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: 1429

Results at 6 Months of Abatacept vs TNF-α Blockers in Patients with Severe, Long-standing, DMARDs Resistant Rheumatoid Arthritis

Omar Valenzuela 1, Sebastian Ibanez2, Maria Paz Poblete 3, Claudia Mardones 2, Francisco Silva 2, Maria Jose Villar 2 and Katherine Mogollones 1, 1Facultad de Medicina Clinica Alemana -UDD, Santiago, Region Metropolitana, Chile, 2Facultad de Medicina Clinica Alemana - UDD, Santiago, Region Metropolitana, Chile, 3Rheumatology dpt., Facultad de Medicina Clinica Alemana - UDD, Santiago, Region Metropolitana, Chile

Meeting: 2019 ACR/ARP Annual Meeting

Keywords: Abatacept, anti-TNF therapy and Disease Activity, rheumatoid arthritis, treatment

  • Tweet
  • Email
  • Print
Session Information

Date: Monday, November 11, 2019

Title: RA – Treatments Poster II: Established Treatments

Session Type: Poster Session (Monday)

Session Time: 9:00AM-11:00AM

Background/Purpose: Since January 2016, Chilean patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA), with severe activity despite the use of 3 DMARDs for at least 6 months, have guaranteed access to biologics. In the first year the only first-line option was abatacept, in the second year etanercept and adalimumab were added. Our objetive was to evaluate the efficacy at 6 months of abatacept vs TNF-α blockers as first-line biologic.

Methods: Real life, prospective-cohort, single-center study. Only RA patients with a DAS28 ESR greater than 5.1 or with > 6 painful joints, >3 swollen joints, ESR >30 mm/h, and morning stiffness >45 minutes on 2 evaluations, separated between 30-120 days, were allowed to postulate for biologic treatment. Included patients during 2016 received abatacept as first-line biologic, and since 2017 the first-line biologic was selected by randomizing patients in order of attention to abatacept, etanercept or adalimumab, unless there was a particular condition that made it preferable one over another (latent tuberculosis, intersticial lung disease). Tapering of other DMARDs and prednisone was done depending on the clinician’s judgment. The patients were followed for 6 months, DAS28 ESR change was evaluated and the EULAR response criteria was calculated. HAQ, other medications use changes, and adverse events were evaluated. Comparisons were made between abatacept and TNF-α blockers (etanercept/adalimumab). Multivariate analysis was performed taking into account age, sex, years with symptoms, comorbidities, smoking, BMI, CCP status, DMARDs, corticoids, NSAIDs and tramadol use, and baseline DAS28.

Results: 123 patients were enrolled (table 1 for baseline characteristics). Users of TNF-α blockers had a significantly greater decrease in DAS28 ESR, higher rate of remission, higher rate of good EULAR response, and a lower rate of failure according to the physician (Table 2). These differences maintained statistical significance (p < 0.05) after multivariate analysis. A higher BMI was significantly related, after multivariate analysis, to a lower reduction of DAS28 ESR and lower rate of remission after 6 months. For HAQ there was no difference in the reduction and the result after 6 months of biologic treatment (from 1.9 to 1.5). The median number of DMARDs and the median prednisone dose was reduced without differences between groups. The rate of tramadol use saw a 10.9% reduction in the abatacept group and 2.5% in the TNF-α blocker group (table 3). After multivariate analysis more years with symptoms was related to higher rate of tramadol use after 6 months of biologics. The rate of adverse events (AE) was higher in the TNF-α blocker group (39.1 vs 27.7%) but the rate of serious events was higher in the abatacept group (30.4 vs 22.2% of all AE), although no significant differences were found.

Conclusion: At 6 months, in this real life study, more than 80% of the patients with severe, long standing, DMARDs resistant, RA had at least a moderate response to biologic treatment. This improvement was significantly higher in the TNF-α blocker group. Although the abatacept group had more comorbidities the difference with the TNF-α blocker group remained significant after multivariate analysis.


Disclosure: O. Valenzuela, None; S. Ibanez, None; M. Poblete, None; C. Mardones, None; F. Silva, None; M. Villar, None; K. Mogollones, None.

To cite this abstract in AMA style:

Valenzuela O, Ibanez S, Poblete M, Mardones C, Silva F, Villar M, Mogollones K. Results at 6 Months of Abatacept vs TNF-α Blockers in Patients with Severe, Long-standing, DMARDs Resistant Rheumatoid Arthritis [abstract]. Arthritis Rheumatol. 2019; 71 (suppl 10). https://acrabstracts.org/abstract/results-at-6-months-of-abatacept-vs-tnf-%ce%b1-blockers-in-patients-with-severe-long-standing-dmards-resistant-rheumatoid-arthritis/. Accessed .
  • Tweet
  • Email
  • Print

« Back to 2019 ACR/ARP Annual Meeting

ACR Meeting Abstracts - https://acrabstracts.org/abstract/results-at-6-months-of-abatacept-vs-tnf-%ce%b1-blockers-in-patients-with-severe-long-standing-dmards-resistant-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