patients with polymyalgia rheumatica in glucocorticoid-free remission remained stable at 1 year after infusion, and a glucocorticoid sparing effect was evident. A larger trial including possibility for retreatment is warranted to confirm these results. FUNDING: Sint Maartenskliniek.