Peter B J de Sonnaville

Induction therapy with a combination of DMARDs is better than methotrexate monotherapy: first results of the tREACH trial

Objective To determine the most effective induction disease-modifying antirheumatic drug (DMARD) strategy in early rheumatoid arthritis (RA), second to compare one single dose of intramuscular glucocorticoids (GCs) with daily oral GCs during the induction phase. Methods The 3-month data of a single-blinded clinical trial in patients with recent-onset arthritis (tREACH) were used. Patients were included who had a high probability (>70%) of progressing to persistent arthritis, based on the prediction model of Visser. Patients were randomised into three induction therapy strategies: (A) combination therapy (methotrexate (MTX) + sulfasalazine + hydroxychloroquine) with GCs intramuscularly; (B) combination therapy with an oral GC tapering scheme and (C) MTX with oral GCs similar to B. A total of 281 patients were randomly assigned to strategy (A) (n=91), (B) (n=93) or (C) (n=97). Results The Disease Activity Score (DAS) after 3 months was lower in patients receiving initial combination therapy than in those receiving MTX monotherapy (0.39 (0.67 to 0.11, 95% CI)). DAS did not differ between the different GC bridging treatments. After 3 months 50% fewer biological agents were prescribed in the combination therapy groups. Although the proportion of patients with medication adjustments differed significantly between the treatment arms, no differences were seen in these adjustments due to adverse events after stratification for drug. Conclusion Triple DMARD induction therapy is better than MTX monotherapy in early RA. Furthermore, no differences were seen in medication adjustments due to adverse events after stratification for drug. Intramuscular and oral GCs are equally effective as bridging treatments and both can be used.

Cost-Utility Analysis of Treatment Strategies in Patients With Recent-Onset Rheumatoid Arthritis

OBJECTIVE To evaluate societal costs and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) of treatment strategies for patients with recent-onset active rheumatoid arthritis (RA). METHODS Patients (n = 508) were randomly allocated to 1 of 4 treatment strategy groups: sequential monotherapy, step-up combination therapy, initial combination therapy with prednisone, or initial combination therapy with infliximab. For 2 years, patients reported cost and utility measures. RESULTS Average QALYs (ideally 2.00) for groups 1-4 were 1.29, 1.31, 1.32, and 1.41, respectively, for the British EuroQol (P <or= 0.05 for group 4 versus groups 1-3); 1.41, 1.43, 1.44, and 1.52, respectively, for the Dutch EuroQol (P <or= 0.05 for group 4 versus groups 1-3); and 1.38, 1.38, 1.39, and 1.44, respectively, for the Short Form 6D (P <or= 0.05 for group 4 versus groups 1-3). The Time Trade-Off showed no significant differences. In the primary analysis, using the friction cost method to value productivity, the cost-utility ratio for group 4 against the next best alternative was estimated at euro 130,000 (95% confidence interval euro 27,000, euro 3,000,000) per QALY. Using the human capital method, the value of sustained productivity in group 4 largely compensated for the extra medication costs. CONCLUSION Initial combination therapy with infliximab for patients with recent-onset active RA resulted in significantly better quality of life than other strategies. Using the friction cost method, costs to achieve this improvement are generally considered too high, and initial combination therapy with prednisone should be preferred. However, depending on the extent to which productivity is valued, infliximab costs could be largely compensated for by savings on productivity. Since patterns of infliximab use had not yet stabilized after 2 years, longer followup may change the economic conclusions.

