Explore the vast range of titles available.

Objectives To compare over 2 years the safety, efficacy and radiographic outcomes of subcutaneous abatacept versus adalimumab, in combination with methotrexate (MTX), in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA). Methods AMPLE is a phase IIIb, 2-year, randomised, investigator-blinded study with a 1-year primary endpoint. Biologic-naive patients with active RA and an inadequate response to MTX were randomised to 125 mg abatacept weekly or 40 mg adalimumab bi-weekly, both with a stable dose of MTX. Results Of 646 patients randomised, 79.2% abatacept and 74.7% adalimumab patients completed year 2. At year 2, efficacy outcomes, including radiographic, remained comparable between groups and with year 1 results. The American College Rheumatology 20, 50 and 70 responses at year 2 were 59.7%, 44.7% and 31.1% for abatacept and 60.1%, 46.6% and 29.3% for adalimumab. There were similar rates of adverse events (AEs) and serious adverse events (SAEs). More serious infections occurred with adalimumab (3.8% vs 5.8%) including two cases of tuberculosis with adalimumab. There were fewer discontinuations due to AEs (3.8% vs 9.5%), SAEs (1.6% vs 4.9%) and serious infections (0/12 vs 9/19 patients) in the abatacept group. Injection site reactions (ISRs) occurred less frequently with abatacept (4.1% vs 10.4%). Conclusions Through 2 years of blinded treatment in this first head-to-head study between biologic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs in RA patients with an inadequate response to MTX, subcutaneous abatacept and adalimumab were similarly efficacious based on clinical, functional and radiographic outcomes. Overall, AE frequency was similar in both groups but there were less discontinuations due to AEs, SAEs, serious infections and fewer local ISRs with abatacept. ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier NCT00929864.

ObjectiveTo evaluate the efficacy and safety of etanercept (ETN) after 48 weeks in patients with early active non-radiographic axial spondyloarthritis (nr-axSpA).MethodsPatients meeting Assessment of SpondyloArthritis international Society (ASAS) classification criteria for axSpA, but not modified New York radiographic criteria, received double-blind ETN 50 mg/week or placebo (PBO) for 12 weeks, then open-label ETN (ETN/ETN or PBO/ETN). Clinical, health, productivity, MRI and safety outcomes were assessed and the 48-week data are presented here.Results208/225 patients (92%) entered the open-label phase at week 12 (ETN, n=102; PBO, n=106). The percentage of patients achieving ASAS40 increased from 33% to 52% between weeks 12 and 48 for ETN/ETN and from 15% to 53% for PBO/ETN (within-group p value <0.001 for both). For ETN/ETN and PBO/ETN, the EuroQol 5 Dimensions utility score improved by 0.14 and 0.08, respectively, between baseline and week 12 and by 0.23 and 0.22 between baseline and week 48. Between weeks 12 and 48, MRI Spondyloarthritis Research Consortium of Canada sacroiliac joint (SIJ) scores decreased by −1.1 for ETN/ETN and by −3.0 for PBO/ETN, p<0.001 for both. Decreases in MRI SIJ inflammation and C-reactive protein correlated with several clinical outcomes at weeks 12 and 48.ConclusionsPatients with early active nr-axSpA demonstrated improvement from week 12 in clinical, health, productivity and MRI outcomes that was sustained to 48 weeks.Trial registration numberNCT01258738.

