Comparison of etanercept and methotrexate, alone and combined, in the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis: two-year clinical and radiographic results from the TEMPO study, a double-blind, randomized trial

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the efficacy, including radiographic changes, and safety of etanercept and methotrexate (MTX), used in combination and alone, in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) in whom previous treatment with a disease-modifying antirheumatic drug other than MTX had failed. METHODS: Patients with RA were treated with etanercept (25 mg subcutaneously twice weekly), oral MTX (up to 20 mg weekly), or combination therapy with etanercept plus MTX through a second year, in a double-blinded manner. Clinical response was assessed using American College of Rheumatology (ACR) criteria and the Disease Activity Score (DAS), in a modified intent-to-treat analysis with the last observation carried forward (LOCF) and in a population of completers. Radiographs of the hands, wrists, and forefeet were scored for erosions and joint space narrowing at annual intervals. RESULTS: A total of 503 of 686 patients continued into year 2 of the study. During the 2 years, significantly fewer patients receiving combination therapy withdrew from the study (29% of the combination therapy group, 39% of the etanercept group, and 48% of the MTX group). Both the LOCF and the completer analyses yielded similar results. The ACR 20% improvement (ACR20), ACR50, and ACR70 responses and the remission rates (based on a DAS of <1.6) were significantly higher with combination therapy than with either monotherapy (P<0.01). Similarly, improvement in disability (based on the Health Assessment Questionnaire) was greater with combination therapy (P<0.01). The combination therapy group showed significantly less radiographic progression than did either group receiving monotherapy (P<0.05); moreover, radiographic progression was significantly lower in the etanercept group compared with the MTX group (P<0.05). For the second consecutive year, overall disease progression in the combination therapy group was negative, with the 95% confidence interval less than zero. Adverse events were similar in the 3 treatment groups. CONCLUSION: Etanercept in combination with MTX reduced disease activity, slowed radiographic progression, and improved function more effectively than did either monotherapy over a 2-year period. No increase in toxicity was associated with combination treatment with etanercept plus MTX.     

Disease remission and sustained halting of radiographic progression with combination etanercept and methotrexate in patients with rheumatoid arthritis

OBJECTIVE: The Trial of Etanercept and Methotrexate with Radiographic Patient Outcomes (TEMPO) is a 3-year, double-blind, multicenter study evaluating the efficacy and safety of etanercept, methotrexate, and the combination of etanercept plus methotrexate in patients with active rheumatoid arthritis (RA). The results after 1 and 2 years of the study have been previously reported. Here we provide the 3-year clinical and radiographic outcomes and safety of etanercept, methotrexate, and the combination in patients with RA. METHODS: In this randomized, double-blind, multicenter TEMPO study, 682 patients received etanercept 25 mg twice weekly, methotrexate < or =20 mg weekly, or the combination. Key efficacy assessments included the Disease Activity Score (DAS) and the DAS in 28 joints. RESULTS: Combination therapy resulted in significantly greater improvement in the DAS and in more patients with disease in remission than either monotherapy. This finding was confirmed by longitudinal analysis; patients receiving combination therapy were more than twice as likely to have disease in remission than those receiving either monotherapy. Independent predictors of remission included male sex, lower disease activity, lower level of joint destruction, and/or better physical function. Combination and etanercept therapy both resulted in significantly less radiographic progression than did methotrexate (P < 0.05). Etanercept and combination treatment were well tolerated, with no new safety findings. CONCLUSION: Etanercept plus methotrexate showed sustained efficacy through 3 years and remained more effective than either monotherapy, even after adjustment for patient withdrawal. Combination therapy for 3 years led to disease remission and inhibition of radiographic progression, 2 key goals for treatment of patients with RA.     

Once-weekly administration of 50 mg etanercept in patients with active rheumatoid arthritis: results of a multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the safety, efficacy, and pharmacokinetics of 50 mg etanercept administered subcutaneously once weekly in adult patients with active rheumatoid arthritis (RA). METHODS: Four hundred twenty RA patients were randomized to receive, in a blinded manner, the study drug for up to 16 weeks: 214 patients received 50 mg etanercept once weekly, 153 received 25 mg etanercept twice weekly, and 53 received placebo for 8 weeks followed by 25 mg etanercept twice weekly for 8 weeks. Efficacy and safety were assessed at weeks 8 and 16. Pharmacokinetic analyses were performed on serum samples from patients at selected study sites. The primary efficacy end point was achievement of the American College of Rheumatology (ACR) 20% improvement criteria (ACR20 response) at week 8. RESULTS: An ACR20 response was achieved at week 8 by 50% of the patients receiving 50 mg etanercept once weekly, by 49% of the patients receiving 25 mg etanercept twice weekly, and by 19% of the patients in the placebo group (P 相似文献   

