Objective.To examine the influence of concomitant methotrexate (MTX) with adalimumab (ADA) on outcomes in patients with psoriatic arthritis (PsA) using data from an observational study of ADA.Methods.Data from a German noninterventional study of patients with PsA starting treatment with ADA were analyzed retrospectively for effects of concomitant MTX on key outcomes, including Disease Activity Score-28 joints, tender and swollen joint counts, skin assessments, and safety. Patients were categorized into those with symptoms of axial involvement and those with no symptoms of axial involvement as judged by the examining clinician.Results.A total of 1455 patients met the study criteria, 296 with axial involvement (ADA monotherapy = 165; plus MTX = 131) and 1159 with no axial involvement (ADA monotherapy = 658; plus MTX = 501). ADA, alone or combined with MTX, resulted in strong and comparable reductions in disease activity measures in patients with and those without axial disease over 24 months of therapy. In multiple regression analyses, concomitant MTX did not affect joint or skin outcomes in either the group with axial manifestations or the group without axial disease. Neither adverse event rates nor withdrawal rates were significantly influenced by concomitant MTX.Conclusion.ADA is an effective treatment option for patients with PsA with or without axial involvement. Compared with ADA monotherapy, the use of concomitant MTX with ADA does not improve articular or skin outcomes in patients with PsA regardless of axial symptoms. Trial registration: Clinicaltrials.govNCT01111240
The objective of this study is to evaluate the vaccination status in rheumatoid arthritis (RA) patients during routine clinical practice, data from a German non-interventional cross-sectional study. In this prospective study, patients with rheumatoid arthritis were interviewed using a standardized questionnaire focusing on vaccination. Available vaccination documents were evaluated, and titers for common vaccination antigens (hepatitis B, rubella, mumps, measles, diphtheria, tetanus) were analyzed with special regard to the underlying treatment and age of patients. A total of 301 RA patients treated with conventional DMARDs alone (cohort I, n = 125), TNF-blocking agents (cohort II, n = 117), or B-cell depletion with rituximab (cohort III, n = 59) have been studied. Significantly more patients in the biologic cohorts II and III were aware of an increased risk of infections (I: 67.7%, II: 83.8%*, III: 89.9%*, P < 0.05). Pneumococcal vaccination rate was significantly higher (I: 20.2%, II 36.8%* and III: 39.0%*, P < 0.05) compared with cohort I. Differences were less evident for influenza. Significantly more patients ≥60 years of age have been vaccinated against Streptococcus pneumoniae and influenza. An obvious discrepancy existed between vaccination awareness and actual vaccination rates for all cohorts. No significant differences in vaccination titers could be seen between the three cohorts. Awareness of infectious complications was more present in patients treated with biologicals, and also, the rate of patients vaccinated against Streptococcus pneumoniae increased significantly depending on the underlying treatment. Nevertheless, there was a discrepancy between vaccination awareness and actual vaccination rates for all cohorts.
Objective. To define a valid criterion for treatment response as assessed by the Disease Activity Score in 28 joints (DAS28) that exceeds random disease activity variations in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA). Methods. We utilized anonymized data sets of RA patients from multiple rheumatology centers in Germany to identify patients with stable responses to conventional or biologic disease-modifying antirheumatic drug (DMARD) therapy (discovery cohort). To evaluate fluctuations in DAS28 scores, we subjected patients' DAS28 scores at months 12, 18, and 24 to an analysis of variance model to establish a 1-sided 95% confidence interval for normal fluctuations; this value was used to define the critical difference (DAS28-d crit ) for individual changes from baseline. The DAS28-d crit value was then applied to analyses of therapeutic response in an adalimumab noninterventional study cohort.
ObjectiveTo use statistical methods to establish a threshold for individual response in patient‐reported outcomes (PROs) in patients with rheumatoid arthritis.MethodsWe used an analysis of variance model in patients on stable therapy (discovery cohort) to establish critical differences (dcrit) for the minimum change associated with a significant individual patient response (beyond normal variation) in the PRO measures of pain (0–10), fatigue (0–10), and function (Funktionsfragebogen Hannover questionnaire; 0–100). We then evaluated PRO responses in patients initiating adalimumab in a noninterventional study (treatment cohort).ResultsIn the discovery cohort (n = 700), PROs showed excellent long‐term retest reliability. The minimum change that exceeded random fluctuation was conservatively determined to be 3 points for pain, 4 points for fatigue, and 16 points for function. In the treatment cohort (n = 2,788), 1,483 patients (53.2%) achieved a significant individual therapeutic response as assessed by Disease Activity Score in 28 joints (DAS28)–dcrit (≥1.8 points) after 12 months of adalimumab treatment; 68.5% of patients with a DAS28‐dcrit response achieved a significant improvement in pain, whereas approximately 40% achieved significant improvements in fatigue or function. Significant improvements in all 3 PROs occurred in 22.7% of patients; 22.8% did not have any significant PRO responses. In contrast, significant improvements in all 3 PROs occurred in only 4.4% of 1,305 patients who did not achieve a DAS28‐dcrit response at month 12, and 59.1% did not achieve any significant PRO responses.ConclusionThe establishment of critical differences in PROs distinguishes true responses from random variation and provides insights into appropriate patient management.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.