Low dose, add-on prednisolone in patients with rheumatoid arthritis aged 65+: the pragmatic randomised, double-blind placebo-controlled GLORIA trial.

BACKGROUND: Low-dose glucocorticoid (GC) therapy is widely used in rheumatoid arthritis (RA) but the balance of benefit and harm is still unclear. METHODS: The GLORIA (Glucocorticoid LOw-dose in RheumatoId Arthritis) pragmatic double-blind randomised trial compared 2 years of prednisolone, 5 mg/day, to placebo in patients aged 65+ with active RA. We allowed all cotreatments except long-term open label GC and minimised exclusion criteria, tailored to seniors. Benefit outcomes included disease activity (disease activity score; DAS28, coprimary) and joint damage (Sharp/van der Heijde, secondary). The other coprimary outcome was harm, expressed as the proportion of patients with ≥1 adverse event (AE) of special interest. Such events comprised serious events, GC-specific events and those causing study discontinuation. Longitudinal models analysed the data, with one-sided testing and 95% confidence limits (95% CL). RESULTS: We randomised 451 patients with established RA and mean 2.1 comorbidities, age 72, disease duration 11 years and DAS28 4.5. 79% were on disease-modifying treatment, including 14% on biologics. 63% prednisolone versus 61% placebo patients completed the trial. Discontinuations were for AE (both, 14%), active disease (3 vs 4%) and for other (including covid pandemic-related disease) reasons (19 vs 21%); mean time in study was 19 months. Disease activity was 0.37 points lower on prednisolone (95% CL 0.23, p<0.0001); joint damage progression was 1.7 points lower (95% CL 0.7, p=0.003). 60% versus 49% of patients experienced the harm outcome, adjusted relative risk 1.24 (95% CL 1.04, p=0.02), with the largest contrast in (mostly non-severe) infections. Other GC-specific events were rare. CONCLUSION: Add-on low-dose prednisolone has beneficial long-term effects in senior patients with established RA, with a trade-off of 24% increase in patients with mostly non-severe AE; this suggests a favourable balance of benefit and harm. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT02585258.

Early rheumatoid arthritis treated with tocilizumab, methotrexate, or their combination (U-Act-Early): a multicentre, randomised, double-blind, double-dummy, strategy trial.

BACKGROUND: For patients with newly diagnosed rheumatoid arthritis, treatment aim is early, rapid, and sustained remission. We compared the efficacy and safety of strategies initiating the interleukin-6 receptor-blocking monoclonal antibody tocilizumab with or without methotrexate (a conventional synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drug [DMARD]), versus initiation of methotrexate monotherapy in line with international guidelines. METHODS: We did a 2-year, multicentre, randomised, double-blind, double-dummy, strategy study at 21 rheumatology outpatient departments in the Netherlands. We included patients who had been diagnosed with rheumatoid arthritis within 1 year before inclusion, were DMARD-naive, aged 18 years or older, met current rheumatoid arthritis classification criteria, and had a disease activity score assessing 28 joints (DAS28) of at least 2·6. We randomly assigned patients (1:1:1) to start tocilizumab plus methotrexate (the tocilizumab plus methotrexate arm), or tocilizumab plus placebo-methotrexate (the tocilizumab arm), or methotrexate plus placebo-tocilizumab (the methotrexate arm). Tocilizumab was given at 8 mg/kg intravenously every 4 weeks with a maximum of 800 mg per dose. Methotrexate was started at 10 mg per week orally and increased stepwise every 4 weeks by 5 mg to a maximum of 30 mg per week, until remission or dose-limiting toxicity. We did the randomisation using an interactive web response system. Masking was achieved with placebos that were similar in appearance to the active drug; the study physicians, pharmacists, monitors, and patients remained masked during the study, and all assessments were done by masked assessors. Patients not achieving remission on their initial regimen switched from placebo to active treatments; patients in the tocilizumab plus methotrexate arm switched to standard of care therapy (typically methotrexate combined with a tumour necrosis factor inhibitor). When sustained remission was achieved, methotrexate (and placebo-methotrexate) was tapered and stopped, then tocilizumab (and placebo-tocilizumab) was also tapered and stopped. The primary endpoint was the proportion of patients achieving sustained remission (defined as DAS28 <2·6 with a swollen joint count ≤four, persisting for at least 24 weeks) on the initial regimen and during the entire study duration, compared between groups with a two-sided Cochran-Mantel-Haenszel test. Analysis was based on an intention-to-treat method. This trial was registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01034137. FINDINGS: Between Jan 13, 2010, and July 30, 2012, we recruited and assigned 317 eligible patients to treatment (106 to the tocilizumab plus methotrexate arm, 103 to the tocilizumab arm, and 108 to the methotrexate arm). The study was completed by a similar proportion of patients in the three groups (range 72-78%). The most frequent reasons for dropout were adverse events or intercurrent illness: 27 (34%) of dropouts, and insufficient response: 26 (33%) of dropouts. 91 (86%) of 106 patients in the tocilizumab plus methotrexate arm achieved sustained remission on the initial regimen, compared with 86 (84%) of 103 in the tocilizumab arm, and 48 (44%) of 108 in the methotrexate arm (relative risk [RR] 2·00, 95% CI 1·59-2·51 for tocilizumab plus methotrexate vs methotrexate, and 1·86, 1·48-2·32 for tocilizumab vs methotrexate, p<0·0001 for both comparisons). For the entire study, 91 (86%) of 106 patients in the tocilizumab plus methotrexate arm, 91 (88%) of 103 in the tocilizumab arm, and 83 (77%) of 108 in the methotrexate arm achieved sustained remission (RR 1·13, 95% CI 1·00-1·29, p=0·06 for tocilizumab plus methotrexate vs methotrexate, 1·14, 1·01-1·29, p=0·0356 for tocilizumab vs methotrexate, and p=0·59 for tocilizumab plus methotrexate vs tocilizumab). Nasopharyngitis was the most common adverse event in all three treatment groups, occurring in 38 (36%) of 106 patients in the tocilizumab plus methotrexate arm, 40 (39%) of 103 in the tocilizumab arm, and 37 (34%) of 108 in the methotrexate arm. The occurrence of serious adverse events did not differ between the treatment groups (17 [16%] of 106 patients in the tocilizumab plus methotrexate arm vs 19 [18%] of 103 in the tocilizumab arm and 13 [12%] of 108 in the methotrexate arm), and no deaths occurred during the study. INTERPRETATION: For patients with newly diagnosed rheumatoid arthritis, strategies aimed at sustained remission by immediate initiation of tocilizumab with or without methotrexate are more effective, and with a similar safety profile, compared with initiation of methotrexate in line with current standards. FUNDING: Roche Nederland BV.

