Search

Objective: Responsive assessment of disease activity in patients who have rheumatoid arthritis (RA) is necessary to evaluate therapeutic efficacy and guide treatment. We compared the utility of the multibiomarker disease activity (MBDA) score in the assessment of RA disease activity with that of the Disease Activity Score in 28 joints using the erythrocyte sedimentation rate (DAS28-ESR) score and the Clinical Disease Activity Index (CDAI) in a multicenter, randomized, placebo-controlled trial of repository corticotropin injection (RCI) in patients with persistently active RA., Methods: Patients received 80 units of RCI twice weekly during a 12-week open-label period; those who experienced low disease activity at week 12 were randomly assigned to receive either 80 units of RCI or placebo twice weekly during a 12-week double-blind period. Changes in disease activity (measured by DAS28-ESR, CDAI, and MBDA scores) and correlations between MBDA scores and both DAS28-ESR and CDAI scores were assessed., Results: Changes from baseline in DAS28-ESR and CDAI scores suggested that RCI therapy led to clinically meaningful improvements in disease activity, but improvements from baseline in MBDA scores were below the minimally important difference threshold. For the DAS28-ESR and CDAI, correlations with total MBDA and individual component scores were generally low (r ≤ 0.3) and occasionally moderate (r > 0.3 but r < 0.5)., Conclusion: The results of the present study suggest overall MBDA scores are not sufficiently responsive for assessing RA disease activity after RCI therapy. These findings are consistent with those seen with other RA drugs and, although they are from a clinical trial, suggest the MBDA should not be a preferred disease activity measure in clinical practice., (© 2021 American College of Rheumatology.)

Objective: Rheumatoid arthritis (RA) clinical trials often exclude patients who have low C-reactive protein (CRP) levels, which slows enrollment into the trial. The purpose of this study was to determine whether high Multi-Biomarker Disease Activity (MBDA) scores (>44) in RA patients with low CRP levels (≤10 mg/liter) could be used as a complement to CRP levels >10 mg/liter to enhance patient recruitment without affecting clinical trial outcomes., Methods: We evaluated patients from the Swedish Pharmacotherapy (SWEFOT) trial, which did not include any selection criteria for CRP levels. Clinical outcomes were assessed after 3 months of methotrexate (MTX) monotherapy in MTX-naive RA patients (n = 220) and after 3-10 months of add-on therapy in patients who were incomplete responders to MTX alone (MTX-IR) (n = 127). Radiographic outcomes were assessed at 1 year in all patients. Within each cohort, the outcomes were compared between patients with a CRP level of ≤10 mg/liter and an MBDA score of >44 at the start of the respective treatment interval versus those with a CRP level of >10 mg/liter., Results: Patients with both a CRP level of ≤10 mg/liter and an MBDA score of >44 at baseline had clinical and radiographic outcomes that were comparable to those in patients with a CRP level of >10 mg/liter at baseline. This broadened definition of the inclusion criteria identified an additional 24% of patients in the MTX-naive cohort and 47% in the MTX-IR cohort., Conclusion: Patient recruitment into RA clinical trials may be substantially enhanced, without any decrease in clinical and radiographic outcomes, by using as an inclusion criterion "a CRP level of >10 mg/liter and/or an MBDA score of >44.", (© 2015 The Authors. Arthritis & Rheumatology is published by Wiley Periodicals, Inc. on behalf of the American College of Rheumatology.)

Objective: To estimate the comparative lifetime cost-effectiveness of sequenced therapy with tumor necrosis factor (TNF) antagonists as the initial therapeutic intervention for patients with early rheumatoid arthritis (RA)., Methods: Because patients with RA switch regimens many times throughout the course of disease, sequenced therapeutic interventions were modeled, continuing until the last effective agent failed or death occurred. The model used published clinical outcomes from short-term, randomized controlled trials. Direct treatment costs and costs of lost productivity were modeled for each of 5 alternative treatment sequences. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios are expressed as quality-adjusted lifeyears (QALY) gained., Results: Treatment sequences that included TNF antagonists produced a greater number of QALY than conventional disease modifying antirheumatic drug regimens alone. The cost-effectiveness of sequenced therapy initiated with adalimumab plus methotrexate (MTX) extendedly dominated both infliximab-plus-MTX-initiated and etanercept sequences. The cost of adalimumab plus MTX per QALY was US $47,157 excluding productivity losses, and $19,663 including productivity losses. A supplementary sequence that incorporated adalimumab-plus-MTX-initiated first-line therapy followed by another TNF antagonist as second-line therapy was modeled; this sequence resulted in additional QALY gained and extendedly dominated all single-TNF strategies., Conclusion: Of the 3 single-TNF antagonist sequences, the adalimumab-plus-MTX-initiated sequence was cost-effective in producing the greatest number of QALY. Multiple TNF strategies, such as the supplementary sequence modeled in this analysis, may be cost-effective in producing even greater health gain.

