Search

Objective: To describe the frequency and predictors of nonserious infections (NSI) and compare incidence across biologic agents within the British Society for Rheumatology Biologics Register for Rheumatoid Arthritis (BSRBR‐RA). Methods: The BSRBR‐RA is a prospective observational cohort study. An NSI was defined as an infection that did not require hospitalization or intravenous therapy. Infections were captured from clinician questionnaires and patient diaries. Individuals were considered "at risk" from the date of initiation of biologic treatment for up to 3 years. Drug exposure was defined by agent: tumor necrosis factor inhibitor (TNFi), interleukin‐6 (IL‐6) inhibitor, B cell depletion (rituximab), or conventional synthetic disease‐modifying antirheumatic drugs (csDMARDs) alone. A multiple‐failure Cox model was used with multivariable adjustment. Missing data were addressed using multiple imputation. Results: There were 17,304 NSI in 8,145 patients, with an event rate of 27.0 per person per year (95% confidence interval [95% CI] 26.6–27.4). Increasing age, female sex, comorbidity burden, glucocorticoid therapy, higher Disease Activity Score in 28 joints, and higher Health Assessment Questionnaire disability index were associated with an increased risk of NSI. There was a significant reduction in NSI risk with csDMARDs compared to biologic treatments. Compared to TNFi, IL‐6 inhibition and rituximab were associated with a higher NSI risk (adjusted hazard ratio 1.45 [95% CI 1.29–1.63] and adjusted hazard ratio 1.28 [95% CI 1.14–1.45], respectively), while the csDMARD cohort had a lower risk (adjusted hazard ratio 0.64 [95% CI 0.59–0.70]). Within the TNFi class, adalimumab was associated with a higher NSI risk than etanercept (adjusted hazard ratio 1.11 [95% CI 1.05–1.17]). Conclusion: NSI occur frequently in RA, and predictors mirror those reported with serious infections. All biologics are associated with a greater risk of NSI, with differences observed between agents. While unmeasured confounding must be considered, the magnitude of effect is large, and a relationship between NSI and targeted immunomodulatory therapy likely exists. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Early aggressive treatment of rheumatoid arthritis is associated with improved disease control, slower radiological progression and improved functional outcomes. Tumor necrosis factor blocking therapy is effective but there remain concerns about long-term risks. Combining disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs) is a widely used therapeutic alternative; however, there is uncertainty surrounding the most effective regimen. A popular combination is methotrexate plus sulfasalazine, but each of these DMARDs can also be used in combination with other DMARDs and in triple therapy regimens. However, wide variations in study size, design, steroid usage and approaches to combination therapy have made it difficult to form firm conclusions regarding their efficacy. Generally, combination therapy is well tolerated and associated with no significant increase in the rate of adverse events compared with monotherapy. Methotrexate-sulfasalazine, methotrexate-chloroquine, methotrexate-ciclosporin, methotrexate-leflunomide, methotrexate-intramuscular-gold and methotrexate-doxycycline are effective combination regimens. Triple DMARD therapy is better than various DMARD monotherapy and dual therapy regimens. Methotrexate and hydroxychloroquine may have synergistic anti-inflammatory properties. Clinical trial evidence to support the use of other methotrexate and sulfasalazine combinations is often weak or lacking. Further investigation is required to determine the most effective regimen and approach to combination therapy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]