Reaching the therapeutic target of remission or low-disease activity has improved outcomes in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) significantly. The treat-to-target recommendations, formulated in ...2010, have provided a basis for implementation of a strategic approach towards this therapeutic goal in routine clinical practice, but these recommendations need to be re-evaluated for appropriateness and practicability in the light of new insights.
To update the 2010 treat-to-target recommendations based on systematic literature reviews (SLR) and expert opinion.
A task force of rheumatologists, patients and a nurse specialist assessed the SLR results and evaluated the individual items of the 2010 recommendations accordingly, reformulating many of the items. These were subsequently discussed, amended and voted upon by >40 experts, including 5 patients, from various regions of the world. Levels of evidence, strengths of recommendations and levels of agreement were derived.
The update resulted in 4 overarching principles and 10 recommendations. The previous recommendations were partly adapted and their order changed as deemed appropriate in terms of importance in the view of the experts. The SLR had now provided also data for the effectiveness of targeting low-disease activity or remission in established rather than only early disease. The role of comorbidities, including their potential to preclude treatment intensification, was highlighted more strongly than before. The treatment aim was again defined as remission with low-disease activity being an alternative goal especially in patients with long-standing disease. Regular follow-up (every 1-3 months during active disease) with according therapeutic adaptations to reach the desired state was recommended. Follow-up examinations ought to employ composite measures of disease activity that include joint counts. Additional items provide further details for particular aspects of the disease, especially comorbidity and shared decision-making with the patient. Levels of evidence had increased for many items compared with the 2010 recommendations, and levels of agreement were very high for most of the individual recommendations (≥9/10).
The 4 overarching principles and 10 recommendations are based on stronger evidence than before and are supposed to inform patients, rheumatologists and other stakeholders about strategies to reach optimal outcomes of RA.
To report long-term safety from the completed extension trial of baricitinib, an oral selective Janus kinase inhibitor, in patients with active rheumatoid arthritis (RA).
Treatment-emergent adverse ...events are summarised from an integrated database (9 phase III/II/Ib and 1 long-term extension) of patients who received any baricitinib dose (All-bari-RA). Standardised incidence ratio (SIR) for malignancy (excluding non-melanoma skin cancer (NMSC)) and standardised mortality ratio (SMR) were estimated. Additional analysis was done in a subset of patients who had ever taken 2 mg or 4 mg baricitinib.
3770 patients received baricitinib (14 744 patient-years of exposure (PYE)). All-bari-RA incidence rates (IRs) per 100 patient-years at risk were 2.6, 3.0 and 0.5 for serious infections, herpes zoster and major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE), respectively. In patients aged ≥50 with ≥1 cardiovascular risk factor, the IR for MACE was 0.77 (95% CI 0.56 to 1.04). The IR for malignancy (excluding NMSC) during the first 48 weeks was 0.6 and remained stable thereafter (IR 1.0). The SIR for malignancies excluding NMSC was 1.07 (95% CI 0.90 to 1.26) and the SMR was 0.74 (95% CI 0.59 to 0.92). All-bari-RA IRs for deep vein thrombosis (DVT)/pulmonary embolism (PE), DVT and PE were 0.5 (95% CI 0.38 to 0.61), 0.4 (95% CI 0.26 to 0.45) and 0.3 (95% CI 0.18 to 0.35), respectively. No clear dose differences were noted for exposure-adjusted IRs (per 100 PYE) for deaths, serious infections, DVT/PE and MACE.
In this integrated analysis including long-term data of baricitinib from 3770 patients (median 4.6 years, up to 9.3 years) with active RA, baricitinib maintained a similar safety profile to earlier analyses. No new safety signals were identified.
NCT01185353, NCT00902486, NCT01469013, NCT01710358, NCT02265705, NCT01721044, NCT01721057, NCT01711359 and NCT01885078.
Patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) receive highly targeted biologic therapies without previous knowledge of target expression levels in the diseased tissue. Approximately 40% of patients do not ...respond to individual biologic therapies and 5-20% are refractory to all. In a biopsy-based, precision-medicine, randomized clinical trial in RA (R4RA; n = 164), patients with low/absent synovial B cell molecular signature had a lower response to rituximab (anti-CD20 monoclonal antibody) compared with that to tocilizumab (anti-IL6R monoclonal antibody) although the exact mechanisms of response/nonresponse remain to be established. Here, in-depth histological/molecular analyses of R4RA synovial biopsies identify humoral immune response gene signatures associated with response to rituximab and tocilizumab, and a stromal/fibroblast signature in patients refractory to all medications. Post-treatment changes in synovial gene expression and cell infiltration highlighted divergent effects of rituximab and tocilizumab relating to differing response/nonresponse mechanisms. Using ten-by-tenfold nested cross-validation, we developed machine learning algorithms predictive of response to rituximab (area under the curve (AUC) = 0.74), tocilizumab (AUC = 0.68) and, notably, multidrug resistance (AUC = 0.69). This study supports the notion that disease endotypes, driven by diverse molecular pathology pathways in the diseased tissue, determine diverse clinical and treatment-response phenotypes. It also highlights the importance of integration of molecular pathology signatures into clinical algorithms to optimize the future use of existing medications and inform the development of new drugs for refractory patients.
Full text
Available for:
EMUNI, FIS, FZAB, GEOZS, GIS, IJS, IMTLJ, KILJ, KISLJ, MFDPS, NLZOH, NUK, OILJ, PNG, SAZU, SBCE, SBJE, SBMB, SBNM, UKNU, UL, UM, UPUK, VKSCE, ZAGLJ
Summary Background Biological agents offer good control of rheumatoid arthritis, but the long-term benefits of achieving low disease activity with a biological agent plus methotrexate or methotrexate ...alone are unclear. The OPTIMA trial assessed different treatment adjustment strategies in patients with early rheumatoid arthritis attaining (or not) stable low disease activity with adalimumab plus methotrexate or methotrexate monotherapy. Methods This trial was done at 161 sites worldwide. Patients with early (<1 year duration) rheumatoid arthritis naive to methotrexate were randomly allocated (by interactive voice response system, in a 1:1 ratio, block size four) to adalimumab (40 mg every other week) plus methotrexate (initiated at 7·5 mg/week, increased by 2·5 mg every 1–2 weeks to a maximum weekly dose of 20 mg by week 8) or placebo plus methotrexate for 26 weeks (period 1). Patients in the adalimumab plus methotrexate group who completed period 1 and achieved the stable low disease activity target (28-joint disease activity score with C-reactive protein DAS28<3·2 at weeks 22 and 26) were randomised to adalimumab-continuation or adalimumab-withdrawal for an additional 52 weeks (period 2). Patients achieving the target with initial methotrexate continued methotrexate-monotherapy. Inadequate responders were offered adalimumab plus methotrexate. All patients and investigators were masked to treatment allocation in period 1. During period 2, treatment reallocation of patients who achieved the target was masked to patients and investigators; patients who did not achieve the target remained masked to original randomisation, but were aware of the subsequent assignment. The primary endpoint was a composite measure of DAS28 of less than 3·2 at week 78 and radiographic non-progression from baseline to week 78, compared between adalimumab-continuation and methotrexate-monotherapy. Adverse events were monitored throughout period 2. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov , number NCT00420927. Findings The study was done between Dec 28, 2006, and Aug 3, 2010. 1636 patients were assessed and 1032 were randomised in period 1 (515 to adalimumab plus methotrexate; 517 to placebo plus methotrexate). 466 patients in the adalimumab plus methotrexate group completed period 1; 207 achieved the stable low disease activity target, of whom 105 were rerandomised to adalimumab-continuation. 460 patients in the placebo plus methotrexate group completed period 1; 112 achieved the stable low disease activity target and continued methotrexate-monotherapy. 73 of 105 (70%) patients in the adalimumab-continuation group and 61 of 112 (54%) patients in the methotrexate-monotherapy group achieved the primary endpoint at week 78 (mean difference 15% 95% CI 2–28%, p=0·0225). Patients achieving the stable low disease activity target on adalimumab plus methotrexate who withdrew adalimumab mostly maintained their good responses. Overall, 706 of 926 patients in period 2 had an adverse event, of which 82 were deemed serious; however, distribution of adverse events did not differ between groups. Interpretation Treatment to a stable low disease activity target resulted in improved clinical, functional, and structural outcomes, with both adalimumab-continuation and methotrexate-monotherapy. However, a higher proportion of patients treated with initial adalimumab plus methotrexate achieved the low disease activity target compared with those initially treated with methotrexate alone. Outcomes were much the same whether adalimumab was continued or withdrawn in patients who initially responded to adalimumab plus methotrexate. Funding AbbVie.
