Interdisziplinäre Diagnostik und Therapie, Akademie für Manuelle Medizin an der WWU Münster, Von-Esmarch-Str. 50, 48149, Münster, Germany.
Gemeinschaftspraxis, Passau, Germany.
Clin Rheumatol. 2017 Sep;36(9):1989-1996. doi: 10.1007/s10067-017-3757-8. Epub 2017 Jul 30.
Approximately 30% of patients with rheumatoid arthritis receiving biological disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (bDMARDs) take them as monotherapy. Although etanercept (ETN) monotherapy has been evaluated in clinical trials, data in the real-world setting are sparse. We compared the efficacy and safety of ETN, given alone or in combination with methotrexate (MTX), in routine clinical practice. This was a subanalysis of patients who received either ETN alone or ETN + MTX during a 52-week prospective, observational study conducted at 329 German centers. The primary endpoint was "Funktionsfragebogen Hannover" (Hannover Functional Ability Questionnaire [FFbH]; low FFbH = worse function) functional remission at week 26 and week 52. Secondary endpoints included the 28-joint count Disease Activity Score (DAS28), DAS28 remission (DAS28 < 2.6), and adverse events (AEs). Participating centers applied ETN monotherapy in 43.1% of patients and ETN + MTX in 56.9%. A smaller proportion of patients achieved FFbH functional remission with ETN vs ETN + MTX (31.9%, 95% confidence interval [CI] 29.1-34.9% vs 39.8%, 37.2-42.5%, respectively; p < 0.001) at 26 weeks and at 52 weeks (38.4%, 35.1-41.7% vs 44.3%, 41.5-47.2%, respectively; p = 0.007). After 52 weeks, the mean DAS28 (±SD) decreased from 5.5 ± 1.3 to 3.4 ± 1.4 (ETN) vs 5.3 ± 1.3 to 3.2 ± 1.3 (ETN + MTX) and DAS28 remission was achieved by 32.5% (95% CI 29.0-36.1%) of patients with ETN vs 38.8% (35.8-41.9%; p = 0.007) with ETN + MTX. Overall, 20.6 (ETN) and 19.7% (ETN + MTX) of patients reported treatment-related AEs. Patients received ETN monotherapy almost as often as ETN + MTX. ETN + MTX appeared marginally more effective than ETN monotherapy in some, but not all, outcomes measured.
大约 30%接受生物疾病修饰抗风湿药物(bDMARDs)治疗的类风湿关节炎患者采用单药治疗。虽然已经在临床试验中评估了依那西普(ETN)单药治疗,但真实世界的数据仍然很少。我们比较了 ETN 单独使用或与甲氨蝶呤(MTX)联合使用在常规临床实践中的疗效和安全性。这是在 329 个德国中心进行的为期 52 周的前瞻性观察研究中接受 ETN 单独或 ETN+MTX 治疗的患者的亚分析。主要终点是第 26 周和第 52 周时“汉诺威功能能力问卷”(Hannover Functional Ability Questionnaire [FFbH];FFbH 低=功能更差)的功能缓解。次要终点包括 28 关节疾病活动评分(DAS28)、DAS28 缓解(DAS28<2.6)和不良事件(AE)。参与中心在 43.1%的患者中应用 ETN 单药治疗,在 56.9%的患者中应用 ETN+MTX。与 ETN+MTX 相比,采用 ETN 单药治疗的患者达到 FFbH 功能缓解的比例较小(31.9%,95%置信区间[CI]29.1-34.9%比 39.8%,37.2-42.5%;p<0.001),第 26 周和第 52 周分别为(38.4%,35.1-41.7%比 44.3%,41.5-47.2%;p=0.007)。52 周后,平均 DAS28(±SD)从 5.5±1.3 降至 3.4±1.4(ETN)和 5.3±1.3 降至 3.2±1.3(ETN+MTX),32.5%(95%CI 29.0-36.1%)的患者达到 DAS28 缓解,而 38.8%(35.8-41.9%;p=0.007)的患者采用 ETN+MTX 治疗。总体而言,20.6%(ETN)和 19.7%(ETN+MTX)的患者报告了与治疗相关的 AE。患者接受 ETN 单药治疗的频率几乎与 ETN+MTX 相同。与 ETN 单药治疗相比,ETN+MTX 在一些但不是所有测量的结局中似乎略为更有效。