Treatment of rheumatoid arthritis with methotrexate and hydroxychloroquine,methotrexate and sulfasalazine,or a combination of the three medications: Results of a two‐year,randomized, double‐blind,placebo‐controlled trial

Objective

To compare the efficacy of combination therapy with methotrexate (MTX) and hydroxychloroquine (HCQ), MTX and sulfasalazine (SSZ), and MTX, HCQ, and SSZ in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA).

Methods

RA patients (n = 171) who had not previously been treated with combinations of the study medications were randomized to receive 1 of the 3 treatment combinations in this 2‐year, double‐blind, placebo‐controlled protocol. HCQ was given at a dosage of 200 mg twice a day. The dosage of MTX was accelerated from 7.5 mg/week to 17.5 mg/week in all patients who were not in remission. Similarly, the dosage of SSZ was escalated from 500 mg twice a day to 1 gm twice a day in patients who were not in remission. The primary end point of the study was the percentage of patients who had a 20% response to therapy according to the American College of Rheumatology (ACR) criteria at 2 years.

Results

Intent‐to‐treat analysis revealed that patients receiving the triple combination responded best, with 78% achieving an ACR 20% response at 2 years, compared with 60% of those treated with MTX and HCQ (P = 0.05) and 49% of those treated with MTX and SSZ (P = 0.002). Similar trends were seen for the ACR 50% response, with 55%, 40%, and 29% of patients in the 3 treatment groups, respectively, achieving these results at 2 years (P = 0.005 for the triple combination group versus the MTX and SSZ group). All combination treatments were well‐tolerated. Fourteen patients (evenly distributed among the 3 groups) withdrew from the protocol because of symptoms that were potentially related to the study medication.

Conclusion

The triple combination of MTX, SSZ, and HCQ is well‐tolerated, and its efficacy is superior to that of the double combination of MTX and SSZ and is marginally superior to that of the double combination of MTX and HCQ.

     

The good initial response to therapy with a combination of traditional disease‐modifying antirheumatic drugs is sustained over time: The eleven‐year results of the Finnish rheumatoid arthritis combination therapy trial

Objective

To evaluate the evolution of functional and clinical outcomes over 11 years in patients with early rheumatoid arthritis (RA) initially treated with a combination of 3 disease‐modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs) or with a single DMARD.

Methods

A cohort of 199 patients with early active RA were initially randomized to receive treatment with a combination of methotrexate, sulfasalazine, and hydroxychloroquine with prednisolone or treatment with a single DMARD (initially, sulfasalazine) with or without prednisolone. After 2 years, the drug treatment strategy became unrestricted, but still targeted remission. At 11 years, function was assessed with the Health Assessment Questionnaire (HAQ), and clinical outcomes were assessed with the modified Minimal Disease Activity (MDA) measure and the American College of Rheumatology (ACR) criteria for remission.

Results

At 11 years, 138 patients were assessed (68 in the combination‐DMARD group and 70 in the single‐DMARD group). The mean ± SD HAQ scores were 0.34 ± 0.54 in the combination‐DMARD group and 0.38 ± 0.58 in the single‐DMARD group (P = 0.88). Modified MDA was achieved by 63% (95% confidence interval [95% CI] 51, 77) and by 43% (95% CI 32, 55) (P = 0.016) of the combination‐DMARD group and the single‐DMARD group, respectively, and ACR remission by 37% (95% CI 26, 49) and by 19% (95% CI 11, 29) (P = 0.017), respectively.

Conclusion

Initial therapy with a combination of DMARDs in early RA results in higher rates of patients achieving modified MDA and strict ACR remission even over the long term than initial single‐DMARD therapy. Targeting remission with tight clinical controls results in good functional and clinical outcomes in most RA patients.

     

Treatment of giant cell arteritis using induction therapy with high‐dose glucocorticoids: A double‐blind,placebo‐controlled,randomized prospective clinical trial

Objective

Glucocorticoid (GC) therapy for giant cell arteritis (GCA) is effective but requires prolonged administration, resulting in adverse side effects. The goal of the current study was to test the hypothesis that induction treatment with high‐dose pulse intravenous (IV) methylprednisolone permits a shorter course of therapy.

