Indirect Treatment Comparison of the Efficacy and Safety of Sarilumab Monotherapy in Rheumatoid Arthritis Patients with Inadequate Response to Conventional Disease-Modifying Antirheumatic Drugs.
Biologic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs
Network meta-analysis
Rheumatoid arthritis
Rheumatology
Sarilumab monotherapy
Journal
Advances in therapy
ISSN: 1865-8652
Titre abrégé: Adv Ther
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 8611864
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
04 2019
04 2019
Historique:
received:
20
12
2018
pubmed:
14
3
2019
medline:
2
5
2020
entrez:
14
3
2019
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
To evaluate the comparative efficacy and safety of subcutaneous sarilumab 200 mg monotherapy administered every 2 weeks (q2w) versus other monotherapies of biologic, targeted and conventional synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (bDMARDs, tsDMARDs, csDMARDs) at recommended doses for treatment of rheumatoid arthritis in patients who are intolerant of or inadequate responders to csDMARDs (csDMARD-IR). A systematic literature review and network meta-analysis (NMA) were conducted on 24-week efficacy outcomes: Health Assessment Questionnaire Disability Index (HAQ-DI) score, American College of Rheumatology (ACR) 20/50/70 criteria, and European League Against Rheumatism Disease Activity Score 28-joint count erythrocyte sedimentation rate (DAS28) < 2.6. In addition, serious infections and serious adverse events (SI/SAE) were examined at 24 weeks. Nine trials were selected for the NMA. Sarilumab 200 mg showed superiority versus adalimumab monotherapy on all efficacy outcomes and versus tofacitinib monotherapy on ACR20. Compared with csDMARDs, sarilumab 200 mg showed superiority on ACR 20/50/70 criteria and DAS28 < 2.6 but had similar efficacy on HAQ-DI. Efficacy of sarilumab 200 mg was similar versus certolizumab, etanercept, tofacitinib and tocilizumab 8 mg/kg monotherapy across all efficacy outcomes. SI/SAE appeared similar for sarilumab 200 mg versus all comparators. In csDMARD-IR patients, sarilumab 200 mg monotherapy has superior efficacy and similar safety versus csDMARDs, superior efficacy and similar safety versus adalimumab, and similar efficacy and safety versus bDMARDs and tsDMARDs. Sanofi and Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Inc.
Identifiants
pubmed: 30864105
doi: 10.1007/s12325-019-00912-x
pii: 10.1007/s12325-019-00912-x
pmc: PMC6824353
doi:
Substances chimiques
Antibodies, Monoclonal, Humanized
0
Antirheumatic Agents
0
sarilumab
NU90V55F8I
Types de publication
Journal Article
Meta-Analysis
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Systematic Review
Langues
eng
Pagination
817-827Références
Genovese MC, Fleischmann R, Kivitz AJ, Rell-Bakalarska M, Martincova R, Fiore S, et al. Sarilumab plus methotrexate in patients with active rheumatoid arthritis and inadequate response to methotrexate: results of a phase III study. Arthritis Rheumatol. 2015;67(6):1424–37.
doi: 10.1002/art.39093
pubmed: 25733246
Burmester GR, Lin Y, Patel R, van Adelsberg J, Mangan EK, Graham NM, et al. Efficacy and safety of sarilumab monotherapy versus adalimumab monotherapy for the treatment of patients with active rheumatoid arthritis (MONARCH): a randomised, double-blind, parallel-group phase III trial. Ann Rheum Dis. 2017;76(5):840–7.
doi: 10.1136/annrheumdis-2016-210310
pubmed: 27856432
Strand V, Kosinski M, Chen CI, Joseph G, Rendas-Baum R, Graham NM, et al. Sarilumab plus methotrexate improves patient-reported outcomes in patients with active rheumatoid arthritis and inadequate responses to methotrexate: results of a phase III trial. Arthritis Res Ther. 2016;18:198.
doi: 10.1186/s13075-016-1096-9
pubmed: 27600829
pmcid: 5012017
Fleischmann R, van Adelsberg J, Lin Y, Castelar-Pinheiro GD, Brzezicki J, Hrycaj P, et al. Sarilumab and nonbiologic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs in patients with active rheumatoid arthritis and inadequate response or intolerance to tumor necrosis factor inhibitors. Arthritis Rheumatol. 2017;69(2):277–90.
doi: 10.1002/art.39944
pubmed: 27860410
pmcid: 6207906
Epstein D. The use of Comparative Effectiveness Research and Health Technology Assessment in European countries: current situation and prospects for the future. www.ugr.es/~davidepstein/HTA%20in%20european%20countries.docx . Accessed 27 Feb 2017.
