Advertisement

Rheumatology International

, Volume 40, Issue 2, pp 263–272 | Cite as

Efficacy and retention rate of adalimumab in rheumatoid arthritis and psoriatic arthritis patients after first-line etanercept failure: the FEARLESS cohort

  • Ennio G. FavalliEmail author
  • Andrea Becciolini
  • Antonio Carletto
  • Fabrizio Conti
  • Giorgio Amato
  • Enrico Fusaro
  • Luca Quartuccio
  • Colin Gerard Egan
  • Andrea Lo Monaco
  • Maurizio Benucci
  • Fausto Salaffi
  • Angelo Semeraro
  • Simone Parisi
  • Fulvia Ceccarelli
  • Ilaria Piazza
  • Rosario Foti
Observational Research
  • 185 Downloads

Abstract

Few studies have compared the efficacy of switching from etanercept to adalimumab in the real-life setting in rheumatoid arthritis (RA) and psoriatic arthritis (PsA). This study evaluated the 2-year retention rate and 12-month efficacy of adalimumab in RA and PsA patients, previously treated with etanercept. RA and PsA patients from 11 Italian Rheumatology Units received adalimumab after first-line etanercept failure. Two-year adalimumab retention rate was calculated by the Kaplan–Meier method and Cox proportional hazard models were developed to examine predictors of drug persistence. Univariate and multivariate logistic regression analyses were developed to examine potential predictors of 12-month DAS-28 remission. The study population included 117 RA (disease duration of 10.1 ± 7.7 years and baseline DAS28-ESR of 4.97 ± 1.3) and 102 PsA (disease duration of 7.1 ± 5.1 years and baseline DAPSA of 24.6 ± 11.8). The 2-year retention rate was 48.2% in RA and 56.5% in PsA patients. Concomitant methotrexate treatment was not associated with increased drug survival in both groups. Similarly, cause of etanercept discontinuation or treatment duration was not associated with retention rate. 12-month remission and low disease activity were achieved, respectively, in 27.3% and 23.9% of RA patients and 27.4% and 23.5% PsA of patients. In multivariate models, etanercept discontinuation due to inefficacy (OR 0.27, 95% CI 1.03–0.73; p = 0.009) and baseline DAS-28 (OR 0.45, 95% CI 0.29–0.69; p < 0.001) remained significant negative predictors of remission in RA patients. No variable was associated with remission in PsA patients. Adalimumab after etanercept failure was highly effective and safe in both RA and PsA patients.

Keywords

Psoriatic arthritis Rheumatoid arthritis Biological drugs Adalimumab Etanercept 

Notes

Author contributions

Study concept and design: EGF, AB; data acquisition; EGF, AB, AC, FC, GA, EF, LQ, CGE, ALM, MB, FS, AS, SP, FC, IP, RF; analysis: EGF, AB, CGE; writing: EGF, CGE; interpretation of results; EGF, AB. All authors were involved in drafting the article or revising it critically for important intellectual content. All authors approved the final version to be submitted for publication.

Compliance with ethical standards

Ethics approval

Ethics committee approval on 15/05/2008 from Gaetano Pini Institute, Milan, Italy (protocol no. 63/08) and written informed consent for the anonymous use of personal data were obtained from every patient, in compliance with Legislative Decree 196/2003. This study complies with the ethical standards laid down in the 1975 Declaration of Helsinki.

Conflict of interest

EGF served as a consultant and/or speaker for BMS, Lilly, Celgene, MSD, UCB, Pfizer, Sanofi-Genzyme, Novartis, and AbbVie. AB served as a speaker for Sanofi-Genzyme, UCB, and AbbVie. AC served as a consultant and/or speaker for BMS, Lilly, Celgene, MSD, Janssen, Roche, Sanofi, Sandoz and Novartis. FaC served as a consultant and/or speaker for BMS, Lilly, Celgene, Pfizer, and AbbVie. LQ served as a consultant and/or speaker for Celgene, Roche, Lilly, AbbVie, and Pfizer. ALM served as a consultant for Sanofi and Roche. MB served as a consultant and/or speaker for BMS, Lilly, Roche, Novartis, Janssen. FS served as a consultant and/or speaker for BMS, MSD, Pfizer, Novartis, and AbbVie. AS served as speaker for BMS, AbbVie, MSD, UCB, Novartis, Sanofi. SP served as consultant and/or speaker for AbbVie, Biogen, BMS, Celgene, Janssen, Lilly, Novartis and UCB. RF served as a consultant and/or speaker for BMS, Lilly, Celgene, MSD, UCB, Pfizer, Janssen, Novartis, and AbbVie. EF, FuC, CGE and IP declared no conflict of interest.

