Protective effect of antirheumatic drugs on dementia in rheumatoid arthritis patients.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Judge A
PROVIDER: S-EPMC5700830 | biostudies-literature | 2017 Nov
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Publications
Protective effect of antirheumatic drugs on dementia in rheumatoid arthritis patients.
Judge Andy A Garriga Cesar C Arden Nigel K NK Lovestone Simon S Prieto-Alhambra Dani D Cooper Cyrus C Edwards Christopher J CJ
Alzheimer's & dementia (New York, N. Y.) 20171109 4
<h4>Introduction</h4>Rheumatoid arthritis is a systemic inflammatory disease, and classical disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (cDMARDs) have proven efficacy. It is unknown what impact cDMARDs might have on dementia as an outcome.<h4>Methods</h4>Incident diagnoses of rheumatoid arthritis in persons over 18 years from 1995 to 2011 were identified from the UK Clinical Practice Research Datalink. There were 3876 cDMARD users and were propensity score matched to 1938 nonusers, on a wide range of ...[more]
Similar Datasets
Project description:Recent research suggests that rheumatoid arthritis increases the risk of venous thromboembolism. This study compared the risk of venous thromboembolism in patients with newly diagnosed rheumatoid arthritis initiating a biologic disease-modifying antirheumatic drug (DMARD) with those initiating methotrexate or a nonbiologic DMARD.We conducted a population-based cohort study using US insurance claims data (2001-2012). Three mutually exclusive, hierarchical DMARD groups were used: (1) a biologic DMARD with and without nonbiologic DMARDs; (2) methotrexate without a biologic DMARD; or (3) nonbiologic DMARDs without a biologic DMARD or methotrexate. We calculated the incidence rates of venous thromboembolism. Cox proportional hazard models stratified by propensity score (PS) deciles after asymmetric PS trimming were used for 3 pairwise comparisons, controlling for potential confounders at baseline.We identified 29,481 patients with rheumatoid arthritis with 39,647 treatment episodes. From the pairwise comparison after asymmetric PS trimming, the incidence rate of hospitalization for venous thromboembolism per 1000 person-years was 5.5 in biologic DMARD initiators versus 4.4 in nonbiologic DMARD initiators and 4.8 in biologic DMARD initiators versus 3.5 in methotrexate initiators. The PS decile-stratified hazard ratio of venous thromboembolism associated with biologic DMARDs was 1.83 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.91-3.66) versus nonbiologic DMARDs and 1.39 (95% CI, 0.73-2.63) versus methotrexate. The hazard ratio of venous thromboembolism in biologic DMARD initiators was the highest in the first 180 days versus nonbiologic DMARD initiators (2.48; 95% CI, 1.14-5.39) or methotrexate initiators (1.80; 95% CI, 0.90-3.62).The absolute risk for venous thromboembolism was low in patients with newly diagnosed rheumatoid arthritis. Initiation of a biologic DMARD seems to be associated with an increased short-term risk of hospitalization for venous thromboembolism compared with initiation of a nonbiologic DMARD or methotrexate.
| S-EPMC4414700 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectiveDisease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs) are the standard of care for rheumatoid arthritis (RA); however, studies have found that many patients do not receive them. We examined predictors of starting and stopping DMARDs among a longitudinal cohort of patients with RA.MethodsStudy participants came from a cohort of RA patients recruited from a random sample of rheumatologists' practices in Northern California. We examined patterns and predictors of stopping and starting nonbiologic and biologic DMARDs during 1982-2009 based on annual questionnaires. Stopping was defined as stopping all DMARDs and starting was defined as transitioning from no DMARDs to any DMARDs across 2 consecutive years.ResultsThe analysis of starting DMARDs included 471 subjects with 1,974 pairs of years with no DMARD use in the first of 2 consecutive years. From this population, subjects started DMARD use by year 2 in 313 (15.9%) of the pairs. The analysis of stopping DMARDs included 1,026 subjects with 7,595 pairs of years with DMARD use in the first of 2 consecutive years; in 423 pairs (5.6%), subjects stopped DMARD use by year 2. In models that adjusted for RA-related factors, sociodemographics, and comorbidities, significant predictors of starting DMARDs included younger age, Hispanic ethnicity, shorter disease duration, and the use of oral glucocorticoids. In separate adjusted models, predictors of stopping DMARDs included Hispanic ethnicity and low income, while younger age was associated with a reduced risk of stopping.ConclusionEfforts to improve DMARD use should focus on patient age, ethnicity, and income and RA-related factors.
