Rheumatology International

, Volume 32, Issue 11, pp 3631–3637 | Cite as

Clinical results for tocilizumab over one year in the clinical setting as assessed by CDAI (clinical disease activity index): CRP at week 12 and MMP-3 at week 24 are predictive factors for CDAI

  • Atsushi Kaneko
  • Daihei Kida
  • Kiwamu Saito
  • Masami Tsukamoto
  • Tomotaro Sato
Original Article

Abstract

To investigate the clinical results of 1 year tocilizumab (TCZ) treatment of rheumatoid arthritis patients in clinical practice by using the clinical disease activity index (CDAI). Thirty-one patients with inadequate response to DMARDs, including methotrexate (MTX), or TNF inhibitors received TCZ (8 mg every 4 weeks). The clinical responses were measured using the 28-joint disease activity score (DAS28-ESR) and CDAI. Matrix metalloproteinase-3 (MMP-3) was assessed as a serological biomarker. Mean baseline DAS28-ESR was 5.96, decreasing to 2.89 at week 52 with a remission rate (DAS28-ESR < 2.6) of 35.5%. Mean baseline CDAI was 28.4, decreasing to 10.2 at week 52 with a remission rate (CDAI ≤ 2.8) of 22.6%. Of patients whose CRP levels had fallen to below the limit of detection by week 12, 65.2% achieved remission or low disease activity as assessed by CDAI at week 52. Median baseline MMP-3 level was 165.7 ng/mL, decreasing to 79.5 ng/mL at week 52. A positive correlation was seen between CDAI at week 52 and MMP-3 level from week 12 onward. About 50% of the patients treated with TCZ in clinical practice achieved a low disease activity level at week 52 as assessed by CDAI, which does not include acute-phase proteins. Our results suggested that CRP levels falling to below the limit of detection by week 12 and MMP-3 ≤ 80.6 ng/mL at week 24 could predict low disease activity or remission at week 52 as assessed by CDAI.

Keywords

Rheumatoid arthritis Tocilizumab CDAI IL-6 CRP MMP-3 

Notes

Acknowledgments

T.S. has received research support (less than $10,000) from Chugai Pharmaceutical Co. Ltd., Eisai Co. Ltd., Mitsubishi Tanabe Pharma Corporation, Takeda Pharmaceutical Co. Ltd., Pfizer Inc., and Bristol-Myers Squibb. A.K. has received speaking fees and/or honoraria (less than $5000) from Chugai Pharmaceutical Co. Ltd., Eisai Co. Ltd., Mitsubishi Tanabe Pharma Corporation, Takeda Pharmaceutical Co. Ltd., Pfizer Inc., and Bristol-Myers Squibb.

