Dataset Information

Rituximab versus an alternative TNF inhibitor in patients with rheumatoid arthritis who failed to respond to a single previous TNF inhibitor: SWITCH-RA, a global, observational, comparative effectiveness study.

ABSTRACT: OBJECTIVES:To compare the effectiveness of rituximab versus an alternative tumour necrosis factor (TNF) inhibitor (TNFi) in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) with an inadequate response to one previous TNFi. METHODS:SWITCH-RA was a prospective, global, observational, real-life study. Patients non-responsive or intolerant to a single TNFi were enrolled ?4?weeks after starting rituximab or a second TNFi. Primary end point: change in Disease Activity Score in 28 joints excluding patient's global health component (DAS28-3)-erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR) over 6?months. RESULTS:604 patients received rituximab, and 507 an alternative TNFi as second biological therapy. Reasons for discontinuing the first TNFi were inefficacy (n=827), intolerance (n=263) and other (n=21). A total of 728 patients were available for primary end point analysis (rituximab n=405; TNFi n=323). Baseline mean (SD) DAS28-3-ESR was higher in the rituximab than the TNFi group: 5.2 (1.2) vs 4.8 (1.3); p<0.0001. Least squares mean (SE) change in DAS28-3-ESR at 6?months was significantly greater in rituximab than TNFi patients: -1.5 (0.2) vs -1.1 (0.2); p=0.007. The difference remained significant among patients discontinuing the initial TNFi because of inefficacy (-1.7 vs -1.3; p=0.017) but not intolerance (-0.7 vs -0.7; p=0.894). Seropositive patients showed significantly greater improvements in DAS28-3-ESR with rituximab than with TNFi (-1.6 (0.3) vs -1.2 (0.3); p=0.011), particularly those switching because of inefficacy (-1.9 (0.3) vs -1.5 (0.4); p=0.021). The overall incidence of adverse events was similar between the rituximab and TNFi groups. CONCLUSIONS:These real-life data indicate that, after discontinuation of an initial TNFi, switching to rituximab is associated with significantly improved clinical effectiveness compared with switching to a second TNFi. This difference was particularly evident in seropositive patients and in those switched because of inefficacy.

SUBMITTER: Emery P

PROVIDER: S-EPMC4431330 | biostudies-literature | 2015 Jun

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Rituximab versus an alternative TNF inhibitor in patients with rheumatoid arthritis who failed to respond to a single previous TNF inhibitor: SWITCH-RA, a global, observational, comparative effectiveness study.

Emery P P Gottenberg J E JE Rubbert-Roth A A Sarzi-Puttini P P Choquette D D Taboada V M Martínez VM Barile-Fabris L L Moots R J RJ Ostor A A Andrianakos A A Gemmen E E Mpofu C C Chung C C Gylvin L Hinsch LH Finckh A A

Annals of the rheumatic diseases 20140117 6

<h4>Objectives</h4>To compare the effectiveness of rituximab versus an alternative tumour necrosis factor (TNF) inhibitor (TNFi) in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) with an inadequate response to one previous TNFi.<h4>Methods</h4>SWITCH-RA was a prospective, global, observational, real-life study. Patients non-responsive or intolerant to a single TNFi were enrolled ≤4 weeks after starting rituximab or a second TNFi. Primary end point: change in Disease Activity Score in 28 joints excludin ...[more]

PMID: 24442884

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundRheumatoid Arthritis (RA) is one of the most common autoimmune diseases, affecting approximately 1% of the UK adult population. Patients suffer considerable pain, stiffness and swelling and can sustain various degrees of joint destruction, deformity, and significant functional decline. In addition, the economic burden due to hospitalisation and loss of employment is considerable, with over 50% of patients being work-disabled within 10 years of diagnosis. Despite several biologic disease modifying anti-rheumatic drugs (bDMARD) now available, there is a lack of data to guide biologic sequencing. In the UK, second-line biologic treatment is restricted to a single option, rituximab. The aim of the SWITCH trial is to establish whether an alternative-mechanism-TNF-inhibitor (TNFi) or abatacept are as effective as rituximab in patients with RA who have failed an initial TNFi drug.Methods/designSWITCH is a pragmatic, phase IV, multi-centre, parallel-group design, open-label, randomised, controlled trial (RCT) comparing alternative-mechanism-TNFi and abatacept with rituximab in patients with RA who have failed an initial TNFi drug. Participants are randomised in a 1:1:1 ratio to receive alternative mechanism TNFi, (monoclonal antibodies: infliximab, adalimumab, certolizumab or golimumab or the receptor fusion protein, etanercept), abatacept or rituximab during the interventional phase (from randomisation up to week 48). Participants are subsequently followed up to a maximum of 96 weeks, which constitutes the observational phase. The primary objective is to establish whether an alternative-mechanism-TNFi or abatacept are non-inferior to rituximab in terms of disease response at 24 weeks post randomisation. The secondary objectives include the comparison of alternative-mechanism-TNFi and abatacept to rituximab in terms of disease response, quality of life, toxicity, safety and structural and bone density outcomes over a 12-month period (48 weeks) and to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of switching patients to alternative active therapies compared to current practice.DiscussionSWITCH is a well-designed trial in this therapeutic area that aims to develop a rational treatment algorithm to potentially inform personalised treatment regimens (as opposed to switching all patients to only one available (and possibly unsuccessful) therapy), which may lead to long-term improved patient outcomes and gains in population health.Trial registrationUKCRN Portfolio ID: 12343; ISRCTN89222125 ; NCT01295151.

