Search

The risk of herpes zoster (HZ) and HZ-related complications is increased in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) and psoriatic arthritis (PsA) relative to the general population; therefore, HZ vaccination is recommended in these patient groups. In this literature-based review, we summarise the available evidence on the use of HZ vaccines in patients with RA and PsA, and discuss strategies for managing breakthrough infection. Currently available data show suboptimal rates of HZ vaccination among these patients and highlight a need for strategies to improve HZ vaccination programmes in clinical practice. Further clinical studies are also required to optimise the use of HZ vaccines in patients with RA and PsA, particularly with regard to determining the impact of different immunosuppressive therapy regimens on vaccine immunogenicity and, ultimately, efficacy, as well as the impact of vaccination on disease activity and safety.

Objectives: Tofacitinib is an oral Janus kinase inhibitor for the treatment of RA. We evaluated radiographic progression in tofacitinib-treated patients with RA for up to 3 years in two pooled long-term extension (LTE) studies (ORAL Sequel; A3921041) (primary analysis), and for up to 5 years using data integrated from one phase (P)2 (A3921068), two P3 (ORAL Start; ORAL Scan) and two LTE studies (exploratory analysis)., Methods: In LTE studies, patients received tofacitinib 5 mg twice daily (BID) or 10 mg BID as monotherapy or with conventional synthetic (cs)DMARDs. Radiographic outcomes up to 3 years: least squares mean (LSM) change from baseline in van der Heijde modified Total Sharp Score (ΔmTSS), erosion score (ΔES) and joint space narrowing (ΔJSN) score; proportion of patients with no radiographic progression (ΔmTSS ≤0.5); proportion of patients with no new erosions (ΔES ≤0.5). ΔmTSS was evaluated for up to 5 years in an exploratory analysis., Results: For all tofacitinib-treated patients with radiographic data available at LTE month 36 (n = 414), LSM ΔmTSS was 1.14, LSM ΔES was 0.66, LSM ΔJSN was 0.74, and 74.3% and 86.2% of patients showed no radiographic progression and no new erosions, respectively. Similar values were observed regardless of tofacitinib dose, or whether patients received tofacitinib as monotherapy or with csDMARDs. In an exploratory analysis of integrated P2/P3/LTE studies, LSM ΔmTSS was 3.34 at month 60 (n = 269)., Conclusion: Limited progression of structural damage was observed in tofacitinib-treated patients up to 5 years, with similar results for tofacitinib used as monotherapy or combination therapy up to 3 years., Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov (http://clinicaltrials.gov): NCT01164579; NCT01039688; NCT00847613; NCT00413699; NCT00661661., (© The Author(s) 2020. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the British Society for Rheumatology.)

Objective: Tofacitinib is an oral Janus kinase (JAK) inhibitor for the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis (RA). We report the largest integrated safety analysis of tofacitinib, as of March 2017, using data from phase I, II, III, IIIb/IV and long-term extension studies in adult patients with RA., Methods: Data were pooled for patients with RA who received ≥1 tofacitinib dose. Incidence rates (IRs; patients with events/100 patient-years [PY]; 95% CIs) of first-time occurrences were obtained for adverse events (AEs) of interest., Results: 7061 patients received tofacitinib (total exposure: 22 875 PY; median [range] exposure: 3.1 [0 to 9.6] years). IRs (95% CI) for serious AEs, serious infections, herpes zoster (all), opportunistic infections (excluding tuberculosis [TB]) and TB were 9.0 (8.6 to 9.4), 2.5 (2.3 to 2.7), 3.6 (3.4 to 3.9), 0.4 (0.3 to 0.5) and 0.2 (0.1 to 0.2), respectively. IRs (95% CI) for malignancies (excluding non-melanoma skin cancer [NMSC]), NMSC and lymphomas were 0.8 (0.7 to 0.9), 0.6 (0.5 to 0.7) and 0.1 (0.0 to 0.1), respectively. IRs (95% CI) for gastrointestinal perforations, deep vein thrombosis, pulmonary embolism, venous thromboembolism, arterial thromboembolism and major adverse cardiovascular events were 0.1 (0.1 to 0.2), 0.2 (0.1 to 0.2), 0.1 (0.1 to 0.2), 0.3 (0.2 to 0.3), 0.4 (0.3 to 0.5) and 0.4 (0.3 to 0.5), respectively. IR (95% CI) for mortality was 0.3 (0.2 to 0.3). IRs generally remained consistent across 6-month intervals to >78 months., Conclusion: This represents the largest clinical dataset for a JAK inhibitor in RA to date. IRs remained consistent with previous reports from the tofacitinib RA clinical development programme, and stable over time., Trial Registration Numbers: NCT01262118; NCT01484561; NCT00147498; NCT00413660; NCT00550446; NCT00603512; NCT00687193; NCT01164579; NCT00976599; NCT01059864; NCT01359150; NCT02147587; NCT00960440; NCT00847613; NCT00814307; NCT00856544; NCT00853385; NCT01039688; NCT02187055; NCT00413699; NCT00661661.For summary of phase I, phase II, phase III, phase IIIb/IV and LTE studies included in the integrated safety analysis, see online supplemental table 1., Competing Interests: Competing interests: SBC has received grant/research support from AbbVie, Amgen, Astellas, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Eli Lilly, Genentech, Gilead, Janssen, Novartis, Pfizer Inc, Roche and Sandoz; and consultancy fees from AbbVie, Amgen, Astellas, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Eli Lilly, Genentech, Gilead, Janssen, Novartis, Pfizer Inc, Roche and Sandoz. YT has received grant/research support from AbbVie, Asahi Kasei, Astellas, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Chugai, Daiichi Sankyo, Eisai, Eli Lilly, Gilead, GlaxoSmithKline, Janssen, Mitsubishi Tanabe, Novartis, Pfizer Inc, Sanofi and YL Biologics; and speaker fees and/or honoraria from AbbVie, Astellas, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Chugai, Daiichi Sankyo, Eisai, Eli Lilly, Janssen, Mitsubishi Tanabe, Novartis, Pfizer Inc, Takeda, Teijin and YL Biologics. XM has received consultancy fees from Bristol-Myers Squibb, Gilead, GlaxoSmithKline, Janssen, Pfizer Inc, Samsung and UCB. JRC has received grant/research support from Amgen, Corrona, Crescendo Bio and Pfizer Inc; and consultancy fees from AbbVie, Amgen, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Corrona, Eli Lilly, Janssen, Myriad, Pfizer Inc, Roche/Genentech and UCB. EBL has received consultancy fees from Pfizer Inc. PN has received grant/research support and consultancy fees from, and is part of the speakers’ bureau for, AbbVie, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Eli Lilly, Janssen, Novartis, Pfizer Inc, Roche, Sanofi and UCB. KLW has received grant/research support and consultancy fees from AbbVie, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Eli Lilly, Gilead, Pfizer Inc, Roche and UCB. CC-S has received grant/research support from AbbVie, Bristol-Myers Squibb and Pfizer Inc; and consultancy fees from Gilead, Pfizer Inc and Regeneron-Sanofi. LW, CC, KK, PB, AS and AM are employees and shareholders of Pfizer Inc. JW has received consultancy fees from, and is on the speaker’s bureau for, Pfizer Inc., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2020. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Introduction/objective: Tofacitinib is an oral Janus kinase inhibitor for the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis (RA). This post-hoc analysis evaluated the effect of temporary discontinuation and reinitiation of tofacitinib on disease control in patients with RA in the vaccine sub-study of the long-term extension (LTE) study ORAL Sequel (NCT00413699)., Methods: The sub-study of ORAL Sequel was a randomized, parallel-group, open-label study. Patients who received tofacitinib 10 mg twice daily for ≥ 3 months in ORAL Sequel were randomized to receive continuous (tofacitinib monotherapy/with methotrexate) or interrupted (tofacitinib withdrawn for 2 weeks post-randomization then reinitiated as monotherapy/with methotrexate) treatment. Efficacy assessments included ACR20/50/70 response rates, change from baseline (∆) in C-reactive protein (CRP), Health Assessment Questionnaire-Disability Index (HAQ-DI), Disease Activity Score in 28 joints, erythrocyte sedimentation rate (DAS28-4 [ESR]), Clinical Disease Activity Index (CDAI), Patient Global Assessment of arthritis (PtGA), Pain (Visual Analog Scale [VAS]), and Physician Global Assessment of arthritis (PGA). Safety was assessed throughout., Results: The sub-study included 99 patients each in the continuous and interrupted treatment groups. ACR20/50 response rates, ∆CRP, ∆HAQ-DI (day 15), ∆DAS28-4 (ESR), ∆CDAI, ∆PtGA, ∆Pain (VAS), and ∆PGA were significantly worse in interrupted vs continuous patients during dose interruption, but were generally similar to pre-interruption/continuous treatment levels 28 days post-reinitiation. A numerically higher proportion of interrupted patients reported adverse events (49.5%) vs continuous patients (35.4%)., Conclusions: Tofacitinib efficacy can be re-established after temporary withdrawal and reinitiation. The safety profile of patients who temporarily discontinued tofacitinib in the sub-study was consistent with previous tofacitinib LTE studies over 9 years., Clinical Trial Registration Number: NCT00413699 Key Points • In this sub-study of the long-term extension (LTE) study, ORAL Sequel, the efficacy of tofacitinib was re-established after temporary withdrawal (2 weeks) and reinitation of treatment in patients with RA. • Patients with RA who temporarily discontinued tofacitinib had similar safety events to those reported in previous LTE studies. • The results of this sub-study were consistent with a post-hoc analysis of pooled data from two LTE studies, ORAL Sequel and A3921041, which assessed the efficacy of tofacitinib following a treatment discontinuation period of 14-30 days.