References

  1. 1.
    Smolen JS, Aletaha D, McInnes IB (2016) Rheumatoid arthritis. Lancet Lond Engl 388:2023–2038.  https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(16)30173-8 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Ogdie A, Weiss P (2015) The epidemiology of psoriatic arthritis. Rheum Dis Clin N Am 41:545–568.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rdc.2015.07.001 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Firestein GS (2014) The disease formerly known as rheumatoid arthritis. Arthritis Res Ther 16:114.  https://doi.org/10.1186/ar4593 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    McArdle A, Pennington S, FitzGerald O (2018) Clinical features of psoriatic arthritis: a comprehensive review of unmet clinical needs. Clin Rev Allergy Immunol 55:271–294.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s12016-017-8630-7 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Cross M, Smith E, Hoy D et al (2014) The global burden of rheumatoid arthritis: estimates from the global burden of disease 2010 study. Ann Rheum Dis 73:1316–1322.  https://doi.org/10.1136/annrheumdis-2013-204627 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Husni ME (2015) Comorbidities in psoriatic arthritis. Rheum Dis Clin N Am 41:677–698.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rdc.2015.07.008 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Favalli EG, Biggioggero M, Meroni PL (2014) Methotrexate for the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis in the biologic era: still an “anchor” drug? Autoimmun Rev 13:1102–1108.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.autrev.2014.08.026 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Smolen JS, Landewé R, Bijlsma J et al (2017) EULAR recommendations for the management of rheumatoid arthritis with synthetic and biological disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs: 2016 update. Ann Rheum Dis 76:960–977.  https://doi.org/10.1136/annrheumdis-2016-210715 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Gossec L, Smolen JS, Ramiro S et al (2016) European League Against Rheumatism (EULAR) recommendations for the management of psoriatic arthritis with pharmacological therapies: 2015 update. Ann Rheum Dis 75:499–510.  https://doi.org/10.1136/annrheumdis-2015-208337 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Chighizola CB, Favalli EG, Meroni PL (2014) Novel mechanisms of action of the biologicals in rheumatic diseases. Clin Rev Allergy Immunol 47:6–16.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s12016-013-8359-x CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Favalli EG, Pregnolato F, Biggioggero M et al (2016) Twelve-year retention rate of first-line tumor necrosis factor inhibitors in rheumatoid arthritis: real-life data from a local registry. Arthritis Care Res 68:432–439.  https://doi.org/10.1002/acr.22788 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Favalli EG, Selmi C, Becciolini A et al (2017) Eight-year retention rate of first-line tumor necrosis factor inhibitors in spondyloarthritis: a multicenter retrospective analysis. Arthritis Care Res 69:867–874.  https://doi.org/10.1002/acr.23090 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Favalli EG, Raimondo MG, Becciolini A et al (2017) The management of first-line biologic therapy failures in rheumatoid arthritis: current practice and future perspectives. Autoimmun Rev 16:1185–1195.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.autrev.2017.10.002 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Todoerti M, Favalli EG, Iannone F et al (2018) Switch or swap strategy in rheumatoid arthritis patients failing TNF inhibitors? Results of a modified Italian Expert Consensus. Rheumatol Oxf Engl 57:742–753.  https://doi.org/10.1093/rheumatology/key195 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Cantini F, Niccoli L, Nannini C et al (2017) Second-line biologic therapy optimization in rheumatoid arthritis, psoriatic arthritis, and ankylosing spondylitis. Semin Arthritis Rheum 47:183–192.