Full text
Available for:
GEOZS, IJS, IMTLJ, KILJ, KISLJ, NUK, OILJ, PNG, SAZU, SBCE, SBJE, UL, UM, UPCLJ, UPUK
Summary Background Clinical remission and low disease activity are essential treatment targets in patients with rheumatoid arthritis. Although moderately active rheumatoid arthritis is common, ...treatment effects in moderate disease have not been well studied. Additionally, optimum use of biologics needs further investigation, including the use of induction, maintenance, and withdrawal treatment strategies. The aim of the PRESERVE trial was to assess whether low disease activity would be sustained with reduced doses or withdrawal of etanercept in patients with moderately active disease. Methods In a randomised controlled trial, patients aged between 18 and 70 years with moderately active rheumatoid arthritis (disease activity score in 28 joints DAS28 >3·2 and ≤5·1) despite treatment with methotrexate were enrolled at 80 centres in Europe, Latin America, Asia, and Australia between March 6, 2008, and Sept 9, 2009. To be eligible, patients had to have been receiving 15–25 mg of methotrexate every week for at least 8 weeks. In an open-label period of 36 weeks, all patients were given 50 mg etanercept plus methotrexate every week. To be eligible for a subsequent double-blind period of 52 weeks, participants had to have achieved sustained low disease activity. These patients were randomly assigned (1:1:1) by an interactive voice-response system to one of three treatment groups: 50 mg etanercept plus methotrexate, 25 mg etanercept plus methotrexate, or placebo plus methotrexate. Patients were stratified in blocks of three by DAS28 response (low disease activity or remission) at week 36. Patients, investigators, data analysts, and study staff were all masked to treatment allocation. The primary endpoint was the proportion of patients with low disease activity at week 88 in the groups given 50 mg etanercept or placebo in the double-blind period. A conditional primary endpoint was the proportion of patients receiving 25 mg etanercept who achieved low disease activity. Modified intention-to-treat populations were used for analyses. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov , number NCT00565409. Findings 604 (72·4%) of 834 enrolled patients were eligible for the double-blind period, of whom 202 were assigned to 50 mg etanercept plus methotrexate, 202 to 25 mg etanercept plus methotrexate, and 200 to placebo plus methotrexate. At week 88, 166 (82·6%) of 201 patients who had received at least one dose of 50 mg etanercept and one or more DAS28 evaluations had low disease activity, compared with 84 (42·6%) of 197 who had received placebo (mean difference 40·8%, 95% CI 32·5–49·1%; p<0·0001). Additionally, 159 (79·1%) of 201 patients given 25 mg etanercept had low disease activity at week 88 (mean difference from placebo 35·9%, 27·0–44·8%; p<0·0001). Interpretation Conventional or reduced doses of etanercept with methotrexate in patients with moderately active rheumatoid arthritis more effectively maintain low disease activity than does methotrexate alone after withdrawal of etanercept. Funding Pfizer.
