Cargando…

Long-term golimumab persistence: Five-year treatment retention data pooled from pivotal Phase III clinical trials in patients with rheumatoid arthritis, psoriatic arthritis, and ankylosing spondylitis

INTRODUCTION: Golimumab, a monoclonal antibody against tumor necrosis factor–α (TNF-α), is used widely for treatment of rheumatic diseases. Long-term persistence is an important factor influencing therapeutic benefit and is a surrogate measure of efficacy. We compared five-year golimumab treatment p...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Weinstein, Cindy L. J., Meehan, Alan G., Lin, Jianxin, Briscoe, Steven D., Govoni, Marinella
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Springer International Publishing 2023
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10640568/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37751000
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10067-023-06760-z
Descripción
Sumario:INTRODUCTION: Golimumab, a monoclonal antibody against tumor necrosis factor–α (TNF-α), is used widely for treatment of rheumatic diseases. Long-term persistence is an important factor influencing therapeutic benefit and is a surrogate measure of efficacy. We compared five-year golimumab treatment persistence across studies, indications, and lines of therapy using pooled data from pivotal golimumab Phase III clinical trials. METHODS: This post-hoc analysis evaluated use of golimumab administered subcutaneously (50 or 100 mg every four weeks) for up to five years in 2228 adult participants with rheumatoid arthritis (RA; GO-BEFORE, GO-AFTER, and GO-FORWARD studies), psoriatic arthritis (PsA; GO-REVEAL study), or ankylosing spondylitis (AS; GO-RAISE study). Retention rate differences were evaluated by study, indication, and line of therapy using log-rank tests, and probability of treatment persistence was estimated by Kaplan–Meier analysis. RESULTS: Golimumab retention rates at Year 5 were consistently high when used as 1(st)-line therapy (69.8%) and did not differ significantly across the three indications tested (p = 0.5106) or across 1(st)-line studies (p = 0.2327). Retention at Year 5 was better in participants using golimumab as 1(st)-line than in those using it as 2(nd)-line (41.6%) therapy. Participants on 2(nd)-line golimumab therapy had a longer disease duration (median 9.2 years versus 3.7 years) than those on 1(st)-line golimumab therapy. CONCLUSIONS: These data support the value of long-term golimumab therapy in patients with chronic, immune-mediated rheumatic diseases when used as 1(st)-line (RA, PsA, AS) or 2(nd)-line (RA) therapy. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s10067-023-06760-z.