The safety of infliximab,combined with background treatments,among patients with rheumatoid arthritis and various comorbidities: A large,randomized, placebo‐controlled trial

Objective

To assess the risk of serious infections following 22 weeks of infliximab therapy, and to further characterize the safety profile of infliximab in combination with background treatments during 1 year in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) with various comorbidities.

Methods

Patients with active RA despite receiving methotrexate (MTX) were randomly assigned to receive infusions of placebo (group 1, n = 363), 3 mg/kg infliximab (group 2, n = 360), or 10 mg/kg infliximab (group 3, n = 361) at weeks 0, 2, 6, and 14. At week 22, patients in placebo group 1 began receiving 3 mg/kg infliximab, and patients in group 3 continued to receive an infliximab dose of 10 mg/kg. Patients in group 2 who failed to meet predefined response criteria received increasing doses of infliximab in increments of 1.5 mg/kg.

Results

At week 22, the relative risk of developing serious infections in groups 2 and 3, compared with group 1, was 1.0 (95% confidence interval [95% CI] 0.3–3.1, P = 0.995) and 3.1 (95% CI 1.2–7.9, P = 0.013), respectively. The incidence of serious adverse events was 7.8% in groups 2 and 3 compared with 7.5% in group 1. From week 22 to week 54, 11.8%, 9.9%, and 10.3% of patients in groups 1, 2, and 3, respectively, reported occurrences of serious adverse events. Through week 54, 1 patient in group 1, 2 patients in group 2, and 4 patients in group 3 developed active tuberculosis.

Conclusion

The risk of serious infections in patients receiving the approved infliximab dose of 3 mg/kg plus MTX was similar to that in patients receiving MTX alone. Patients receiving the unapproved induction regimen of 10 mg/kg infliximab plus MTX followed by a 10 mg/kg maintenance regimen had an increased risk of serious infections through week 22.

     

Maintenance of infliximab treatment in ankylosing spondylitis: Results of a one‐year randomized controlled trial comparing systematic versus on‐demand treatment

Objective

Continuous treatment with the anti–tumor necrosis factor α (anti‐TNFα) antibody infliximab is efficacious in ankylosing spondylitis (AS), whereas treatment discontinuation results in disease relapse, with variable delay. This study was undertaken to compare the efficacy of continuous treatment with infliximab with that of a treatment regimen adapted to symptom recurrence. Methotrexate (MTX) in combination with infliximab was also tested.

Methods

Patients with active AS were randomly assigned at week 0 to receive infliximab every 6 weeks (continuous treatment) or upon symptom recurrence (on‐demand treatment), following infusions at weeks 4, 6, and 10. Patients in the on‐demand group were randomly assigned to receive either MTX in combination with infliximab or infliximab alone. Patients were monitored for 1 year. The primary end point was the proportion of patients who met the ASsessment in AS International Working Group criteria for 20% improvement (ASAS20) at week 58.

Results

Of 247 patients, 124 were assigned to receive infliximab every 6 weeks and 123 to receive on‐demand treatment. Among the latter, 62 received MTX, and 61 received infliximab alone. A greater proportion of patients receiving infliximab every 6 weeks fulfilled ASAS20 response criteria at week 58 than did patients receiving on‐demand treatment (75% versus 46%; P < 0.0001). Patients in the continuous treatment group received more infliximab infusions after week 10 than did those in the on‐demand group (mean ± SD 5.8 ± 2.2 versus 3.5 ± 2; P < 0.0001). Addition of MTX did not significantly affect the proportion of patients with an ASAS20 response at week 58, nor the number of infliximab infusions administered.

Conclusion

These findings indicate that continuous treatment of AS with infliximab is more efficacious than on‐demand treatment, and that the addition of MTX to infliximab provides no significant benefit.

     

A home‐based two‐year strength training period in early rheumatoid arthritis led to good long‐term compliance: A five‐year followup

Objective

To evaluate the impact of a 2‐year home‐based strength‐training program on physical function in patients with early rheumatoid arthritis (RA) after a subsequent 3‐year followup.

