Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 9 de 9
Filter
2.
Rheumatology (Oxford) ; 57(6): 969-976, 2018 06 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-29481661

ABSTRACT

Objectives: In PsA management, remission and low disease activity represent preferential treatment targets. We aimed at evaluating the predictive value and clinical use of initial therapeutic response for subsequent achievement of these targets. Methods: Based on data of 216 patients enrolled in a randomized controlled trial of golimumab (GO-REVEAL), we performed diagnostic testing analyses using 3- and 6-month disease activity as tests for treatment outcomes to understand the implications of early response. In regression analyses, we estimated the probabilities for achieving at least LDA. Disease activity was measured by the disease activity index for PsA (DAPSA). Results: Three-month DAPSA levels were excellent tests for disease activity at 6 months (and at 1 year), with areas under the receiver operating characteristic curves of 0.92 (and 0.88, respectively). The estimated probability for 6-month LDA could be quantified as <22% if patients did not reach at least moderate disease activity after 3 months on golimumab. Similar data were seen for early DAPSA response: patients achieving a DAPSA 85% at 3 months had an 84% probability for 6-month LDA or REM. All results were validated in an independent trial cohort of patients treated with infliximab (IMPACT 2). Conclusion: Three months after implementation of therapy in PsA, it is already possible to evaluate the potential for accomplishing therapeutic goals. This substantiates the choice of the 3-month assessment as essential for treatment adaptations.


Subject(s)
Antibodies, Monoclonal/administration & dosage , Arthritis, Psoriatic/drug therapy , Arthritis, Psoriatic/diagnosis , Disease Progression , Dose-Response Relationship, Drug , Drug Administration Schedule , Female , Follow-Up Studies , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , ROC Curve , Time Factors , Treatment Outcome
3.
Ann Rheum Dis ; 77(2): 165-174, 2018 02.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-28866648

ABSTRACT

The study aimed to develop evidence-based recommendations regarding the evaluation and use of biosimilars to treat rheumatological diseases. The task force comprised an expert group of specialists in rheumatology, dermatology and gastroenterology, and pharmacologists, patients and a regulator from ten countries. Four key topics regarding biosimilars were identified through a process of discussion and consensus. Using a Delphi process, specific questions were then formulated to guide a systematic literature review. Relevant English-language publications through November 2016 were searched systematically for each topic using Medline; selected papers and pertinent reviews were examined for additional relevant references; and abstracts presented at the 2015 and 2016 American College of Rheumatology (ACR) and European League Against Rheumatism (EULAR) annual scientific meetings were searched for those about biosimilars. The experts used evidence obtained from these studies to develop a set of overarching principles and consensus recommendations. The level of evidence and grade of recommendation were determined for each. By the search strategy, 490 references were identified. Of these, 29 full-text papers were included in the systematic review. Additionally, 20 abstracts were retrieved from the ACR and EULAR conference abstract databases. Five overarching principles and eight consensus recommendations were generated, encompassing considerations regarding clinical trials, immunogenicity, extrapolation of indications, switching between bio-originators and biosimilars and among biosimilars, and cost. The level of evidence and grade of recommendation for each varied according to available published evidence. Five overarching principles and eight consensus recommendations regarding the evaluation and use of biosimilars to treat rheumatological diseases were developed using research-based evidence and expert opinion.


Subject(s)
Biosimilar Pharmaceuticals/therapeutic use , Rheumatic Diseases/drug therapy , Biosimilar Pharmaceuticals/adverse effects , Consensus , Evidence-Based Medicine , Humans , Practice Guidelines as Topic
4.
Ann Rheum Dis ; 75(5): 811-8, 2016 May.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-26269398

