Disease Management and Health Outcomes

, Volume 10, Issue 1, pp 17–39

Management of Rheumatoid Arthritis

Defining the Role of Etanercept
Drugs in Disease Management

Abstract

Rheumatoid arthritis is associated with substantial costs to both the individual and society; costs increase as disease severity worsens. Current thinking is that disease-modifying antirheumatic drug (DMARD) therapy should be started as soon as possible after the diagnosis of rheumatoid arthritis and that patients should be offered the most effective treatment available.

Etanercept is a soluble dimeric fusion protein comprising two copies of the extracellular ligand-binding domain of the human p75 receptor for tumour necrosis factor-α (TNFα) linked to the constant portion of human immunoglobulin G1. TNFα is thought to play an important role in the pathophysiology of rheumatoid arthritis; by binding the cytokine, etanercept blocks its biologic effects.

In a 12-month double-blind, randomized study involving patients with early active rheumatoid arthritis, administration of subcutaneous etanercept 25mg twice weekly was associated with a more rapid and significantly greater overall response (assessed using American College of Rheumatology criteria) than oral methotrexate. In addition, compared with methotrexate, etanercept was associated with more rapid slowing of radiographic progression and a more rapid improvement in measures of health-related quality of life. The efficacy of etanercept was maintained at 3 years’ follow-up.

Etanercept, alone or in combination with methotrexate, also showed sustained efficacy in three double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled studies of 3 to 6 months’ duration involving patients with active rheumatoid arthritis who had not responded adequately to previous treatment with DMARDs.

Etanercept was generally well tolerated in clinical trials (the most commonly occurring adverse events included injection site reactions, infection, headache, nausea, rhinitis, dizziness, pharyngitis and cough).

The high cost of etanercept relative to traditional DMARDs may be justified if it can be shown to reduce long-term outcomes associated with rheumatoid arthritis, thereby reducing disease costs.

Conclusion: Etanercept is an important new treatment option in rheumatoid arthritis. It provides a rapid and sustained reduction in disease activity and inhibits the progression of structural damage in patients with early active rheumatoid arthritis, with good tolerability. The improvement in disease activity and slowing of joint damage seen with etanercept was more rapid than that seen with methotrexate. In addition, etanercept, alone or in combination with methotrexate, is effective in the treatment of patients with active rheumatoid arthritis who have not responded adequately to previous DMARD therapy. It is anticipated that etanercept may also improve the long-term outcome of patients with rheumatoid arthritis and reduce the substantial economic burden imposed by the disease; however, more long-term data are needed to establish this.

