Alfons A. den Broeder

Difference in the risk of serious infections in patients with rheumatoid arthritis treated with adalimumab, infliximab and etanercept: results from the Dutch Rheumatoid Arthritis Monitoring (DREAM) registry

Background Tumour necrosis factor (TNF)-inhibiting therapy increases the risk of serious infections in rheumatoid arthritis (RA). However, it is not clear whether this risk differs between TNF inhibitors. Objective To analyse whether the risk of serious infections in patients with RA treated with an anti-TNF inhibitor is different for adalimumab, infliximab and etanercept. Methods Data from the Dutch RA monitoring registry were used. Incidence rates were calculated from the observed number of first serious infections and follow-up time up to 5 years. A Cox proportional hazards model with time-to-first-serious infection was used to estimate risk differences among the anti-TNF treatment groups, with correction for confounders. Results The unadjusted incidence rate of a first serious infection in patients with RA per 100 patient-years was 2.61 (95% CI 2.21 to 3.00) for adalimumab, 3.86 (95% CI 3.33 to 4.40) for infliximab and 1.66 (95% CI 1.09 to 2.23) for etanercept. Age, year of starting anti-TNF therapy, comorbidities at baseline and disease activity score 28 over time were included as confounders. No difference in risk for serious infections was found between adalimumab and infliximab with an adjusted HR (adjHR) of 0.90 (95% CI 0.55 to 1.48). The risk of serious infections was significantly lower in etanercept than in both infliximab (adjHR=0.49 (95% CI 0.29 to 0.83)) and adalimumab (adjHR=0.55 (95% CI 0.44 to 0.67)). Conclusions The risk of serious infections in patients with RA treated with adalimumab or infliximab was similar, while the risk of serious infections in patients with RA treated with etanercept was lower than with both adalimumab and infliximab.

A tight control treatment strategy aiming for remission in early rheumatoid arthritis is more effective than usual care treatment in daily clinical practice: a study of two cohorts in the Dutch Rheumatoid Arthritis Monitoring registry

There is strong evidence from clinical trials that a ‘treat to target’ strategy is effective in reaching remission in rheumatoid arthritis (RA). However, the question is whether these results can be translated into daily clinical practice and clinical remission is a reachable target indeed. Objective The study aims to investigate whether in early RA a treatment strategy aiming at Disease Activity Score (DAS) 28 <2.6 is more effective than ‘usual care’ treatment for reaching clinical remission after 1 year. Methods Two early RA inception cohorts from two different regions including patients who fulfilled the American College of Rheumatology criteria for RA were compared. Patients in the tight-control cohort (n=126) were treated according to a DAS28-driven step-up treatment strategy starting with methotrexate, addition of sulphasalazine (SSZ) and exchange of SSZ by anti-tumour necrosis factor in case of failure. Patients in the usual-care cohort (n=126) were treated with methotrexate or SSZ, without DAS28-guided treatment decisions. The primary outcome was the percentage remission (DAS28<2.6) at 1 year. Time to first remission and change in DAS28 were secondary outcomes. Results After 1 year, 55% of tight-control patients had a DAS28<2.6 versus 30% of usual care patients (OR 3.1, 95% CI 1.8 to 5.2). The median time to first remission was 25 weeks for tight control and more than 52 weeks for usual care (p<0.0001). The DAS28 decreased with −2.5 in tight control and −1.5 in usual care (p<0.0001). Conclusion In early RA, a tight control treatment strategy aiming for remission leads to more rapid DAS28 remission and higher percentages of remission after 1 year than does a usual care treatment.

Long-term effectiveness and safety of TNF-blocking agents in daily clinical practice: results from the Dutch Rheumatoid Arthritis Monitoring register