Conflict of interest

All other authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

  1. 1.
    Short CL, Bauer W (1948) The course of rheumatoid arthritis in patients receiving simple medical and orthopedic measures. N Engl J Med 238:142–148PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Short CL, Bauer W, Reynolds WE (1957) Rheumatoid arthritis: a definition of the disease and a clinical description based on a numerical study of 293 patients and controls. Harvard University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Koike R, Harigai M, Atsumi T, Amano K, Kawai S, Saito K, Saito T, Yamamura M, Matsubara T, Miyasaka N (2009) Japan college of rheumatology 2009 guidelines for the use of tocilizumab, a humanized anti-interleukin-6 receptor monoclonal antibody, in rheumatoid arthritis. Mod Rheumatol 19:351–357PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Yazici Y, Abramson SB (2007) Rheumatoid arthritis treatment and monitoring of outcomes—where are we [corrected] in 2007? Bull NYU Hosp Jt Dis 65:300–305PubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Funahashi K, Koyano S, Miura T, Hagiwara T, Okuda K, Matsubara T (2009) Efficacy of tocilizumab and evaluation of clinical remission as determined by CDAI and MMP-3 level. Mod Rheumatol 19:507–512PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Sfriso P, Salaffi F, Montecucco CM, Bombardieri S, Todesco S (2009) MonitorNet: the Italian multi-centre observational study aimed at estimating the risk/benefit profile of biologic agents in real-world rheumatology practice. Reumatismo 61:132–139PubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Mierau M, Schoels M, Gonda G, Fuchs J, Aletaha D, Smolen JS (2007) Assessing remission in clinical practice. Rheumatology (Oxford) 46:975–979CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Shaver TS, Anderson JD, Weidensaul DN, Shahouri SS, Busch RE, Mikuls TR, Michaud K, Wolfe F (2008) The problem of rheumatoid arthritis disease activity and remission in clinical practice. J Rheumatol 35:1015–1022PubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Sokka T, Hetland ML, Makinen H, Kautiainen H, Horslev-Petersen K, Luukkainen RK, Combe B, Badsha H, Drosos AA, Devlin J, Ferraccioli G, Morelli A, Hoekstra M, Majdan M, Sadkiewicz S, Belmonte M, Holmqvist AC, Choy E, Burmester GR, Tunc R, Dimic A, Nedovic J, Stankovic A, Bergman M, Toloza S, Pincus T (2008) Remission and rheumatoid arthritis: data on patients receiving usual care in twenty-four countries. Arthritis Rheum 58:2642–2651PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Aletaha D, Nell VP, Stamm T, Uffmann M, Pflugbeil S, Machold K, Smolen JS (2005) Acute phase reactants add little to composite disease activity indices for rheumatoid arthritis: validation of a clinical activity score. Arthritis Res Ther 7:R796–R806PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    van Gestel AM, Anderson JJ, van Riel PL, Boers M, Haagsma CJ, Rich B, Wells G, Lange ML, Felson DT (1999) ACR and EULAR improvement criteria have comparable validity in rheumatoid arthritis trials. American college of rheumatology European league of associations for rheumatology. J Rheumatol 26:705–711PubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Smolen JS, Breedveld FC, Schiff MH, Kalden JR, Emery P, Eberl G, van Riel PL, Tugwell P (2003) A simplified disease activity index for rheumatoid arthritis for use in clinical practice. Rheumatology (Oxford) 42:244–257CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Aletaha D, Smolen J (2005) The simplified disease activity index (SDAI) and the clinical disease activity index (CDAI): a review of their usefulness and validity in rheumatoid arthritis. Clin Exp Rheumatol 23:S100–S108PubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Aletaha D, Smolen JS (2007) The simplified disease activity index (SDAI) and clinical disease activity index (CDAI) to monitor patients in standard clinical care. Best Pract Res Clin Rheumatol 21:663–675PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Aletaha D, Smolen JS (2009) The simplified disease activity index and clinical disease activity index to monitor patients in standard clinical care. Rheum Dis Clin North Am 35:759–772, viiiGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Matsui T, Kuga Y, Kaneko A, Nishino J, Eto Y, Chiba N, Yasuda M, Saisho K, Shimada K, Tohma S (2007) Disease activity score 28 (DAS28) using C-reactive protein underestimates disease activity and overestimates EULAR response criteria compared with DAS28 using erythrocyte sedimentation rate in a large observational cohort of rheumatoid arthritis patients in Japan. Ann Rheum Dis 66:1221–1226PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Bentley MJ, Reed GW (2008) Simplified composite disease activity measures in rheumatoid arthritis: should they be used in standard care? Clin Exp Rheumatol 26:358–366PubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  • Atsushi Kaneko
    • 1
  • Daihei Kida
    • 1
  • Kiwamu Saito
    • 2
  • Masami Tsukamoto
    • 3
  • Tomotaro Sato
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Orthopedic Surgery and RheumatologyNagoya Medical Center, National Hospital OrganizationNagoyaJapan
  2. 2.Saito Clinic Orthopedic and RheumatologyNagoyaJapan
  3. 3.Asahigaoka OrthopedicsNagoyaJapan

Personalised recommendations