References

  1. 1.
    Immunex Corporation, Wyeth-Ayerst Pharmaceuticals. Enbrel® (etanercept) prescribing information. Available from http://www.immunex.com [Accessed 2001 Sep 10].
  2. 2.
    European Agency for the Evaluation of Medicinal Products. Etanercept: summary of product characteristics. Available from http://www.emea.eu [Accessed 2001 Oct 1].
  3. 3.
    Lovell DJ, Giannini EH, Reiff A, et al. Etanercept in children with polyarticular juvenile rheumatoid arthritis. Pediatric Rheumatology Collaborative Study Group. N Engl J Med 2000; 342: 763–9.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Wyeth. FDA assigns priority review status to ENBREL® (etanercept) sBLA for treatment of psoriatic arthritis [media release]. Available from http://www.wyeth.com [Accessed 2001 Sep 28].
  5. 5.
    Jarvis B, Faulds D. Etanercept: a review of its use in rheumatoid arthritis. Drugs 1999; 57: 945–66.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Nichol MB, Harada ASM. Measuring the effects of medication use on health-related quality of life in patients with rheumatoid arthritis: a review. Pharmacoeconomics 1999; 16: 433–48.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Akil M, Amos RS. ABC of rheumatology: rheumatoid arthritis: clinical features and diagnosis. BMJ 1995 Mar 4; 310: 587–90.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Grassi W, De Angelis R, Lamanna G, et al. The clinical features of rheumatoid arthritis. Eur J Radiol 1998; 27 (Suppl. 1): 18–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Buckley CD. Science, medicine and the future: treatment of rheumatoid arthritis. BMJ 1997; 315: 236–8.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Pearce GJ, Chikanza IC. Targeting tumour necrosis factor in the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis. Biodrugs 2001; 15 (3): 139–49.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Kavanaugh A. An overview of immunomodulatory intervention in rheumatoid arthritis. Drugs Today 1999; 35: 275–86.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Choy EHS, Panayi GS. Cytokine pathways and joint inflammation in rheumatoid arthritis. N Engl J Med 2001; 344: 907–16.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Schulze-Koops H, Burkhardt H, Kalden JR. What we have learned from trials of immunomodulatory agents in rheumatoid arthritis: future directions. Drugs Today 1999; 35: 327–51.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Brennan FM, Maini RN, Feldmann M. Role of pro-inflammatory cytokines in rheumatoid arthritis. Springer Semin Immunpathol 1998; 20: 133–47.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Arend WP. Cytokine inhibition in the treatment of rheumatic and inflammatory diseases. Jpn J Rheumatol 1998; 8(4): 333–45.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Urbina-Joiro H, Cardiel MH, Alcocer-Varela J. Reclassifying the pathogenesis of rheumatoid arthritis: from the susceptibility to the degenerative stages. Clin Exp Rheumatol 1998; 16: 87–91.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Gabriel SE, Coyle D, Moreland LW. Clinical and economic review of diseasemodifying antirheumatic drugs. Pharmacoeconomics 2001; 19 (7): 715–28.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Emery P, Reginster JY, Appelboom T, et al. WHO Collaborating Centre consensus meeting on anti-cytokine therapy in rheumatoid arthritis. Rheumatology (Oxford) 2001; 40: 699–702.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Balsa A, Minaur NJ, Pascual-Salcedo D, et al. Class II MHC antigens in early rheumatoid arthritis in Bath (UK) and Madrid (Spain). Rheumatology (Oxford) 2000; 39: 844–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Wiles N, Symmons DP, Harrison B, et al. Estimating the incidence of rheumatoid arthritis: trying to hit a moving target? Arthritis Rheum 1999; 42: 1339–46.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Uhlig T, Kvien TK, Glennås A, et al. The incidence and severity of rheumatoid arthritis. Results from a county register in Oslo, Norway. J Rheumatol 1998; 25: 1078–84.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Alarcon GS. Epidemiology of rheumatoid arthritis. Rheum Dis Clin North Am 1995; 21: 589–604.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Rooney BK, Silman AJ. Epidemiology of the rheumatic diseases. Curr Opin Rheumatol 1999; 11: 91–7.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Karlson EW, Lee IM, Cook NR, et al. A retrospective cohort study of cigarette smoking and risk of rheumatoid arthritis in female health professionals. Arthritis Rheum 1999; 42: 910–7.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Vandenbroucke JP, Valkenburg HA, Boersma JW, et al. Oral contraceptives and rheumatoid arthritis: further evidence for a preventive effect. Lancet 1982; 2: 839–42.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    van Zeben D, Hazes JM, Vandenbroucke JP, et al. Diminished incidence of severe rheumatoid arthritis associated with oral contraceptive use. Arthritis Rheum 1990; 33: 1462–5.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Spector TD, Roman E, Silman AJ. The pill, parity, and rheumatoid arthritis. Arthritis Rheum 1990; 33: 782–9.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Romieu I, Hernandez-Avila M, Liang MH. Oral contraceptives and the risk of rheumatoid arthritis: a meta-analysis of a conflicting literature. Br J Rheumatol 1989; 28 Suppl: 13–7.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Hernandez-Avila M, Liang MH, Willett WC, et al. Exogenous sex hormones and the risk of rheumatoid arthritis. Arthritis Rheum 1990; 33: 947–53.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Barrett JH, Brennan P, Fiddler M, et al. Breast-feeding and postpartum relapse in women with rheumatoid and inflammatory arthritis. Arthritis Rheum 2000; 43: 1010–5.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Brun JG, Nilssen S, Kvåle G. Breast feeding, other reproductive factors and rheumatoid arthritis. Aprospective study. Br J Rheumatol 1995; 34: 542–6.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Hazes JMW, Dijkmans BAC, Vandenbroucke JP, et al. Pregnancy and the risk of developing rheumatoid arthritis. Arthritis Rheum 1990; 33: 1770–5.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Heliövaara M, Aho K, Reunanen A, et al. Parity and risk of rheumatoid arthritis in Finnish women. Br J Rheumatol 1995; 34: 625–8.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Silman AJ, Newman J, MacGregor AJ. Cigarette smoking increases the risk of rheumatoid arthritis. Arthritis Rheum 1996; 39: 732–5.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Symmons DP, Bankhead CR, Harrison BJ, et al. Blood transfusion, smoking, and obesity as risk factors for the development of rheumatoid arthritis: results from a primary care-based incident case-control study in Norfolk, England. Arthritis Rheum 1997; 40: 1955–61.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Toussirot E, Auge B, Tiberghien P, et al. HLA-DRB1 alleles and shared amino acid sequences in disease susceptibility and severity in patients from eastern France with rheumatoid arthritis. J Rheumatol 1999; 26: 1446–51.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Gregersen PK, Silver J, Winchester RJ. The shared epitope hypothesis. An approach to understanding the molecular genetics of susceptibility to rheumatoid arthritis. Arthritis Rheum 1987 Nov; 30 (11): 1205–13.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Harrison B, Thomson W, Symmons D, et al. The influence of HLA-DRB1 alleles and rheumatoid factor on disease outcome in an inception cohort of patients with early inflammatory arthritis. Arthritis Rheum 1999; 42: 2174–83.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Thomson W, Harrison B, Ollier B, et al. Quantifying the exact role of HLA-DRB1 alleles in susceptibility to inflammatory polyarthritis. Arthritis Rheum 1999 Apr; 42 (4): 757–62.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Perdriger A, Guggenbuhl P, Chalès G, et al. Positive association of the HLA DMBl*0101-0101 genotype with rheumatoid arthritis. Rheumatology (Oxford) 1999; 38: 448–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Weyand CM, Hicok KC, Conn DL, et al. The influence of HLA-DRB1 genes on disease severity in rheumatoid arthritis. Ann Intern Med 1992 Nov 15; 117 (10): 801–6.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Kim JM, Weisman MH. When does rheumatoid arthritis begin and why do we need to know? Arthritis Rheum 2000; 43: 473–84.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Scott DL, Pugner K, Kaarela K, et al. The links between joint damage and disability in rheumatoid arthritis. Rheumatology (Oxford) 2000; 39: 122–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Welsing PMJ, van Gestel AM, Swinkels HL, et al. The relationship between disease activity, joint destruction, and functional capacity over the course of rheumatoid arthritis. Arthritis Rheum 2001 Sep; 44 (9): 2009–17.