Background AVERT-2 (a phase IIIb, two-stage study) evaluated abatacept + methotrexate versus methotrexate alone, in methotrexate-naive, anti-citrullinated protein antibody-positive patients with early (≤ 6 months), active RA. This subanalysis investigated whether individual patients who achieved the week 24 Simplified Disease Activity Index (SDAI) remission primary endpoint could sustain remission to 1 year and then maintain it following changes in therapy. Methods During the 56-week induction period (IP), patients were randomized to weekly subcutaneous abatacept 125 mg + methotrexate or abatacept placebo + methotrexate. Patients completing the IP who achieved SDAI remission (≤ 3.3) at weeks 40 and 52 entered a 48-week de-escalation (DE) period. Patients treated with abatacept + methotrexate were re-randomized to continue weekly abatacept + methotrexate, or de-escalate and then withdraw abatacept (after 24 weeks), or receive abatacept monotherapy. Proportions of patients achieving sustained SDAI and Boolean remission, and Disease Activity Score in 28 joints using C-reactive protein (DAS28 [CRP]) < 2.6, were assessed. For patients achieving early sustained SDAI remission at weeks 24/40/52, flow between disease activity categories and individual trajectories was evaluated; flow was also evaluated for later remitters (weeks 40/52 but not week 24). Results Among patients treated with abatacept + methotrexate ( n / N  = 451/752) at IP week 24, 22% achieved SDAI remission, 17% achieved Boolean remission, and 42% achieved DAS28 (CRP) < 2.6; of these, 56%, 58%, and 74%, respectively, sustained a response throughout IP weeks 40/52. Among patients with a sustained response at IP weeks 24/40/52, 82% (14/17) on weekly abatacept + methotrexate, 81% (13/16) on abatacept monotherapy, 63% (12/19) who de-escalated/withdrew abatacept, and 65% (11/17) on abatacept placebo + methotrexate were in SDAI remission at end of the DE period; rates were higher than for later remitters in all arms except abatacept placebo + methotrexate. Conclusions A high proportion of individual patients achieving clinical endpoints at IP week 24 with abatacept + methotrexate sustained their responses through week 52. Of patients achieving early and sustained SDAI remission through 52 weeks, numerically more maintained remission during the DE period if weekly abatacept treatment continued. Trial registration NCT02504268 (ClinicalTrials.gov), registered July 21, 2015.

Rheumatoid Arthritis (RA) is a chronic inflammatory autoimmune systemic disease that preferentially affects small and large joints with a progressive course and can become deforming and disabling. In recent years, much progress has been made in the evaluation of inflammation and disease activity, however, there are other factors that have a high impact on the quality of life of these patients, such as depression, anxiety, fatigue, sleep disorders, suicidal behavior, fibromyalgia, sexual activity, sarcopenia, frailty, cachexia and obesity that are not always evaluated by rheumatologists. This review shows that the evaluation and timely detection of these aspects in patients with RA could interfere with the prognosis and improve their quality of life.

Introduction The aim of our work is to assess the prevalence of probable major depressive disorder and/or probable generalized anxiety disorder (pMDD/pGAD) in patients with moderate to severe rheumatoid arthritis (RA), and to evaluate the efficacy of tofacitinib on RA symptoms stratified by baseline pMDD/pGAD status. Methods Data were pooled from five phase 3 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and one phase 3b/4 RCT, assessing tofacitinib 5 or 10 mg twice daily (BID), adalimumab (two RCTs), or placebo. pMDD/pGAD was defined as Short Form-36 Health Survey (SF-36) Mental Component Summary (MCS) score ≤ 38. Efficacy outcomes over 12 months included least squares mean change from baseline in SF-36 MCS score and Health Assessment Questionnaire-Disability Index, proportions of patients with pMDD/pGAD in those with baseline pMDD/pGAD, and American College of Rheumatology 20/50/70 response, and Disease Activity Score in 28 joints, erythrocyte sedimentation rate remission (< 2.6) rates. Results A total of 4404 patients with non-missing baseline values were included. Baseline pMDD/pGAD was reported by 44.5%, 39.8%, 45.4%, and 39.1% of patients receiving tofacitinib 5 mg BID, tofacitinib 10 mg BID, adalimumab, and placebo, respectively. SF-36 MCS improvements were greater for tofacitinib versus adalimumab/placebo through month 6, with numerical improvements for tofacitinib versus adalimumab sustained through month 12, when the proportions of patients with baseline pMDD/pGAD who continued to have pMDD/pGAD were reduced. RA efficacy outcomes were generally similar in patients with/without baseline pMDD/pGAD. Conclusions The percentage of patients with pMDD/pGAD reduced from baseline over 1 year of treatment with tofacitinib or adalimumab. Effective treatment of underlying RA may lead to improvements in depression and anxiety, based on the SF-36 MCS. Specially designed studies using gold-standard diagnostic tools would be warranted to investigate this further. Video Abstract available for this article. Trial Registration NCT00960440, NCT00847613, NCT00814307, NCT00856544, NCT00853385, NCT02187055. 2KFdHwVqrg4vV_WgRB317c Video Abstract (MP4 204475 KB) Plain Language Summary Tofacitinib is a medicine used to treat rheumatoid arthritis (swollen and painful joints). A total of 4400 patients with moderate or severe rheumatoid arthritis who were taking part in tofacitinib clinical trials completed a survey about their general health and well-being at that time. We used their answers to determine whether they were likely to have depression or anxiety. We then looked at how common depression or anxiety was in patients with rheumatoid arthritis, and whether having depression or anxiety affected how patients responded to tofacitinib treatment. It is important to note that tofacitinib is not approved for the treatment of depression or anxiety, and these clinical trials were not designed to assess whether tofacitinib improved depression or anxiety symptoms. About 40% of patients likely had depression or anxiety when they started a clinical trial. This percentage decreased among patients who received tofacitinib treatment over a year. Patients treated with tofacitinib showed more improvement in their depression or anxiety than those treated with placebo. Over a year of treatment, tofacitinib improved signs and symptoms of rheumatoid arthritis, for example, the number of swollen or painful joints and fatigue. Having depression or anxiety did not change the way that patients responded to tofacitinib. This research shows how treating rheumatoid arthritis symptoms may also improve depression and anxiety symptoms. However, specially designed studies are needed to confirm this.

