Grant W. Cannon

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

Two‐year, blinded, randomized, controlled trial of treatment of active rheumatoid arthritis with leflunomide compared with methotrexate

OBJECTIVE Three 6-12-month, double-blind, randomized, controlled trials have shown leflunomide (LEF; 20 mg/day, loading dose 100 mg x 3 days) to be effective and safe for the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis (RA). This analysis of the North American trial assessed whether the clinical benefit evident at month 12 was sustained over 24 months of treatment with LEF as compared with the efficacy and safety of methotrexate (MTX), an equivalent disease-modifying antirheumatic drug, at 24 months. METHODS The year-2 cohort, comprising patients continuing into the second year of treatment with > or = 1 dose of study medication and > or = 1 followup visit after week 52, consisted of 235 patients (LEF n = 98; placebo n = 36; MTX n = 101). The mean (+/- SD) maintenance dose of LEF was 19.6 +/- 1.99 mg/day in year 2 and that of MTX was 12.6 +/- 4.69 mg/week. Statistical analyses used an intent-to-treat (ITT) approach. Statistical comparisons of the active treatments only were prospectively defined in the protocol. RESULTS In total, 85% and 79% of LEF and MTX patients, respectively, who entered year 2 completed 24 months of treatment. From month 12 to month 24, the American College of Rheumatology improvement response rates of > or = 20% (LEF 79% versus MTX 67%; P = 0.049), > or = 50% (LEF 56% versus MTX 43%; P = 0.053), and > or = 70% (LEF 26% versus MTX 20%; P = 0.361) were sustained in both of the active treatment groups. The mean change in total Sharp radiologic damage scores at year 2 compared with year 1 and baseline (LEF 1.6 versus MTX 1.2) showed statistically equivalent sustained retardation of radiographic progression in the active treatment groups. Maximal improvements evident at 6 months in the Health Assessment Questionnaire (HAQ) disability index (HAQ DI) and the physical component score of the Medical Outcomes Survey 36-item short form were sustained over 12 months and 24 months; improvement in the HAQ DI with LEF4(-0.60) was statistically significantly superior to that with MTX (-0.37) at 24 months (P = 0.005). Over 24 months in the ITT cohort, serious treatment-related adverse events were reported in 1.6% of the LEF-treated patients and 3.7% of the MTX-treated patients. Frequently reported adverse events included upper respiratory tract infections, diarrhea, nausea and vomiting, rash, reversible alopecia, and transient liver enzyme elevations. CONCLUSION The safety and efficacy of LEF and MTX were maintained over the second year of this 2-year trial. Both active treatments retarded radiographic progression over 24 months. LEF was statistically significantly superior to MTX in improving physical function as measured by the HAQ DI over 24 months of treatment. Results indicate that LEF is a safe and effective initial treatment for active RA, with clinical benefit sustained over 2 years of treatment without evidence of new or increased toxicity.

Rofecoxib, a specific inhibitor of cyclooxygenase 2, with clinical efficacy comparable with that of diclofenac sodium: Results of a one-year, randomized, clinical trial in patients with osteoarthritis of the knee and hip

OBJECTIVE To compare the clinical efficacy of rofecoxib, a specific inhibitor of cyclooxygenase 2 (COX-2), with that of diclofenac in patients with osteoarthritis (OA) and to evaluate the safety and tolerability of rofecoxib. METHODS We performed a randomized, double-blind, active comparator-controlled trial in 784 adults with OA of the knee or hip. Patients were randomized to 1 of 3 treatment groups: 12.5 mg of rofecoxib once daily, 25 mg of rofecoxib once daily, and 50 mg of diclofenac 3 times daily. Clinical efficacy and safety were evaluated over a 1-year continuous treatment period. RESULTS Rofecoxib at dosages of 12.5 and 25 mg demonstrated efficacy that was clinically comparable to that of diclofenac, as assessed by all 3 primary end points according to predefined comparability criteria. Results from secondary end points were consistent with those of the primary end points. There were small statistical differences favoring diclofenac for 2 of the end points. All treatments were well tolerated. CONCLUSION Rofecoxib was well tolerated and provided efficacy that was clinically comparable, according to predefined statistical criteria, to that of 150 mg of diclofenac per day in this 1-year study. Specific inhibition of COX-2 provided therapeutic efficacy in OA.

