The comparison of effects of biologic agents on rheumatoid arthritis damage progression is biased by period of enrolment: Data from a systematic review and meta-analysis
Introduction
Rheumatoid arthritis (RA) is a chronic inflammatory arthropathy whose progression is heterogeneous, and the outcome is difficult to predict. Some RA patients do not develop any erosion even after long-term disease, but the vast majority display bone erosions and cartilage breakdown, resulting in joint destruction, functional impairment, and increased mortality [1], [2].
The outcome of the disease improved considerably in recent years with the availability of new effective therapies. In particular, biological agents displayed a rapid and sustained disease control, associated with impressive prevention of joint destruction [3]. Biological agents target several immune effectors that play a key role in local and systemic inflammation, including TNF, IL-6 receptor and IL-1 β, while rituximab is a MoAb against CD20 positive B-cells and abatacept is a fusion protein against CTLA-4, inhibiting T-cell co-stimulation.
The large number of currently available biologic drugs provides a rationale for comparing the efficacy of these agents on damage progression in order to make a reasonable therapeutic choice. To date, all these agents have been tested versus methotrexate (MTX) for efficacy on disease progression prevention in several randomised clinical trials (RCTs), whereas only few direct head-to-head comparisons have been conducted.
The purpose of this investigation is to indirectly compare the 12-month effects of all available biologic drugs in slowing radiographic progression in RCTs. In particular, we thought that RCTs inclusion criteria have been subjected to gradual changes over the years making the reported radiographic damage progression much more related to the patients’ characteristics than to the efficacy of the tested biologic agent.
Section snippets
Literature search and study selection
A systematic review of literature was conducted using a PubMed searching of MEDLINE from Jan 1995 to May 2012, according to standard reporting guidelines [4]. PubMed was searched using the medical subject heading (MeSH) terms (‘arthritis, rheumatoid/radiography’ OR ‘disease progression’) combined with ‘arthritis, rheumatoid/drug therapy’, and limited to ‘randomised control trial’ as article type, ‘humans’ as species, ‘English’ as language, ‘adult’ as age and a period between 1 January 1995 and
Results
The PubMed search (Fig. 1) resulted in 183 references. Ninety-nine were excluded because they did not include any of the biologic agents under evaluation. Out of 84 remaining potentially relevant trials, 27 were excluded as not especially designed to evaluate radiographic progression in biologic versus non-biologic-treated patients, four because of the assessment of damage progression by MRI or ultrasound only, five because of the insufficient sample number and/or follow-up period, two because
Discussion
Our meta-analysis shows statistically significant differences regarding efficacy in slowing/stopping radiographic disease progression among the available biologic agents for RA. However, data analysis reveals how such differences are deeply influenced by the heterogeneity in baseline population characteristics. In fact, the main finding of current analysis is the demonstration that both the clinical response to MTX before trial beginning and the period of study enrolment play a crucial role on
References (47)
Methods of assessing radiographic change in rheumatoid arthritis
Am J Med
(1983)- et al.
Comparison of methotrexate monotherapy with a combination of methotrexate and etanercept in active, early, moderate to severe rheumatoid arthritis (COMET): a randomised, double-blind, parallel treatment trial
Lancet
(2008) - et al.
Therapeutic effect of the combination of etanercept and methotrexate compared with each treatment alone in patients with rheumatoid arthritis: double-blind randomised controlled trial
Lancet
(2004) Pharmaceutical company funding and its consequences: a qualitative systematic review
Contemp Clin Trials
(2008)- et al.
Immediate and late outcome of patients aged 80 years and older undergoing isolated aortic valve replacement: a systematic review and meta-analysis of 48 studies
Am Heart J
(2012) - et al.
Mortality in rheumatoid arthritis: 2008 update
Clin Exp Rheumatol
(2008) - et al.
The relationship between disease activity and radiologic progression in patients with rheumatoid arthritis: a longitudinal analysis
Arthritis Rheum
(2004) - et al.
Clinical and radiographic outcomes of four different treatment strategies in patients with early rheumatoid arthritis (the BeSt study): a randomized, controlled trial
Arthritis Rheum
(2005) - et al.
PRISMA group. Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement
Ann Intern Med
(2009) - et al.
Methods of scoring the progression of radiologic changes in rheumatoid arthritis. Correlation of radiologic, clinical and laboratory abnormalities
Arthritis Rheum
(1971)