Article

Influence of immunogenicity on the efficacy of long-term treatment with infliximab in rheumatoid arthritis.

Immunology Unit, Hospital La Paz, Paseo de La Castellana 261, 28046 Madrid, Spain.
Rheumatology (Oxford, England) (Impact Factor: 4.24). 03/2011; 50(8):1445-52. DOI: 10.1093/rheumatology/ker124
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT To analyse the clinical relevance of the production of anti-infliximab antibodies (anti-infliximab Abs) in patients with RA undergoing infliximab treatment over a prolonged period of time.
Clinical characteristics, serum trough infliximab and antibody levels were evaluated in 85 RA patients treated with infliximab for a median of 4.42 (interval 0.4-10.2) years. DAS in 28 joints (DAS-28), EULAR response criteria and survival of treatment were assessed at 3 time points (6 months, 12 months and >4 years).
Antibodies against infliximab were detected in 28 (32.9%) patients and were present in all EULAR non-responder patients. Antibody levels were higher in EULAR non-responders throughout the study period (P = 0.05 at 6 months, P = 0.02 at 1 year, P = 0.003 at >4 years) compared with EULAR (good and moderate) responders. Nine (10.5%) patients, all of them with high-serum anti-infliximab Ab levels, developed infusion-related reactions. Patients with anti-infliximab Abs more often required increased infliximab doses (51.7%) (P = 0.032) and median survival time on treatment was shorter (4.15 vs 8.89 years) (P = 0.0006). MTX co-therapy was not associated with lower proportion of anti-infliximab Ab-positive patients, but those receiving both infliximab and MTX had lower levels of anti-infliximab Abs (P = 0.073) and longer survival (P = 0.015) on treatment.
The formation of anti-infliximab Abs during treatment with infliximab is associated with a loss of clinical response, the appearance of infusion reactions and discontinuation of treatment.

1 Bookmark
 · 
237 Views
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: In the previous issue of Arthritis Research & Therapy, Ducourau and colleagues report that they retrospectively detected anti-infliximab antibodies in 21% of patients with rheumatic diseases. Patients with anti-infliximab antibodies had lower serum drug concentrations. These findings contribute to the existing evidence of immunogenicity of biologicals and its clinical relevance. We argue for therapeutic drug monitoring to optimize treatment response.
    Arthritis research & therapy 08/2011; 13(4):120. · 4.27 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: PURPOSE: Biological drugs in circulation can interfere with anti-drug antibody (ADA) assays and cause false ADA negatives. We surveyed the applications of biological products approved by FDA during 2005-2011 for prevalence of drug interferences and proposed approaches to address this issue scientifically. METHODS: The immunogenicity assay drug tolerance, steady-state drug concentrations, and immunogenicity rates were reviewed for 26 BLA/NDA and 2 sBLA. RESULTS: Many FDA approved biologics had higher steady-state drug concentrations than the drug tolerance of ADA assays, by 1.2- to 800-fold. Reported immunogenicity rates may be negatively impacted. Some sponsors triaged immunogenicity samples according to the drug tolerance, leaving some samples un-assayed or reporting them as inconclusive ADA; but these samples were interpreted as ADA- for calculating immunogenicity rates. CONCLUSIONS: Implementation of ADA assays that can tolerate therapeutic drug concentrations is imperative. Given drug interferences, we propose in this paper the following practices: (i) to measure drug concentrations in ADA samples, (ii) to explicitly list all ADA status, including inconclusive ADA and un-assayed samples, (iii) to calculate population immunogenicity rates based on only subjects with confirmed ADA+ and ADA-, and (iv) to make available ADA assay specifics relevant to the use of ADA data in disease management.
    Pharmaceutical Research 08/2012; · 4.74 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: This paper aims to estimate the annual cost of etanercept, adalimumab, and infliximab per treated patient across adult indications using US-managed care drug use data. Adult patients who used etanercept, adalimumab, or infliximab were identified in the Thomson Reuters MarketScan® Commercial Claims and Encounters Database (Thomson Reuters Healthcare, Ann Arbor, MI, USA) between January 1, 2005 and June 30, 2009. The index event was the first use of etanercept, adalimumab, or infliximab preceded by a diagnosis for rheumatoid arthritis, psoriasis, psoriatic arthritis, or ankylosing spondylitis. Patients were defined as either newly initiating or continuing tumor necrosis factor (TNF) blocker treatment based on their use during the 6 months before the index event. Annual cost per treated patient was the sum of the etanercept, adalimumab, and infliximab medication and administration costs during the 12 months following the index claim. Annual costs were calculated across all patients as well as within each indication group and patient type (new initiator or continuing). In total, 21,652 patients met the study criteria (etanercept n = 12,065; adalimumab n = 5,685; infliximab n = 3,902); 43% of patients were new initiators. Patient characteristics were similar across treatment groups in terms of age (mean = 49, SD = 10) and gender (66% female). Across indications, the mean annual TNF-blocker cost per treated patient was $15,345 for etanercept, $18,046 for adalimumab, and $24,018 for infliximab. In new initiators, the TNF-blocker cost per treated patient across indications was $14,543 for etanercept, $16,978 for adalimumab, and $21,086 for infliximab; among patients continuing therapy, annual costs were $15,836 for etanercept, $19,457 for adalimumab, and $25,748 for infliximab. Patients on etanercept had the lowest TNF-blocker cost per treated patient for adult indications when applying actual drug use from a US-managed care population. TNF-blocker costs per treated patient on adalimumab and infliximab were approximately 18% and 57% higher than etanercept, respectively, using real-world drug use data.
    Advances in Therapy 03/2012; 29(3):234-48. · 2.44 Impact Factor

Full-text (2 Sources)

View
16 Downloads
Available from
May 21, 2014