Inflammatory and fatty lesions in the spine and sacroiliac joints on whole-body MRI in early axial spondyloarthritis--3-Year data of the ESTHER trial.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the relationship between active inflammation and development of chronic lesions in the spine and sacroiliac (SI)-joints on MRI in early axial spondyloarthritis (SpA) during treatment with etanercept. METHODS: Here, we analyzed the 41 patients of the ESTHER trial, who were treated with etanercept over 3 continuous years and of whom MRIs were available for baseline, year 2, and year 3. MRIs were scored for active inflammation (STIR sequences) and chronic changes (T1 sequence) such as fatty lesions, erosions, and ankylosis in the SI joints and spinal vertebral units (VUs). RESULTS: The mean fatty lesion scores increased between baseline and year 2 both in the spine (1.13 at baseline vs. 1.40 at year 2, p = 0.0254) and in the SI joints (4.76 at baseline vs. 5.46 at year 2, p = 0.27), but we found no further increase of the fatty lesion score between years 2 and 3. New fatty lesions at years 2 and 3 developed nearly exclusively in SI joint quadrants and VUs in which active MRI inflammation was present at baseline. Fatty lesions disappeared only in 3 SI joint quadrants and in none of VUs at years 2 and 3. Erosion and ankylosis scores remained unchanged. CONCLUSION: Our data indicate a relationship between the presence of active MRI inflammation and the new development of fatty lesions. Furthermore, there was no increase of fatty lesions during continuous treatment of axial SpA patients with etanercept after successful suppression of active inflammation. Whether this is predictive of stopping radiographic progression needs to be further investigated.

Prevention of new osteitis on magnetic resonance imaging in patients with early axial spondyloarthritis during 3 years of continuous treatment with etanercept: data of the ESTHER trial.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to assess the degree of fluctuation of osteitis on MRI during long-term treatment with etanercept (ETN) in patients with early axial SpA (axSpA) with active inflammation (osteitis) on whole-body MRI in the spine and/or the SI joints at baseline. METHODS: We analysed MRI data from 328 SI joint quadrants and 943 spine vertebral units (VUs) in terms of osteitis in the pooled data set of 41 patients who were treated with ETN for 3 consecutive years. Scoring was performed by two blinded radiologists at baseline, year 2 and year 3. RESULTS: Through years 2 and 3, osteitis on MRI resolved completely in 56 of 144 (38.9%) SI joint quadrants and in 20 of 40 (50%) VUs affected at baseline, while persistent osteitis was found in 24 of 144 (16.7%) SI joint quadrants and in 8 of 40 (20.0%) spine VUs. The development of new osteitis in sites that were free of osteitis at baseline only occurred in 2 of 131 (1.5%) SI joint quadrants and in 3 of 862 (0.4%) spine VUs in both year 2 and year 3. CONCLUSION: There was a consistently small amount of osteitis on MRI in patients with early axSpA compared with baseline values, and only a very low rate of new-onset osteitis was found during 3 years of continuous treatment with ETN. TRIAL REGISTRATION: www.clinicaltrials.gov, NCT00844142.

Consistently Good clinical response in patients with early axial spondyloarthritis after 3 years of continuous treatment with etanercept: longterm data of the ESTHER trial.

OBJECTIVE: In patients with early active axial spondyloarthritis (axSpA) with a disease duration of < 5 years, the longterm efficacy of 3 years of continuous etanercept (ETN) treatment was assessed. METHODS: In a previously reported ESTHER trial, patients with axSpA were randomized to treatment with ETN (n = 40) versus sulfasalazine (SSZ; n = 36) in the first year. We analyzed the clinical, laboratory, and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) response in the pooled dataset of patients (study population; n = 61), including patients with ankylosing spondylitis (AS, n = 31) and nonradiographic axSpA (nr-axSpA, n = 30) who were continuously treated with ETN for 3 consecutive years. Data were analyzed using the last observation carried forward and completer analysis. RESULTS: In the entire group of patients in the study population (n = 61), the mean Bath Ankylosing Spondylitis Disease Activity Index (BASDAI) decreased from 5.7 (± 1.3) at baseline to 2.6 (± 2.4) at Year 3. The Ankylosing Spondylitis Disease Activity Score (ASDAS) decreased from 3.4 (± 0.8) to 1.5 (± 1.0). Also, mean values for MRI spine and sacroiliac joint scores showed a significant decrease. Response rates in the nr-axSpA group were similar and at least as good compared to the AS group for all outcome measures. When comparing remission stages, we found that ASDAS inactive disease correlated better with C-reactive protein and MRI remission than with Assessment of SpondyloArthritis international Society partial remission. CONCLUSION: There was a consistent and sustained clinical response in patients with early axSpA treated with ETN over 3 years. ClinicalTrials.gov registration number NCT00844142.