Methods

Seventy patients with early RA were randomized to perform either strength training (experimental group [EG]) or range‐of‐motion exercises (control group [CG]). Maximal strength values were recorded by dynamometers. The Modified Disease Activity Score (DAS28), pain, Health Assessment Questionnaire (HAQ), walking speed, and stair‐climbing speed were also measured.

Results

The maximum strength of assessed muscle groups increased by 19–59% in the EG during the training period and remained at the reached level throughout the subsequent 3 years. Muscle strength improved in the CG by 1–31%, but less compared with the EG. During the 2‐year training period, DAS28 decreased by 50% and 45% and pain by 67% and 39% in the EG and CG, respectively. The differences in muscle strength, DAS28, and HAQ were significantly in favor of the EG both at the 2‐year and 5‐year followup assessments.

Conclusions

The improvements achieved during the 2‐year strength‐training period were sustained for 3 years in patients with early RA.

     

Effect of rituximab on physical function and quality of life in patients with rheumatoid arthritis previously untreated with methotrexate

Objective

To assess the effect of rituximab plus methotrexate (MTX) compared with MTX alone on patient‐reported outcomes (PROs) and health‐related quality of life (HRQOL) in patients with active early rheumatoid arthritis (RA) previously untreated with MTX.

Methods

Patients with active early RA were randomized to groups receiving placebo, rituximab 500 mg, or rituximab 1,000 mg. Rituximab was given by intravenous infusion on days 1 and 15. From week 24, patients with a Disease Activity Score in 28 joints–erythrocyte sedimentation rate of ≥2.6 were eligible for retreatment. Physical function was assessed by Health Assessment Questionnaire (HAQ) disability index (DI) and Short Form 36 (SF‐36) scores. Patients achieving a minimal clinically important difference (MCID) for PROs were determined. Additional PROs, including fatigue and pain, were assessed.

Results

A total of 748 patients were randomized and received the study drug. Patient characteristics were well balanced. At week 52, treatment with rituximab in both dose groups showed significant improvements in the HAQ DI compared to the MTX alone group (?0.905 and ?0.916 in the rituximab 500 mg plus MTX and 1,000 mg plus MTX groups, respectively, versus ?0.628 in the MTX alone group; P < 0.0001). Higher proportions of patients achieved MCID in the HAQ DI in the rituximab plus MTX groups compared to MTX alone. Treatment with rituximab plus MTX led to a significant reduction in the SF‐36 physical component summary for both rituximab dose groups, but did not show statistically significant differences in the SF‐36 mental component summary. Compared to the MTX alone group, both doses of rituximab plus MTX were associated with significant reductions in the patient global assessment of disease activity and pain, and a significantly higher improvement in Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy–Fatigue scores from baseline to 52 weeks.

Conclusions

Rituximab plus MTX was associated with significant improvement in physical function and HRQOL outcomes compared with MTX alone in patients previously untreated with MTX.

     

The relationship of serum infliximab concentrations to clinical improvement in rheumatoid arthritis: Results from ATTRACT,a multicenter,randomized, double‐blind,placebo‐controlled trial

Objective

To investigate the relationship between serum concentrations of infliximab, a monoclonal anti–tumor necrosis factor α antibody, and clinical improvement from infliximab therapy for rheumatoid arthritis (RA).

Methods

Multiple blood samples were obtained from each of 428 subjects with active RA who were enrolled in a multicenter, randomized, double‐blind, placebo‐controlled trial (ATTRACT [Anti–Tumor Necrosis Factor Trial in Rheumatoid Arthritis with Concomitant Therapy]) evaluating the clinical efficacy and safety of infliximab therapy. Serum levels of infliximab were measured by enzyme‐linked immunosorbent assay. Dose‐response trends were analyzed using generalized logistic regression techniques. Pharmacokinetic modeling was used to predict the serum concentrations of infliximab after simulated infusions using doses and dosing intervals not evaluated in the trial.

Results

At week 54, 26% of the subjects receiving 3 mg/kg infliximab every 8 weeks had undetectable trough serum levels of infliximab, a significantly greater proportion than in the other 3 treatment groups (P < 0.001). Increased magnitude of American College of Rheumatology (ACR) response (measured by the ACR‐N, a continuous measure of clinical improvement derived from the ACR 20% response criteria) and greater reduction from baseline in serum C‐reactive protein level were both associated with higher trough serum concentrations of infliximab (P < 0.001), as was less progression of radiographic joint damage (P = 0.004), providing support for a dose‐response relationship. Pharmacokinetic models predicted that decreasing the dosing interval from 8 weeks to 6 weeks would yield higher trough serum levels of infliximab than increasing the dose by 100 mg.

