-
BMJ (Clinical Research Ed.) Dec 2020To evaluate and compare benefits and harms of three biological treatments with different modes of action versus active conventional treatment in patients with early... (Randomized Controlled Trial)
Randomized Controlled Trial
Active conventional treatment and three different biological treatments in early rheumatoid arthritis: phase IV investigator initiated, randomised, observer blinded clinical trial.
OBJECTIVE
To evaluate and compare benefits and harms of three biological treatments with different modes of action versus active conventional treatment in patients with early rheumatoid arthritis.
DESIGN
Investigator initiated, randomised, open label, blinded assessor, multiarm, phase IV study.
SETTING
Twenty nine rheumatology departments in Sweden, Denmark, Norway, Finland, the Netherlands, and Iceland between 2012 and 2018.
PARTICIPANTS
Patients aged 18 years and older with treatment naive rheumatoid arthritis, symptom duration less than 24 months, moderate to severe disease activity, and rheumatoid factor or anti-citrullinated protein antibody positivity, or increased C reactive protein.
INTERVENTIONS
Randomised 1:1:1:1, stratified by country, sex, and anti-citrullinated protein antibody status. All participants started methotrexate combined with (a) active conventional treatment (either prednisolone tapered to 5 mg/day, or sulfasalazine combined with hydroxychloroquine and intra-articular corticosteroids), (b) certolizumab pegol, (c) abatacept, or (d) tocilizumab.
MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES
The primary outcome was adjusted clinical disease activity index remission (CDAI≤2.8) at 24 weeks with active conventional treatment as the reference. Key secondary outcomes and analyses included CDAI remission at 12 weeks and over time, other remission criteria, a non-inferiority analysis, and harms.
RESULTS
812 patients underwent randomisation. The mean age was 54.3 years (standard deviation 14.7) and 68.8% were women. Baseline disease activity score of 28 joints was 5.0 (standard deviation 1.1). Adjusted 24 week CDAI remission rates were 42.7% (95% confidence interval 36.1% to 49.3%) for active conventional treatment, 46.5% (39.9% to 53.1%) for certolizumab pegol, 52.0% (45.5% to 58.6%) for abatacept, and 42.1% (35.3% to 48.8%) for tocilizumab. Corresponding absolute differences were 3.9% (95% confidence interval -5.5% to 13.2%) for certolizumab pegol, 9.4% (0.1% to 18.7%) for abatacept, and -0.6% (-10.1% to 8.9%) for tocilizumab. Key secondary outcomes showed no major differences among the four treatments. Differences in CDAI remission rates for active conventional treatment versus certolizumab pegol and tocilizumab, but not abatacept, remained within the prespecified non-inferiority margin of 15% (per protocol population). The total number of serious adverse events was 13 (percentage of patients who experienced at least one event 5.6%) for active conventional treatment, 20 (8.4%) for certolizumab pegol, 10 (4.9%) for abatacept, and 10 (4.9%) for tocilizumab. Eleven patients treated with abatacept stopped treatment early compared with 20-23 patients in the other arms.
CONCLUSIONS
All four treatments achieved high remission rates. Higher CDAI remission rate was observed for abatacept versus active conventional treatment, but not for certolizumab pegol or tocilizumab versus active conventional treatment. Other remission rates were similar across treatments. Non-inferiority analysis indicated that active conventional treatment was non-inferior to certolizumab pegol and tocilizumab, but not to abatacept. The results highlight the efficacy and safety of active conventional treatment based on methotrexate combined with corticosteroids, with nominally better results for abatacept, in treatment naive early rheumatoid arthritis.
TRIAL REGISTRATION
EudraCT2011-004720-35, NCT01491815.
Topics: Abatacept; Adult; Aged; Anti-Citrullinated Protein Antibodies; Antibodies, Monoclonal, Humanized; Antirheumatic Agents; Arthritis, Rheumatoid; Biological Products; C-Reactive Protein; Certolizumab Pegol; Denmark; Drug Therapy, Combination; Early Medical Intervention; Female; Finland; Glucocorticoids; Humans; Hydroxychloroquine; Injections, Intra-Articular; Male; Methotrexate; Middle Aged; Netherlands; Norway; Prednisolone; Rheumatoid Factor; Severity of Illness Index; Single-Blind Method; Sulfasalazine; Sweden; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 33268527
DOI: 10.1136/bmj.m4328 -
Cancer Discovery Mar 2021Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI) targeting CTLA4 or PD-1/PD-L1 have transformed cancer therapy but are associated with immune-related adverse events, including...
Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI) targeting CTLA4 or PD-1/PD-L1 have transformed cancer therapy but are associated with immune-related adverse events, including myocarditis. Here, we report a robust preclinical mouse model of ICI-associated myocarditis in which monoallelic loss of in the context of complete genetic absence of leads to premature death in approximately half of mice. Premature death results from myocardial infiltration by T cells and macrophages and severe ECG abnormalities, closely recapitulating the clinical and pathologic hallmarks of ICI-associated myocarditis observed in patients. Using this model, we show that and functionally interact in a gene dosage-dependent manner, providing a mechanism by which myocarditis arises with increased frequency in the setting of combination ICI therapy. We demonstrate that intervention with CTLA4-Ig (abatacept) is sufficient to ameliorate disease progression and additionally provide a case series of patients in which abatacept mitigates the fulminant course of ICI myocarditis. SIGNIFICANCE: We provide a preclinical model of ICI-associated myocarditis which recapitulates this clinical syndrome. Using this model, we demonstrate that CTLA4 and PD-1 (ICI targets) functionally interact for myocarditis development and that intervention with CTLA4-Ig (abatacept) attenuates myocarditis, providing mechanistic rationale and preclinical support for therapeutic clinical studies...
Topics: Animals; Biomarkers, Tumor; Cardiotoxicity; Disease Management; Disease Models, Animal; Disease Susceptibility; Electrocardiography; Humans; Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors; Mice; Molecular Targeted Therapy; Myocarditis; Neoplasms
PubMed: 33257470
DOI: 10.1158/2159-8290.CD-20-0856 -
American Journal of Transplantation :... Jul 2022
Topics: Abatacept; Graft Rejection; Graft Survival; Immunoconjugates; Immunosuppressive Agents; Motivation
PubMed: 35543181
DOI: 10.1111/ajt.17048 -
JAMA Network Open Mar 2023Current data are lacking regarding the risk of biologic and targeted synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drug (b/tsDMARD) use on the development of interstitial...
IMPORTANCE
Current data are lacking regarding the risk of biologic and targeted synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drug (b/tsDMARD) use on the development of interstitial lung disease (ILD) in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA).
OBJECTIVE
To determine the risk of developing ILD in patients with RA undergoing treatment with different b/tsDMARDs.
DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS
Retrospective cohort study using claims data from the Optum Clinformatics Data Mart between December 2003 and December 2019. Adult patients with RA, 1 year or more of continuous enrollment, treatment with a b/tsDMARD of interest, and without preexisting ILD were included. Data were analyzed from October 2021 to April 2022.
EXPOSURES
New administration of adalimumab, abatacept, rituximab, tocilizumab, or tofacitinib.
MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES
Crude incidence rates (IRs) for the development of ILD were calculated. The risk of ILD across different b/tsDMARDs was compared using Cox-regression models. A sensitivity analysis using a prevalent new-user cohort design compared patients treated with tofacitinib and adalimumab.
RESULTS
A total of 28 559 patients with RA (mean [SD] age 55.6 [13.7] years; 22 158 female [78%]) were treated with adalimumab (13 326 patients), abatacept (5676 patients), rituximab (5444 patients), tocilizumab (2548 patients), or tofacitinib (1565 patients). Crude IRs per 1000 person-years for ILD were 3.43 (95% CI 2.85-4.09) for adalimumab, 4.46 (95% CI 3.44-5.70) for abatacept, 6.15 (95% CI 4.76-7.84) for rituximab, 5.05 (95% CI 3.47-7.12) for tocilizumab, and 1.47 (95% CI 0.54-3.27) for tofacitinib. After multiple adjustments, compared with patients treated with adalimumab, patients treated with tofacitinib had a lower risk of ILD (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR] 0.31; 95% CI, 0.12-0.78; P = .009). In a prevalent new-user cohort analysis, patients treated with tofacitinib had 68% reduced risk of ILD compared with adalimumab (aHR 0.32; 95% CI 0.13-0.82; P < .001). In an adjusted model, there was a 69% reduced risk of ILD in patients treated with tofacitinib compared with patients treated with adalimumab.
CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE
In this retrospective cohort of patients with RA, patients treated with tofacitinib had the lowest incidence of ILD compared with patients treated with all bDMARDs evaluated, and patients treated with tofacitinib had a reduced risk of ILD compared with patients treated with adalimumab after adjusting for important covariates. Additional prospective studies are needed to better understand the role tofacitinib may play in preventing ILD in patients with RA. These results, while significant, should be interpreted with caution given the fairly small sample size of the tofacitinib group.
