Eric Ruderman

Concomitant Leflunomide Therapy in Patients with Active Rheumatoid Arthritis despite Stable Doses of Methotrexate: A Randomized, Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled Trial

Context Several disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs) slow disease progression in patients with rheumatoid arthritis. Many experts prefer methotrexate, although trials do not uniformly show that it is superior to other DMARDs. It is not known whether combining methotrexate with a second DMARD is better than prescribing methotrexate alone. Contribution This 24-week, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial shows that leflunomide added to ongoing stable-dose methotrexate therapy in patients with persistently active rheumatoid arthritis improves clinical outcomes compared with methotrexate alone. Cautions Some adverse effects, such as diarrhea, were more common with combination therapy. All patients receiving DMARD therapy need close monitoring for toxicities. The Editors Rheumatoid arthritis has considerable societal costs (1-5). Many patients with rheumatoid arthritis become disabled within a few years of disease onset (4, 5). Methotrexate is the standard treatment for rheumatoid arthritis. During the past several years, investigators have found that some disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs can increase the efficacy of methotrexate monotherapy (6-9). Methotrexate is an antimetabolite and immunomodulator that affects many intracellular metabolic pathways of purine metabolism (10). The precise intracellular biochemical pathway responsible for the observed clinical benefits of methotrexate in the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis is still the subject of some debate (11), but methotrexate is thought to act primarily on purine pathways of cellular metabolism (10). Leflunomide (Arava, Aventis Pharmaceuticals, Bridgewater, New Jersey) also has antimetabolic effects, inhibiting pyrimidine intracellular pathways (12). Leflunomide has been shown to be effective for rheumatoid arthritis in double-blind, placebo-controlled trials (13, 14). Given the diverse intracellular pathways affected by both drugs, the combination of leflunomide and methotrexate has the potential for biochemical synergy. The possibility of increased benefits should be weighed against the possible toxicities of this combination. Abnormal aminotransferase levels have been seen with both methotrexate (15) and leflunomide (14) monotherapy in patients with rheumatoid arthritis. In a small open study, we previously observed that the combination of methotrexate and leflunomide led to considerable clinical improvements and reversible elevations in aminotransferase levels (16). We therefore sought to determine whether similar results could be achieved in a large, double-blind investigation of the combination of these two antimetabolic agents. Methods Patients The study sample consisted of 263 patients who had rheumatoid arthritis as defined by American College of Rheumatology (ACR) criteria (17). Patients were 18 to 75 years of age and were receiving stable dosages of methotrexate (15 to 20 mg/wk, or 10 to 15 mg/wk if this was the maximum tolerated dose). Patients were recruited from active outpatient practice centers, and study participants were approached without a particular schema. Eligible patients had active rheumatoid arthritis despite at least 6 months of methotrexate therapy, including stable dosage for at least 8 weeks. Patients with active rheumatoid arthritis were defined as meeting three of the following criteria on two different evaluations, 7 to 21 days apart: at least nine tender joints, at least six swollen joints, at least 45 minutes of morning stiffness, and an erythrocyte sedimentation rate of at least 28 mm/h. Previous disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs, not including ongoing methotrexate, had failed in 11 patients. Patients receiving corticosteroids were required to have been taking a stable daily dose of 10 mg or less for at least 30 days before study drug administration, and the corticosteroid dose was required to remain constant throughout the study. Complete exclusion criteria are listed in Appendix Table 1. Study Design The 24-week, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study, with evaluations occurring at 4-week intervals (Figure 1), was conducted in 20 centers in the United States and Canada between September 1998 and June 2000. The primary objective was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of adding leflunomide or placebo to stable methotrexate therapy in patients with active rheumatoid arthritis. All participants provided written consent, and the institutional review board at each center approved the protocol. Figure 1. Patient eligibility, randomization, assignment, and discontinuation. Include no wish to continue in study, poor adherence to treatment, protocol violation, and moving away from the study area. A randomization schedule, generated by and stored with Quintiles, Inc., Kansas City, Missouri, was used to assign sequential numbers to randomly allocated treatment codes. Randomization was done by using the Aventis standard random-code generator. Investigators allocated numbers to patients, beginning with the lowest available number. Quintiles, Inc., packaged and labeled the study medication. The randomization code used was concealed from investigators and patients throughout the study. Randomization was stratified by center. A set of 500 random numbers was generated, with treatment groups randomly assigned in a balanced manner (1:1 ratio) within each block of four consecutive random numbers (block size, 4). A set of these blocks was then sent to each investigative center. This method is identical to stratification by center because centers are balanced with respect to treatment assignment. Patients were randomly assigned to receive leflunomide, 100 mg/d, for 2 days followed by 10 mg/d or matching placebo. If substantial adverse events occurred, this dose could be reduced to 10 mg every other day. If 10 mg/d was tolerated but active disease, as defined earlier, was still present at week 8 or thereafter, an increase to 20 mg of leflunomide or matching placebo per day was required. If substantial adverse events occurred while the patient was taking 20 mg of the study drug per day, a one-time dose reduction to 10 mg/d was allowed at the discretion of the investigator. At least 1 mg of folate supplementation per day was mandated by the protocol. Adherence to study medication, assessed at each visit by tablet counts (actual number of tablets returned compared with number expected to be returned), was similar in the two groups. The mean adherence for all patients in the intention-to-treat sample was 98.0% (98.5% for those receiving placebo and 97.4% for those receiving leflunomide). In the placebo group and leflunomide group, respectively, 90.2% (120 of 133 patients) and 87.7% (114 of 130 patients) had adherence rates of 80% to 120%. Measurement of Efficacy The primary efficacy variable was the rate at which the intention-to-treat sample achieved 20% improvement in ACR criteria (ACR20) at the end of the study. To be classified as having achieved ACR20, patients were required to complete 24 weeks of treatment and meet ACR20 response criteria at end of the study (13). The ACR20 criteria were developed to define improvement in rheumatoid arthritis (18). Clinical improvement is indicated by 20% improvement in tender and swollen joint counts and 20% improvement in three of the following five criteria: patient global assessment, physician global assessment, pain intensity, physical function or disability measure, and level of acute-phase reactant (19). All ACR assessments were performed by the investigators, and the same assessor performed all analyses throughout the study whenever possible to increase the reliability of the assessment. Patients who discontinued therapy before the end of week 24 or for whom data were insufficient to assess ACR20 response at week 24 were classified as nonresponders for the primary analysis. Count of tender joints was based on 68 joint assessments, and count of swollen joints was based on 66 joint assessments. Percentage changes in tender joint and swollen joint counts were based on the number of evaluable joints at a visit. Joints that had been replaced or had been injected with corticosteroids within 4 weeks before the assessment were considered nonevaluable. Secondary outcomes included ACR50 and ACR70 responder rates at week 24 (analyses of responders at study end for the nonprimary efficacy measures). The ACR50 and ACR70 were defined as at least 50% and 70% improvement, respectively, in the same criteria used to calculate ACR20 response. Secondary efficacy variables also included change from baseline to end point in each of the individual components of the ACR response criteria and change from baseline to week 24 in levels of rheumatoid factor. Mean changes from baseline in individual efficacy measures are shown in Appendix Table 2. Measurement of Safety Safety was evaluated by adverse event reports; laboratory assays for changes in hematologic characteristics, blood chemistry, urinalysis, and liver function; and physical examination. Potential adverse events were assessed by using open-ended questions at each study visit. The assessor was blinded to reported toxicities and to any additional information obtained at the visit. The study protocol provided recommendations for dosage change and discontinuation of drug therapy, without unblinding, when patients were found to have alanine aminotransferase (ALT) and aspartate aminotransferase (AST) values greater than two times the upper limit of normal. Investigators decreased the dose of the study medication if, on repeated analysis at 72 hours, test values remained greater than two times but less than or equal to five times the upper limit of normal; only one dose adjustment was allowed before discontinuation of therapy with the study drug. Therapy with the study drug was also discontinued in patients with persistent elevations of aminotransferase enzyme levels to more than two times the upper limit of normal on repeated te

Evaluation of fetuses in a study of intravenous immunoglobulin as preventive therapy for congenital heart block: Results of a multicenter, prospective, open-label clinical trial†

OBJECTIVE The recurrence rate of anti-SSA/Ro-associated congenital heart block (CHB) is 17%. Sustained reversal of third-degree block has never been achieved. Based on potential reduction of maternal autoantibody titers as well as fetal inflammatory responses, intravenous immunoglobulin (IVIG) was evaluated as preventive therapy for CHB. METHODS A multicenter, prospective, open-label study based on Simons 2-stage optimal design was initiated. Enrollment criteria included the presence of anti-SSA/Ro antibodies in the mother, birth of a previous child with CHB/neonatal lupus rash, current treatment with < or = 20 mg/day of prednisone, and <12 weeks pregnant. IVIG (400 mg/kg) was given every 3 weeks from week 12 to week 24 of gestation. The primary outcome was the development of second-degree or third-degree CHB. RESULTS Twenty mothers completed the IVIG protocol before the predetermined stopping rule of 3 cases of advanced CHB in the study was reached. CHB was detected at 19, 20, and 25 weeks; none of the cases occurred following the finding of an abnormal PR interval on fetal Doppler monitoring. One of these mothers had 2 previous children with CHB. One child without CHB developed a transient rash consistent with neonatal lupus. Sixteen children had no manifestations of neonatal lupus at birth. No significant changes in maternal titers of antibody to SSA/Ro, SSB/La, or Ro 52 kd were detected over the course of therapy or at delivery. There were no safety issues. CONCLUSION This study establishes the safety of IVIG and the feasibility of recruiting pregnant women who have previously had a child with CHB. However, IVIG at low doses consistent with replacement does not prevent the recurrence of CHB or reduce maternal antibody titers.

Portability of an algorithm to identify rheumatoid arthritis in electronic health records.

OBJECTIVES Electronic health records (EHR) can allow for the generation of large cohorts of individuals with given diseases for clinical and genomic research. A rate-limiting step is the development of electronic phenotype selection algorithms to find such cohorts. This study evaluated the portability of a published phenotype algorithm to identify rheumatoid arthritis (RA) patients from EHR records at three institutions with different EHR systems. MATERIALS AND METHODS Physicians reviewed charts from three institutions to identify patients with RA. Each institution compiled attributes from various sources in the EHR, including codified data and clinical narratives, which were searched using one of two natural language processing (NLP) systems. The performance of the published model was compared with locally retrained models. RESULTS Applying the previously published model from Partners Healthcare to datasets from Northwestern and Vanderbilt Universities, the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve was found to be 92% for Northwestern and 95% for Vanderbilt, compared with 97% at Partners. Retraining the model improved the average sensitivity at a specificity of 97% to 72% from the original 65%. Both the original logistic regression models and locally retrained models were superior to simple billing code count thresholds. DISCUSSION These results show that a previously published algorithm for RA is portable to two external hospitals using different EHR systems, different NLP systems, and different target NLP vocabularies. Retraining the algorithm primarily increased the sensitivity at each site. CONCLUSION Electronic phenotype algorithms allow rapid identification of case populations in multiple sites with little retraining.

Safety, tolerability, and clinical outcomes after intraarticular injection of a recombinant adeno-associated vector containing a tumor necrosis factor antagonist gene: Results of a phase 1/2 study

Objective. To assess safety and clinical outcomes in patients with inflammatory arthritis after intraarticular (IA) injection of rAAV2-TNFR:Fc, a recombinant adeno-associated viral vector containing the human tumor necrosis factor (TNF) receptor-immunoglobulin (IgG1) Fc fusion (TNFR:Fc) gene. Methods. In this phase 1/2 randomized study, adults with persistent moderate or severe inflammation in a target joint, being treated with or without systemic anti-TNF therapy, received a single IA injection of either rAAV2-TNFR:Fc (1 × 1011, 1 × 1012, or 1 × 1013 DNase-resistant particles/ml joint volume) or placebo, followed by open-label rAAV2-TNFR:Fc 12–30 weeks later, depending on when the target joint met predetermined criteria for reinjection. Results. 127 subjects received the first injection of blinded study drug; 95 subjects received open-label rAAV2-TNFR:Fc. Administration site reactions, consisting of transient mild to moderate increases in tenderness and swelling of the injected joint, occurred after 23/191 (12%) rAAV2-TNFR:Fc injections and were dose-dependent. Rates of other adverse events were not dose-dependent. Notable serious adverse events (SAE) included culture-negative septic arthritis in a subject receiving leflunomide and fatal disseminated histoplasmosis considered unrelated to rAAV2-TNFR:Fc in a subject receiving adalimumab. In the phase 2 portion of the study, a 30% decrease in target joint global visual analog scale was observed in 21/50 (42%) rAAV2-TNFR:Fc subjects and 3/16 (19%) placebo subjects 12 weeks after first injection (p = 0.14). Conclusion. IA rAAV2-TNFR:Fc resulted in administration site reactions after 12% of injections. A fatal SAE, disseminated histoplasmosis, was considered not related to study agent. Patient-reported outcome measures of clinical response showed greater improvement in treated patients than placebo patients.

The evolving clinical profile of abatacept (CTLA4–Ig): a novel co-stimulatory modulator for the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis

Abatacept (CTLA4–Ig) is a novel fusion protein designed to modulate the T cell co-stimulatory signal mediated through the CD28–CD80/86 pathway. Clinical trials have provided preliminary evidence of the efficacy of this compound in the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis. This review describes the molecular and biologic bases for the use of abatacept in rheumatoid arthritis and summarizes the current clinical data on its safety and effectiveness in this disease.

Cardiac involvement and treatment-related mortality after non-myeloablative haemopoietic stem-cell transplantation with unselected autologous peripheral blood for patients with systemic sclerosis: a retrospective analysis

BACKGROUND Autologous haemopoietic stem-cell transplantation (HSCT) benefits patients with systemic sclerosis but has been associated with significant treatment-related mortality and failure to improve diffusion capacity of carbon monoxide (DLCO). We aimed to assess efficacy of HSCT and use of rigorous cardiac screening in this group. METHODS We assessed patients with diffuse systemic sclerosis or limited systemic sclerosis and interstitial lung disease who were treated with HSCT as part of a study or on a compassionate basis at Northwestern University (Chicago, IL, USA) or the University of São Paulo (Ribeirão Preto, Brazil). Unselected peripheral blood stem cells were harvested with cyclophosphamide (2 g/m(2)) and filgrastim. The transplant regimen was a non-myeloablative regimen of cyclophosphamide (200 mg/kg) and rabbit anti-thymocyte globulin (rATG; 4·5-6·5 mg/kg). We followed patients up to 5 years for overall survival, relapse-free survival, modified Rodnan skin score, and pulmonary function tests. FINDINGS Five (6%) of 90 patients died from treatment-related causes. Despite standard guidelines that recommend echocardiogram for screening before transplantation, four treatment-related deaths occurred because of cardiovascular complications (one constrictive pericarditis, two right heart failures without underlying infection, and one heart failure during mobilisation), and one death was secondary to sepsis without documented underlying heart disease. Kaplan-Meier analysis showed survival was 78% at 5 years (after eight relapse-related deaths) and relapse-free survival was 70% at 5 years. Compared with baseline, we noted improvements after HSCT in modified Rodnan skin scores at 1 year (58 patients; p<0·0001), 2 years (42 patients; p<0·0001), and 3 years (27 patients; p<0·0001) and forced vital capacity at 1 year (58 patients; p=0·009), 2 years (40 patients; p=0·02), and 3 years (28 patients; p=0·004), but total lung capacity and DLCO were not improved significantly after HSCT. Overall mean DLCO was significantly improved in patients with normal baseline echocardiograms (p=0·005) or electrocardiographs (p=0·05). INTERPRETATION Autologous HSCT with a non-myeloablative regimen of cyclophosphamide and rATG with a non-selected autograft results in sustained improvement in skin thickness and forced vital capacity. DLCO is affected by baseline cardiac function. Guidelines for cardiac screening of patients with systemic sclerosis to assess treatment-related risk from pulmonary artery hypertension, primary cardiac involvement, or pericardial disease should be reconsidered and updated. FUNDING None.

Overview of safety of non-biologic and biologic DMARDs

Safety data come from a number of sources. Randomized clinical trials tend to be relatively short, exclude patients with significant comorbidity, have limited numbers of subjects and are primarily powered for efficacy. The most useful post-marketing data come from large national registries, such as Britains BSRBR, Swedens ARTIS, Germanys RABBIT, Frances DANBIO, Spains BIODASER and North Americas CORRONA. Among the most commonly used non-biologic DMARDs, MTX is associated with risks of hepatotoxicity and cytopenia, as well as pneumonitis, particularly during the first year of treatment. Regarding TNF inhibitors, there is an increased risk of infection (including serious infections) by bacterial pathogens, atypical fungi and opportunistic pathogens. When possible, pneumococcal and influenza vaccines should be given before initiation of treatment with any biologic DMARD. Screening for latent tuberculosis is recommended for all TNF inhibitors, and has been shown to reduce the risk of reactivation. Evidence from registries suggests that there is no increased risk of solid tumours with TNF inhibitor treatment; however, non-melanoma skin cancers are more common. Specific risks with other biologic DMARDs include gastrointestinal perforation with tocilizumab, progressive multifocal leucoencephalopathy with rituximab and pulmonary infections with abatacept. Overall, the safety of biologic and non-biologic DMARDs appears to be reasonable, particularly compared with the risks associated with the disease itself.

Efficacy and safety of etanercept 50 mg twice a week in patients with rheumatoid arthritis who had a suboptimal response to etanercept 50 mg once a week: Results of a multicenter, randomized, double‐blind, active drug–controlled study

OBJECTIVE To evaluate the efficacy and safety of treatment with 50 mg of etanercept twice a week plus weekly methotrexate (MTX; > or =15 mg) in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) who had a suboptimal response to 50 mg of etanercept once a week plus weekly MTX (> or =15 mg). METHODS In this multicenter, randomized, double-blind, active drug-controlled study, suboptimal responders to treatment with MTX plus etanercept 50 mg once weekly were given MTX plus etanercept 50 mg twice weekly (n = 160) or MTX plus etanercept 50 mg once weekly plus a placebo (n = 40) for 12 weeks. In a subsequent 12-week open-label period, patients who responded to etanercept 50 mg twice weekly decreased their dosage to 50 mg once weekly, those who had a partial response to etanercept 50 mg once weekly increased their dosage to 50 mg twice weekly, and those who had no response to etanercept 50 mg twice weekly were discontinued. The primary end point was the proportion of patients with a response on the Disease Activity Score 28-joint assessment (DAS28) at week 12. RESULTS A total of 201 patients were randomized; 187 completed 12 weeks, and 102 completed 24 weeks. At week 12 (double-blind period), the DAS28 response in the 50 mg twice weekly and the 50 mg once weekly groups was not significantly different (45.6% versus 35.0%; P = 0.285), and similar proportions of patients in the groups taking 100 mg and 50 mg experienced adverse events (34.4% versus 37.5%; P = 0.711). Serious adverse events occurred in 7 of 160 of the 50 mg twice weekly group and 0 of 40 of the 50 mg once weekly group (P = 0.387), and serious infectious events occurred in 3 of 160 patients in the 50 mg twice weekly group (P = 0.884). CONCLUSION Etanercept 50 mg once weekly is an optimal dosage in most patients with RA. Increasing the dosage from 50 mg once weekly to 50 mg twice weekly in suboptimal responders did not significantly improve their DAS28 responses.

Safety of biologic therapy in rheumatoid arthritis

Biologic therapies have revolutionized the treatment of rheumatic diseases in the past decade. As with any drugs, however, a variety of important safety concerns affect the choice and use of these agents. Several issues, such as the risk of infection, malignancy, or administration reactions, apply to all of these compounds, although some conditions that affect patient selection and management within these categories seem to be specific to particular biologic treatments. Other safety concerns with biologic agents, such as congestive heart failure, demyelinating disease, and hyperlipidemia, are associated with individual agents. Despite all these concerns, the therapeutic indices for biologic agents remain fairly high in relation to non-biologic DMARDs. Available safety data for all biologic agents approved for the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis are reviewed in this manuscript. With careful patient selection and appropriate vigilance on the part of treating physicians and other care providers, these compounds can be safely integrated into the therapeutic plan.

Prevalence of axial spondyloarthritis in United States rheumatology practices: Assessment of SpondyloArthritis International Society criteria versus rheumatology expert clinical diagnosis.

New classification criteria for axial spondyloarthritis (SpA) have been validated by the Assessment of SpondyloArthritis international Society (ASAS) working group. We applied these criteria to estimate prevalence of SpA in randomly selected, retrospectively reviewed medical records from representative US rheumatology practices.