Alternative tumour necrosis factor inhibitors (TNFi) or abatacept or rituximab following failure of initial TNFi in rheumatoid arthritis: the SWITCH RCT

Background: Rheumatoid arthritis (RA), the most common autoimmune disease in the UK, is a chronic systemic inflammatory arthritis that affects 0.8% of the UK population. Objectives: To determine whether or not an alternative class of biologic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (bDMARDs) are compa...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Hauptverfasser: Brown, S, Everett, CC, Naraghi, K, Davies, C, Dawkins, B, Hulme, C, McCabe, C, Pavitt, S, Emery, P, Sharples, L, Buch, MH
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Online-Zugang:Volltext bestellen
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:Background: Rheumatoid arthritis (RA), the most common autoimmune disease in the UK, is a chronic systemic inflammatory arthritis that affects 0.8% of the UK population. Objectives: To determine whether or not an alternative class of biologic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (bDMARDs) are comparable to rituximab in terms of efficacy and safety outcomes in patients with RA in whom initial tumour necrosis factor inhibitor (TNFi) bDMARD and methotrexate (MTX) therapy failed because of inefficacy. Design: Multicentre, Phase III, open-label, parallel-group, three-arm, non-inferiority randomised controlled trial comparing the clinical and cost-effectiveness of alternative TNFi and abatacept with that of rituximab (and background MTX therapy). Eligible consenting patients were randomised in a 1 : 1 : 1 ratio using minimisation incorporating a random element. Minimisation factors were centre, disease duration, non-response category and seropositive/seronegative status. Setting: UK outpatient rheumatology departments. Participants: Patients aged ≥ 18 years who were diagnosed with RA and were receiving MTX, but had not responded to two or more conventional synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drug therapies and had shown an inadequate treatment response to a first TNFi. Interventions: Alternative TNFi, abatacept or rituximab (and continued background MTX). Main outcome measures: The primary outcome was absolute reduction in the Disease Activity Score of 28 joints (DAS28) at 24 weeks post randomisation. Secondary outcome measures over 48 weeks were additional measures of disease activity, quality of life, cost-effectiveness, radiographic measures, safety and toxicity. Limitations: Owing to third-party contractual issues, commissioning challenges delaying centre set-up and thus slower than expected recruitment, the funders terminated the trial early. Results: Between July 2012 and December 2014, 149 patients in 35 centres were registered, of whom 122 were randomised to treatment (alternative TNFi, n = 41; abatacept, n = 41; rituximab, n = 40). The numbers, as specified, were analysed in each group [in line with the intention-to-treat (ITT) principle]. Comparing alternative TNFi with rituximab, the difference in mean reduction in DAS28 at 24 weeks post randomisation was 0.3 [95% confidence interval (CI) –0.45 to 1.05] in the ITT patient population and –0.58 (95% CI –1.72 to 0.55) in the per protocol (PP) population. Corresponding results for the abatacept and
DOI:10.3310/hta22340