Rituximab for rheumatoid arthritis

被引:72
|
作者
Lopez-Olivo, Maria Angeles [1 ]
Urruela, Matxalen Amezaga [2 ]
McGahan, Lynda [3 ]
Pollono, Eduardo N. [4 ]
Suarez-Almazor, Maria E. [1 ]
机构
[1] Univ Texas MD Anderson Canc Ctr, Dept Gen Internal Med, Houston, TX 77030 USA
[2] UPMC St Margarets, Pittsburgh, PA USA
[3] L McGahan Consulting, Ottawa, ON, Canada
[4] Univ S Florida, Dept Cardiovasc Sci, Tampa, FL USA
来源
COCHRANE DATABASE OF SYSTEMATIC REVIEWS | 2015年 / 01期
关键词
COLLEGE-OF-RHEUMATOLOGY; MODIFYING ANTIRHEUMATIC DRUGS; NECROSIS-FACTOR INHIBITOR; INADEQUATE RESPONSE; PLUS METHOTREXATE; DOUBLE-BLIND; RECEIVING RITUXIMAB; CLINICAL-OUTCOMES; CONTROLLED-TRIAL; JOINT DAMAGE;
D O I
10.1002/14651858.CD007356.pub2
中图分类号
R5 [内科学];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100201 ;
摘要
Background Rituximab is a selective, B-cell depleting, biologic agent for treating refractory rheumatoid arthritis (RA). It is a chimeric monoclonal antibody targeted against CD 20 that is promoted as therapy for patients who fail to respond to other biologics. There is evidence to suggest that rituximab is effective and well tolerated when used in combination with methotrexate for RA. Objectives To evaluate the benefits and harms of rituximab for the treatment of RA. Search methods We conducted a search (until January 2014) in electronic databases (The Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, Web of Science), clinical trials registries, and websites of regulatory agencies. Reference lists from comprehensive reviews were also screened. Selection criteria All controlled trials comparing treatment with rituximab as monotherapy or in combination with any disease modifying anti-rheumatic drug (DMARD) (traditional or biologic) versus placebo or other DMARD (traditional or biologic) in adult patients with active RA. Data collection and analysis Two review authors independently assessed the risk of bias and abstracted data from each study. Main results We included eight studies with 2720 patients. For six studies selection bias could not be evaluated and two studies were considered to have low risk of bias. The level of evidence ranged from low to high, but was rated as moderate for most outcomes. We have prioritised reporting of rituximab (two 1000 mg doses) in combination with methotrexate since this is the approved dose and most commonly used combination. We also reported data on other combinations and doses as supplementary information in the results section of the review. American College of Rheumatology (ACR) 50 response rates were statistically significantly improved with rituximab (two 1000 mg doses) in combination with methotrexate compared with methotrexate alone at 24 to 104 weeks. The RR for achieving an ACR 50 at weeks was 3.3 (95% CI 2.3 to 4.6); 29% of patients receiving rituximab (two 1000 mg doses) in combination with methotrexate achieved the ACR 50 compared to 9% of controls. The absolute treatment benefit (ATB) was 21% (95% CI 16% to 25%) with a number needed to treat (NNT) of 6 (95% CI 4 to 9). At 52 weeks, the RR for achieving clinical remission (Disease Activity Score (DAS) 28 joints < 2.6) with rituximab (two 1000 mg doses) in combination with methotrexate compared with methotrexate monotherapy was 2.4 (95% CI 1.7 to 3.5); 22% of patients receiving rituximab (two 1000 mg doses) in combination with methotrexate achieved clinical remission compared to 11% of controls. The ATB was 11% (95% CI 2% to 20%) with a NNT of 7 (95% CI 4 to 13). At 24 weeks, the RR for achieving a clinically meaningful improvement (CMI) in the Health Assessment Questionnaire (HAQ) (>0.22) for patients receiving rituximab combined with methotrexate compared to patients on methotrexate alone was 1.6 (95% CI 1.2 to 2.1). The ATB was 24% (95% CI 12% to 36%) with an NNT of 5 (95% CI 3 to 13). At 104 weeks, the RR for achieving a CMI in HAQ (> 0.22) was 1.4 (95% CI 1.3 to 1.6). The ATB was 24% (95% CI 16% to 31%) with a NNT of 5 (95% CI 3 to 7). At 24 weeks, the RR for preventing radiographic progression in patients receiving rituximab (two 1000 mg doses) in combination with methotrexate was 1.2 (95% CI 1.0 to 1.4) compared to methotrexate alone; 70% of patients receiving rituximab (two 1000 mg doses) in combination with methotrexate had no radiographic progression compared to 59% of controls. The ATB was 11% (95% CI 2% to 19%) and the NNT was 10 (95% CI 5 to 57). Similar benefits were observed at 52 to 56 weeks and 104 weeks. Statistically significantly more patients achieved a CMI on the physical and mental components of the quality of life, measured by the Short Form (SF)-36, in the rituximab (two 1000 mg doses) in combination with methotrexate-treated group compared with methotrexate alone at 24 to 52 weeks (RR 2.0, 95% CI 1.1 to 3.4; NNT 4, 95% CI 3 to 8 and RR 1.4, 95% CI 1.1 to 1.9; NNT 8, 95% CI 5 to 19, respectively); 34 and 13 more patients out of 100 showed an improvement in the physical component of the quality of life measure compared to methotrexate alone (95% CI 5% to 84%; 95% CI 7% to 8%, respectively). There was no evidence of a statistically significant difference in the rates of withdrawals because of adverse events or for other reasons (that is, withdrawal of consent, violation, administrative, failure to return) in either group. However, statistically significantly more people receiving the control drug withdrew from the study compared to those receiving rituximab (two 1000 mg doses) in combination with methotrexate at all times (RR 0.40, 95% CI 0.32 to 0.50; RR 0.61, 95% CI 0.40 to 0.91; RR 0.48, 95% CI 0.28 to 0.82; RR 0.58, 95% CI 0.45 to 0.75, respectively). At 104 weeks, 37% withdrew from the control group and 20% withdrew from the rituximab (two 1000 mg doses) in combination with methotrexate group. The absolute risk difference (ARD) was -20% (95% CI -34% to -5%) with a number needed to harm (NNH) of 7 (95% CI 5 to 11). A greater proportion of patients receiving rituximab (two 1000 mg doses) in combination with methotrexate developed adverse events after their first infusion compared to those receiving methotrexate monotherapy and placebo infusions (RR 1.6, 95% CI 1.3 to 1.9); 26% of those taking rituximab plus methotrexate reported more events associated with their first infusion compared to 16% of those on the control regimen with an ARD of 9% (95% CI 5% to 13%) and a NNH of 11 (95% CI 21 to 8). However, no statistically significant differences were noted in the rates of serious adverse events. Authors' conclusions Evidence from eight studies suggests that rituximab (two 1000 mg doses) in combination with methotrexate is significantly more efficacious than methotrexate alone for improving the symptoms of RA and preventing disease progression.
引用
收藏
页数:377
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [41] Treatment Strategies in Early Rheumatoid Arthritis and Prevention of Rheumatoid Arthritis
    Demoruelle, M. Kristen
    Deane, Kevin D.
    CURRENT RHEUMATOLOGY REPORTS, 2012, 14 (05) : 472 - 480
  • [42] Progression of structural damage is not related to rituximab serum levels in rheumatoid arthritis patients
    Boumans, Maria
    Teng, Onno
    Thurlings, Rogier
    Bijlsma, Johannes
    Gerlag, Danielle
    Huizinga, Tom
    Vos, Koen
    Stapel, Steven
    Wolbink, Gertjan
    Tekstra, Janneke
    van Laar, Jaap
    Tak, Paul P.
    RHEUMATOLOGY, 2013, 52 (08) : 1462 - 1466
  • [43] Factors Determining Retreatment Time Interval of Rituximab in Korean Patients With Rheumatoid Arthritis
    Kim, Ji-Won
    Jung, Ju-Yang
    Shin, Kichul
    Suh, Chang-Hee
    Kim, Hyoun-Ah
    FRONTIERS IN MEDICINE, 2021, 8
  • [44] Correlation between cellular expression of complement regulatory proteins with depletion and repopulation of B-lymphocytes in peripheral blood of patients with rheumatoid arthritis treated with rituximab
    Viecceli, Daniela
    Garcia, Mariana Pires
    Schneider, Laiana
    Alegretti, Ana Paula
    Silva, Cristiano Kohler
    Ribeiro, Andre Lucas
    Brenol, Claiton Viegas
    Xavier, Ricardo Machado
    REVISTA BRASILEIRA DE REUMATOLOGIA, 2017, 57 (05) : 385 - 391
  • [45] Rheumatoid factor as predictor of response to abatacept, rituximab and tocilizumab in rheumatoid arthritis: Systematic review and meta-analysis
    Maneiro, R. J.
    Salgado, Eva
    Carmona, Loreto
    Gomez-Reino, Juan J.
    SEMINARS IN ARTHRITIS AND RHEUMATISM, 2013, 43 (01) : 9 - 17
  • [46] Placebo Response in Rheumatoid Arthritis Clinical Trials
    Bechman, Katie
    Yates, Mark
    Norton, Sam
    Cope, Andrew P.
    Galloway, James B.
    JOURNAL OF RHEUMATOLOGY, 2020, 47 (01) : 28 - 34
  • [47] Management of established rheumatoid arthritis with an emphasis on pharmacotherapy
    Blom, M.
    van Riel, P. L. C. M.
    BEST PRACTICE & RESEARCH IN CLINICAL RHEUMATOLOGY, 2007, 21 (01): : 43 - 57
  • [48] Quality of life and the outcome of established rheumatoid arthritis
    Kingsley, Gabrielle
    Scott, Ian C.
    Scott, David L.
    BEST PRACTICE & RESEARCH IN CLINICAL RHEUMATOLOGY, 2011, 25 (04): : 585 - 606
  • [49] Physician- and Patient-reported Effectiveness Are Similar for Tofacitinib and TNFi in Rheumatoid Arthritis: Data From a Rheumatoid Arthritis Registry
    Movahedi, Mohammad
    Cesta, Angela
    Li, Xiyuing
    Keystone, Edward C.
    Bombardier, Claire
    JOURNAL OF RHEUMATOLOGY, 2022, 49 (05) : 447 - 453
  • [50] Abatacept for rheumatoid arthritis
    Maxwell, Lara
    Singh, Jasvinder A.
    COCHRANE DATABASE OF SYSTEMATIC REVIEWS, 2009, (04):