A multicentre, double blind, randomised, placebo controlled trial of anakinra (Kineret), a recombinant interleukin 1 receptor antagonist, in patients with rheumatoid arthritis treated with background methotrexate

OBJECTIVE: To assess the efficacy and safety of 100 mg daily anakinra (Kineret), a recombinant form of the naturally occurring interleukin 1 receptor antagonist, plus methotrexate (MTX) in reducing the signs and symptoms of rheumatoid arthritis (RA). METHODS: Patients with active RA (n = 506) despite current treatment with MTX were enrolled in this multicentre, double blind, randomised, placebo controlled study. Patients received subcutaneous injections of anakinra 100 mg/day or placebo. They were assessed monthly for 6 months for improvement in signs and symptoms of RA and for adverse events. The primary efficacy measure was the percentage of patients attaining ACR20 response at week 24. RESULTS: Significantly greater proportions of patients treated with anakinra compared with placebo achieved ACR20 (38% v 22%; p<0.001), ACR50 (17% v 8%; p<0.01), and ACR70 (6% v 2%; p<0.05) responses. The response to anakinra was rapid; the proportion of patients with an ACR20 response at the first study assessment (4 weeks) was twice as high with anakinra as with placebo (p<0.005). Clinically meaningful and statistically significant responses were also seen in individual components of the ACR response (for example, Health Assessment Questionnaire, pain, C reactive protein levels, and erythrocyte sedimentation rate). Anakinra was well tolerated, with a safety profile, similar to that of placebo with one exception: mild to moderate injection site reactions were more common with anakinra than with placebo (65% v 24%). CONCLUSIONS: This study confirms previous observations from a dose-ranging study showing that anakinra, in combination with MTX, is an effective and safe treatment for patients with RA who have inadequate responses to MTX alone.     

The PREMIER study: A multicenter, randomized, double-blind clinical trial of combination therapy with adalimumab plus methotrexate versus methotrexate alone or adalimumab alone in patients with early, aggressive rheumatoid arthritis who had not had previous methotrexate treatment

OBJECTIVE: To compare the efficacy and safety of adalimumab plus methotrexate (MTX) versus MTX monotherapy or adalimumab monotherapy in patients with early, aggressive rheumatoid arthritis (RA) who had not previously received MTX treatment. METHODS: This was a 2-year, multicenter, double-blind, active comparator-controlled study of 799 RA patients with active disease of < 3 years' duration who had never been treated with MTX. Treatments included adalimumab 40 mg subcutaneously every other week plus oral MTX, adalimumab 40 mg subcutaneously every other week, or weekly oral MTX. Co-primary end points at year 1 were American College of Rheumatology 50% improvement (ACR50) and mean change from baseline in the modified total Sharp score. RESULTS: Combination therapy was superior to both MTX and adalimumab monotherapy in all outcomes measured. At year 1, more patients receiving combination therapy exhibited an ACR50 response (62%) than did patients who received MTX or adalimumab monotherapy (46% and 41%, respectively; both P < 0.001). Similar superiority of combination therapy was seen in ACR20, ACR70, and ACR90 response rates at 1 and 2 years. There was significantly less radiographic progression (P < or = 0.002) among patients in the combination treatment arm at both year 1 and year 2 (1.3 and 1.9 Sharp units, respectively) than in patients in the MTX arm (5.7 and 10.4 Sharp units) or the adalimumab arm (3.0 and 5.5 Sharp units). After 2 years of treatment, 49% of patients receiving combination therapy exhibited disease remission (28-joint Disease Activity Score <2.6), and 49% exhibited a major clinical response (ACR70 response for at least 6 continuous months), rates approximately twice those found among patients receiving either monotherapy. The adverse event profiles were comparable in all 3 groups. CONCLUSION: In this population of patients with early, aggressive RA, combination therapy with adalimumab plus MTX was significantly superior to either MTX alone or adalimumab alone in improving signs and symptoms of disease, inhibiting radiographic progression, and effecting clinical remission.     

