Dataset Information

Abatacept is Efficacious in the Treatment of Older Patients with csDMARD-Refractory Rheumatoid Arthritis: A Prospective, Multicenter, Observational Study.

ABSTRACT:

Introduction

Abatacept efficacy in older patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) has been primarily demonstrated via retrospective comparisons with younger patients. The objective of this study was to compare efficacy of abatacept in older vs. younger patients with RA, and efficacy of abatacept with that of conventional synthetic disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs (csDMARDs) in both age groups.

Methods

This prospective, multicenter, observational study (UMIN000014913) enrolled csDMARD-refractory patients without previous biological DMARD treatment. Abatacept (A) or csDMARDs (C) were administered at the treating physician's discretion to older (O, ≥ 65 years) and younger (Y, 20-64 years) patients, producing AO, AY, CO, and CY groups. Clinical efficacy after 24 weeks was evaluated using European League Against Rheumatism (EULAR) erythrocyte sedimentation rate response criteria.

Results

Overall, 202 patients were evaluated. Compared with the CO group, more patients in the AO group achieved a EULAR good or moderate response (p < 0.0001). Compared with the CY group, more patients in the AY group achieved a EULAR good or moderate response (p < 0.01). Similar proportions of patients in the AO and AY groups achieved a EULAR good response or a good or moderate response. Few adverse events were reported.

Conclusions

This prospective study demonstrated that abatacept is efficacious and safe in older patients with RA and a history of being refractory to csDMARDs. Abatacept was shown to be more efficacious than adding or switching to a new csDMARD in both younger and older csDMARD-refractory patients with RA.

Trial registration

UMIN000014913.

SUBMITTER: Muraoka S

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8572263 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundTo evaluate the effect of treatment on serum bone biomarkers and explore whether serum bone biomarkers are associated with therapeutic response in rheumatoid arthritis (RA) patients treated with abatacept.MethodsWe enrolled 59 RA patients treated with abatacept from a multicenter, exploratory, short-term, prospective and observational ultrasound cohort study of patients who received biologic or targeted synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drug (DMARD) therapy. We evaluated the patients' clinical disease activity and musculoskeletal ultrasound (MSUS) scores. The serum concentrations of five bone biomarkers were evaluated (dickkopf-1 [Dkk-1], sclerostin [SOST], osteocalcin [OC], osteopontin [OPN], and osteoprotegerin [OPG]) by multiplex bead assays at baseline, 3, and 6 months: the change over 6 months was defined as the Δ value. 'Power Doppler (PD) responder' was defined as a patient whose Δtotal PD score over 6 months was greater than the median change.ResultsAbatacept significantly improved the clinical disease activity and MSUS score over 6 months. Serum OPG was significantly elevated at 6 months after the abatacept introduction (p = 0.016). The ΔSOST and ΔOPG were significantly greater in the PD responders versus the non-PD responders (p = 0.0041 and 0.0073, respectively). The serum Dkk-1 at baseline was significantly lower in the PD responders (n = 30) vs. the non-PD responders (n = 29) (p = 0.026). A multivariate logistic regression analysis showed that the serum Dkk-1 at baseline (odds ratio 0.50, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.23-0.91, p = 0.043) was an independent predictor of PD responder status.ConclusionSerum levels of bone biomarkers may be useful for predicting RA patients' therapeutic responses to abatacept.Trial registrationName of the registry: Assessment of therapeutic responsiveness by imaging of the joints in patients with rheumatoid arthritis; A observational cohort study Trial registration number: UMIN000012524 Date of registration: 12/9/2013 URL of trial registry record: https://upload.umin.ac.jp/cgi-open-bin/ctr/ctr_view.cgi?recptno=R000014657.

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.

Project description:BackgroundThe use of eHealth tools (eg, the internet, mobile apps, and connected devices) in the management of chronic diseases and for rheumatoid arthritis is growing. eHealth may improve the overall quality of care provided to patients with chronic diseases.ObjectiveThe primary objective of this study was to describe eHealth use by patients with rheumatoid arthritis in France. The secondary objectives were to identify associations between patient demographics and disease characteristics and the use of eHealth tools, and assess their expectations of eHealth.MethodsIn this cross-sectional, multicenter study, patients with rheumatoid arthritis, according to the 2010 ACR/EULAR classification criteria, were recruited from 5 university hospitals (Bordeaux, Clermont-Ferrand, Limoges, Montpellier, and Toulouse). Patients completed an anonymous self-questionnaire, including demographic data, evaluating their eHealth use (ie, access, support, frequency of use, type of use, and reason for use). The rheumatologist in charge of each patient completed an independent medical questionnaire on disease characteristics, activity of rheumatoid arthritis, and treatments. Data were collected between December 2018 and July 2019.ResultsQuestionnaires were completed by 575 participants, with a mean age of 62 (SD 13) years, 447 (77.7%) of whom were female. Overall, 82.2% (473/575) of the participants had access to eHealth through a computer (402/467, 86.1%), tablet (188/467, 40.2%), or smartphone (221/467, 47.3%). Of these, 36.4% (170/467) of the participants used the internet for health in general, and 28.7% (134/467) used it specifically for rheumatoid arthritis-related reasons. All these 134 patients used eHealth to learn about disease pathology, and 66.4% (89/134) of them used it as a tool to help monitor rheumatoid arthritis. Most patients (87/125, 69.6%) had a paper file, 19.2% (24/125) used a digital tool (spreadsheets, 10/125, 8%; mobile app, 9/125, 7.2%; or website, 5/125, 4%), and 24.8% (31/125) did not use any tools for monitoring. Few patients (16/125, 12.8%) used tools for treatment reminders. About 21.6% (27/125) of the patients using eHealth used a specific app for rheumatoid arthritis. Univariate analysis showed that age, education level, employment status, treatment, comorbidities, membership of a patient association, and patient education program were associated with eHealth use for rheumatoid arthritis. Multivariate analysis showed that membership of a patient association (odds ratio [OR] 5.8, 95% CI 3.0-11.2), use of biologic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (OR 0.6, 95% CI 0.4-1.0), and comorbidities (OR 0.7, 95% CI 0.6-0.8) remained associated with eHealth use for rheumatoid arthritis. Recommendation by a doctor (225/330, 68.2%), ease of use (105/330, 31.8%), and data security (69/330, 20.9%) were factors favoring the use of eHealth.ConclusionsTo date, few patients have used eHealth for disease management. The use of a reliable and validated eHealth tool for rheumatoid arthritis could therefore be promoted by rheumatologists and could optimize therapeutic adherence.