Conclusion

These results suggest that some patients with RA may benefit from infliximab given at higher doses than 3 mg/kg or more frequently than every 8 weeks.

     

Major reduction in spinal inflammation in patients with ankylosing spondylitis after treatment with infliximab: Results of a multicenter,randomized, double‐blind,placebo‐controlled magnetic resonance imaging study

Objective

To determine whether the effects of anti–tumor necrosis factor α (TNFα) in reducing the signs and symptoms of ankylosing spondylitis (AS) coincide with a reduction in spinal inflammation as detected by magnetic resonance imaging (MRI).

Methods

Pre‐ and postgadolinium T1 and STIR MR images of the spine were acquired at baseline and at week 24 in patients with AS who participated in a multicenter, randomized, double‐blind, placebo‐controlled study. Patients were randomly assigned at an 8:3 ratio to receive infusions of infliximab (5 mg/kg) or placebo at weeks 0, 2, and 6 and then every 6 weeks thereafter. MR images were obtained and evaluated independently by 2 readers who were blinded to the treatment allocation and time sequence of the images.

Results

A total of 194 patients in the infliximab group and 72 patients in the placebo group had evaluable images at baseline and week 24. About 80% of the patients had at least 1 active spinal lesion at baseline, as assessed by MRI. The improvement in the MRI Activity Score after 6 months was significantly greater in the patients who received infliximab (mean 5.02, median 2.72) than in those who received placebo (mean 0.60, median 0.0) (P < 0.001). Almost complete resolution of spinal inflammation was seen in most patients who received infliximab, irrespective of baseline activity.

Conclusion

Patients with AS who received infliximab therapy showed a decrease in spinal inflammation as detected by MRI, whereas those who received placebo showed persistent inflammatory spondylitis.

     

Life‐threatening histoplasmosis complicating immunotherapy with tumor necrosis factor α antagonists infliximab and etanercept

Objective

Two tumor necrosis factor α (TNFα) antagonists were recently licensed in the US. Infliximab was licensed in 1998 for the treatment of Crohn's disease (CD), and since 1999, it has been licensed in combination with methotrexate for treatment of rheumatoid arthritis (RA). Etanercept was licensed in 1998 for treatment of RA and, more recently, for juvenile RA and psoriatic arthritis. Because of potential immunosuppression related to use of anti‐TNFα agents, we sought to identify postlicensure cases of opportunistic infection, including histoplasmosis, in patients treated with these products.

Methods

The US Food and Drug Administration's (FDA) passive surveillance database for monitoring postlicensure adverse events was reviewed to identify all reports received through July 2001 of histoplasmosis in patients treated with either infliximab or etanercept.

Results

Ten cases of Histoplasma capsulatum (HC) infection were reported: 9 associated with infliximab and 1 associated with etanercept. In patients treated with infliximab, manifestations of histoplasmosis occurred within 1 week to 6 months after the first dose and typically included fever, malaise, cough, dyspnea, and interstitial pneumonitis. Of the 10 patients with histoplasmosis, 9 required treatment in an intensive care unit, and 1 died. All patients had received concomitant immunosuppressive medications in addition to infliximab or etanercept, and all resided in HC‐endemic regions.

Conclusion

Postlicensure surveillance suggests that acute life‐threatening histoplasmosis may complicate immunotherapy with TNFα antagonists, particularly infliximab. Histoplasmosis should be considered early in the evaluation of patients who reside in HC‐endemic areas in whom infectious complications develop during treatment with infliximab or etanercept.

     

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.

     

Comparison of the response to infliximab or etanercept monotherapy with the response to cotherapy with methotrexate or another disease‐modifying antirheumatic drug in patients with rheumatoid arthritis: Results from the British Society for Rheumatology Biologics Register

Objective

To compare outcome at 6 months in unselected “real‐world” patients with rheumatoid arthritis treated with etanercept or infliximab as either monotherapy, cotherapy with methotrexate (MTX), or cotherapy with another disease‐modifying antirheumatic drug (DMARD).

