Charité-Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Free University and Humboldt University of Berlin, , Berlin, Germany.
Ann Rheum Dis. 2014 Jan;73(1):69-74. doi: 10.1136/annrheumdis-2013-203523. Epub 2013 Jul 31.
This study compared the efficacy and safety of subcutaneous (SC) versus intravenous (IV) formulations of tocilizumab in patients with rheumatoid arthritis with an inadequate response to disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARD).
Patients (n=1262) were randomly assigned to receive tocilizumab-SC 162 mg weekly+placebo-IV every 4 weeks or tocilizumab-IV 8 mg/kg every 4 weeks+placebo-SC weekly in combination with traditional DMARD. The primary outcome was to demonstrate the non-inferiority of tocilizumab-SC to tocilizumab-IV with regard to the proportion of patients in each group achieving an American College of Rheumatology (ACR) 20 response at week 24 using a 12% non-inferiority margin (NIM). Secondary outcomes were disease activity score using 28 joints (DAS28), ACR responses, health assessment questionnaire scores and safety assessments.
At week 24, 69.4% (95% CI 65.5 to 73.2) of tocilizumab-SC-treated patients versus 73.4% (95% CI 69.6 to 77.1) of tocilizumab-IV-treated patients achieved an ACR20 response (weighted difference between groups -4.0%, 95% CI -9.2 to 1.2); the 12% NIM was met. ACR50/70 responses, DAS28 and physical function improvements were comparable between the tocilizumab-SC and tocilizumab-IV groups. The safety profiles of tocilizumab-SC and tocilizumab-IV were similar, and the most common adverse event was infection. Injection-site reactions (ISR) occurred more frequently in the tocilizumab-SC group than in the tocilizumab-IV (placebo-SC) group. No anaphylaxis was reported over the 24 weeks.
Tocilizumab-SC 162 mg weekly demonstrated comparable efficacy to tocilizumab-IV 8 mg/kg. The safety profile of tocilizumab-SC is consistent with the known and well-established safety profile of tocilizumab-IV, with the exception of a higher incidence of ISR, which were more common with tocilizumab-SC administration.
本研究比较了皮下(SC)和静脉(IV)两种托珠单抗制剂在接受改善病情抗风湿药物(DMARD)治疗后应答不足的类风湿关节炎患者中的疗效和安全性。
将 1262 名患者随机分为托珠单抗-SC 162mg 每周+安慰剂-IV 每 4 周一次组,或托珠单抗-IV 8mg/kg 每 4 周一次+安慰剂-SC 每周一次组,联合使用传统 DMARD。主要终点是证明托珠单抗-SC 在达到美国风湿病学会(ACR)20 应答的患者比例方面不劣于托珠单抗-IV,采用 12%的非劣效性边界(NIM)。次要终点是 28 个关节疾病活动度评分(DAS28)、ACR 应答、健康评估问卷评分和安全性评估。
在第 24 周,托珠单抗-SC 治疗组有 69.4%(95%可信区间 65.5 至 73.2)的患者达到 ACR20 应答,而托珠单抗-IV 治疗组有 73.4%(95%可信区间 69.6 至 77.1)的患者达到 ACR20 应答(两组间加权差异-4.0%,95%可信区间-9.2 至 1.2);满足 12%的 NIM。托珠单抗-SC 组和托珠单抗-IV 组的 ACR50/70 应答、DAS28 和身体功能改善相当。托珠单抗-SC 和托珠单抗-IV 的安全性谱相似,最常见的不良事件是感染。托珠单抗-SC 组比托珠单抗-IV(安慰剂-SC)组更常发生注射部位反应(ISR)。在 24 周内没有报告过敏反应。
托珠单抗-SC 每周 162mg 与托珠单抗-IV 8mg/kg 疗效相当。托珠单抗-SC 的安全性谱与托珠单抗-IV 已知且成熟的安全性谱一致,除了 ISR 的发生率较高外,这在托珠单抗-SC 给药时更为常见。