OBJECTIVES Experience with anti-TNF agents for a decade can be used to research the safety and effectiveness of anti-TNF agents in the long term. The objective of this article is to describe drug survival, disease activity, daily functioning, quality of life and adverse events of TNF-blocking agents in daily clinical practice after 5 years of follow-up. METHODS Data from the Dutch Rheumatoid Arthritis Monitoring (DREAM) register of 1560 RA patients were used for analyses (5-year follow-up, n=174). Drug survival and time to first serious infection or malignancy were analysed by Kaplan-Meier analysis. Several outcome measures at several follow-up moments were analysed per intention to treat and per protocol. RESULTS The 5-year drug survival of the first anti-TNF was 45%, and 60% for total use of TNF-blocking agents. Baseline 28-joint DAS (DAS-28) was 5.1 (s.d. 1.3). After 5 years, the mean DAS-28 was 3.2 (s.d. 1.3) in all patients who had started with TNF-blocking agents and 2.9 (s.d. 1.1) in patients who were still on TNF-blocking agents. In the latter group, the HAQ score was 0.88 (s.d. 0.7) and the EuroQol five dimensions (EQ-5D) utility score was 0.7 (s.d. 0.2). Incidence rates of serious infections and malignancies were 2.9 and 0.6 per 100 patient-years, respectively. CONCLUSION Five-year follow-up of RA patients treated with TNF-blocking agents showed a 60% drug survival accompanied by sustained low disease activity, normalized function and quality of life similar to that in the general population. The benefit to risk ratio for long-term TNF-blocking therapy remains favourable.

Disease activity guided dose reduction and withdrawal of adalimumab or etanercept compared with usual care in rheumatoid arthritis: open label, randomised controlled, non-inferiority trial

Objective To evaluate whether a disease activity guided strategy of dose reduction of two tumour necrosis factor (TNF) inhibitors, adalimumab or etanercept, is non-inferior in maintaining disease control in patients with rheumatoid arthritis compared with usual care. Design Randomised controlled, open label, non-inferiority strategy trial. Setting Two rheumatology outpatient clinics in the Netherlands, from December 2011 to May 2014. Participants 180 patients with rheumatoid arthritis and low disease activity using adalimumab or etanercept; 121 allocated to the dose reduction strategy, 59 to usual care. Interventions Disease activity guided dose reduction (advice to stepwise increase the injection interval every three months, until flare of disease activity or discontinuation) or usual care (no dose reduction advice). Flare was defined as increase in DAS28-CRP (a composite score measuring disease activity) greater than 1.2, or increase greater than 0.6 and current score of at least 3.2. In the case of flare, TNF inhibitor use was restarted or escalated. Main outcome measures Difference in proportions of patients with major flare (DAS28-CRP based flare longer than three months) between the two groups at 18 months, compared against a non-inferiority margin of 20%. Secondary outcomes included TNF inhibitor use at study end, functioning, quality of life, radiographic progression, and adverse events. Results Dose reduction of adalimumab or etanercept was non-inferior to usual care (proportion of patients with major flare at 18 months, 12% v 10%; difference 2%, 95% confidence interval −12% to 12%). In the dose reduction group, TNF inhibitor use could successfully be stopped in 20% (95% confidence interval 13% to 28%), the injection interval successfully increased in 43% (34% to 53%), but no dose reduction was possible in 37% (28% to 46%). Functional status, quality of life, relevant radiographic progression, and adverse events did not differ between the groups, although short lived flares (73% v 27%) and minimal radiographic progression (32% v 15%) were more frequent in dose reduction than usual care. Conclusions A disease activity guided, dose reduction strategy of adalimumab or etanercept to treat rheumatoid arthritis is non-inferior to usual care with regard to major flaring, while resulting in the successful dose reduction or stopping in two thirds of patients. Trial registration Dutch trial register (www.trialregister.nl), NTR 3216.

The effect of disease duration and disease activity on the risk of cardiovascular disease in rheumatoid arthritis patients

Objective Disease duration and disease activity may be associated with an increased risk of cardiovascular disease (CVD) in rheumatoid arthritis (RA). The objectives of this study were to investigate (1) the relationship between duration of inflammation and the development of CVD in RA patients and (2) the relationship between RA disease activity over time and CVD in patients with RA. Methods RA patients with a follow-up of ≥6 months in the Nijmegen early RA cohort without prior CVD were included. Disease activity over time was calculated using the time-averaged 28 joint disease activity score (DAS28) for each patient. Kaplan–Meier survival analysis and Cox proportional hazards regression were used for the analyses. Results During follow-up of the 855 patients that were included, 154 CV events occurred. The course of hazards over time did not indicate a change in the risk of CVD over the course of RA (disease duration), which is also reflected by the absence of a deflection in the survival curves. The survival distributions did not differ between patients with a disease duration of <10 years or >10 years (Log-rank test: p=0.82). Time-averaged DAS28 was significantly associated with CVD (p=0.002) after correction for confounders. Conclusions Disease duration does not appear to independently affect the risk of CVD. The risk of CVD in RA patients was not increased after 10 years of disease duration compared with the first 10 years. Disease activity over time may contribute to the risk of CVD.