Project description:Background:Tapering of anti-tumour necrosis factor (TNF) therapy appears feasible, safe and effective in selected patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA). Depression is highly prevalent in RA and may impact on flare incidence through various mechanisms. This study aims to investigate if psychological states predict flare in patients' dose tapering their anti-TNF therapy. Methods:This study is a post-hoc analysis of the Optimizing TNF Tapering in RA trial, a multicentre, randomised, open-label study investigating anti-TNF tapering in RA patients with sustained low disease activity. Patient-reported outcomes (Health Assessment Questionnaire, EuroQol 5-dimension scale, Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy fatigue scale (FACIT-F), 36-Item Short Form Survey (SF-36)) were collected at baseline. The primary outcome was flare, defined as an increase in 28-joint count Disease Activity Score (DAS28) ?0.6 and ?1?swollen joint. Discrete-time survival models were used to identify patient-reported outcomes that predict flare. Results:Ninety-seven patients were randomised to taper their anti-TNF dose by either 33% or 66%. Forty-one patients flared. Higher baseline DAS28 score was associated with flare (adjusted HR 1.96 (95% CI 1.18 to 3.24), p=0.01). Disability (SF-36 physical component score), fatigue (FACIT-F) and mental health (SF-36 mental health subscale (MH)) predicted flare in unadjusted models. In multivariate analyses, only SF-36 MH remained a statistically significant predictor of flare (adjusted HR per 10 units 0.74 (95% CI 0.60 to 0.93), p=0.01). Conclusions:Baseline DAS28 and mental health status are independently associated with flare in patients who taper their anti-TNF therapy. Fatigue and function also associate with flare but the effect disappears when adjusting for confounders. Given these findings, mental health and functional status should be considered in anti-TNF tapering decisions in order to optimise the likelihood of success. Trial registration numbers:EudraCT Number: 2010-020738-24; ISRCTN: 28955701; Post-results.

Project description:ObjectivesThe objective of this study was to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of abatacept, tocilizumab, and tumor necrosis factor (TNF) inhibitors as compared with rituximab in Finnish rheumatoid arthritis patients, who have previously been treated with TNF inhibitors.MethodsA patient-level simulation model was developed to predict costs and outcomes associated with four biological drugs (abatacept, tocilizumab, rituximab and TNF inhibitors) in the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis. Following lack of efficacy or adverse events, the patients were switched to another biological drug until all four options were exhausted. After that, the patients were assumed to receive a 6th line treatment until death. The patients' baseline characteristics and regression models used in the simulation were based on observational data from the National Register for Biological Treatments in Finland. Direct costs comprised drug costs, administration costs, costs of switching, and outpatient and inpatient care, while indirect costs included disability pension and sick leaves due to rheumatoid arthritis. Several subgroup and deterministic sensitivity analyses were conducted.ResultsDrug costs were the lowest for rituximab, but when administration costs and costs of switching were included, drug costs were the lowest for TNF inhibitors. Abatacept was associated with the highest drug costs, whereas rituximab was associated with the highest healthcare costs. In total, TNF inhibitors had the lowest direct costs, while rituximab had the highest direct costs. The amount of quality-adjusted life years (QALY) gained ranged from 9.405 for rituximab to 9.661 for TNF inhibitors. TNF inhibitors, abatacept, and tocilizumab were dominant in comparison to RTX.ConclusionsTNF inhibitors, abatacept, and tocilizumab had lower costs and higher QALYs than rituximab, and therefore, they were dominant in comparison to rituximab. As TNF inhibitors had the lowest costs and highest QALYs, they were the most cost-effective treatment option.

Dataset Information

Rituximab versus an alternative TNF inhibitor in patients with rheumatoid arthritis who failed to respond to a single previous TNF inhibitor: SWITCH-RA, a global, observational, comparative effectiveness study.

Publications

Rituximab versus an alternative TNF inhibitor in patients with rheumatoid arthritis who failed to respond to a single previous TNF inhibitor: SWITCH-RA, a global, observational, comparative effectiveness study.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets