Long-term safety of sarilumab in rheumatoid arthritis: an integrated analysis with up to 7 years' follow-up.

OBJECTIVE: Sarilumab is a human monoclonal antibody that blocks IL-6 from binding to membrane-bound and soluble IL-6 receptor-α. We assessed the long-term safety of sarilumab in patients from eight clinical trials and their open-label extensions. METHODS: Data were pooled from patients with rheumatoid arthritis who received at least one dose of sarilumab in combination with conventional synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (csDMARDs; combination group) or as monotherapy (monotherapy group). Treatment-emergent adverse events (AEs) and AEs and laboratory values of special interest were assessed. RESULTS: 2887 patients received sarilumab in combination with csDMARDs and 471 patients received sarilumab monotherapy, with mean exposure of 2.8 years and 1.7 years, maximum exposure 7.3 and 3.5 years, and cumulative AE observation period of 8188 and 812 patient-years, respectively. Incidence rates per 100 patient-years in the combination and monotherapy groups, respectively, were 9.4 and 6.7 for serious AEs, 3.7 and 1.0 for serious infections, 0.6 and 0.5 for herpes zoster (no cases were disseminated), 0.1 and 0 for gastrointestinal perforations, 0.5 and 0.2 for major adverse cardiovascular events, and 0.7 and 0.6 for malignancy. Absolute neutrophil counts <1000 cells/mm3 were recorded in 13% and 15% of patients, respectively. Neutropenia was not associated with increased risk of infection or serious infection. Analysis by 6-month interval showed no signal for increased rate of any AE over time. CONCLUSION: The long-term safety profile of sarilumab, either in combination with csDMARDs or as monotherapy, remained stable and consistent with the anticipated profile of a molecule that inhibits IL6 signalling.

Two Cases of High Tibial Osteotomy in Patients with Rheumatoid Arthritis Treated with Biologic Disease-modifying Anti-rheumatic Drugs.

High tibial osteotomy (HTO) procedure is generally contraindicated in rheumatoid arthritis (RA) patients because synovial inflammation may exacerbate joint damage post-surgery. The natural course of joint destruction in RA changed dramatically with new treatment strategies and the introduction of biologic disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs (bDMARDs). We report the cases of two RA patients who underwent HTO and whose disease activities were well controlled by bDMARDs. Despite their short follow-up periods, they showed acceptable objective and subjective clinical results. We believe that the combination of bDMARDs and HTO can be indicated for selected RA patients before total knee arthroplasty.

Sarilumab: Review of a Second IL-6 Receptor Antagonist Indicated for the Treatment of Rheumatoid Arthritis.

Major Objectives: To review the efficacy, safety, and economics of sarilumab, an interleukin-6 (IL-6) receptor antagonist, in the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis (RA). DATA SOURCES: PubMed (1966 to January 2018), Clinicaltrials.gov (January 2018), and Scopus (1970 to January 2018) were searched using sarilumab, Kevzara, REGN88, and SAR153191. STUDY SELECTION AND DATA EXTRACTION: Human studies published in peer-reviewed publications in English were the primary sources for efficacy and safety. DATA SYNTHESIS: Data from randomized, double-blind, controlled, published clinical studies weeks demonstrated statistically significantly higher American College of Rheumatology (ACR) 20, ACR50, and Disease Activity Score-28 (DAS28) remission response rates and improvements in DAS28 and Health Assessment Questionnaire-Disability Index scores for sarilumab monotherapy versus adalimumab monotherapy (P < 0.05) and for sarilumab versus placebo in patients receiving methotrexate or other conventional synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs); P < 0.05. The ACR20 and ACR50 response rates were, respectively, 56-72% and 35-46% for sarilumab, 58% and 30% for adalimumab, and 33-34% and 15-18% for placebo. DAS28 remission rates were 20-34% for sarilumab, 7% for adalimumab, and 7-10% for placebo. Sarilumab has a higher risk for neutropenia than tocilizumab, the other IL-6 inhibitor, but a lower risk for dyslipidemia, injection site reactions, and gastrointestinal perforation. The acquisition costs of sarilumab are expected to be similar to those of most other biologic DMARDs. CONCLUSION: Sarilumab is an alternative to biologic DMARDs or targeted synthetic DMARDs in patients with moderate to severely active RA who have not responded adequately to prior conventional synthetic DMARDs or tumor necrosis factor-α inhibitors.