Background: Final data are presented for the ORAL Sequel long-term extension (LTE) study evaluating the safety and efficacy of tofacitinib 5 mg and 10 mg twice daily (BID) for up to 9.5 years in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA)., Methods: Eligible patients had previously completed a phase 1, 2, or 3 qualifying index study of tofacitinib and received open-label tofacitinib 5 mg or 10 mg BID. Stable background therapy, including csDMARDs, was continued; adjustments to tofacitinib or background therapy were permitted at investigators' discretion. Assignment to dose groups (5 mg or 10 mg BID) was based on patients' average total daily dose. The primary objective was to determine the long-term safety and tolerability of tofacitinib 5 mg and 10 mg BID; the key secondary objective was to evaluate the long-term persistence of efficacy., Results: Between February 5, 2007, and November 30, 2016, 4481 patients were enrolled. Total tofacitinib exposure was 16,291 patient-years. Safety data are reported up to month 114 for all tofacitinib; efficacy data are reported up to month 96 for tofacitinib 5 mg BID and month 72 for 10 mg BID (with low patient numbers limiting interpretation beyond these time points). Overall, 52% of patients discontinued (24% due to adverse events [AEs] and 4% due to insufficient clinical response); the safety profile remained consistent with that observed in prior phase 1, 2, 3, or LTE studies. The incidence rate (IR; number of patients with events per 100 patient-years) for AEs leading to discontinuation was 6.8. For all-cause AEs of special interest, IRs were 3.4 for herpes zoster, 2.4 for serious infections, 0.8 for malignancies excluding non-melanoma skin cancer, 0.4 for major adverse cardiovascular events, and 0.3 for all-cause mortality. Clinically meaningful improvements in the signs and symptoms of RA and physical functioning, which were observed in the index studies, were maintained., Conclusions: Tofacitinib 5 mg and 10 mg BID demonstrated a consistent safety profile (as monotherapy or combination therapy) and sustained efficacy in this open-label LTE study of patients with RA. Safety data are reported up to 9.5 years, and efficacy data up to 8 years, based on adequate patient numbers to support conclusions., Trial Registration: NCT00413699 , funded by Pfizer Inc (date of trial registration: December 20, 2006).

Background: Medication-based strategies to treat rheumatoid arthritis are crucial in terms of outcome. They aim at preventing joint destruction, loss of function and disability by early and consistent inhibition of inflammatory processes., Objective: Achieving consensus about evidence-based recommendations for the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis with disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs in Germany., Methods: Following a systematic literature research, a structured process among expert rheumatologists was used to reach consensus., Results: The results of the consensus process can be summed up in 6 overarching principles and 10 recommendations. There are several new issues compared to the version of 2012, such as differentiated adjustments to the therapeutic regime according to time point and extent of treatment response, the therapeutic goal of achieving remission as assessed by means of the simplified disease activity index (SDAI) as well as the potential use of targeted synthetic DMARDs (JAK inhibitors) and suggestions for a deescalating in case of achieving a sustained remission. Methotrexate still plays the central role at the beginning of the treatment and as a combination partner in the further treatment course. When treatment response to methotrexate is inadequate, either switching to or combining with another conventional synthetic DMARD is an option in the absence of unfavourable prognostic factors. Otherwise biologic or targeted synthetic DMARDs are recommended according to the algorithm. Rules for deescalating treatment with glucocorticoids and-where applicable-DMARDs give support for the management of patients who have reached a sustained remission., Discussion: The new guidelines set up recommendations for RA treatment in accordance with the treat-to-target principle. Modern disease-modifying drugs, now including also JAK inhibitors, are available in an algorithm.

Objectives: Tofacitinib is an oral Janus kinase inhibitor for the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis (RA). We report an integrated safety summary of tofacitinib from two phase I, nine phase II, six phase III and two long-term extension studies in adult patients with active RA., Methods: Data were pooled for all tofacitinib-treated patients (data cut-off: 31 March 2015). Incidence rates (IRs; patients with event/100 patient-years) and 95% CIs are reported for adverse events (AEs) of interest., Results: 6194 patients received tofacitinib for a total 19 406 patient-years' exposure; median exposure was 3.4 patient-years. IR (95% CI) for serious AEs was 9.4 (9.0 to 9.9); IR for serious infections was 2.7 (2.5 to 3.0). IR for (all) herpes zoster was 3.9 (3.6 to 4.2); IR for disseminated or multidermatomal herpes zoster was 0.3 (0.2 to 0.4). IR for opportunistic infections (excluding tuberculosis) was 0.3 (0.2 to 0.4) and was 0.2 (0.1 to 0.3) for tuberculosis. IR for malignancies (excluding non-melanoma skin cancer (NMSC)) was 0.9 (0.8 to 1.0); NMSC IR was 0.6 (0.5 to 0.7). IR for gastrointestinal perforations was 0.1 (0.1 to 0.2). Analysis of IR for serious infections, herpes zoster and malignancies by 6-month intervals did not reveal any notable increase in IR with longer-duration tofacitinib exposure., Conclusion: This analysis of tofacitinib exposure up to 8.5 years allowed estimation of safety events with improved precision versus previous tofacitinib reports. AEs were generally stable over time; no new safety signals were observed compared with previous tofacitinib reports., Trial Registration Numbers: NCT01262118, NCT01484561, NCT00147498, NCT00413660, NCT00550446, NCT00603512, NCT00687193, NCT01164579, NCT00976599, NCT01059864, NCT01359150, NCT00960440, NCT00847613, NCT00814307, NCT00856544, NCT00853385, NCT01039688, NCT00413699, NCT00661661; Results., Competing Interests: Competing interests: SBC, KLW, CC-S and JW have served as consultants for, and have received speaker fees and honoraria from, Pfizer Inc. YT has served as a consultant for, and has received speaker fees and honoraria from, AbbVie, Asahi-kasei, Astellas Pharma, BMS, Chugai Pharma, Daiichi Sankyo, Eli Lilly, GlaxoSmithKline, Janssen, Mitsubishi-Tanabe, Pfizer Inc, Sanofi, Takeda, Teijin and YL Biologics. XM has served as a consultant for, and has received speaker fees and honoraria from, BMS, GlaxoSmithKline, Pfizer Inc and UCB. EBL has served as a consultant for Pfizer Inc. KT, RDM, JG, KK and LW are employees and shareholders of Pfizer Inc. RR was an employee of Pfizer Inc at the time these analyses were conducted and holds stock/stock options in Pfizer Inc., (Published by the BMJ Publishing Group Limited. For permission to use (where not already granted under a licence) please go to http://www.bmj.com/company/products-services/rights-and-licensing/.)