Periodontitis and Porphyromonas gingivalis in Patients With Rheumatoid Arthritis

To examine the degree to which shared risk factors explain the relationship of periodontitis (PD) to rheumatoid arthritis (RA) and to determine the associations of PD and Porphyromonas gingivalis with pathologic and clinical features of RA.

Pulmonary disease during the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis with low dose pulse methotrexate

Methotrexate therapy has been effective in the treatment of RA with short term experience suggesting little serious adverse reactions. Our review of 168 patients receiving methotrexate has identified nine patients with probable or possible methotrexate-induced pulmonary toxicity, giving a prevalence of 5% and an incidence of 3.9 per 100 patients per year. No clinical or laboratory features showed an association that could potentially predict the development of pulmonary disease. All patients experienced complete recovery with supportive care and/or corticosteroid therapy. Clinical monitoring for this complication is warranted in all patients receiving long term methotrexate therapy for RA.

Prevalence of Vitamin D Insufficiency/Deficiency in Rheumatoid Arthritis and Associations with Disease Severity and Activity

Objective. 25-hydroxy-vitamin D (25-OH-D) insufficiency/deficiency is increasingly prevalent and has been associated with many chronic diseases, including rheumatoid arthritis (RA). Our purpose was to define the prevalence and associations of 25-OH-D insufficiency/deficiency in a cohort of US veterans with RA. Methods. Vitamin D status (25-OH-D) was assessed in patients with RA using radioimmunoassay on banked plasma collected at enrollment. Insufficiency was defined as concentrations < 30 ng/ml and deficiency as < 20 ng/ml. Associations of 25-OH-D insufficiency/deficiency with patient characteristics obtained at enrollment were examined using multivariate logistic regression, adjusting for age, sex, season of enrollment, and race. Results. Patients (850 men, 76% Caucasian) had a mean (SD) age of 64 (SD 11.3) years. The prevalences of 25-OH-D insufficiency and deficiency were 84% and 43%, respectively. After multivariate adjustment, both insufficiency and deficiency were more common with anti-cyclic citrullinated peptide antibody positivity and non-Caucasian race, and in the absence of vitamin D supplementation. 25-OH-D deficiency, but not insufficiency, was independently associated with higher tender joint counts and highly sensitive C-reactive protein levels. Conclusion. In a predominantly elderly, male RA population, 25-OH-D insufficiency was highly prevalent. With the increasing adverse health outcomes associated with hypovitaminosis D, screening and supplementation, particularly among minority, seropositive patients with RA, should be performed routinely.

The Prosorba column for treatment of refractory rheumatoid arthritis: A randomized, double-blind, sham-controlled trial

OBJECTIVE To evaluate the efficacy and safety of the Prosorba column as a treatment for rheumatoid arthritis (RA) in patients with active and treatment-resistant (refractory) disease. METHODS A sham-controlled, randomized, double-blind, multicenter trial of Prosorba versus sham apheresis was performed in patients with RA who had failed to respond to treatment with methotrexate or at least 2 other second-line drugs. Patients received 12 weekly treatments with Prosorba or sham apheresis, with efficacy evaluated 7-8 weeks after treatment ended. Patients were characterized as responders if they experienced improvement according to the American College of Rheumatology (ACR) response criteria at the efficacy time point. A data safety monitoring board (DSMB) evaluated interim analyses for the possibility of early completion of the trial. RESULTS Patients in the trial had RA for an average of 15.5 years (range 1.7-50.6) and had failed an average of 4.2 second-line drug treatments prior to entry. After the completion of treatment of 91 randomized patients, the DSMB stopped the trial early due to successful outcomes. Of the 47 patients in the Prosorba arm, 31.9% experienced ACR-defined improvement versus 11.4% of the 44 patients in the sham-treated arm (P = 0.019 after adjustment for interim analysis). When results from 8 additional patients, who had completed blinded treatments at the time of DSMB action, were added to the analysis (n = 99), results were unchanged. The most common adverse events were a short-term flare in joint pain and swelling following treatment, a side effect that occurred in most subjects at least once in both treatment arms. Other side effects, although common, occurred equally as frequently in both treatment groups. CONCLUSION Apheresis with the Prosorba column is an efficacious treatment for RA in patients with active disease who have failed other treatments.