Nearly pain-free self-administration of subcutaneous methotrexate with an autoinjector: results of a phase 2 clinical trial in patients with rheumatoid arthritis who have functional limitations.

BACKGROUND: A methotrexate autoinjector (MTXAI) was developed for self-administration of subcutaneous (SC) methotrexate by patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA). The MTXAI circumvents the need for vials, needles, and syringes and may therefore improve dosing accuracy, handling risks, and patient adherence. OBJECTIVES: The objective of this study was to evaluate actual human use of the MTXAI in patients with RA and determine its reliability, robustness, safety, local tolerance, and ease of use. METHODS: In this phase 2, multicenter, open-label, single-dose, single-arm, in-clinic US study, adults (N = 101) treated with methotrexate for 3 months or longer were trained to use the MTXAI and assigned to 10, 15, 20, or 25 mg methotrexate based on previous treatment and disease status. Patients completed training confirmation and ease-of-use questionnaires. Pain was evaluated immediately after self-administration and at follow-up with a 100-mm visual analog scale (0 = no pain, 100 = worst possible pain). RESULTS: At screening, 90.1% of patients had moderate to severe functional limitations (class II-IV). All patients successfully completed the study. All devices functioned correctly and as intended. The device was rated easy to use by 98%, and instructions clear and easy to follow by 100% of patients. On the visual analog scale, mean and median pain scores were 3.6/100 and 1.0/100 mm, respectively, immediately after self-administration, and were lower at follow-up. Most patients (92.3%) had no administration-site erythema; 7.7% had minimal erythema. CONCLUSIONS: The SC MTXAI was well tolerated and considered easy to use by patients with RA. Improving SC methotrexate delivery may increase patient tolerance of self-administration, possibly improving adherence.

New autoinjector technology for the delivery of subcutaneous methotrexate in the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis.

Methotrexate (MTX) is the cornerstone of treatment for rheumatoid arthritis (RA), and is widely used both as first-line therapy and as an important component of long-term therapy. Although subcutaneous MTX is typically delivered orally, parenteral administration offers benefits with respect to tolerability and systemic exposure, and may be an underutilized treatment option. The RA patient population presents specific challenges for safe and accurate administration of parenteral therapies, because of common symptoms of joint pain and limited manual dexterity. These challenges may contribute to the low incidence of parenteral MTX administration. A novel MTX autoinjector (MTXAI) was recently introduced, which is designed to facilitate subcutaneous MTX self-administration among patients with RA. Here we review the development and utility of the MTXAI in the treatment of RA, and discuss how this technology may facilitate the use of subcutaneous MTX.

Head-to-head, randomised, crossover study of oral versus subcutaneous methotrexate in patients with rheumatoid arthritis: drug-exposure limitations of oral methotrexate at doses ≥15†mg may be overcome with subcutaneous administration.