Secondary failure to treatment with recombinant human IL-1 receptor antagonist in Chinese patients with rheumatoid arthritis

The aim of this study is to assess the efficacy of anakinra, a recombinant human interleukin 1 receptor antagonist, plus methotrexate (MTX) in patients with active rheumatoid arthritis (RA) refractory to MTX therapy. A total of 54 patients with active RA, who were taking MTX at a stable dosage, were randomized to receive daily subcutaneous injections of anakinra (80 mg) or placebo. Clinical outcomes were assessed every 4 weeks for 24 weeks by using the criteria of the American College of Rheumatology. After 24 weeks, more patients achieved clinical benefits as determined by the ACR20 improvement treated with anakinra plus MTX compared with MTX alone (64% vs. 17%, P = 0.004). In the anakinra group, an ACR50 response was observed in 38% and an ACR70 response in 17%. None of the patients treated with MTX alone achieved ACR50 or ACR 70 improvement. However, nine of 42 (21.4%) patients in the anakinra group, who showed therapeutic response initially, had secondary drug failure to anakinra therapy thereafter. A significant increase in mean DAS28 from baseline was found in the non-responders to anakinra compared with placebo (0.83 ± 1.38 vs. −1.28 ± 0.78, P < 0.001). Anakinra is effective in the treatment of patients with active RA by blocking IL-1. However, the efficacy of anakinra is soon lost in about one fifth of patients in spite of initial good response.     

Comparison of etanercept and methotrexate,alone and combined,in the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis: Two‐year clinical and radiographic results from the TEMPO study,a double‐blind,randomized trial

Objective

To evaluate the efficacy, including radiographic changes, and safety of etanercept and methotrexate (MTX), used in combination and alone, in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) in whom previous treatment with a disease‐modifying antirheumatic drug other than MTX had failed.

Methods

Patients with RA were treated with etanercept (25 mg subcutaneously twice weekly), oral MTX (up to 20 mg weekly), or combination therapy with etanercept plus MTX through a second year, in a double‐blinded manner. Clinical response was assessed using American College of Rheumatology (ACR) criteria and the Disease Activity Score (DAS), in a modified intent‐to‐treat analysis with the last observation carried forward (LOCF) and in a population of completers. Radiographs of the hands, wrists, and forefeet were scored for erosions and joint space narrowing at annual intervals.

Results

A total of 503 of 686 patients continued into year 2 of the study. During the 2 years, significantly fewer patients receiving combination therapy withdrew from the study (29% of the combination therapy group, 39% of the etanercept group, and 48% of the MTX group). Both the LOCF and the completer analyses yielded similar results. The ACR 20% improvement (ACR20), ACR50, and ACR70 responses and the remission rates (based on a DAS of <1.6) were significantly higher with combination therapy than with either monotherapy (P < 0.01). Similarly, improvement in disability (based on the Health Assessment Questionnaire) was greater with combination therapy (P < 0.01). The combination therapy group showed significantly less radiographic progression than did either group receiving monotherapy (P < 0.05); moreover, radiographic progression was significantly lower in the etanercept group compared with the MTX group (P < 0.05). For the second consecutive year, overall disease progression in the combination therapy group was negative, with the 95% confidence interval less than zero. Adverse events were similar in the 3 treatment groups.

Conclusion

Etanercept in combination with MTX reduced disease activity, slowed radiographic progression, and improved function more effectively than did either monotherapy over a 2‐year period. No increase in toxicity was associated with combination treatment with etanercept plus MTX.

     

Once‐weekly administration of 50 mg etanercept in patients with active rheumatoid arthritis: Results of a multicenter,randomized, double‐blind,placebo‐controlled trial

Objective

To evaluate the safety, efficacy, and pharmacokinetics of 50 mg etanercept administered subcutaneously once weekly in adult patients with active rheumatoid arthritis (RA).

Methods

Four hundred twenty RA patients were randomized to receive, in a blinded manner, the study drug for up to 16 weeks: 214 patients received 50 mg etanercept once weekly, 153 received 25 mg etanercept twice weekly, and 53 received placebo for 8 weeks followed by 25 mg etanercept twice weekly for 8 weeks. Efficacy and safety were assessed at weeks 8 and 16. Pharmacokinetic analyses were performed on serum samples from patients at selected study sites. The primary efficacy end point was achievement of the American College of Rheumatology (ACR) 20% improvement criteria (ACR20 response) at week 8.

Results

An ACR20 response was achieved at week 8 by 50% of the patients receiving 50 mg etanercept once weekly, by 49% of the patients receiving 25 mg etanercept twice weekly, and by 19% of the patients in the placebo group (P ≤ 0.0001 for each etanercept group versus placebo). Similarly, achievement of the ACR50 response was attained by 18% of patients in each of the 2 etanercept groups, compared with 6% of patients in the placebo group (P < 0.03 for each comparison). Pharmacokinetics of the 2 etanercept regimens were similar at steady state. No clinically significant differences in efficacy or safety were observed between the 2 etanercept groups.