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.semarthrit.2017.03.008 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Favalli EG, Arreghini M, Arnoldi C et al (2004) Anti-tumor necrosis factor alpha switching in rheumatoid arthritis and juvenile chronic arthritis. Arthritis Rheum 51:301–302.  https://doi.org/10.1002/art.20242 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Becciolini A, Raimondo MG, Crotti C et al (2017) A review of the literature analyzing benefits and concerns of infliximab biosimilar CT-P13 for the treatment of rheumatologic diseases: focus on interchangeability. Drug Des Dev Ther 11:1969–1978.  https://doi.org/10.2147/DDDT.S138515 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Smolen JS, Kay J, Doyle MK et al (2009) Golimumab in patients with active rheumatoid arthritis after treatment with tumour necrosis factor alpha inhibitors (GO-AFTER study): a multicentre, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase III trial. Lancet Lond Engl 374:210–221.  https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(09)60506-7 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Weinblatt ME, Fleischmann R, Huizinga TWJ et al (2012) Efficacy and safety of certolizumab pegol in a broad population of patients with active rheumatoid arthritis: results from the REALISTIC phase IIIb study. Rheumatol Oxf Engl 51:2204–2214.  https://doi.org/10.1093/rheumatology/kes150 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Furst DE, Gaylis N, Bray V et al (2007) Open-label, pilot protocol of patients with rheumatoid arthritis who switch to infliximab after an incomplete response to etanercept: the opposite study. Ann Rheum Dis 66:893–899.  https://doi.org/10.1136/ard.2006.068304 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Fagerli KM, Lie E, van der Heijde D et al (2013) Switching between TNF inhibitors in psoriatic arthritis: data from the NOR-DMARD study. Ann Rheum Dis 72:1840–1844.  https://doi.org/10.1136/annrheumdis-2012-203018 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Glintborg B, Ostergaard M, Krogh NS et al (2013) Clinical response, drug survival, and predictors thereof among 548 patients with psoriatic arthritis who switched tumor necrosis factor α inhibitor therapy: results from the Danish Nationwide DANBIO Registry. Arthritis Rheum 65:1213–1223.  https://doi.org/10.1002/art.37876 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Favalli EG, Sinigaglia L, Becciolini A et al (2018) Two-year persistence of golimumab as second-line biologic agent in rheumatoid arthritis as compared to other subcutaneous tumor necrosis factor inhibitors: real-life data from the LORHEN registry. Int J Rheum Dis 21:422–430.  https://doi.org/10.1111/1756-185X.13199 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Caporali R, Sarzi-Puttini P, Atzeni F et al (2010) Switching TNF-alpha antagonists in rheumatoid arthritis: the experience of the LORHEN registry. Autoimmun Rev 9:465–469.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.autrev.2009.12.010 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Conti F, Ceccarelli F, Marocchi E et al (2007) Switching tumour necrosis factor alpha antagonists in patients with ankylosing spondylitis and psoriatic arthritis: an observational study over a 5-year period. Ann Rheum Dis 66:1393–1397.  https://doi.org/10.1136/ard.2007.073569 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Conti F, Scrivo R, Spinelli FR et al (2009) Outcome in patients with rheumatoid arthritis switching TNF-alpha antagonists: a single center, observational study over an 8-year period. Clin Exp Rheumatol 27:540–541PubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Rubbert-Roth A, Atzeni F, Masala IF et al (2018) TNF inhibitors in rheumatoid arthritis and spondyloarthritis: are they the same? Autoimmun Rev 17:24–28.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.autrev.2017.11.005 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Lequerré T, Farran É, Ménard J-F et al (2015) Switching from an anti-TNF monoclonal antibody to soluble TNF-receptor yields better results than vice versa: an observational retrospective study of 72 rheumatoid arthritis switchers. Jt Bone Spine 82:330–337.