Add-on iguratimod as a therapeutic strategy to achieve remission in patients with rheumatoid arthritis inadequately responding to biological DMARDs: A retrospective study

Objectives: In this study, iguratimod (IGU) was added to rheumatoid arthritis (RA) patients inadequately responding to 24-week or longer treatment with biological disease-modifying antirheumatic drug (bDMARDs), its effectiveness was assessed, and factors contributing to remission were evaluated.

Methods: RA patients who fulfilled the following criteria were included: (i) ≥?24-week of bDMARDs; (ii) 2.6?Results: DAS assessing 28 joints with ESR (DAS28-ESR) decreased significantly from 3.45?±?0.92 at baseline to 2.85?±?1.13 at 24 weeks (p?p?p =.002). Shorter duration of disease (p =.020) was related to ultrasound remission, in addition to a lower baseline DAS28-ESR (p?Conclusions: IGU add-on therapy can be a therapeutic strategy to achieve remission in RA patients inadequately responding to ≥24-week treatment with bDMARDs.     

Health assessment questionnaire-disability index (HAQ-DI) score at the start of biological disease-modifying antirheumatic drug (bDMARD) therapy is associated with radiographic progression of large joint damage in patients with rheumatoid arthritis

Objectives: Radiographic progression of damage (RPD) to large joints in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) has not been fully studied. We previously demonstrated that Larsen grade of the large joints was associated with RPD of large joints in patients treated with biological disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs (bDMARDs); however, no factors associated with background characteristics of patients were identified.

Methods: A total of 400 large joints in the upper and lower extremities, including the shoulder, elbow, knee, and ankle, of 88 patients with RA treated with bDMARDs for 1–3 years were investigated. Radiographs of tender and/or swollen large joints were acquired at least twice during the study period (mean, 16.4 months), and the RPD was evaluated.

Results: A multivariate analysis revealed that health assessment questionnaire-disability index (HAQ-DI) score at the start of bDMARD treatment was associated with RPD. The cutoff value that discriminated progression from non-progression, determined by a receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve, was 1.4375 (sensitivity: 0.778, specificity: 0.894).

Conclusions: HAQ-DI score at the start of bDMARD treatment was associated with RPD to large joints during a therapeutic period of 1–3 years. Progressive damage is expected to increase when functional disability exceeds an HAQ-DI score of 1.5.     

Risk for malignancy in rheumatoid arthritis patients treated with biological disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs compared to the general population: A nationwide cohort study in Japan

Objectives: To investigate and compare the risk for malignancy in rheumatoid arthritis (RA) patients treated with biologics in Japan to the general population.

Methods: Data for 14,440 patients from 335 institutions who were given infliximab, etanercept, adalimumab, golimumab, tocilizumab, or abatacept were retrieved from the SafEty of biologics in Clinical Use in Japanese patients with RhEumatoid arthritis (SECURE) database.

Results: We identified 333 incidents of malignancies in 320 patients during 49,320 patient-years (PY). The age- and sex-standardized incidence rate (ASR) (95% confidence interval [CI]) for overall malignancy of the SECURE cohort was 313.9/10⁵ PY (271.4–361.3), and the standardized incidence rate ratio (SIR) (95% CI) was 0.745 (0.667–0.826). The ASR was decreased compared to the estimated incidence rate of malignancies in the Japanese general population (462.4/10⁵ PY). The SIRs for site-specific nonhematopoietic malignancies of the SECURE cohort were not significantly elevated compared to the Japanese general population. A significant increase of SIR for malignant lymphoma (6.183, 95% CI, 4.809–7.643) was found in the SECURE cohort, similar to or slightly higher than the SIR previously reported from Japanese cohorts for RA patients.

Conclusions: Continued vigilance with larger numbers of patients, longer observation periods, and inclusion of different biologics are recommended.     

Pharmacoeconomic analysis of biological disease modifying antirheumatic drugs in patients with rheumatoid arthritis based on real-world data from the IORRA observational cohort study in Japan

Objectives: To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of biological disease modifying antirheumatic drugs (bDMARDs) in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) in a real-world setting in Japan.

Methods: We used a state-transition model and parameters were determined from RA patients registered in the Institute of Rheumatology, Rheumatoid Arthritis (IORRA) cohort study on 421 patients who had failed at least one DMARD and started either 1 of 4 bDMARDs (bDMARD group; adalimumab, etanercept, infliximab, and tocilizumab) or methotrexate (control group). bDMARD group was evaluated as two groups: sequence of any 1 of 4 bDMARDs with and without tocilizumab. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) for bDMARD group were estimated using base-case analysis, probabilistic sensitivity analysis (PSA) and scenario sensitivity analyses.

