Arthritis & Rheumatism, Volume 63,
November 2011 Abstract Supplement

Abstracts of the American College of
Rheumatology/Association of Rheumatology Health Professionals
Annual Scientific Meeting
Chicago, Illinois November 4-9, 2011.

Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis of Combination Therapy for Methotrexate-Experienced, Rheumatoid Arthritis Patients: Analysis of American College of Rheumatology Criteria Scores 20, 50 and 70.

Orme1,  Michelle E., Fotheringham2,  Iain, Mitchell2,  Stephen A., Spurden3,  Dean, Bird3,  Alex

ICERA consutling, United Kingdom
Abacus International, United Kingdom
Pfizer Ltd, Surrey, United Kingdom

Background/Purpose:

To determine the relative effectiveness of all UK licensed biological disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs (bDMARDs) for the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis (RA), in particular the concomitant use of bDMARDs with methotrexate (MTX) after failure of one or more DMARD.

Methods:

A comprehensive systematic review was conducted to identify randomised controlled trials of bDMARDS for the treatment of RA in MTX experienced patients (defined as patients with an inadequate response to at least 1 cycle of MTX (6 months) or withdrawn from MTX due to adverse events). This analysis covers combination therapy (biological DMARD + other DMARD) in MTX experienced patients and:

Excludes studies in MTX naïve patients.

Excludes study arms evaluating biologic monotherapy, except if this results in only one remaining study arm for the meta-analysis (the biologic monotherapy arm is then included as the control for this study).

MTX monotherapy controls are included in the network and MTX is the reference treatment for the network meta-analysis (NMA).

Structured literature searches were conducted in MEDLINE, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library, as well as hand searches of conference proceedings and reference lists. From this 13,649 citations were identified, of which 12,984 were excluded based on the title/abstract. After reviewing 665 full-text papers, there were 26 eligible studies that reported endpoints based on ACR criteria reported between 12 and 30 weeks. A network meta-analysis was conducted to estimate the relative effectiveness of treatments whilst preserving the randomised comparisons within each trial. A Bayesian network meta-analysis was conducted using a random-effects, logit model fitted to the binomial ACR20/50/70 trial data and was coded in WinBUGS. Direct probability statements are based on results from two chains of 20,000 samples.

Results:

The table below summarise the network meta-analysis results for ACR 20/50/70.

TreatmentLog-OR vs MTX (95% CrI)% pts achieving ACR20/50/70 (95% CrI)Probability best
ACR70   
Etanercept 2×25mg/week + MTX3.34 (1.11, 6.55)*55.3% (12.8%, 97.3%)62.59%
Certolizumab Pegol 200mg/2 weeks + MTX2.61 (1.38, 3.96)*41.4% (15.8%, 73.8%)27.17%
Tocilizumab 8mg/kg/month + MTX1.93 (0.76, 3.1)*27.3% (9.2%, 54.5%)5.2%
Golimumab 50mg/month + MTX1.64 (0.26, 3.03)*22.9% (5.8%, 52.6%)3.48%
Abatacept 10mg/kg/month + MTX1.49 (0.62, 2.41)*19.3% (7.9%, 37.8%)0.57%
Rituximab 2×1000mg + MTX1.1 (-0.13, 2.39)14.9% (4%, 36.9%)0.51%
Adalimumab 40mg/2 weeks + MTX1.34 (0.51, 2.19)*17.1% (7%, 33.1%)0.25%
Infliximab 3mg/kg/2 months + MTX1.3 (0.49, 2.21)*16.7% (6.9%, 33.2%)0.24%
MTX–4.9% (3.2%, 7.1%)0%
ACR50   
Etanercept 2×25mg/week + MTX3.04 (1.65, 4.65)*71.8% (40.9%, 93.6%)77.79%
Certolizumab Pegol 200mg/2 weeks + MTX2.29 (1.41, 3.22)*57.1% (34.6%, 78.1%)17.54%
Golimumab 50mg/month + MTX1.65 (0.67, 2.63)*42.1% (20.3%, 66.8%)2.21%
Tocilizumab 8mg/kg/month + MTX1.55 (0.65, 2.45)*39.8% (19.9%, 62.6%)1.27%
Rituximab 2×1000mg + MTX1.42 (0.49, 2.38)*37% (17.6%, 60.8%)0.89%
Adalimumab 40mg/2 weeks + MTX1.4 (0.77, 2.05)*36.1% (21.5%, 53.2%)0.15%
Infliximab 3mg/kg/2 months + MTX1.34 (0.73, 1.97)*34.8% (20.8%, 51.4%)0.09%
Abatacept 10mg/kg/month + MTX1.3 (0.65, 1.96)*33.8% (19.5%, 51%)0.08%
MTX–12.1% (9%, 15.9%)0%
ACR20   
Etanercept 2×25mg/week + MTX2.35 (1.34, 3.41)*80.1% (60.6%, 92.8%)44.94%
Certolizumab Pegol 200mg/2 weeks + MTX2.42 (1.7, 3.16)*81.7% (68.2%, 91.2%)52.89%
Tocilizumab 8mg/kg/month + MTX1.43 (0.68, 2.19)*63% (43.9%, 79.7%)0.89%
Golimumab 50mg/month + MTX1.21 (0.38, 2.04)*58% (36.7%, 77.1%)0.45%
Abatacept 10mg/kg/month + MTX1.16 (0.61, 1.71)*56.9% (41.6%, 71.3%)0.05%
Rituximab 2×1000mg + MTX1.33 (0.56, 2.11)*60.7% (40.8%, 78.4%)0.61%
Adalimumab 40mg/2 weeks + MTX1.26 (0.71, 1.81)*59.3% (44.3%, 73.2%)0.1%
Infliximab 3mg/kg/2 months + MTX1.32 (0.81, 1.84)*60.8% (46.5%, 73.9%)0.08%
MTX–29.6% (23.7%, 36%)0%
Abbreviations: CrI, credible interval (Bayesian probability interval);* p<0.05

Conclusion:

In conclusion, in these selected studies, concomitant bDMARDs were significantly more effective than MTX alone in improving ACR 20/50/70 outcomes in MTX experienced patients. Out of the studies that met inclusion in our analysis, Etanercept had the highest probability of being the most effective concomitant bDMARD for achieving ACR 70 and 50 responses, whilst certolizumab pegol had the highest probability of achieving ACR 20 response.

To cite this abstract, please use the following information:
Orme, Michelle E., Fotheringham, Iain, Mitchell, Stephen A., Spurden, Dean, Bird, Alex; Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis of Combination Therapy for Methotrexate-Experienced, Rheumatoid Arthritis Patients: Analysis of American College of Rheumatology Criteria Scores 20, 50 and 70. [abstract]. Arthritis Rheum 2011;63 Suppl 10 :2247
DOI:

Abstract Supplement

Meeting Menu

2011 ACR/ARHP