OBJECTIVE: To compare the relative bioavailability, safety and tolerability of oral methotrexate (MTX) and subcutaneous (SC) MTX administered via an auto-injector (MTXAI) in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA). METHODS: In this randomised, multicenter, open-label, three-way crossover study, patients ≥18 years with adult RA undergoing treatment with MTX for ≥3 months were assigned to receive MTX 10, 15, 20 and 25 mg weekly in a random sequence of three treatments: oral, SC into the abdomen and SC into the thigh. For 24 h after administration of each treatment, blood samples were collected for pharmacokinetic analysis and injection sites were assessed. RESULTS: Forty-seven patients completed the study. Systemic exposure of oral MTX plateaued at doses ≥15 mg/week. In contrast, SC MTX demonstrated a linear increase in systemic exposure that was greater than oral MTX at each dose. No unexpected AEs were noted for either formulation. CONCLUSIONS: Unlike oral MTX, the systemic exposure of SC MTX did not plateau over the doses studied, particularly at doses ≥15 mg/week. In this study, higher systemic MTX exposure was not associated with increases in AEs. Patients with an inadequate clinical response to oral MTX may benefit from higher drug exposure by switching to SC MTX. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT01618968.

The efficacy and safety of etanercept when used with as-needed adjunctive topical therapy in a randomised, double-blind study in subjects with moderate-to-severe psoriasis (the PRISTINE trial).

OBJECTIVE: To assess the efficacy and safety of two etanercept dose regimens for psoriasis treatment. METHODS: Subjects were ≥18 years old with stable moderate-to-severe plaque psoriasis. Subjects were randomised to etanercept 50 mg once weekly (QW) or 50 mg twice weekly (BIW) double-blind for 12 weeks, followed by 50 mg QW open label in all subjects through week 24. Only mild topical corticosteroids were permitted on scalp, axillae and groin for first 12 weeks; topical medications (corticosteroids of all potencies, vitamin D analogues and combination products) were allowed as needed for second 12 weeks at physicians' discretion, consistent with "real-world" therapeutic practice. An independent ethics committee reviewed and approved the study protocol. RESULTS: At week 24, 59.9% and 78.2% in the QW/QW and BIW/QW groups achieved PASI 75 improvement. Mean percentage PASI improvement in these groups was 58.5% and 74.1% at week 12 and 70.7% and 81.3% at week 24. Although permitted from weeks 12 to 24, topical agents were used in only 27.7% and 22.6% in the QW/QW and BIW/QW groups by week 24. CONCLUSION: Both etanercept regimens were efficacious in moderate-to-severe psoriasis, although the BIW/QW regimen consistently provided higher response rates than the QW/QW regimen. More potent topical medications were used electively in <25% of subjects in each group.

Active inflammation and structural change in early active axial spondyloarthritis as detected by whole-body MRI.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate active inflammatory lesions (AIL) and structural changes (SC) in patients with active non-radiographic axial spondyloarthritis (nr-axSpA) compared with patients with ankylosing spondylitis (AS) on whole-body MRI (wb-MRI). METHOD: 75 patients with active disease and a symptom duration of <5 years (39 with AS and 36 with nr-axSpA) were investigated with a comprehensive wb-MRI protocol and scored for AIL and SC in the spine, sacroiliac joints (SIJs) and non-axial manifestations. RESULTS: 92% of patients with AS showed active inflammation in the SIJ, 53% in the spine and 94% and 39%, respectively, in the nr-axSpA group. There was a non-significant trend towards more inflammation in patients with AS compared with patients with nr-axSpA in SIJs and spine. Peripheral enthesitis/osteitis was more common in patients with AS (n=22) than in those with nr-axSpA (n=12) (p=0.05). SC were more common in patients with AS than in those with nr-axSpA, with significantly higher scores for SIJ fatty bone marrow deposition (FMD) in patients with AS (4.8±3.2) compared with those with nr-axSpA (2.4±2.7; p=0.001) and more frequent bone proliferation in the spine and the SIJ (p=0.02 and p=0.005, respectively). SIJ erosions were more common in AS (score 4.2±2.3) than in nr-axSpA (score 3.8±1.8) patients (not significant). CONCLUSIONS: Wb-MRI detects active inflammation and SC more frequently in the SIJs than in the spine. Half of the patients showed inflammation in non-axial sites. Active inflammatory and structural lesions were present both in patients with AS and those with nr-axSpA, being only slightly more common in patients with AS.