Construct and criterion validity of several proposed DAS28-based rheumatoid arthritis flare criteria: an OMERACT cohort validation study

Background To describe rheumatoid arthritis (RA) worsening that leads to change or re-initiation of treatment, several Disease Activity Score 28 (DAS28)-based flare criteria have been described, but none validated. Methods Six previously published DAS28-based flare criteria ((1) increase in DAS28 >1.2, or >0.6 if DAS28 >5.1; (2) increase in DAS28 >1.2, or >0.6 if DAS28 ≥3.2; (3) increase >0.6 or DAS28 >3.2; (4) increase in DAS28 >1.2; (5) DAS28 >3.2; (6) DAS28 >2.6) were tested against five hypotheses concerning criterion and construct validity: (1+2) Sensitivity and specificity >70% compared with patients/physicians judgment; (3) difference in proportion with disease modifying anti-rheumatic drug/corticosteroid initiation/increase >0.2; (4) mean difference in C-reactive protein (CRP) >10 mg/l; and (5) no statistical difference in Short Form-36 Mental Health subscale change. Three different RA patient databases in which flare might occur were used. Sensitivity/specificity, χ2 and two-sample student t test analyses were done. Results The analyses included 51, 147 and 744 RA patients, from the three databases. Criterion 2 fulfilled most hypotheses: 4 out of 5. Sensitivity and specificity varied between 63%–78% and 84%–92%. Construct validity was demonstrated with 23% more treatment change, higher mean CRP (11.4 mg/l) and depression scale change of −5. Criteria 3, 5 and 6 were more sensitive, criteria 1, 2 and 4 more specific. Conclusions An increase in DAS28 >1.2 or >0.6 if DAS28 ≥3.2 appears most discriminating and valid by our predefined validation criteria. Considering the other criteria, sensitivity and specificity shown here might facilitate use in different settings.

Validation Study of Existing Gene Expression Signatures for Anti-TNF Treatment in Patients with Rheumatoid Arthritis

So far, there are no means of identifying rheumatoid arthritis (RA) patients who will fail to respond to tumour necrosis factor blocking agents (anti-TNF), prior to treatment. We set out to validate eight previously reported gene expression signatures predicting therapy outcome. Genome-wide expression profiling using Affymetrix GeneChip Exon 1.0 ST arrays was performed on RNA isolated from whole blood of 42 RA patients starting treatment with infliximab or adalimumab. Clinical response according to EULAR criteria was determined at week 14 of therapy. Genes that have been reported to be associated with anti-TNF treatment were extracted from our dataset. K-means partition clustering was performed to assess the predictive value of the gene-sets. We performed a hypothesis-driven analysis of the dataset using eight existing gene sets predictive of anti-TNF treatment outcome. The set that performed best reached a sensitivity of 71% and a specificity of 61%, for classifying the patients in the current study. We successfully validated one of eight previously reported predictive expression profile. This replicated expression signature is a good starting point for developing a prediction model for anti-TNF treatment outcome that can be used in a daily clinical setting. Our results confirm that gene expression profiling prior to treatment is a useful tool to predict anti-TNF (non) response.