Effectiveness of biologics in Australian patients with rheumatoid arthritis: a large observational study: REAL.

BACKGROUND: The comparative effectiveness of biologic treatment regimens in a real world Australian population is unknown. AIM: To assess the effectiveness of biological disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs (bDMARD) as monotherapy or in combination with methotrexate and/or other conventional DMARD (cDMARD) for the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis (RA). METHODS: A retrospective, non-interventional study was conducted that investigated the use of bDMARD in adult patients with RA in routine clinical practice. Data were extracted from the Optimising Patient Outcomes in Australian Rheumatology - Quality Use of Medicines Initiative database. Real-world effectiveness was measured using the 28-joint disease activity score (DAS28) and clinical disease activity index (CDAI) by treatment group at baseline, weeks 12 and 24. RESULTS: A total of 2970 patients was included with a median (min-max) age of 60.0 (19.0-94.0) years and median (min-max) duration of RA before first bDMARD treatment of 6.0 (0.2-58.3) years. A total of 1177 patients received more than one bDMARD during the analysis period of 1 January 1997 to 15 August 2015. Patients had 4922 treatment 'episodes' (defined as a cycle of continuous individual bDMARD prescribing in a single patient). Patients received a mean (SD) of 1.7 (1.0) episodes of treatment with median (min-max) treatment duration of 0.7 (0-11.8) years; median treatment duration was higher with the first treatment episode. bDMARD were most commonly initiated in combination with methotrexate (73.9% of episodes) and least commonly as monotherapy (9.9% of episodes). Median (min-max) baseline DAS28 decreased from 5.3 (0-8.7) with the first bDMARD to 3.7 (0-8.8) with the second. Median baseline CDAI similarly decreased. CONCLUSIONS: Patients tended to persist longer on their first bDMARD treatment. bDMARD as monotherapy or in combination appear to be accepted treatment strategies in the real world.

Effectiveness of biologic DMARDs in monotherapy versus in combination with synthetic DMARDs in rheumatoid arthritis: data from the Swiss Clinical Quality Management Registry.

OBJECTIVES: To determine the frequency of use of biologic DMARDs (bDMARDs) in monotherapy, to describe the baseline characteristics of patients treated with bDMARDs in monotherapy and to compare the effectiveness of bDMARDs in monotherapy with that of bDMARDs in combination with synthetic DMARDs (sDMARDs). METHODS: Using data from the Swiss RA (SCQM-RA) registry, bDMARD treatment courses (TCs) were classified either as monotherapy or as combination therapy, depending on the presence of concomitant sDMARDs. Prescription of bDMARD monotherapy was analysed using logistic regression. bDMARD retention was analysed using Kaplan-Meier and Cox models with the addition of time-varying covariate effects. Evolution of the DAS28 over time was analysed with mixed-effects models for longitudinal data. RESULTS: A total of 4218 TCs on bDMARDs from 3111 patients were included, of which 1136 TCs (27%) were initiated as monotherapy. bDMARD monotherapy was preferentially prescribed to older, co-morbid patients with longer disease duration, lower BMI, more active disease and more previous bDMARDs. After adjusting for potential confounding factors, drug retention was significantly lower in monotherapy [hazard ratio 1.15 (95% CI: 1.03, 1.30)]. Other factors such as type of bDMARD and calendar year of prescription were associated with a stronger effect on drug retention. Response to treatment in terms of DAS28 evolution was also slightly but significantly less favourable in monotherapy (P = 0.04). CONCLUSION: Our data suggest that bDMARD monotherapy is prescribed to more complex cases and is significantly less effective than bDMARD therapy in combination with sDMARDs, but to an extent that is clinically only marginally relevant.

Assessment of the effectiveness of golimumab 50-mg and 100-mg regimens in patients with rheumatoid arthritis in daily practice.

