Browsing by Subject "PLUS METHOTREXATE"

Sort by: Order: Results:

Now showing items 1-2 of 2
  • NORD STAR Study Grp; Hetland, Merete Lund; Haavardsholm, Espen A.; Rudin, Anna; Nordström, Dan; van Vollenhoven, Ronald (2020)
    OBJECTIVE To evaluate and compare benefits and harms of three biological treatments with different modes of action versus active conventional treatment in patients with early rheumatoid arthritis. DESIGN Investigator initiated, randomised, open label, blinded assessor, multiarm, phase IV study. SETTING Twenty nine rheumatology departments in Sweden, Denmark, Norway, Finland, the Netherlands, and Iceland between 2012 and 2018. PARTICIPANTS Patients aged 18 years and older with treatment naive rheumatoid arthritis, symptom duration less than 24 months, moderate to severe disease activity, and rheumatoid factor or anti-citrullinated protein antibody positivity, or increased C reactive protein. INTERVENTIONS Randomised 1:1:1:1, stratified by country, sex, and anti-citrullinated protein antibody status. All participants started methotrexate combined with (a) active conventional treatment (either prednisolone tapered to 5 mg/day, or sulfasalazine combined with hydroxychloroquine and intraarticular corticosteroids), (b) certolizumab pegol, (c) abatacept, or (d) tocilizumab. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES The primary outcome was adjusted clinical disease activity index remission (CDAI RESULTS 812 patients underwent randomisation. The mean age was 54.3 years (standard deviation 14.7) and 68.8% were women. Baseline disease activity score of 28 joints was 5.0 (standard deviation 1.1). Adjusted 24 week CDAI remission rates were 42.7% (95% confidence interval 36.1% to 49.3%) for active conventional treatment, 46.5% (39.9% to 53.1%) for certolizumab pegol, 52.0% (45.5% to 58.6%) for abatacept, and 42.1% (35.3% to 48.8%) for tocilizumab. Corresponding absolute differences were 3.9% (95% confidence interval -5.5% to 13.2%) for certolizumab pegol, 9.4% (0.1% to 18.7%) for abatacept, and -0.6% (-10.1% to 8.9%) for tocilizumab. Key secondary outcomes showed no major differences among the four treatments. Differences in CDAI remission rates for active conventional treatment versus certolizumab pegol and tocilizumab, but not abatacept, remained within the prespecified non-inferiority margin of 15% (per protocol population). The total number of serious adverse events was 13 (percentage of patients who experienced at least one event 5.6%) for active conventional treatment, 20 (8.4%) for certolizumab pegol, 10 (4.9%) for abatacept, and 10 (4.9%) for tocilizumab. Eleven patients treated with abatacept stopped treatment early compared with 20-23 patients in the other arms. CONCLUSIONS All four treatments achieved high remission rates. Higher CDAI remission rate was observed for abatacept versus active conventional treatment, but not for certolizumab pegol or tocilizumab versus active conventional treatment. Other remission rates were similar across treatments. Non-inferiority analysis indicated that active conventional treatment was non-inferior to certolizumab pegol and tocilizumab, but not to abatacept. The results highlight the efficacy and safety of active conventional treatment based on methotrexate combined with corticosteroids, with nominally better results for abatacept, in treatment naive early rheumatoid arthritis.
  • Chatzidionysiou, Katerina; Lie, Elisabeth; Nasonov, Evgeny; Lukina, Galina; Hetland, Merete Lund; Tarp, Ulrik; Ancuta, Ioan; Pavelka, Karel; Nordstrom, Dan C.; Gabay, Cem; Canhao, Helene; Tomsic, Matija; van Riel, Piet L. C. M.; Gomez-Reino, Juan; Kvien, Tore K.; van Vollenhoven, Ronald F.; Rheumatic Dis Portuguese Register (2016)
    Background: The approved dose of rituximab (RTX) in rheumatoid arthritis is 1000 mg x 2, but some data have suggested similar clinical efficacy with 500 mg x 2. The purpose of this study was to compare the effectiveness of the regular and low doses given as first treatment course. Methods: Twelve European registries participating in the CERERRA collaboration (The European Collaborative Registries for the Evaluation of Rituximab in Rheumatoid Arthritis) submitted anonymized datasets with demographic, efficacy and treatment data for patients who had started RTX. Treatment effectiveness was assessed by DAS28 reductions and EULAR responses after 6 months. Results: Data on RTX dose were available for 2,873 patients, of whom 2,625 (91.4 %) and 248 (8.6 %) received 1000 mg x 2 and 500 mg x 2, respectively. Patients treated with 500 mg x 2 were significantly older, had longer disease duration, higher number of prior DMARDs, but lower number of prior biologics and lower baseline DAS28 than those treated with 1000 mg x 2. Fewer patients in the low-dose group received concomitant DMARDs but more frequently received concomitant corticosteroids. Both doses led to significant clinical improvements at 6 months. DAS28 reductions at 6 months were comparable in the 2 dose regimens [mean DeltaDAS28 +/- SD -2.0 +/- 1.3 (high dose) vs. -1.7 +/- 1.4 (low dose), p = 0.23 adjusted for baseline differences]. Similar percentages of patients achieved EULAR good response in the two dose groups, 18.4 % vs. 17.3 %, respectively (p = 0.36). Conclusions: In this large observational cohort initial treatment with RTX at 500 mg x 2 and 1000 mg x 2 led to comparable clinical outcomes at 6 months.