Entity

Time filter

Source Type

Alum Rock, CA, United States

Tak P.P.,University of Amsterdam | Rigby W.F.,Dartmouth Hitchcock Medical Center | Rubbert-Roth A.,University of Cologne | Peterfy C.G.,Spire science LLC | And 6 more authors.
Annals of the Rheumatic Diseases | Year: 2011

Objectives: Rituximab is an effective treatment in patients with established rheumatoid arthritis (RA). The Objective: of the IMAGE study was to determine the effi cacy of rituximab in the prevention of joint damage and its safety in combination with methotrexate (MTX) in patients initiating treatment with MTX. Methods: In this double-blind randomised controlled phase III study, 755 MTX-naïve patients with active RA were randomly assigned to MTX alone, rituximab 2×500 mg + MTX or rituximab 2×1000 mg + MTX. The primary end point at week 52 was the change in joint damage measured using a Genant-modified Sharp score. Results: 249, 249 and 250 patients were randomly assigned to MTX alone, rituximab 2×500 mg + MTX or rituximab 2×1000 mg + MTX, respectively. At week 52, treatment with rituximab 2×1000 mg + MTX compared with MTX alone was associated with a reduction in progression of joint damage (mean change in total modified Sharp score 0.359 vs 1.079; p=0.0004) and an improvement in clinical outcomes (ACR50 65% vs 42%; p<0.0001); rituximab 2×500 mg + MTX improved clinical outcomes (ACR50 59% vs 42%; p<0.0001) compared with MTX alone but did not signifi cantly reduce the progression of joint damage. Safety outcomes were similar between treatment groups. Conclusions: Treatment with rituximab 2×1000 mg in combination with MTX is an effective therapy for the treatment of patients with MTX-naïve RA. Source


Boyesen P.,Diakonhjemmet Hospital | McQueen F.M.,University of Auckland | Gandjbakhch F.,University Pierre and Marie Curie | Lillegraven S.,Diakonhjemmet Hospital | And 7 more authors.
Journal of Rheumatology | Year: 2011

Objective. The aim of this multireader exercise was to assess the reliability and sensitivity to change of the psoriatic arthritis magnetic resonance imaging score (PsAMRIS) in PsA patients followed for 1 year. Methods. MRI was acquired from 12 patients with PsA before initiation of treatment and after 12 months. MR images were scored according to PsAMRIS (for synovitis, tenosynovitis, periarticular inflammation, bone marrow edema, bone erosion, and bone proliferation) under standardized conditions, in unknown chronological order. Intraobserver/interobserver reliability was examined by intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC) and sensitivity to change by standardized response means (SRM). Results. The interobserver reliability of PsAMRIS was high for synovitis, tenosynovitis, periarticular inflammation, and bone edema status and change scores (interobserver ICC 0.87-0.97). The intraobserver reliability was moderate to high (ICC 0.60-0.98) for status and change scores, except for change in periarticular inflammation (ICC 0.33). PsAMRIS sensitivity to change was moderate for synovitis, tenosynovitis, and periarticular inflammation (SRM 0.5-0.8), while poor (SRM 0.1-0.3) for bone marrow edema, erosion, and bone proliferation. Rare occurrence and minimal change contributed to poor SRM and change-score ICC for bone parameters. Conclusion. This multireader exercise, performed under standardized conditions, confirmed PsAMRIS to have high interobserver and intraobserver reliability for hand PsA. Measures of inflammation were sensitive to change, implying that PsAMRIS may be a valuable tool for monitoring change in inflammation during PsA clinical trials. The Journal of Rheumatology Copyright © 2011. All rights reserved. Source


Peterfy C.,Spire science LLC | Ostergaard M.,Copenhagen University | Conaghan P.G.,University of Leeds
Annals of the Rheumatic Diseases | Year: 2013

