Comparative effectiveness of abatacept, rituximab, tocilizumab and TNFi biologics in RA : Results from the nationwide Swedish register
(2019) In Rheumatology (United Kingdom) 58(8). p.1367-1377- Abstract
Objectives: Current guidelines rank abatacept, rituximab, tocilizumab and TNF-inhibitors (TNFi) as having equal effectiveness for the treatment of RA, at least as second line therapies. These recommendations are mainly based on meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials, with few direct drug-drug comparisons. Our objective was to compare the real-world absolute and relative effectiveness among RA patients starting any of the available biologic DMARDs (bDMARDs). Methods: We used the Swedish Rheumatology Register to identify patients with RA initiating TNFi, rituximab, abatacept or tocilizumab in 2010-2016 as first bDMARD (n = 9333), or after switch from TNFi as first bDMARD (n = 3941). National Swedish registers provided additional... (More)
Objectives: Current guidelines rank abatacept, rituximab, tocilizumab and TNF-inhibitors (TNFi) as having equal effectiveness for the treatment of RA, at least as second line therapies. These recommendations are mainly based on meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials, with few direct drug-drug comparisons. Our objective was to compare the real-world absolute and relative effectiveness among RA patients starting any of the available biologic DMARDs (bDMARDs). Methods: We used the Swedish Rheumatology Register to identify patients with RA initiating TNFi, rituximab, abatacept or tocilizumab in 2010-2016 as first bDMARD (n = 9333), or after switch from TNFi as first bDMARD (n = 3941). National Swedish registers provided additional covariates and censoring events. Effectiveness was assessed 3 and 12 months after treatment start, as the proportion remaining on therapy and with EULAR Good Response, HAQ improvement >0.2, zero swollen/tender joints and CDAI remission. Adjusted differences were estimated with multivariable linear regression. Results: Patients starting non-TNFi (vs TNFi) as first bDMARD had a higher proportion remaining on drug and reaching most response outcomes as first bDMARD (1-year EULAR Good Response/HAQ improvement: TNFi 24.9/25.4%, rituximab 28.6/37.2%, abatacept 31.9/33.7%, tocilizumab 50.9/43.1%). After switch from a first TNFi, rituximab and tocilizumab, but not abatacept, were associated with significantly better response measures than TNFi (1-year EULAR Good Response/HAQ improvement: TNFi 11.6/16.1%, rituximab 24.8/33.2%, abatacept 13.1/17.5%, tocilizumab 34.1/29.4%). Differences remained significant after adjusting for potential confounders. Conclusion: Treatment outcomes among RA patients treated in Swedish clinical practice are in line with a superior effectiveness of non-TNFi bDMARDs, in particular tocilizumab and rituximab, compared with TNFi.
(Less)
- author
- Frisell, Thomas ; Dehlin, Mats ; Di Giuseppe, Daniela ; Feltelius, Nils ; Turesson, Carl LU and Askling, Johan
- author collaboration
- organization
- publishing date
- 2019
- type
- Contribution to journal
- publication status
- published
- subject
- keywords
- abatacept, anti-TNF, biologics, effectiveness, rheumatoid arthritis, rituximab, tocilizumab, treatment outcome
- in
- Rheumatology (United Kingdom)
- volume
- 58
- issue
- 8
- pages
- 11 pages
- publisher
- Oxford University Press
- external identifiers
-
- scopus:85081607009
- pmid:31056707
- ISSN
- 1462-0324
- DOI
- 10.1093/rheumatology/key433
- language
- English
- LU publication?
- yes
- id
- aed6dab2-3c01-4dcc-be0b-b122170bb316
- date added to LUP
- 2020-03-30 11:42:16
- date last changed
- 2024-05-29 10:36:31
@article{aed6dab2-3c01-4dcc-be0b-b122170bb316,
abstract = {{<p>Objectives: Current guidelines rank abatacept, rituximab, tocilizumab and TNF-inhibitors (TNFi) as having equal effectiveness for the treatment of RA, at least as second line therapies. These recommendations are mainly based on meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials, with few direct drug-drug comparisons. Our objective was to compare the real-world absolute and relative effectiveness among RA patients starting any of the available biologic DMARDs (bDMARDs). Methods: We used the Swedish Rheumatology Register to identify patients with RA initiating TNFi, rituximab, abatacept or tocilizumab in 2010-2016 as first bDMARD (n = 9333), or after switch from TNFi as first bDMARD (n = 3941). National Swedish registers provided additional covariates and censoring events. Effectiveness was assessed 3 and 12 months after treatment start, as the proportion remaining on therapy and with EULAR Good Response, HAQ improvement >0.2, zero swollen/tender joints and CDAI remission. Adjusted differences were estimated with multivariable linear regression. Results: Patients starting non-TNFi (vs TNFi) as first bDMARD had a higher proportion remaining on drug and reaching most response outcomes as first bDMARD (1-year EULAR Good Response/HAQ improvement: TNFi 24.9/25.4%, rituximab 28.6/37.2%, abatacept 31.9/33.7%, tocilizumab 50.9/43.1%). After switch from a first TNFi, rituximab and tocilizumab, but not abatacept, were associated with significantly better response measures than TNFi (1-year EULAR Good Response/HAQ improvement: TNFi 11.6/16.1%, rituximab 24.8/33.2%, abatacept 13.1/17.5%, tocilizumab 34.1/29.4%). Differences remained significant after adjusting for potential confounders. Conclusion: Treatment outcomes among RA patients treated in Swedish clinical practice are in line with a superior effectiveness of non-TNFi bDMARDs, in particular tocilizumab and rituximab, compared with TNFi.</p>}},
author = {{Frisell, Thomas and Dehlin, Mats and Di Giuseppe, Daniela and Feltelius, Nils and Turesson, Carl and Askling, Johan}},
issn = {{1462-0324}},
keywords = {{abatacept; anti-TNF; biologics; effectiveness; rheumatoid arthritis; rituximab; tocilizumab; treatment outcome}},
language = {{eng}},
number = {{8}},
pages = {{1367--1377}},
publisher = {{Oxford University Press}},
series = {{Rheumatology (United Kingdom)}},
title = {{Comparative effectiveness of abatacept, rituximab, tocilizumab and TNFi biologics in RA : Results from the nationwide Swedish register}},
url = {{http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/rheumatology/key433}},
doi = {{10.1093/rheumatology/key433}},
volume = {{58}},
year = {{2019}},
}