Remission induction therapy with methotrexate and prednisone in patients with early rheumatoid and undifferentiated arthritis (the IMPROVED study)

Aim Classifying more patients as rheumatoid arthritis (RA) (2010 American College of Rheumatology/European League Against Rheumatism criteria for RA) may improve treatment outcomes but may cause overtreatment in daily practice. The authors determined the efficacy of initial methotrexate (MTX) plus prednisone treatment in patients with 1987 or 2010 classified RA and undifferentiated arthritis (UA). Method 610 recent onset RA or UA patients started with MTX 25 mg/week and prednisone 60 mg/day tapered to 7.5 mg/day in 7 weeks. Percentage remissions after 4 months were compared between RA (1987 or 2010 criteria) and UA. Predictors for remission were identified. Results With the 2010 criteria, 19% more patients were classified as RA than with the 1987 criteria, but similar remission rates were achieved: 291/479 (61%) 2010 classified RA and 211/264 (58%) 1987 classified RA patients (p=0.52), and 79/122 (65%) UA patients (p=0.46). Anticitrullinated protein antibodies (ACPA) positive RA patients achieved more remission (66%) than ACPA negative RA patients (51%, p=0.001), but also had a lower mean baseline Disease Activity Score (DAS) (3.2 vs 3.6, p<0.001). Independent predictors for remission were male sex, low joint counts, DAS and Health Assessment Questionnaire, low body mass index and ACPA positivity. Conclusion Initial treatment with MTX and a tapered high dose of prednisone results in similarly high remission percentages after 4 months (about 60%) in RA patients, regardless of fulfilling the 1987 or 2010 criteria, and in UA patients. Independent predictors indicate that initiating treatment while disease activity is relatively low results in more remission.

Response to glucocorticoids at 2 weeks predicts the effectiveness of DMARD induction therapy at 3 months: post hoc analyses from the tREACH study

Objective To investigate if a glucocorticoid (GC) response at 2 weeks, defined by EULAR response criteria, can predict active disease (Disease Activity Score (DAS)>2.4) at 3 months. Methods For this study, data of the Treatment in the Rotterdam Early Arthritis Cohort study (tREACH), an ongoing clinical trial that evaluates different induction therapies in early rheumatoid arthritis, were used. We selected patients who had a high probability of progressing to persistent arthritis (>70% based on the prediction model of Visser). All patients within the high-probability stratum, who had a baseline DAS>2.2 and a DAS assessment at 2 weeks after randomisation, were included (n=120). Besides GC response at 2 weeks, we investigated which other factors were associated with active disease (DAS>2.4) after 3 months of disease-modifying antirheumatic drug (DMARD) treatment. All variables with a p≤0.25 were assessed in our logistic regression model with backward selection. Variables were eliminated until all remaining variables had a significant association (p<0.05). Results Patients who did not respond to GC bridging therapy at 2 weeks had an overall OR of having active disease at 3 months of 10.29 (95% CI 3.34 to 31.64; p<0.001) in comparison with responders. The corrected OR was 14.00 (95% CI 3.31 to 59.21; p<0.001). Our final model predicting response at 3 months included the following variables: gender, GC response, induction therapy arms and baseline DAS, which had an explained variance of 39%. Conclusions GC response at 2 weeks is a useful tool for recognising those patients who will probably have active disease (DAS>2.4) after 3 months of DMARD treatment.

Treatment decisions and related costs differ significantly depending on the choice of a disease activity index in RA, according to 1987 and 2010 classification criteria

OBJECTIVE To evaluate the therapeutic and economic consequences of various disease activity indices (DAIs) in RA according to 1987 and 2010 criteria. METHODS Data on disease activity states from all sustained visits were assessed from all patients who participate in the treatment in the Rotterdam Early Arthritis Cohort (tREACH) study, a stratified randomized trial to evaluate different treatment strategies in patients with a symptom duration of <1 year. Frequencies of treatment adaptations, based upon exclusive thresholds of various DAIs, were visualized in reclassification tables. The Stuart-Maxwell test was applied to analyse any significant differences between treatment decisions according to the different DAIs. Simulated annual median medication costs were estimated using the tREACH medication protocol with standard national costs. RESULTS DAIs perform similar in RA according to 1987 and 2010 criteria. A total of 1104 DASs per DAI were available from 296 patients. DAIs differ significantly, compared with DASs, in classifying a patients disease state. Consequently, treatment intensifications occur more frequently with SDAI, CDAI and DAS-28 usage, compared with DAS. Tapering treatment occurs less frequently with SDAI and CDAI and more frequently with DAS-28 usage. Simulated annual median medication costs are significantly higher if DAS-28, SDAI and CDAI are used compared with DAS usage. CONCLUSION Usage of various DAIs in a single patient leads to inconsistent disease state categorizations. Consequently, these inconsistencies significantly influence therapeutic decisions and accompanying costs. As DAI usage is imperative to uphold current European League Against Rheumatology (EULAR) treatment recommendations, physicians should consider these therapeutic and economic consequences before choosing a particular DAI.