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: The Disease Activity Index for Psoriatic Arthritis (DAPSA) is a valid and discriminative tool. Definitions of disease activity states and therapeutic response are still missing. We derived such criteria for the DAPSA. METHODS: We retrieved 30 patient profiles from an observational database including joint counts, patient pain and global activity ratings and C-reactive protein (CRP) and carried out a survey among experts to classify patients into remission (REM), low (LDA), moderate (MDA) or high (HDA) disease activity. Based on the distributions of DAPSA in each of these expert-assigned states we defined the cutpoints between groups. We performed similar analyses evaluating a clinical score (cDAPSA), omitting CRP. To define minor, moderate and major treatment response, we used Cohen's Kappa statistics and analysed agreement of DAPSA percentage change with ACR20/50/70-response in three randomised controlled trials. RESULTS: Our survey yielded a response rate of 75% (n=33). Mean DAPSA differed significantly between patients classified as REM, LDA, MDA or HDA (p<0.001). Based on the distributions of DAPSA in these groups, we propose cut-off values of ≤4 for REM, >4 and ≤14 for LDA, >14 and ≤28 for MDA and >28 for HDA. We observed best agreement with ACR20/50/70-response at DAPSA changes of 50/75/85%, reflecting minor, moderate and major improvement. CONCLUSIONS: The DAPSA constitutes a disease-specific, validated and feasible tool for PsA assessment. In this study, we provide criteria for disease activity states and treatment response. They are based on an international expert survey, and show good performance in clinical trials and observational data.


Subject(s)
Arthritis, Psoriatic/diagnosis , Arthritis, Psoriatic/drug therapy , Severity of Illness Index , Adult , Aged , Antirheumatic Agents/therapeutic use , Biomarkers/blood , C-Reactive Protein/metabolism , Female , Follow-Up Studies , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Pain Measurement , Remission Induction , Treatment Outcome
5.
Ann Rheum Dis ; 75(1): 16-22, 2016 Jan.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-25990290

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: A systematic literature review (SLR; 2009-2014) to compare a target-oriented approach with routine management in the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis (RA) to allow an update of the treat-to-target recommendations. METHODS: Two SLRs focused on clinical trials employing a treatment approach targeting a specific clinical outcome were performed. In addition to testing clinical, functional and/or structural changes as endpoints, comorbidities, cardiovascular risk, work productivity and education as well as patient self-assessment were investigated. The searches covered MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane databases and Clinicaltrial.gov for the period between 2009 and 2012 and separately for the period of 2012 to May of 2014. RESULTS: Of 8442 citations retrieved in the two SLRs, 176 articles underwent full-text review. According to predefined inclusion/exclusion criteria, six articles were included of which five showed superiority of a targeted treatment approach aiming at least at low-disease activity versus routine care; in addition, publications providing supportive evidence were also incorporated that aside from expanding the evidence provided by the above six publications allowed concluding that a target-oriented approach leads to less comorbidities and cardiovascular risk and better work productivity than conventional care. CONCLUSIONS: The current study expands the evidence that targeting low-disease activity or remission in the management of RA conveys better outcomes than routine care.


Subject(s)
Antirheumatic Agents/therapeutic use , Arthritis, Rheumatoid/drug therapy , Patient Care Planning , Severity of Illness Index , Arthritis, Rheumatoid/diagnostic imaging , Arthritis, Rheumatoid/physiopathology , Clinical Trials as Topic , Comorbidity , Evidence-Based Medicine , Humans , Radiography , Treatment Outcome
7.
Curr Opin Rheumatol ; 25(3): 375-83, 2013 May.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-23508130

ABSTRACT

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Rheumatoid arthritis (RA) is a potentially destructive disease with profound impact on patients' function and quality of life. Newer therapeutic agents have revolutionized outcomes but have not resulted in best outcomes for all patients. In this article, we will review recent progress in the development of strategies to enhance outcomes in patients with early RA (ERA). RECENT FINDINGS: Over the past 10 years, investigators have increasingly focused on additional means for improving long-term prognosis of patients with RA by examining the effect of different strategies to reach clinical targets reflecting optimal levels of disease control. In particular, it has become apparent that patients with ERA have the best chance to reach optimal outcomes, thus normalizing function, and halting radiographic damage. Studies show that strategies including treating to a target, computerizing targets, and combining clinical and biological or imaging targets for patients are enabling more patients to achieve remission, sustained remission, and even drug-free remission. SUMMARY: Overall, the bar has been set higher in clinical research with the expectation that therapeutic approaches for all patients should be implemented to achieve high-level targeted outcomes. Studies evaluating the feasibility of implementing these in practice are needed to achieve this goal for all patients with ERA.