Similar response rates in patients with ankylosing spondylitis and non-radiographic axial spondyloarthritis after 1 year of treatment with etanercept: results from the ESTHER trial.

OBJECTIVE: We assessed whether there is a difference to etanercept (ETA) treatment in patients with ankylosing spondylitis (AS) compared with non-radiographic axial SpA (nr-axSpA) patients with a disease duration <5 years. METHOD: AS (n=20) and nr-axSpA (n=20) patients who were treated with ETA for 1 year were compared for differences in baseline data and treatment effect. Clinical, laboratory and MRI of sacroiliac joints (SI-joints) and spine were analysed. RESULTS: At baseline, there were no significant differences between the 20 AS and the 20 nr-axSpA patients regarding age, disease duration, gender, HLA-B27 and clinical disease activity in terms of Bath AS Disease Activity Index (BASDAI), C-reactive protein and MRI SI-joint and spine scores in the AS compared with the nr-axSpA group. After 1 year of treatment with ETA the treatment effect was similarly good in AS and nr-axSpA (reduction of BASDAI by 3.3 (95% CI 2.2 to 3.8) vs 3.6 (95% CI 2.8 to 4.4) and reduction of AS Disease Activity Score by 1.8 (95% CI 1.5 to 2.2) vs 1.8 (95% CI 1.5 to 2.1), respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The response rate to TNF-blockers does not differ between AS and nr-axSpA if the baseline data regarding symptom duration and disease activity are similar for the two groups.

Randomized comparison of etanercept with usual therapy in an Asian population with active rheumatoid arthritis: the APPEAL trial.

AIM: Rheumatoid arthritis (RA) is an important rheumatologic disease in Asia-Pacific countries, as in other parts of the world. However, limited information is available regarding RA therapy in this region. The Asia-Pacific Study in Patients to be Treated With Etanercept or an Alternative Listed DMARD (APPEAL) compared efficacy and safety of etanercept (ETN) + methotrexate (MTX) versus usual disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs (DMARDs) + MTX (reflecting regional practice) in subjects with moderate to severe RA from multiple Asia-Pacific countries. METHOD: In this open-label, active-comparator, parallel-design, multicenter study, subjects (n = 300) in the Asia-Pacific region were randomized to ETN + MTX (n = 197) or DMARD + MTX (n = 103). The primary efficacy endpoint was the American College of Rheumatology (ACR) response (ACR-N) area under the curve (AUC) over 16 weeks. RESULTS: Baseline characteristics were similar between groups. At Week 16, ACR-N AUC indicated a significantly greater response with ETN + MTX compared with DMARD + MTX (mean difference -145.3; P < 0.001). Significantly greater proportions of subjects achieved ACR 20, 50 and 70 responses with ETN + MTX versus DMARD + MTX at Week 16 (P < 0.05). Low Disease Activity Score based on a 28-joint count (DAS28 < 3.2) was also achieved by significantly more subjects in the ETN + MTX group versus the DMARD + MTX group (P < 0.001). Greater improvements were shown for DAS28, pain visual analogue scale, health assessment questionnaire, and physician and patient global assessments (P < 0.05) for ETN + MTX versus DMARD + MTX. No new safety signals were found. CONCLUSION: In this Asia-Pacific population of subjects with moderate to severe RA, ETN + MTX showed superior efficacy versus usual DMARD + MTX regimens, with similar safety profiles.

Frequency and duration of drug-free remission after 1 year of treatment with etanercept versus sulfasalazine in early axial spondyloarthritis: 2 year data of the ESTHER trial.