| S-EPMC4112169 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectiveThe efficacy and safety of subcutaneous tocilizumab (TCZ-SC) versus subcutaneous placebo (PBO-SC) was evaluated in patients with rheumatoid arthritis who had an inadequate response to disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs in the BREVACTA study.MethodsPatients (n = 656) were randomized 2:1 to receive TCZ-SC 162 mg every other week or PBO-SC every other week for 24 weeks; 20% previously received anti-tumor necrosis factor treatment. Escape therapy with TCZ-SC 162 mg weekly was offered from week 12 for inadequate response. The primary end point was the American College of Rheumatology 20% improvement (ACR20) response at week 24. The key secondary outcomes were radiographic progression and safety.ResultsTCZ-SC was superior to PBO-SC for ACR20 response at week 24 (60.9% versus 31.5%; P < 0.0001). All secondary end points showed TCZ-SC to be superior to PBO-SC, including ACR50 and ACR70 response (40% and 20% for TCZ-SC, respectively, and 12% and 5% for PBO-SC, respectively; P < 0.0001 for both) and Disease Activity Score in 28 joints (DAS28) remission (DAS28 <2.6; 32% versus 4% [P < 0.0001]). The mean change in modified Sharp/van der Heijde score was significantly lower in the TCZ-SC group than the PBO-SC group (0.62 versus 1.23; P = 0.0149). Adverse events (AEs) and serious AEs (SAEs) were comparable between the TCZ-SC and PBO-SC groups; 4.6% and 3.7% of patients had at least 1 SAE, respectively, and infection was the most common SAE in 2.1% and 1.8% of patients, respectively. More injection site reactions occurred with TCZ-SC than PBO-SC (7.1% versus 4.1%). No anaphylaxis or serious hypersensitivity reactions occurred. There were 3 deaths in the TCZ-SC group and 0 in the PBO-SC group.ConclusionTCZ-SC every other week had significantly greater efficacy, including ACR end points and inhibition of joint damage, compared with PBO-SC. TCZ-SC was well tolerated and its safety profile was comparable with that of previous intravenous TCZ studies.
| S-EPMC4276289 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Background/aimsWe aimed to compare the effectiveness and safety of Janus kinase inhibitors (JAKi) vs. biologic disease- modifying antirheumatic drugs (bDMARD) in Korean patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) who had an inadequate response to conventional synthetic DMARDs.MethodsA quasi-experimental, multi-center, prospective, non-randomized study was conducted to compare response rates between JAKi and bDMARDs in patients with RA naïve to targeted therapy. An interim analysis was performed to estimate the proportion of patients achieving low disease activity (LDA) based on disease activity score (DAS)-28- erythroid sedimentation rate (ESR) (DAS28-ESR) at 24 weeks after treatment initiation and to evaluate the development of adverse events (AEs).ResultsAmong 506 patients enrolled from 17 institutions between April 2020 and August 2022, 346 (196 JAKi group and 150 bDMARD group) were included in the analysis. After 24 weeks of treatment, 49.0% of JAKi users and 48.7% of bDMARD users achieved LDA (p = 0.954). DAS28-ESR remission rates were also comparable between JAKi and bDMARD users (30.1% and 31.3%, respectively; p = 0.806). The frequency of AEs reported in the JAKi group was numerically higher than that in the bDMARDs group, but the frequencies of serious and severe AEs were comparable between the groups.ConclusionOur interim findings reveal JAKi have comparable effectiveness and safety to bDMARDs at 24 weeks after treatment initiation.
| S-EPMC10338257 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectiveNonadherence to disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDS) in rheumatoid arthritis (RA) and spondyloarthritis (SpA) results in increased disease activity and symptoms and poorer quality of life. We aimed to describe patients' attitudes and experiences of DMARDs in RA and SpA to inform strategies to improve medication adherence.MethodsDatabases (MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, and CINAHL) were searched to January 2016. Thematic synthesis was used to analyze the findings.ResultsFrom 56 studies involving 1,383 adult patients (RA [n = 1,149], SpA [n = 191], not specified [n = 43]), we identified 6 themes (with subthemes): intensifying disease identity (severity of sudden pharmacotherapy, signifying deteriorating health, daunting lifelong therapy), distressing uncertainties and consequences (poisoning the body, doubting efficacy, conflicting and confusing advice, prognostic uncertainty with changing treatment regimens), powerful social influences (swayed by others' experiences, partnering with physicians, maintaining roles, confidence in comprehensive and ongoing care, valuing peer support), privilege and right of access to biologic agents (expensive medications must be better, right to receive a biologic agent, fearing dispossession), maintaining control (complete ownership of decision, taking extreme risks, minimizing lifestyle intrusion), and negotiating treatment expectations (miraculous recovery, mediocre benefit, reaching the end of the line).ConclusionPatients perceive DMARDs as strong medications with alarming side effects that intensify their disease identity. Trust and confidence in medical care, positive experiences with DMARDS among other patients, and an expectation that medications will help maintain participation in life can motivate patients to use DMARDs. Creating a supportive environment for patients to voice their concerns may improve treatment satisfaction, adherence, and health outcomes.