Results: ICERs of bDMARD group with or without tocilizumab were $38,179 and $48,855, respectively. By PSA, these sequences had respective probabilities of 86.8% and 75.1% of falling below the assumed cost-effectiveness threshold of $50,000 in Japan. Scenario sensitivity analyses showed that the best population for initiating bDMARD was RA patients less than 50 years old with Japanese version of HAQ between 1.1 and 1.6 and using tocilizumab as the bDMARD.

Conclusion: bDMARDs were cost-effective for RA patients based on a real-world setting in Japan.     

A survey of United States rheumatologists concerning effectiveness of disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs and prednisone in the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis

Objective . To collect the ratings of American rheumatologists regarding relative short-term and long-term effectiveness of disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drug (DMARD) therapy in the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis and to compare these data with results of a meta-analysis of randomized, controlled clinical trials (RCTs) of these drugs. Methods . A survey was mailed to 3,200 United States rheumatologists who were members of the American College of Rheumatology during the summer of 1996. The survey was completed by 645 rheumatologists. Results . Methotrexate (MTX) was rated as substantially more effective than any other DMARD after both 1 year and 4 years of therapy. At 1 year, more than 90% of rheumatologists rated MTX as “good or excellent,” compared with 35% giving a similar rating to intramuscular (IM) gold, the second-ranked DMARD. At 4 years, MTX was rated as “good or excellent” by 65%, compared with 53% for combinations, 30% for prednisone, and 11% for hydroxychloroquine, the second-ranked single DMARD. These ratings reflect results of long-term observational studies, but differ considerably from a meta-analysis of results of short-term RCTs, in which the efficacy of MTX, sulfasalazine, penicillamine, and IM gold were indistinguishable. Conclusion . The ratings of US rheumatologists regarding effectiveness of DMARD therapies are in agreement with observational data, but differ substantially from results of RCTs. These findings suggest that observational studies may yield useful and important information about treatment results, which are complementary to, but not available from, the RCT model. Regulatory agencies should consider long-term observational studies as a part of the evaluation of drugs.     

Efficacy and safety of infliximab: A comparison with other biological disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs

Objectives: The intensification of infliximab (IFX) treatment, involving escalation of the dose and shortening of interval, was approved in Japan in July 2009. We consider IFX intensification therapy to be preferable for patients with treatment-resistant active rheumatoid arthritis (RA). We retrospectively compared the efficacy of IFX with that of other bDMARDs in methotrexate (MTX)-resistant patients.

Methods: Patients who satisfied the following criteria were enrolled: (i) those who started bDMARDs between February 2011 and December 2016, and (ii) those who required bDMARDs after 180 d of MTX treatment. We compared 33 patients who had been treated with IFX (IFX group) and 146 who had received other bDMARDs treatment (non-IFX group).

Results: IFX was administered at a dose of 6.98?mg/kg/8-week equivalent at 52 weeks. Clinical disease activity index clinical remission (CDAI-CR) was achieved in 49 of the 179 patients at 52 weeks and 13 of these 49 patients received IFX. Logistic regression analysis showed that treatment with IFX was an important variable for the achievement of CDAI-CR at 52 weeks (odds ratio 2.69, 95% confidence interval 1.13–6.42). The severity and frequency of adverse events did not differ.

Conclusion: Intensification of IFX was effective and well tolerated for MTX resistant patients.     

Ultrasound disease activity of bilateral wrist and finger joints at three months reflects the clinical response at six months of patients with rheumatoid arthritis treated with biologic disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs

Objective: We evaluated whether the early responsiveness of ultrasound synovitis can predict the clinical response in rheumatoid arthritis (RA) patients treated with biologic disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs (bDMARDs).

Methods: Articular synovitis was assessed by ultrasound at 22 bilateral wrist and finger joints in 39 RA patients treated with bDMARDs. Each joint was assigned a gray-scale (GS) and power Doppler (PD) score from 0 to 3, and the sum of the GS or PD scores was considered to represent the ultrasound disease activity. We investigated the correlation of the change in ultrasound disease activity at three months with the EULAR response criteria at six months.

Results: GS and PD scores were significantly decreased at three months (p?p?Conclusions: The responsiveness of ultrasound disease activity is considered to predict further clinical response in RA patients treated with bDMARDs.     

Radiographic progression of large joint damage in patients with rheumatoid arthritis treated with biological disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs

Objectives: Radiographic progression of damage to the small joints in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) is well known; however, it has not been studied fully in the large joints. In this study, we looked at the prevalence of radiographic progression of large joint damage in patients with RA treated with biological disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs (bDMARDs).

Methods: A total of 273 large joints in the upper and lower extremities of 67 patients with RA treated with bDMARDs were investigated. Radiographs for tender and/or swollen large joints were taken at least twice during the study period (mean 18.6 months), and the progression of damage was evaluated.

Results: Progressive damage was found in 20.9% of patients and 6.2% of joints. A multivariate analysis revealed that the Larsen grade (LG) alone was a risk factor for progressive damage. The LG cutoff value was determined to be 2.5 (sensitivity: 0.529, specificity: 0.805).

Conclusions: The only factor to predict progressive damage was the LG of the joints with symptoms, and the damage must be stopped within LG II. Regular radiographic examinations for large joints should be performed in addition to routine examinations for small joints, such as the hand and foot.     

Cost effectiveness analysis of disease modifying antirheumatic drugs in rheumatoid arthritis

The objective was to assess the cost-effectiveness of various DMARDs compared with antimalarials (AM) for rheumatoid arthritis (RA) treatment. The data on disease activity, functional status and societal costs were collected from a 1-year cohort of 152 patients with RA receiving at least one DMARD for ≥ 6 months. Incremental cost effectiveness ratio (ICER) was calculated from the societal costs of DMARD treatment compared with AM per one unit of HAQ improvement. All costs were presented in 2001 US dollars. Mean (SD) societal cost of AM treatment was US$ 2,285 (1,154) per patient per year. MTX + AM was less costly and more effective than AM, as the ICER of this combination would save US$ 834 per 1 U of HAQ improvement. MTX + SSZ, leflunomide, and triple therapy (AM + MTX + SSZ) were more effective than AM with additional costs. RA treatment with non MTX-based DMARDs was not cost-effective.     

Outcome of patients with rheumatoid arthritis treated by step-wise administration of disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs over a 10-year period

 Disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs) are expected to relieve polyarthritis, and thereby improve the patient's quality of life and eventually alter the prognosis of rheumatoid arthritis (RA) or the progressive joint destruction caused by it. DMARDs may cause adverse reactions and become less effective over time in some patients. Using changes in disease activity and X-ray findings as indicators, we retrospectively evaluated the long-term results of the step-wise administration of DMARDs in 200 patients with RA. The patients had been treated with gold compounds, SH compounds, and methotrexate, in this order, over a total of 10 years since initially being diagnosed with the disease in its relatively early stages. The step-wise administration of DMARDs had decreased and controlled RA activity and inflammatory response over the 10 years. Although X-ray findings for the wrists worsened over time in most of the patients, no knee or hip joint destruction was observed in patients in whom disease activity had been controlled well for a long period of time. The progression of destruction of major joints can be prevented in cases in which the Lansbury activity index and C-reactive protein are maintained at levels not more than 30% and 1.5 mg/dl, respectively. Since no drugs are now available which specifically prevent the progression of joint destruction, it is important to control RA activity for as long as possible. Received: November 5, 2001 / Accepted: June 5, 2002 Correspondence to:F. Shinomiya     

Reduction of methotrexate and glucocorticoids use after the introduction of biological disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs in patients with rheumatoid arthritis in daily practice based on the IORRA cohort

Objectives: To evaluate usage patterns for methotrexate (MTX) and/or glucocorticoids in rheumatoid arthritis (RA) patients receiving biological disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (bDMARDs) in daily practice.

Methods: Data from RA patients who commenced treatment with bDMARDs (infliximab [IFX], etanercept [ETN], tocilizumab [TCZ], or adalimumab [ADA]) from 2008 to 2010 were extracted from the Institute of Rheumatology, Rheumatoid Arthritis (IORRA) database. The proportions of patients taking concomitant MTX and glucocorticoids and doses of these medications were evaluated before and 2 years after initiation of each bDMARD.

Results: A total of 470 RA patients who had initiated a bDMARD (IFX: n?=?98, ETN: n?=?181, TCZ: n?=?90, and ADA: n?=?101) were evaluated. The proportion of patients taking MTX decreased over time among ETN and TCZ users, while it increased among ADA users. The MTX dose decreased over time among IFX, ETN, and TCZ users, but not among ADA users. Although the rate of glucocorticoid use and dose decreased after bDMARD initiation in all four bDMARD groups, approximately 50% of patients continued to receive glucocorticoids 2 years after bDMARD initiation.