Methods

Twenty‐seven patients with biopsy‐proven GCA were enrolled in a randomized, double‐blind, placebo‐controlled study to receive IV methylprednisolone (15 mg/kg of ideal body weight/day) or IV saline for 3 consecutive days. All patients were started on 40 mg/day prednisone and followed the same tapering schedule as long as disease activity was controlled. The numbers of patients with disease in remission after 36, 52, and 78 weeks of treatment and taking ≤5 mg/day prednisone were compared. Cumulative prednisone dose, number of relapses, and development of adverse GC effects were assessed.

Results

Ten of the 14 IV GC–treated patients, but only 2 of 13 control patients, were taking ≤5 mg/day prednisone at 36 weeks (P = 0.003). This difference was maintained; there was a higher number of sustained remissions after discontinuation of treatment in the IV GC–treated group and a lower median daily dose of prednisone at 78 weeks (P = 0.0004). The median cumulative dose of oral prednisone, excluding the IV GC dose, was 5,636 mg in the IV GC–treated group compared with 7,860 mg in the IV saline–treated group (P = 0.001).

Conclusion

Initial treatment of GCA with IV GC pulses allowed for more rapid tapering of oral GCs and had long‐term benefits, with a higher frequency of patients experiencing sustained remission of their disease after discontinuation of treatment.

     

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.

     

Long‐term safety and efficacy of etanercept in children with polyarticular‐course juvenile rheumatoid arthritis

Objective

Previous studies showed that etanercept treatment in patients with polyarticular‐course juvenile rheumatoid arthritis (JRA) provided rapid clinical improvement that was sustained for up to 2 years. The goal of our study was to provide data on safety and efficacy after 4 years of etanercept treatment in patients with JRA.

Methods

Patients with active polyarticular‐course JRA who participated in an efficacy study continued etanercept treatment in an open‐label extension. Safety was assessed by measuring rates of serious adverse events (SAEs) and serious infections. Efficacy was assessed using the American College of Rheumatology (ACR) Pediatric 30 criteria for improvement and standard measures of disease activity. (The ACR Pediatric 30 criteria are defined as improvement of ≥30% in at least 3 of 6 core response variables used to assess disease activity, with no more than 1 variable worsening by ≥30%.)

Results

Of the 69 patients who enrolled in the original efficacy study, 58 patients (84%) enrolled in the extension, 34 patients received etanercept treatment for ≥4 years, and 32 of these received complete efficacy assessments. The rate of SAEs was 0.13 per patient‐year, and the rate of serious infections was 0.04 per patient‐year, in a total etanercept exposure of 225 patient‐years. Eighty‐two percent of patients who received corticosteroids at any time during the extension were able to decrease their dosage to ≤5 mg/day prednisone equivalent. Of the 32 patients with complete efficacy data who received etanercept for ≥4 years, 94% achieved an ACR Pediatric 30 response and 78% achieved an ACR Pediatric 70 response at the last study visit.

Conclusion

Etanercept offers an acceptable safety profile in children with polyarticular‐course JRA and provides significant improvement in disease manifestations that are sustained for ≥4 years.

     

The efficacy and safety of rituximab in patients with active rheumatoid arthritis despite methotrexate treatment: Results of a phase IIB randomized,double‐blind,placebo‐controlled,dose‐ranging trial

Objective

To examine the efficacy and safety of different rituximab doses plus methotrexate (MTX), with or without glucocorticoids, in patients with active rheumatoid arthritis (RA) resistant to disease‐modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs), including biologic agents.

Methods

A total of 465 patients were randomized into 9 treatment groups: 3 rituximab groups (placebo [n = 149], 500 mg [n = 124], or 1,000 mg [n = 192] on days 1 and 15) each also taking either placebo glucocorticoids, intravenous methylprednisolone premedication, or intravenous methylprednisolone premedication plus oral prednisone for 2 weeks. All patients received MTX (10–25 mg/week); no other DMARDs were permitted.