Can simple ultrasonography predict the clinical effect of intra-articular injection therapy of the knee joint?

To investigate whether ultrasonographic joint assessment can predict the clinical response to intra-articular injection therapy of the knee. Patients with persistent gonarthritis intra-articularly received in a randomized double-blinded crossover fashion radiation synovectomy or a glucocorticoid injection, both followed by clinical bed rest. Prior to treatment and 3 months afterwards, grey-scale ultrasonography (US) of the knee was performed, measuring synovial thickness and extent of effusion. The final clinical effect of these two treatments was assessed at 3 months and finally at 6 months using a composite index. Ninety-seven patients, mainly suffering from undifferentiated arthritis (40%) or rheumatoid arthritis (31%), received 165 injections (including crossovers). Clinical effect at 6 months was not related to the baseline ultrasonographic extent of effusion or synovial thickness, nor with ultrasonographic decrease of effusion after the first 3 months. Nevertheless, it was associated with ultrasonographic decrease of synovial thickness within the first 3 months. Simple baseline US measurements fail to predict the final clinical effect of intra-articular treatment of the knee at 6 months, in contrast to early US changes of synovial thickness 3 months after therapy.

Adalimumab is effective and well tolerated in treating patients with ankylosing spondylitis who have advanced spinal fusion.

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the effectiveness and safety of adalimumab in treating patients with AS and advanced structural damage. METHODS: Patients with active AS [Bath AS Disease Activity Index (BASDAI) > or =4] received 40 mg of adalimumab every other week plus their standard anti-rheumatic therapies in this 12-week, open-label study. Investigators documented the presence or absence of advanced ankylosis based on previous radiographs. Stages IV (from 50 to <80% involvement in more than two spinal segments) and V (> or =80% spinal involvement, including bamboo spine) disease were considered as advanced AS. Effectiveness parameters included Assessment of SpondyloArthritis international Society (ASAS) criteria, BASDAI response and achievement of optimal sleep. Adverse events were reported throughout therapy and at a 70-day follow-up. RESULTS: The analysis population included 897 patients whose AS was not advanced (i.e. Stages I-III), 31 with Stage IV disease and 41 with Stage V disease. At Week 12, ASAS40/BASDAI 50 responses were achieved by 54%/57% of patients with AS Stages I-III, 48%/58% with AS Stage IV and 54%/66% with AS Stage V, respectively. ASAS partial remission rates were 30, 26 and 7% for patients with Stages I-III, IV and V disease, respectively. Serious infections occurred in three (<1%) patients with AS Stages I-III and in one (1%) patient with AS Stage V. CONCLUSIONS: After 12 weeks of adalimumab therapy, patients with advanced but active AS, including those with structural damage of > or =80% of the vertebrae, achieved improvements in signs and symptoms similar to those attained by patients whose AS was not advanced.