PURPOSE: The aims of this study were (1) to assess the frequency and duration of drug-free remission and efficacy of etanercept (ETA) treatment after flare in patients with early active axial spondyloarthritis who were treated with ETA (n=40) versus sulfasalazine (SSZ, n=36) for 48 weeks and (2) to analyse the efficacy of ETA treatment in patients in year 2 who did not reach remission at week 48. METHOD: At week 48, patients who reached study remission (Assessment of Spondyloarthritis international Society (ASAS) plus MRI remission) were followed up without active treatment up to 1 year. In case of a flare, patients were treated with ETA for another year. All patients who were not in ASAS plus MRI remission at week 48 were treated with ETA in year 2. RESULTS: ASAS plus MRI remission at week 48 was reached significantly more often in ETA-treated compared to SSZ-treated patients (33% vs 11%, p=0.03). However, the flare rate was not different between these two groups: 69% in the ETA group versus 75% in the SSZ group. Only 8% of patients initially treated with ETA versus 3% of those initially treated with SSZ reached permanent drug-free remission (not significant). After treatment with ETA over 1 year, patients with flare showed an improvement in all clinical and imaging variables. CONCLUSION: Patients with axial spondyloarthritis treated with ETA over 1 year did not reach drug-free remission in a higher percentage compared to patients from a control group treated with SSZ.

Combination etanercept and methotrexate provides better disease control in very early (<=4 months) versus early rheumatoid arthritis (>4 months and <2 years): post hoc analyses from the COMET study.

OBJECTIVE: The objective of this post hoc analysis was to test the benefits of treating very early rheumatoid arthritis (VERA; ≤4 months) using COMET trial data. Treatment response in VERA and early rheumatoid arthritis (ERA; >4 months to 2 years) with combination etanercept+methotrexate (ETN+MTX) or MTX monotherapy was compared. METHODS: Data assessed at week 52 for baseline disease duration effect included remission (disease activity score (DAS)28 <2.6, SDAI ≤3.3, Boolean), low disease activity (LDA; DAS28 <3.2), Boolean components of remission and radiographic non-progression. Subjects who discontinued because of lack of efficacy were included as non-responders. RESULTS: Higher proportions of VERA subjects achieved LDA (79%) and DAS28 remission (70%) than ERA (62%, 48%, respectively, p<0.05) with ETN+MTX. Such high responses with MTX monotherapy were not observed (VERA, LDA=47%, DAS28 remission=35%; ERA, 47% and 32% respectively, p>0.70 for each). Regardless of disease duration, no radiographic progression was seen in 80% of subjects with ETN+MTX. In contrast, a higher proportion of VERA subjects showed no radiographic progression compared with ERA subjects treated with MTX (73.9% vs 50%, p=0.01). CONCLUSIONS: Treatment of VERA with ETN+MTX provides qualitatively improved clinical outcomes not seen with MTX monotherapy, supporting the pivotal role of TNF inhibition in early disease.

Clinical efficacy of etanercept versus sulfasalazine in ankylosing spondylitis subjects with peripheral joint involvement.

OBJECTIVE: Etanercept, a fully human tumor necrosis factor soluble receptor, is effective in treatment of ankylosing spondylitis (AS). Current guidelines suggest sulfasalazine (SSZ) treatment as initial therapy for the management of patients with AS with peripheral arthritis versus therapy with biologics. We compared the efficacy of etanercept with SSZ in patients with AS with peripheral joint involvement. METHODS: The efficacy of etanercept 50 mg once weekly was compared with that of SSZ up to 3 g daily in subjects with ≥ 1 swollen peripheral joint at baseline, using data from a 16-week randomized double-blind study in subjects with AS. Efficacy was assessed by the Assessment in AS criteria and the Bath AS Disease Activity, Functional, and Metrology indices. The last observation carried forward method was used for imputation of missing values. RESULTS: Of 566 subjects included in original study, 181 (etanercept 121; SSZ 60) had ≥ 1 swollen peripheral joint and 364 (etanercept 250; SSZ 124) had none at baseline. AS patients treated with etanercept showed significantly greater improvement than those treated with SSZ in all joint assessments regardless of swollen joint involvement. CONCLUSION: In this analysis, etanercept was significantly more effective than SSZ for management of patients with AS and peripheral joint involvement.

Safety and effectiveness responses to etanercept for rheumatoid arthritis in Japan: a sub-analysis of a post-marketing surveillance study focusing on the duration of rheumatoid arthritis.

