Which subgroup of patients with rheumatoid arthritis benefits from switching to rituximab versus alternative anti-tumour necrosis factor (TNF) agents after previous failure of an anti-TNF agent?

Finckh, Axel; Ciurea, A.; Brulhart, L.; Moller, B.; Walker, U. A.; Courvoisier, Delphine; Kyburz, D.; Dudler, J.; Gabay, Cem

Advanced search

Browse by...

Deposit

Highlights

More informations

Title		Which subgroup of patients with rheumatoid arthritis benefits from switching to rituximab versus alternative anti-tumour necrosis factor (TNF) agents after previous failure of an anti-TNF agent?
Authors		Finckh, Axel Ciurea, A. Brulhart, L. Moller, B. Walker, U. A. Courvoisier, Delphine Kyburz, D. Dudler, J. Gabay, Cem show all authors [1 - 9]
Published in		Annals of the Rheumatic Diseases. 2010, vol. 69, no. 2, p. 387-393
Abstract		BACKGROUND: Patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) with an inadequate response to TNF antagonists (aTNFs) may switch to an alternative aTNF or start treatment from a different class of drugs, such as rituximab (RTX). It remains unclear in which clinical settings these therapeutic strategies offer most benefit. OBJECTIVE: To analyse the effectiveness of RTX versus alternative aTNFs on RA disease activity in different subgroups of patients. METHODS: A prospective cohort study of patients with RA who discontinued at least one aTNF and subsequently received either RTX or an alternative aTNF, nested within the Swiss RA registry (SCQM-RA) was carried out. The primary outcome, longitudinal improvement in 28-joint count Disease Activity Score (DAS28), was analysed using multivariate regression models for longitudinal data and adjusted for potential confounders. RESULTS: Of the 318 patients with RA included; 155 received RTX and 163 received an alternative aTNF. The relative benefit of RTX varied with the type of prior aTNF failure: when the motive for switching was ineffectiveness to previous aTNFs, the longitudinal improvement in DAS28 was significantly better with RTX than with an alternative aTNF (p = 0.03; at 6 months, -1.34 (95% CI -1.54 to -1.15) vs -0.93 (95% CI -1.28 to -0.59), respectively). When the motive for switching was other causes, the longitudinal improvement in DAS28 was similar for RTX and alternative aTNFs (p = 0.40). These results were not significantly modified by the number of previous aTNF failures, the type of aTNF switches, or the presence of co-treatment with a disease-modifying antirheumatic drug. CONCLUSION: This observational study suggests that in patients with RA who have stopped a previous aTNF treatment because of ineffectiveness changing to RTX is more effective than switching to an alternative aTNF.
Keywords		Antibodies, Monoclonal/therapeutic use — Antibodies, Monoclonal, Murine-Derived — Antigens, CD20/immunology — Antirheumatic Agents/therapeutic use — Arthritis, Rheumatoid/drug therapy — Female — Humans — Male — Middle Aged — Patient Selection — Prospective Studies — Severity of Illness Index — Treatment Failure — Treatment Outcome — Tumor Necrosis Factor-alpha/antagonists & inhibitors
Identifiers		DOI: 10.1136/ard.2008.105064 PMID: 19416802
Full text		Article - Limited access to UNIGE
Structures		Faculté de médecine / Section de médecine clinique / Département de médecine interne des spécialités
Research group		Mécanisme de l'inflammation articulaire (44)
Citation (ISO format)		FINCKH, Axel et al. Which subgroup of patients with rheumatoid arthritis benefits from switching to rituximab versus alternative anti-tumour necrosis factor (TNF) agents after previous failure of an anti-TNF agent?. In: Annals of the Rheumatic Diseases, 2010, vol. 69, n° 2, p. 387-393. https://archive-ouverte.unige.ch/unige:19810