Initiation of tumor necrosis factor-α antagonists and the risk of hospitalization for infection in patients with autoimmune diseases.

Division of Pharmacoepidemiology, Department of Preventive Medicine, Vanderbilt University School of Medicine, 1500 21st Ave S, Ste 2600, The Village at Vanderbilt, Nashville, TN 37212, USA.
JAMA The Journal of the American Medical Association (Impact Factor: 29.98). 11/2011; 306(21):2331-9. DOI: 10.1001/jama.2011.1692
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT Although tumor necrosis factor (TNF)-α antagonists are increasingly used in place of nonbiologic comparator medications, their safety profile remains incomplete.
To determine whether initiation of TNF-α antagonists compared with nonbiologic comparators is associated with an increased risk of serious infections requiring hospitalization.
Within a US multi-institutional collaboration, we assembled retrospective cohorts (1998-2007) of patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA), inflammatory bowel disease (IBD), and psoriasis, psoriatic arthritis, or ankylosing spondylitis (psoriasis and spondyloarthropathies) combining data from Kaiser Permanente Northern California, New Jersey and Pennsylvania Pharmaceutical Assistance programs, Tennessee Medicaid, and national Medicaid/Medicare. TNF-α antagonists and nonbiologic regimens were compared in disease-specific propensity score (PS)-matched cohorts using Cox regression models with nonbiologics as the reference. Baseline glucocorticoid use was evaluated as a separate covariate.
Infections requiring hospitalization (serious infections) during the first 12 months after initiation of TNF-α antagonists or nonbiologic regimens.
Study cohorts included 10,484 RA, 2323 IBD, and 3215 psoriasis and spondyloarthropathies matched pairs using TNF-α antagonists and comparator medications. Overall, we identified 1172 serious infections, most of which (53%) were pneumonia and skin and soft tissue infections. Among patients with RA, serious infection hospitalization rates were 8.16 (TNF-α antagonists) and 7.78 (comparator regimens) per 100 person-years (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR], 1.05 [95% CI, 0.91-1.21]). Among patients with IBD, rates were 10.91 (TNF-α antagonists) and 9.60 (comparator) per 100 person-years (aHR, 1.10 [95% CI, 0.83-1.46]). Among patients with psoriasis and spondyloarthropathies, rates were 5.41 (TNF-α antagonists) and 5.37 (comparator) per 100 person-years (aHR, 1.05 [95% CI, 0.76-1.45]). Among patients with RA, infliximab was associated with a significant increase in serious infections compared with etanercept (aHR, 1.26 [95% CI, 1.07-1.47]) and adalimumab (aHR, 1.23 [95% CI, 1.02-1.48]). Baseline glucocorticoid use was associated with a dose-dependent increase in infections.
Among patients with autoimmune diseases, compared with treatment with nonbiologic regimens, initiation of TNF-α antagonists was not associated with an increased risk of hospitalizations for serious infections.

  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: IntroductionThe objective of this study was to evaluate the long-term safety and efficacy of tabalumab, a monoclonal antibody that neutralizes membrane-bound and soluble B-cell activating factor, in rheumatoid arthritis (RA) patients.Methods Patients with RA who completed one of two 24-week randomized controlled trials (RCTs) participated in this 52-week, flexible-dose, open-label extension study. Patients in RCT1 received intravenous placebo, 30-mg tabalumab, or 80-mg tabalumab every three weeks, and patients in RCT2 received subcutaneous placebo or 1-, 3-, 10-, 30-, 60-, or 120-mg tabalumab every four weeks (Q4W). Regardless of prior treatment, all patients in this study received subcutaneous 60-mg tabalumab Q4W for the first three months, then a one-time increase to 120-mg tabalumab Q4W (60/120-mg group) and a one-time decrease to 60-mg Q4W per patient was allowed (60/120/60-mg group).ResultsThere were 182 patients enrolled: 60-mg (n¿=¿60), 60/120-mg (n¿=¿121), and 60/120/60-mg (n¿=¿1). Pre-tabalumab baseline disease activity was generally higher for the 60/120-mg group. There was a higher frequency of serious adverse events and treatment-emergent adverse events, as well as infections and injection-site reactions, in the 60/120-mg group. One death unrelated to study drug occurred (60/120-mg group). For both groups, total B-cell counts decreased approximately 40% from baseline of the RCT originating study. Both groups demonstrated efficacy on American College of Rheumatology criteria improvement ¿20%, ¿50%, and ¿70%, European League Against Rheumatism Responder Index in 28 joints, Disease Activity Score in 28 joints¿C-reactive protein, and Health Assessment Questionnaire¿Disability Index with 52 weeks of treatment relative to baseline pre-tabalumab disease activity.Conclusions With long-term, open-label tabalumab treatment, no unexpected safety signals were observed, and B-cell reductions were consistent with previous findings. Despite differences in RCT-originating studies, both groups demonstrated an efficacy response through the 52-week extension.Trial NCT00837811. Registered 3 February 2009.
    Arthritis Research & Therapy 08/2014; 16(5):415. · 4.12 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Tumor necrosis factor-α (TNF-α) inhibitors are biological agents introduced in the late 1990s for the treatment of different immune-mediated diseases as inflammatory bowel disease, rheumatoid arthritis and psoriasis. The most commonly used TNF-α antagonists are infliximab, adalimumab, and certolizumab pegol, and though highly effective in lowering inflammation, the efficacy must be weighed against the potential for adverse events. The treatment-induced immunosuppression is suspected to increase the risk of infections, including the risk of reactivation of latent tuberculosis, as the TNF-α cytokine plays an important role in the immune function. In this topic highlight a short overview of the infection risk associated with TNF-α inhibiter therapy is outlined with a focus on the overall risk of serious infections, mycobacterial infection and latent viral infections.
    World journal of gastroenterology : WJG. 11/2014; 20(43):16014-16019.
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Objectives To compare the risk of infection for rheumatoid arthritis (RA) patients who took etanercept or adalimumab medication in a nationwide population. Methods RA patients who took etanercept or adalimumab were identified in the Taiwan's National Health Insurance Research Database. The composite outcome of serious infections, including hospitalization for infection, reception of an antimicrobial injection, and tuberculosis were followed for 365 days. A Kaplan–Meier survival curve with a log-rank test and Cox proportional hazards regression were used to compare risks of infection between the two cohorts of tumor necrosis factor (TNF)-α antagonists users. Hazard ratios (HRs) were obtained and adjusted with propensity scores and clinical factors. Sensitivity analyses and subgroup analyses were also performed. Results In total, 1660 incident etanercept users and 484 incident adalimumab users were eligible for the analysis. The unadjusted HR for infection of the etanercept users was significantly higher than that of the adalimumab users (HR: 1.93; 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.09–3.42; p = 0.024). The HRs were 2.04 (95% CI: 1.14–3.65; p = 0.016) and 2.02 (95% CI: 1.13–3.61; p = 0.018) after adjusting for propensity scores and for propensity scores in addition to clinical factors, respectively. The subgroup analyses revealed that HRs for composite infection was significantly higher in patient subgroups of older age, female, as well as patients who did not have DM, COPD, and hospitalization history at the baseline. Conclusion In this head-to-head cohort study involving a nationwide population of patients with RA, etanercept users demonstrated a higher risk of infection than adalimumab users. Results of this study suggest the possible existence of an intra-class difference in infection risk among TNF-α antagonists.
    Computer Methods and Programs in Biomedicine 10/2014; · 1.09 Impact Factor

Full-text (2 Sources)

Available from
May 27, 2014