Results

Significantly more patients who received 2 500‐mg or 2 1,000‐mg infusions of rituximab met the American College of Rheumatology 20% improvement criteria (achieved an ACR20 response) at week 24 (55% and 54%, respectively) compared with placebo (28%; P < 0.0001). ACR50 responses were achieved by 33%, 34%, and 13% of patients, respectively (P < 0.001), and ACR70 responses were achieved by 13%, 20%, and 5% of patients (P < 0.05). Changes in the Disease Activity Score in 28 joints (−1.79, −2.05, −0.67; P < 0.0001) and moderate to good responses on the European League Against Rheumatism criteria (P < 0.0001) reflected the ACR criteria responses. Glucocorticoids did not contribute significantly to the primary efficacy end point, ACR20 response at 24 weeks. Intravenous glucocorticoid premedication reduced the frequency and intensity of first infusion–associated events; oral glucocorticoids conferred no additional safety benefit. Rituximab was well tolerated; the type and severity of infections was similar to those for placebo.

Conclusion

Both rituximab doses were effective and well tolerated when added to MTX therapy in patients with active RA. The primary end point (ACR20 response) was independent of glucocorticoids, although intravenous glucocorticoid premedication improved tolerability during the first rituximab infusion.

     

LY2439821, a humanized anti–interleukin‐17 monoclonal antibody,in the treatment of patients with rheumatoid arthritis: A phase I randomized,double‐blind,placebo‐controlled,proof‐of‐concept study

Objective

We undertook this study to evaluate safety, tolerability, pharmacokinetics, pharmacodynamics, and efficacy of LY2439821, a humanized anti–interleukin‐17 (anti–IL‐17) monoclonal antibody, in a first in‐human trial in rheumatoid arthritis (RA) patients taking oral disease‐modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs).

Methods

This randomized, double‐blind, placebo‐controlled study consisted of 2 parts. In part A, 20 patients received 1 intravenous (IV) dose of LY2439821 (0.06, 0.2, 0.6, or 2.0 mg/kg, escalating) or placebo followed by 8 weeks of evaluation. End points included safety, tolerability, and pharmacokinetics. In part B, 77 patients received 1 IV dose of LY2439821 (0.2, 0.6, or 2.0 mg/kg) or placebo every 2 weeks for a total of 5 doses, with a total evaluation period of 16 weeks. End points included safety, tolerability, pharmacokinetics/pharmacodynamics, and efficacy (Disease Activity Score in 28 joints [DAS28] and percentages of patients meeting American College of Rheumatology 20%, 50%, or 70% improvement criteria [achieving an ACR20, ACR50, or ACR70 response]). The primary efficacy end point was the DAS28 at week 10.

Results

Baseline characteristics were similar across all groups. Changes in the DAS28 were significantly greater in the 0.2 mg/kg, 2.0 mg/kg, and all‐LY2439821–combined groups (−2.3, −2.4, and −2.3, respectively) than in the placebo group (−1.7) at week 10 (P ≤ 0.05), and these differences were significant as early as week 1. Percentages of ACR20, ACR50, and ACR70 responses as well as improvements in the ACR core set of measures were greater in LY2439821‐treated patients than in placebo‐treated patients at multiple time points. There was no apparent dose‐response relationship in treatment‐emergent adverse events.

Conclusion

LY2439821 added to oral DMARDs improved signs and symptoms of RA, with no strong adverse safety signal noted. This first evaluation of LY2439821 supports neutralization of IL‐17 as a potential novel goal for the treatment of RA.

     

A 48‐week,randomized, double‐blind,double‐observer,placebo‐controlled multicenter trial of combination methotrexate and intramuscular gold therapy in rheumatoid arthritis: Results of the METGO study

Objective

To evaluate the efficacy and safety of adding intramuscular (IM) gold to the treatment regimen of patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) who have a suboptimal response to methotrexate (MTX).

Methods

A randomized, double‐blind, double‐observer, placebo‐controlled multicenter trial of 48 weeks was conducted. Sixty‐five RA patients who had a suboptimal response to ≥12 weeks of MTX therapy were randomly assigned to receive weekly IM gold or placebo in addition to MTX. Gold was administered according to a standard protocol developed for the study. The primary outcome measure was the percentage of patients who met the American College of Rheumatology (ACR) 20% improvement criteria (achieved an ACR20 response) at week 48. Secondary outcomes included the percentages of patients achieving ACR50 and ACR70 responses, the individual criteria that make up the primary outcome, quality of life, direct and indirect health care costs, intraarticular steroid use, and adverse events, among other measures. Statistical analyses were based on an intent‐to‐treat strategy.

Results

Sixty‐one percent of patients receiving gold achieved an ACR20 response compared with 30% of patients receiving placebo (χ² = 6.04, P = 0.014; logistic regression odds ratio 3.64 [95% confidence interval 1.3, 10.4], P = 0.016). Twenty‐six percent of patients receiving gold achieved an ACR50 response compared with 4% of patients receiving placebo (P = 0.017), and 21% of patients receiving gold achieved an ACR70 response compared with 0% of patients receiving placebo (P = 0.011). From both clinical and cost‐effectiveness perspectives, gold was the preferred and dominant strategy. Study treatment was discontinued in 23 patients (14 in the placebo group compared with 9 in the gold group; P = 0.022) due to loss to followup, adverse events, or lack of efficacy.

Conclusion

In RA patients with a suboptimal response to MTX, adding weekly IM gold causes significant clinical improvement. Adverse events were minor, and IM gold–related adverse events led to discontinuation in only 11% of the gold group over 48 weeks.

     

Early suppression of disease activity is essential for maintenance of work capacity in patients with recent‐onset rheumatoid arthritis: Five‐year experience from the FIN‐RACo trial

Objective

To explore the impact of an early treatment response on maintenance of work capacity in patients with early, active rheumatoid arthritis (RA).

Methods

In the Finnish Rheumatoid Arthritis Combination Therapy trial, 195 patients with recent‐onset RA were randomized to receive either a combination of disease‐modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs) with prednisolone or a single DMARD with or without prednisolone for 2 years. Treatment responses were evaluated according to the American College of Rheumatology (ACR) criteria. After a 5‐year followup, the cumulative number of days of sick leave and RA‐related permanent work disability was calculated for each of the 162 patients who were available for the active work force at baseline.

Results

Of the 159 patients assessed at 6 months, 29 were in clinical remission, 66 achieved an ACR50 response but not remission, 29 achieved an ACR20 response but not an ACR50 response, and 35 failed to achieve an ACR20 response. In these 4 groups, the median numbers of work disability days per patient‐year from 6 months through 60 months of followup were 0 (interquartile range [IQR] 0–3), 4 (IQR 0–131), 16 (IQR 0–170), and 352 (16–365), respectively (P < 0.001). Pairwise multiple comparisons showed a statistically significant difference between all groups except the ACR50 and ACR20 groups. At 12 months, 30 patients were in remission. None of the 44 patients in remission at 6 or 12 months became permanently work disabled over the 5‐year followup, as compared with 15 patients in the ACR50 group (23%), 6 in the ACR20 group (21%), and 19 without an ACR20 response at 6 months (56%).

Conclusion

Prompt induction of remission translates into maintenance of work capacity. At 6 months, an ACR50 response is no better than an ACR20 response with regard to future productivity, while failure to achieve an ACR20 response carries a high risk for work disability.

     

Adalimumab for the treatment of patients with moderately to severely active psoriatic arthritis: Results of a double‐blind,randomized, placebo‐controlled trial

Objective

Adalimumab, a fully human, anti–tumor necrosis factor monoclonal antibody, was evaluated for its safety and efficacy compared with placebo in the treatment of active psoriatic arthritis (PsA).

Methods

Patients with moderately to severely active PsA and a history of inadequate response to nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drugs were randomized to receive 40 mg adalimumab or placebo subcutaneously every other week for 24 weeks. Study visits were at baseline, weeks 2 and 4, and every 4 weeks thereafter. The primary efficacy end points were the American College of Rheumatology 20% improvement (ACR20) response at week 12 and the change in the modified total Sharp score of structural damage at week 24. Secondary end points were measures of joint disease, disability, and quality of life in all patients, as well as the severity of skin disease in those patients with psoriasis involving at least 3% of body surface area.