Conclusion

Safety, efficacy, and pharmacokinetics were comparable between the 2 etanercept dosing regimens. Thus, comparable clinical outcomes are to be expected when patients are treated with etanercept administered either as 50 mg once weekly or as 25 mg twice weekly.

     

Patient reported outcomes in a trial of combination therapy with etanercept and methotrexate for rheumatoid arthritis: the TEMPO trial

OBJECTIVE: To compare patient reported measures of function, health related quality of life (QoL), and satisfaction with medication among patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) treated with methotrexate (MTX), etanercept, or both for up to 1 year. METHODS: In a 52 week, double blind, clinical trial, patients with active RA were randomised to receive etanercept 25 mg twice weekly, methotrexate up to 20 mg weekly, or combination therapy. The Health Assessment Questionnaire (HAQ) disability index, EuroQoL health status visual analogue scale (EQ-5D VAS), patient global assessment, and patient general health VAS were administered at baseline and weeks 2, 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, 24, 32, 40, 48, and 52. Satisfaction with the medication was compared at 52 weeks. RESULTS: Of 682 enrolled patients, 522 completed 52 weeks of treatment. Mean improvement from baseline in HAQ score was 0.65, 0.70, and 1.0 for MTX, etanercept, and the combination, respectively. The mean percentage and absolute improvement in the HAQ was significantly higher (p<0.01) for combination therapy than for either of the monotherapies. Combination therapy produced significantly more rapid achievement of HAQ < or =0.5 sustained for 6 months than either of the monotherapies (p<0.01). Compared with patients receiving monotherapy, those receiving combination therapy achieved a significantly better (p<0.05) health state as measured by the EQ-5D VAS (mean (SD) 63.7 (3.2), 66.8 (3.2), 72.7 (3.1) for MTX, etanercept, and the combination, respectively). Results were similar for other assessments (p<0.01). Patients in combination and etanercept groups were significantly more likely (p<0.0001, p = 0.0009, respectively) to report satisfaction with the medication. CONCLUSIONS: Combination therapy with etanercept and methotrexate improved function, QoL, and satisfaction with the medication significantly more than monotherapy.     

Safety and efficacy of etanercept treatment in elderly subjects with rheumatoid arthritis

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate safety and efficacy of etanercept treatment in elderly (age > or = 65 yrs) and younger adult subjects (age < 65 yrs) with rheumatoid arthritis (RA). METHODS: Subset analyses were used to describe the safety and efficacy of etanercept in elderly and younger subjects treated for early and disease modifying antirheumatic drug-resistant or late-stage RA (ERA and LRA) in one of 4 randomized controlled clinical studies (N = 1353) or 2 longterm extensions (N = 1049). RESULTS: Rates of serious adverse events tended to be higher in elderly than younger subjects; however, rates of safety events observed in elderly etanercept-treated subjects did not exceed rates in elderly placebo or methotrexate (MTX)-treated subjects. With regard to efficacy measures [American College of Rheumatology 20% response (ACR20), ACR50, and ACR70], elderly subjects tended to have somewhat less robust responses to treatment than younger subjects. However, for both age groups, treatment with etanercept resulted in improved efficacy and function compared with control treatment, and combination therapy with etanercept plus MTX resulted in greater efficacy than either etanercept or MTX used alone. Efficacy responses of elderly subjects were sustained for up to 6 years. Radiographic progression (measured using modified Sharp Score) after one year of treatment was lower in subjects treated with both etanercept and MTX compared with subjects treated with either agent used alone, and this pattern was similar in both age groups. CONCLUSION: Consistent with responses in younger subjects, elderly subjects with RA treated with etanercept experienced significant improvement in disease activity and function without incurring additional safety concerns.     