Huynh T, Proudfoot C, Chen C, Pollissard L, Kuznik A, van Hoogstraten H, et al. Network meta-analysis of the efficacy and safety of sarilumab monotherapy and combination therapy in rheumatoid arthritis patients with intolerance or inadequate response to disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs. J Manag Care Spec Pharm. 2017;23:S75.
Hutton B, Salanti G, Caldwell DM, Chaimani A, Schmid CH, Cameron C, et al. The PRISMA extension statement for reporting of systematic reviews incorporating network meta-analyses of health care interventions: checklist and explanations. Ann Intern Med. 2015;162(11):777–84.
doi: 10.7326/M14-2385
pubmed: 26030634
National Institute for Health and Care Excellence. Guide to the methods of technology appraisal 2013. https://www.nice.org.uk/process/pmg9/resources/guide-to-the-methods-of-technology-appraisal-2013-pdf-2007975843781 . Accessed 27 Feb 2017.
National Institute for Health and Care Excellence. Adalimumab, etanercept, infliximab, certolizumab pegol, golimumab, tocilizumab and abatacept for rheumatoid arthritis not previously treated with DMARDs or after conventional DMARDs only have failed. https://www.nice.org.uk/guidance/ta375/resources/adalimumab-etanercept-infliximab-certolizumab-pegol-golimumab-tocilizumab-and-abatacept-for-rheumatoid-arthritis-not-previously-treated-with-dmards-or-after-conventional-dmards-only-have-failed-82602790920133 . Accessed 27 Feb 2017.
Jansen JP, Fleurence R, Devine B, Itzler R, Barrett A, Hawkins N, et al. Interpreting indirect treatment comparisons and network meta-analysis for health-care decision making: report of the ISPOR Task Force on Indirect Treatment Comparisons Good Research Practices: part 1. Value Health. 2011;14(4):417–28.
doi: 10.1016/j.jval.2011.04.002
pubmed: 21669366
Hoaglin DC, Hawkins N, Jansen JP, Scott DA, Itzler R, Cappelleri JC, et al. Conducting indirect-treatment-comparison and network-meta-analysis studies: report of the ISPOR Task Force on Indirect Treatment Comparisons Good Research Practices: part 2. Value Health. 2011;14(4):429–37.
doi: 10.1016/j.jval.2011.01.011
pubmed: 21669367
Nuesch E, Trelle S, Reichenbach S, Rutjes AW, Tschannen B, Altman DG, et al. Small study effects in meta-analyses of osteoarthritis trials: meta-epidemiological study. BMJ. 2010;341:c3515.
doi: 10.1136/bmj.c3515
pubmed: 20639294
pmcid: 2905513
Bucher HC, Guyatt GH, Griffith LE, Walter SD. The results of direct and indirect treatment comparisons in meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. J Clin Epidemiol. 1997;50(6):683–91.
doi: 10.1016/S0895-4356(97)00049-8
pubmed: 9250266
Lu G, Ades AE. Combination of direct and indirect evidence in mixed treatment comparisons. Stat Med. 2004;23(20):3105–24.
doi: 10.1002/sim.1875
pubmed: 15449338
Dias S, Sutton AJ, Welton NJ, Ades AE. NICE DSU Technical Support Document 3: Heterogeneity: subgroups, meta-regression, bias and bias-adjustment. http://www.nicedsu.org.uk/TSD3%20Heterogeneity.final%20report.08.05.12.pdf . Accessed 27 Feb 2017.