Results

At week 12, 58% of the adalimumab‐treated patients (87 of 151) achieved an ACR20 response, compared with 14% of the placebo‐treated patients (23 of 162) (P < 0.001). At week 24, similar ACR20 response rates were maintained and the mean change in the modified total Sharp score was −0.2 in patients receiving adalimumab and 1.0 in those receiving placebo (P < 0.001). Among the 69 adalimumab‐treated patients evaluated with the Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI), 59% achieved a 75% PASI improvement response at 24 weeks, compared with 1% of the 69 placebo‐treated patients evaluated (P < 0.001). Disability and quality of life measures were also significantly improved with adalimumab treatment compared with placebo. Adalimumab was generally safe and well‐tolerated.

Conclusion

Adalimumab significantly improved joint and skin manifestations, inhibited structural changes on radiographs, lessened disability due to joint damage, and improved quality of life in patients with moderately to severely active PsA.

     

Effects of prasterone on corticosteroid requirements of women with systemic lupus erythematosus: A double‐blind,randomized, placebo‐controlled trial

Objective

To evaluate whether treatment with prasterone (dehydroepiandrosterone [DHEA]) would allow the dosage of prednisone (or an equivalent corticosteroid) to be reduced to ≤7.5 mg/day for 2 months or longer while maintaining stable or reduced disease activity in steroid‐dependent women with systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE).

Methods

In a double‐blind, randomized trial, 191 female SLE patients receiving prednisone (10–30 mg/day) were treated daily with either placebo, 100 mg of oral prasterone (an adrenal androgen), or 200 mg of oral prasterone for 7–9‐months. At monthly intervals, corticosteroid dosages were reduced by algorithm in patients whose SLE Disease Activity Index (SLEDAI) score was stable or improved. Patients for whom a sustained reduction in the dosage of prednisone (≤7.5 mg/day) was achieved for at least the last 2 months of the 7–9‐month treatment period were classified as responders.

Results

Response rates were 41% in the placebo group, 44% in the 100‐mg prasterone group, and 55% in the 200‐mg group (P = 0.110, 200 mg versus placebo). Among the 137 subjects (45 in the placebo group, 47 in the 100‐mg group, and 45 in the 200‐mg group) who had active disease at baseline (defined as SLEDAI score >2), 29%, 38%, and 51%, respectively, were responders (P = 0.031 for 200 mg prasterone versus placebo). Acne was the most common adverse event but was generally mild. Clinical and laboratory changes primarily reflected androgenic effects of prasterone.

Conclusion

Among women with lupus disease activity, reducing the dosage of prednisone to ≤7.5 mg/day for a sustained period of time while maintaining stabilization or a reduction of disease activity was possible in a significantly greater proportion of patients treated with oral prasterone, 200 mg once daily, compared with patients treated with placebo.

     

Treatment of rheumatoid arthritis with humanized anti–interleukin‐6 receptor antibody: A multicenter,double‐blind,placebo‐controlled trial

Objective

Interleukin‐6 (IL‐6) is a pleiotropic cytokine that regulates the immune response, inflammation, and hematopoiesis. Overproduction of IL‐6 plays pathologic roles in rheumatoid arthritis (RA), and the blockade of IL‐6 may be therapeutically effective for the disease. This study was undertaken to evaluate the safety and efficacy of a humanized anti–IL‐6 receptor antibody, MRA, in patients with RA.

Methods

In a multicenter, double‐blind, placebo‐controlled trial, 164 patients with refractory RA were randomized to receive either MRA (4 mg/kg body weight or 8 mg/kg body weight) or placebo. MRA was administered intravenously every 4 weeks for a total of 3 months. The clinical responses were measured using the American College of Rheumatology (ACR) criteria.

Results

Treatment with MRA reduced disease activity in a dose‐dependent manner. At 3 months, 78% of patients in the 8‐mg group, 57% in the 4‐mg group, and 11% in the placebo group achieved at least a 20% improvement in disease activity according to the ACR criteria (an ACR20 response) (P < 0.001 for 8‐mg group versus placebo). Forty percent of patients in the 8‐mg group and 1.9% in the placebo group achieved an ACR50 response (P < 0.001). The overall incidences of adverse events were 56%, 59%, and 51% in the placebo, 4‐mg, and 8‐mg groups, respectively, and the adverse events were not dose dependent. A blood cholesterol increase was observed in 44.0% of the patients. Liver function disorders and decreases in white blood cell counts were also observed, but these were mild and transient. There was no increase in antinuclear antibodies or anti‐DNA antibodies. Anti‐MRA antibodies were detected in 2 patients.