Full text
Available for:
GEOZS, IJS, IMTLJ, KILJ, KISLJ, NUK, OILJ, PNG, SAZU, SBCE, SBJE, UL, UM, UPCLJ, UPUK
Summary Background Remission and radiographic non-progression are goals in the treatment of early rheumatoid arthritis. The aim of the combination of methotrexate and etanercept in active early ...rheumatoid arthritis (COMET) trial is to compare remission and radiographic non-progression in patients treated with methotrexate monotherapy or with methotrexate plus etanercept. Methods 542 outpatients who were methotrexate-naive and had had early moderate-to-severe rheumatoid arthritis for 3–24 months were randomly assigned to receive either methotrexate alone titrated up from 7·5 mg a week to a maximum of 20 mg a week by week 8 or methotrexate (same titration) plus etanercept 50 mg a week. Coprimary endpoints at 52 weeks were remission measured with the disease activity score in 28 joints (DAS28) and radiographic non-progression measured with modified total Sharp score. Treatment was allocated with a computerised randomisation and enrolment system, which masked both participants and carers. Analysis was done by modified intention to treat with last observation carried forward for missing data. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov , number NCT00195494 ). Findings 274 participants were randomly assigned to receive combined treatment and 268 methotrexate alone. 132 of 265 (50%, 95% CI 44–56%) patients who took combined treatment and were available for assessment achieved clinical remission compared with 73 of 263 (28%, 23–33%) taking methotrexate alone (effect difference 22·05%, 95%CI 13·96–30·15%, p<0·0001). 487 evaluable patients had severe disease (DAS28>5·1). 196 of 246 (80%, 75–85%) and 135 of 230 (59%, 53–65%), respectively, achieved radiographic non-progression (20·98%, 12·97–29·09%, p<0·0001). Serious adverse events were similar between groups. Interpretation Both clinical remission and radiographic non-progression are achievable goals in patients with early severe rheumatoid arthritis within 1 year of combined treatment with etanercept plus methotrexate. Funding Wyeth Research.
Full text
Available for:
GEOZS, IJS, IMTLJ, KILJ, KISLJ, NUK, OILJ, PNG, SAZU, SBCE, SBJE, UL, UM, UPCLJ, UPUK
The rationale is simple and refer to the association of dose response of antibody titres after vaccination and protection against symptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection.9 In a prospective cohort of ...patients with autoimmune disease, COVID-19 infection occurred in 7.4% of patients (threefold increased risk) and were associated with nonresponders to the vaccine defined by no antibody titres.10 They reported that MTX was associated with lower antibody titres but not with breakthrough infection in contrast with other treatment such as mycophenolate mofetil, rituximab and glucocorticoid.11 In two studies reported by Arumahandi de Silva et al and Stahl et al, age was the major determinant to explain the decrease in the humoral response in MTX-treated patient with RA.12 13 This was recently confirmed in the study published by Frommert et al by a negative impact of age, MTX, type of vaccine and dosage interval on vaccine antibodies response.14 Withholding MTX after the second dose of COVID-19 vaccine resulted in a similar humoral response in a randomised controlled trial.15 Therefore, pausing MTX could be proposed for the second vaccine dose and in patients over 65 years of age. ...even if we could define a validated value, the access to the test and its interpretation will not be feasible for all patients in daily care. The Korean study published by Park et al clearly demonstrated the risk of a rebound of the disease (10.6% RA flare if MTX is interrupted for 2 weeks compared with 5.1% in the MTX maintenance group) and the need to use glucocorticoids.7 A higher rate of flare after the second dose of vaccine was also observed by Araujo et al.5 In the VROOM study, an absolute 25% increased risk of flare with a more frequent use of glucocorticoids in the group pausing MTX was reported.6 This is not in line with the results of a pharmacological study in which pausing temporary MTX for one tot wo weeks has no influence on the intracellular polyglutamate dosage of MTX.20 To limit the risk of flare, factors such as the duration of MTX administration and the dose, the disease activity in the last months, the severity of RA and the comedication should be globally analysed before taking a decision. A recent review published by Xie et al showed a flare rate in RA ranging from 7.8% to 11.3% but the resolution occurred very shortly within 7 days.21 In 2019, the EULAR updated their recommendation for vaccine and one of them indicate that vaccination in patients should be promoted during a quiescent state of disease to avoid flare-ups and favour a good immune response.22 Pausing MTX recommendation could therefore be problematic in patients with early or active disease.