Objective: To create a tool to predict probability of remission and low disease activity (LDA) in patients with RA being considered for anti-TNF treatment in clinical practice., Methods: We analysed data from GO-MORE, an open-label, multinational, prospective study in biologic-naïve patients with active RA (DAS28-ESR ⩾3.2) despite DMARD therapy. Patients received 50 mg s.c. golimumab (GLM) once monthly for 6 months. In secondary analyses, regression models were used to determine the best set of baseline factors to predict remission (DAS28-ESR <2.6) at month 6 and LDA (DAS28-ESR ⩽3.2) at month 1., Results: In 3280 efficacy-evaluable patients, of 12 factors included in initial regression models predicting remission or LDA, six were retained in final multivariable models. Greater likelihood of LDA and remission was associated with being male; younger age; lower HAQ, ESR (or CRP) and tender joint count (or swollen joint count) scores; and absence of comorbidities. In models predicting 1-, 3- and 6-month LDA or remission, area under the receiver operating curve was 0.648-0.809 (R(2) = 0.0397-0.1078). The models also predicted 6-month HAQ and EuroQoL-5-dimension scores. A series of matrices were developed to easily show predicted rates of remission and LDA., Conclusion: A matrix tool was developed to show predicted GLM treatment outcomes in patients with RA, based on a combination of six baseline characteristics. The tool could help provide practical guidance in selection of candidates for anti-TNF therapy., (© The Author 2016. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the British Society for Rheumatology.)

Introduction: The effect of certolizumab pegol (CZP) on patient-reported outcomes (PROs) was investigated in 1063 patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) from the REALISTIC trial (double-blind, placebo-controlled to week 12, open-label to week 28; randomized 4:1 [CZP:placebo]). Correlations between PROs and RA signs and symptoms, and the relative efficacy of these measures, were examined., Methods: Adults with RA and an inadequate response to at least one disease-modifying antirheumatic drug were enrolled. PROs assessed included physical function (using the Health Assessment Questionnaire-Disability Index), pain, fatigue, sleep disturbance, Patient Global Assessment of Disease Activity (PtGA), Routine Assessment of Patient Index Data 3 (RAPID3), and Rheumatoid Arthritis Disease Activity Index (RADAI)., Results: Early significant and clinically meaningful improvements in all PROs were observed to week 12 with CZP vs. placebo and were maintained to the end of the trial (week 28). At week 12, up to one-third more CZP patients showed improvements compared with placebo that were greater than or equal to the minimal clinically important difference (MCID) in fatigue, sleep problems, pain, PtGA, RADAI, and RAPID3. The changes in PROs were correlated with clinical measures of disease activity, including the Disease Activity Score in 28 joints using C-reactive protein as well as tender and swollen joint counts., Conclusions: Rapid improvements in PROs were seen in patients with RA treated with CZP. The magnitude of improvement exceeded the MCID in multiple domains and demonstrated that CZP improves aspects of health-related quality of life that are meaningful to patients and superior to placebo. PROs provide information complementary to clinical outcomes in assessment of treatment benefits., Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT00717236 . Registered on 15 July 2008.

Introduction: This study evaluated various remission criteria in abatacept plus methotrexate (MTX)-treated patients with early rheumatoid arthritis (RA). We aimed to investigate the time to, and sustainability of, remission, and to evaluate the relationship between remission, function and structure., Methods: Post hoc analyses were performed from the 12-month, double-blind period of the Abatacept study to Gauge Remission and joint damage progression in methotrexate (MTX)-naive patients with Early Erosive rheumatoid arthritis (AGREE) in patients with early RA (≤2 years) and poor prognostic factors, comparing abatacept plus MTX (n = 210) versus MTX alone (n = 209)., Results: At month 12, Disease Activity Score 28, Simplified Disease Activity Index (SDAI), Clinical Disease Activity Index and Boolean remission rates were, for abatacept plus MTX versus MTX alone: 47.6 % versus 27.3 %, 33.3 % versus 12.4 %, 34.3 % versus 16.3 %, and 23.8 % versus 5.7 %, respectively. Cumulative probability demonstrated higher proportions achieving first remission and first sustained remission for abatacept plus MTX versus MTX alone (e.g., 23.3 % [95 % confidence interval (CI): 17.6, 29.1] vs 12.9 % [8.4, 17.5] for first SDAI remission over 0-6 months). For patients in SDAI remission at month 3, mean Health Assessment Questionnaire-Disability Index at month 12 was 0.20 versus 0.50 for abatacept plus MTX versus MTX alone. Mean changes in radiographic score from baseline to month 12 were minimal for patients in SDAI remission at month 3 in both groups, while less structural damage progression was seen, 0.75 versus 1.35, respectively, for abatacept plus MTX versus MTX alone for patients with moderate/high disease activity at month 3 (adjusted mean treatment difference: -0.60 [95 % CI: -1.11, -0.09; P < 0.05])., Conclusions: High proportions of abatacept plus MTX-treated patients achieved stringent remission criteria. Remission was associated with long-term functional benefit; dissociation was seen between clinical and structural outcomes for abatacept. These findings highlight the impact of reaching stringent remission targets early, on physical function and structural damage, in MTX-naïve biologic-treated patients., Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier NCT00122382. Registered 19 July 2005.

Objectives: To evaluate maintenance of response while reducing intravenous abatacept dose from ~10 mg/kg to ~5 mg/kg in patients with early rheumatoid arthritis (RA) who achieved disease activity score (DAS)28 (erythrocyte sedimentation rate, ESR) <2.6., Methods: This 1-year, multinational, randomised, double-blind substudy evaluated the efficacy and safety of ~10 mg/kg and ~5 mg/kg abatacept in patients with early RA with poor prognosis who had reached DAS28 (ESR) <2.6 at year 2 of the AGREE study. The primary outcome was time to disease relapse (defined as additional disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs, ≥2 courses high-dose steroids, return to open-label abatacept ~10 mg/kg, or DAS28 (C reactive protein) ≥3.2 at two consecutive visits)., Results: 108 patients were randomised (~10 mg/kg, n=58; ~5 mg/kg, n=50). Three and five patients, respectively, discontinued, and four per group returned to open-label abatacept. Relapse over time and the proportion of patients relapsing were similar in both groups (31% (~10 mg/kg) vs 34% (~5 mg/kg); HR: 0.87 (95% CI 0.45 to 1.69)). Mean steady-state trough serum concentration for the ~10 mg/kg group was 20.3-24.1 µg/mL, compared with 8.8-12.0 µg/mL for the ~5 mg/kg group., Conclusions: This exploratory study suggests that abatacept dose reduction may be an option in patients with poor prognosis early RA who achieve DAS28 (ESR) <2.6 after ≥1 year on abatacept (~10 mg/kg)., Trial Registration Number: NCT00989235., (Published by the BMJ Publishing Group Limited. For permission to use (where not already granted under a licence) please go to http://group.bmj.com/group/rights-licensing/permissions.)