Treatment of rheumatoid arthritis with anakinra, a recombinant human interleukin-1 receptor antagonist, in combination with methotrexate: results of a twenty-four-week, multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of anakinra in combination with methotrexate (MTX) in patients with active rheumatoid arthritis (RA). METHODS: Patients with moderate-to-severe active RA who were receiving MTX for 6 consecutive months, with stable doses for > or = 3 months (those with disease duration of >6 months but <12 years) were randomized into 6 groups: placebo or 0.04, 0.1, 0.4, 1.0, or 2.0 mg/kg of anakinra administered in a single, daily, subcutaneous injection. The primary efficacy end point was the proportion of subjects who met the American College of Rheumatology 20% improvement criteria (attained an ACR20 response) at week 12. RESULTS: A total of 419 patients were randomized in the study. Patient demographics and disease status were similar in the 6 treatment groups. The ACR20 responses at week 12 in the 5 active treatment plus MTX groups demonstrated a statistically significant (P = 0.001) dose-response relationship compared with the ACR20 response in the placebo plus MTX group. The ACR20 response rate in the anakinra 1.0-mg/kg (46%; P = 0.001) and 2.0-mg/kg (38%; P = 0.007) dose groups was significantly greater than that in the placebo group (19%). The ACR20 responses at 24 weeks were consistent with those at 12 weeks. Similar improvements in anakinra-treated subjects were noted in individual ACR components, erythrocyte sedimentation rate, onset of ACR20 response, sustainability of ACR20 response, and magnitude of ACR response. Anakinra was safe and well tolerated. Injection site reaction was the most frequently noted adverse event, and this led to premature study withdrawal in 7% (1.0-mg/kg group) to 10% (2.0-mg/kg group) of patients receiving higher doses. CONCLUSION: In patients with persistently active RA, the combination of anakinra and MTX was safe and well tolerated and provided significantly greater clinical benefit than MTX alone.     

Treatment of rheumatoid arthritis with anakinra,a recombinant human interleukin‐1 receptor antagonist,in combination with methotrexate: Results of a twenty‐four–week,multicenter, randomized,double‐blind,placebo‐controlled trial

Objective

To evaluate the efficacy and safety of anakinra in combination with methotrexate (MTX) in patients with active rheumatoid arthritis (RA).

Methods

Patients with moderate‐to‐severe active RA who were receiving MTX for 6 consecutive months, with stable doses for ≥3 months (those with disease duration of >6 months but <12 years) were randomized into 6 groups: placebo or 0.04, 0.1, 0.4, 1.0, or 2.0 mg/kg of anakinra administered in a single, daily, subcutaneous injection. The primary efficacy end point was the proportion of subjects who met the American College of Rheumatology 20% improvement criteria (attained an ACR20 response) at week 12.

Results

A total of 419 patients were randomized in the study. Patient demographics and disease status were similar in the 6 treatment groups. The ACR20 responses at week 12 in the 5 active treatment plus MTX groups demonstrated a statistically significant (P = 0.001) dose‐response relationship compared with the ACR20 response in the placebo plus MTX group. The ACR20 response rate in the anakinra 1.0‐mg/kg (46%; P = 0.001) and 2.0‐mg/kg (38%; P = 0.007) dose groups was significantly greater than that in the placebo group (19%). The ACR20 responses at 24 weeks were consistent with those at 12 weeks. Similar improvements in anakinra‐treated subjects were noted in individual ACR components, erythrocyte sedimentation rate, onset of ACR20 response, sustainability of ACR20 response, and magnitude of ACR response. Anakinra was safe and well tolerated. Injection site reaction was the most frequently noted adverse event, and this led to premature study withdrawal in 7% (1.0‐mg/kg group) to 10% (2.0‐mg/kg group) of patients receiving higher doses.

Conclusion

In patients with persistently active RA, the combination of anakinra and MTX was safe and well tolerated and provided significantly greater clinical benefit than MTX alone.

     

重组人Ⅱ型肿瘤坏死因子受体-体融合蛋白联合甲氨蝶呤对改善病情抗风湿药治疗无效活动性类风湿关节炎的疗效

目的观察重组人Ⅱ型肿瘤坏死因子受体．抗体融合蛋白（rhTNFR：Fc，益赛普）联合甲氨蝶呤（methotrexate，MTX）对改善病情抗风湿药（disease—modifying antirheumatic drug，DMARD）无效类风湿关节炎（rheumatoid arthritis，RA）患者的疗效。方法DMARD治疗效果不佳的活动性RA患者64例，根据患者性别、年龄、病程及疾病活动程度将患者随机分为具有可比性的两组。试验组32例，予每周2次皮下注射rhTNFR：Fc 25mg／次．同时口服MTX 15mg／周；对照组32例，13服泼尼松5～10mg／d，同时口服MTX1 5mg／周。疗程12周。疗效评价采用美国风湿病学会（ACR）疗效评定标准。结果治疗第4、8和12周，试验组ACR20有效率（45．2％、54．8％和64．5％）均显著高于对照组（16．1％、19．4％和22．6％）（P〈0．05）。治疗第8和12周试验组ACR50有效率亦显著高于对照组（P〈0．05）。结论相对于应用小剂量激素联合甲氨蝶呤，rhTNFR：Fc联合甲氨蝶呤治疗DMARD无效的RA效果更佳。     