Interleukin-17A (IL-17A) is elaborated by the T helper 17 (T(H)17) subset of T(H) cells and exhibits potent proinflammatory properties in animal models of autoimmunity, including collagen-induced ...arthritis, experimental autoimmune encephalomyelitis, and experimental autoimmune uveitis. To determine whether IL-17A mediates human inflammatory diseases, we investigated the efficacy and safety of AIN457, a human antibody to IL-17A, in patients with psoriasis, rheumatoid arthritis, and chronic noninfectious uveitis. Patients with chronic plaque-type psoriasis (n = 36), rheumatoid arthritis (n = 52), or chronic noninfectious uveitis (n = 16) were enrolled in clinical trials to evaluate the effects of neutralizing IL-17A by AIN457 at doses of 3 to 10 mg/kg, given intravenously. We evaluated efficacy by measuring the psoriasis area and severity index (PASI), the American College of Rheumatology 20% response (ACR20) for rheumatoid arthritis, or the number of responders for uveitis, as defined by either vision improvement or reduction in ocular inflammation or corticosteroid dose. AIN457 treatment induced clinically relevant responses of variable magnitude in patients suffering from each of these diverse immune-mediated diseases. Variable response rates may be due to heterogeneity in small patient populations, differential pathogenic roles of IL-17A in these diseases, and the different involvement or activation of IL-17A-producing cells. The rates of adverse events, including infections, were similar in the AIN457 and placebo groups. These results support a role for IL-17A in the pathophysiology of diverse inflammatory diseases including psoriasis, rheumatoid arthritis, and noninfectious uveitis.
Baricitinib is an oral selective inhibitor of Janus kinase (JAK)1 and JAK2 that has proved effective and well tolerated in the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis (RA) in an extensive programme of ...clinical studies of patients with moderate-to-severe disease. In a phase 2b dose-ranging study of baricitinib in combination with traditional disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs) in RA patients, magnetic resonance imaging showed that baricitinib 2 mg or 4 mg once daily provided dose-dependent suppression of synovitis, osteitis, erosion and cartilage loss at weeks 12 and 24 versus placebo. These findings correlated with clinical outcomes and were confirmed in three phase 3 studies (RA-BEGIN, RA-BEAM and RA-BUILD) using X-rays to assess structural joint damage. In patients naïve to DMARDs (RA-BEGIN study), baricitinib 4 mg once daily as monotherapy or combined with methotrexate produced smaller mean changes in structural joint damage than methotrexate monotherapy at week 24. Differences versus methotrexate were statistically significant for combined therapy. In patients responding inadequately to methotrexate (RA-BEAM study), baricitinib 4 mg plus background methotrexate significantly inhibited structural joint damage at week 24 versus placebo, and the results were comparable to those observed with adalimumab plus background methotrexate. In patients responding inadequately to conventional synthetic DMARDs (csDMARDs; RA-BUILD study), baricitinib 4 mg again significantly inhibited radiographic progression compared with placebo at week 24. Benefits were also observed with baricitinib 2 mg once daily, but the effects of baricitinib 4 mg were more robust. The positive effects of baricitinib 4 mg on radiographic progression continued over 1 and 2 years in the long-term extension study RA-BEYOND, with similar effects to adalimumab and significantly greater effects than placebo. Findings from the phase 3 studies of patients with RA were supported by preclinical studies, which showed that baricitinib has an osteoprotective effect, increasing mineralisation in bone-forming cells. In conclusion, baricitinib 4 mg once daily inhibits radiographic joint damage progression in patients with moderate-to-severe RA who are naïve to DMARDs or respond inadequately to csDMARDs, including methotrexate, and the beneficial effects are similar to those observed with adalimumab.
