ACR Meeting Abstracts

ACR Meeting Abstracts

  • Home
  • Meetings Archive
    • ACR Convergence 2020
    • 2020 ACR/ARP PRSYM
    • 2019 ACR/ARP Annual Meeting
    • 2018 ACR/ARHP Annual Meeting
    • 2017 ACR/ARHP Annual Meeting
    • 2017 ACR/ARHP PRSYM
    • 2016-2009 Meetings
    • Download Abstracts
  • Keyword Index
  • Advanced Search
  • Your Favorites
    • Favorites
    • Login
    • Register
    • View and print all favorites
    • Clear all your favorites
  • Meeting Resource Center

Abstract Number: 431

Prediction Of Week 52 Treatment Response Based On A Week 12 Assessment In Rheumatoid Arthritis Patients Receiving Certolizumab Pegol: Comparison Of A Patient-Reported Instrument Versus Physician-Based Disease Activity Assessment

Jeffrey R. Curtis1, Willem Koetse2, Jeymi Tambiah3, Lucian Ionescu4 and Yusuf Yazici5, 1Division of Clinical Immunology and Rheumatology, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, AL, 2UCB Pharma, Raleigh, NC, 3UCB Pharma, Smyrna, GA, 4UCB Pharma, Brussels, Belgium, 5New York University Hospital for Joint Diseases, New York, NY

Meeting: 2013 ACR/ARHP Annual Meeting

Keywords: anti-TNF therapy, certolizumab pegol, patient-reported outcome measures and rheumatoid arthritis (RA)

  • Tweet
  • Email
  • Print
Save to PDF
Session Information

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

Session Type: Abstract Submissions (ACR)

Background/Purpose: Guidelines support early intervention in rheumatoid arthritis (RA).1,2 The aim was to prospectively test whether outcome assessment at 12 weeks (wks) using a patient-reported tool (RAPID3) was comparable with investigator-based assessment (CDAI) in RA patients (pts) treated with certolizumab pegol (CZP) for predicting attainment of low disease activity (LDA) or better at Wk 52. Both scoring tools are used as clinical measures of disease activity in the absence of inflammatory laboratory markers.

Methods: In this 52-wk study (PREDICT; NCT01255761) pts received CZP standard dosing regimen (400mg at Wks 0, 2, 4 [loading dose] then 200mg Q2W). Pts were ≥18 yrs with adult onset active RA, unsatisfactory response to ≥1 DMARD and ≤2 prior TNF inhibitors. Pts were randomized 1:1 to RAPID3 or CDAI for classification as responder/non-responder at Wk12. Treatment decision at Wk12 was based upon randomization arm (RAPID3 responder, ≤6 or 20% improvement from baseline [BL]; CDAI responder, ≤10 or 20% improvement from BL). Pts who showed no improvement by Wk12 (<1 point improvement in CDAI or no improvement in RAPID3) were classified as failures and withdrawn. All other pts continued CZP 200mg Q2W unless they reached high disease activity (HDA; CDAI>22 or RAPID3>12) at 2 consecutive visits, at which point they escaped. Pts were permitted concomitant DMARDs if their regimen was unmodified between Wks 0 and 12. Long-term treatment success was defined as DAS28(ESR) ≤3.2 (LDA or better) at Wk52. Safety was monitored. The results are presented for the full analysis set (FAS; all pts who had valid BL and post-BL measurements) and both arms were adjusted for baseline DAS28(ESR) scores. Non-responder imputation (NRI) was applied.

Results:

Enrolled pts (FAS; N=733) had longstanding disease (mean±SD 8.9±9.1 years), HDA (mean±SD DAS28[ESR] 6.3±1.1, RAPID3 16.1±5.6, CDAI 40.2±13) and over half (55.5%) were prior TNF inhibitor failures.

At Wk12, 64.7% (238/368) and 76.4% (279/365) of pts randomized to RAPID3 and CDAI, respectively, were classed as responders (Table 1). At Wk52, 31.5% (75/238) of Wk12 RAPID3 responders, and 32.3% (90/279) of Wk12 CDAI responders, achieved DAS28(ESR) LDA or better (Table 1) demonstrating similar positive predictive values of these measures. No new safety signals were observed.

Conclusion:

In pts with chronic, severe RA the physician-based assessment detected greater CZP response at Wk12 compared with the patient-reported tool. Although the two outcome measures were not statistically comparable at Wk12, the positive predictive value for LDA at Wk52 for both assessments was similar. Further analysis is needed to evaluate the sensitivity and specificity of these measures for clinical disease activity assessments and treatment decisions in RA.

 

References: 1. Saag K.G. Arthritis Rheum 2008;59(6):762-784; 2. Smolen J.S. Curr Med Res Opin 2011;27(2):315-325    


Disclosure:

J. R. Curtis,

Roche, Genentech, UCB Pharma, Janssen, CORRONA, Amgen, Pfizer, BMS, Crescendo, AbbVie,

2,

Roche, Genentech, UCB Pharma, Janssen, CORRONA, Amgen, Pfizer, BMS, Crescendo, AbbVie,

5;

W. Koetse,

UCB Pharma,

3,

UCB Pharma,

1;

J. Tambiah,

UCB Pharma,

3;

L. Ionescu,

U.B Pharma,

3,

UCB Pharma,

1;

Y. Yazici,

BMS, Genentech, Celgene,

2,

Abbvie, BMS, Celgene, Genentech, Pfizer, UCB Pharma,

5.

  • Tweet
  • Email
  • Print
Save to PDF

« Back to 2013 ACR/ARHP Annual Meeting

ACR Meeting Abstracts - https://acrabstracts.org/abstract/prediction-of-week-52-treatment-response-based-on-a-week-12-assessment-in-rheumatoid-arthritis-patients-receiving-certolizumab-pegol-comparison-of-a-patient-reported-instrument-versus-physician-based/

Advanced Search

Your Favorites

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

ACR Convergence: Where Rheumatology Meets. All Virtual. November 5-9.

ACR Pediatric Rheumatology Symposium 2020

© COPYRIGHT 2021 AMERICAN COLLEGE OF RHEUMATOLOGY

Wiley

  • Home
  • Meetings Archive
  • Advanced Search
  • Meeting Resource Center
  • Online Journal
  • Privacy Policy
  • Permissions Policies
loading Cancel
Post was not sent - check your email addresses!
Email check failed, please try again
Sorry, your blog cannot share posts by email.
This site uses cookies: Find out more.