Conclusion

Treatment with MRA was generally well tolerated and significantly reduced the disease activity of RA.

     

Fcγ receptor type IIIA genotype and response to tumor necrosis factor α–blocking agents in patients with rheumatoid arthritis

Objective

To determine whether a functional single‐nucleotide polymorphism in the gene encoding Fcγ receptor type IIIA (FcγRIIIA) correlates with the response to treatment with tumor necrosis factor α inhibitors in rheumatoid arthritis (RA).

Methods

The study population comprised 282 Swedish patients with RA in whom the therapeutic efficacy of conventional disease‐modifying antirheumatic drugs had been insufficient. Infliximab or etanercept treatment was initiated, and patients were evaluated after 3 months, using the American College of Rheumatology 20% improvement criteria (ACR20), the ACR50, and the ACR70 or the European League Against Rheumatism (EULAR) criteria. The chi‐square test was used to compare response rates across FcγRIIIA genotypes.

Results

No differences in genotype distribution were observed among nonresponders compared with ACR20 responders (P = 0.80), ACR50 responders (P = 0.56), or ACR70 responders (P = 0.91). Similar results were observed when analyzing infliximab and etanercept separately or when using the EULAR response criteria.

Conclusion

Unlike the findings of a previous study, the results of the current study suggest that the 158V/F polymorphism of FcγRIIIA is very unlikely to influence the clinical efficacy of infliximab or etanercept in patients with RA.

     

Efficacy of methotrexate treatment in patients with probable rheumatoid arthritis: A double‐blind,randomized, placebo‐controlled trial

Objective

To determine whether patients with undifferentiated arthritis (UA; inflammatory, nontraumatic arthritis that cannot be diagnosed using current classification criteria) benefit from treatment with methotrexate (MTX).

Methods

The PRObable rheumatoid arthritis: Methotrexate versus Placebo Treatment (PROMPT) study was a double‐blind, placebo‐controlled, randomized, multicenter trial involving 110 patients with UA who fulfilled the American College of Rheumatology (ACR) 1958 criteria for probable RA. Treatment started with MTX (15 mg/week) or placebo tablets, and every 3 months the dosage was increased if the Disease Activity Score was >2.4. After 12 months, the study medication was tapered and discontinued. Patients were followed up for 30 months. When a patient fulfilled the ACR criteria for RA (primary end point), the study medication was changed to MTX. Joint damage was scored on radiographs of the hands and feet.

Results

In 22 of the 55 patients (40%) in the MTX group, UA progressed to RA compared with 29 of 55 patients (53%) in the placebo group. However, in the MTX group, patients fulfilled the ACR criteria for RA at a later time point than in the placebo group (P = 0.04), and fewer patients showed radiographic progression over 18 months (P = 0.046).

Conclusion

This study provides evidence for the efficacy of MTX treatment in postponing the diagnosis of RA, as defined by the ACR 1987 criteria, and retarding radiographic joint damage in UA patients.

     

Open‐label study of infliximab treatment for psoriatic arthritis: Clinical and magnetic resonance imaging measurements of reduction of inflammation

Objective

To evaluate infliximab efficacy and safety in disease‐modifying antirheumatic drug–unresponsive psoriatic arthritis (PsA).

Methods

In a 54‐week, open‐label, compassionate‐use study, 10 patients received intravenous infliximab (5 mg/kg; weeks 0, 2, 6; individualized dosing after week 10). Patients continued their current therapy (stable dose) until week 10. Assessments were performed at weeks 2, 6, 10, and 54. Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) objectively measured joint inflammation at weeks 0 and 10.