The aim is to investigate the relationship of duration of rheumatoid arthritis (RA) with safety and effectiveness of etanercept (ETN) in Japan. Post-marketing surveillance data for 7,099 patients treated with ETN were analyzed. Baseline characteristics, treatment effectiveness, incidence of adverse events (AEs), and serious AEs (SAEs) in relation to duration of RA were studied. At baseline, patients with RA for longer duration were older, weighed less, had more comorbidities, allergies, and corticosteroid use, but smoked less and had less morning stiffness. By 2-5 years with RA, more than half of the patients had advanced to Steinbrocker radiographic stage III or IV. Methotrexate (MTX) was the most commonly used pre-treatment disease-modifying antirheumatic drug; however, concomitant MTX use and its dose were lower among patients with longer duration of RA. Remission rates (26.6%) were greatest among patients having RA for <2 years. Less AEs and SAEs were observed among patients with shorter duration of RA. These results suggest that RA treatment in Japan in the era pre-biologics may not have been adequate to control disease activity and prevent joint destruction. Patients with shorter duration of RA may have better physical status which allows the opportunity to treat more intensively putting a higher percentage of patients in remission and possibly decreasing exposure to SAEs.

Safety and effectiveness of switching from infliximab to etanercept in patients with rheumatoid arthritis: results from a large Japanese postmarketing surveillance study.

Finding an effective treatment strategy for rheumatoid arthritis (RA) patients who have not benefited from previous tumor necrosis factor-α antagonist treatment is important for minimizing RA disease activity and improving patient outcomes. The aim of this study was to compare the safety and effectiveness of etanercept in patients with and without infliximab (IFX) treatment experience. Patients (n = 7,099) from a large postmarketing observational study of etanercept use in Japan were divided into 2 cohorts based on previous IFX use (pre-IFX and non-IFX). Baseline characteristics were assessed in each cohort. Adverse events (AEs) and European League Against Rheumatism (EULAR) responses were monitored every 4 weeks for 24 weeks. At baseline, pre-IFX patients were younger and had fewer comorbidities and a shorter RA duration than non-IFX patients. During the study, pre-IFX patients received concomitant methotrexate more often than non-IFX patients. The incidence of AEs and serious AEs were significantly lower in pre-IFX patients, as was the percentage of patients who discontinued treatment. Both cohorts had significant improvement (P < 0.001) in EULAR responses at the end of the treatment period. This study demonstrated that etanercept was effective and well tolerated in active RA patients with and without prior IFX treatment.

Does achieving clinical response prevent work stoppage or work absence among employed patients with early rheumatoid arthritis?

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the impact of clinical response on work stoppage or work absence among employed people with early RA. METHODS: First-year data from the combination of MTX and etanercept trial was used. The analyses were restricted to the 205 patients working full or part time at baseline who answered questions on whether they stopped working or missed days from work in one or more of the four follow-up visits. Work stoppage referred to the first occurrence of subjects reporting stopping work. Work absence was defined as whether patients reported missed days from work. Clinical response and activity state considered included the ACR and European League against Rheumatism response criteria, 28-joint DAS (DAS-28) remission and the minimum clinically important difference of the HAQ score. RESULTS: After adjustment for baseline characteristics, ACR70 responders were 72% less likely to stop working and 55% less likely to miss work than ACR20 non-responders (P < 0.05). Patients achieving DAS-28 remission were 54% less likely to stop work than those with DAS-28 > 3.2 (P < 0.05). Moderate improvements did not appear to effect work stoppage or missed days after adjustments. CONCLUSIONS: Results suggest that achieving clinical remission or major improvement might be necessary to significantly impact work outcomes.

Clinical efficacy and safety of etanercept versus sulfasalazine in patients with ankylosing spondylitis: a randomized, double-blind trial.