| S-EPMC5901029 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Objective:The objective of this study is to examine the risk of serious infections (SIs) associated with biological disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (bDMARDs) compared with conventional synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (csDMARDs) in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA). Methods:We studied patients with RA who initiated bDMARDs or csDMARDs from 2001 to 2016 in FORWARD-The National Databank for Rheumatic Diseases. Disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs) were categorized into three groups: (1) csDMARDs (bDMARD-naïve; reference), (2) tumor necrosis factor ? inhibitors (TNFis), and (3) non-TNFi biologics (abatacept, rituximab, tocilizumab, and anakinra). SIs were defined as those requiring intravenous antibiotics or hospitalization or those resulting in death. We calculated the propensity score (PS), which reflected the probability of receiving a specific DMARD group, and estimated the hazard ratio (HR) (with the 95% confidence interval [CI]) for SI from multivariable Cox models, adjusting for PS and time-varying confounders. Results:A total of 694 (5.9%) first SIs were identified in 11?623 patients with RA during 27?552 patient-years of follow-up. The SI incidence rate per 1000 patient-years was 22.4 (95% CI 19.2-26.1) for csDMARDs, 26.9 (95% CI 24.5-29.6) for TNFis, and 23.3 (95% CI 19.0-28.5) for non-TNFi bDMARDs. Adjusted HRs for SIs were 1.33 (95% CI 1.05-1.68) for TNFis and 1.48 (95% CI 1.02-2.16) for non-TNFi bDMARDs, compared with csDMARDs. The SI risk with non-TNFi bDMARDs versus TNFis was not different. Other risk factors for SI were older age, higher comorbidity burden (particularly pulmonary disease), higher weighted cumulative prednisone dose, disability and disease activity, and number of prior csDMARD failures. Conclusion:TNFis and non-TNFi bDMARDs were associated with an increased SI risk compared with csDMARDs in RA, even after accounting for risk-associated patient characteristics.
| S-EPMC6858027 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Rheumatoid arthritis (RA) is a chronic inflammatory systemic disease characterized by persistent joint synovial inflammation and swelling, leading to cartilage damage and bone erosion. This retrospective, longitudinal study is to evaluate the treatment patterns of biologic-naïve RA patients receiving index biologic disease-modifying antirheumatic drug (bDMARD) and tofacitinib by the data of Taiwan National Healthcare Insurance Claims and the Death Registry between 2012 and 2017. Drug survival and treatment patterns were determined by investigating the occurrence of switching and discontinuation from index treatment. At baseline, 70.0% of patients used tumor necrosis factor inhibitors (TNFi) bDMARD with the majority taking etanercept (27.0%) or adalimumab (26.2%). During the follow-up period, 40.0% (n = 3,464) of index users switched (n = 1,479) or discontinued (n = 1,985) the treatment with an average incidence rate of 0.18 per patient-year. Among the six index treatment groups, drug survival was the lowest for adalimumab and highest for tocilizumab. When compared with etanercept, only adalimumab had a higher cumulative probability of switching/discontinuation (adjusted HR = 1.17, 95% CI: 1.08-1.28), whereas golimumab, non-TNFi bDMARDs and tofacitinib were significantly less probable to switch or discontinue. For patients switching the index treatment, tocilizumab (31.2%) and tofacitinib (23.4%) were the main regimens being switched to. In addition, 48.2% of patients who discontinued the index treatment received further retreatment, and 63.8-77.0% of them were retreated with same agent. In conclusion, this population-based study found that TNFi were the preferred agents as the index treatments during 2012-2017. Non-TNFi and tofacitinib were more common second-line agents being switched to. Nearly half of discontinued patients received retreatment, with a majority receiving the same agent.
| S-EPMC8333863 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundThis study aimed to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of Anbainuo (ABN) plus methotrexate (MTX) vs. conventional disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (cDMARDs) in Chinese rheumatoid arthritis (RA) patients.MethodsA total of 90 RA patients who underwent ABN + MTX [assigned as ABN + MTX group (n=47)] or cDMARDs [assigned as control group (n=43)] treatment were analyzed. Disease activity was assessed at baseline (M0), 3rd month (M3), 6th month (M6), and 12th month (M12) after treatment. Drug, other medical, indirect, and total costs were calculated. Then, pharmacoeconomic analyses were performed with the threshold of cost-effectiveness set as 3 times of the mean gross domestic product (GDP) per capita in China during the study period.ResultsTreatment response rate was similar between the 2 groups, while disease remission and low disease activity (LDA) rates were increased in the ABN + MTX group compared to control group. Drug cost, other medical costs, and total cost were higher in the ABN + MTX group than control group, while indirect cost was similar between the 2 groups. Meanwhile, the quality-adjusted life-years (QALY) in ABN + MTX group and control group were 0.72 and 0.48 years, respectively. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICER) of ABN + MTX group compared to control group among the entire participant cohort, moderate-disease-activity participants, and severe-disease-activity participants were ¥135,486.7, ¥146,450.4, and ¥124,987.2/QALY, respectively, which were all below the cost-effectiveness threshold. Further sensitivity analyses revealed that the cost-effectiveness of ABN + MTX vs. cDMARDs was relatively robust, while among all the indexes, ABN price and Health Assessment Questionnaire Disability Index (HAQ-DI) score change for the ABN + MTX group affected ICER most.ConclusionsTreatment with ABN + MTX offers acceptable cost-effectiveness compared to cDMARDs treatment in Chinese RA patients.