OBJECTIVES: To assess the effectiveness of the golimumab (GLM) 50-mg and 100-mg regimens in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) in daily practice. METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed RA patients who started GLM between September 2011 and July 2012. Patients were divided into three groups: a 50-mg group; a 50/100-mg group (had a dose increase to 100 mg); and a 100-mg group (started GLM at 100 mg). We assessed Disease Activity Score 28 (DAS28) and treatment continuation rate. Risk factors associated with time to discontinuation of the 50-mg regimen were determined with proportional hazards analysis. RESULTS: We analyzed 74 patients: 43 in the 50-mg group, 23 in the 50/100-mg group, and 8 in the 100-mg group. DAS28 improved from 4.0 ± 1.0, 4.8 ± 1.0, and 4.7 ± 1.9, respectively, at baseline to 2.4 ± 1.2, 3.3 ± 1.5, and 2.5 ± 0.7, respectively, at week 52. Treatment continuation rates at week 52 were 73.7%, 60.9%, and 87.5%, respectively. In the 50/100-mg group, the mean DAS28 improved significantly from 4.4 ± 1.2 before to 3.6 ± 1.3 12 weeks after the dose increase. Oral corticosteroid therapy ≥ 5 mg/day, previous use of two biologic agents, and DAS28 > 5.1 at initiation of GLM were significantly associated with discontinuation of the 50-mg regimen. CONCLUSIONS: Both GLM 50-mg and 100-mg regimens are effective in patients with RA in daily practice.

Chronological changes in baseline disease activity of patients with rheumatoid arthritis who received biologic DMARDs between 2003 and 2012.

BACKGROUND/PURPOSE: The use of biologic disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs (DMARDs) for rheumatoid arthritis (RA) has been increasing since 2003. In this study, we evaluated changes in the characteristics of patients receiving biologic DMARDs daily, in Japan. METHODS: The characteristics of all RA patients who received any biologic DMARD at the Institute of Rheumatology, Tokyo Women's Medical University, within 1 year after its approval in Japan, were retrospectively evaluated. The periods of patient enrollment for each biologic agent were: infliximab (IFX), 2003-2004; etanercept (ETN), 2005-2006; tocilizumab (TCZ), 2008-2009; adalimumab (ADA), 2008-2009; abatacept (ABT), 2010-2011; and golimumab (GLM), 2011-2012. We retrospectively collected individual patient characteristics, concomitant medication usage, and disease activity assessed by disease activity score 28 (DAS28) at the time of administration, from the medical records. The retention rate for each agent at 6 months after treatment initiation was also assessed. RESULTS: The numbers of patients who received each biologic DMARD at our institute within 1 year after its approval were: IFX, 49; ETN, 50; TCZ, 62; ADA, 52; ABT, 40; and GLM, 77. From 2003 to 2012, the proportion of patients with prior use of any biologic DMARD increased, as did concomitant use and dose of methotrexate (MTX); however, corticosteroid use and doses decreased. DAS28, at the time of treatment initiation, gradually decreased. At the time of IFX administration, 75% and 25% of patients had high and moderate disease activity respectively, compared to 25% and 58% respectively, of patients who received GLM. No significant difference was observed in the retention rate of biologic DMARDs at 6 months (range, 75.0% to 89.6%). CONCLUSION: Baseline disease activity of RA patients who received biologic DMARDs between 2003 and 2012 has changed from high to moderate in daily practice in Japan.

Determinants associated with the prescription of a first biologic therapy in patients with axial spondyloarthritis and concomitant fibromyalgia in daily practice.

OBJECTIVES: There is no consensus on the therapeutic strategy of rheumatologists for patients with spondyloarthritis (SpA) and concomitant fibromyalgia (FM). The main aim of this study was to identify, in a population of rheumatologists practicing in Normandy, France, the determinants associated with their decision to prescribe a first biologic DMARD (bDMARD) in patients with Spa/FM. Specific objectives were to evaluate professional prescribing practices to identify a set of criteria likely to contribute to the therapeutic decision of rheumatologists, and to validate the relevance of these criteria. METHOD: This is a cross-sectional survey-based study using a mixed (qualitative and quantitative) method. The quantitative approach was web-based and conducted among rheumatologists in Normandy. RESULTS: The qualitative study allowed us to identify a set of criteria likely to contribute to the therapeutic decision of rheumatologists. In the quantitative study, 54/113 rheumatologists filled the questionnaire. Four criteria were considered by all respondents to contribute to their decision to prescribe a first bDMARD: arthritis on physical examination, extra-articular manifestations, systemic inflammation and structural damage on imaging. CONCLUSIONS: The determinants associated with the decision of rheumatologists to prescribe a first bDMARD in patients with SpA/FM were mostly objective, in line with the recommendations in the literature. Most criteria were more related to an approach aimed at ensuring the diagnosis of SpA than evaluating its activity or severity.