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Kremer JM. Rational use of new and existing disease-modifying agents in rheumatoid arthritis. Ann Intern Med 2001 Apr 17; 134: 695–706.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    van der Heijde DM, van Leeuwen MA, van Riel PL, et al. Biannual radiographic assessments of hands and feet in a three-year prospective followup of patients with early rheumatoid arthritis. Arthritis Rheum 1992; 35: 26–34.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. 47.
    Young A, Dixey J, Cox N, et al. How does functional disability in early rheumatoid arthritis (RA) affect patients and their lives? Results of 5 years follow-up in 732 patients from the Early RA Study (ERAS). Rheumatology (Oxford) 2000: 603–11.Google Scholar
  48. 48.
    Pincus T Long-term outcomes in rheumatoid arthritis. Br J Rheumatol 1995 Nov; 34: 59–73.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. 49.
    Pope RM. Rheumatoid arthritis: pathogenesis and early recognition. Am J Med 1996 Feb 26; 100 (Suppl. 2A): 3S–9S.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. 50.
    Scott DL, Symmons DPM, Coulton BL, et al. Long-term outcome of treating rheumatoid arthritis: results after 20 years. Lancet 1987 May 16; 1: 1108–11.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. 51.
    Guedes C, Dumont-Fischer D, Leichter-Nakache S, et al. Mortality in rheumatoid arthritis. Rev Rhum — Engl Ed: Joint, Bone, Spine Diseases 1999; 66: 492–8.Google Scholar
  52. 52.
    Pincus T. The underestimated long term medical and economic consequences of rheumatoid arthritis. Drugs 1995; 50: 1–14.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. 53.
    Symmons DPM, Jones MA, Scott DL, et al. Longterm mortality outcome in patients with rheumatoid arthritis: early presenters continue to do well. J Rheumatol 1998; 25 (6): 1072–7.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  54. 54.
    Krause D, Schleusser B, Herborn G, et al. Response to methotrexate treatment is associated with reduced mortality in patients with severe rheumatoid arthritis. Arthritis Rheum 2000 Jan; 43 (1): 14–21.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. 55.
    Wolfe F, Lane NE. RA patients who improve during the first year of rheumatology treatment have decreased long-term mortality [abstract]. Arthritis Rheum 2000 Sep; 43 (Suppl. 9): 183.Google Scholar
  56. 56.
    Magnusson S. Treatment of rheumatoid arthritis—does it affect society’s cost for the disease? Br J Rheumatol 1996; 35: 791–5.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. 57.
    Clarke AE, Zowall H, Levinton C, et al. Direct and indirect medical costs incurred by Canadian patients with rheumatoid arthritis: a 12 year study. J Rheumatol 1997; 24: 1051–60.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  58. 58.
    Lanes SF, Lanza LL, Radensky PW, et al. Resource utilization and cost of care for rheumatoid arthritis and osteoarthritis in a managed care setting: the importance of drug and surgery costs. Arthritis Rheum 1997; 40: 1475–81.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. 59.
    Cooper NJ. Economic burden of rheumatoid arthritis: a systematic review. Rheumatology (Oxford) 2000; 39: 28–33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. 60.
    Lubeck DP, Spitz PW, Fries JF, et al. A multicenter study of annual health service utilization and costs in rheumatoid arthritis. Arthritis Rheum 1986; 29: 488–93.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. 61.
    Yelin E, Wanke LA. An assessment of the annual and long-term direct costs of rheumatoid arthritis: the impact of poor function and functional decline. Arthritis Rheum 1999; 42: 1209–18.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. 62.
    Yelin E. The costs of rheumatoid arthritis: absolute, incremental, and marginal estimates. J Rheumatol 1996; 23: 47–51.Google Scholar
  63. 63.
    Liang MH, Larson M, Thompson M, et al. Costs and outcomes in rheumatoid arthritis and osteoarthritis. Arthritis Rheum 1984; 27: 522–9.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. 64.
