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: 427

The Impact of Biologic Agent Initiation after 1 Versus 2 Prior Csdmards in Patients with Rheumatoid Arthritis

Dimitrios A. Pappas1,2, Jenny Griffith3, Chitra Karki2, Mei Liu4, Joel M. Kremer5, Arijit Ganguli3 and Jeffrey D. Greenberg2,6, 1Columbia University, New York, NY, 2Corrona, LLC, Southborough, MA, 3AbbVie Inc., North Chicago, IL, 4352 Turnpike Rd, Corrona, LLC, Southborough, MA, 5Albany Medical College and The Center for Rheumatology, Albany, NY, 6NYU School of Medicine, New York, NY

Meeting: 2015 ACR/ARHP Annual Meeting

Date of first publication: September 29, 2015

Keywords: Disease Activity, DMARDs, registries 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

Date: Sunday, November 8, 2015

Title: Rheumatoid Arthritis - Clinical Aspects Poster I

Session Type: ACR Poster Session A

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

Background/Purpose: Patients with Rheumatoid Arthritis (RA) who don’t respond to conventional synthetic disease modifying anti-rheumatic drugs (csDMARDs) should be treated with biologic agents(1). The objective of this analysis was to evaluate the impact of initiating a biologic agent early (after failure to 1 csDMARD) versus later (after failure to 2 csDMARDs).

Methods: RA patients starting their first biologic agent after enrollment in Corrona between May 2002 and July 2014 and with at least 1 year of follow-up in the registry were included in the analysis. Baseline characteristics of patients initiating a biologic agent after therapy with 1 vs 2 csDMARDs were compared. The second csDMARD could be added to the first csDMARD or substitute therapy with the first csDMARD. The two cohorts were matched using propensity score (PS). Disease activity and functionality outcomes were assessed at 1 year post biologic initiation among the matched groups. The rate of biologic drug changes in the first year after biologic initiation were evaluated among the matched groups. Time to initiation of biologic and time spent in moderate/high disease activity prior to biologic initiation were evaluated. Mixed logistics and mixed linear regression models were used to evaluate binary and continuous outcomes.

Results: A total of 1612 patients initiated their first biologic after therapy with 1 csDMARD (group 1) and 288 patients after therapy with 2 csDMARDs (group 2). Baseline characteristics at the time of the biologic initiation for group 1 (vs group 2) were: 75.4% females (vs 78.5%), age (mean ±SD) of 57.4±13.2 years (vs 57.5±12.3), Caucasian race 89.1% (vs 93.8%), disease duration 6.3± 8.4 (vs 6.9±7.3), baseline CDAI 19.9±14.0 (vs 19.4±13.2) seropositivity 81.8% (vs 78%).  After PS matching 288 patients remained in each group. Similar improvements in disease activity occurred in both groups after 1 year of follow up: 53.4% in group 1 vs. 49.3% in group 2 achieved LDA (p=0.4), mean (SD) CDAI change was 8.4 (13.2) in group 1 vs 7.1 (13.5) in group 2 (p=0.2) and mean (SD) HAQ change was 0.08 (0.36) in group 1 vs 0.06 (0.41) in group 2 (p=0.5). Switching to an alternate biologic occurred in 7.6% and 15.3% of patients in group 1 and 2, respectively, while 14.2% and 15.3% discontinued biologic therapy at 1 year (p=0.01). The time since initiation of the first csDMARD to initiation of the first biologic was 13.3 ±15.9 months for biologic initiators in group 1 vs 20.7±19.7 in group 2 (p<0.01). Time spent in moderate or high disease prior to initiation of the biologic agent was 8.1±10.8 months in group 1 vs 13.7±14.9 months in group 2.

Conclusion: Earlier initiation of a biologic agent was associated with a shorter period of time spent in moderate/high RA disease activity and a higher likelihood of remaining on the same biologic at 1 year after initiation.

References:

  1. Singh et al. 2012. Update of the 2008 American College of Rheumatology (ACR) Recommendations for the use of Disease-Modifying Anti-Rheumatic Drugs and Biologics in the treatment of Rheumatoid Arthritis (RA). Arthritis Care Res (Hoboken). 2012 May; 64(5): 625–639

Disclosure: D. A. Pappas, Corrona, LLC, 3,Novartis, 9; J. Griffith, AbbVie, Inc., 1,AbbVie, Inc., 3; C. Karki, Corrona, LLC, 3; M. Liu, Corrona, LLC, 3; J. M. Kremer, Corrona, LLC., 3,Corrona, LLC., 1,AbbVie, Amgen, BMS, Genentech, Lilly, Pfizer, 5; A. Ganguli, AbbVie, Inc, 1,AbbVie, Inc., 3; J. D. Greenberg, Corrona, LLC., 3,Corrona, LLC., 1,AstraZeneca, Celgene, Genentech, Janssen, Novartis, Pfizer, 5.

To cite this abstract in AMA style:

Pappas DA, Griffith J, Karki C, Liu M, Kremer JM, Ganguli A, Greenberg JD. The Impact of Biologic Agent Initiation after 1 Versus 2 Prior Csdmards in Patients with Rheumatoid Arthritis [abstract]. Arthritis Rheumatol. 2015; 67 (suppl 10). https://acrabstracts.org/abstract/the-impact-of-biologic-agent-initiation-after-1-versus-2-prior-csdmards-in-patients-with-rheumatoid-arthritis/. 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 2015 ACR/ARHP Annual Meeting

ACR Meeting Abstracts - https://acrabstracts.org/abstract/the-impact-of-biologic-agent-initiation-after-1-versus-2-prior-csdmards-in-patients-with-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