Large epidemiologic and clinical estimates of spondyloarthritis (SpA) in Latin America are not available. In this narrative review, our goal was to descriptively summarize the prevalence and features of SpA in Latin America, based on available small studies. A review of peer-reviewed literature identified 41 relevant publications. Of these, 11 (mostly based on Mexican data) estimated the prevalence of SpA and its subtypes, which varied from 0.28 to 0.9% (SpA), 0.02 to 0.8% (ankylosing spondylitis), 0.2 to 0.9% (axial SpA), and 0.004 to 0.08% (psoriatic arthritis). Demographic and/or clinical characteristics were reported in 31 of the 41 publications, deriving data from 3 multinational studies, as well as individual studies from Argentina, Brazil, Chile, Colombia, Costa Rica, Mexico, Peru, Uruguay, and Venezuela. Data relating to treatment, disease manifestations (articular and extra-articular), and comorbidities were summarized across the countries. Available data suggest that there is a variability in prevalence, manifestations, and comorbidities of SpA across Latin America. Basic epidemiologic and clinical data are required from several countries not currently represented. Data relating to current treatment approaches, patient outcomes, and socioeconomic impact within this large geographic region are also needed.

Objectives This post hoc analysis evaluated change from baseline (Δ) in weight/body mass index (BMI) and association with disease activity or lipid changes in tofacitinib‐treated patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA). Methods Data up to month 12 were pooled from eight phase 3 and 3b/4 studies of patients with RA receiving tofacitinib 5 or 10 mg twice daily or tofacitinib 11 mg modified‐release once daily (alone or combined with conventional synthetic disease‐modifying antirheumatic drugs), or placebo. Assessments included Δweight/BMI and the proportion of patients with weight gain ≥5%, at months 3, 6, and 12. Correlations between ∆weight/∆BMI and baseline/∆Disease Activity Score in 28 joints, erythrocyte sedimentation rate (DAS28‐4[ESR]), baseline C‐reactive protein (CRP), and ∆lipids were assessed. Statistical analysis included a longitudinal linear mixed model for repeated measures. Results The analysis included 5,335 patients (tofacitinib 5 mg twice daily [n = 2,349], 10 mg twice daily [n = 1,611], 11 mg once daily [n = 694], and placebo [n = 681]). Increases in least squares mean Δweight and ΔBMI were significantly greater (P < 0.05) at months 3 and 6 with all tofacitinib doses versus placebo; increases continued to month 12. Significantly greater (at least P < 0.05) proportions of tofacitinib‐treated patients (all doses) had weight gain ≥5% at months 3 and 6 versus placebo. There were weak correlations between weight/BMI changes with tofacitinib and DAS28‐4(ESR), baseline CRP, or lipid changes. Conclusion Patients receiving tofacitinib experienced weight and BMI changes (primarily increases) over time, with weak correlations with disease activity or lipids.

