Active conventional treatment and three different biological treatments in early rheumatoid arthritis: phase IV investigator initiated, randomised, observer blinded clinical trial.
Cast your vote
You can rate an item by clicking the amount of stars they wish to award to this item.
When enough users have cast their vote on this item, the average rating will also be shown.
Your vote was cast
Thank you for your feedback
Thank you for your feedback
AuthorsHetland, Merete Lund
Haavardsholm, Espen A
Heiberg, Marte S
Hyldstrup, Lise Hejl
Hultgård Ekwall, Anna-Karin
Grøn, Kathrine Lederballe
Ljoså, Maud-Kristine Aga
Olsson, Åsa Reckner
Just, Søren Andreas
Stevens, David John
Laurberg, Trine Bay
Olsen, Inge C
van Vollenhoven, Ronald
MetadataShow full item record
CitationHetland ML, Haavardsholm EA, Rudin A, Nordström D, Nurmohamed M, Gudbjornsson B, et al. Active conventional treatment and three different biological treatments in early rheumatoid arthritis: phase IV investigator initiated, randomised, observer blinded clinical trial. BMJ (Clinical research ed). 2020;371:m4328.doi:10.1136/bmj.m4328.
AbstractObjective: To evaluate and compare benefits and harms of three biological treatments with different modes of action versus active conventional treatment in patients with early rheumatoid arthritis. Design: Investigator initiated, randomised, open label, blinded assessor, multiarm, phase IV study. Setting: Twenty nine rheumatology departments in Sweden, Denmark, Norway, Finland, the Netherlands, and Iceland between 2012 and 2018. Participants: Patients aged 18 years and older with treatment naive rheumatoid arthritis, symptom duration less than 24 months, moderate to severe disease activity, and rheumatoid factor or anti-citrullinated protein antibody positivity, or increased C reactive protein. Interventions: Randomised 1:1:1:1, stratified by country, sex, and anti-citrullinated protein antibody status. All participants started methotrexate combined with (a) active conventional treatment (either prednisolone tapered to 5 mg/day, or sulfasalazine combined with hydroxychloroquine and intra-articular corticosteroids), (b) certolizumab pegol, (c) abatacept, or (d) tocilizumab. Main outcome measures: The primary outcome was adjusted clinical disease activity index remission (CDAI≤2.8) at 24 weeks with active conventional treatment as the reference. Key secondary outcomes and analyses included CDAI remission at 12 weeks and over time, other remission criteria, a non-inferiority analysis, and harms. Results: 812 patients underwent randomisation. The mean age was 54.3 years (standard deviation 14.7) and 68.8% were women. Baseline disease activity score of 28 joints was 5.0 (standard deviation 1.1). Adjusted 24 week CDAI remission rates were 42.7% (95% confidence interval 36.1% to 49.3%) for active conventional treatment, 46.5% (39.9% to 53.1%) for certolizumab pegol, 52.0% (45.5% to 58.6%) for abatacept, and 42.1% (35.3% to 48.8%) for tocilizumab. Corresponding absolute differences were 3.9% (95% confidence interval -5.5% to 13.2%) for certolizumab pegol, 9.4% (0.1% to 18.7%) for abatacept, and -0.6% (-10.1% to 8.9%) for tocilizumab. Key secondary outcomes showed no major differences among the four treatments. Differences in CDAI remission rates for active conventional treatment versus certolizumab pegol and tocilizumab, but not abatacept, remained within the prespecified non-inferiority margin of 15% (per protocol population). The total number of serious adverse events was 13 (percentage of patients who experienced at least one event 5.6%) for active conventional treatment, 20 (8.4%) for certolizumab pegol, 10 (4.9%) for abatacept, and 10 (4.9%) for tocilizumab. Eleven patients treated with abatacept stopped treatment early compared with 20-23 patients in the other arms. Conclusions: All four treatments achieved high remission rates. Higher CDAI remission rate was observed for abatacept versus active conventional treatment, but not for certolizumab pegol or tocilizumab versus active conventional treatment. Other remission rates were similar across treatments. Non-inferiority analysis indicated that active conventional treatment was non-inferior to certolizumab pegol and tocilizumab, but not to abatacept. The results highlight the efficacy and safety of active conventional treatment based on methotrexate combined with corticosteroids, with nominally better results for abatacept, in treatment naive early rheumatoid arthritis.
DescriptionTo access publisher's full text version of this article, please click on the hyperlink in Additional Links field or click on the hyperlink at the top of the page marked Download
Rights© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2019. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.
- Head-to-head comparison of aggressive conventional therapy and three biological treatments and comparison of two de-escalation strategies in patients who respond to treatment: study protocol for a multicenter, randomized, open-label, blinded-assessor, phase 4 study.
- Authors: Glinatsi D, Heiberg MS, Rudin A, Nordström D, Haavardsholm EA, Gudbjornsson B, Østergaard M, Uhlig T, Grondal G, Hørslev-Petersen K, van Vollenhoven R, Hetland ML
- Issue date: 2017 Apr 4
- Early rheumatoid arthritis treated with tocilizumab, methotrexate, or their combination (U-Act-Early): a multicentre, randomised, double-blind, double-dummy, strategy trial.
- Authors: Bijlsma JWJ, Welsing PMJ, Woodworth TG, Middelink LM, Pethö-Schramm A, Bernasconi C, Borm MEA, Wortel CH, Ter Borg EJ, Jahangier ZN, van der Laan WH, Bruyn GAW, Baudoin P, Wijngaarden S, Vos PAJM, Bos R, Starmans MJF, Griep EN, Griep-Wentink JRM, Allaart CF, Heurkens AHM, Teitsma XM, Tekstra J, Marijnissen ACA, Lafeber FPJ, Jacobs JWG
- Issue date: 2016 Jul 23
- Biologics or tofacitinib for people with rheumatoid arthritis naive to methotrexate: a systematic review and network meta-analysis.
- Authors: Singh JA, Hossain A, Mudano AS, Tanjong Ghogomu E, Suarez-Almazor ME, Buchbinder R, Maxwell LJ, Tugwell P, Wells GA
- Issue date: 2017 May 8
- Head-to-head comparison of certolizumab pegol versus adalimumab in rheumatoid arthritis: 2-year efficacy and safety results from the randomised EXXELERATE study.
- Authors: Smolen JS, Burmester GR, Combe B, Curtis JR, Hall S, Haraoui B, van Vollenhoven R, Cioffi C, Ecoffet C, Gervitz L, Ionescu L, Peterson L, Fleischmann R
- Issue date: 2016 Dec 3
- Certolizumab pegol (CDP870) for rheumatoid arthritis in adults.
- Authors: Ruiz Garcia V, Burls A, Cabello JB, Vela Casasempere P, Bort-Marti S, Bernal JA
- Issue date: 2017 Sep 8