| 2. |
- Hetland, M. L., et al.
(författare)
-
Active conventional treatment and three different biological treatments in early rheumatoid arthritis: phase IV investigator initiated, randomised, observer blinded clinical trial
- 2020
-
Ingår i: Bmj-British Medical Journal. - : BMJ. - 1756-1833. ; 371
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- 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 intraarticular 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.
|
|
| 3. |
- Dijkshoorn, B, et al.
(författare)
-
PROFOUND ANTICOAGULANT EFFECTS OF INITIAL ANTIRHEUMATIC TREATMENTS IN EARLY RHEUMATOID ARTHRITIS PATIENTS: A NORD-STAR SPIN-OFF STUDY
- 2022
-
Ingår i: ANNALS OF THE RHEUMATIC DISEASES. - : BMJ. - 0003-4967 .- 1468-2060. ; 81, s. 40-41
-
Konferensbidrag (övrigt vetenskapligt/konstnärligt)abstract
- Patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) are at an increased risk of venous thromboembolism. Thus far, there have not been any comparative studies investigating the effects of initial antirheumatic treatments in (very) early RA patients.ObjectivesTo assess the effects of different initial treatments on hemostatic parameters in patients with early RA.MethodsNORD-STAR is an international, multicentre, open-label, assessor-blinded, phase 4 study where patients with newly diagnosed RA started methotrexate (MTX) and were randomised 1:1:1:1 to a) conventional treatment (either prednisolone tapered to 5mg/day, or sulfasalazine combined with hydroxychloroquine and intra-articular corticosteroids), b) certolizumab pegol, c) abatacept, d) tocilizumab1. This study is a spin-off from the main NORD-STAR study extensively investigating hemostatic system in 24 per protocol consecutive Dutch participants at baseline, 12 weeks and 24 weeks after the start of the treatment. Statistical analysis was done using paired samples t-test in SPSS version 28.ResultsThe mean age of investigated patients was 51.8 (± 12.7) years and 58.3% were female. At baseline patients had an average DAS28 score of 4.6 (± 0.9) and had elevated levels of investigated coagulation biomarkers: Factor 1 + 2, fibrinogen, D-dimer and parameters of the two global hemostatic assays, i.e. endogenous thrombin potential (ETP) and overall hemostasis potential (OHP). These biomarkers decreased significantly at 12 and 24 weeks in patients in all groups (Table 1). Overall fibrinolytic potential (OFP) was decreased and clot lysis time (CLT) was prolonged at baseline, demonstrating impaired fibrinolytic activity in early RA. The reduction of coagulation parameters was significantly higher in biological treatment arms in comparison to the standard MTX treatment arm. In addition, tocilizumab was more effective compared to certolizumab and abatacept, (Figure 1), which was expected considering the direct inhibitory effect of this drug on the IL-6 synthesis and consequently the coagulation activation as well. After 24 weeks of treatment with methotrexate and tocilizumab, the average fibrinogen of patients was reduced by 63% vs 31% and 36% in the certolizumab and abatacept groups, respectively. The changes in DAS-28 and the changes in fibrinogen had a correlation of 0.385 which did not reach statistical significance.Table 1.Measurements are marked with * if p<0.05, ** if p<0.01 and *** if p<0.001BaselineW12W24Factor 1 + 2 (pmol/L)270.25 (149.4)190.36 (108.6)**179.52 (85.3)***Fibrinogen (g/L)4.64 (1.5)3.61 (1.6)**2.63 (1.2)***D-dimer (mg/L)2.17 (3.0)0.33 (0.23)**0.29 (0.2)**OHP (Abs-sum)157.38 (64.9)120.62 (68.7)*100.49 (53.8)***OCP (Abs-sum)369.52 (58.8)305.04 (101.7)*275.91 (83.1)***OFP (%)57.97 (13.1)63.20 (12.7)*65.25 (11.4)***Lag time (s)304.5 (71.1)306.8 (71.8)312.7 (65.4)Slope0.07 (0.02)0.066 (0.03)0.094 (0.12)Max Abs1.17 (0.3)1.00 (0.4)*0.91 (0.3)**CLT (s)1405 (356)1317 (377)1231 (320)**ETP (nM*min)1480 (471)1395 (395)*1337 (429)*Peak (nM)231 (78)223 (68)223 (74)Lagtime (min)4.06 (2.1)3.28 (1.2)**2.87 (1.0)***ttPeak (min)7.40 (2.2)6.61 (1.5)*6.13 (1.4)**Figure 1.ConclusionOur results indicate an enhanced coagulation and fibrinolytic impairment in newly diagnosed RA patients. Effective antirheumatic treatments reduce this hemostatic imbalance, with significantly more pronounced effects of biologic drugs compared to conventional (MTX+glucocorticoids) treatment.References[1]Hetland M et al. BMJ. 2020Disclosure of InterestsBas Dijkshoorn: None declared, Aleksandra Antovic: None declared, Daisy Vedder: None declared, Anna Rudin: None declared, Dan Nordström Speakers bureau: Novartis, UCB, Consultant of: Abbvie, BMS, Lilly, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, UCB, Björn Gudbjornsson Speakers bureau: Amgen and Novartis - not related to this work, Consultant of: Novartis - not related to this work, Kristina Lend: None declared, Till Uhlig Speakers bureau: Grünenthal, Novartis, Consultant of: Grünenthal, Novartis, Grant/research support from: NORDFORSK, Espen A Haavardsholm Consultant of: Pfizer, AbbVie, Celgene, Novartis, Janssen, Gilead, Eli-Lilly, UCB, Grant/research support from: NORDFORSK, Norwegian Regional Health Authorities, South-Eastern Norway Regional Health Authority, Gerdur Gröndal: None declared, Merete Lund Hetland Consultant of: Abbvie, Biogen, BMS, Celltrion, Eli Lilly, Janssen Biologics B.V, Lundbeck Fonden, MSD, Pfizer, Roche, Samsung Biopies, Sandoz, Novartis, Grant/research support from: Abbvie, Biogen, BMS, Celltrion, Eli Lilly, Janssen Biologics B.V, Lundbeck Fonden, MSD, Pfizer, Roche, Samsung Biopies, Sandoz, Novartis, Marte Heiberg: None declared, Mikkel Østergaard Speakers bureau: Abbvie, BMS, Celgene, Eli-Lilly, Galapagos, Gilead, Janssen, Merck, Novartis, Orion, Pfizer, Roche and UCB, Consultant of: Abbvie, BMS, Boehringer-Ingelheim, Celgene, Eli-Lilly, Hospira, Janssen, Merck, Novartis, Novo, Orion, Pfizer, Regeneron, Roche, Sandoz, Sanofi and UCB, Grant/research support from: Abbvie, Amgen, BMS, Merck, Celgene and Novartis, Kim Hørslev-Petersen: None declared, Jon Lampa Speakers bureau: Pfizer, Janssen, Novartis, Ronald van Vollenhoven Speakers bureau: Abbvie, Galapagos, GSK, Janssen, Pfizer, R-Pharma, UCB, Consultant of: Abbvie, AstraZeneca, Biogen, BMS, Galapagos, Janssen, Miltenyi, Pifzer, UCB, Grant/research support from: BMS, GSK, UCB, Michael Nurmohamed Speakers bureau: Abbvie, Janssen, Celgene, Consultant of: Abbvie, Grant/research support from: Abbvie, Amgen, Pfizer, Galapagos, BMS.
|
|
