Cargando…

Abatacept with methotrexate versus other biologic agents in treatment of patients with active rheumatoid arthritis despite methotrexate: a network meta-analysis

INTRODUCTION: The goal of this study was to compare the efficacy in terms of Health Assessment Questionnaire change from baseline (HAQ CFB), 50% improvement in American College of Rheumatology criterion (ACR-50) and Disease Activity Score in 28 joints (DAS28) defined remission (< 2.6) between aba...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Guyot, Patricia, Taylor, Peter, Christensen, Robin, Pericleous, Louisa, Poncet, Coralie, Lebmeier, Maximilian, Drost, Pieter, Bergman, Gert
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2011
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3334657/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22151924
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/ar3537
_version_ 1782230662468599808
author Guyot, Patricia
Taylor, Peter
Christensen, Robin
Pericleous, Louisa
Poncet, Coralie
Lebmeier, Maximilian
Drost, Pieter
Bergman, Gert
author_facet Guyot, Patricia
Taylor, Peter
Christensen, Robin
Pericleous, Louisa
Poncet, Coralie
Lebmeier, Maximilian
Drost, Pieter
Bergman, Gert
author_sort Guyot, Patricia
collection PubMed
description INTRODUCTION: The goal of this study was to compare the efficacy in terms of Health Assessment Questionnaire change from baseline (HAQ CFB), 50% improvement in American College of Rheumatology criterion (ACR-50) and Disease Activity Score in 28 joints (DAS28) defined remission (< 2.6) between abatacept and other biologic disease modifying anti-rheumatic drugs (DMARDs) in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) who have inadequate response to methotrexate (MTX-IR). METHODS: A systematic literature review identified controlled trials investigating the efficacy of abatacept (three studies), etanercept (two studies), infliximab (two), adalimumab (two), certolizumab pegol (two) ritixumab (three), and tocilizumab (two) in MTX-IR patients with RA. The clinical trials included in this analysis were similar with respect to trial design, baseline patient characteristics and background therapy (MTX). The key clinical endpoints of interest were HAQ CFB, ACR-50 and DAS28 < 2.6 measured at 24 and 52 weeks. The results were analysed using network meta-analysis methods that enabled calculation of an estimate for expected relative effect of comparative treatments. Analysis results were expressed as the difference in HAQ CFB score and odds ratio (OR) of achieving an ACR-50 and DAS28 response and associated 95% credible intervals (CrI). RESULTS: The analysis of HAQ CFB at 24 weeks and 52 weeks showed that abatacept in combination with MTX is expected to be more efficacious than MTX monotherapy and is expected to show a comparable efficacy relative to other biologic DMARDs in combination with MTX. Further, abatacept showed comparable ACR-50 and DAS28 < 2.6 response rates with other biologic DMARDs at 24 and 52 weeks, except for ACR-50 compared to certolizumab pegol at 52 weeks and for DAS28 < 2.6 compared to tocilizumab at 24 weeks. Sensitivity analyses confirmed the robustness of the findings. CONCLUSIONS: Abatacept in combination with MTX is expected to result in a comparable change from baseline in HAQ score and comparable ACR-50 and DAS28 < 2.6 response rates in MTX-IR patients compared to other approved biologic agents.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-3334657
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2011
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-33346572012-04-25 Abatacept with methotrexate versus other biologic agents in treatment of patients with active rheumatoid arthritis despite methotrexate: a network meta-analysis Guyot, Patricia Taylor, Peter Christensen, Robin Pericleous, Louisa Poncet, Coralie Lebmeier, Maximilian Drost, Pieter Bergman, Gert Arthritis Res Ther Research Article INTRODUCTION: The goal of this study was to compare the efficacy in terms of Health Assessment Questionnaire change from baseline (HAQ CFB), 50% improvement in American College of Rheumatology criterion (ACR-50) and Disease Activity Score in 28 joints (DAS28) defined remission (< 2.6) between abatacept and other biologic disease modifying anti-rheumatic drugs (DMARDs) in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) who have inadequate response to methotrexate (MTX-IR). METHODS: A systematic literature review identified controlled trials investigating the efficacy of abatacept (three studies), etanercept (two studies), infliximab (two), adalimumab (two), certolizumab pegol (two) ritixumab (three), and tocilizumab (two) in MTX-IR patients with RA. The clinical trials included in this analysis were similar with respect to trial design, baseline patient characteristics and background therapy (MTX). The key clinical endpoints of interest were HAQ CFB, ACR-50 and DAS28 < 2.6 measured at 24 and 52 weeks. The results were analysed using network meta-analysis methods that enabled calculation of an estimate for expected relative effect of comparative treatments. Analysis results were expressed as the difference in HAQ CFB score and odds ratio (OR) of achieving an ACR-50 and DAS28 response and associated 95% credible intervals (CrI). RESULTS: The analysis of HAQ CFB at 24 weeks and 52 weeks showed that abatacept in combination with MTX is expected to be more efficacious than MTX monotherapy and is expected to show a comparable efficacy relative to other biologic DMARDs in combination with MTX. Further, abatacept showed comparable ACR-50 and DAS28 < 2.6 response rates with other biologic DMARDs at 24 and 52 weeks, except for ACR-50 compared to certolizumab pegol at 52 weeks and for DAS28 < 2.6 compared to tocilizumab at 24 weeks. Sensitivity analyses confirmed the robustness of the findings. CONCLUSIONS: Abatacept in combination with MTX is expected to result in a comparable change from baseline in HAQ score and comparable ACR-50 and DAS28 < 2.6 response rates in MTX-IR patients compared to other approved biologic agents. BioMed Central 2011 2011-12-12 /pmc/articles/PMC3334657/ /pubmed/22151924 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/ar3537 Text en Copyright ©2011 Guyot et al.; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0 This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Research Article
Guyot, Patricia
Taylor, Peter
Christensen, Robin
Pericleous, Louisa
Poncet, Coralie
Lebmeier, Maximilian
Drost, Pieter
Bergman, Gert
Abatacept with methotrexate versus other biologic agents in treatment of patients with active rheumatoid arthritis despite methotrexate: a network meta-analysis
title Abatacept with methotrexate versus other biologic agents in treatment of patients with active rheumatoid arthritis despite methotrexate: a network meta-analysis
title_full Abatacept with methotrexate versus other biologic agents in treatment of patients with active rheumatoid arthritis despite methotrexate: a network meta-analysis
title_fullStr Abatacept with methotrexate versus other biologic agents in treatment of patients with active rheumatoid arthritis despite methotrexate: a network meta-analysis
title_full_unstemmed Abatacept with methotrexate versus other biologic agents in treatment of patients with active rheumatoid arthritis despite methotrexate: a network meta-analysis
title_short Abatacept with methotrexate versus other biologic agents in treatment of patients with active rheumatoid arthritis despite methotrexate: a network meta-analysis
title_sort abatacept with methotrexate versus other biologic agents in treatment of patients with active rheumatoid arthritis despite methotrexate: a network meta-analysis
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3334657/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22151924
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/ar3537
work_keys_str_mv AT guyotpatricia abataceptwithmethotrexateversusotherbiologicagentsintreatmentofpatientswithactiverheumatoidarthritisdespitemethotrexateanetworkmetaanalysis
AT taylorpeter abataceptwithmethotrexateversusotherbiologicagentsintreatmentofpatientswithactiverheumatoidarthritisdespitemethotrexateanetworkmetaanalysis
AT christensenrobin abataceptwithmethotrexateversusotherbiologicagentsintreatmentofpatientswithactiverheumatoidarthritisdespitemethotrexateanetworkmetaanalysis
AT pericleouslouisa abataceptwithmethotrexateversusotherbiologicagentsintreatmentofpatientswithactiverheumatoidarthritisdespitemethotrexateanetworkmetaanalysis
AT poncetcoralie abataceptwithmethotrexateversusotherbiologicagentsintreatmentofpatientswithactiverheumatoidarthritisdespitemethotrexateanetworkmetaanalysis
AT lebmeiermaximilian abataceptwithmethotrexateversusotherbiologicagentsintreatmentofpatientswithactiverheumatoidarthritisdespitemethotrexateanetworkmetaanalysis
AT drostpieter abataceptwithmethotrexateversusotherbiologicagentsintreatmentofpatientswithactiverheumatoidarthritisdespitemethotrexateanetworkmetaanalysis
AT bergmangert abataceptwithmethotrexateversusotherbiologicagentsintreatmentofpatientswithactiverheumatoidarthritisdespitemethotrexateanetworkmetaanalysis