Subject(s)
Antirheumatic Agents/therapeutic use , Arthritis, Rheumatoid/drug therapy , Biological Products/therapeutic use , Biomarkers/blood , Combined Modality Therapy , Humans , Prognosis , Secondary Prevention/methods , Treatment Outcome
8.
Ann Rheum Dis ; 72(4): 482-92, 2013 Apr.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-23172750

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Since approval of tocilizumab (TCZ) for treatment of rheumatoid arthritis (RA) and juvenile idiopathic arthritis (JIA), interleukin 6 (IL-6) pathway inhibition was evaluated in trials of TCZ and other agents targeting the IL-6 receptor and ligand in various RA populations and other inflammatory diseases. This consensus document informs on interference with the IL-6 pathway based on evidence and expert opinion. METHODS: Preparation of this document involved international experts in RA treatment and RA patients. A systematic literature search was performed that focused on TCZ and other IL6-pathway inhibitors in RA and other diseases. Subsequently, incorporating available published evidence and expert opinion, the steering committee and a broader expert committee (both including RA patients) formulated the current consensus statement. RESULTS: The consensus statement covers use of TCZ as combination- or monotherapy in various RA populations and includes clinical, functional and structural aspects. The statement also addresses the second approved indication in Europe JIA and non-approved indications. Also early phase trials involving additional agents that target the IL-6 receptor or IL-6 were evaluated. Safety concerns, including haematological, hepatic and metabolic issues as well as infections, are addressed likewise. CONCLUSIONS: The consensus statement identifies points to consider when using TCZ, regarding indications, contraindications, screening, dose, comedication, response evaluation and safety. The document is aimed at supporting clinicians and informing patients, administrators and payers on opportunities and limitations of IL-6 pathway inhibition.


Subject(s)
Antibodies, Monoclonal, Humanized/administration & dosage , Arthritis, Rheumatoid/drug therapy , Inflammation/drug therapy , Interleukin-6/antagonists & inhibitors , Receptors, Interleukin-6/antagonists & inhibitors , Antibodies, Monoclonal, Humanized/adverse effects , Antirheumatic Agents/administration & dosage , Antirheumatic Agents/adverse effects , Arthritis, Rheumatoid/immunology , Drug Monitoring/methods , Humans , Inflammation/immunology
9.
Ann Rheum Dis ; 72(4): 583-9, 2013 Apr.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-23144446

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Suppression of the immunoinflammatory cascade by targeting interleukin 6 (IL-6) mediated effects constitutes a therapeutic option for chronic inflammatory diseases. Tocilizumab is the only IL-6 inhibitor (IL-6i) licensed for rheumatoid arthritis (RA) and juvenile idiopathic arthritis (JIA), but also other agents targeting either IL-6 or its receptor are investigated in various indications. OBJECTIVE: To review published evidence on safety and efficacy of IL-6i in inflammatory diseases. METHODS: We performed systematic literature searches in Medline and Cochrane, screened EULAR and American College of Rheumatology meeting-abstracts, and accessed http://www.clinicaltrials.gov. RESULTS: Comprehensive evidence supports the efficacy of tocilizumab in RA in DMARD-naïve patients, and after DMARD- and TNFi-failure. Randomised comparisons demonstrate superiority of tocilizumab in JIA, but not ankylosing spondylitis (AS). Other indications are currently investigated. Additional IL-6i show similar efficacy; safety generally appears acceptable. CONCLUSIONS: IL-6i is effective and safe in RA and JIA, but not in AS. Preliminary results in other indications need substantiation.


Subject(s)
Antibodies, Monoclonal, Humanized/therapeutic use , Arthritis, Juvenile/drug therapy , Arthritis, Rheumatoid/drug therapy , Interleukin-6/antagonists & inhibitors , Spondylitis, Ankylosing/drug therapy , Antirheumatic Agents/therapeutic use , Arthritis, Juvenile/immunology , Arthritis, Rheumatoid/immunology , Consensus , Humans , Interleukin-6/immunology , Spondylitis, Ankylosing/immunology
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL
...