Long-term safety and effectiveness of tocilizumab in patients with rheumatoid arthritis and inadequate responses to csDMARDs and/or TNF inhibitors: an open-label study close to clinical practice
Jazyk angličtina Země Německo Médium print-electronic
Typ dokumentu časopisecké články
PubMed
31028551
DOI
10.1007/s10067-019-04535-z
PII: 10.1007/s10067-019-04535-z
Knihovny.cz E-zdroje
- Klíčová slova
- Monotherapy, Rheumatoid arthritis, Safety, Tocilizumab,
- MeSH
- antirevmatika škodlivé účinky terapeutické užití MeSH
- dospělí MeSH
- glukokortikoidy škodlivé účinky terapeutické užití MeSH
- humanizované monoklonální protilátky škodlivé účinky terapeutické užití MeSH
- inhibitory TNF škodlivé účinky terapeutické užití MeSH
- kombinovaná farmakoterapie MeSH
- lidé středního věku MeSH
- lidé MeSH
- mladý dospělý MeSH
- revmatoidní artritida diagnóza farmakoterapie MeSH
- senioři nad 80 let MeSH
- senioři MeSH
- stupeň závažnosti nemoci MeSH
- výsledek terapie MeSH
- Check Tag
- dospělí MeSH
- lidé středního věku MeSH
- lidé MeSH
- mladý dospělý MeSH
- mužské pohlaví MeSH
- senioři nad 80 let MeSH
- senioři MeSH
- ženské pohlaví MeSH
- Publikační typ
- časopisecké články MeSH
- Názvy látek
- antirevmatika MeSH
- glukokortikoidy MeSH
- humanizované monoklonální protilátky MeSH
- inhibitory TNF MeSH
- tocilizumab MeSH Prohlížeč
OBJECTIVE: To assess the long-term safety, tolerability, and effectiveness of tocilizumab (TCZ) as monotherapy or in combination with conventional synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (csDMARDs) in clinical practice in patients with moderate to severe rheumatoid arthritis (RA). METHODS: Patients in the 24-week, open-label ACT-SURE study who had at least a moderate EULAR response by week 24 and were from a participating country were eligible for this long-term extension (LTE); the patients continued to receive TCZ 8 mg/kg intravenously every 4 weeks as monotherapy or in combination with ≥ 1 csDMARD for up to an additional 108 weeks. The primary endpoint was the incidence of adverse events (AEs) and serious AEs (SAEs). Effectiveness endpoints included Disease Activity Score in 28 joints (DAS28) responses, American College of Rheumatology (ACR) responses, and patient-reported outcomes (PROs). RESULTS: Of the 1102 patients who completed the core 24-week study, 934 participated in the LTE; the median exposure to TCZ was 64.3 weeks. From baseline to the end of the LTE, AEs and SAEs occurred in 90% and 9% of patients, respectively. The overall event rates (95% CI) of AEs and SAEs were 406.5 per 100 patient-years (PY) (395.5, 417.8) and 8.8 per 100 PY (7.3, 10.6), respectively. Mean (SD) improvement in DAS28 was 4.12 (1.18), P < 0.0001. The DAS28 remission rates, ACR response rates, and PRO scores were maintained during the LTE study. CONCLUSION: In clinical practice, TCZ as monotherapy or in combination with csDMARDs was safe, well tolerated, and efficacious in patients with moderate to severe RA.
Department of Rheumatology Cabrini Medical Centre Melbourne Victoria Australia
Department of Rheumatology CHU Hautepierre Strasbourg France
Department of Rheumatology Mount Sinai Hospital Toronto Ontario Canada
F Hoffmann La Roche Ltd Basel Switzerland
Genentech Inc South San Francisco CA USA
Institute of Rheumatology and Clinic of Rheumatology Charles University Prague Czech Republic
Jan van Breemen Research Institute VU University Medical Center Amsterdam The Netherlands
Zobrazit více v PubMed
Lancet. 1999 Dec 4;354(9194):1932-9 PubMed
N Engl J Med. 2000 Nov 30;343(22):1586-93 PubMed
Arthritis Rheum. 2003 Jan;48(1):35-45 PubMed
Arthritis Rheum. 2006 Sep;54(9):2817-29 PubMed
Lancet. 2008 Mar 22;371(9617):987-97 PubMed
Ann Rheum Dis. 2008 Nov;67(11):1516-23 PubMed
Lancet. 2008 Aug 2;372(9636):375-82 PubMed
Arthritis Rheum. 2008 Oct;58(10):2968-80 PubMed
Ann Rheum Dis. 2010 Jan;69(1):88-96 PubMed
Mod Rheumatol. 2010 Jun;20(3):222-32 PubMed
Ann Rheum Dis. 2011 Apr;70(4):583-9 PubMed
Arthritis Rheum. 2011 Mar;63(3):609-21 PubMed
Ann Rheum Dis. 2013 Jan;72(1):43-50 PubMed
Ann Rheum Dis. 2012 Dec;71(12):1950-4 PubMed
J Rheumatol. 2013 Feb;40(2):113-26 PubMed
J Rheumatol. 2013 Jun;40(6):768-80 PubMed
Lancet. 2013 May 4;381(9877):1541-50 PubMed
Ann Rheum Dis. 2014 Jan;73(1):69-74 PubMed
Ann Rheum Dis. 2015 Feb;74(2):415-21 PubMed
Arthritis Rheumatol. 2014 Feb;66(2):264-72 PubMed
Rheumatology (Oxford). 2015 Jan;54(1):113-20 PubMed
Clin Rheumatol. 2015 Mar;34(3):563-71 PubMed
J Rheumatol. 2015 Aug;42(8):1368-75 PubMed
Arthritis Care Res (Hoboken). 2016 May;68(5):706-10 PubMed
Arthritis Care Res (Hoboken). 2016 Jan;68(1):1-25 PubMed
Rheum Dis Clin North Am. 2016 Feb;42(1):157-76, ix-x PubMed
Ann Rheum Dis. 2016 Jun;75(6):952-7 PubMed
Clin Exp Rheumatol. 2016 Jul-Aug;34(4):625-33 PubMed
Rheumatol Ther. 2016 Dec;3(2):291-304 PubMed
J Rheumatol. 2017 Feb;44(2):142-146 PubMed
Ann Rheum Dis. 2017 Jun;76(6):960-977 PubMed
Ann Rheum Dis. 2017 Jun;76(6):1102-1107 PubMed
Ann Rheum Dis. 2017 Jul;76(7):1279-1284 PubMed
Rheumatol Ther. 2017 Dec;4(2):405-417 PubMed
J Rheumatol. 2018 Apr;45(4):456-464 PubMed
Arthritis Rheumatol. 2018 Aug;70(8):1200-1208 PubMed
Rheumatology (Oxford). 2019 Jun 1;58(6):1056-1064 PubMed