Efficacy and safety of sarilumab monotherapy versus adalimumab monotherapy for the treatment of patients with active rheumatoid arthritis (MONARCH): a randomised, double-blind, parallel-group phase III trial
TL;DR: Sarilumabmonotherapy demonstrated superiority to adalimumab monotherapy by improving the signs and symptoms and physical functions in patients with RA who were unable to continue MTX treatment.
Abstract: Objectives To compare efficacy and safety of sarilumab monotherapy with adalimumab monotherapy in patients with active rheumatoid arthritis (RA) who should not continue treatment with methotrexate (MTX) due to intolerance or inadequate response. Methods MONARCH was a randomised, active-controlled, double-blind, double-dummy, phase III superiority trial. Patients received sarilumab (200 mg every 2 weeks (q2w)) or adalimumab (40 mg q2w) monotherapy for 24 weeks. The primary end point was change from baseline in 28-joint disease activity score using erythrocyte sedimentation rate (DAS28-ESR) at week 24. Results Sarilumab was superior to adalimumab in the primary end point of change from baseline in DAS28-ESR (−3.28 vs −2.20; p Conclusions Sarilumab monotherapy demonstrated superiority to adalimumab monotherapy by improving the signs and symptoms and physical functions in patients with RA who were unable to continue MTX treatment. The safety profiles of both therapies were consistent with anticipated class effects. Trial registration number NCT02332590.
Citations
More filters
TL;DR: A treat-to-target strategy aimed at reducing disease activity by at least 50% within 3 months and achieving remission or low disease activity within 6 months, with sequential drug treatment if needed, can prevent RA-related disability.
Abstract: Importance Rheumatoid arthritis (RA) occurs in about 5 per 1000 people and can lead to severe joint damage and disability. Significant progress has been made over the past 2 decades regarding understanding of disease pathophysiology, optimal outcome measures, and effective treatment strategies, including the recognition of the importance of diagnosing and treating RA early. Observations Early diagnosis and treatment of RA can avert or substantially slow progression of joint damage in up to 90% of patients, thereby preventing irreversible disability. The development of novel instruments to measure disease activity and identify the presence or absence of remission have facilitated new treatment strategies to arrest RA before joints are damaged irreversibly. Outcomes have been improved by recognizing the benefits of early diagnosis and early therapy with disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs). The treatment target is remission or a state of at least low disease activity, which should be attained within 6 months. Methotrexate is first-line therapy and should be prescribed at an optimal dose of 25 mg weekly and in combination with glucocorticoids; 40% to 50% of patients reach remission or at least low disease activity with this regimen. If this treatment fails, sequential application of targeted therapies, such as biologic agents (eg, tumor necrosis factor [TNF] inhibitors) or Janus kinase inhibitors in combination with methotrexate, have allowed up to 75% of these patients to reach the treatment target over time. New therapies have been developed in response to new pathogenetic findings. The costs of some therapies are considerable, but these costs are decreasing with the advent of biosimilar drugs (drugs essentially identical to the original biologic drugs but usually available at lower cost). Conclusions and relevance Scientific advances have improved therapies that prevent progression of irreversible joint damage in up to 90% of patients with RA. Early treatment with methotrexate plus glucocorticoids and subsequently with other DMARDs, such as inhibitors of TNF, IL-6, or Janus kinases, improves outcomes and prevents RA-related disability. A treat-to-target strategy aimed at reducing disease activity by at least 50% within 3 months and achieving remission or low disease activity within 6 months, with sequential drug treatment if needed, can prevent RA-related disability.
1,042 citations
TL;DR: New insights into the management of rheumatoid arthritis with targeted therapy approaches using classic and novel medications are described, and the potential effects of precision medicine in this challenging disease are outlined.
621 citations
TL;DR: The current state of IL-6-targeting approaches in the clinic is reviewed and how to apply the growing understanding of the immunobiology ofIL-6 to clinical decisions is discussed.
498 citations
TL;DR: The authors recount the earliest stages of translational research into IL-6 biology and the subsequent development of therapeutic IL- 6 pathway inhibitors for the treatment of autoimmune rheumatic diseases and potentially numerous other indications.
Abstract: In 1973, IL-6 was identified as a soluble factor that is secreted by T cells and is important for antibody production by B cells. Since its discovery more than 40 years ago, the IL-6 pathway has emerged as a pivotal pathway involved in immune regulation in health and dysregulation in many diseases. Targeting of the IL-6 pathway has led to innovative therapeutic approaches for various rheumatic diseases, such as rheumatoid arthritis, juvenile idiopathic arthritis, adult-onset Still's disease, giant cell arteritis and Takayasu arteritis, as well as other conditions such as Castleman disease and cytokine release syndrome. Targeting this pathway has also identified avenues for potential expansion into several other indications, such as uveitis, neuromyelitis optica and, most recently, COVID-19 pneumonia. To mark the tenth anniversary of anti-IL-6 receptor therapy worldwide, we discuss the history of research into IL-6 biology and the development of therapies that target IL-6 signalling, including the successes and challenges and with an emphasis on rheumatic diseases.
