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: 1433

Tailoring Second-Line Biologic Therapy in Rheumatoid Arthritis: New Findings on the Usefulness of Antibody Status to Optimise Drug Selection

Muhammad Shipa1, Maria Di Cicco2, Emese Balogh2, Aneela Mian3, Dev Mukerjee4 and Euthalia Roussou2, 1Rheumatology and General internal Medicine, North Middlesex University Hospital NHS trust, London, United Kingdom, 2Barking Havering and Redbridge University hospitals NHS Trust, London, United Kingdom, 3Rheumatology, King's College London, London, United Kingdom, 4Rheumatology, North Middlesex University Trust, London, United Kingdom

Meeting: 2017 ACR/ARHP Annual Meeting

Date of first publication: September 18, 2017

Keywords: Biologics, rheumatoid arthritis (RA) and tumor necrosis factor (TNF)

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

Date: Monday, November 6, 2017

Title: Rheumatoid Arthritis – Small Molecules, Biologics and Gene Therapy Poster II: Prognostic Factors, Imaging and Miscellaneous Reports

Session Type: ACR Poster Session B

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

Background/Purpose:

Treatment of rheumatoid arthritis (RA) has been revolutionized by the introduction of Tumour Necrosis Factor alpha inhibitors (TNFi). However a significant proportion of patients fails to respond (primary failure) or may lose the initial response over time (secondary failure). Whether a second TNFi or Biologics with Different Mode of Action [ BDMA; Rituximab (RTX), Abatacept (ABT), Tocilizumab (TCZ)] should be used, who had secondary failure still needs to be defined. The aim was to retrospectively compare the efficacy of second TNFi versus BDMA after secondary failure and to investigate whether there was an association between response and antibody status [Rheumatoid Factor (RF) and Anti CCP].

Methods:

This was a retrospective observational real life data analysis from two hospitals of North-East London serving diverse ethnic population. The list of the RA patients (defined by 2010 ACR/EULAR criteria), who had secondary failure to first line TNFi from 2010 to 2016, was obtained. The study population were randomly selected using ‘RESEARCH RAMDOMIZER’ software. Response to treatment was defined as the achievement of at least moderate response at six months according to EULAR response criteria.

Results:

A total of 422 patients were included in the analysis: 211 in each group (TNFi and BDMA). Male/female ratio was 1:3 and the mean age was of 61.4 years (SD ± 12.1). Baseline DAS28 (SD) scores were higher in BDMA group than in the TNFi group: [5.90(0.6) vs 5.20(0.8); p<0.01].

Table 1 describes response rates according to biologic subcategories and autoantibody status. This reflects 74 patients responded to second TNFi (35%) compared to 148 patients who responded in the BDMA group (70%) (p<0.01); Number need to treat (NNT) was 2.9. The response rates were better in seropositive if receiving RTX (85%) or TCZ (68%), while poorer on ABT (46%), p<0.01. In contrast, for seronegative patients RTX response was poor (35%), but markedly better response observed on ABT or TCZ (83% and 74% respectively).

Table 1: Comparison between TNFi and different BDMA according antibody status [Rheumatoid Factor (RF) and Anti CCP]

Total (N=422)

TNFi (N=211)

BDMA (N=211)

p Value

RTX (N=99)

ABT (N=55)

TCZ (N=57)

p Value

Responders (%)

74(35%)

148 (70%)

<0.01

74 (75%)

36 (65%)

40 (70%)

0.90

Sero (+) ( %) : Sero (-) (%)

134(63%)

:77(37%)

130(62%)

:81(38%)

0.80

73 (74%)

: 26 (26%)

26 (47%)

: 29 (53%)

31

(54%)

: 26 (46%)

0.01

Sero (+) Responders (%)

48 (36%)

98(75%)

<0.01

62(85%)

12(46%)

21(68%)

<0.01

Sero (-) Responders (%)

26 (34%)

50 (61%)

0.01

9 (35%)

24(83%)

17 (74%)

<0.01

Footnote: Sero (+) = seropositive, Sero (-) = seronegative, N= number.

Conclusion:

RA patients who had secondary failure to the initial TNFi, had greater response rate (nearly 3:1), if treated with a BDMA instead of another TNFi. Our findings suggest that seropositive patients may be benefitted from switching to RTX or TCZ, meanwhile seronegative patients may do better with ABT or TCZ.


Disclosure: M. Shipa, None; M. Di Cicco, None; E. Balogh, None; A. Mian, None; D. Mukerjee, None; E. Roussou, None.

To cite this abstract in AMA style:

Shipa M, Di Cicco M, Balogh E, Mian A, Mukerjee D, Roussou E. Tailoring Second-Line Biologic Therapy in Rheumatoid Arthritis: New Findings on the Usefulness of Antibody Status to Optimise Drug Selection [abstract]. Arthritis Rheumatol. 2017; 69 (suppl 10). https://acrabstracts.org/abstract/tailoring-second-line-biologic-therapy-in-rheumatoid-arthritis-new-findings-on-the-usefulness-of-antibody-status-to-optimise-drug-selection/. Accessed .
  • Tweet
  • Click to email a link to a friend (Opens in new window) Email
  • Click to print (Opens in new window) Print

« Back to 2017 ACR/ARHP Annual Meeting

ACR Meeting Abstracts - https://acrabstracts.org/abstract/tailoring-second-line-biologic-therapy-in-rheumatoid-arthritis-new-findings-on-the-usefulness-of-antibody-status-to-optimise-drug-selection/

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