Indirect treatment comparison of abatacept with methotrexate versus other biologic agents for active rheumatoid arthritis despite methotrexate therapy in the United kingdom.

OBJECTIVE: To compare the efficacy of abatacept and alternative biologic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARD) in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) and an inadequate response to methotrexate (MTX) in the United Kingdom. METHODS: A systematic literature search identified 11 individual...

Disgrifiad llawn

Manylion Llyfryddiaeth
Prif Awduron: Guyot, P, Taylor, P, Christensen, R, Pericleous, L, Drost, P, Eijgelshoven, I, Bergman, G, Lebmeier, M
Fformat: Journal article
Iaith:English
Cyhoeddwyd: 2012
_version_ 1826291536172679168
author Guyot, P
Taylor, P
Christensen, R
Pericleous, L
Drost, P
Eijgelshoven, I
Bergman, G
Lebmeier, M
author_facet Guyot, P
Taylor, P
Christensen, R
Pericleous, L
Drost, P
Eijgelshoven, I
Bergman, G
Lebmeier, M
author_sort Guyot, P
collection OXFORD
description OBJECTIVE: To compare the efficacy of abatacept and alternative biologic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARD) in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) and an inadequate response to methotrexate (MTX) in the United Kingdom. METHODS: A systematic literature search identified 11 individual studies investigating the efficacy of abatacept, infliximab, adalimumab, etanercept, certolizumab pegol, and golimumab in adult patients with RA that did not respond to MTX. The clinical trials included in this analysis were similar in trial design, baseline patient characteristics, and background therapy (i.e., MTX). The key clinical endpoints of interest were the Health Assessment Questionnaire (HAQ) change from baseline (CFB) and the American College of Rheumatology (ACR) responses at 6 months (24-28 weeks). Results were analyzed using Bayesian network metaanalysis methods, and were expressed as differences in HAQ CFB and ACR20/50/70 relative risks, with 95% credible limits (CrL). RESULTS: Analysis of HAQ CFB at 6 months showed that abatacept is more efficacious than placebo [mean difference in HAQ CFB: -0.30 (95% CrL -0.42; -0.16)] and comparable to all other biologic agents, in patients receiving MTX as background treatment. Abatacept is also expected to result in a higher proportion of ACR responders compared to placebo, with relative risks ranging from 1.90 (95% CrL 1.24; 2.57) for ACR20 to 3.72 (95% CrL 1.50; 10.52) for ACR70, and to result in comparable proportions of ACR responders as other biologic agents, at 6 months. CONCLUSION: Abatacept is expected to result in improvement in functional status comparable to other recommended biologic agents in patients with RA who are unresponsive to MTX in the UK.
first_indexed 2024-03-07T03:00:51Z
format Journal article
id oxford-uuid:b0ec1f1d-41c7-47e5-b355-5b50a256306c
institution University of Oxford
language English
last_indexed 2024-03-07T03:00:51Z
publishDate 2012
record_format dspace
spelling oxford-uuid:b0ec1f1d-41c7-47e5-b355-5b50a256306c2022-03-27T03:59:57ZIndirect treatment comparison of abatacept with methotrexate versus other biologic agents for active rheumatoid arthritis despite methotrexate therapy in the United kingdom.Journal articlehttp://purl.org/coar/resource_type/c_dcae04bcuuid:b0ec1f1d-41c7-47e5-b355-5b50a256306cEnglishSymplectic Elements at Oxford2012Guyot, PTaylor, PChristensen, RPericleous, LDrost, PEijgelshoven, IBergman, GLebmeier, M OBJECTIVE: To compare the efficacy of abatacept and alternative biologic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARD) in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) and an inadequate response to methotrexate (MTX) in the United Kingdom. METHODS: A systematic literature search identified 11 individual studies investigating the efficacy of abatacept, infliximab, adalimumab, etanercept, certolizumab pegol, and golimumab in adult patients with RA that did not respond to MTX. The clinical