Rheumatoid Arthritis (RA) often exhibits suboptimal treatment response despite early diagnosis and treatment. This study aimed to analyze Early Rheumatoid Arthritis (ERA) synovial biopsies through ...histology and immunohistochemistry (IHC) to identify predictive factors for treatment response to Methotrexate (MTX).OBJECTIVERheumatoid Arthritis (RA) often exhibits suboptimal treatment response despite early diagnosis and treatment. This study aimed to analyze Early Rheumatoid Arthritis (ERA) synovial biopsies through histology and immunohistochemistry (IHC) to identify predictive factors for treatment response to Methotrexate (MTX).140 ERA patients from the UCLouvain Arthritis Cohort underwent synovial biopsy and were monitored after initiating Disease-Modifying Antirheumatic Drug (DMARD) therapy. Histological features Synovial Hyperplasia, Fibrinoid Necrosis (FN), Hypervascularization and Inflammatory Infiltrate and IHC (CD3, CD20, CD138, CD68) were each semi-quantitatively assessed on a 0-3 scale with 7 levels.METHODS140 ERA patients from the UCLouvain Arthritis Cohort underwent synovial biopsy and were monitored after initiating Disease-Modifying Antirheumatic Drug (DMARD) therapy. Histological features Synovial Hyperplasia, Fibrinoid Necrosis (FN), Hypervascularization and Inflammatory Infiltrate and IHC (CD3, CD20, CD138, CD68) were each semi-quantitatively assessed on a 0-3 scale with 7 levels.A strong association was observed between synovial CD68 and Fibrinoid Necrosis scores r = 0.44 (0.27 - 0.56); p < 0.0001. CD68 correlated with C-Reactive Protein (CRP), DAS28, SDAI and CDAI. Fibrinoid Necrosis score correlated with CRP and DAS28. Patients were then categorized as CD68NecrosisHIGH (CD68 + Necrosis ≥ 3) and CD68NecrosisLOW (CD68 + Necrosis < 3). CD68NecrosisHIGH exhibited higher pre-treatment disease activity 5.48 (1.6) versus 4.8 (1.7); p = 0.03 and a greater fall in DAS28 1.99 (2.06) versus 1.1 (2.27), p = 0.03, SDAI 21.45 (IQR 23.3) versus 11.65 (IQR 17.5); p = 0.003 and CDAI 16 14.9 versus 10.5 (20.1), p = 0.04. CD68NecrosisHIGH patients had a higher EULAR Moderate/Good Response rate. CD68Necrosis score was incorporated into a probability matrix model together with clinical features (SJC44 and DAS28) to predict achieving a Moderate/Good EULAR Response Criteria at 3 months with a good performance (AUC 0.724).RESULTSA strong association was observed between synovial CD68 and Fibrinoid Necrosis scores r = 0.44 (0.27 - 0.56); p < 0.0001. CD68 correlated with C-Reactive Protein (CRP), DAS28, SDAI and CDAI. Fibrinoid Necrosis score correlated with CRP and DAS28. Patients were then categorized as CD68NecrosisHIGH (CD68 + Necrosis ≥ 3) and CD68NecrosisLOW (CD68 + Necrosis < 3). CD68NecrosisHIGH exhibited higher pre-treatment disease activity 5.48 (1.6) versus 4.8 (1.7); p = 0.03 and a greater fall in DAS28 1.99 (2.06) versus 1.1 (2.27), p = 0.03, SDAI 21.45 (IQR 23.3) versus 11.65 (IQR 17.5); p = 0.003 and CDAI 16 14.9 versus 10.5 (20.1), p = 0.04. CD68NecrosisHIGH patients had a higher EULAR Moderate/Good Response rate. CD68Necrosis score was incorporated into a probability matrix model together with clinical features (SJC44 and DAS28) to predict achieving a Moderate/Good EULAR Response Criteria at 3 months with a good performance (AUC 0.724).FN and CD68 + in ERA synovial biopsies identify patients with higher disease activity and predict a better treatment response at three months. A model including synovial CD68 and fibrinoid necrosis with baseline clinical features predicts EULAR response at 3 months.CONCLUSIONFN and CD68 + in ERA synovial biopsies identify patients with higher disease activity and predict a better treatment response at three months. A model including synovial CD68 and fibrinoid necrosis with baseline clinical features predicts EULAR response at 3 months.
PDF