Topics: Adult; Humans; Female; Middle Aged; Antirheumatic Agents; Abatacept; Rituximab; Retrospective Studies; Incidence; Adalimumab; Arthritis, Rheumatoid; Lung Diseases, Interstitial; Biological Products
PubMed: 36939701
DOI: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2023.3640 -
BioDrugs : Clinical Immunotherapeutics,... Jan 2023Published data on the safety of biologics other than tumor necrosis factor (TNF) inhibitors during pregnancy are limited.
Fetal and Neonatal Adverse Drug Reactions Associated with Biologics Taken During Pregnancy by Women with Autoimmune Diseases: Insights from an Analysis of the World Health Organization Pharmacovigilance Database (VigiBase).
INTRODUCTION
Published data on the safety of biologics other than tumor necrosis factor (TNF) inhibitors during pregnancy are limited.
OBJECTIVE
The aim was to detect pharmacovigilance signals for fetal and neonatal adverse drug reactions (ADRs) to biologics taken by pregnant women with autoimmune diseases.
METHODS
We performed a disproportionality analysis of the World Health Organization's VigiBase pharmacovigilance database from 1968 to June 1, 2021. Data were collected in June 2021. By using terms for different hierarchical levels of the Medical Dictionary for Regulatory Activities, we selected the following fetal or neonatal ADRs: stillbirth, premature birth, low birth weight, small for gestational age, and congenital malformations. The frequency of all identified ADRs for biologics of interest (adalimumab, infliximab, golimumab, certolizumab, etanercept, anakinra, canakinumab, tocilizumab, sarilumab, ustekinumab, guselkumab, secukinumab, ixekizumab, belimumab, abatacept, and rituximab) was compared with that of all other reports for all other drugs and quoted as the reporting odds ratio (ROR) [95% confidence interval]. Reports with known concomitant use of teratogenic drugs were excluded from the main analysis. Other analyses included ROR stratifications by therapeutic indication in the periods 1968-2021 and 2001-2021, and an analysis after excluding reports with steroids.
RESULTS
In the main analysis, the RORs were particularly high for musculoskeletal malformations with anakinra (7.18 [3.50-14.73]), canakinumab (19.54 [12.82-29.79]), and abatacept (5.09 [2.77-9.33]), and for immune system disorders with canakinumab (347.88 [217.9-555.50]) and rituximab (9.27 [2.95-29.15]). After the exclusion of reports with steroids, the ROR was significant for neonatal infections with belimumab (28.49 [5.75-141.25]).
CONCLUSION
We identified possible associations with some adverse fetal and neonatal outcomes, suggesting that vigilance is required when prescribing certain biologics during pregnancy.
Topics: Pregnancy; Infant, Newborn; Female; Humans; Rituximab; Abatacept; Biological Products; Interleukin 1 Receptor Antagonist Protein; Pharmacovigilance; Autoimmune Diseases; World Health Organization; Drug-Related Side Effects and Adverse Reactions; Adverse Drug Reaction Reporting Systems
PubMed: 36401769
DOI: 10.1007/s40259-022-00564-4 -
Rheumatology (Oxford, England) May 2022To estimate the occurrence and relative risks of first-ever-incident non-cutaneous cancer overall and for 16 sites in patients with RA treated with biologic and targeted... (Observational Study)
Observational Study
OBJECTIVE
To estimate the occurrence and relative risks of first-ever-incident non-cutaneous cancer overall and for 16 sites in patients with RA treated with biologic and targeted synthetic DMARDs (b/tsDMARDs), by time since treatment start, attained age, and duration of active treatment.
METHODS
This is an observational nationwide and population-based cohort study of patients with RA (n = 69 308), treated with TNF inhibitors (TNFi; adalimumab, certolizumab, etanercept, golimumab, infliximab) or other b/tsDMARDs (abatacept, rituximab, baricitinib, tofacitinib and tocilizumab) compared with RA patients not treated with b/tsDMARDs, and matched general population referents (n = 109 532), 2001-2018. The study was based on prospectively collected data from the Swedish Rheumatology Quality Register and from other registers, linked to the national Swedish Cancer Register. Incidence rates and hazard ratios were estimated via Cox regression adjusted for co-morbidities and other health characteristics.
RESULTS
Based on 8633 incident cancers among RA patients, the overall relative risk of cancer with TNFi [hazard ratio (HR) = 1.0] was neither increased nor did it change with time since treatment start, duration of active treatment, or attained age, when compared with b/tsDMARD-naïve RA. For other b/tsDMARDs, we noted no consistent signal of increased overall risks (HRs ranged from 1.0 to 1.2), but there were statistically significant estimates above 1 for abatacept with 2-5 years of active treatment, for older age groups, and between several of the bDMARDs and urinary tract cancer.
