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: 2171

Comparative Efficacy of Biologics As Monotherapy and in Combination with Methotrexate in Rheumatoid Arthritis Patients with an Inadequate Response to Conventional Dmards: A Network Meta-Analysis

Felicity Buckley1, Axel Finckh2, Thomas W. Huizinga3, Fred Dejonckheere4 and Jeroen P. Jansen1, 1MAPI Consultancy, Boston, MA, 2Rhumatology, University Hospital of Geneva, Geneva, Switzerland, 3Department of Rheumatology, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, Netherlands, 4F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd, Basel, Switzerland

Meeting: 2012 ACR/ARHP Annual Meeting

Keywords: anti-TNF therapy, meta-analysis, methotrexate (MTX), rheumatoid arthritis, treatment and tocilizumab

  • Tweet
  • Email
  • Print
Session Information

Title: Rheumatoid Arthritis Treatment - Small Molecules, Biologics and Gene Therapy

Session Type: Abstract Submissions (ACR)

Background/Purpose: A number of meta-analyses compare the efficacy of biologics for rheumatoid arthritis (RA). However, systematic reviews comparing the efficacy of biologics as monotherapy versus combination with DMARDs are rare,1 and none include all currently approved biologics. Our objective was to compare ACR response at 24 weeks in RA patients with an inadequate response to conventional DMARDs (DMARD-IR) receiving approved biologics as monotherapy or in combination with methotrexate (MTX).

Methods: A systematic literature review was undertaken to identify RCTs that assessed approved biologic therapies as monotherapy or in combination with MTX in DMARD-IR RA patients. 22 RCTs were identified that evaluated tocilizumab (TCZ), adalimumab, certolizumab pegol, etanercept, golimumab, infliximab, abatacept, or anakinra. ACR responses at 24 weeks were extracted and combined by means of Bayesian network meta-analyses to obtain treatment effect estimates between all interventions included in the analysis, whether directly or indirectly compared. As shown elsewhere,1,2 an assumption was made that the effects of anti-TNF-α agents (aTNFs) are exchangeable. Given this, and the limited data identified for these therapies in monotherapy, aTNF data were pooled.

Results: Using random effects models, TCZ + MTX was shown to be comparable to other biologics + MTX across the ACR outcomes. A higher expected treatment effect was seen with TCZ + MTX for ACR70, in line with earlier analyses.3 When comparing biologic monotherapies with biologics + MTX, TCZ showed a comparable likelihood of ACR20, ACR50, and ACR70 response versus TCZ + MTX ([RR 0.98 (95% credible interval [CrI]: 0.70, 1.71)], [RR 0.92 [95% CrI: 0.62, 1.56)], and [RR 1.04 (95% CrI: 0.58, 2.08)], respectively). aTNF as monotherapy was likely to be less efficacious compared to aTNFs + MTX in terms of ACR20 and ACR50 response (probability better=13% [RR 0.71 (95% CrI: 0.48, 1.64)] and probability better=5% [RR 0.52 (95% CrI: 0.31, 1.25)], respectively). Between monotherapies, the chance of ACR20, ACR50, and ACR70 response for TCZ was found likely to be greater compared to responses for aTNFs (probability better=88%, 97%, and 96%, respectively), in line with recently reported outcomes of a trial4 comparing TCZ and adalimumab.

Conclusion: Our network meta-analysis, involving indirect comparison of trial findings, suggests that in DMARD-IR patients, TCZ + MTX shows comparable efficacy to other biologics + MTX. In monotherapy, TCZ is likely to have a greater efficacy than aTNFs and shows comparable efficacy compared to TCZ + MTX, whereas aTNFs are likely to show lower efficacy compared to aTNFs + MTX.

References

1. Nixon Rheumatology. 2007;46:1140; 2. Salliot Ann Rheum Dis. 2011;70:266; 3. Bergman Semin Arthritis Rheum 2010;39:425; 4. Gabay Ann Rheum Dis 2012;71(Suppl 3):152.

 


Disclosure:

F. Buckley,

Roche Pharmaceuticals,

5;

A. Finckh,

BMS, Pfizer,

2,

BMS, Abbott, Roche Pharmaceuticals, Pfizer,

5,

Roche Pharmaceuticals,

8;

T. W. Huizinga,

Merck, UCB, BMS, Biotest AG, Pfizer, Novartis, Roche, Sanofi-Aventis, Abbott, Crescendo Bioscience, Nycomed, Axis-Shield Diagnostics,

5,

Merck, UCB, BMS, Biotest AG, Pfizer, Novartis, Roche, Sanofi-Aventis, Abbott, Crescendo Bioscience, Nycomed, Axis-Shield Diagnostics,

8;

F. Dejonckheere,

F. Hoffman-La Roche,

3;

J. P. Jansen,

Roche Pharmaceuticals,

5.

  • Tweet
  • Email
  • Print

« Back to 2012 ACR/ARHP Annual Meeting

ACR Meeting Abstracts - https://acrabstracts.org/abstract/comparative-efficacy-of-biologics-as-monotherapy-and-in-combination-with-methotrexate-in-rheumatoid-arthritis-patients-with-an-inadequate-response-to-conventional-dmards-a-network-meta-analysis/

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