Methods

A total of 2,711 subjects starting treatment with their first biologic agent (1,453 infliximab and 1,258 etanercept) were followed up for 6 months. Outcome was assessed using the European League Against Rheumatism (EULAR) response criteria. Ordinal regression was used to model the response in the MTX and other DMARD cotherapy groups relative to the monotherapy group separately for the 2 anti–tumor necrosis factor α agents, after adjusting for baseline differences.

Results

Etanercept‐treated patients had an increased likelihood of achieving a higher EULAR response category with cotherapy with MTX (odds ratio [OR] 2.0, 95% confidence interval [95% CI] 1.5–2.7) and with another DMARD (OR 1.2, 95% CI 0.9–1.6) as compared with monotherapy. For infliximab‐treated patients, the likelihoods were 1.4 (95% CI 0.9–2.0) for MTX and 1.3 (95% CI 0.8–2.1) for other DMARDs versus monotherapy. Cotherapy with MTX or another DMARD produced significantly higher rates of remission with etanercept (12% and 11%, respectively) as compared with etanercept monotherapy (5%). Infliximab‐treated patients showed similar remission rates in the MTX and other DMARD cotherapy groups (8% and 5%, respectively) as in the monotherapy group (7%).

Conclusion

In this study of real‐world patients, the use of MTX and, to a lesser extent, other DMARDs as cotherapy with etanercept was associated with a higher likelihood of response. Although the infliximab guidelines suggest that MTX be used as cotherapy, in clinical practice, both monotherapy and cotherapy with DMARDs other than MTX are used. These data suggest that either of the latter strategies may be useful in patients who are intolerant to MTX.

     

Propensity‐adjusted association of methotrexate with overall survival in rheumatoid arthritis

Objective

While medications used to treat rheumatoid arthritis (RA) may affect survival in RA, few studies take into account the propensity for medication use, which may reflect selection bias in treatment allocation in survival models. We undertook this study to examine the relationship between methotrexate (MTX) use and mortality in RA, after controlling for individual propensity scores for MTX use.

Methods

We studied 5,626 RA patients prospectively for 25 years to determine the risk of death associated with MTX use, modeled in time‐varying Cox regression models. We used the random forest method to generate individual propensity scores for MTX use at study entry and during followup in a time‐varying manner; these scores were included in the multivariate model. We also investigated whether selective discontinuation of MTX immediately prior to death altered the risk of mortality, and we examined the association of duration of MTX use with survival.

Results

During followup, 666 patients (12%) died. MTX use was associated with reduced risk of death (adjusted hazard ratio 0.30 [95% confidence interval 0.09–1.03]). Selective MTX cessation immediately before death did not account for the protective association of MTX use with mortality. Only MTX use for >1 year was associated with lower risks of mortality, but associations were not stronger with longer durations of use.

Conclusion

MTX use was associated with a 70% reduction in mortality in RA.

     

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.

     

Double‐blind randomized controlled clinical trial of the interleukin‐6 receptor antagonist,tocilizumab, in European patients with rheumatoid arthritis who had an incomplete response to methotrexate

Objective

To establish the safety and efficacy of repeat infusions of tocilizumab (previously known as MRA), a humanized anti–interleukin‐6 (IL‐6) receptor antibody, alone and in combination with methotrexate (MTX), for the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis (RA).

Methods

The study group comprised 359 patients with active RA in whom the response to MTX was inadequate. During a stabilization period, these patients received their current dose of MTX for at least 4 weeks. Following stabilization, they were randomized to 1 of 7 treatment arms, as follows: tocilizumab at doses of 2 mg/kg, 4 mg/kg, or 8 mg/kg either as monotherapy or in combination with MTX, or MTX plus placebo.

Results

A 20% response (improvement) according to the American College of Rheumatology criteria (ACR20 response) was achieved by 61% and 63% of patients receiving 4 mg/kg and 8 mg/kg of tocilizumab as monotherapy, respectively, and by 63% and 74% of patients receiving those doses of tocilizumab plus MTX, respectively, compared with 41% of patients receiving placebo plus MTX. Statistically significant ACR50 and ACR70 responses were observed in patients receiving combination therapy with either 4 mg/kg or 8 mg/kg of tocilizumab plus MTX (P < 0.05). A dose‐related reduction in the Disease Activity Score in 28 joints was observed from week 4 onward, in all patients except those receiving monotherapy with 2 mg/kg of tocilizumab. In the majority of patients who received 8 mg/kg of tocilizumab, the C‐reactive protein level/erythrocyte sedimentation rate normalized, while placebo plus MTX had little effect on these laboratory parameters. Tocilizumab was mostly well tolerated, with a safety profile similar to that of other biologic and immunosuppressive therapies. Alanine transaminase and aspartate transaminase levels followed a sawtooth pattern (rising and falling between infusions). There were moderate but reversible increases in the nonfasting total cholesterol and triglyceride levels and reversible reductions in the high‐density lipoprotein cholesterol and neutrophil levels. There were 2 cases of sepsis, both of which occurred in patients who were receiving combination therapy with 8 mg/kg of tocilizumab plus MTX.

Conclusion

These results indicate that targeted blockade of IL‐6 signaling is a highly efficacious and promising means of decreasing disease activity in RA.

     

Validation of single‐factor structure and scoring protocol for the health assessment questionnaire‐disability index

Objective

The extensively used Health Assessment Questionnaire Disability Index (HAQ‐DI) has been well received by the research and clinical community, notably because of its measurement strengths including reliability and stability of scores over time, utility in observational studies and clinical trials, predictive relationship with morbidity and mortality in rheumatoid arthritis (RA), and its translation for use in different countries. However, HAQ‐DI scoring has not been validated. The purpose of this study was to examine the structural validity of the HAQ‐DI and evaluate the latent factors underlying HAQ‐DI scoring.

Methods

This study used a cross‐validation approach on a total of 278 patients with RA. Exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses were performed.

Results

Results yielded a single‐factor HAQ‐DI score, which favored the current scoring system of the HAQ‐DI. Additionally, modification indices suggested improved model fit with the secondary inclusion of correlated residual scores from a motor skills subdomain.

Conclusion

The current study provides the first validation of the HAQ‐DI scoring system as determined by its latent factor structure. In addition, the findings suggest some benefit from a secondary interpretation of the scores based on domains that measure motor skills.

     

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.

     

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.

     

Similar effects of disease‐modifying antirheumatic drugs,glucocorticoids, and biologic agents on radiographic progression in rheumatoid arthritis: Meta‐analysis of 70 randomized placebo‐controlled or drug‐controlled studies,including 112 comparisons

Objective

To define the differences in effects on joint destruction in rheumatoid arthritis (RA) patients between therapy with single and combination disease‐modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs), glucocorticoids, and biologic agents.

Methods

Randomized controlled trials in RA patients, investigating the effects of drug treatment on the percentage of the annual radiographic progression rate (PARPR) were included in a meta‐analysis performed with the use of Review Manager 5.0 software according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta‐Analyses (PRISMA) Statement protocol.

Results

Data from 70 trials (112 comparisons, 16 interventions) were summarized in 21 meta‐analyses. Compared with placebo, the PARPR was 0.65% smaller in the single‐DMARD group (P < 0.002) and 0.54% smaller in the glucocorticoid group (P < 0.00001). Compared with single‐DMARD treatment, the PARPR was 0.62% smaller in the combination‐DMARD group (P < 0.001) and 0.61% smaller in the biologic agent plus methotrexate (MTX) group (P < 0.00001). The effect of a combination of 2 DMARDs plus step‐down glucocorticoids did not differ from the effect of a biologic agent plus MTX (percentage mean difference –0.07% [95% confidence interval –0.25, 0.11]) (P = 0.44).

Conclusion

Treatment with DMARDs, glucocorticoids, biologic agents, and combination agents significantly reduced radiographic progression at 1 year, with a relative effect of 48–84%. A direct comparison between the combination of a biologic agent plus MTX and the combination of 2 DMARDs plus initial glucocorticoids revealed no difference. Consequently, biologic agents should still be reserved for patients whose RA is resistant to DMARD therapy. Future trials of the effects of biologic agents on RA should compare such agents with combination treatments involving DMARDs and glucocorticoids.

