38
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Discontinuation of infliximab after attaining low disease activity in patients with rheumatoid arthritis: RRR (remission induction by Remicade in RA) study

      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

          Tumour necrosis factor (TNF) inhibitors enable tight control of disease activity in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA). Discontinuation of TNF inhibitors after acquisition of low disease activity (LDA) is important for safety and economic reasons.

          Objective

          To determine whether infliximab might be discontinued after achievement of LDA in patients with RA and to evaluate progression of articular destruction during the discontinuation.

          Methods

          114 patients with RA who had received infliximab treatment, and whose Disease Activity Score, including a 28-joint count (DAS28) was <3.2 (LDA) for 24 weeks, were studied.

          Results

          The mean disease duration of the 114 patients was 5.9 years, mean DAS28 5.5 and mean modified total Sharp score (mTSS) 63.3. After maintaining LDA for >24 weeks by infliximab treatment, the drug was discontinued and DAS28 in 102 patients was evaluated at year 1. Fifty-six patients (55%) continued to have DAS28<3.2 and 43% reached DAS<2.6 at 1 year after discontinuing infliximab. For 46 patients remission induction by Remicade in RA (RRR) failed: disease in 29 patients flared within 1 year and DAS28 was >3.2 at year 1 in 17 patients. Yearly progression of mTSS (ΔTSS) remained <0.5 in 67% and 44% of the RRR-achieved and RRR-failed groups, respectively. The estimated ΔmTSS was 0.3 and 1.6 and Health Assessment Questionnaire-Disability Index was 0.174 and 0.614 in the RRR-achieved and RRR-failed groups, respectively, 1 year after the discontinuation.

          Conclusion

          After attaining LDA by infliximab, 56 (55%) of the 102 patients with RA were able to discontinue infliximab for >1 year without progression of radiological articular destruction.

          Related collections

          Most cited references18

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

          The American Rheumatism Association 1987 revised criteria for the classification of rheumatoid arthritis.

          The revised criteria for the classification of rheumatoid arthritis (RA) were formulated from a computerized analysis of 262 contemporary, consecutively studied patients with RA and 262 control subjects with rheumatic diseases other than RA (non-RA). The new criteria are as follows: 1) morning stiffness in and around joints lasting at least 1 hour before maximal improvement; 2) soft tissue swelling (arthritis) of 3 or more joint areas observed by a physician; 3) swelling (arthritis) of the proximal interphalangeal, metacarpophalangeal, or wrist joints; 4) symmetric swelling (arthritis); 5) rheumatoid nodules; 6) the presence of rheumatoid factor; and 7) radiographic erosions and/or periarticular osteopenia in hand and/or wrist joints. Criteria 1 through 4 must have been present for at least 6 weeks. Rheumatoid arthritis is defined by the presence of 4 or more criteria, and no further qualifications (classic, definite, or probable) or list of exclusions are required. In addition, a "classification tree" schema is presented which performs equally as well as the traditional (4 of 7) format. The new criteria demonstrated 91-94% sensitivity and 89% specificity for RA when compared with non-RA rheumatic disease control subjects.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            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.

            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. 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. 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 < or = 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. 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.
              Bookmark
              • 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

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Ann Rheum Dis
                annrheumdis
                ard
                Annals of the Rheumatic Diseases
                BMJ Group (BMA House, Tavistock Square, London, WC1H 9JR )
                0003-4967
                1468-2060
                July 2010
                1 April 2010
                : 69
                : 7
                : 1286-1291
                Affiliations
                [1 ]The First Department of Internal Medicine, University of Occupational and Environmental Health, Japan, Kitakyushu, Japan
                [2 ]Division of Rheumatology and Clinical Immunology, Department of Internal Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, Keio University, Tokyo, Japan
                [3 ]Department of Rheumatology and Clinical Immunology, Kyoto University Graduate School of Medicine, Kyoto, Japan
                [4 ]Department of Rheumatology/Clinical Immunology, Saitama Medical Centre, Saitama Medical University, Kawagoe, Japan
                [5 ]Department of Medicine and Rheumatology, Tokyo Medical and Dental University, Tokyo, Japan
                [6 ]Department of Medicine II, Hokkaido University, Sapporo, Japan
                Author notes
                Correspondence to Professor Yoshiya Tanaka, The First Department of Internal Medicine, School of Medicine, University of Occupational and Environmental Health, Japan, 1-1 Iseigaoka, Kitakyushu 807-8555 Japan; tanaka@ 123456med.uoeh-u.ac.jp
                Article
                annrheumdis121491
                10.1136/ard.2009.121491
                3015067
                20360136
                880c108f-3c28-4440-8810-61ad846c74f4
                Published by the BMJ Publishing Group Limited. For permission to use (where not already granted under a licence) please go to http://group.bmj.com/group/rights-licensing/permissions

                This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-commercial License, which permits use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited, the use is non commercial and is otherwise in compliance with the license. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/2.0/ and http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/2.0/legalcode.

                History
                : 9 January 2010
                Categories
                Clinical and Epidemiological Research
                1506
                Extended report
                Custom metadata
                unlocked

                Immunology
                Immunology

                Comments

                Comment on this article