Do we need to lower the cut point of the 2010 ACR/EULAR classification criteria for diagnosing rheumatoid arthritis?

OBJECTIVE In this study we aimed to evaluate the effect of lowering the cut point of the 2010 criteria to identify more patients with RA among early inflammatory arthritis patients. METHODS We included early arthritis patients from the Rotterdam Early Arthritis Cohort with at least one joint with clinical synovitis and symptoms for <1 year, with no other explanation for their symptoms. The demographic and clinical characteristics of each patient were recorded at baseline. Patients were classified as case or non-case at the 1-year follow-up by the definition used in the development of the 2010 criteria (MTX initiation). To assess the diagnostic performance of the 2010 criteria, the sensitivity and specificity at each cut point were determined. RESULTS We included 557 patients in our analysis. At the 1-year follow-up, 253 patients (45%) were classified as case (MTX use). In the group of patients who scored 0-5 points (n = 328), 98 patients (30%) were classified as case (MTX use). The sensitivity and specificity of the 2010 criteria using the cut point of 6 were 61% and 76%, respectively. With the cut point of 5, the sensitivity would increase to 76% and the specificity would decrease to 68%. CONCLUSION By lowering the cut point of the 2010 criteria from 6 to 5 points, we were able to identify 15% more RA patients at the cost of 8% more false-positive patients.

Clinical and radiological outcomes of 5-year drug-free remission-steered treatment in patients with early arthritis: IMPROVED study

Objectives To determine the 5-year outcomes of early remission induction therapy followed by targeted treatment aimed at drug-free remission (DFR) in patients with early arthritis. Methods In 12 hospitals, 610 patients with early (<2 years) rheumatoid arthritis (RA) or undifferentiated arthritis (UA) started on methotrexate (MTX) 25 mg/week and prednisone (60 mg/day tapered to 7.5 mg/day). Patients not in early remission (Disease Activity Score <1.6 after 4 months) were randomised (single blind) to arm 1, adding hydroxychloroquine 400 mg/day and sulfasalazine 2000 mg/day, or arm 2, switching to MTX plus adalimumab 40 mg/2 weeks. Treatment adjustments over time aimed at DFR. Outcomes were remission percentages, functional ability, toxicity and radiological damage progression after 5 years. Results After 4 months, 387 patients were in early remission, 83 were randomised to arm 1 and 78 to arm 2. After 5 years, 295/610 (48%) patients were in remission, 26% in sustained DFR (SDFR) (≥1 year) (220/387 (57%) remission and 135/387 (35%) SDFR in the early remission group, 50% remission, 11% SDFR in the randomisation arms without differences between the arms). More patients with UA (37% vs 23% RA, p=0.001) and more anticitrullinated protein antibody (ACPA)-negative patients (37% vs 18% ACPA-positive, p<0.001) achieved SDFR. Overall, mean Health Assessment Questionnaire was 0.6 (0.5), and median (IQR) damage progression was 0.5 (0–2.7) Sharp/van der Heijde points, with only five patients showing progression >25 points in 5 years. Conclusions Five years of DFR-steered treatment in patients with early RA resulted in almost normal functional ability without clinically relevant joint damage across treatment groups. Patients who achieved early remission had the best clinical outcomes. There were no differences between the randomisation arms. SDFR is a realistic treatment goal.