Dataset Information

Patterns of etanercept use in juvenile idiopathic arthritis in the Childhood Arthritis and Rheumatology Research Alliance Registry.

ABSTRACT:

Background

We aimed to characterize etanercept (ETN) use in juvenile idiopathic arthritis (JIA) patients enrolled in the Childhood Arthritis and Rheumatology Research Alliance (CARRA) Registry.

Methods

The CARRA Registry is a convenience cohort of patients with paediatric onset rheumatic diseases, including JIA. JIA patients treated with ETN for whom the month and year of ETN initiation were available were included. Patterns of ETN and methotrexate (MTX) use were categorized as follows: combination therapy (ETN and MTX started concurrently), step-up therapy (MTX started first and ETN added later), switchers (MTX started and then stopped when or before ETN started), MTX add-on (ETN started first and MTX added later), and ETN only (no MTX use). Data were described using parametric and non-parametric statistics as appropriate.

Results

Two thousand thirty-two of the five thousand six hundred forty-one patients with JIA met inclusion criteria (74% female, median age at diagnosis 6.0 years [interquartile range 2.0, 11.0]. Most patients (66.9%) were treated with a non-biologic disease modifying anti-rheumatic drug (DMARD), primarily MTX, prior to ETN. There was significant variability in patterns of MTX use prior to starting ETN. Step-up therapy was the most common approach. Only 34.0% of persistent oligoarticular JIA patients continued treatment with a non-biologic DMARD 3 months or more after ETN initiation. ETN persistence overall was 66.3, 49.4, and 37.3% at 24, 36 and 48 months respectively. ETN persistence among spondyloarthritis patients (enthesitis related arthritis and psoriatic JIA) varied by MTX initiation pattern, with higher ETN persistence rates in those who initiated combination therapy (68.9%) and switchers/ETN only (73.3%) patients compared to step-up (65.4%) and MTX add-on (51.1%) therapy.

Conclusion

This study characterizes contemporary patterns of ETN use in the CARRA Registry. Treatment was largely in keeping with American College of Rheumatology guidelines.

SUBMITTER: Beukelman T

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8380401 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:ObjectiveThe optimal time to start biologics in polyarticular juvenile idiopathic arthritis (JIA) remains uncertain. The Childhood Arthritis and Rheumatology Research Alliance (CARRA) developed 3 consensus treatment plans (CTPs) for untreated polyarticular JIA to compare strategies for starting biologics.MethodsStart Time Optimization of Biologics in Polyarticular JIA (STOP-JIA) was a prospective, observational, CARRA Registry study comparing the effectiveness of 3 CTPs: 1) the step-up plan (initial nonbiologic disease-modifying antirheumatic drug [DMARD] monotherapy, adding a biologic if needed, 2) the early combination plan (DMARD and biologic started together), and 3) the biologic first plan (biologic monotherapy). The primary outcome measure was clinically inactive disease according to the provisional American College of Rheumatology (ACR) criteria, without glucocorticoids, at 12 months. Secondary outcome measures included Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) pain interference and mobility scores, inactive disease as defined by the clinical Juvenile Arthritis Disease Activity Score in 10 joints (JADAS-10), and the ACR Pediatric 70 criteria (Pedi 70).ResultsOf 400 patients enrolled, 257 (64%) began the step-up plan, 100 (25%) the early combination plan, and 43 (11%) the biologic first plan. After propensity score weighting and multiple imputation, clinically inactive disease according to the ACR criteria was achieved in 37% of those on the early combination plan, 32% on the step-up plan, and 24% on the biologic first plan (P = 0.17). Inactive disease according to the clinical JADAS-10 (score ≤2.5) was also achieved in more patients on the early combination plan than the step-up plan (59% versus 43%; P = 0.03), as was ACR Pedi 70 (81% versus 62%; P = 0.008), but generalizability was limited by missing data. PROMIS measures improved in all groups, but without significant differences. Twenty serious adverse events were reported (mostly infections).ConclusionAchievement of clinically inactive disease without glucocorticoids did not significantly differ between groups at 12 months. While there was a significantly higher likelihood of early combination therapy achieving inactive disease according to the clinical JADAS-10 and ACR Pedi 70, these results require further exploration.

Project description:BACKGROUND:To reduce treatment variability and facilitate comparative effectiveness studies, the Childhood Arthritis and Rheumatology Research Alliance (CARRA) published consensus treatment plans (CTPs) including one for juvenile proliferative lupus nephritis (LN). Induction immunosuppression CTPs outline treatment with either monthly intravenous (IV) cyclophosphamide (CYC) or mycophenolate mofetil (MMF) in conjunction with one of three corticosteroid (steroid) CTPs: primarily oral, primarily IV or mixed oral/IV. The acceptability and in-practice use of these CTPs are unknown. Therefore, the primary aims of the pilot study were to demonstrate feasibility of adhering to the LN CTPs and delineate barriers to implementation in clinical care in the US. Further, we aimed to explore the safety and effectiveness of the treatments for induction therapy. METHODS:Forty-one patients were enrolled from 10 CARRA sites. Patients had new-onset biopsy proven ISN/RPS class III or IV proliferative LN, were starting induction therapy with MMF or IV CYC and high-dose steroids and were followed for up to 24 months. Routine clinical data were collected at each visit. Provider reasons for CTP selection were assessed at baseline. Adherence to the CTPs was evaluated by provider survey and medication logs. Complete and partial renal responses were reported at 6 months. RESULTS:The majority of patients were female (83%) with a mean age of 14.7 years, SD 2.8. CYC was used more commonly than MMF for patients with ISN/RPS class IV LN (vs. class III), those who had hematuria, and those with adherence concerns. Overall adherence to the immunosuppression induction CTPs was acceptable with a majority of patients receiving the target MMF (86%) or CYC (63%) dose. However, adherence to the steroid CTPs was poor (37%) with large variability in dosing. Renal response endpoints were exploratory and did not show a significant difference between CYC and MMF. CONCLUSIONS:Overall, the immunosuppression CTPs were followed as intended in the majority of patients however, adherence to the steroid CTPs was poor indicating revision is necessary. In addition, our pilot study revealed several sources of treatment selection bias that will need to be addressed in for future comparative effectiveness research.