重组人Ⅱ型肿瘤坏死因子受体—抗体融合蛋白联合甲氨蝶呤治疗活动性类风湿关节炎的疗效和安全性的开放多中心临床研究

目的 评估重组人Ⅱ型肿瘤坏死因子受体—抗体融合蛋白(rhTNRF:Fc)联合甲氨蝶呤治疗活动性类风湿关节炎(RA) 52周的临床疗效、放射学改变和安全性。方法 30例中重度活动性RA患者应用rhTNRF：Fc(25 mg皮下注射,每周2次)联合甲氨蝶呤（每周15 mg口服）治疗。应用美国风湿病学会(ACR)20、50、70疗效标准和28个关节的疾病活动度评分(DAS28)评估临床疗效,应用改良的Sharp评分标准评价放射学疗效。计数资料应用x2检验或Fisher精确检验,计量资料采用配对t检验。结果 治疗52周时达到ACR20、50、70标准的有效率分别为90％、87％和67％。DAS28由6.4±0.6降至3.4±1.1(P＜0.01),23％患者达到疾病缓解,17％达到低度活动状态。健康状况问卷由1.18±0.56降至0.25±0.34（P＜0.01）。基线期和52周时,双手和双腕X线片关节间隙狭窄（8±10与8±11）和关节侵蚀(10±15与10±15)的改良Sharp评分差异无统计学意义;73％患者无放射学进展。未见严重不良反应,无新发结核菌感染和恶性肿瘤。结论 rhTNRF:Fc联合甲氨蝶呤治疗RA 52周能够显著减低疾病活动度、改善关节功能以及延缓放射学进展,达到临床缓解和阻止放射学进展的治疗目标：且耐受性良好。     

Cyclosporin A monotherapy versus cyclosporin A and methotrexate combination therapy in patients with early rheumatoid arthritis: a double blind randomised placebo controlled trial

OBJECTIVE: To compare the efficacy and toxicity of cyclosporin A (CsA) monotherapy with CsA plus methotrexate (MTX) combination therapy in patients with early rheumatoid arthritis (RA). PATIENTS AND METHODS: 120 patients with active RA, rheumatoid factor positive and/or erosive, were randomly allocated to receive CsA with MTX (n=60) or CsA with placebo (n=60). Treatment with CsA was started in all patients at 2.5 mg/kg/day and increased to a maximum of 5 mg/kg/day in 16 weeks. MTX was started at 7.5 mg/week and increased to a maximal dose of 15 mg/week at week 16. Primary outcomes were clinical remission (Pinals criteria) and radiological damage (Larsen score), at week 48. RESULTS: Treatment was discontinued prematurely in 27 patients in the monotherapy group (21 because of inefficacy, and six because of toxicity) and in 26 patients in the combination therapy group (14 and 12, respectively). At week 48, clinical remission was achieved in four patients in the monotherapy group and in six patients in the combination therapy group (p=0.5). The median Larsen score increased to 10 (25th, 75th centiles: 3.5; 13.3) points in the monotherapy group and to 4 (1.0; 10.5) points in the combination therapy group (p=0.004). 28/60 (47%) of patients in the monotherapy group v 34/60 (57%) of patients in the combination therapy group had reached an American college of Rheumatology 20% (ACR20) response (p=0.36) at week 48; 15/60 (25%) v 29/60 (48%) of patients had reached an ACR50 response (p=0.013); and 7 (12%) v 12 (20%) of patients had reached an ACR70 response (p=0.11).Their was a tendency towards more toxicity in the combination therapy group. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with early RA, neither CsA plus MTX combination therapy nor CsA monotherapy is very effective in inducing clinical remission. Combination therapy is probably better at improving clinical disease activity, and definitely better at slowing radiological progression. Combination therapy should still be compared with methotrexate monotherapy.     

