Walker Ulrich A, Jaeger Veronika K, Chatzidionysiou Katerina, Hetland Merete L, Hauge Ellen-Margrethe, Pavelka Karel, Nordström Dan C, Canhão Helena, Tomšič Matija, van Vollenhoven Ronald, Gabay Cem
Department of Rheumatology, University Hospital Basel, Basel, Switzerland,
Department of Rheumatology, University Hospital Basel, Basel, Switzerland.
Rheumatology (Oxford). 2016 Feb;55(2):230-6. doi: 10.1093/rheumatology/kev297. Epub 2015 Aug 27.
To compare the effectiveness of biologics after rituximab (RTX) treatment in RA.
The effectiveness of TNF-α inhibitors (TNFi), abatacept (ABA) or tocilizumab (TCZ) was examined in patients previously treated with RTX using clinical data collected in the Collaborative Registries for the Evaluation of Rituximab in RA Collaborative registry. Patients had stopped RTX 6 months or less prior to the new biologic and had a baseline visit within 21 days of starting the new biologic.
Two hundred and sixty-five patients were analysed after 6 months of treatment. Patients on TCZ (n = 86) had a greater decline of DAS28-ESR and clinical disease activity index than patients on TNFi (n = 89) or ABA (n = 90). This effect was also seen after adjusting for baseline prednisone use and the number of previous biologics. The mean DAS28-ESR scores in patients on TCZ were 1.0 (95% CI: 0.2, 1.7) and 1.8 (95% CI: 1.0, 2.5) points lower than in patients on TNFi or ABA, respectively. In patients on TCZ, the clinical disease activity index was 9.4 (95% CI: 1.7, 16.1) and 8.1 (95% CI: 0.9, 15.3) points lower than on TNFi and ABA, respectively. Patients on TCZ more frequently had good EULAR responses than patients on TNFi or ABA (66 vs 31 vs 14%, P < 0.001). The HAQ disability index improved in all treatment groups (P < 0.001), but did not differ between biologics, as did drug retention rates. The reasons for discontinuation of RTX and the number of previous biologics had no influence on outcomes.
In this observational cohort of patients who discontinued RTX, TCZ provided a better control of RA than ABA or TNFi.
比较利妥昔单抗(RTX)治疗后生物制剂在类风湿关节炎(RA)中的疗效。
利用类风湿关节炎中利妥昔单抗评估协作注册中心收集的临床数据,对先前接受RTX治疗的患者使用肿瘤坏死因子-α抑制剂(TNFi)、阿巴西普(ABA)或托珠单抗(TCZ)的疗效进行了研究。患者在开始使用新生物制剂前6个月内停用了RTX,并在开始新生物制剂后21天内进行了基线访视。
治疗6个月后对265例患者进行了分析。与接受TNFi(n = 89)或ABA(n = 90)治疗的患者相比,接受TCZ治疗的患者(n = 86)的DAS28-ESR和临床疾病活动指数下降幅度更大。在调整基线泼尼松使用情况和既往生物制剂使用数量后,也观察到了这种效果。接受TCZ治疗的患者的平均DAS28-ESR评分分别比接受TNFi或ABA治疗的患者低1.0(95%CI:0.2,1.7)和1.8(95%CI:1.0,2.5)分。在接受TCZ治疗的患者中,临床疾病活动指数分别比接受TNFi和ABA治疗的患者低9.4(95%CI:1.7,16.1)和8.1(95%CI:0.9,15.3)分。接受TCZ治疗的患者比接受TNFi或ABA治疗的患者更频繁地获得良好的欧洲抗风湿病联盟(EULAR)反应(66%对31%对14%,P < 0.001)。所有治疗组的健康评估问卷残疾指数均有所改善(P < 0.001),但生物制剂之间无差异,药物保留率也是如此。停用RTX的原因和既往生物制剂的使用数量对结果没有影响。
在这个停用RTX的观察性队列中,TCZ比ABA或TNFi能更好地控制RA。