Safety outcomes in patients with rheumatoid arthritis treated with abatacept: results from a multinational surveillance study across seven European registries.

BACKGROUND: Patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) have an increased risk of infection and malignancy compared with the general population. Infection risk is increased further with the use of disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs), whereas evidence on whether the use of biologic DMARDs increases cancer risk remains equivocal. This single-arm, post-marketing study estimated the incidence of prespecified infection and malignancy outcomes in patients with RA treated with intravenous or subcutaneous abatacept. METHODS: Data were included from seven European RA quality registries: ATTRA (Anti-TNF Therapy in Rheumatoid Arthritis [Czech Republic]), DANBIO (Danish Rheumatologic Database), ROB-FIN (National Registry of Antirheumatic and Biological Treatment in Finland), ORA (Orencia and Rheumatoid Arthritis [France]), GISEA (Italian Group for the Study of Early Arthritis), BIOBADASER (Spanish Register of Adverse Events of Biological Therapies in Rheumatic Diseases), and the SCQM (Swiss Clinical Quality Management) system. Each registry is unique with respect to design, data collection, definition of the study cohort, reporting, and validation of outcomes. In general, registries defined the index date as the first day of abatacept treatment and reported data for infections requiring hospitalization and overall malignancies; data for other infection and malignancy outcomes were not available for every cohort. Abatacept exposure was measured in patient-years (p-y). Incidence rates (IRs) were calculated as the number of events per 1000 p-y of follow-up with 95% confidence intervals. RESULTS: Over 5000 patients with RA treated with abatacept were included. Most patients (78-85%) were female, and the mean age range was 52-58 years. Baseline characteristics were largely consistent across registries. Among patients treated with abatacept, IRs for infections requiring hospitalization across the registries ranged from 4 to 100 events per 1000 p-y, while IRs for overall malignancy ranged from 3 to 19 per 1000 p-y. CONCLUSIONS: Despite heterogeneity between registries in terms of design, data collection, and ascertainment of safety outcomes, as well as the possibility of under-reporting of adverse events in observational studies, the safety profile of abatacept reported here was largely consistent with previous findings in patients with RA treated with abatacept, with no new or increased risks of infection or malignancy.

Factors associated with discontinuation of biologics in patients with inflammatory arthritis in remission: data from the BIOBADASER registry.

BACKGROUND: The objectives of this study were to assess the discontinuation of biologic therapy in patients who achieve remission and identify predictors of discontinuation of biologics in patients with inflammatory arthritis in remission. METHODS: An observational retrospective study from the BIOBADASER registry comprising adult patients diagnosed with rheumatoid arthritis (RA), ankylosing spondylitis (AS), or psoriatic arthritis (PsA) and receiving 1 or 2 biological disease-modifying drugs (bDMARDs) between October 1999 and April 2021. Patients were followed yearly after initiation of therapy or until discontinuation of treatment. Reasons for discontinuation were collected. Patients who discontinued bDMARDs because of remission as defined by the attending clinician were studied. Predictors of discontinuation were explored using multivariable regression models. RESULTS: The study population comprised 3,366 patients taking 1 or 2 bDMARDs. Biologics were discontinued owing to remission by 80 patients (2.4%): 30 with RA (1.7%), 18 with AS (2.4%), and 32 with PsA (3.9%). The factors associated with a higher probability of discontinuation on remission were shorter disease duration (OR: 0.95; 95% CI: 0.91-0.99), no concomitant use of classic DMARDs (OR: 0.56; 95% CI: 0.34-0.92), and shorter usage of the previous bDMARD (before the decision to discontinue biological therapy) (OR: 1.01; 95% CI: 1.01-1.02); in contrast, smoking status (OR: 2.48; 95% CI: 1.21-5.08) was associated with a lower probability. In patients with RA, positive ACPA was associated with a lower probability of discontinuation (OR: 0.11; 95% CI: 0.02-0.53). CONCLUSIONS: Discontinuation of bDMARDs in patients who achieve remission is uncommon in routine clinical care. Smoking and positive ACPA in RA patients were associated with a lower probability of treatment discontinuation because of clinical remission.

Comparative effectiveness of treatments for rheumatoid arthritis in clinical practice: A systematic review.

OBJECTIVE: To assess real-world comparative effectiveness studies of biologic (b) and targeted synthetic (ts) disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs) in adults with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) through a systematic review. METHODS: We searched Medline for journal articles (2001-2021) and Embase® for abstracts presented at the European Alliance of Associations for Rheumatology and American College of Rheumatology (ACR) 2020 and 2021 annual meetings on non-randomized studies comparing the effectiveness of b/tsDMARDs using ACR-recommended disease activity measures, measures of functional status, and patient-reported outcomes (HAQ, PROMIS PF, patient pain, Patient and Physician Global Assessment of disease activity). Methodological heterogeneity between studies precluded meta-analyses. Risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane Risk Of Bias In Non-randomized Studies of Interventions-I tool. RESULTS: Of 1283 records screened, 68 were selected for data extraction, of which 1 was excluded due to critical risk of bias. Most studies were multicenter observational cohort/registry studies (n = 60) and were published between 2011 and 2021 (n = 60). Mean or median reported RA duration was between 6 and 15 years. Disease Activity Score in 28 joints (46 studies), Clinical Disease Activity Index (37 studies), and Health Assessment Questionnaire-Disability Index (32 studies) were the most common outcomes used in clinical practice, with regional differences identified. The most common comparison was between tumor necrosis factor inhibitors (TNFis) and non-TNFi bDMARDs (35 studies). There were no evident differences between b/tsDMARDs in clinical effectiveness. CONCLUSION: This systematic review summarizing real-world evidence from a very large number of global studies found there are many effective options for the treatment of RA, but relatively less evidence to support the use of any one b/tsDMARD or drug class over another. Treatment for patients with RA should be tailored to suit individual clinical profiles. Further research is needed to identify whether specific patient subgroups may benefit from specific drug classes.

Analysis of the Pharmacoutilization of Biological Drugs in Psoriatic Arthritis Patients: A Real-World Retrospective Study Among an Italian Population.

INTRODUCTION: Real-world pharmacoutilization analysis of biological drugs in psoriatic arthritis (PsA) patients with the aim to evaluate biologic treatment patterns and pharmacoutilization among patients with PsA in Italy. METHODS: A retrospective study was conducted using administrative databases of Italian Entities. PsA patients were included and diagnosed by hospitalization and/or an active exemption code. Two analyses were performed: a cross-sectional for treatment patterns in patients enrolled among 2017-2020, and a longitudinal study during 2015 to investigate the pharmacoutilization, in terms of persistence and monthly maintenance dosage of biological/targeted synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (b/tsDMARDs). Patients with or without b/tsDMARDs prescriptions before inclusion were defined as bioexperienced or naïve, respectively. An analysis on ixekizumab-treated patients (IXE patients) from the 2017-to study ending was performed. RESULTS: PsA was diagnosed in 24,786 (2017), 27,221 (2018), 28,889 (2019), and 29,292 (2020) patients. Across 2017-2020, 31.1-40.5% of PsA patients were untreated with systemic medications, and 16.4-18.8% were under biological therapies. Among b/tsDMARD-treated patients, decreasing use of TNF-inhibitors (77.6-57.1%) and increasing IL-inhibitors (19.6-33.2%) was found across 2017-2020, respectively. Persistence to TNF-inhibitors and IL inhibitors as first-line ranged, respectively, 74.9-83.0% and 73.0-84.6%; specifically, 73.1-76.9% and 73.0-83.8% among bio-naïve, 83.3-90.0%, and 87.0% among bio-experienced. Among IXE-patients (N = 178), 55.6% were bio-naïve, while 21.9% previously used secukinumab, 12.9% adalimumab, 10.1% etanercept. During a 1-year follow-up, 6.8% of IXE patients switched therapy. CONCLUSIONS: This real-world study of PsA pharmacoutilization in Italy showed that more than one-third of patients were systemically untreated, and almost 20% were receiving biological medications. Among biological users, increasing use of IL-inhibitors and a decrease in TNF-inhibitors prescriptions over the years were found. A rather-high extent of persistency in treatment was observed. A focused analysis on IXE patients revealed over half of them to be bio-naïve, while around one-fourth were bio-experienced to IL inhibitors.