trials included in this analysis were similar in trial design, baseline patient characteristics, and background therapy (i.e., MTX). The key clinical endpoints of interest were the Health Assessment Questionnaire (HAQ) change from baseline (CFB) and the American College of Rheumatology (ACR) responses at 6 months (24-28 weeks). Results were analyzed using Bayesian network metaanalysis methods, and were expressed as differences in HAQ CFB and ACR20/50/70 relative risks, with 95% credible limits (CrL). RESULTS: Analysis of HAQ CFB at 6 months showed that abatacept is more efficacious than placebo [mean difference in HAQ CFB: -0.30 (95% CrL -0.42; -0.16)] and comparable to all other biologic agents, in patients receiving MTX as background treatment. Abatacept is also expected to result in a higher proportion of ACR responders compared to placebo, with relative risks ranging from 1.90 (95% CrL 1.24; 2.57) for ACR20 to 3.72 (95% CrL 1.50; 10.52) for ACR70, and to result in comparable proportions of ACR responders as other biologic agents, at 6 months. CONCLUSION: Abatacept is expected to result in improvement in functional status comparable to other recommended biologic agents in patients with RA who are unresponsive to MTX in the UK.
spellingShingle Guyot, P
Taylor, P
Christensen, R
Pericleous, L
Drost, P
Eijgelshoven, I
Bergman, G
Lebmeier, M
Indirect treatment comparison of abatacept with methotrexate versus other biologic agents for active rheumatoid arthritis despite methotrexate therapy in the United kingdom.
title Indirect treatment comparison of abatacept with methotrexate versus other biologic agents for active rheumatoid arthritis despite methotrexate therapy in the United kingdom.
title_full Indirect treatment comparison of abatacept with methotrexate versus other biologic agents for active rheumatoid arthritis despite methotrexate therapy in the United kingdom.
title_fullStr Indirect treatment comparison of abatacept with methotrexate versus other biologic agents for active rheumatoid arthritis despite methotrexate therapy in the United kingdom.
title_full_unstemmed Indirect treatment comparison of abatacept with methotrexate versus other biologic agents for active rheumatoid arthritis despite methotrexate therapy in the United kingdom.
title_short Indirect treatment comparison of abatacept with methotrexate versus other biologic agents for active rheumatoid arthritis despite methotrexate therapy in the United kingdom.
title_sort indirect treatment comparison of abatacept with methotrexate versus other biologic agents for active rheumatoid arthritis despite methotrexate therapy in the united kingdom
work_keys_str_mv AT guyotp indirecttreatmentcomparisonofabataceptwithmethotrexateversusotherbiologicagentsforactiverheumatoidarthritisdespitemethotrexatetherapyintheunitedkingdom
AT taylorp indirecttreatmentcomparisonofabataceptwithmethotrexateversusotherbiologicagentsforactiverheumatoidarthritisdespitemethotrexatetherapyintheunitedkingdom
AT christensenr indirecttreatmentcomparisonofabataceptwithmethotrexateversusotherbiologicagentsforactiverheumatoidarthritisdespitemethotrexatetherapyintheunitedkingdom
AT pericleousl indirecttreatmentcomparisonofabataceptwithmethotrexateversusotherbiologicagentsforactiverheumatoidarthritisdespitemethotrexatetherapyintheunitedkingdom
AT drostp indirecttreatmentcomparisonofabataceptwithmethotrexateversusotherbiologicagentsforactiverheumatoidarthritisdespitemethotrexatetherapyintheunitedkingdom
AT eijgelshoveni indirecttreatmentcomparisonofabataceptwithmethotrexateversusotherbiologicagentsforactiverheumatoidarthritisdespitemethotrexatetherapyintheunitedkingdom
AT bergmang indirecttreatmentcomparisonofabataceptwithmethotrexateversusotherbiologicagentsforactiverheumatoidarthritisdespitemethotrexatetherapyintheunitedkingdom
AT lebmeierm indirecttreatmentcomparisonofabataceptwithmethotrexateversusotherbiologicagentsforactiverheumatoidarthritisdespitemethotrexatetherapyintheunitedkingdom