Results

Patients achieved a 20% improvement according to the American College of Rheumatology (ACR) criteria (ACR20) in all patients by week 2; 8 patients improved 70% (ACR70) at week 10; 6 patients maintained ACR70 after week 54. Week 10 MRI revealed an 82.5% mean reduction in inflammation from baseline, and psoriasis area and severity index scores were reduced by 71.3% ± 16.7%. There were no significant adverse events, severe infections, or infusion reactions.

Conclusion

Infliximab was effective, safe, and well tolerated in PsA. Arthritis and psoriasis improved in all patients during the 54‐week evaluation. Further investigation of the use of infliximab for PsA and psoriasis is warranted.

     

Monitoring by rheumatologists for methotrexate‐, etanercept‐, infliximab‐, and anakinra‐associated adverse events

Objective

To determine what monitoring protocols rheumatologists use to identify adverse events in rheumatoid arthritis (RA) patients treated with methotrexate (methotrexate), etanercept (etanercept), infliximab (infliximab), and anakinra (anakinra), how often rheumatologists encounter treatment‐altering adverse events in their RA patients receiving these treatments, and how they feel about and comply with the current monitoring guidelines.

Methods

Three hundred ten physician members of the American College of Rheumatology (ACR) were notified by e‐mail of a survey that was posted on our rheumatology Web site. Questions were closed‐ended and multiple choice in format.

Results

One hundred twenty‐three responses were received (40%). Most rheumatologists reported that they utilize the ACR recommended screening tests at baseline before methotrexate treatment is initiated. Seventy‐nine percent reported that treatment‐altering abnormalities had occurred in <5% of their methotrexate‐treated RA patients, and 88% reported that such abnormalities had occurred in <10% of such patients, in the previous 3 years. Forty‐one percent believed liver function monitoring guidelines need to be changed; 59% said they would agree with new guidelines that would include a recommendation for liver function monitoring every 3–4 months. Most rheumatologists were not aware of any guidelines for monitoring by blood tests in RA patients treated with biologic agents, yet the majority reported that they order blood tests before patients start these therapies and on followup.

Conclusion

Our survey indicates that treatment‐altering liver function abnormalities in methotrexate‐treated RA patients are rare, and more than half of rheumatologists agree that a less stringent monitoring regimen should be considered. Rheumatologists and pharmaceutical companies might work together to develop guidelines for monitoring of patients treated with biologic agents.

     

Treatment of rheumatoid arthritis with the selective costimulation modulator abatacept: Twelve‐month results of a phase iib,double‐blind,randomized, placebo‐controlled trial

Objective

To determine the clinical efficacy, safety, and immunogenicity of abatacept (CTLA‐4Ig), a selective costimulation modulator, in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) that has remained active despite methotrexate (MTX) therapy.

Methods

This was a 12‐month, multicenter, randomized, double‐blind, placebo‐controlled study. A total of 339 patients with active RA despite MTX therapy were randomly assigned to receive 10 mg/kg abatacept (n = 115), 2 mg/kg abatacept (n = 105), or placebo (n = 119). This report focuses on the results observed at month 12 of a phase IIb trial.

Results

A significantly greater percentage of patients treated with 10 mg/kg abatacept met the American College of Rheumatology 20% improvement criteria (achieved an ACR20 response) at 1 year compared with patients who received placebo (62.6% versus 36.1%; P < 0.001). Greater percentages of patients treated with 10 mg/kg abatacept also achieved ACR50 responses (41.7% versus 20.2%; P < 0.001) and ACR70 responses (20.9% versus 7.6%; P = 0.003) compared with patients who received placebo. For patients treated with 10 mg/kg abatacept, there were also statistically significant and clinically important improvements in modified Health Assessment Questionnaire scores compared with patients who received placebo (49.6% versus 27.7%; P < 0.001). Abatacept at a dosage of 10 mg/kg elicited an increase in rates of remission (Disease Activity Score in 28 joints of <2.6) compared with placebo at 1 year (34.8% versus 10.1%; P < 0.001). The incidence of adverse events was comparable between the groups, and no significant formation of neutralizing antibodies was noted.

Conclusion

Abatacept was associated with significant reductions in disease activity and improvements in physical function that were maintained over the course of 12 months in patients with RA that had remained active despite MTX treatment. Abatacept was found to be well tolerated and safe over the course of 1 year. Abatacept in combination with MTX has the potential to play an important role in future RA therapy.