Time to achieve remission determines time to be in remission

IntroductionThough remission is currently a treatment goal in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA), the number of patients who achieve and sustain remission in daily practice is still small. It is suggested that early remission will be associated with sustainability of remission. The aim was to study the association between time-to-remission and sustainability of remission in a cohort of early RA patients treated according to daily practice.MethodsFor this study, three-year follow-up data were used from the Nijmegen RA Inception Cohort of patients included between 1985 and 2005 (N = 753). Patients were included upon diagnosis (ACR criteria), were systematically evaluated at three-monthly visits and treated according to daily practice. Remission was defined according to the Disease Activity Score (DAS) <1.6 and the ACR remission criteria. Remission of at least 6 months duration was regarded as sustained remission. Predictors for time-to-remission were identified by Cox-regression analyses. The relation between time-to-remission and sustained remission was analyzed using longitudinal binary regression.ResultsN = 398 (52%) patients achieved remission with a median time-to-remission of 12 months. Male gender, younger age and low DAS at baseline were predictive to reach remission rapidly. There were n = 142 (36%) patients experiencing sustained remission, which was determined by a shorter time-to-remission only. The relationship between time-to-remission and sustained remission was described by a significant odds ratio (1.11) (1.10 to 1.12-95% CI) that was constant over the whole period 1985 to 2005. Results obtained with the ACR remission criteria were similar.ConclusionsA shorter time-to-remission is related to sustainability of remission, supporting striving for early remission in patients with RA.

Treating to the target of remission in early rheumatoid arthritis is cost-effective: results of the DREAM registry.

BackgroundWhere health economic studies are frequently performed using modelling, with input from randomized controlled trials and best guesses, we used real-life data to analyse the cost-effectiveness and cost-utility of a treatment strategy aiming to the target of remission compared to usual care in early rheumatoid arthritis (RA).MethodsWe used real-life data from comparable cohorts in the Dutch Rheumatoid Arthritis Monitoring (DREAM) registry: the DREAM remission induction cohort (treat-to-target, T2T) and the Nijmegen early RA inception cohort (usual care, UC). Both cohorts were followed prospectively using the DREAM registry methodology. All patients fulfilled the American College of Rheumatology criteria for RA and were included in the cohort at the time of diagnosis. The T2T cohort was treated according to a protocolised strategy aiming at remission (Disease Activity Score in 28 joints (DAS28) < 2.6). The UC cohort was treated without DAS28-guided treatment decisions. EuroQol-5D utility scores were estimated from the Health Assessment Questionnaire. A health care perspective was adopted and direct medical costs were collected. The incremental cost effectiveness ratio (ICER) per patient in remission and incremental cost utility ratio (ICUR) per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) gained were calculated over two and three years of follow-up.ResultsTwo year data were available for 261 T2T patients and 213 UC patients; an extended follow-up of three years was available for 127 and 180 patients, respectively. T2T produced higher remission percentages and a larger gain in QALYs than UC. The ICER was € 3,591 per patient in remission after two years and T2T was dominant after three years. The ICUR was € 19,410 per QALY after two years and T2T was dominant after three years.ConclusionsWe can conclude that treating to the target of remission in early RA is cost-effective compared with UC. The data suggest that in the third year, T2T becomes cost-saving.

Treatment strategies aiming at remission in early rheumatoid arthritis patients: starting with methotrexate monotherapy is cost-effective

OBJECTIVE To perform a modelling study on the cost-effectiveness of three outcome-directed strategies in early RA patients: Strategy 1: starting MTX monotherapy, followed by the addition of LEF, followed by MTX with addition of anti-TNF; Strategy 2: start with MTX and LEF combination followed by MTX with anti-TNF; and Strategy 3: immediate start with MTX and anti-TNF. METHODS A validated Markov model was used to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of the three strategies. Effectiveness of the strategies was determined using daily practice data from two cohorts and used as input parameter in the model. Patients treated according to the strategies were matched for baseline 28-joint DAS (DAS-28). Using Monte Carlo simulation, expected costs, quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) and incremental cost per QALY gained for a 5-year time horizon were calculated following both a health-care and a societal perspective. RESULTS The percentage of patients in remission and number of QALYs were comparable between the three strategies. Starting with a combination (MTX plus LEF or anti-TNF) was more costly than starting with MTX alone. This resulted in an unfavourable incremental cost-effectiveness ratio for starting on anti-TNF vs initially MTX: health-care perspective of €138,028 and from a societal perspective of €136,150 per QALY gained over 5 years. CONCLUSION In this modelling study, starting with MTX or anti-TNF has comparable effectiveness. However, initial anti-TNF was far more expensive than starting with MTX monotherapy. Therefore, based on this study, a treatment strategy starting with MTX monotherapy is favoured over a strategy with MTX and anti-TNF right away in early RA patients.