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbspin.2015.01.021 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Chatzidionysiou K, Askling J, Eriksson J et al (2015) Effectiveness of TNF inhibitor switch in RA: results from the national Swedish register. Ann Rheum Dis 74:890–896.  https://doi.org/10.1136/annrheumdis-2013-204714 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Smolen JS, Burmester G-R, Combe B et al (2016) Head-to-head comparison of certolizumab pegol versus adalimumab in rheumatoid arthritis: 2-year efficacy and safety results from the randomised EXXELERATE study. Lancet Lond Engl 388:2763–2774.  https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(16)31651-8 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Mease PJ, Fleischmann R, Deodhar AA et al (2014) Effect of certolizumab pegol on signs and symptoms in patients with psoriatic arthritis: 24-week results of a phase 3 double-blind randomised placebo-controlled study (RAPID-PsA). Ann Rheum Dis 73:48–55.  https://doi.org/10.1136/annrheumdis-2013-203696 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Greenberg JD, Reed G, Decktor D et al (2012) A comparative effectiveness study of adalimumab, etanercept and infliximab in biologically naive and switched rheumatoid arthritis patients: results from the US CORRONA registry. Ann Rheum Dis 71:1134–1142.  https://doi.org/10.1136/annrheumdis-2011-150573 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Virkki LM, Valleala H, Takakubo Y et al (2011) Outcomes of switching anti-TNF drugs in rheumatoid arthritis—a study based on observational data from the Finnish Register of Biological Treatment (ROB-FIN). Clin Rheumatol 30:1447–1454.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10067-011-1779-1 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Manara M, Caporali R, Favalli EG et al (2017) Two-year retention rate of golimumab in rheumatoid arthritis, psoriatic arthritis and ankylosing spondylitis: data from the LORHEN registry. Clin Exp Rheumatol 35:804–809PubMedGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Rémy A, Avouac J, Gossec L, Combe B (2011) Clinical relevance of switching to a second tumour necrosis factor-alpha inhibitor after discontinuation of a first tumour necrosis factor-alpha inhibitor in rheumatoid arthritis: a systematic literature review and meta-analysis. Clin Exp Rheumatol 29:96–103PubMedGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Favalli EG, Biggioggero M, Marchesoni A, Meroni PL (2014) Survival on treatment with second-line biologic therapy: a cohort study comparing cycling and swap strategies. Rheumatol Oxf Engl 53:1664–1668.  https://doi.org/10.1093/rheumatology/keu158 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Gottenberg J-E, Brocq O, Perdriger A et al (2016) Non-TNF-targeted biologic vs a second anti-TNF drug to treat rheumatoid arthritis in patients with insufficient response to a first anti-TNF drug: a randomized clinical trial. JAMA 316:1172–1180.  https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2016.13512 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Kaymakcalan Z, Sakorafas P, Bose S et al (2009) Comparisons of affinities, avidities, and complement activation of adalimumab, infliximab, and etanercept in binding to soluble and membrane tumor necrosis factor. Clin Immunol Orlando Fla 131:308–316.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clim.2009.01.002 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Mitoma H, Horiuchi T, Tsukamoto H et al (2008) Mechanisms for cytotoxic effects of anti-tumor necrosis factor agents on transmembrane tumor necrosis factor alpha-expressing cells: comparison among infliximab, etanercept, and adalimumab. Arthritis Rheum 58:1248–1257.  https://doi.org/10.1002/art.23447 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Hyrich KL, Lunt M, Watson KD et al (2007) Outcomes after switching from one anti-tumor necrosis factor alpha agent to a second anti-tumor necrosis factor alpha agent in patients with rheumatoid arthritis: results from a large UK national cohort study. Arthritis Rheum 56:13–20.  