ObjectiveTo investigate whether antidrug antibodies and/or drug non‐trough levels predict the long‐term treatment response in a large cohort of patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) treated with adalimumab or etanercept and to identify factors influencing antidrug antibody and drug levels to optimize future treatment decisions.MethodsA total of 331 patients from an observational prospective cohort were selected (160 patients treated with adalimumab and 171 treated with etanercept). Antidrug antibody levels were measured by radioimmunoassay, and drug levels were measured by enzyme‐linked immunosorbent assay in 835 serial serum samples obtained 3, 6, and 12 months after initiation of therapy. The association between antidrug antibodies and drug non‐trough levels and the treatment response (change in the Disease Activity Score in 28 joints) was evaluated.ResultsAmong patients who completed 12 months of followup, antidrug antibodies were detected in 24.8% of those receiving adalimumab (31 of 125) and in none of those receiving etanercept. At 3 months, antidrug antibody formation and low adalimumab levels were significant predictors of no response according to the European League Against Rheumatism (EULAR) criteria at 12 months (area under the receiver operating characteristic curve 0.71 [95% confidence interval (95% CI) 0.57, 0.85]). Antidrug antibody–positive patients received lower median dosages of methotrexate compared with antidrug antibody–negative patients (15 mg/week versus 20 mg/week; P = 0.01) and had a longer disease duration (14.0 versus 7.7 years; P = 0.03). The adalimumab level was the best predictor of change in the DAS28 at 12 months, after adjustment for confounders (regression coefficient 0.060 [95% CI 0.015, 0.10], P = 0.009). Etanercept levels were associated with the EULAR response at 12 months (regression coefficient 0.088 [95% CI 0.019, 0.16], P = 0.012); however, this difference was not significant after adjustment. A body mass index of ≥30 kg/m2 and poor adherence were associated with lower drug levels.ConclusionPharmacologic testing in anti–tumor necrosis factor–treated patients is clinically useful even in the absence of trough levels. At 3 months, antidrug antibodies and low adalimumab levels are significant predictors of no response according to the EULAR criteria at 12 months.

The distinct vascular patterns in PsA and ReA compared with those in RA may reflect different specific vascular factors in the pathogenesis of these arthritides. Vascularity and villous hypertrophy are the most reliable features of synovitis grading.

Objective. To determine whether a regimen of methotrexate, cyclosporin A, and corticosteroids introduced at onset in poor-prognosis rheumatoid arthritis (RA) can produce a significant improvement in outcome compared with standard monotherapy with sulfasalazine (SSZ).Methods. Eighty-two consecutive patients presenting with new, untreated RA of less than 12 months' duration who fulfilled criteria for poor long-term outcome were randomized to receive either combination therapy (n ‫؍‬ 40) or SSZ alone (n ‫؍‬ 42). The primary outcome measures were remission and American College of Rheumatology (ACR) criteria for 20% improvement at 48 weeks.Results. After 48 weeks, the numbers of patients who met the ACR criteria for 20% improvement were not significantly different between the two groups (combination 58% versus SSZ 45%), and similar numbers of patients had persisting clinical remission (ϳ10% both groups). During the first 3 months, there were significantly greater reductions in parameters of disease activity in the combination group. By 24 weeks, the swollen and tender joint counts, C-reactive protein levels, and erythrocyte sedimentation rates had fallen significantly in both groups, with a greater improvement in the swollen and tender joint count in the combination group. At 48 weeks, the radiographic damage score had increased by a median of 1 (range 0-42.5) in the combination group and 1.25 (range 0-72.5) in the SSZ group (P ‫؍‬ 0.28; although there were significant differences in the scores for the right hand). There were significantly fewer withdrawals due to lack of efficacy in the combination group than in the SSZ group (1 of 40 versus 10 of 42; P ‫؍‬ 0.007). In the combination group, dose reduction was needed in 22.5% because of hypertension and in 22.5% because of elevated creatinine levels. Over 48 weeks, serum creatinine increased in both groups, but particularly in the combination arm.

Objectives-CD4+ T cells sustain the chronic synovial inflammatory response in rheumatoid arthritis (RA). SB-210396/CE 9.1 is an anti-CD4 monoclonal antibody that has documented eYcacy in RA when given intravenously. This study aimed to establish the safety and eYcacy of the intra-articular administration of SB-210396/CE 9.1 compared with placebo, examining its mode of action using a combined imaging approach of arthroscopy, magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), and histology. Methods-Thirteen RA patients with active, resistant knee synovitis, were randomised to intra-articular injection of placebo (n=3), 0.4 mg (n=3) or 40 mg (n=7) of anti-CD4 after sequential dynamic gadolinium enhanced MRI, followed by same day arthroscopy and synovial membrane biopsy. Imaging and arthroscopic synovial membrane sampling were repeated at six weeks. This study used a unique region of interest (ROI) analysis mapping the MRI area analysed to the specific biopsy site identified arthroscopically, thus providing data for all three modalities at the same synovial membrane site. Results-12 patients completed the study (one placebo treated patient refused further MRI). Arthroscopic improvement was observed in 0 of 2 placebo patients but in 10 of 10 patients receiving active drug (>20% in 6 of 10). Improvement in MRI was consistently observed in all patients of the 40 mg group but not in the other two groups. A reduction in SM CD4+ score was noted in the 40 mg group and in the 0.4 mg group. Strong correlations both before and after treatment, were identified between the three imaging modalities. Intra-articular delivery of SB-210396/CE 9.1 was well tolerated. Conclusions-SB-210396/CE 9.1 is safe when administered by intra-articular injection. A trend toward eYcacy was found by coordinated MRI, arthroscopic, and histological imaging, not seen in the placebo group. The value of ROI analysis was demonstrated.

No abstract