OPEN IN READ APP
COMPARATIVE STUDY
JOURNAL ARTICLE
REVIEW

Comparative effectiveness and safety of biological treatment options after tumour necrosis factor α inhibitor failure in rheumatoid arthritis: systematic review and indirect pairwise meta-analysis

Monika Schoels, Daniel Aletaha, Josef S Smolen, John B Wong
Annals of the Rheumatic Diseases 2012, 71 (8): 1303-8
22294630

BACKGROUND: Optimal treatment for rheumatoid arthritis (RA) after inadequate response (IR) to tumour necrosis factor α inhibitors (TNFi) remains uncertain.

OBJECTIVE: To compare the efficacy and safety of biological agents after TNFi-IR.

METHODS: A systematic literature search was carried out using Medline and Cochrane databases, as well as http://www.clinicaltrials.gov, and bibliographies of the retrieved literature were searched by hand. Randomised, placebo-controlled trials that enrolled patients with RA with TNFi-IR were included and American College of Rheumatology (ACR) response as primary efficacy outcome and adverse events (AEs), serious adverse events (SAEs) and serious infections (SIs) as safety measures were extracted. An indirect meta-analysis with pairwise comparisons of efficacy and safety data was then carried out using ORs or risk differences (RDs) in a random effects model.

RESULTS: In four randomised controlled trials with 24 weeks' follow-up, direct comparisons of abatacept, golimumab, rituximab and tocilizumab versus placebo showed statistically significant mean ORs of 3.3-8.9 for ACR20, 5.5-10.2 for ACR50 and 4.1-13.5 for ACR70. Risks of AEs, SAEs and SIs versus placebo were non-significant. Indirect pairwise comparisons of the four biological agents showed no significant differences in ACR50 and ACR70. Golimumab had a significantly lower OR (0.56-0.59) for ACR20 but significantly fewer AEs (RD 0.13-0.18). Efficacy after one versus multiple TNFi failures did not differ significantly between the different biological agents.

CONCLUSION: In patients refractory to one or more TNFi, new biological agents provide significant improvement with good safety. Lacking head-to-head trials, indirect meta-analysis enables a comparison of effectiveness and safety of biological agents with each other and shows that all biological agents have similar effects.

Discussion

You are not logged in. Sign Up or Log In to join the discussion.

Related Papers

Available on the App Store

Available on the Play Store
Remove bar
Read by QxMD icon Read
22294630
×

Search Tips

Use Boolean operators: AND/OR

diabetic AND foot
diabetes OR diabetic

Exclude a word using the 'minus' sign

Virchow -triad

Use Parentheses

water AND (cup OR glass)

Add an asterisk (*) at end of a word to include word stems

Neuro* will search for Neurology, Neuroscientist, Neurological, and so on

Use quotes to search for an exact phrase

"primary prevention of cancer"
(heart or cardiac or cardio*) AND arrest -"American Heart Association"