Dataset Information

Abatacept initiation in rheumatoid arthritis and the risk of cancer: a population-based comparative cohort study.

ABSTRACT:

Objective

To assess whether abatacept as initial biological DMARD (bDMARD) in the treatment of RA, when compared with other bDMARDs, is associated with an increased risk of cancer overall and by specific cancer sites (breast, lung, lymphoma, melanoma and non-melanoma skin cancer).

Methods

We performed a population-based cohort study among patients newly treated with bDMARDs within the US-based Truven MarketScan population and Supplemental US Medicare from 2007 to 2014. Cox proportional hazards models were used to estimate hazard ratios and 95% CIs of any cancer (and specific cancers) associated with initiation of abatacept, compared with initiation of other bDMARDs, adjusted for age and deciles of the propensity score.

Results

The cohort included 4328 patients on abatacept and 59 860 on other bDMARDs, of whom 409 and 4197 were diagnosed with any cancer during follow-up (incidence rates 4.76 per 100 per year and 3.41 per 100 per year, respectively). Compared with other bDMARDs, the use of abatacept was associated with an increased incidence of cancer overall (hazard ratioadjusted 1.17; 95% CI 1.06, 1.30). Analyses by specific cancer sites showed a significantly increased incidence of non-melanoma skin cancer (hazard ratioadjusted 1.20; 95% CI 1.03, 1.39), but no significant difference for other specific cancer sites.

Conclusion

The use of abatacept as first bDMARD in the treatment of RA was associated with a slight increased risk of cancer overall and particularly non-melanoma skin cancer, compared with other bDMARDs. This potential signal needs to be replicated in other settings.

SUBMITTER: Montastruc F

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6434371 | biostudies-literature | 2019 Apr

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Abatacept initiation in rheumatoid arthritis and the risk of cancer: a population-based comparative cohort study.

Montastruc François F Renoux Christel C Dell'Aniello Sophie S Simon Teresa A TA Azoulay Laurent L Hudson Marie M Suissa Samy S

Rheumatology (Oxford, England) 20190401 4

<h4>Objective</h4>To assess whether abatacept as initial biological DMARD (bDMARD) in the treatment of RA, when compared with other bDMARDs, is associated with an increased risk of cancer overall and by specific cancer sites (breast, lung, lymphoma, melanoma and non-melanoma skin cancer).<h4>Methods</h4>We performed a population-based cohort study among patients newly treated with bDMARDs within the US-based Truven MarketScan population and Supplemental US Medicare from 2007 to 2014. Cox proport ...[more]

PMID: 30535094

Similar Datasets

Project description:IntroductionCurrently there is limited data to drive clinical decision making regarding the choice of biologic/targeted synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARD); thus, head-to-head comparisons are needed to help guide prescribing. In recent years, significant advancements have helped clarify the mechanistic basis of the clinical associations of autoantibodies in rheumatoid arthritis (RA). This study evaluated the effectiveness of abatacept versus tofacitinib in anti-cyclic citrullinated peptide (CCP+) patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA).MethodsCorEvitas (formerly known as CORRONA) Registry patients aged ≥ 18 years, who were CCP+ before initiating abatacept or tofacitinib (December 2012 onwards through October 2019), had 6-month follow-up data (baseline and 6-month Clinical Disease Activity Index [CDAI]), and were not in remission at index were included. Patients were frequency matched 1:1 by prior biologic use before propensity score matching (PSM). Primary (mean change [D] in CDAI) and secondary outcomes 6 months after index were compared using mixed-effects models adjusted for variables that remained unbalanced after PSM.ResultsFollowing PSM, most baseline characteristics for 291 patient pairs were well balanced between treatments, although fewer patients initiating abatacept versus tofacitinib received prior non-TNFi biologic DMARDs, and patients initiating abatacept versus tofacitinib had a higher physician global assessment score, patient-reported fatigue, and modified Health Assessment Questionnaire (mHAQ). In adjusted analyses, there were no significant differences in mean [D] from baseline in CDAI at 6 months with abatacept versus tofacitinib (P = 0.936). Patients naïve for b/tsDMARDs initiating abatacept had a numerically greater mean [D] in CDAI at 6 months versus tofacitinib, although this difference was not statistically significant (P = 0.662). There were no significant differences for any secondary outcomes.ConclusionsIn adjusted analyses, CCP+ patients with RA initiating treatment with abatacept versus tofacitinib did not show a statistically significant difference in reducing disease activity or improving patient-reported outcomes.