    Prashker MJ, Meenan RF The total costs of drug therapy for rheumatoid arthritis: a model based on costs of drug, monitoring, and toxicity. Arthritis Rheum 1995; 38: 318–25.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. 65.
    Cooper NJ, Mugford M, Scott DGI, et al. Secondary health service care and second line drugs costs of early inflammatory polyarthritis in Norfolk, UK. J Rheumatol 2000; 27 (9): 2115–22.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  66. 66.
    Mclntosh E. The cost of rheumatoid arthritis. Br J Rheumatol 1996; 35: 781–90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. 67.
    Merkesdal S, Ruof J, Schöffski O, et al. Indirect medical costs in early rheumatoid arthritis: composition of and changes in indirect costs within the first three years of disease. Arthritis Rheum 2001 Mar; 44 (3): 528–34.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. 68.
    Allaire SH, Prashker MJ, Meenan RF. The costs of rheumatoid arthritis. Pharmacoeconomics 1994; 6: 513–22.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. 69.
    van Jaarsveld CH, Jacobs JWG, Schrijvers AJ, et al. Direct cost of rheumatoid arthritis during the first six years: a cost-of-illness study. Br J Rheumatol 1998; 37: 837–47.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. 70.
    Kobelt G, Eberhardt K, Jonsson L, et al. Economic consequences of the progression of rheumatoid arthritis in Sweden. Arthritis Rheum 1999; 42: 347–56.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. 71.
    Wolfe F, Rehman Q, Lane NE, et al. Starting a disease modifying antirheumatic drug or a biologic agent in rheumatoid arthritis: standards of practice for RA treatment. J Rheumatol 2001; 28 (7): 1704–11.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  72. 72.
    American College of Rheumatology Ad Hoc Committee on Clinical Guidelines. Guidelines for the management of rheumatoid arthritis. Arthritis Rheum 1996 May; 39 (5): 713–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  73. 73.
    Wolfe F, Cush JJ, O’Dell JR, et al. Consensus recommendations for the assessment and treatment of rheumatoid arthritis. J Rheumatol 2001 Jun; 28: 1423–30.Google Scholar
  74. 74.
    Tsakonas E, Fitzgerald AA, Fitzcharles M-A, et al. Consequences of delayed therapy with second-line agents in rheumatoid arthritis: a 3 year follow-up on the hydroxychloroquine in early rheumatoid arthritis (HERA) study. J Rheumatol 2000; 27 (3): 623–9.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  75. 75.
    Amgen Inc.. FDA approves Kineret™ for the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis. Available from http://www.amgen.com [Accessed 2001 Dec 3].
  76. 76.
    Amgen Inc.. Kineret™ (anakinra) prescribing information Available from http://www.amgen.com [Accessed 2001 Dec 3].
  77. 77.
    American College of Rheumatology Ad Hoc Committee On Clinical Guidelines. Guidelines for monitoring drug therapy in rheumatoid arthritis. Arthritis Rheum 1996; 39: 723–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  78. 78.
    Markham A, Lamb HM. Infliximab: a review of its use in the management of rheumatoid arthritis. Drugs 2000; 59: 1341–59.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  79. 79.
    Prakash A, Jarvis B. Leflunomide: a review of its use in active rheumatoid arthritis. Drugs 1999; 58: 1137–64.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  80. 80.
    European Agency for the Evaluation of Medicinal Products. EMEA public statement on leflunomide (Arava) — severe and serious hepatic reactions [media release]. Available from http://www.emea.eu.int [Accessed 2001 Oct 1].
  81. 81.
    European Agency for the Evaluation of Medicinal Products. Leflunomide: summary of product characteristics. Available from http://www.emea.eu.int [Accessed 2001 Nov 19].
  82. 82.
    Centocor I. Remicade® infliximab recombinant for IV injection. Available from http://www.centocor.com [Accessed 2001 Sep 14].
  83. 83.
    European Agency for Evaluation of Medicinal Products. Infliximab: summary of product characteristics. Available from http://www.emea.eu.int [Accessed 2001 Oct 5].
  84. 84.
    Furst DE, Breedveld FC, Burmester GR, et al. Access to disease modifying treatments for rheumatoid arthritis patients. Ann Rheum Dis 1999; 58 (Suppl. 1): 129–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  85. 85.
    Furst DE, Breedveld FC, Burmester GR, et al. Updated consensus statement on tumour necrosis factor blocking agents for the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis. Ann Rheum Dis 2000 May; 59 (Suppl. 1): 1–2.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  86. 86.
    Smolen JS, Breedveld FC, Burmester GR, et al. Consensus statement on the initiation and continuation of tumour necrosis factor blocking therapies in rheumatoid arthritis. Ann Rheum Dis 2000 Jul; 59 (7): 504–5.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  87. 87.
    Working Party of the British Society for Rheumatology. Guidelines for prescribing TNF-α blockers in adults with rheumatoid arthritis. Available from http://www.rheumatology.org.uk [Accessed 2001 Sep 5].
  88. 88.
    Moreland LW, Russell AS, Paulus HE. Management of rheumatoid arthritis: the historical context. J Rheumatol 2001; 28 (6): 1431–52.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  89. 89.
    Matteson EL. Current treatment strategies for rheumatoid arthritis. Mayo Clin Proc 2000; 75: 69–74.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  90. 90.
    Richard-Miceli C, Dougados M. Tumour necrosis factor-α blockers in rheumatoid arthritis: review of the clinical experience. Biodrugs 2001; 15 (4): 251–9.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  91. 91.
    Hughes LB, Moreland LW. New therapeutic approaches to the management of rheumatoid arthritis. Biodrugs 2001; 15 (6): 379–93.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  92. 92.
    Bathon JM, Martin RW, Fleischmann RM, et al. A comparison of etanercept and methotrexate in patients with early rheumatoid arthritis. N Engl J Med 2000; 343: 1586–93.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  93. 93.
    Felson DT, Anderson JJ, Boers M, et al. American College of Rheumatology preliminary definition of improvement in rheumatoid arthritis. Arthritis Rheum 1995; 38: 727–35.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  94. 94.
    Spencer-Green G, Genovese M, Martin RW, et al. Enbrel® (etanercept) vs. methotrexate (MTX) in early rheumatoid arthritis (ERA trial): two-year follow-up [abstract]. J Rheumatol 2001 Jul; 28 Suppl. 63: 106.Google Scholar
  95. 95.
    Genovese M, Martin R, Fleischmann R, et al. Etanercept (Enbrel®) in early erosive rheumatoid arthritis (ERA trial): observations at 3 years [abstract]. Arthritis Rheum 2001 Sep; 44 (Suppl. 9): 78.Google Scholar
  96. 96.
    Moreland LW, Baumgartner SW, Schiff MH, et al. Treatment of rheumatoid arthritis with a recombinant human tumor necrosis factor receptor (p75)-Fc fusion protein. N Engl J Med 1997; 337: 141–7.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  97. 97.
    Moreland LW, Schiff MH, Baumgartner SW, et al. Etanercept therapy in rheumatoid arthritis: a randomized, controlled study. Ann Intern Med 1999; 130: 478–86.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  98. 98.
    Weinblatt ME, Kremer JM, Bankhurst AD, et al. A trial of etanercept, a recombinant tumor necrosis factor receptor: Fc fusion protein, in patients with rheumatoid arthritis receiving methotrexate. N Engl J Med 1999; 340: 253–9.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  99. 99.
    Hochberg MC, Chang RW, Dwosh I, et al. American College of Rheumatology 1991 revised criteria for the classification of global functional status in rheumatoid arthritis. Arthritis Rheum 1992; 35: 498–502.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  100. 100.
    Moreland LW, Cohen SB, Baumgartner SW, et al. Longterm safety and efficacy of etanercept in patients with rheumatoid arthritis. J Rheumatol 2001 Jun; 28 (6): 1238–44.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  101. 101.
    Baumgartner SW, Moreland LW, Cohen SB, et al. Long-term use of Enbrel® (etanercept) in patients with DMARD-refractory rheumatoid arthritis. J Rheumatol 2001 Jul; 28 (Suppl. 63): 106.Google Scholar
  102. 102.
    Burge D J, Weinblatt M E, Kremer J M, et al. Enbrel® (etanercept) in addition to methotrexate (MTX) in rheumatoid arthritis (RA): long-term observations [abstract]. J Rheumatol 2001 Jul; 28 (Suppl. 63): 106.Google Scholar
  103. 103.
    Baghai M, Osmon DR, Wolk DM, et al. Fatal sepsis in a patient with rheumatoid arthritis treated with etanercept. Mayo Clin Proc 2001 Jun; 76 (6): 653–6.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  104. 104.
    Wallis WJ, Burge DJ, Holman J, et al. Infection reports with etanercept (Enbrel®) therapy [abstract]. Arthritis Rheum 2001 Sep; 44 Suppl. 9: 78.Google Scholar