     

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.

     

The safety and efficacy of a JAK inhibitor in patients with active rheumatoid arthritis: Results of a double‐blind,placebo‐controlled phase IIa trial of three dosage levels of CP‐690,550 versus placebo

Objective

To determine the efficacy, safety, and tolerability of 3 different dosages of CP‐690,550, a potent, orally active JAK inhibitor, in patients with active rheumatoid arthritis (RA) in whom methotrexate, etanercept, infliximab, or adalimumab caused an inadequate or toxic response.

Methods

Patients (n = 264) were randomized equally to receive placebo, 5 mg of CP‐690,550, 15 mg of CP‐690,550, or 30 mg of CP‐690,550 twice daily for 6 weeks, and were followed up for an additional 6 weeks after treatment. The primary efficacy end point was the American College of Rheumatology 20% improvement criteria (ACR20) response rate at 6 weeks.

Results

By week 6, the ACR20 response rates were 70.5%, 81.2%, and 76.8% in the 5 mg, 15 mg, and 30 mg twice daily groups, respectively, compared with 29.2% in the placebo group (P < 0.001). Improvements in disease activity in CP‐690,550–treated patients compared with placebo were seen in all treatment groups as early as week 1. ACR50 and ACR70 response rates significantly improved in all treatment groups by week 4. The most common adverse events reported were headache and nausea. The infection rate in both the 15 mg twice daily group and the 30 mg twice daily group was 30.4% (versus 26.2% in the placebo group). No opportunistic infections or deaths occurred. Increases in mean low‐density lipoprotein cholesterol and high‐density lipoprotein cholesterol levels, and increases in mean serum creatinine level (0.04–0.06 mg/dl) were seen in all CP‐690,550 treatment arms.

Conclusion

Our findings indicate that CP‐690,550 is efficacious in the treatment of RA, resulting in rapid, statistically significant, and clinically meaningful reductions in the signs and symptoms of RA. Further studies of CP‐690,550 in RA are warranted.

     

Golimumab,a new human anti–tumor necrosis factor α antibody,administered intravenously in patients with active rheumatoid arthritis: Forty‐eight–week efficacy and safety results of a phase III randomized,double‐blind,placebo‐controlled study

Objective

To assess the efficacy and safety of intravenous administration of golimumab in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA).

Methods

Adult patients with RA in whom disease activity was persistent despite treatment with methotrexate (MTX) at a dosage of 15–25 mg/week for ≥4 weeks were randomized to receive intravenous infusions of placebo plus MTX or intravenous infusions of golimumab at a dose of 2 mg/kg or 4 mg/kg, with or without MTX, every 12 weeks through week 48. Patients with <20% improvement in the swollen and tender joint counts could enter early escape and receive additional active treatment (week 16) or could have their dose regimen adjusted (week 24). The primary end point was the proportion of patients achieving a 50% response according to the American College of Rheumatology improvement criteria (ACR50) at week 14.

Results

The primary study end point was not met (at week 14, an ACR50 response was observed in 21% of the patients treated with golimumab plus MTX compared with 13% of the patients treated with placebo plus MTX [P = 0.051]). By week 24, significantly more patients treated with golimumab plus MTX had achieved an ACR50 response. Differences in the proportion of patients achieving an ACR50 response between the group receiving golimumab monotherapy and the group receiving placebo plus MTX were not significant at either week 14 (16% versus 13%) or week 24 (10% versus 9%). At week 48, the proportions of patients achieving ACR20 and ACR50 responses were highest among those who had received golimumab 4 mg/kg plus MTX (70% and 48%, respectively). Concomitant treatment with MTX was associated with a lower incidence of antibodies to golimumab. The most commonly reported adverse events through week 48 were infections (48% of patients treated with golimumab with or without MTX and 41% of patients receiving placebo plus MTX).

Conclusion

The primary end point was not met. However, intravenously administered golimumab plus MTX appears to have benefit in the longer‐term reduction of RA signs/symptoms in MTX‐resistant patients, with no unexpected safety concerns.