Comparison of 2 doses of etanercept (50 vs 100 mg) in active rheumatoid arthritis: a randomized double blind study

OBJECTIVE: To assess the safety and efficacy of etanercept 50 mg administered twice weekly versus 25 mg administered twice weekly as monotherapy in patients with tumor necrosis factor-alpha (TNF-alpha) blocker-na?ve active rheumatoid arthritis (RA). METHODS: Seventy-seven patients with RA were randomized in an unequal allocation (2:1) in a blinded fashion to receive either 50 mg (51 patients) or 25 mg (26 patients) of etanercept twice a week for 24 weeks. RESULTS: The primary outcome measure, the ACR-N AUC at 24 weeks, showed no difference between the 2 dose groups. In addition, there was no difference in ACR 20, 50, and 70 responses or in EULAR response criteria by Week 24. There were no statistically significant differences between the 2 groups in the proportion of patients with any non-infectious adverse event. The proportion of patients with upper respiratory tract infections was significantly higher in patients receiving 50 mg etanercept compared with those receiving 25 mg (26% vs 4%, p = 0.027). CONCLUSION: Etanercept as a monotherapy at 50 mg twice weekly does not provide increased efficacy when compared to the standard dose of 25 mg twice weekly in TNF-alpha blocker-na?ve patients.     

A cost-effectiveness analysis of treatment options for patients with methotrexate-resistant rheumatoid arthritis

OBJECTIVE: Recently, new treatment options for rheumatoid arthritis (RA) patients with an inadequate response to methotrexate (MTX) have become available. Given the wide variability in efficacy and costs among these different treatment options, we sought to determine their cost-effectiveness (CE) in order to guide policy in different cost-constrained settings. METHODS: We performed a CE analysis comparing 6 treatment options for patients with MTX-resistant RA: 1) etanercept + MTX, 2) etanercept monotherapy, 3) cyclosporine + MTX, 4) triple therapy (hydroxychloroquine, sulfasalazine, and MTX), 5) continuation of MTX monotherapy, and 6) no second-line agent. A decision model was used with a time horizon of 6 months. We used 2 measures of effectiveness based on published clinical trial data: the American College of Rheumatology 20% response criteria (ACR 20); and a weighted average of proportions of patients achieving responses of ACR 70, ACR 50, and ACR 20 (ACR 70 weighted response [ACR 70WR]). Incremental CE ratios were calculated as the additional cost per patient achieving either outcome, compared with the next least expensive option. To help interpret CE relative to these RA-specific outcomes, we conducted a separate, "reference" CE analysis of MTX use in MTX-naive RA patients, using the same outcomes. RESULTS: In our reference analysis, MTX therapy for MTX-naive RA cost $1,100 per ACR 20 outcome and $1,500 per ACR 70WR, compared with no second-line agent. In our base-case analysis with either outcome, MTX continuation, cyclosporine + MTX, and etanercept monotherapy cost more, but either were not more efficacious or had a higher incremental CE ratio than the next most expensive option (i.e., they were dominated). Therefore, these options were not cost-effective. The least expensive option, triple therapy, cost 1.3 times more per patient with ACR 20 outcome ($1,500/ACR 20) and 2.1 times more per ACR 70WR ($3,100/ACR 70WR) than MTX therapy for MTX-naive RA. The most efficacious option, the combination of etanercept and MTX, cost 38 times more per patient with ACR 20 outcome ($4,600/ACR 20) and 23 times more per ACR 70WR ($34,800/ACR 70WR) than MTX therapy for MTX-naive RA. Overall, the results of extensive sensitivity analyses did not substantially affect these results. CONCLUSION: Our analysis indicates that if 15 mg/week MTX is cost-effective for achieving ACR 20 or ACR 70WR in MTX-naive RA over a 6-month period, then most likely so is triple therapy in MTX-resistant RA. Whether etanercept + MTX is cost-effective depends on whether $34,800/ACR 70WR (or $42,600/ACR 20) over a 6-month period is considered acceptable.     

Etanercept added to background methotrexate therapy in patients with rheumatoid arthritis: continued observations

OBJECTIVE: To observe the long-term safety and efficacy of combination therapy with etanercept and methotrexate in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA), and to determine whether the addition of etanercept allowed reductions in methotrexate or corticosteroid dosages while maintaining a clinical response. METHODS: Patients with RA who received methotrexate plus etanercept in a previous randomized, placebo-controlled trial were offered the opportunity to enroll in an open-label extension study for further evaluation of treatment with etanercept and methotrexate. RESULTS: Seventy-nine of the 89 patients in the original blinded study enrolled in the extension study, and 65 of these patients continue in the study. Patients have received etanercept therapy for up to 47 months (median 44 months). The types and rate of adverse events noted during the extension trial were similar to those observed in the controlled trial. At the 3-year assessment, 77% of the 57 patients available for evaluation met American College of Rheumatology 20% (ACR20) criteria for improvement in RA, 47% met the ACR50 criteria, and 23% met the ACR70 criteria. Of the 36 patients assessed at 3 years in the extension study, 30 (83%) were able to decrease their dosages of corticosteroids, and 20 (56%) were able to discontinue corticosteroid therapy. At 3 years, the dosage of methotrexate was decreased in 41 of 66 patients (62%), and methotrexate therapy was discontinued in 19 patients (29%). CONCLUSION: In this observational continuation study, the addition of etanercept to background methotrexate provided sustained clinical benefit over a median period of 44 months. With etanercept therapy, there were trends toward dosage reduction or discontinuation of methotrexate and corticosteroids, without apparent worsening of ACR response rates. Compared with the controlled trial, no increases in the rate of adverse events were observed.     