Giant cell arteritis: what is new in the preclinical and early clinical development pipeline?

INTRODUCTION: Giant Cell Arteritis (GCA) is the most common systemic vasculitis worldwide. For decades, glucocorticoids have represented the mainstay of treatment, at the expense of toxic systemic effects owing to prolonged courses of high-dose treatment regimens. The search for effective drugs permitting lower glucocorticoid treatment regimens in GCA has been afrustrating one. The recent successful therapeutic application of tocilizumab, an interleukin-6 receptor inhibitor, has transformed the treatment of GCA and catalyzed research exploring other promising therapeutic targets. AREAS COVERED: This review explores emerging drugs in preclinical and clinical development for the management of GCA, in addition to synthesizing data on the current standard of care therapeutic agents. Drug therapies were identified by search of MEDLINE and PubMed in addition to trials from registries (clinicaltrials.gov, clinicaltrialsregister.eu, pubmed.gov) from theyear 2010. EXPERT OPINION: Tocilizumab has revolutionized the treatment of GCA. However, much remains to be learned about its optimal usage in GCA and asubstantial minority of pa tients do not achieve sustained glucocorticoid-free remission. Numerous exciting new agents are under investigation to fill this treatment gap in GCA, with the GM-CSF inhibitor mavrilimumab, and IL-12/23 blockade with ustekinumab providing promise through targeting the GCA pathogenic pathway in its proximal portion.

Ixekizumab in the treatment of psoriatic arthritis.

Psoriatic arthritis (PsA) is a heterogeneous chronic rheumatic disorder with numerous phenotypic facets. A better in deep understanding of the pathophysiologic mechanisms leading to psoriasis and PsA has contributed to the introduction of novel therapeutic agents. IL-17 is at the heart and a critical factor in the onset of PsA. Ixekizumab, a high-affinity monoclonal antibody against IL-17 A, has been approved by the US FDA in March 2016 for baseline psoriasis and Dec 2017 for PsA; by the EMA in April 2016 and January 2018, respectively. This article reviews the published data relating to ixekizumab efficacy and safety in the PsA treatment.

Prediction of sustained biologic and targeted synthetic DMARD-free remission in rheumatoid arthritis patients.

OBJECTIVES: The aim was to develop a prediction model of sustained remission after cessation of biologic or targeted synthetic DMARD (b/tsDMARD) in RA. METHODS: We conducted an explorative cohort study among b/tsDMARD RA treatment episode courses stopped owing to remission in the Swiss Clinical Quality Management registry (SCQM; 2008-2019). The outcome was sustained b/tsDMARD-free remission of ≥12 months. We applied logistic regression model selection algorithms using stepwise, forward selection, backward selection and penalized regression to identify patient characteristics predictive of sustained b/tsDMARD-free remission. We compared c-statistics corrected for optimism between models. The three models with the highest c-statistics were validated in new SCQM data until 2020 (validation dataset). RESULTS: We identified 302 eligible episodes, of which 177 episodes (59%) achieved sustained b/tsDMARD-free remission. Two backward and one forward selection model, with eight, four and seven variables, respectively, obtained the highest c-statistics corrected for optimism of c = 0.72, c = 0.70 and c = 0.69, respectively. In the validation dataset (47 eligible episodes), the models performed with c = 0.99, c = 0.80 and c = 0.74, respectively, and excellent calibration. The best model included the following eight variables (measured at b/tsDMARD stop): RA duration, b/tsDMARD duration, other pain/anti-inflammatory drug use, quality of life (EuroQol), DAS28-ESR score, HAQ score, education, and interactions of RA duration and other pain/anti-inflammatory drug use and of b/tsDMARD duration and HAQ score. CONCLUSION: Our results suggest that models with up to eight unique variables may predict sustained b/tsDMARD-free remission with good efficiency. External validation is warranted.