IDENTIFICATION OF FOUR NEW QUANTITATIVE TRAIT LOCI REGULATING ARTHRITIS SEVERITY AND ONE NEW QUANTITATIVE TRAIT LOCUS REGULATING AUTOANTIBODY PRODUCTION IN RATS WITH COLLAGEN-INDUCED ARTHRITIS

OBJECTIVE Collagen-induced arthritis (CIA) is a polygenic model of experimentally induced autoimmunity and chronic joint inflammation. This study maps genetic loci that regulate CIA susceptibility in DA/Bkl (DA) and BN/SsNHsd (BN) rats. METHODS Genome scans covering chromosomes 1-20 and interval mapping techniques using 159 simple sequence-length polymorphism markers were used to identify quantitative trait loci (QTLs) that regulate CIA in (DA x BN)F2 hybrids. Serum antibody titers to type II collagen were determined by enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay. RESULTS DA rats were high responders to porcine type II collagen (PII) and developed severe CIA (100%). BN rats were low responders to PII and resistant to CIA (0%). BN genes strongly repressed PII-induced CIA. Only 12% of (DA x BN)F1 rats (7 of 60) and 31% of (DA x BN)F2 rats (307 of 1,004) developed CIA. Three new QTLs (Cia11, Cia12, and Cia13) with significant logarithm of odds (LOD) scores of 5.6, 4.6, and 4.5, respectively, plus a suggestive QTL (Cia14*, LOD 3.0) regulating arthritis severity were identified on chromosomes 3, 12, 4, and 19. A new QTL, Ciaa3, associating with anticollagen antibody titer (antibody to PII LOD 6.5; antibody to rat type II collagen LOD 5.2) mapped to chromosome 9. Of 10 CIA QTLs previously identified in (DA x F344) and (DA x ACI) rats, only Cia1 in the major histocompatibility complex and a region coincident to Cia5 on chromosome 10 (LOD >8.0) influenced CIA severity in (DA x BN)F2 rats. CONCLUSION Since CIA exhibits many of the pathologic features of rheumatoid arthritis, the data indicate that the variety of genetic elements regulating human autoimmune and rheumatic diseases may be much larger and more varied than originally envisioned.

Rheumatoid factor as a potentiator of anti-citrullinated protein antibody-mediated inflammation in rheumatoid arthritis

The co‐occurrence of rheumatoid factor (RF) and anti–citrullinated protein antibody (ACPA) positivity in rheumatoid arthritis (RA) is well described. However, the mechanisms underlying the potential interaction between these 2 distinct autoantibodies have not been well defined. The aim of this study was to evaluate the epidemiologic and molecular interaction of ACPAs and RF and its association with both disease activity and measures of RA‐associated inflammation.

Associations of disease activity and treatments with mortality in men with rheumatoid arthritis: results from the VARA registry

OBJECTIVES To examine the all-cause mortality rate and factors associated with mortality in US veteran men with RA. METHODS Men with RA were enrolled and followed until death or censoring. Vital status was ascertained through systematic record review and standardized mortality ratios (SMRs) were calculated using US life tables for men. Multivariate Cox proportional hazards regression was used to examine the independent associations of patient factors including socio-demographics, comorbidity, measures of RA disease activity/severity and medication use with mortality. Measures of RA disease activity and medications were examined as time-varying factors. RESULTS A total of 138 deaths were observed during 2314 patient-years of follow-up (n=1015 patients), corresponding to a crude morality rate of 5.9 deaths per 100 patient-years (95% CI 5.0, 7.0) and an SMR of 2.1 (95% CI 1.8, 2.5). After multivariate adjustment, factors independently associated with higher mortality risk in men with RA included older age, Caucasian race, low body weight, an increased frequency of rheumatology visits, higher ESR and RF concentrations, increased DAS28, subcutaneous nodules and prednisone use. In contrast, MTX use [hazard ratio (HR) 0.63; 95% CI 0.42, 0.96] was associated with ∼40% lower mortality risk. CONCLUSION Mortality rates among US male veterans with RA are more than twice those of age-matched men in the general population. These results suggest that optimizing disease control, particularly with regimens that include MTX and minimize glucocorticoid exposure, could improve long-term survival in this population.