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: 2373

Compliance in the Rheumatoid Arthritis Comparison of Active Therapies Trial: Triple Vs Etanercept

Sarah Leatherman1, Hongsheng Wu2,3, Edward Keystone4, Mary Brophy1 and James O'Dell5,6, 1MAVERIC CSPCC (151MAV), VA Boston Healthcare System, Boston, MA, 2VA Boston Healthcare System, Boston, MA, 3Computer Science and Systems, Wentworth Institute of Technology, Boston, MA, 4Mount Sinai Hospital, Toronto, ON, Canada, 5VA Nebraska-Western Iowa Health Care System, Omaha, NE, 6University of Nebraska Medical Center, Omaha, NE

Meeting: 2014 ACR/ARHP Annual Meeting

Keywords: Compliance, randomized trials and rheumatoid arthritis (RA)

  • 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: Rheumatoid Arthritis - Clinical Aspects (ACR): Impact of Various Interventions and Therapeutic Approaches

Session Type: Abstract Submissions (ACR)

Background/Purpose

In the 48-week, double-blinded, noninferiority RACAT trial, 353 methotrexate suboptimal responders were randomized to two treatment strategies, either the addition of sulfasalazine and hydroxychloroquine (triple therapy) or the addition of etanercept. If subjects showed no clinical improvement in DAS28 at 24 weeks, their treatment strategy was switched.  Compliance to the study medications as well as placebo is an important aspect for any clinical outcome and an important consideration for the application of results to treatment of patients.  This is particularly relevant since many have questioned the tolerability of triple therapy.

Methods

Compliance with placebo and study medications was calculated using returned pill counts. Participants were defined as medication compliant if they took 80% or more of dispensed study medication. Baseline characteristics were compared between active drug compliant and non-compliant subjects for both the 24-week and 48-week follow-up periods. Administration method (pills versus injection) compliance, treatment strategy (active drug versus placebo) compliance, and the association between compliance and treatment response were also explored.

Results

Within active drug group, there were no significant differences at 24 or 48 weeks between compliant and non-compliant subjects for any of the baseline variables except that the Physician Global Assessment score for compliant was significantly better than that of non-compliant (p=0.01 and p=0.01, respectively). Injection compliance was significantly higher than pill compliance at both 24 weeks (94.6% versus 86.4%, p = 0.0003) and 48 weeks (96.4% versus 90.6%, p = 0.0034).  There were no differences in compliance of active and placebo medications at 24 weeks (90.0% versus 90.9%) and 48 weeks (93.9% versus 93.8%). Unlike some other studies, we found no relationship between compliance and treatment response. Other factors previously found to be associated with good compliance, such as demographic variables, treatment assignment, and treatment response, were not significantly related. 

Conclusion

Subjects taking pills were less likely to be compliant than those having injections.  Patients were equally likely to take active therapy and placebo therapy.  Despite differences in compliance, treatment strategies were comparable and both strategies were well tolerated.


Disclosure:

S. Leatherman,
None;

H. Wu,
None;

E. Keystone,

Abbott Laboratories, Amgen Inc., AstraZeneca Pharmaceuticals LP, Bristol-Myers Squibb, F. Hoffmann-La Roche Inc, Janssen Inc, Lilly Pharmaceuticals, Novartis Pharmaceuticals, Pfizer Pharmaceuticals, Sanofi-Aventis, UCB,

2,

Abbott Laboratories, AstraZeneca Pharma, Biotest, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Company, F. Hoffmann-La Roche Inc, Genentech Inc, Jannsen Inc, Lilly Pharmaceuticals, Merck, Pfizer Pharmaceuticals, UCB,

5,

Abbott Laboratories, Astrazeneca LP, Bristol-Myers Squibb Canada,F. Hoffmann-La Roche Inc., Janssen Inc., Pfizer Pharmaceuticals, UCB, Amgen,

8;

M. Brophy,
None;

J. O’Dell,

Abbvie, Lilly, Antares, Medac,

5.

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

« Back to 2014 ACR/ARHP Annual Meeting

ACR Meeting Abstracts - https://acrabstracts.org/abstract/compliance-in-the-rheumatoid-arthritis-comparison-of-active-therapies-trial-triple-vs-etanercept/

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