Project description:OBJECTIVE:To compare the effectiveness and safety of three non-tumour necrosis factor (TNF) ? inhibitors (rituximab, abatacept, and tocilizumab) in the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis. DESIGN:Population based prospective study. SETTING:53 university and 54 non-university clinical centres in France. PARTICIPANTS:3162 adults (>18 years) with rheumatoid arthritis according to 1987 American College of Rheumatology criteria, enrolled in one of the three French Society of Rheumatology registries; who had no severe cardiovascular disease, active or severe infections, or severe immunodeficiency, with follow-up of at least 24 months. INTERVENTION:Initiation of intravenous rituximab, abatacept, or tocilizumab for rheumatoid arthritis. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE:The primary outcome was drug retention without failure at 24 months. Failure was defined as all cause death; discontinuation of rituximab, abatacept, or tocilizumab; initiation of a new biologic or a combination of conventional disease modifying antirheumatic drugs; or increase in corticosteroid dose >10 mg/d compared with baseline at two successive visits. Because of non-proportional hazards, treatment effects are presented as life expectancy difference without failure (LEDwf), which measures the difference between average duration of survival without failure. RESULTS:Average durations of survival without failure were 19.8 months for rituximab, 15.6 months for abatacept, and 19.1 months for tocilizumab. Average durations were greater with rituximab (LEDwf 4.1, 95% confidence interval 3.1 to 5.2) and tocilizumab (3.5, 2.1 to 5.0) than with abatacept, and uncertainty about tocilizumab compared with rituximab was substantial (-0.7, -1.9 to 0.5). No evidence was found of difference between treatments for mean duration of survival without death, presence of cancer or serious infections, or major adverse cardiovascular events. CONCLUSION:Among adults with refractory rheumatoid arthritis followed-up in routine practice, rituximab and tocilizumab were associated with greater improvements in outcomes at two years compared with abatacept.

Project description:BackgroundPostpartum psychiatric disorders (PPD) are common complications of childbirth. A common explanation for their development is that the psychological, hormonal, and immune changes associated with pregnancy and parturition may trigger psychiatric symptoms postpartum. Rheumatoid arthritis (RA) is characterized by abnormalities in the activity of the hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal axis and of the immune system, but its association with PPD is unknown. We analyzed whether women with RA before childbirth have an increased risk of PPD.MethodsWe conducted a large population-based cohort study including mothers of singleton births in the Danish (1995-2015), Finnish (1997-2013), and Swedish Medical Birth Registers (2001-2013) (N = 3,516,849). We linked data from the Medical Birth Registers with data from several national socioeconomic and health registers. Exposure was defined as having a diagnosis of RA before childbirth, while the main outcome was a clinical diagnosis of psychiatric disorders 90 days postpartum. We analyzed the association between RA and PPD using Cox proportional hazard models, stratified by a personal history of psychiatric disorders.ResultsAmong women without a history of psychiatric disorders, the PPD incidence rate was 32.2 in the exposed and 19.5 per 1000 person-years in the unexposed group; women with RA had a higher risk of overall PPD than their unexposed counterparts [adjusted hazard ratio (HR) = 1.52, 95% confidence intervals (CI) 1.17 to 1.98]. Similar associations were also observed for postpartum depression (HR = 1.65, 95% CI 1.09 to 2.48) and other PPD (HR = 1.59, 95% CI 1.13 to 2.24). Among women with a history of psychiatric disorders, the incidence rate of overall PPD was 339.6 in the exposed and 346.6 per 1000 person-years in the unexposed group; RA was not associated with PPD. We observed similar associations between preclinical RA (RA diagnosed after childbirth) and PPD to those corresponding to clinical RA.ConclusionsRheumatoid arthritis was associated with an increased PPD risk in women without, but not in those with a psychiatric history. If our findings are confirmed in future studies, new mothers with RA may benefit from increased surveillance for new-onset psychiatric disorders postpartum.

Project description:Rheumatoid arthritis (RA) is a chronic, inflammatory disease affecting synovial joints. Patients with persistent, active disease have traditionally been treated with disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs) (eg, methotrexate) or biologic agents (eg, tumor necrosis factor [TNF] antagonists). However, patients may discontinue these treatments due to toxicity, infection, or lack of efficacy. Two additional biologic therapies-rituximab and abatacept-are currently available for TNF-antagonist inadequate responders. Abatacept is also indicated for inadequate responders to traditional DMARDs.The aims of this review was to provide an overview of the issues surrounding the treatment of RA patients experiencing inadequate responses to current treatment and to discuss the current and future impact of abatacept on the RA treatment armamentarium.The MEDLINE, EMBASE, and BIOSIS databases were searched (search dates: January 1, 2000-September 19, 2007) using the terms abatacept or CTLA-4 or Orencia with rheumatoid arthritis. Full text articles in English were selected for relevance, and only articles presenting primary clinical trial data from randomized, placebo-controlled, clinical trials of abatacept were included. This review focused on the Phase III trials of abatacept in methotrexate and/or TNF-antagonist inadequate responders, as these trials had the largest number of patients and the longest study durations.The literature search initially yielded 848 papers. A total of 12 articles fulfilled the inclusion criteria. Abatacept is a novel agent that has been reported to reduce the signs and symptoms of RA in patients with active RA with an inadequate response to DMARDs and/or TNF-antagonist treatment. In both of these patient populations, treatment with abatacept was found to provide clinically meaningful health-related quality-of-life benefits, such as improvements in physical function, activity limitation, sleep, and fatigue. Abatacept was reported to have a consistent safety and tolerability profile, with a low rate (3.5%-4.2%) of discontinuation due to adverse events.The efficacy and tolerability data from Phase III clinical trials suggest that abatacept is an effective and generally well tolerated treatment option for RA patients with an inadequate response to methotrexate and/or TNF antagonists.

Dataset Information

Abatacept initiation in rheumatoid arthritis and the risk of cancer: a population-based comparative cohort study.

Objective

Methods

Results

Conclusion

Publications

Abatacept initiation in rheumatoid arthritis and the risk of cancer: a population-based comparative cohort study.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets