University Medical Center Utrecht and Utrecht University, The Netherlands.
F. Hoffmann-La Roche, Basel, Switzerland.
Arthritis Care Res (Hoboken). 2022 Jun;74(6):889-895. doi: 10.1002/acr.24524. Epub 2022 Mar 25.
To compare the effects of preventing radiographic progression (in its 3 components) of tocilizumab (TCZ) monotherapy with those of TCZ and methotrexate (MTX) in combination therapy (TCZ + MTX), and to evaluate possible effect modifiers in this model.
Randomized trials that compared TCZ monotherapy to TCZ + MTX combination therapy for differences in radiographic progression were analyzed on an individual patient data level using mixed-effects models, and data were collected from 820 subjects with either early rheumatoid arthritis (RA) or established RA. Outcomes were classified as the absence of radiographic progression after 2 years (i.e., preventing radiographic progression) as measured by total Sharp/van der Heijde score (SHS), erosion score, and joint space narrowing (JSN) score. Effect modification by baseline joint damage, disease duration, and Disease Activity Score in 28 joints (DAS28) was studied.
Overall, TCZ + MTX combination therapy was more effective in preventing radiographic progression compared to TCZ monotherapy, which was measured by total SHS score. However, in patients with early RA who had more joint damage compared to those with less joint damage at baseline (relative risk [RR] 1.02 versus RR 0.91, respectively) or in patients with a lower DAS28 score compared to those with a higher DAS28 score (RR 1.04 versus RR 0.92, respectively) at baseline, this advantage disappeared. In patients with established RA, the advantage of TCZ + MTX versus TCZ alone in the prevention of radiographic progression disappeared with a longer disease duration at baseline (RR 1.04 versus 0.83). Results of erosion scores as an outcome were in line with these findings, though findings for JSN scores were less clear.
Combination therapy with TCZ + MTX is more effective in preventing radiographic progression compared to TCZ monotherapy, but the effectiveness of TCZ monotherapy may approximate the effectiveness of TCZ + MTX in patients with early RA who have more joint damage and/or a lower DAS28 at baseline and in patients with established RA who have longer disease duration.
比较托珠单抗(TCZ)单药治疗与 TCZ 联合甲氨蝶呤(MTX)联合治疗在预防影像学进展(其 3 个组成部分)方面的效果,并评估该模型中的可能的效应修饰因子。
对比较 TCZ 单药治疗与 TCZ 联合 MTX 联合治疗在影像学进展方面差异的随机试验进行了个体患者数据水平的分析,采用混合效应模型,并从 820 名患有早期类风湿关节炎(RA)或已确诊 RA 的患者中收集数据。结果分为 2 年后无影像学进展(即,预防影像学进展),其通过总 Sharp/van der Heijde 评分(SHS)、侵蚀评分和关节间隙狭窄(JSN)评分来衡量。研究了基线关节损伤、疾病持续时间和 28 个关节疾病活动度评分(DAS28)对效应的修饰作用。
总体而言,与 TCZ 单药治疗相比,TCZ 联合 MTX 联合治疗在预防影像学进展方面更有效,这通过总 SHS 评分来衡量。然而,在基线时关节损伤较多的早期 RA 患者与基线时关节损伤较少的患者相比(相对风险 [RR] 1.02 与 RR 0.91)或在基线时 DAS28 评分较低的患者与 DAS28 评分较高的患者相比(RR 1.04 与 RR 0.92),这一优势消失了。在已确诊的 RA 患者中,随着基线疾病持续时间的延长,TCZ 联合 MTX 治疗在预防影像学进展方面的优势相对于 TCZ 单药治疗消失(RR 1.04 与 RR 0.83)。作为结果的侵蚀评分的结果与这些发现一致,尽管 JSN 评分的结果不太明确。
与 TCZ 单药治疗相比,TCZ 联合 MTX 联合治疗在预防影像学进展方面更有效,但在基线时关节损伤较多和/或 DAS28 评分较低的早期 RA 患者以及疾病持续时间较长的已确诊 RA 患者中,TCZ 单药治疗的有效性可能接近 TCZ 联合 MTX 的有效性。