Machado DA, Guzman RM, Xavier RM, Simon JA, Mele L, Pedersen R, et al. Open-label observation of addition of etanercept versus a conventional disease-modifying antirheumatic drug in subjects with active rheumatoid arthritis despite methotrexate therapy in the Latin American region. J Clin Rheumatol. 2014;20(1):25–33.
doi: 10.1097/RHU.0000000000000055
pubmed: 24356474
Caldwell DM, Ades AE, Higgins JP. Simultaneous comparison of multiple treatments: combining direct and indirect evidence. BMJ. 2005;331(7521):897–900.
doi: 10.1136/bmj.331.7521.897
pubmed: 16223826
pmcid: 1255806
Spiegelhalter DJ, Best NG, Carlin BP, van der Linde A. Bayesian measures of model complexity and fit. J R Stat Soc B. 2002;64:583–639.
doi: 10.1111/1467-9868.00353
Fleischmann R, Cutolo M, Genovese MC, Lee EB, Kanik KS, Sadis S, et al. Phase IIb dose-ranging study of the oral JAK inhibitor tofacitinib (CP-690,550) or adalimumab monotherapy versus placebo in patients with active rheumatoid arthritis with an inadequate response to disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs. Arthritis Rheum. 2012;64(3):617–29.
doi: 10.1002/art.33383
pubmed: 21952978
Weinblatt ME, Schiff M, Valente R, van der Heijde D, Citera G, Zhao C, et al. Head-to-head comparison of subcutaneous abatacept versus adalimumab for rheumatoid arthritis: findings of a phase IIIb, multinational, prospective, randomized study. Arthritis Rheum. 2013;65(1):28–38.
doi: 10.1002/art.37711
pubmed: 23169319
pmcid: 3572583
Gabay C, Emery P, van Vollenhoven R, Dikranian A, Alten R, Pavelka K, et al. Tocilizumab monotherapy versus adalimumab monotherapy for treatment of rheumatoid arthritis (ADACTA): a randomised, double-blind, controlled phase 4 trial. Lancet. 2013;381(9877):1541–50.
doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(13)60250-0
Schiff M, Weinblatt ME, Valente R, van der Heijde D, Citera G, Elegbe A, et al. Head-to-head comparison of subcutaneous abatacept versus adalimumab for rheumatoid arthritis: two-year efficacy and safety findings from AMPLE trial. Ann Rheum Dis. 2014;73(1):86–94.
doi: 10.1136/annrheumdis-2013-203843
pubmed: 23962455
van Vollenhoven RF, Fleischmann R, Cohen S, Lee EB, Garcia Meijide JA, Wagner S, et al. Tofacitinib or adalimumab versus placebo in rheumatoid arthritis. N Engl J Med. 2012;367(6):508–19.
doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1112072
pubmed: 22873531
Taylor PC, Keystone EC, van der Heijde D, Weinblatt ME, Del Carmen Morales L, Reyes Gonzaga J, et al. Baricitinib versus placebo or adalimumab in rheumatoid arthritis. N Engl J Med. 2017;376(7):652–62.
doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1608345
pubmed: 28199814
Singh JA, Hossain A, Tanjong Ghogomu E, Mudano AS, Tugwell P, Wells GA. Biologic or tofacitinib monotherapy for rheumatoid arthritis in people with traditional disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drug (DMARD) failure: a cochrane systematic review and network meta-analysis (NMA). Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2016;11:Cd012437.
Tarp S, Furst DE, Dossing A, Ostergaard M, Lorenzen T, Hansen MS, et al. Defining the optimal biological monotherapy in rheumatoid arthritis: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised trials. Semin Arthritis Rheum. 2017;46(6):699–708.
doi: 10.1016/j.semarthrit.2016.09.003
pubmed: 27769592
Buckley F, Finckh A, Huizinga TW, Dejonckheere F, Jansen JP. Comparative efficacy of novel DMARDs as monotherapy and in combination with methotrexate in rheumatoid arthritis patients with inadequate response to conventional DMARDs: a network meta-analysis. J Manag Care Spec Pharm. 2015;21(5):409–23.
pubmed: 25943002
National Institute for Clinical and Economic Review. Targeted immune modulators for rheumatoid arthritis: effectiveness and value. Evidence report. https://icer-review.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/08/NE_CEPAC_RA_Evidence_Report_FINAL_040717.pdf . Accessed 7 Nov 2017.