The success of modern rheumatoid arthritis (RA) therapies and treatment strategies has led to extended placebo phases being unethical in RA randomised controlled trials (RCTs). Modern trials therefore increasingly involve active comparator designs, and this together with some technical issues has meant difficulties in differentiating structural progression using traditional radiographic outcome measures. Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) has been demonstrated to assess damage more sensitively than radiographs, but importantly it can measure the upstream drivers of erosions and cartilage loss, synovitis and osteitis. An increasing number of recent RCTs using the RA MRI scoring system (RAMRIS) have demonstrated the ability of MRI to discriminate progression and treatment effect. Consistency of erosion progression determination was seen across the majority of these studies. In most studies, MRI demonstrated reduction in synovitis and osteitis at early (12 week) timepoints, and MRI predicted subsequent radiographic findings. Often small numbers of patients were required to demonstrate such changes. The time is right for regulatory authorities to include MRI as an alternative to radiographic data in support of claims of inhibition of progression of structural damage in RA trials. Source


Tak P.P.,University of Amsterdam | Rigby W.,Dartmouth Hitchcock Medical Center | Rubbert-Roth A.,University of Cologne | Peterfy C.,Spire science LLC | And 6 more authors.
Annals of the Rheumatic Diseases | Year: 2012

Background: In the IMAGE study, rituximab plus methotrexate (MTX) inhibited joint damage and improved clinical outcomes at 1 year in MTX-naïve patients with early active rheumatoid arthritis. Objective: The aim of this study was to assess joint damage progression and clinical outcomes over 2 years. Methods: Patients (n=755) were randomised to receive rituximab 2x500 mg+MTX, 2x1000 mg+MTX or placebo+MTX. The placebo-controlled period continued to week 104. Two-year end points were defined as secondary or exploratory and included change in total Genant-modified Sharp score (mTSS), total erosion score and joint space narrowing score from baseline to week 104. Clinical efficacy and physical function end points were also assessed. Results: At 2 years, rituximab 2x1000 mg+MTX maintained inhibition of progressive joint damage versus MTX alone (mTSS change 0.41 vs 1.95; p<0.0001 (79% inhibition)), and a higher proportion of patients receiving rituximab 2x1000 mg+MTX had no radiographic progression over 2 years compared with those receiving MTX alone (57% vs 37%; p<0.0001). Contrary to 1-year results, exploratory analysis of rituximab 2x500 mg+MTX at 2 years showed that progressive joint damage was slowed by ∼61% versus placebo+MTX (mTSS, exploratory p=0.0041). Improvements in clinical signs and symptoms and physical function seen after 1 year in rituximab-treated patients versus those receiving placebo were maintained at year 2. Safety profiles were similar between groups. Conclusions: Treatment with rituximab 2x1000 mg+MTX was associated with sustained improvements in radiographic, clinical and functional outcomes over 2 years. Clinical trials.gov identifier NCT00299104. Source


Deodhar A.,Oregon Health And Science University | Dore R.K.,M&D Inc. | Schechtman J.,Sun Valley Arthritis Center Ltd. | Shergy W.,Rheumatology Associates of North Alabama | And 8 more authors.
Arthritis Care and Research | Year: 2010

Objective. Periarticular osteoporosis is one of the earliest radiographic signs of bone damage in rheumatoid arthritis (RA). Denosumab, an investigational fully human monoclonal antibody that binds to RANKL, inhibits bone erosion and systemic bone loss in clinical studies of patients with RA. In this hand bone mineral density (BMD) substudy, we investigated the effects of denosumab on hand BMD and its correlation with hand erosion scores. Methods. Patients receiving methotrexate for erosive RA were randomized in a 1:1:1 ratio to receive subcutaneous placebo, denosumab 60 mg, or denosumab 180 mg at 0 and 6 months. Measurements included BMD (by dual x-ray absorptiometry [DXA]) of both hands (0, 1, 6, and 12 months), magnetic resonance images of the hands/wrists (0 and 6 months), and radiographs of the hands/wrists and feet (0, 6, and 12 months). Results. There were 56 patients (13 placebo, 21 denosumab 60 mg, and 22 denosumab 180 mg). Mean changes in hand BMD at 6 and 12 months were: +0.8% and +1.0%, respectively, for denosumab 60 mg; +2.0% and +2.5%, respectively, for denosumab 180 mg; and -1.2% and -2.0%, respectively, for placebo. Erosion scores remained near baseline in the denosumab groups and increased from baseline in the placebo group. A negative correlation was observed between hand BMD and erosion scores. Conclusion. In patients with RA, denosumab provided protection against erosion, and not only prevented bone loss but increased hand BMD as measured by DXA. © 2010, American College of Rheumatology. Source

Discover hidden collaborations