CONCLUSION
TNFis, as used long term in clinical practice against RA, are not linked to increased risks for cancer overall. For other b/tsDMARDs, and for site-specific risks, our results are generally reassuring but contain signals that call for replication.
Topics: Abatacept; Aged; Antirheumatic Agents; Arthritis, Rheumatoid; Biological Products; Cohort Studies; Humans; Neoplasms
PubMed: 34324640
DOI: 10.1093/rheumatology/keab570 -
RMD Open Feb 2020Biologic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (bDMARDs) and targeted synthetic DMARDs are used in patients with psoriatic arthritis (PsA), but few studies directly... (Comparative Study)
Comparative Study Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Biologic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (bDMARDs) and targeted synthetic DMARDs are used in patients with psoriatic arthritis (PsA), but few studies directly compare their clinical efficacy. In such situations, network meta-analysis (NMA) can inform evidence-based decision-making.
OBJECTIVE
To evaluate the comparative efficacy and safety of approved bDMARDs in patients with PsA.
METHODS
Bayesian NMA was conducted to compare the clinical efficacy of bDMARDs at weeks 12‒16 in bDMARD-naïve patients with PsA in terms of American College of Rheumatology (ACR) criteria, Psoriatic Arthritis Response Criteria (PsARC) and Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI). Safety end points were evaluated in the overall mixed population of bDMARD-naive and bDMARD-experienced patients.
RESULTS
For ACR, all treatments except abatacept were statistically superior to placebo. Infliximab was most effective, followed by golimumab and etanercept, which were statistically superior to most other treatments. Ixekizumab 80 mg every 2 weeks (Q2W) was statistically superior to abatacept subcutaneous, apremilast and both regimens of ustekinumab; similar findings were observed for ixekizumab 80 mg Q4W. For PsARC response, ixekizumab did not significantly differ from other therapies, except for golimumab, infliximab and etanercept, which were superior to most other agents including ixekizumab. For PASI response, infliximab was numerically most effective, but was not statistically superior to ixekizumab, which was the next best performing agent. Analysis of safety end points identified few differences between treatments.
CONCLUSION
Our NMA confirms the efficacy and acceptable safety profile of bDMARDs in patients with active PsA. There were generally few statistically significant differences between most treatments.
Topics: Abatacept; Adult; Antibodies, Monoclonal, Humanized; Antirheumatic Agents; Arthritis, Psoriatic; Biological Products; Clinical Decision-Making; Humans; Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors; Interleukin-17; Network Meta-Analysis; Placebos; Safety; Severity of Illness Index; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 32094304
DOI: 10.1136/rmdopen-2019-001117 -
Journal For Immunotherapy of Cancer Apr 2022Immune-checkpoint inhibitors (ICI) have revolutionized cancer therapy but are associated with infrequent but lethal myocarditis, for which management remains uncertain....
Immune-checkpoint inhibitors (ICI) have revolutionized cancer therapy but are associated with infrequent but lethal myocarditis, for which management remains uncertain. Abatacept, a CTLA-4 fusion protein targeting CD86 on antigen presenting cells and leading to global T-cell anergy, has been described as a potential treatment in individual reports. Yet, abatacept treatment dosage, schedule and optimal combination with other immunosuppressive therapies are unclear. We describe a 25-year-old man who developed pembrolizumab (anti-PD1)-induced myocarditis 14 days after first injection for thymoma treatment, which deteriorated into cardiogenic shock, with sustained ventricular arrhythmia, requiring urgent extracorporeal life support implantation, despite prompt initiation of corticosteroids and mycophenolate-mofetil. Using a strategy of serial measurement ensuring with a target of >80% CD86 receptor occupancy on circulating monocytes, abatacept dose was adjusted and combined with ruxolitinib and methylprednisolone. This strategy resulted in high-dose of abatacept: 60 mg/kg in three doses (20 mg/kg each) within the first 10 days, followed by two doses. Clinical improvement occurred within 7 days, with resolution of systolic cardiac dysfunction, and ventricular arrhythmias resulting in successful discharge from hospital. We reversed a case of nearly lethal ICI-myocarditis, using specific patient-dose adjusted abatacept, which may serve as basis for personalized treatment of patients with severe ICI-adverse events. Trial registration number: NCT04294771.
Topics: Abatacept; Adult; Humans; Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors; Male; Myocarditis; Nitriles; Pyrazoles; Pyrimidines
PubMed: 35383117
DOI: 10.1136/jitc-2022-004699