  105. 105.
    Wallis WJ, Burge DJ, Sabath M, et al. Tuberculosis reports with etanercept (Enbrel®) therapy [abstract]. Arthritis Rheum 2001 Sep; 44 Suppl. 9: 78.Google Scholar
  106. 106.
    Zeltser R, Valle L, Tanck C, et al. Clinical, histological, and immunophenotypic characteristics of injection site reactions associated with etanercept: a recombinant tumor necrosis factorα receptor: Fc fusion protein ENG. Arch Dermatol 2001 Jul; 137 (7): 893–9.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  107. 107.
    Mohan N, Edwards ET, Cupps TR, et al. Demyelination diagnosed during etanercept (TNF receptor fusion protein) therapy [abstract]. Arthritis Rheum 2000 Sep; 43: 228.Google Scholar
  108. 108.
    European Agency for the Evaluation of Medicinal Products. Revised EMEA public statement on etanercept (Enbrel) — serious hematological reactions and demyelination disorders. Available from http://www.emea.eu.int [Accessed 2001 Oct 21].
  109. 109.
    Bury-Maynard D, Kosinski M, Wanke LA, et al. Comparing the health related quality of life outcomes of treatment for early rheumatoid arthritis [abstract]. Value Health 2000; 3: 97.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  110. 110.
    Yelin E, Katz P, Lubeck D, et al. Impact of etanercept (Enbrel®) on health care use and employment in early RA [abstract]. Arthritis Rheum 2001 Sep; 44 (Suppl. 9): 152.Google Scholar
  111. 111.
    Baumgartner SW, Fleischmann RM, Moreland LW, et al. Improvement of disability in RA patients with early vs established disease after treatment with Enbrel®. Journal of Rheumatology 2001; 28 Suppl. 63: 106.Google Scholar
  112. 112.
    Choi HK, Seeger JD, Kuntz KM. A cost-effectiveness analysis of treatment options for patients with methotrexate [MTX]-naive rheumatoid arthritis [abstract]. Arthritis Rheum 2000 Sep; 43: 389.Google Scholar
  113. 113.
    Mathias SD, Colwell HH, Miller DP, et al. Health-related quality of life and functional status of patients with rheumatoid arthritis randomly assigned to receive etanercept or placebo. Clin Ther 2000; 22: 128–39.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  114. 114.
    Yelin E, Roepke L, Katz P, et al. Long-term impact of Enbrel on functional status of persons with RA [abstract]. Arthritis Rheum 2000 Sep; 43: 147.Google Scholar
  115. 115.
    Choi HK, Seeger JD, Kuntz KM. A cost-effectiveness analysis of treatment options for patients with methotrexate-resistant rheumatoid arthritis. Arthritis Rheum 2000 Oct; 43 (10): 2316–27.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  116. 116.
    Nuijten MJC, Engelfriet P, Duijn K, et al. A cost-cost study comparing etanercept with infliximab in rheumatoid arthritis. Pharmacoeconomics 2001; 19 (10): 1051–64.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  117. 117.
    Malone DC. Cost-effectiveness analysis of etanercept monotherapy versus infliximab plus methotrexate in the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis [abstract]. Arthritis Rheum 2001 Sep; 44 (Suppl. 9): 322.Google Scholar
  118. 118.
    Brennan A, Bansback N, Conway P, et al. Modelling the cost-effectiveness of etanercept in adults with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) in the UK [abstract]. Arthritis Rheum 2001 Sep; 44 (Suppl. 9): 157.Google Scholar
  119. 119.
    Fleischmann RM. Early diagnosis and treatment of rheumatoid arthritis for improved outcomes: focus on etanercept, a new biologic response modifier. Clin Ther 1999; 21: 1429–42.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  120. 120.
    van der Heide A, Jacobs JWG, Bijlsma JWJ, et al. The effectiveness of early treatment with “second-line” antirheumatic drugs. Ann Intern Med 1996 Apr 15; 124 (8): 699–707.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  121. 121.
    Egsmose C, Lund B, Borg G, et al. Patients with rheumatoid arthritis benefit from early 2nd line therapy: 5 year followup of a prospective double blind placebo controlled study. J Rheumatol 1995; 22 (12): 2208–13.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  122. 122.
    Anderson JJ, Wells G, Verhoeven AC, et al. Factors predicting response to treatment in rheumatoid arthritis: the importance of disease duration. Arthritis Rheum 2000; 43: 22–9.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  123. 123.