Risk of exacerbation of pulmonary comorbidities in patients with rheumatoid arthritis after initiation of abatacept versus TNF inhibitors: A cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Biologic agents may pose a potential risk for exacerbations of pulmonary comorbidities in rheumatoid arthritis (RA) patients. METHODS: Using U.S. Medicare and Truven MarketScan databases, we identified three cohorts of RA patients with interstitial lung disease (ILD), chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), or asthma who initiated abatacept or a TNF inhibitor (TNFi). The primary outcome was a composite exacerbation of individual pulmonary comorbidities based on inpatient or emergency department (ED) visits due to exacerbation of the given pulmonary comorbidity. To adjust for >60 baseline confounders, we used propensity-score fine stratification (PSS) and weighting. Negative binomial regression model estimated a cohort-specific incidence rate ratio (IRR) and 95% confidence interval (CI) of the primary outcome per database, comparing abatacept versus TNFi. Database-specific IRRs were combined using a random-effects meta-analysis. RESULTS: We identified 3,295 ILD, 7,161 COPD, and 5,613 asthma patients with RA who initiated either abatacept or a TNFi. IR of composite exacerbation was high in all three pulmonary cohorts but highest in COPD cohort (3.59-11.80 per 100 person-years in ILD, 20.68-34.97 in COPD, and 4.66-13.78 in asthma). After PSS weighting, the combined IRR (95%CI) in abatacept initiators versus TNFi initiators was 0.44 (0.18-1.09) for ILD exacerbation, 0.91 (0.80-1.03) for COPD exacerbation, and 0.81 (0.54-1.22) for asthma exacerbation. CONCLUSION: Among patients with RA and pulmonary comorbidities, exacerbations requiring inpatient or ED visits occurred frequently after initiating abatacept or TNFi. Overall, we found no significant difference in the risk of ILD, COPD or asthma exacerbation between abatacept and TNFi initiators, but precision of our estimates is limited.

Efficacy of abatacept tapering therapy for sustained remission in patients with rheumatoid arthritis: Prospective single-center study.

AIM: To investigate whether remission can be sustained for rheumatoid arthritis (RA) patients after tapering abatacept (ABT). METHOD: All patients were naïve to biological disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs (bDMARDs) and in low or moderate Disease Activity Score of 28 joints with C-reactive protein (DAS)28-CRP). ABT was administrated intravenously (IV) or subcutaneously (SC) for 36 weeks to patients with RA, who had not previously received bDMARDs. As the ABT tapering protocol, ABT was administrated SC at 125 mg every 2 weeks for 12 weeks in patients with remission. RA disease activity was assessed by DAS28-CRP and ultrasonography. Remission was assessed by defining it as DAS28-CRP <2.3. RESULTS: Of the 51 patients, 84.3% were women (mean age 68.7 ± 10.2 years, mean disease duration 7.7 ± 10.2 years). Twenty-nine patients achieved remission and a power Doppler (PD) score ≤1 at each joint at 36 weeks, followed by tapering ABT. Of these patients, 25 sustained DAS28-CRP remission, and DAS28-CRP was not significantly elevated (1.62 ± 0.41 to 1.69 ± 0.49) at 48 weeks, but the total PD score was significantly elevated (1.52 ± 1.21 to 2.59 ± 2.81 P = 0.049). Longer disease duration, higher DAS28-CRP at 24 weeks, and higher total PD score at 24 weeks were predictors of an elevated total PD score after tapering ABT therapy. CONCLUSION: These findings suggest that ABT tapering is a promising short-term strategy to sustain remission in patients with RA, and ultrasonography is a useful tool for monitoring disease activity after tapering ABT.

Efficacy and safety of sarilumab in patients with active rheumatoid arthritis.

The mainstay of rheumatoid arthritis (RA) treatment involves the use of medications that slow disease progression and reduce inflammation. Inadequate treatment responses and intolerances to conventional RA treatment have led to the development of biologic agents for the management of moderate-to-severe disease activity. Interleukin-6 (IL-6) inhibition is one of the targets for biologic activity in RA treatment. IL-6 is found in excess in the synovial fluid and contributes to joint erosion through its action on osteoclast cells. Sarilumab is a new IL-6 inhibitor indicated for the treatment of moderate-to-severe RA as monotherapy or in combination with conventional therapies in patients with an inadequate response to previous RA treatment.