| S-EPMC8350709 | biostudies-literature
Project description:IntroductionThis open-label study evaluated the immunogenicity, safety, and efficacy of sarilumab monotherapy in patients with active, moderate-to-severe rheumatoid arthritis (RA) and inadequate response or intolerance to prior conventional synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs.MethodsAdults with RA (n = 132) were randomized to receive subcutaneous sarilumab (150 [n = 65] or 200 mg [n = 67]) every 2 weeks (q2w) for 24 weeks. Endpoints included incidence of antidrug antibodies (ADAs) at week 24, safety, and efficacy.ResultsPersistent ADAs occurred in eight patients (12.3%) receiving sarilumab 150 mg q2w, seven of whom (10.8%) had neutralizing antibodies (NAbs), and in four patients (6.1%) receiving sarilumab 200 mg q2w, two of whom (3.0%) had NAbs; all exhibited low antibody titers. Infections and neutropenia were the most common adverse events (AEs). There were three serious AEs, no reports of anaphylaxis, and few hypersensitivity reactions (e.g., rash) with no notable differences in hypersensitivity reactions in ADA-positive patients relative to ADA-negative patients. Changes in absolute neutrophil count, alanine aminotransferase level, and platelet count were consistent with interleukin-6 signaling blockade and in agreement with previous observations. At week 24, overall American College of Rheumatology 20%/50%/70% improvement criteria responses were 73.8%/53.8%/29.2%, respectively, with sarilumab 150 mg q2w and 71.6%/50.7%/29.9% with sarilumab 200 mg q2w. No patients with an ADA-positive response showed loss of efficacy.ConclusionsADA titers were low and persistent ADAs and NAbs occurred relatively infrequently in both sarilumab dose groups. ADA did not meaningfully impact the safety or efficacy of either dose of sarilumab over 24 weeks.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov, identifier NCT02121210.FundingSanofi Genzyme and Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Inc. Plain language summary available for this article.
| S-EPMC6702535 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectiveThe objective of this study was to compare the incidence rate of nonvertebral osteoporotic fractures (NVFs) in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) initiating one of the nine biologic or targeted synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (b/tsDMARDs).MethodsWe analyzed claims data from Optum (2008 to March 2019), Medicare, and MarketScan (2008-2017) to identify adults with RA who newly initiated b/tsDMARDs. Adalimumab was the most frequently used and was thus selected as a reference. The primary outcome was a composite of incident NVFs, including hip, humerus, pelvis, and wrist fractures, based on validated algorithms. We adjusted for greater than 70 potential confounders in each database through propensity score-based inverse probability treatment weighting. Follow-up time started the day after cohort entry until the first occurrence of one of the following: outcome, treatment discontinuation, switching, nursing home admission, death, disenrollment, or end of study period. For each drug comparison, weighted Cox proportional hazards models estimated the hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Secondary analyses were conducted in patients switching from a tumor necrosis factor inhibitor to a different b/tsDMARD.ResultsA total of 134,693 b/tsDMARD initiators were identified across three databases. The adjusted HRs showed similar risk of composite NVFs in all b/tsDMARD exposures compared with adalimumab: abatacept, HR 1.03 (95% CI 0.82-1.30); certolizumab, HR 1.08 (95% CI 0.79-1.49); etanercept, HR 1.12 (95% CI 0.89-1.40); golimumab, HR 0.91 (95% CI 0.59-1.39); infliximab, HR 1.03 (95% CI 0.84-1.28); rituximab, HR 1.07 (95% CI 0.74-1.55); tocilizumab, HR 1.24 (95% CI 0.71-2.17); and tofacitinib, HR 1.07 (95% CI 0.69-1.64). Secondary analyses showed similar results.ConclusionThis multidatabase cohort study found no differences in the risk of NVFs across individual b/tsDMARDs for RA, which provides reassurance to physicians prescribing b/tsDMARDs, especially to patients at high risk of developing NVFs.
| S-EPMC8363846 | biostudies-literature