The aim of this study is to determine the prevalence of psoriatic arthritis (PsA) according to CASPAR criteria, ASAS peripheral and axial SpA criteria, and New York criteria for AS. The first 100 patients consecutively attending a psoriasis dermatology clinic were assessed. Demographic and clinical data were collected; all patients were questioned and examined for joint manifestations. Rheumatoid factor and radiographies of hands, feet, cervical spine, and pelvis for sacroiliac joints were obtained. X-rays were read independently by two experienced observers in blind fashion. Patients with objective joint manifestations, both axial and peripheral, were evaluated for fulfillment of CASPAR, ASAS peripheral and axial, and New York criteria. Median age 48 years; 93 % of patients had psoriasis vulgaris and 56 % nail involvement. Seventeen patients had peripheral arthritis as follows: nine mono/oligoarticular and eight polyarthritis. Median arthritis duration was 8 years. Seventeen percent of patients fulfilled CASPAR and ASAS peripheral criteria, 6 % New York, and 5 % ASAS axial criteria. Patients who met CASPAR criteria showed a significantly higher psoriasis duration compared to those without arthritis (M 16 vs. 10 years, p  = 0.02), and a higher frequency of nail involvement (88.2 vs. 49.4 %, p  = 0.003). Five patients (29.4 %) fulfilled ASAS axial criteria; all of them had peripheral involvement as follows: mono/oligoarticular in three patients and polyarticular in two. Patients with peripheral and axial involvement presented a significantly higher frequency of erythrodermic psoriasis compared to the other patients (35.3 vs. 1.2 %, p  = 0.0006 and 80 vs. 16.7 %, p  = 0.02). Prevalence of PsA, for CASPAR and ASAS peripheral criteria, was of 17 %. Five percent of patients met ASAS axial criteria, while 6 % met New York criteria. Worth noting, few patients without signs or symptoms of arthritis had radiological changes, both axial and peripheral, precluding a proper classification.

Introduction One target of rheumatoid arthritis (RA) treatment is to achieve early sustained remission; over the long term, patients in sustained remission have less structural joint damage and physical disability. We evaluated Simplified Disease Activity Index (SDAI) remission with abatacept + methotrexate versus abatacept placebo + methotrexate and impact of de-escalation (DE) in anti-citrullinated protein antibody (ACPA)-positive patients with early RA. Methods The phase IIIb, randomized, AVERT-2 two-stage study (NCT02504268) evaluated weekly abatacept + methotrexate versus abatacept placebo + methotrexate. Primary endpoint: SDAI remission (≤ 3.3) at week 24. Pre-planned exploratory endpoint: maintenance of remission in patients with sustained remission (weeks 40 and 52) who, from week 56 for 48 weeks (DE period), (1) continued combination abatacept + methotrexate, (2) tapered abatacept to every other week (EOW) + methotrexate for 24 weeks with subsequent abatacept withdrawal (abatacept placebo + methotrexate), or (3) withdrew methotrexate (abatacept monotherapy). Results Primary study endpoint was not met: 21.3% (48/225) of patients in the combination and 16.0% (24/150) in the abatacept placebo + methotrexate arm achieved SDAI remission at week 24 ( p  = 0.2359). There were numerical differences favoring combination therapy in clinical assessments, patient-reported outcomes (PROs) and week 52 radiographic non-progression. After week 56, 147 patients in sustained remission with abatacept + methotrexate were randomized (combination, n  = 50; DE/withdrawal, n  = 50; abatacept monotherapy, n  = 47) and entered DE. At DE week 48, SDAI remission (74%) and PRO improvements were mostly maintained with continued combination therapy; lower remission rates were observed with abatacept placebo + methotrexate (48.0%) and with abatacept monotherapy (57.4%). Before withdrawal, de-escalating to abatacept EOW + methotrexate preserved remission. Conclusions The stringent primary endpoint was not met. However, in patients achieving sustained SDAI remission, numerically more maintained remission with continued abatacept + methotrexate versus abatacept monotherapy or withdrawal. Trial Registration ClinicalTrials.gov identifier, NCT02504268. 6DHXqidsCNRrz-f8FYdsgJ Video abstract (MP4 62241 KB) Plain Language Summary Patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) experience inflamed and damaged joints. RA is an autoimmune disease in which proteins called autoantibodies, particularly anti-citrullinated protein autoantibodies, target the patient’s own joint tissue and organs by mistake, leading to symptomatic inflammation. Successful treatment can decrease the disease’s activity to a state known as remission. Patients in remission may experience little or no symptoms and it may be possible for some to then be able to decrease their treatment. Here, we report the results of a large, international study that looked at two treatments, abatacept and methotrexate, in patients with RA and anti-citrullinated protein autoantibodies. The study had two parts. Firstly, to see how many patients had success (remission) with weekly abatacept and/or methotrexate treatment, and secondly, to see if remission was maintained when treatment was either continued or decreased and stopped. The study showed that the number of patients in remission 6 months after treatment started was not greatly different between patients treated with both abatacept and methotrexate and those treated with just methotrexate. Those taking abatacept and methotrexate together had better remission rates 1 year later. More patients also stayed in remission when they continued to receive both abatacept and methotrexate compared with those who were just treated with abatacept or when their abatacept treatment was decreased and stopped. More patients stayed in remission when abatacept was decreased than when it was stopped. The results from this study may help determine possible future treatment reduction and/or withdrawal plans for some patients with RA.