Efficacy and Safety of Ixekizumab in Patients with Active Psoriatic Arthritis: 52-week Results from a Phase III Study (SPIRIT-P1).

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of ixekizumab (IXE), an interleukin 17A antagonist, in patients with psoriatic arthritis (PsA) after 52 weeks in a phase III study. METHODS: Patients were initially randomly assigned to IXE 80 mg every 2 weeks (IXEQ2W) or every 4 weeks (IXEQ4W) after a 160-mg starting dose, placebo (PBO), or adalimumab (ADA) 40 mg Q2W. At Week 24 (Week 16 for inadequate responders), ADA (8-week washout before starting IXE) and PBO patients were rerandomized to IXEQ2W or IXEQ4W. Six treatment groups were evaluated in the extension period (weeks 24-52): IXEQ2W/IXEQ2W, IXEQ4W/IXEQ4W, ADA/IXEQ2W, ADA/IXEQ4W, PBO/IXEQ2W, and PBO/IXEQ4W. The extension period population (EPP) included patients who received ≥ 1 dose of study medication during the extension period. RESULTS: There were 381/417 (91.4%) patients who entered the extension period. In the IXEQ4W/IXEQ4W and IXEQ2W/IXEQ2W groups (EPP), respectively, American College of Rheumatology (ACR)20 (69.1% and 68.8%), ACR50 (54.6% and 53.1%), and ACR70 (39.2% and 39.6%) response rates were sustained at Week 52. Patients rerandomized to IXE also demonstrated efficacy measured by ACR response rates at Week 52. A similar pattern was observed for Psoriasis Area and Severity Index outcomes. Radiographic progression in all 6 groups was minimal. The most frequently reported treatment-emergent adverse events (≥ 4%) were nasopharyngitis, injection site reaction, injection site erythema, upper respiratory tract infection, and back pain. No deaths were reported, and serious adverse event frequency was 0-4% with IXE. CONCLUSION: During the extension period, IXEQ4W or IXEQ2W treatment demonstrated sustained efficacy in key PsA domains with a safety profile consistent with other studies investigating IXE. Clinical trial number: NCT01695239; EudraCT 2011-002326-49.

Abatacept for the treatment of adults with psoriatic arthritis: patient selection and perspectives.

Psoriatic arthritis (PsA) is a heterogeneous disease with several clinical subtypes including peripheral arthritis, dactylitis, enthesitis, nail disease, and axial arthritis. Nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, glucocorticoids, and conventional disease-modifying agents are used as first line in the treatment of active PsA. For moderate-to-severe PsA failing conventional therapy, antitumor necrosis factor inhibitors have historically been the drugs of choice. In recent years, novel interleukin-23/interleukin-17 pathway targets such as ustekinumab and secukinumab, and phosphodiesterase-4 inhibitor apremilast have been approved for use in the United States and Europe. Two sets of recommendations for the management of PsA were published in 2016 with consideration for these newer therapies. Since then, the results from a Phase III randomized controlled trial demonstrated that abatacept has efficacy in the treatment of PsA. Abatacept, a cytotoxic-T-lymphocyte-associated antigen 4 (CTLA-4)-Ig human fusion protein, acts to prevent naïve T-cell activation through the inhibition of the critical CD28 co-stimulatory signal. In the 2017 Active Psoriatic Arthritis Randomized Trial (ASTRAEA), 424 participants were randomized 1:1 to receive subcutaneous abatacept 125 mg weekly versus placebo. At week 24, 39.4% of those who received abatacept achieved a minimum of 20% improvement in the American College of Rheumatology (ACR) response compared to 22.3% in the placebo arm, a statistically significant finding (P<0.001). The 2011 Phase II study published by Mease et al demonstrated statistically significant improvements in the ACR20 response by week 169 in participants treated with intravenous abatacept 10 mg/kg (48%) and 30/10 mg/kg (42%) when compared with placebo (19%). This article reviews the data supporting the efficacy of abatacept in the management of PsA and attempts to place this agent in the context of other biologic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs and targeted small molecules used in the treatment of patients with PsA.