Introduction: The aim of this study was to assess long-term golimumab therapy in rheumatoid arthritis (RA) patients who discontinued previous tumor necrosis factor-α (TNF)-inhibitor(s)., Methods: Patients enrolled into this multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study of active RA (≥4 tender, ≥4 swollen joints) received placebo (Group 1) or golimumab 50 mg (Group 2) or 100 mg (Group 3) injections every 4 weeks. Patients in Groups 1 and 2 with inadequate response at week 16 escaped to golimumab 50 and 100 mg, respectively. At week 24, Group 1 patients crossed-over to golimumab 50 mg, Group 2 continued golimumab 50/100 mg per escape status, and Group 3 maintained dosing. During the long-term-extension (LTE), golimumab 50 mg could be increased to 100 mg, and 100 mg could be decreased to 50 mg. Data through 5 years are reported for all patients (safety) and patients using methotrexate (efficacy, intention-to-treat (ITT) analysis with last-observation-carried-forward for missing data and non-responder imputation for unsatisfactory efficacy discontinuations)., Results: In total, 459 of 461 randomized patients received the study agent, 304 of whom were methotrexate-treated and included in efficacy analyses. Through week 256, the proportions of methotrexate-treated patients achieving American-College-of-Rheumatology (ACR) responses were 37.6% to 47.0% for ACR20, 21.4% to 35.0% for ACR50, and 7.8% to 17.0% for ACR70 response across randomized groups. Golimumab safety through week 268 was generally consistent with that at week 24 and week 160 and other anti-TNF agents., Conclusions: In some patients with active RA discontinuing previous TNF-antagonist therapy, golimumab safety and efficacy, assessed conservatively with ITT analyses, was confirmed through 5 years., Trial Registration: Clinicaltrials.gov NCT00299546 . Registered 03 March 2006.

Objective: Rheumatoid arthritis (RA) management involves improving clinical outcomes and quality of life (QOL). Golimumab is used as add-on therapy for patients who have failed disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs). This GO-MORE subanalysis investigated relationships between patient and physician expectations and outcomes., Methods: GO-MORE was an open-label, multinational, prospective study in biologic agent-naive patients with active RA despite DMARD treatment. Patients received 50 mg subcutaneous golimumab monthly for 6 months. At baseline and month 3, patients rated treatment expectations for the following 3 months using 5-point scales (where 1 = good and 5 = poor). Outcomes were compared among expectation tertiles: most positive, intermediate, and least positive. At baseline and month 3, physicians predicted patient disease state 3 months later., Results: At baseline, 3,280 efficacy-evaluable patients with moderate (21.3%) or high (78.7%) disease activity had mean ± SD disease duration of 7.6 ± 7.9 years, mean ± SD Health Assessment Questionnaire (HAQ) disability index (DI) score of 1.44 ± 0.67, and mean ± SD EuroQol 5-domain (EQ-5D) score of 0.42 ± 0.33. Patients reported high treatment expectations (mean 1.43); 95.9% expected golimumab to be better than current treatment. Patients with fewer DMARD failures, higher disease activity, shorter disease duration, younger age, and female sex reported higher expectations (P < 0.05 for all). After 6 months, patients with the most positive expectations had higher remission rates (P < 0.0001) and greater HAQ DI (P < 0.0001) and EQ-5D (P < 0.0001) score improvements. At baseline, physicians expected 29.6% and 59.2% of patients to attain remission and low disease activity, respectively, after 3 months., Conclusion: Patients had high expectations for golimumab treatment. Patients with more positive expectations had greater remission rates, improvements in function, and QOL., (Copyright © 2014 by the American College of Rheumatology.)

Objectives: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of subcutaneous golimumab as add-on therapy in patients with active rheumatoid arthritis (RA) despite disease-modifying antirheumatic drug (DMARD) treatment. To evaluate an intravenous plus subcutaneous (IV+SC) golimumab strategy in patients who had not attained remission., Methods: GO-MORE was an open-label, multinational, prospective study in patients with active RA in typical clinical practice settings. In part 1, patients received add-on monthly 50-mg subcutaneous golimumab for 6 months. The percentage of patients with good/moderate European League Against Rheumatism (EULAR) 28-joint disease activity score (DAS28)-erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR) response was compared in patient subgroups with various concurrent or previous DMARD treatments. In part 2, patients with EULAR responses but not remission were randomly assigned to receive IV+SC or subcutaneous golimumab to month 12; DAS28-ESR remission was measured., Results: 3366 patients were enrolled. At baseline of part 1, 3280 efficacy-evaluable patients had mean disease duration of 7.6 years and mean DAS28-ESR of 5.97 (SD=1.095). At month 6, 82.1% achieved good/moderate EULAR responses and 23.9% attained remission. When EULAR responses were analysed by the number of previously failed DMARD or the concomitant methotrexate dose, DMARD type, or corticosteroid use, no statistically significant differences were observed. Part 2 patients (N=490) who received IV+SC or subcutaneous golimumab achieved similar remission rates (∼25%). Adverse events were consistent with previous reports of golimumab and other tumour necrosis antagonists in this population., Conclusions: Add-on monthly subcutaneous golimumab resulted in good/moderate EULAR response in most patients; 25% achieved remission after 6 more months of golimumab, but an IV+SC regimen provided no additional efficacy over the subcutaneous regimen., (Published by the BMJ Publishing Group Limited. For permission to use (where not already granted under a licence) please go to http://group.bmj.com/group/rights-licensing/permissions.)

Objective: To describe the longterm safety and efficacy profile of tofacitinib in patients with moderate to severe active rheumatoid arthritis (RA)., Methods: Data were pooled from 2 open-label studies (NCT00413699, NCT00661661) involving patients who had participated in qualifying phase I, II, or III index studies of tofacitinib. Safety data included over 60 months of observation; efficacy data are reported up to Month 48. Treatment was initiated with tofacitinib 5 or 10 mg twice daily. Primary endpoints were adverse events (AE) and laboratory safety data. Secondary endpoints included American College of Rheumatology (ACR) response rates, and Disease Activity Score (28 joints) (DAS28)-4[erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR)] and Health Assessment Questionnaire-Disability Index (HAQ-DI) assessments., Results: Overall, 4102 patients were treated for 5963 patient-years; mean (maximum) treatment duration was 531 (1844) days; 20.8% of patients discontinued treatment over 60 months. The most common AE were nasopharyngitis (12.7%) and upper respiratory tract infection (10.5%). Serious AE were reported in 15.4% of patients with an exposure-estimated incidence rate of 11.1 events/100 patient-years. Serious infections were reported in 4.5% of patients with an exposure-estimated incidence rate of 3.1 events/100 patient-years (95% CI: 2.66-3.55). Mean values for laboratory variables were stable over time and consistent with phase II and III studies. Persistent efficacy was demonstrated through Month 48, as measured by ACR response rate (ACR20/50/70) DAS28-4-ESR, and HAQ-DI. Safety and efficacy were similar for patients receiving tofacitinib as monotherapy or with background nonbiologic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs., Conclusion: Tofacitinib demonstrated consistent safety and persistent efficacy over 48 months in patients with RA.