Objective: To estimate relative efficiencies of the 7 rheumatoid arthritis (RA) Core Data Set measures to distinguish adalimumab from control treatments in 4 clinical trials., Methods: Four adalimumab clinical trials were analyzed for arithmetic and percentage changes for each Core Data Set measure from baseline to endpoint: 3 assessor/physician measures -- swollen joints, tender joints, and global estimate; 1 laboratory test -- C-reactive protein; and 3 patient measures -- physical function, pain, and global estimate. Relative efficiencies of each measure to distinguish adalimumab from control group responses were assessed, with tender joint count as the referent measure., Results: Relative efficiencies were in a similar range for physician/assessor, patient, and laboratory measures, with some variation between trials. Among physician/assessor measures, relative efficiencies for global estimates were greater than for swollen and tender joint counts in 8/8 comparisons. Among patient measures, relative efficiencies for global estimates were greater than for physical function and pain scores in at least 6/8 comparisons. Among all measures, relative efficiencies for patient global estimates were greater than for swollen joint counts in 5/8 comparisons, and for tender joint counts in 8/8 comparisons., Conclusion: Patient and physician/assessor measures distinguished adalimumab from control treatment groups in similar ranges. Among all measures, physician/assessor global estimate was most efficient, and tender joint count least efficient, in all 4 trials. This information suggests that while joint counts are the most specific measure to assess RA, their sensitivity to detect treatment effects in patients with RA is generally no greater, and usually less, than other measures.

Background: Adalimumab is a therapeutic monoclonal antibody for SC administration by 2 single-use injection devices providing bioequivalent amounts of adalimumab: a ready-to-use, prefilled syringe and an integrated, disposable delivery system, the autoinjection Pen. Although pens have been shown to be preferred over syringes by patients requiring long-term SC administration of medications, there are no data on preference and pain in the use of biologics in patients with chronic inflammatory diseases., Objective: The aim of this study was to assess injection-site pain, tolerability, and patient preference of 2 delivery systems of adalimumab., Methods: Patients with rheumatoid arthritis were enrolled in a Phase II, multicenter, open-label, single-arm, sequential trial. Patients self-administered a standard dose of adalimumab 40 mg SC every other week at each of 3 monitored clinical visits: visit 1 (syringe), visits 2 and 3 (Pen). At each visit, patients rated their pain on an 11-point scale (0 = none to 10 = pain as bad as it could be) immediately after injection and 15-30 minutes after injection and provided their impressions of and preferences for each delivery system. Safety events were recorded throughout the study and 70 days after final study dose., Results: Fifty-two patients were enrolled in the trial and completed all 3 visits (32 women, 20 men; mean [SD] age, 53.8 [12.1] years). Forty (76.9%) patients reported that the Pen was less painful than the syringe, 4 (7.7%) patients found the syringe to be less painful, and 8 (15.4%) patients had no preference. Patients had statistically significant reductions in injection-pain scores from visit 1 to visit 2 and from visit 1 to visit 3. No new safety signals or apparent differences regarding tolerability between the syringe and Pen were observed. In addition, 46 (88.5%) patients preferred the Pen, 3 (5.8%) preferred the syringe, and 3 (5.8%) had no preference. Overall, patients evaluated the Pen as easier to use (94.2%), more convenient (92.3%), requiring less time to inject (82.7%), and safer (88.5%)., Conclusions: Patients experienced less pain self-administering adalimumab via the Pen and preferred it versus the syringe. Further, patients perceived the Pen to be easier to use and more convenient. Both delivery systems were generally well tolerated.