The immunogenicity, safety, and efficacy of etanercept liquid administered once weekly in patients with rheumatoid arthritis

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the immunogenicity, safety, and efficacy of 50 mg/mL liquid etanercept. METHODS: In a multicenter, open-label study, adults with active rheumatoid arthritis (RA) received 50 mg/mL liquid etanercept subcutaneously once weekly for 24 weeks. Immunogenicity was assessed at baseline and weeks 24 and 28, safety at all study visits, and efficacy at baseline and weeks 12 and 24. RESULTS: Of 222 treated patients, 88% completed the study; 81% were women; 84% were white; mean age was 53 years; mean RA duration was 10 years. Antibodies to etanercept, all non-neutralizing, were detected in 12 of 214 patients; 7 of the 12 were borderline positive (antibody titers <1:50). The presence of non-neutralizing anti-etanercept antibodies did not appear to affect clinical safety or efficacy. Few patients reported serious adverse events (6.3%), serious infections (2.3%), or withdrew because of adverse events (4.5%). Most adverse events were mild or moderate. The most common event, injection site reaction, occurred in 29.3% patients. At week 24, 63% of patients achieved an ACR20 response, 36% an ACR50 response, and 14% an ACR70 response. Similar responses were apparent by week 12. Week 24 mean improvement in the Health Assessment Questionnaire disability index scores was 0.6 points; improvement in the Short Form-36 Physical Component Score was 10.0 points. CONCLUSION: The 50 mg/mL liquid etanercept formulation administered once weekly was well tolerated. The incidence of anti-etanercept antibodies, the nature and frequency of adverse events, and improvements in signs and symptoms of RA and patient physical function were similar to those in previous etanercept studies.     

The PREMIER study: A multicenter,randomized, double‐blind clinical trial of combination therapy with adalimumab plus methotrexate versus methotrexate alone or adalimumab alone in patients with early,aggressive rheumatoid arthritis who had not had previous methotrexate treatment

Objective

To compare the efficacy and safety of adalimumab plus methotrexate (MTX) versus MTX monotherapy or adalimumab monotherapy in patients with early, aggressive rheumatoid arthritis (RA) who had not previously received MTX treatment.

Methods

This was a 2‐year, multicenter, double‐blind, active comparator–controlled study of 799 RA patients with active disease of <3 years' duration who had never been treated with MTX. Treatments included adalimumab 40 mg subcutaneously every other week plus oral MTX, adalimumab 40 mg subcutaneously every other week, or weekly oral MTX. Co‐primary end points at year 1 were American College of Rheumatology 50% improvement (ACR50) and mean change from baseline in the modified total Sharp score.

Results

Combination therapy was superior to both MTX and adalimumab monotherapy in all outcomes measured. At year 1, more patients receiving combination therapy exhibited an ACR50 response (62%) than did patients who received MTX or adalimumab monotherapy (46% and 41%, respectively; both P < 0.001). Similar superiority of combination therapy was seen in ACR20, ACR70, and ACR90 response rates at 1 and 2 years. There was significantly less radiographic progression (P ≤ 0.002) among patients in the combination treatment arm at both year 1 and year 2 (1.3 and 1.9 Sharp units, respectively) than in patients in the MTX arm (5.7 and 10.4 Sharp units) or the adalimumab arm (3.0 and 5.5 Sharp units). After 2 years of treatment, 49% of patients receiving combination therapy exhibited disease remission (28‐joint Disease Activity Score <2.6), and 49% exhibited a major clinical response (ACR70 response for at least 6 continuous months), rates approximately twice those found among patients receiving either monotherapy. The adverse event profiles were comparable in all 3 groups.

Conclusion

In this population of patients with early, aggressive RA, combination therapy with adalimumab plus MTX was significantly superior to either MTX alone or adalimumab alone in improving signs and symptoms of disease, inhibiting radiographic progression, and effecting clinical remission.