Introduction: Peripheral arthritis is the most common presenting complaint in clinical rheumatology. Unequivocal identification of the underlying entity can be difficult, particularly at an early stage. Such cases are commonly referred to as undifferentiated peripheral inflammatory arthritis (UPIA). Since evidence-based recommendations for the clinical management of UPIA are lacking, this international 3e initiative convened 697 rheumatologists from 17 countries to develop appropriate recommendations., Methods: Based on a systematic literature research in Medline, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, and the ACR/EULAR abstracts of 2007/2008, 10 multinational recommendations were developed by 3 rounds of a Delphi process. In Germany, a national group of experts worked on 3 additional recommendations using the same method. The recommendations were discussed among the members of the 3e initiative and the degree of consensus was analyzed as well as the potential impact of the recommendations on clinical practice., Results: A total of 39,756 references were identified, of which 250 were systematically reviewed for the development of 10 multinational recommendations concerning differential diagnosis, diagnostic and prognostic value of clinical assessments, laboratory tests and imaging techniques, and monitoring of UPIA. In addition, 3 national recommendations on the diagnostic and prognostic value of a response to anti-inflammatory therapy on the analysis of synovial fluid and on enthesitis were developed by the German experts based on 35 out of 5542 references., Conclusions: The article translates the 2011 published original paper of the international 3e initiative (Machado et al., Ann Rheum Dis 70:15-24, 2011) and reports the methods and results of the national vote and the additional 3 national recommendations.

The German Society of Rheumatology approved new German guidelines for the sequential medical treatment of rheumatoid arthritis (RA) based on the European League Against Rheumatism (EULAR) recommendations for the management of RA published in 2010. An update of the EULAR systematic literature research was performed in Medline, Embase, and Cochrane databases. Meta-analyses, controlled trials, cohort studies, and registry data addressing traditional and biologic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs, glucocorticoids, and treatment strategies published between January 2009 and August 2011 were included. Two reviewers independently evaluated and compared the additional data that had been published after the time limit set by the EULAR recommendations. A national guideline working group developed an adapted set of recommendations. The new German guidelines were accepted by vote using an informal Delphi approach. Twelve recommendations and the resulting updated treatment algorithm were developed and approved as a practical orientation for rheumatologists. These recommendations are based on a successive treatment with traditional and biologic disease-modifying drugs depending on the individual progress of the disease and distinct patient characteristics. The German guidelines have been developed on the basis of the internationally well-recognized EULAR recommendations. In addition, more recent evidence from a systematic literature research was considered. They have been developed and approved by a group of national experts aiming at guidance for rheumatologists to reach best medical practice.

Objective: Rheumatoid arthritis (RA) has been associated with a variety of emotional stressors, but findings remain inconclusive if RA is related to childhood trauma, which is known to have long-lasting negative consequences for physical health decades into adulthood. We investigated the association between childhood trauma and RA by comparing histories of child abuse and neglect between RA patients and adults from the general population in a cross-sectional case-control study., Methods: 331 patients with definite RA and 662 gender- and age-matched adults from the general population were administered the self-report Childhood Trauma Questionnaire (CTQ) for the assessment of emotional, physical and sexual abuse as well as emotional and physical neglect., Results: Adjusting for gender and current depression, RA patients scored significantly higher in all CTQ subscales apart from sexual abuse and physical neglect than the controls. Adjusted odds ratios for these types of childhood trauma were higher in the RA group than in controls ranging from 2.0 for emotional neglect (95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.4-3.0) to 2.6 for emotional abuse (95% CI: 1.4-4.7). Gender-specific analyses revealed basically the same pattern for women, but not for men., Conclusion: Our findings suggest an association between childhood trauma and development of RA, particularly in women. This relationship may be mediated by dysregulations of neuro-endocrine-immune networks, but larger prospective studies are needed to clarify the association between early life stress and the risk for RA in genetically susceptible individuals., (Copyright © 2012 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Rheumatoid arthritis is a heterogeneous chronic disease, and no therapeutic agent has been identified which is universally and persistently effective in all patients. We investigated the effectiveness of tofacitinib (CP-690,550), a novel oral Janus kinase inhibitor, as a targeted immunomodulator and disease-modifying therapy for rheumatoid arthritis., Methods: We did a 6-month, double-blind, parallel-group phase 3 study at 82 centres in 13 countries, including North America, Europe, and Latin America. 399 patients aged 18 years or older with moderate-to-severe rheumatoid arthritis and inadequate response to tumour necrosis factor inhibitors (TNFi) were randomly assigned in a 2:2:1:1 ratio with an automated internet or telephone system to receive twice a day treatment with: tofacitinib 5 mg (n=133); tofacitinib 10 mg (n=134); or placebo (n=132), all with methotrexate. At month 3, patients given placebo advanced to either tofacitinib 5 mg twice a day (n=66) or 10 mg twice a day (n=66). Primary endpoints included American College of Rheumatology (ACR)20 response rate, mean change from baseline in Health Assessment Questionnaire-Disability Index (HAQ-DI), and rates of disease activity score (DAS)28-4(ESR) less than 2·6 (referred to as DAS28<2·6), all at month 3. The full analysis set for the primary analysis included all randomised patients who received at least one dose of study medication and had at least one post-baseline assessment. This trial is registered with www.ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00960440., Findings: At month 3, ACR20 response rates were 41·7% (55 of 132 [95% CI vs placebo 6·06-28·41]; p=0·0024) for tofacitinib 5 mg twice a day and 48·1% (64 of 133; [12·45-34·92]; p<0·0001) for tofacitinib 10 mg twice a day versus 24·4% (32 of 131) for placebo. Improvements from baseline in HAQ-DI were -0·43 ([-0·36 to -0·15]; p<0·0001) for 5 mg twice a day and -0·46 ([-0·38 to -0·17]; p<0·0001) for 10 mg twice a day tofacitinib versus -0·18 for placebo; DAS28<2·6 rates were 6·7% (eight of 119; [0-10·10]; p=0·0496) for 5 mg twice a day tofacitinib and 8·8% (11 of 125 [1·66-12·60]; p=0·0105) for 10 mg twice a day tofacitinib versus 1·7% (two of 120) for placebo. Safety was consistent with phase 2 and 3 studies. The most common adverse events in months 0-3 were diarrhoea (13 of 267; 4·9%), nasopharyngitis (11 of 267; 4·1%), headache (11 of 267; 4·1%), and urinary tract infection (eight of 267; 3·0%) across tofacitinib groups, and nausea (nine of 132; 6·8%) in the placebo group., Interpretation: In this treatment-refractory population, tofacitinib with methotrexate had rapid and clinically meaningful improvements in signs and symptoms of rheumatoid arthritis and physical function over 6 months with manageable safety. Tofacitinib could provide an effective treatment option in patients with an inadequate response to TNFi., Funding: Pfizer., (Copyright © 2013 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

The German Society for Rheumatology recently published guidelines for the sequential therapy of rheumatoid arthritis (RA). These recommendations were developed as a transition from the 2010 EULAR (EUropean League Against Rheumatism) recommendations to the national clinical practice and are based on an updated systematic literature research and expert discussion. While most EULAR recommendations have remained unchanged, some were modified based on new evidence from randomized, controlled trials, current clinical practice, or national drug approval status. The guidelines also include a treatment algorithm for sequential therapy of RA with disease-modifying agents including biologics.

