31
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study to evaluate the addition of methotrexate to etanercept in patients with moderate to severe plaque psoriasis

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Background

          Etanercept plus methotrexate combination therapy has not been adequately investigated in psoriasis.

          Objectives

          To evaluate etanercept plus methotrexate vs. etanercept monotherapy in patients with moderate to severe plaque psoriasis who had not failed prior methotrexate or tumour necrosis factor-inhibitor therapy.

          Methods

          Patients received etanercept 50 mg twice weekly for 12 weeks followed by 50 mg once weekly for 12 weeks and were randomized 1 : 1 to receive methotrexate (7·5–15 mg weekly) or placebo. The primary endpoint was the proportion of patients achieving ≥75% improvement in Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI 75) at week 24.

          Results

          In total, 239 patients were enrolled in each arm. PASI 75 was significantly higher at week 24 for the combination therapy group compared with the monotherapy group (77·3% vs. 60·3%; P < 0·0001). Other PASI improvement scores at week 12 [PASI 75, 70·2% vs. 54·3% ( P = 0·01); PASI 50, 92·4% vs. 83·8% ( P = 0·01); and PASI 90, 34·0% vs. 23·1% ( P = 0·03)] showed similar results as did week 24 PASI 50 (91·6% vs. 84·6%; P = 0·01) and PASI 90 (53·8% vs. 34·2%; P = 0·01). Significantly more patients receiving combination therapy than monotherapy had static Physician’s Global Assessment of clear/almost clear at week 12 (65·5% vs. 47·0%; P = 0·01) and week 24 (71·8% vs. 54·3%; P = 0·01). Adverse events (AEs) were reported in 74·9% and 59·8% of combination therapy and monotherapy groups, respectively; three serious AEs were reported in each arm.

          Conclusions

          Combination therapy with etanercept plus methotrexate had acceptable tolerability and increased efficacy compared with etanercept monotherapy in patients with moderate to severe psoriasis.

          Related collections

          Most cited references35

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Therapeutic effect of the combination of etanercept and methotrexate compared with each treatment alone in patients with rheumatoid arthritis: double-blind randomised controlled trial.

          Etanercept and methotrexate are effective in the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis but no data exist on concurrent initiation or use of the combination compared with either drug alone. We aimed to assess combination treatment with etanercept and methotrexate versus the monotherapies in patients with rheumatoid arthritis. In a double-blind, randomised, clinical efficacy, safety, and radiographic study, 686 patients with active rheumatoid arthritis were randomly allocated to treatment with etanercept 25 mg (subcutaneously twice a week), oral methotrexate (up to 20 mg every week), or the combination. Clinical response was assessed by criteria of the American College of Rheumatology (ACR). The primary efficacy endpoint was the numeric index of the ACR response (ACR-N) area under the curve (AUC) over the first 24 weeks. The primary radiographic endpoint was change from baseline to week 52 in total joint damage and was assessed with the modified Sharp score. Analysis was by intention to treat. Four patients did not receive any drug; thus 682 were studied. ACR-N AUC at 24 weeks was greater for the combination group compared with etanercept alone and methotrexate alone (18.3%-years [95% CI 17.1-19.6] vs 14.7%-years [13.5-16.0], p<0.0001, and 12.2%-years [11.0-13.4], p<0.0001; respectively). The mean difference in ACR-N AUC between combination and methotrexate alone was 6.1 (95% CI 4.5-7.8, p<0.0001) and between etanercept and methotrexate was 2.5 (0.8-4.2, p=0.0034). The combination was more efficacious than methotrexate or etanercept alone in retardation of joint damage (mean total Sharp score -0.54 [95% CI -1.00 to -0.07] vs 2.80 [1.08 to 4.51], p<0.0001, and 0.52 [-0.10 to 1.15], p=0.0006; respectively). The mean difference in total Sharp score between combination and methotrexate alone was -3.34 (95% CI -4.86 to -1.81, p<0.0001) and between etanercept and methotrexate was -27 (-3.81 to -0.74, p=0.0469). The number of patients reporting infections or adverse events was similar in all groups. The combination of etanercept and methotrexate was significantly better in reduction of disease activity, improvement of functional disability, and retardation of radiographic progression compared with methotrexate or etanercept alone. These findings bring us closer to achievement of remission and repair of structural damage in rheumatoid arthritis.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Comparison of methotrexate monotherapy with a combination of methotrexate and etanercept in active, early, moderate to severe rheumatoid arthritis (COMET): a randomised, double-blind, parallel treatment trial.

            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. 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). 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 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. 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. Wyeth Research.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Guidelines of care for the management of psoriasis and psoriatic arthritis: section 6. Guidelines of care for the treatment of psoriasis and psoriatic arthritis: case-based presentations and evidence-based conclusions.

              Psoriasis is a common, chronic, inflammatory, multisystem disease with predominantly skin and joint manifestations affecting approximately 2% of the population. In the first 5 parts of the American Academy of Dermatology Psoriasis Guidelines of Care, we have presented evidence supporting the use of topical treatments, phototherapy, traditional systemic agents, and biological therapies for patients with psoriasis and psoriatic arthritis. In this sixth and final section of the Psoriasis Guidelines of Care, we will present cases to illustrate how to practically use these guidelines in specific clinical scenarios. We will describe the approach to treating patients with psoriasis across the entire spectrum of this fascinating disease from mild to moderate to severe, with and without psoriatic arthritis, based on the 5 prior published guidelines. Although specific therapeutic recommendations are given for each of the cases presented, it is important that treatment be tailored to meet individual patients' needs. In addition, we will update the prior 5 guidelines and address gaps in research and care that currently exist, while making suggestions for further studies that could be performed to help address these limitations in our knowledge base. Copyright © 2010 American Academy of Dermatology, Inc. Published by Mosby, Inc. All rights reserved.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Br J Dermatol
                Br. J. Dermatol
                bjd
                The British Journal of Dermatology
                Blackwell Publishing Ltd (Oxford, UK )
                0007-0963
                1365-2133
                September 2012
                : 167
                : 3
                : 649-657
                Affiliations
                [1 ]Tufts Medical Center Boston, MA, U.S.A.
                [2 ]Dalhousie University Halifax, NS, Canada
                [3 ]University of Connecticut School of Medicine Farmington, CT, U.S.A.
                [4 ]Probity Medical Research Waterloo, ON, Canada
                [5 ]Amgen Inc. Thousand Oaks, CA, U.S.A.
                Author notes
                Alice B. Gottlieb. E-mail: agottlieb@ 123456tuftsmedicalcenter.org

                Funding sources This study was funded by Immunex Corporation, a wholly owned subsidiary of Amgen Inc, and by Wyeth, which was acquired by Pfizer Inc in October 2009.

                Conflicts of interest statements for the authors are listed in the Appendix.

                Article
                10.1111/j.1365-2133.2012.11015.x
                3504074
                22533447
                0396e065-af05-4328-ac65-d5c76b2335a0
                © 2012 The Authors. BJD © 2012 British Association of Dermatologists

                Re-use of this article is permitted in accordance with the Creative Commons Deed, Attribution 2.5, which does not permit commercial exploitation.

                History
                : 15 April 2012
                Categories
                Original Articles

                Dermatology
                Dermatology

                Comments

                Comment on this article