OBJECTIVE: Etanercept, a fully human tumor necrosis factor (TNF) receptor, is an effective treatment in patients with ankylosing spondylitis (AS). Sulfasalazine is frequently used for the treatment of both axial symptoms and peripheral symptoms of AS, and it has been the recommended therapy before the use of an anti-TNF agent when peripheral arthritis is present. Until now, no clinical trial has compared the efficacy and safety of a TNF blocker with that of sulfasalazine. This study was undertaken to compare the efficacy and safety of etanercept with that of sulfasalazine after 16 weeks of treatment in patients with axial and peripheral manifestations of AS. METHODS: In this randomized, double-blind study, patients received etanercept 50 mg once weekly (n=379) or sulfasalazine titrated to a maximum of 3 gm/day (n=187) for 16 weeks. The primary end point was the proportion of patients who achieved the Assessment of SpondyloArthritis international Society criteria for 20% improvement (ASAS20) at 16 weeks. Last observation carried forward was predefined for imputation of missing values. RESULTS: The mean age of the patients was 41 years, 74% were male, and the mean disease duration was 7.6 years. The proportion of ASAS20 responders at week 16 was greater among patients treated with etanercept compared with those treated with sulfasalazine (75.9% versus 52.9%; P<0.0001). As early as week 2 of treatment, etanercept was found to be more effective than sulfasalazine (P<0.0001) in ameliorating both the axial symptoms and peripheral manifestations. Serious adverse events rarely occurred, and the rate of serious adverse events did not differ between groups. CONCLUSION: In this population of patients with AS, etanercept was significantly more effective than sulfasalazine in improving the signs and symptoms of AS in the axial skeleton and peripheral joints.

Differences in biologic dose-escalation, non-biologic and steroid intensification among three anti-TNF agents: evidence from clinical practice.

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate prevalence of dose escalation among RA patients in normal clinical practice treated with etanercept, adalimumab or infliximab and to estimate its economic impact. METHODS: A retrospective observational study of 739 patients with RA receiving continuous treatment with etanercept (n=319), adalimumab (n=313) or infliximab (n=107) for 18 months. Dose escalation, intensification of concomitant DMARDs and risk of dose escalation were evaluated, as well as costs. RESULTS: Significantly more patients prescribed adalimumab (10%, p<0.001) or infliximab (35%, p<0.001) experienced dose escalation compared with patients treated with etanercept (3%). DMARD or steroid dose adjustment, when added as criteria of escalation, occurred more often among patients treated with adalimumab (28%; p=0.022) or infliximab (47%; p<0.001) than those prescribed etanercept (19%). Independent of confounding covariates, hazard of dose escalation was significantly higher for either infliximab (28.1-fold) or adalimumab (4.9-fold) relative to etanercept. Escalation among subjects treated with either infliximab or adalimumab incurred statistically significant increases in total cost of care compared with non-escalators whereas such differences observed for subjects treated with etanercept were not significant. CONCLUSIONS: Patients receiving monoclonal antibody therapies, adalimumab or infliximab, had significantly higher rates of dose escalation than patients receiving the soluble TNF receptor, etanercept, and related costs were higher.

Postmarketing surveillance of safety and effectiveness of etanercept in Japanese patients with rheumatoid arthritis.

Our aim was to evaluate real-world safety and effectiveness in a 6-month postmarketing surveillance study covering all Japanese patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) who received etanercept during a 2-year period. Data for 13,894 patients (1334 sites) enrolled between March 2005 and April 2007 were collected. Adverse events (AEs) and serious adverse events (SAEs) were reported in 4336 (31.2%) and 857 (6.2%) patients, respectively. The most frequent AEs were injection site reactions (n = 610, 4.4%) and rash (n = 339, 2.4%), whereas pneumonia (n = 116, 0.8%) and interstitial lung disease (n = 77, 0.6%) were the most frequent SAEs. Significant improvement in the proportion of patients with a good European League Against Rheumatism (EULAR) response was observed from week 4 (17.6%) to week 24 (31.6%) (p < 0.001); 84.3% of patients had good or moderate EULAR responses at week 24. The percentage of patients achieving remission increased significantly from week 4 (9.3%) to week 24 (18.9%) (p < 0.001). Patients with early moderate RA were less likely to experience SAEs and were more likely to achieve remission compared with patients with more severe disease. The safety and effectiveness of etanercept was demonstrated in Japanese patients in one of the largest observational trials conducted thus far in RA patients treated with biologics.