The aim of this noninterventional study (NIS) was to analyze the changes in sickness absence, disease activity, and functional capacity in employed rheumatoid arthritis (RA) patients during adalimumab treatment. RA patients receiving adalimumab according to label instructions (40 mg every other week) were evaluated at regular intervals in a multicenter prospective NIS. Patients provided information on sickness absence in the 12 months preceding treatment initiation (baseline) and at months 6 and 12. Disease activity was assessed by the Disease Activity Score using 28 joints, and physical function was assessed via the Hannover Functional Ability Questionnaire, a patient self-questionnaire comparable with the Health Assessment Questionnaire-Disability Index. We present data on 1,157 patients who were employed (part time or full time) at baseline. Patients were categorized by the length of sickness absence at baseline. At baseline, patients with absences of 6 weeks or more in the previous year (n = 226 [19.5%]) accounted for 77% of the documented weeks of sickness absence, and patients with absences of more than 12 weeks (n = 98 [8.5%]) accounted for 54% of sickness absence weeks. During 12 months of adalimumab treatment, disease activity decreased, functional capacity improved, and sickness absence was reduced. The greatest decrease in sickness absence was observed in patients with more than 12 weeks of sick leave in the year prior to adalimumab therapy. These patients also showed gains in function comparable with those observed in other employed patients. We conclude that sustaining and improving functional capacity represent the key to preservation of work capability.

Objective: To investigate the efficacy and safety of certolizumab pegol (CZP) in a broad population of patients with active RA., Methods: In this 12-week, double-blind period of the phase IIIb trial, RA patients with inadequate response to at least one DMARD were randomized 4:1 to CZP (400 mg at weeks 0, 2 and 4, followed by 200 mg every 2 weeks) or placebo (every 2 weeks) plus current therapy stratified by previous TNF inhibitor use, concomitant methotrexate use and disease duration (<2 vs ≥2 years). The primary outcome was ACR20 response rate at week 12., Results: Of 1063 patients (CZP = 851; placebo = 212), 37.6% had previous TNF inhibitor use. Baseline mean HAQ Disability Index (HAQ-DI) and DAS 28-joint assessment-ESR [DAS28(ESR)] values were 1.5 and 6.4 in the CZP group, and 1.6 and 6.4 in the placebo group, respectively. The primary endpoint was significant (week 12 ACR20, CZP vs placebo: 51.1 vs 25.9%; P < 0.001); differences were noted at week 2 (31.8 vs 8.5%; P < 0.001). HAQ-DI and DAS28(ESR) change from baseline and ACR50 were significant from week 2. Week 12 ACR20 responses were similar across CZP patient subgroups regardless of concomitant DMARD use at baseline. Adverse and serious adverse events were comparable between CZP and placebo, with no new safety signals., Conclusion: CZP was associated with rapid and consistent clinical responses and improved physical function in a diverse group of RA patients, irrespective of concomitant or previous therapy., Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov, http://clinicaltrials.gov/, NCT00717236.

Objective: The aim of this study was to assess long-term golimumab therapy in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) who discontinued previous tumour necrosis factor alpha (TNFα) inhibitor(s) for any reason., Methods: Results through week 24 of this multicentre, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled study of active RA (≥4 tender, ≥4 swollen joints) were previously reported. Patients received placebo (Group 1), 50 mg golimumab (Group 2) or 100 mg golimumab (Group 3) subcutaneous injections every 4 weeks. Patients from Groups 1 and 2 with <20% improvement in tender/swollen joints at week 16 early escaped to golimumab 50 mg and 100 mg, respectively. At week 24, Group 1 patients crossed over to golimumab 50 mg, Group 2 continued golimumab 50/100 mg per escape status and Group 3 maintained dosing. Data through week 160 are reported., Results: 459 of the 461 randomised patients were treated; 236/459 (51%) continued treatment through week 160. From week 24 to week 100, ACR20 (≥20% improvement in American College of Rheumatology criteria) response and ≥0.25 unit HAQ (Health Assessment Questionnaire) improvement were sustained in 70-73% and 75-81% of responding patients, respectively. Overall at week 160, 63%, 67% and 57% of patients achieved ACR20 response and 59%, 65% and 64% had HAQ improvement ≥0.25 unit in Groups 1, 2 and 3, respectively. Adjusted for follow-up duration, adverse event incidences (95% CI) per 100 patient-years among patients treated with golimumab 50 mg and 100 mg were 4.70 (2.63 to 7.75) and 8.07 (6.02 to 10.58) for serious infection, 0.95 (0.20 to 2.77) and 2.04 (1.09 to 3.49) for malignancy and 0.00 (0.00 to 0.94) and 0.62 (0.17 to 1.59) for death, respectively., Conclusion: In patients with active RA who discontinued previous TNF-antagonist treatment, golimumab 50 and 100 mg injections every 4 weeks yielded sustained improvements in signs/symptoms and physical function in ∼57-67% of patients who continued treatment. Golimumab safety was consistent with other anti-TNF agents, although definitive conclusions regarding long-term safety require further monitoring.

Following the EULAR recommendations published in 2010 German guidelines for the medical treatment of rheumatoid arthritis were developed based on an update of the systematic literature search and expert consensus. Methotrexate is the standard treatment option at the time of diagnosis, preferably in combination with low dose glucocorticoids. Combined disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARD) therapy should be considered in patients not responding within 12 weeks. Treatment with biologicals should be initiated in patients with persistent high activity no later than 6 months after conventional treatment and in exceptional situations (e.g. early destruction or unfavorable prognosis) even earlier. If treatment with biologicals remains ineffective, changing to another biological is recommended after 3-6 months. In cases of long-standing remission a controlled reduction of medical treatment can be considered.

Inflammatory rheumatic diseases with first onset in advanced age have some specific clinical features. Late-onset rheumatoid arthritis and polymyalgia rheumatica/giant cell arteriitis are the most relevant rheumatic diseases among older patients. They are characterized by acute onset, early functional impairment, and difficult differential diagnosis. First-line therapy usually consists of glucocorticoids. During long-term therapy, a spectrum of immunosuppressive agents and biologicals can also be used in elderly patients.

Background: On behalf of the German association of Rheumatology national experts developed guidelines for the medical treatment of rheumatoid arthritis (RA) based on the EULAR recommendations for the management of RA published in 2010. Current evidence was provided with an update of the systematic literature review (SLR). The methods and results of the SLR are presented in this article., Materials and Methods: An update of the EULAR SLR for the medical treatment of RA was performed from January 2009 to August 2011. The SLR assessed all controlled studies dealing with the outcome in clinical aspects, function and structure of disease modifying treatment of RA., Results: Out of 6,869 screened publications, 138 articles and 56 abstracts were considered in the development of the German guidelines on the treatment of RA. A modified set of recommendations was approved in a consensus of national experts., Conclusion: A systematic literature research provided current evidence for the German recommendations on the sequential medical treatment of RA.

The diagnosis of rheumatoid arthritis (RA) is often based on classification criteria. In 2010 ACR and EULAR presented new classification criteria for RA which allow patients with a high risk for persistent, chronic and erosive arthritis and therefore fulfill the current definition of RA, to be defined. Therapy of RA should be initiated as early as possible. Methotrexate remains the first-line therapy of RA. In patients showing insufficient response of RA, biological agents have been demonstrated to be an effective second-line therapy. It is essential to define and follow an individual treatment target to obtain remission or low disease activity. This target should be reassessed regularly and treatment should be correspondingly adapted to achieve the target.