Conclusion: MTX and glucocorticoid use and doses in daily practice were commonly reduced after the initiation of bDMARDs, with the dose adjustment varied depending on the bDMARD.     

Scientific basis for the efficacy of combined use of antirheumatic drugs against bone destruction in rheumatoid arthritis

Finding a means to ameliorate and prevent bone destruction is one of the urgent issues in the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis. Recent studies revealed bone-resorbing osteoclasts to be essential for arthritic bone destruction, but to date there has been scarce experimental evidence for the underlying mechanism of the bone-protective effect of antirheumatic drugs. Here we examined the effects of one or a combination of disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs) on osteoclast differentiation to provide a cellular and molecular basis for their efficacy against bone destruction. The effects on osteoclast precursor cells and osteoclastogenesis-supporting cells were distinguished by two in vitro osteoclast culture systems. Methotrexate (MTX), bucillamine (Buc) and salazosulphapyridine (SASP) inhibited osteoclastogenesis by acting on osteoclast precursor cells and interfering with receptor activator of NF-κB ligand (RANKL)-mediated induction of the nuclear factor of activated T cells (NFAT) c1. MTX and SASP also suppressed RANKL expression on osteoclastogenesis-supporting mesenchymal cells. Interestingly, the combination of three antirheumatic drugs exerted a marked inhibitory effect on osteoclastogenesis even at a low dose at which there was much less of an effect when administered individually. These results are consistent with the reported efficacy of combined DMARDs therapy in humans and suggest that osteoclast culture systems are useful tools to provide an experimental basis for the bone-protective effects of antirheumatic drugs.     

Acceptability and usefulness of mizoribine in the management of rheumatoid arthritis in methotrexate-refractory patients and elderly patients, based on analysis of data from a large-scale observational cohort study

This report documents the results of a study performed to examine clinical use of mizoribine (MZR), using data from a large-scale prospective cohort study, IORRA (Institute of Rheumatology Rheumatoid Arthritis). The number of patients with RA entered in this study from October 2000 through October 2003 was 6238. Three hundred and six patients (4.9%) received MZR therapy. Mizoribine users who were taking methotrexate (MTX) (MTX–MZR group, n = 94) and over 70 years of age (elderly group, n = 45) were collected. Cumulative retention rates of MZR were calculated by Kaplan–Meier analysis. Median drug survival of MZR was 28 months for the poor responders to MTX and 43 months for the poor responders to MZR, with no significant difference between these groups. Cumulative retention rate of MZR in the elderly group did not show a significant difference compared to that in patients aged under 70 years. Ten patients (10.6%) in the MTX–MZR group and 10 patients (22.2%) in the elderly group experienced adverse effects of MZR. None of these adverse effects was serious. This study indicated that, although MZR has not been frequently prescribed for RA patients, it may be useful and relatively safe for patients who are poor responders to MTX as an additional regimen to MTX therapy as well as for elderly patients.     

Acceptability and usefulness of mizoribine in the management of rheumatoid arthritis in methotrexate-refractory patients and elderly patients,based on analysis of data from a large-scale observational cohort study

Abstract

This report documents the results of a study performed to examine clinical use of mizoribine (MZR), using data from a large-scale prospective cohort study, IORRA (Institute of Rheumatology Rheumatoid Arthritis). The number of patients with RA entered in this study from October 2000 through October 2003 was 6238. Three hundred and six patients (4.9%) received MZR therapy. Mizoribine users who were taking methotrexate (MTX) (MTX–MZR group, n = 94) and over 70 years of age (elderly group, n = 45) were collected. Cumulative retention rates of MZR were calculated by Kaplan–Meier analysis. Median drug survival of MZR was 28 months for the poor responders to MTX and 43 months for the poor responders to MZR, with no significant difference between these groups. Cumulative retention rate of MZR in the elderly group did not show a significant difference compared to that in patients aged under 70 years. Ten patients (10.6%) in the MTX–MZR group and 10 patients (22.2%) in the elderly group experienced adverse effects of MZR. None of these adverse effects was serious. This study indicated that, although MZR has not been frequently prescribed for RA patients, it may be useful and relatively safe for patients who are poor responders to MTX as an additional regimen to MTX therapy as well as for elderly patients.