    Albers JMC, Paimela L, Kurki P, et al. Treatment strategy, disease activity, and outcome in four cohorts of patients with early rheumatoid arthritis. Ann Rheum Dis 2001; 60: 453–8.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  124. 124.
    Kalden JR. How do the biologics fit into the current DMARD armamentarium? J Rheumatol 2001 Jun; 28 (Suppl. 62): 27–35.Google Scholar
  125. 125.
    Pincus T, Marcum SB, Callahan LF. Longterm drug therapy for rheumatoid arthritis in seven rheumatology private practices: II. Second line drugs and prednisone. J Rheumatol 1992; 19 (12): 1885–94.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  126. 126.
    Galindo-Rodriguez G, Avina-Zubieta JA, Russell AS, et al. Disappointing longterm results with disease modifying antirheumatic drugs. A practice based study. J Rheumatol 1999; 26 (11): 2337–43.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  127. 127.
    Maetzel A, Wong A, Strand V, et al. Meta-analysis of treatment termination rates among rheumatoid arthritis patients receiving disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs. Rheumatology (Oxford) 2000; 39: 975–81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  128. 128.
    Maini R, St Clair EW, Breedveld F, et al. Infliximab (chimeric anti-tumour necrosis factor a monoclonal antibody) versus placebo in rheumatoid arthritis patients receiving concomitant methotrexate: a randomised phase III trial. Lancet 1999 Dec 4; 354: 1932–9.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  129. 129.
    Lipsky PE, van der Heijde DMFM, St Clair EW, et al. Infliximab and methotrexate in the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis. N Engl J Med 2000 Nov 30; 343 (22): 1594–602.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  130. 130.
    Keane J, Gershon S, Wise RP, et al. Tuberculosis associated with infliximab, a tumor necrosis factorα-neutralizing agent. N Engl J Med 2001 Oct 11; 345 (15): 1098–104.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  131. 131.
    Etanercept and infliximab for rheumatoid arthritis. Drug Ther Bull 2001 Jul; 39 (7): 49–52.Google Scholar
  132. 132.
    Gallup E. Coverage inequalities of new therapies for rheumatoid arthritis in a managed care setting. Manag Care Interface 2001 Jul; 14 (7): 52–457869.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  133. 133.
    Bresnihan B, Alvaro-Gracia JM, Cobby M, et al. Treatment of rheumatoid arthritis with recombinant human interleukin-1 receptor antagonist. Arthritis Rheum 1998 Dec; 41 (12): 2196–204.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  134. 134.
    Jiang Y, Genant HK, Watt I, et al. A multicenter, double-blind, dose-ranging, randomized, placebo-controlled study of recombinant human interleukin-1 receptor antagonist in patients with rheumatoid arthritis. Arthritis Rheum 2000 May; 43 (5): 1001–9.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  135. 135.
    O’Dell JR. TNF-α inhibition: the need for a tumor necrosis factor thermostat. Mayo Clin Proc 2001 Jun; 76 (6): 573–5.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  136. 136.
    Hochberg MC. Early aggressive DMARD therapy: the key to slowing disease progression in rheumatoid arthritis. Scand J Rheumatol 1999; 112 Suppl.: 3–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  137. 137.
    Emery P. Early rheumatoid arthritis: therapeutic strategies. Scand J Rheumatol 1994; 23 (Suppl. 100): 3–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  138. 138.
    van Zeben D, Hazes JMW, Zwinderman AH, et al. Factors predicting outcome of rheumatoid arthritis: results of a followup study. J Rheumatol 1993; 20 (8): 1288–96.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  139. 139.
    van Zeben D, Breedveld FC. Prognostic factors in rheumatoid arthritis. J Rheumatol 1996; 23 Suppl. 44: 31–2.Google Scholar
  140. 140.
    Young A, van der Heijde DMFM. Can we predict aggressive disease? Baillieres Clin Rheumatol 1997 Feb; 11(1): 27–48.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  141. 141.
    Kvien TK, Uhlig T, Kristiansen IS. Criteria for TNF-targeted therapy in rheumatoid arthritis: estimates of the number of patients potentially eligible. Drugs 2001; 61 (12): 1711–20.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Adis International Limiteds 2002

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Adis International LimitedMairangi Bay, Auckland 10New Zealand

Personalised recommendations