Background: Remission is the established goal in rheumatoid arthritis (RA) treatment. Although originally defined by a disease activity score in 28 joints (DAS28) <2.6, more stringent criteria may imply the absence of disease activity. The 2011 ACR/EULAR remission criteria provide the newest and most stringent definition of remission., Objectives: To evaluate post hoc the remission by ACR/EULAR criteria and compare the criteria with the conventional DAS28 in TAMARA, an open-label phase IIIb tocilizumab (TCZ) trial including patients with active RA receiving inadequate disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs) or tumour necrosis factor α (TNFα) inhibitor treatment., Results: 286 patients were enrolled, 99.7% of patients were receiving a conventional DMARD and 41.6% had TNFα inhibitor pretreatment. Baseline mean DAS28 of 6.0 ± 1.0 fell to 2.6 ± 1.5 at week 24. DAS28 <2.6 was achieved by 47.6% at week 24. Remission rates with the new ACR/EULAR Boolean-based criteria for clinical studies were 15.0% after 12 weeks and 20.3% after 24 weeks. Of note, 13.5% of patients with previous TNFα blocker inadequate response still achieved remission according to the new ACR/EULAR criteria after 24 weeks. Clinical Disease Activity Index and Simplified Disease Activity Index remission rates were 24.1% and 25.2%, respectively., Conclusions: Under the definition of the new stringent 2011 ACR/EULAR remission criteria, patients with active RA despite DMARD treatment and even after inadequate response to TNFα inhibitors, receiving TCZ showed significant rates of remission. Similar remission rates were achieved, when clinical practice criteria, not inclusive of acute phase reactants, were used.

Objective: To assess the efficacy and safety of abatacept plus methotrexate versus methotrexate alone in early erosive rheumatoid arthritis (RA)., Methods: The AGREE was a 2-year phase IIIb multinational study in early (≤ 2 years) RA. During the double-blind period (year 1), patients were randomly assigned 1:1 to receive abatacept+methotrexate or methotrexate alone; all patients received open-label abatacept+methotrexate during year 2. Clinical outcomes assessed included 28-joint disease activity score (DAS28) defined remission, low disease activity score (LDAS), American College of Rheumatology (ACR) responses and physical function. Radiographic outcomes were assessed using the Genant-modified Sharp total score (TS). Safety was monitored throughout., Results: Of the 459 patients completing year 1, 433 patients (94.3%) completed year 2. DAS28-defined remission, LDAS, ACR and physical function were sustained through year 2 in the original abatacept+methotrexate group, with 55.2% in remission at 2 years. Upon introduction of abatacept in the methotrexate-alone group, additional patients achieved DAS28-defined remission (44.5% vs 26.9%), LDAS (60.4% vs 43.2%) and improved ACR 70 (49.8% vs 31.7%) for year 2 versus year 1. Less radiographic progression was observed at 2 years in the original abatacept+methotrexate group than the methotrexate-alone group (change in TS 0.84 vs 1.75, p<0.001). No new safety issues were seen. Similar rates of serious adverse events, serious infections and autoimmune events were observed in years 1 and 2., Conclusions: The AGREE trial was the first to examine the impact of T-cell co-stimulation modulation with abatacept in patients with early erosive RA. Early treatment with abatacept+methotrexate resulted in greater sustainable clinical, functional and radiographic benefits than methotrexate alone, with acceptable safety and tolerability., Trial Registration: NCT00122382.

New therapeutic principles and considerable diagnostic advances have made it possible to define different rheumatic diseases and especially rheumatoid arthritis (RA) at an early stage and by starting an early and aggressive medication a considerable proportion of patients with RA will reach the status of low disease activity or even remission. With the additional development of composite measures to estimate the disease activity of RA, it was the goal of an international working group consisting of rheumatologists and patients to develop recommendations for treating rheumatoid arthritis in a similar way as for patients with hypertension or diabetes, with the aim to achieve remission as often as possible. This treat-to-target initiative has taken off in quite a number of different countries including Germany leading to discussions on how this initiative can be integrated into the specific national healthcare systems and what possibilities would exist for its implementation. To develop strategies for an improved healthcare of people suffering from rheumatic diseases and using RA as an example, action elements and postulates were developed which will be discussed in more detail in the present manuscript.

The spectrum of agents available for the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis (RA) has become more diversified: In addition to TNF-blocking agents, Abatacept, Rituximab and Tocilizumab have now become available for the treatment of RA. All three agents were approved for patients with insufficient response/intolerability to TNF-blockers; Tozilizumab and Abatacept have also been approved for TNF-naive patients with insufficient response to Methorexate.The present article clarifies the efficacy of these three substances in the treatment algorithm of RA. Current data do not suggest differences in general; therefore, individual considerations may result in patient-specific decisions as to which drug should be used after insufficient response to a TNF-blocking agent or Methotrexate. Possible arguments are discussed.

Objectives: To assess the efficacy and safety of abatacept in methotrexate-naive patients with early rheumatoid arthritis (RA) and poor prognostic factors., Methods: In this double-blind, phase IIIb study, patients with RA for 2 years or less were randomly assigned 1 : 1 to receive abatacept (approximately 10 mg/kg) plus methotrexate, or placebo plus methotrexate. Patients were methotrexate-naive and seropositive for rheumatoid factor (RF), anti-cyclic citrullinated protein (CCP) type 2 or both and had radiographic evidence of joint erosions. The co-primary endpoints were the proportion of patients achieving disease activity score in 28 joints (DAS28)-defined remission (C-reactive protein) and joint damage progression (Genant-modified Sharp total score; TS) at year 1. Safety was monitored throughout., Results: At baseline, patients had a mean DAS28 of 6.3, a mean TS of 7.1 and mean disease duration of 6.5 months; 96.5% and 89.0% of patients were RF or anti-CCP2 seropositive, respectively. At year 1, a significantly greater proportion of abatacept plus methotrexate-treated patients achieved remission (41.4% vs 23.3%; p<0.001) and there was significantly less radiographic progression (mean change in TS 0.63 vs 1.06; p = 0.040) versus methotrexate alone. Over 1 year, the frequency of adverse events (84.8% vs 83.4%), serious adverse events (7.8% vs 7.9%), serious infections (2.0% vs 2.0%), autoimmune disorders (2.3% vs 2.0%) and malignancies (0.4% vs 0%) was comparable for abatacept plus methotrexate versus methotrexate alone., Conclusions: In a methotrexate-naive population with early RA and poor prognostic factors, the combination of abatacept and methotrexate provided significantly better clinical and radiographic efficacy compared with methotrexate alone and had a comparable, favourable safety profile.