296 citations
Cites background from "Efficacy and safety of sarilumab mo..."
...Since tocilizumab was approved for RA, sarilumab, an alternative monoclonal antibody to IL-6R, has also demonstrated efficacy and safety and has been approved for the treatment of RA [73] [74] [75] ....
[...]
TL;DR: Clinical studies of IL-6 inhibitors, mainly tocilizumab, reveal that their use is associated with an increased rate of both serious and opportunistic infections generally in the range observed with other non-IL-6 directed biologic therapies.
Abstract: IL-6 is a pleiotropic cytokine with broad-ranging effects within the integrated immune response. One of the roles of IL-6 is to support immunocompetence, defined as the ability of a host to respond to infections. Understanding the precise role of this cytokine in immunocompetence requires a critical appraisal of data derived from both preclinical and clinical studies. Primary immunodeficiency diseases involving IL-6 or its signalling pathways reveal that IL-6 is critical in the defence against numerous types of pathogens. Studies of IL-6 signalling in preclinical models reveal that selective inhibition of either classic IL-6 signalling or IL-6 trans-signalling has differential effects on the host response to different types of infections. Knowledge of such variation might inform bioengineering of new IL-6-targeting molecules and potentially enable modulation of their toxicity. Clinical studies of IL-6 inhibitors, mainly tocilizumab, reveal that their use is associated with an increased rate of both serious and opportunistic infections generally in the range observed with other non-IL-6 directed biologic therapies. Targeting IL-6 has several other important clinical implications related to diagnosis, management and prevention of infectious diseases.
261 citations
References
More filters
Medical University of Vienna1, Boston University2, Arthritis Research UK3, Johns Hopkins University4, University of California, San Francisco5, Charité6, University of Toronto7, National Jewish Health8, Harvard University9, University of Paris10, University of Leeds11, Catholic University of the Sacred Heart12, Erasmus University Rotterdam13, University of Colorado Denver14, Leiden University15, University of California, San Diego16, University of Massachusetts Medical School17, University of Michigan18, University of Washington19, McGill University20, University of Pittsburgh21, Ministry of Health (New Zealand)22, New York University23, University of Manchester24, University of Amsterdam25
TL;DR: This new classification system redefines the current paradigm of RA by focusing on features at earlier stages of disease that are associated with persistent and/or erosive disease, rather than defining the disease by its late-stage features.
Abstract: Objective The 1987 American College of Rheumatology (ACR; formerly the American Rheumatism Association) classification criteria for rheumatoid arthritis (RA) have been criticised for their lack of sensitivity in early disease. This work was undertaken to develop new classification criteria for RA. Methods A joint working group from the ACR and the European League Against Rheumatism developed, in three phases, a new approach to classifying RA. The work focused on identifying, among patients newly presenting with undifferentiated inflammatory synovitis, factors that best discriminated between those who were and those who were not at high risk for persistent and/or erosive disease—this being the appropriate current paradigm underlying the disease construct ‘RA’. Results In the new criteria set, classification as ‘definite RA’ is based on the confirmed presence of synovitis in at least one joint, absence of an alternative diagnosis better explaining the synovitis, and achievement of a total score of 6 or greater (of a possible 10) from the individual scores in four domains: number and site of involved joints (range 0–5), serological abnormality (range 0–3), elevated acute-phase response (range 0–1) and symptom duration (two levels; range 0–1). Conclusion This new classification system redefines the current paradigm of RA by focusing on features at earlier stages of disease that are associated with persistent and/or erosive disease, rather than defining the disease by its late-stage features. This will refocus attention on the important need for earlier diagnosis and institution of effective disease-suppressing therapy to prevent or minimise the occurrence of the undesirable sequelae that currently comprise the paradigm underlying the disease construct ‘RA’.
5,964 citations
01 Jan 2011
TL;DR: Recommendations are intended to inform rheumatologists, patients and other stakeholders about a European consensus on the management of RA with DMARDs and GCs as well as strategies to reach optimal outcomes of RA based on evidence and expert opinion.
Abstract: Treatment of rheumatoid arthritis (RA) may differ among rheumatologists and currently, clear and consensual international recommendations on RA treatment are not available. In this paper recommendations for the treatment of RA with synthetic and biological disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs) and glucocorticoids (GCs) that also account for strategic algorithms and deal with economic aspects, are described. The recommendations are based on evidence from five systematic literature reviews (SLRs) performed for synthetic DMARDs, biological DMARDs, GCs, treatment strategies and economic issues. The SLR-derived evidence was discussed and summarised as an expert opinion in the course of a Delphi-like process. Levels of evidence, strength of recommendations and levels of agreement were derived. Fifteen recommendations were developed covering an area from general aspects such as remission/low disease activity as treatment aim via the preference for methotrexate monotherapy with or without GCs vis-à-vis combination of synthetic DMARDs to the use of biological agents mainly in patients for whom synthetic DMARDs and tumour necrosis factor inhibitors had failed. Cost effectiveness of the treatments was additionally examined. These recommendations are intended to inform rheumatologists, patients and other stakeholders about a European consensus on the management of RA with DMARDs and GCs as well as strategies to reach optimal outcomes of RA, based on evidence and expert opinion.
3,485 citations
TL;DR: In patients with persistently active rheumatoid arthritis despite methotrexate therapy, repeated doses of infliximab in combination with methotRexate provided clinical benefit and halted the progression of joint damage.
Abstract: Background Neutralization of tumor necrosis factor α (TNF-α) for three to six months reduces the symptoms and signs of rheumatoid arthritis. However, the capacity of this approach to effect a more sustained benefit and its effect on joint damage are not known. Methods We treated 428 patients who had active rheumatoid arthritis despite methotrexate therapy with placebo or infliximab, a chimeric monoclonal antibody against TNF-α, in intravenous doses of 3 or 10 mg per kilogram of body weight every 4 or 8 weeks in combination with oral methotrexate for 54 weeks. We assessed clinical responses with use of the criteria of the American College of Rheumatology, the quality of life with a health-status questionnaire, and the effect on joint damage radiographically. Results The combination of infliximab and methotrexate was well tolerated and resulted in a sustained reduction in the symptoms and signs of rheumatoid arthritis that was significantly greater than the reduction associated with methotrexate therapy alo...
3,060 citations
University of Alabama at Birmingham1, American University of Beirut2, Tufts Medical Center3, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center4, University of California, Los Angeles5, Washington University in St. Louis6, University of California, San Diego7, University of Nebraska Medical Center8, Mayo Clinic9, University of Minnesota10, NorthShore University HealthSystem11, Duke University12, American College of Rheumatology13
TL;DR: To develop a new evidence‐based, pharmacologic treatment guideline for rheumatoid arthritis (RA), a large number of patients with RA are referred to a single clinic for treatment with these medications.
Abstract: Objective
To develop a new evidence-based, pharmacologic treatment guideline for rheumatoid arthritis (RA).
Methods
We conducted systematic reviews to synthesize the evidence for the benefits and harms of various treatment options. We used the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) methodology to rate the quality of evidence. We employed a group consensus process to grade the strength of recommendations (either strong or conditional). A strong recommendation indicates that clinicians are certain that the benefits of an intervention far outweigh the harms (or vice versa). A conditional recommendation denotes uncertainty over the balance of benefits and harms and/or more significant variability in patient values and preferences.
Results
The guideline covers the use of traditional disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs), biologic agents, tofacitinib, and glucocorticoids in early (<6 months) and established (≥6 months) RA. In addition, it provides recommendations on using a treat-to-target approach, tapering and discontinuing medications, and the use of biologic agents and DMARDs in patients with hepatitis, congestive heart failure, malignancy, and serious infections. The guideline addresses the use of vaccines in patients starting/receiving DMARDs or biologic agents, screening for tuberculosis in patients starting/receiving biologic agents or tofacitinib, and laboratory monitoring for traditional DMARDs. The guideline includes 74 recommendations: 23% are strong and 77% are conditional.
Conclusion
This RA guideline should serve as a tool for clinicians and patients (our two target audiences) for pharmacologic treatment decisions in commonly encountered clinical situations. These recommendations are not prescriptive, and the treatment decisions should be made by physicians and patients through a shared decision-making process taking into account patients’ values, preferences, and comorbidities. These recommendations should not be used to limit or deny access to therapies.
2,083 citations
TL;DR: Subcutaneous [corrected] etanercept acted more rapidly to decrease symptoms and slow joint damage in patients with early active rheumatoid arthritis.
Abstract: Background Etanercept, which blocks the action of tumor necrosis factor, reduces disease activity in patients with long-standing rheumatoid arthritis. Its efficacy in reducing disease activity and preventing joint damage in patients with active early rheumatoid arthritis is unknown. Methods We treated 632 patients with early rheumatoid arthritis with either twice-weekly subcutaneous etanercept (10 or 25 mg) or weekly oral methotrexate (mean, 19 mg per week) for 12 months. Clinical response was defined as the percent improvement in disease activity according to the criteria of the American College of Rheumatology. Bone erosion and joint-space narrowing were measured radiographically and scored with use of the Sharp scale. On this scale, an increase of 1 point represents one new erosion or minimal narrowing. Results As compared with patients who received methotrexate, patients who received the 25-mg dose of etanercept had a more rapid rate of improvement, with significantly more patients having 20 percent, ...
1,789 citations