ACR Meeting Abstracts

ACR Meeting Abstracts

  • Meetings
    • ACR Convergence 2024
    • ACR Convergence 2023
    • 2023 ACR/ARP PRSYM
    • ACR Convergence 2022
    • ACR Convergence 2021
    • ACR Convergence 2020
    • 2020 ACR/ARP PRSYM
    • 2019 ACR/ARP Annual Meeting
    • 2018-2009 Meetings
    • Download Abstracts
  • Keyword Index
  • Advanced Search
  • Your Favorites
    • Favorites
    • Login
    • View and print all favorites
    • Clear all your favorites
  • ACR Meetings

Abstract Number: 928

Is There an Optimal Treatment Strategy for Disease-Modifying-Antirheumatic-Drug Naïve Patients with Rheumatoid Arthritis?

Roopa Akkineni1 and Daniel A. Albert2, 1Rheumatology, Dartmouth Hitchcock Medical Center, Lebanon, NH, 2Medicine/Rheumatology, Dartmouth-Hitchcock Medical Center, Lebanon, NH

Meeting: 2012 ACR/ARHP Annual Meeting

Keywords: decision analysis and rheumatoid arthritis, DMARDs, treatment

  • Tweet
  • Click to email a link to a friend (Opens in new window) Email
  • Click to print (Opens in new window) Print
Session Information

Title: Epidemiology and Health Services Research: Epidemiology and Outcomes of Rheumatic Disease II

Session Type: Abstract Submissions (ACR)

Background/Purpose:

There is a lack of head-to-head clinical trial data to determine the most effective treatment for rheumatoid arthritis (RA).  However, these trials have had similar patient entry criteria and outcome measures allowing for meta-analysis.  Patients with RA fall into three therapeutic groups: DMARD naïve (no prior exposure to conventional or biologic disease-modifying-anti rheumatic drugs [DMARD]), Biologic naïve (prior exposure to conventional DMARDs but not biologic DMARDs) and Biologic second-line (prior exposure to biologic DMARDs).

A decision analysis was designed to identify an optimal treatment strategy for DMARD naïve patients with RA.

Methods:

A total of 270 studies were identified on ClinicalTrials.gov and Medline, of which 193 were eliminated in the abstract review phase.  Seventy-seven studies were screened in full text and seventy were excluded for reasoning including lack of randomization, uncertain diagnoses, and non-standard treatment.  Seven clinical trials were included for the DMARD naïve group corresponding to twelve treatment options.

The treatment options included placebo, methotrexate, biologic drugs alone and methotrexate plus biologic drugs.  Drug effectiveness was measured by the ACR 20 and ACR 50 criteria and the rate of serious adverse events was modeled across different therapeutic options. Sensitivity analyses were conducted for probability of serious adverse drug reactions and the ACR 20 and ACR 50 effectiveness measures. 

Results:

In the biologic drugs group alone, treatment with etanercept 25mg bi-weekly resulted in the maximum quality-adjusted-life-year (QALY) gain of 23.24 years compared to placebo at 21.55 years (1 year and 8 months) and methotrexate at 22.12 years (1 year and 1 month).  In the methotrexate plus biologic group, treatment with etanercept 50mg plus methotrexate resulted in 23.20 QALYs. Adalimumab 40mg (21.79 QALYs), Infliximab 3mg plus methotrexate (21.83 QALYs) and triple therapy (21.76 QALYs) resulted in the lowest QALY gain.

Sensitivity analysis showed at ACR 20 success criteria etanercept alone is preferred, while at ACR 50 criteria etanercept plus methotrexate is the preferred treatment option. At base case methotrexate was not a preferred treatment, however if methotrexate’s ACR50 response rate exceeds 34% then it would become the optimal treatment strategy if all other factors were held constant. By contrast, treatment with etanercept 25mg on a bi-weekly basis and etanercept 50mg plus methotrexate are no longer the favored treatment options if their adverse drug reaction rates increase from 6% and 12% to 9% and 13% respectively. 

Conclusion:

Biologic therapy alone and biologic therapy plus methotrexate appear to be the favorable treatment strategies for the DMARD naïve group. The QALY gains for biologic therapy in rheumatoid arthritis are similar to that of biologic therapy in psoriasis and interferon therapy for multiple sclerosis (0.20-3.3 QALYs). The decision depends in part on the side effect profile and costs.  Decision aids to elicit patient preferences and drug costs may override differences in drug effectiveness.


Disclosure:

R. Akkineni,
None;

D. A. Albert,
None.

  • Tweet
  • Click to email a link to a friend (Opens in new window) Email
  • Click to print (Opens in new window) Print

« Back to 2012 ACR/ARHP Annual Meeting

ACR Meeting Abstracts - https://acrabstracts.org/abstract/is-there-an-optimal-treatment-strategy-for-disease-modifying-antirheumatic-drug-naive-patients-with-rheumatoid-arthritis/

Advanced Search

Your Favorites

You can save and print a list of your favorite abstracts during your browser session by clicking the “Favorite” button at the bottom of any abstract. View your favorites »

All abstracts accepted to ACR Convergence are under media embargo once the ACR has notified presenters of their abstract’s acceptance. They may be presented at other meetings or published as manuscripts after this time but should not be discussed in non-scholarly venues or outlets. The following embargo policies are strictly enforced by the ACR.

Accepted abstracts are made available to the public online in advance of the meeting and are published in a special online supplement of our scientific journal, Arthritis & Rheumatology. Information contained in those abstracts may not be released until the abstracts appear online. In an exception to the media embargo, academic institutions, private organizations, and companies with products whose value may be influenced by information contained in an abstract may issue a press release to coincide with the availability of an ACR abstract on the ACR website. However, the ACR continues to require that information that goes beyond that contained in the abstract (e.g., discussion of the abstract done as part of editorial news coverage) is under media embargo until 10:00 AM ET on November 14, 2024. Journalists with access to embargoed information cannot release articles or editorial news coverage before this time. Editorial news coverage is considered original articles/videos developed by employed journalists to report facts, commentary, and subject matter expert quotes in a narrative form using a variety of sources (e.g., research, announcements, press releases, events, etc.).

Violation of this policy may result in the abstract being withdrawn from the meeting and other measures deemed appropriate. Authors are responsible for notifying colleagues, institutions, communications firms, and all other stakeholders related to the development or promotion of the abstract about this policy. If you have questions about the ACR abstract embargo policy, please contact ACR abstracts staff at [email protected].

Wiley

  • Online Journal
  • Privacy Policy
  • Permissions Policies
  • Cookie Preferences

© Copyright 2025 American College of Rheumatology