     

Validation of a rheumatoid arthritis health‐related quality of life instrument,the CSHQ‐RA

Objective

To test the validity and reliability of a newly developed disease‐specific multidimensional quality of life instrument: the Cedars‐Sinai Health‐Related Quality of Life Instrument (CSHQ‐RA).

Methods

A total of 350 rheumatoid arthritis (RA) patients were asked to complete the CSHQ‐RA at 2 time points (4 weeks apart). Patients also completed the Medical Outcomes Study Short Form 36 (SF‐36) and the Stanford Health Assessment Questionnaire (HAQ) Disability Index (DI) at the second time point. Construct validity was tested, using Pearson's correlations, by comparing subscale scores on the CSHQ‐RA to those obtained from the mental component summary (MCS) and physical component summary (PCS) of the SF‐36. HAQ DI scores were used to assess the discriminant validity of the CSHQ‐RA. Intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs) were used to assess test–retest reliability.

Results

Response rates for the first and second survey were 83% (291) and 93% (276), respectively; 84% of respondents were women, and mean age was 57 years. Mean scores ± SDs on instruments were: HAQ 0.73 ± 0.69; MCS 49 ± 12; and PCS 33 ± 11. Pearson's correlations between the CSHQ‐RA subscale scores and the SF‐36 scores ranged from 0.55 to 0.76 (P < 0.001). Analysis of variance indicate that scores on the CSHQ‐RA discriminated between levels of physical disability as measured by the HAQ (P < 0.001). Test–retest reliability was demonstrated in the instrument's subscale scores (ICC 0.70–0.90).

Conclusion

These results support the construct validity, discriminant validity, and reliability of the CSHQ‐RA as a measure that captures the impact of RA on patients' health‐related quality of life.

     

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.

     

Clinical and imaging efficacy of infliximab in HLA–B27–Positive patients with magnetic resonance imaging–determined early sacroiliitis

Objective

To evaluate the efficacy of infliximab in HLA–B27–positive patients with magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)–determined early sacroiliitis, using both clinical and MRI assessments.

Methods

Forty patients with recent‐onset inflammatory back pain, as assessed by the Calin criteria, HLA–B27 positivity, clinical disease activity as measured by the Bath Ankylosing Spondylitis Disease Activity Index (BASDAI), pain and morning stiffness, and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)–determined sacroiliac joint bone edema were randomized in a double‐blind manner to receive infliximab 5 mg/kg or placebo at 0, 2, 6, and 12 weeks. MRI scans were performed at baseline and 16 weeks and scored by 2 observers (blinded to both the order of the scans and to treatment group), using the Leeds scoring system. Clinical assessments included the BASDAI, the Bath Ankylosing Spondylitis Functional Index (BASFI), the Ankylosing Spondylitis Quality of Life (ASQoL) instrument, the ASsessment in Ankylosing Spondylitis International Working Group criteria (ASAS) for improvement, and markers of inflammation.

Results

The mean reduction in the total MRI score from week 0 to week 16 was significantly greater in infliximab‐treated patients compared with placebo‐treated patients (P = 0.033). On average, significantly more lesions resolved in the infliximab group (P < 0.001), while significantly more new lesions developed in the placebo group (P = 0.004). Significantly greater improvement in the infliximab group versus the placebo group was also observed for changes from week 0 to week 16 in the BASDAI (P = 0.002), BASFI (P = 0.004), and ASQoL (P = 0.007) scores. Responses according to the ASAS criteria for 40% improvement, the ASAS criteria for 20% improvement in 5 of 6 domains, and ASAS partial remission were achieved by 61%, 44%, and 56% of infliximab‐treated patients, respectively. Infliximab was well tolerated, and no serious adverse events were observed.

Conclusion

Infliximab was an effective therapy for early sacroiliitis, providing a reduction in disease activity by week 16. This study is the first to show that infliximab is effective for reducing clinical and imaging evidence of disease activity in patients with MRI‐determined early axial spondylarthritis.