Background: Tumour necrosis factor alpha (TNFalpha) inhibitors are frequently used to treat rheumatoid arthritis, but whether use of a different TNFalpha inhibitor can improve patient response is unknown. We assess the efficacy and safety of the TNFalpha inhibitor golimumab in patients with active rheumatoid arthritis who had previously received one or more TNFalpha inhibitors., Methods: 461 patients with active rheumatoid arthritis from 82 sites in 10 countries were randomly allocated by interactive voice response system, stratified by study site and methotrexate use, to receive subcutaneous injections of placebo (n=155), 50 mg golimumab (n=153), or 100 mg golimumab (n=153) every 4 weeks between Feb 21, 2006, and Sept 26, 2007. Allocation was double-blind. Eligible patients had been treated with at least one dose of a TNFalpha inhibitor previously. Patients continued stable doses of methotrexate, sulfasalazine, hydroxychloroquine, oral corticosteroids, and non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs. The primary endpoint was achievement at week 14 of 20% or higher improvement in American College of Rheumatology criteria for assessment of rheumatoid arthritis (ACR20). At week 16, patients who had less than 20% improvement in tender and swollen joint counts were given rescue therapy and changed treatment from placebo to 50 mg golimumab, or from 50 mg to 100 mg golimumab. Drug efficacy was assessed by intention to treat and safety was assessed according to the study drug given. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00299546., Findings: Patients had discontinued previous TNFalpha inhibitors because of lack of effectiveness (269 [58%] patients) or reasons unrelated to effectiveness (246 [53%] patients), such as intolerance and accessibility issues. Patients had active disease, which was indicated by a median of 14.0 (IQR 9.0-22.0) swollen and 26.0 (16.0-41.0) tender joints for the whole group. 28 (18%) patients on placebo, 54 (35%) patients on 50 mg golimumab (odds ratio 2.5 [95% CI 1.5-4.2], p=0.0006), and 58 (38%) patients on 100 mg golimumab (2.8 [1.6-4.7], p=0.0001) achieved ACR20 at week 14. Two patients were never treated, and 57 patients did not complete the study because of adverse events, unsatisfactory treatment effect, loss to follow-up, death, or other reasons. 155 patients on placebo, 153 on 50 mg golimumab, and 153 on 100 mg golimumab were assessed for drug efficacy. For weeks 1-16, serious adverse events were recorded in 11 (7%) patients on placebo, 8 (5%) on 50 mg golimumab, and 4 (3%) on 100 mg golimumab. For weeks 1-24, after some patients were given rescue therapy, serious adverse events were recorded in 15 (10%) patients on placebo, 14 (5%) on 50 mg golimumab, and 8 (4%) on 100 mg golimumab., Interpretation: Golimumab reduced the signs and symptoms of rheumatoid arthritis in patients with active disease who had previously received one or more TNFalpha inhibitors., Funding: Centocor Research and Development and Schering-Plough Research Institute.

Objective: To assess the safety and efficacy of combination therapy with infliximab and leflunomide in adults with active rheumatoid arthritis (RA) despite leflunomide therapy., Methods: Adult patients with active RA who had received leflunomide for at least 16 weeks were eligible for this 30-week, open-label trial. All patients received ongoing oral leflunomide (20 mg/day) and 3 mg/kg infliximab administered IV at weeks 0, 2, 6, 14, and 22. The primary end point was the percentage of patients with adverse events that led to patient withdrawal and were at least possibly related to treatment. Descriptive evaluations of efficacy and other safety assessments were performed., Results: Twelve out of 70 patients (17.1%; upper 90% CI 24.5%) withdrew due to treatment-related adverse events. Adverse events were reported in 69 of 72 patients (95.8%); the most common were nasopharyngitis, diarrhea, and pruritus. Serious adverse events occurred in 16 out of 72 patients (22.2%). Significant improvements were observed in efficacy assessments, including Disease Activity Score 28 (DAS28) and pain. At end point, 19.4% of the patients showed a good improvement in DAS28 score and 46.3% had a moderate improvement. American College of Rheumatology (ACR) 20, 50, and 70 responses were achieved by 47.1%, 21.4%, and 12.9% of the patients, respectively., Conclusion: The combination of infliximab and leflunomide neither increased the rate of toxicities nor resulted in unexpected adverse events. Treatment-related withdrawals occurred at an acceptable frequency. Patients experienced clinically significant improvements. Treatment with infliximab plus leflunomide benefits the majority of patients, but monitoring of adverse events is required.

The success of the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis depends primarily on early diagnosis. In most cases, basic therapy begins with methotrexate. Depending on the stage and course of the disease (radiographically detected early erosion and/or progression), basic immunosuppressive therapy can be combined or supplemented with cytokine antagonists. Furthermore, for specific indications, several alternative active substances (DMARD monotherapies) are available. Today the goal of therapy is always remission.

Accumulating evidence suggests that treatment of rheumatoid arthritis (RA) with two or more disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs) is more efficient than single agent therapy. Randomized clinical trials demonstrated the efficacy of various combinations such as methotrexate plus sulfasalazine plus hydroxychloroquine, methotrexate plus ciclosporine or methotrexate plus infliximab, respectively. In contrast to these data, however, most German rheumatologists use combination therapy in a small percentage of patients with active RA. Thus, consensus criteria should be defined when and how to use combination therapy in the treatment of active disease. We suggest that combination therapy should be started if active disease is still present after three months of treatment with a single standard DMARD, mostly methotrexate, plus low dose prednisolone and that combination DMARD therapy should be used before TNF blocking agents.

Objective: To describe indicators of disability and handicap in the 2 major inflammatory rheumatic diseases rheumatoid arthritis (RA) and ankylosing spondylitis (AS) and to estimate the burden of illness in terms of functional status, pain, and global well being, as well as with regard to unemployment and early retirement., Methods: Data from the German rheumatological database on 52,444 patients with RA and 8,776 patients with AS seen at 21 collaborative arthritis centers in Germany between 1993 and 1997 were analyzed. To estimate the burden of the 2 diseases at different biographical phases, age and sex matched groups of patients were compared for functional disability, pain, global assessment of health status, education level, and employment status., Results: For comparable ages, disability in female patients with AS or RA was rated similarly by the physicians (e.g., 61-70 years: 42% severe disability in RA and 44% in AS), whereas men with AS were rated more disabled than men with RA (61-70 years: 35% in RA and 48% in AS). Patients' self-ratings of disability were generally worse for women than for men (age 61-70: women 37% severe disability in RA and 35% in AS, men: 24% in RA and 19% in AS). Pain intensity was rated similarly by women and men with RA and AS at ages < 51 years (33% severe pain at ages 41-50 in men and 34% in women in both diseases). It increased with age in women (> 70 years: 41% severe pain in RA and 44% in AS) and remained stable in men (27% RA and 29% AS > 70 years). At 71.3% the employment rate in AS was clearly higher than in RA (49.5%). There was significant influence of the education level (men 51-60 years with AS: low education 56% employment rate, high education 79%) and the labor market (men 51-55 years with AS: 80% employment rate under good, 59% under bad overall labor market conditions)., Conclusion: Age and sex matched groups of patients with RA and AS in tertiary rheumatological care show similar amounts of disability, pain, and reduction in well being. Therefore, the offer of comprehensive care and pain management to both groups should be comparable.

Objective: Increasing evidence suggests that there is a close interrelationship between the immune system and the hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal axis. One way these systems are linked is through specific receptor proteins for glucocorticoid hormones in lymphocytes. We sought to determine whether the levels of these receptors differ in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA), compared with levels in healthy subjects., Methods: We determined the density and affinity of lymphocyte glucocorticoid receptors, as well as basal cortisol levels, in 90 patients with active RA and in 200 healthy controls, using a whole cell binding assay., Results: The number of glucocorticoid receptors in RA patients was significantly lower than in controls (mean +/- SD 2,144 +/- 500 per cell versus 5,619 +/- 1,373 per cell; P less than 0.001), whereas there were no differences in binding affinity or cortisol levels. Glucocorticoid receptor density did not correlate with inflammatory disease activity., Conclusion: Since glucocorticoids are potent immunosuppressive agents, the decrease in their receptors suggests an impairment of the immune-hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal axis in patients with RA.

The therapeutic repertoire for the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis has been expanded to new disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs), like Auranofine, Sulfasalazine, and Methotrexate. Rheumatoid arthritis is not only a highly disabling disease but is now recognized to be related with increased mortality. Therefore, the aim of therapeutic strategies is the early induction of remission. The strategy for treatment of rheumatoid arthritis should be based on an analysis of the individual risk of a patient to develop severe illness. A concept of "risk-oriented DMARD-therapy" of rheumatoid arthritis is proposed.