Gastrointestinal perforations in patients with rheumatoid arthritis treated with biological disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs in Sweden: a nationwide cohort study.
Aged
Antirheumatic Agents
/ adverse effects
Arthritis, Rheumatoid
/ complications
Biological Therapy
/ methods
Disease Susceptibility
Duration of Therapy
Female
Follow-Up Studies
Humans
Incidence
Intestinal Perforation
/ epidemiology
Male
Middle Aged
Population Surveillance
Proportional Hazards Models
Sweden
/ epidemiology
Tumor Necrosis Factor Inhibitors
/ adverse effects
DMARDs (biologic)
Epidemiology
Rheumatoid Arthritis
Treatment
Journal
RMD open
ISSN: 2056-5933
Titre abrégé: RMD Open
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101662038
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
07 2020
07 2020
Historique:
received:
11
02
2020
revised:
07
04
2020
accepted:
25
06
2020
entrez:
17
7
2020
pubmed:
17
7
2020
medline:
11
6
2021
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
To compare incidence rates of gastrointestinal (GI) perforations between patients with RA and the general population, and between patients treated with tumour necrosis factor inhibitors (TNFi) and non-TNFi biologics. In this nationwide cohort study, a total of 63 532 patients with RA, with 26 050 biological treatment episodes (TNFi, rituximab, abatacept or tocilizumab) and 76 304 general population controls, were followed between 2009 and 2017 until the first outcome event. The main outcome was hospitalisation or death due to lower GI perforations, identified according to a prespecified list of ICD-10 (International Classification of Diseases, 10th revision) codes. Inverse probability of treatment weighting was used for adjustment. The sex-standardised and age-standardised incidence rates of lower GI perforations were 1.1 (95% CI 1.0 to 1.3) events per 1000 person-years among general population controls, 1.6 (1.5-1.7) among bionaïve patients and ranged from 1.8 (1.4-3.6) (TNFi) to 4.5 (2.7-10.4) (tocilizumab) among biologics-treated patients. After adjustment for glucocorticoid use, the risk in bionaïve, TNFi-treated, abatacept-treated or rituximab-treated patients with RA was no longer different from the general population, while for tocilizumab it remained significantly higher. Comparing tocilizumab to TNFi, the adjusted HR for lower GI perforations was 2.2 (1.3-3.8), corresponding to one additional GI perforation per 451 patient-years treated with tocilizumab instead of TNFi. Tocilizumab was associated with a higher risk of lower GI perforations compared with alternative biologics. In absolute numbers, the risk remained low on all biologics commonly used to treat RA, but the accumulated evidence across settings and outcome definitions supports that this risk should be considered in treatment guidelines for RA.
Identifiants
pubmed: 32669452
pii: rmdopen-2020-001201
doi: 10.1136/rmdopen-2020-001201
pmc: PMC7425111
pii:
doi:
Substances chimiques
Antirheumatic Agents
0
Tumor Necrosis Factor Inhibitors
0
Types de publication
Journal Article
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Informations de copyright
© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2020. Re-use permitted under CC BY. Published by BMJ.
Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
Competing interests: The work was supported by agreements between Karolinska Institutet (J. Askling as principal investigator) and Abbvie, BMS, MSD, Eli Lilly, Pfizer, Roche, Samsung Bioepis, and UCB, mainly regarding the safety monitoring of bDMARDs in rheumatology. Companies with products mentioned in this manuscript were given a courtesy review of the manuscript before publication, but were not involved in planning the study, performing the analysis, or interpreting the results. Andrei Barbulescu, Bénédicte Delcoigne and Thomas Frisell have no conflicts of interest to declare.
Références
Eur J Epidemiol. 2009;24(11):659-67
pubmed: 19504049
Arthritis Rheum. 2011 Feb;63(2):346-51
pubmed: 20967860
Rheumatology (Oxford). 2019 Jan 21;:
pubmed: 30668875
Ann Rheum Dis. 2019 Apr;78(4):456-464
pubmed: 30679153
Stat Med. 2009 Jul 10;28(15):1982-98
pubmed: 19452569
PLoS One. 2014 Dec 05;9(12):e114195
pubmed: 25478789
Ann Rheum Dis. 2014 Jan;73(1):252-5
pubmed: 23644671
Comput Methods Programs Biomed. 2004 Jul;75(1):45-9
pubmed: 15158046
Stat Med. 2015 Dec 10;34(28):3661-79
pubmed: 26238958
Eur J Epidemiol. 2016 Feb;31(2):125-36
pubmed: 26769609
BMC Public Health. 2011 Jun 09;11:450
pubmed: 21658213
Stat Med. 2016 Dec 30;35(30):5642-5655
pubmed: 27549016
Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf. 2007 Jul;16(7):726-35
pubmed: 16897791
Clin Exp Rheumatol. 2006 Jan-Feb;24(1):113
pubmed: 16539834
Clin Exp Rheumatol. 2014 Sep-Oct;32(5 Suppl 85):S-147-9
pubmed: 25365105
Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf. 2011 Nov;20(11):1150-8
pubmed: 22020901
Arthritis Res Ther. 2011;13(5):R141
pubmed: 21884601
Semin Arthritis Rheum. 2015 Feb;44(4):381-8
pubmed: 25300699
Ann Rheum Dis. 2018 May;77(5):650-657
pubmed: 29237621
BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2014 Dec 15;15:432
pubmed: 25510838
Arthritis Res Ther. 2013;15 Suppl 3:S3
pubmed: 24267289
BMC Med Res Methodol. 2015 Jul 28;15:54
pubmed: 26216355
Scand J Rheumatol. 2015;44(1):22-8
pubmed: 25379815
J Rheumatol. 2012 Jul;39(7):1355-62
pubmed: 22467929
Am J Epidemiol. 2008 Sep 15;168(6):656-64
pubmed: 18682488
Arthritis Rheumatol. 2016 Nov;68(11):2612-2617
pubmed: 27213279
Ann Rheum Dis. 2017 Mar;76(3):504-510
pubmed: 27405509
Stat Med. 2013 Aug 30;32(19):3388-414
pubmed: 23508673
Nat Rev Cancer. 2007 Jun;7(6):475-85
pubmed: 17522716
Arthritis Care Res (Hoboken). 2019 Apr;71(4):498-511
pubmed: 29856128
Eur J Epidemiol. 2017 Sep;32(9):765-773
pubmed: 28983736
Gut. 2011 Feb;60(2):219-24
pubmed: 20940283
Stat Med. 1997 Apr 15;16(7):791-801
pubmed: 9131766
Am J Epidemiol. 2001 Jun 1;153(11):1089-93
pubmed: 11390328
Rheumatol Ther. 2016 Dec;3(2):337-352
pubmed: 27747579
Drug Saf. 2018 Jun;41(6):545-553
pubmed: 29392593
Arthritis Rheum. 2003 Jun;48(6):1521-9
pubmed: 12794819