https://doi.org/10.1002/art.22331 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Emery P, Pope JE, Kruger K et al (2018) Efficacy of monotherapy with biologics and JAK inhibitors for the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis: a systematic review. Adv Ther 35:1535–1563.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s12325-018-0757-2 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Burmester G-R, Kivitz AJ, Kupper H et al (2015) Efficacy and safety of ascending methotrexate dose in combination with adalimumab: the randomised CONCERTO trial. Ann Rheum Dis 74:1037–1044.  https://doi.org/10.1136/annrheumdis-2013-204769 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Favalli EG, Becciolini A, Biggioggero M et al (2018) The role of concomitant methotrexate dosage and maintenance over time in the therapy of rheumatoid arthritis patients treated with adalimumab or etanercept: retrospective analysis of a local registry. Drug Des Dev Ther 12:1421–1429.  https://doi.org/10.2147/DDDT.S162286 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Soliman MM, Ashcroft DM, Watson KD et al (2011) Impact of concomitant use of DMARDs on the persistence with anti-TNF therapies in patients with rheumatoid arthritis: results from the British Society for Rheumatology Biologics Register. Ann Rheum Dis 70:583–589.  https://doi.org/10.1136/ard.2010.139774 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Fagerli KM, Lie E, van der Heijde D et al (2014) The role of methotrexate co-medication in TNF-inhibitor treatment in patients with psoriatic arthritis: results from 440 patients included in the NOR-DMARD study. Ann Rheum Dis 73:132–137.  https://doi.org/10.1136/annrheumdis-2012-202347 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    Atzeni F, Bongiovanni S, Marchesoni A et al (2014) Predictors of response to anti-TNF therapy in RA patients with moderate or high DAS28 scores. Jt Bone Spine 81:37–40.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbspin.2013.04.005 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. 47.
    Katchamart W, Johnson S, Lin H-JL et al (2010) Predictors for remission in rheumatoid arthritis patients: a systematic review. Arthritis Care Res 62:1128–1143.  https://doi.org/10.1002/acr.20188 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. 48.
    Generali E, Scirè CA, Favalli EG, Selmi C (2016) Biomarkers in psoriatic arthritis: a systematic literature review. Expert Rev Clin Immunol 12:651–660.  https://doi.org/10.1586/1744666X.2016.1147954 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  49. 49.
    Lee K-E, Choi S-E, Xu H et al (2017) HAQ score is an independent predictor of sustained remission in patients with rheumatoid arthritis. Rheumatol Int 37:2027–2034.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00296-017-3833-z CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Ennio G. Favalli
    • 1
    Email author
  • Andrea Becciolini
    • 1
  • Antonio Carletto
    • 2
  • Fabrizio Conti
    • 3
  • Giorgio Amato
    • 4
  • Enrico Fusaro
    • 5
  • Luca Quartuccio
    • 6
  • Colin Gerard Egan
    • 7
  • Andrea Lo Monaco
    • 8
  • Maurizio Benucci
    • 9
  • Fausto Salaffi
    • 10
  • Angelo Semeraro
    • 11
  • Simone Parisi
    • 5
  • Fulvia Ceccarelli
    • 3
  • Ilaria Piazza
    • 2
  • Rosario Foti
    • 4
  1. 1.Department of RheumatologyASST Gaetano Pini-CTOMilanItaly
  2. 2.Rheumatology UnitAOUIVeronaItaly
  3. 3.Dipartimento di Medicina Interna e Specialità Mediche, ReumatologiaSapienza Università di RomaRomeItaly
  4. 4.Rheumatology UnitA.O.U. Policlinico Vittorio EmanueleCataniaItaly
  5. 5.Rheumatology UnitAzienda Ospedaliera Universitaria Città della Salute e della ScienzaTurinItaly
  6. 6.Clinica di Reumatologia, Dipartimento di Area MedicaASUIUDUdineItaly
  7. 7.CE Medical WritingPisaItaly
  8. 8.UOC di ReumatologiaAzienda Ospedaliero-Universitaria Sant’Anna Cona-FerraraFerraraItaly
  9. 9.SOS ReumatologiaOspedale S. Giovanni di DioFlorenceItaly
  10. 10.Clinica ReumatologicaUniversità Politecnica delle MarcheAnconaItaly
  11. 11.U.O.ReumatologiaASL Taranto-PP.OO.SS. Annunziata Taranto e Valle d’ItriaTarantoItaly

Personalised recommendations