Skip to main content

Main menu

  • Home
  • Content
    • First Release
    • Current
    • Archives
    • Collections
    • Audiovisual Rheum
    • COVID-19 and Rheumatology
  • Resources
    • Guide for Authors
    • Submit Manuscript
    • Payment
    • Reviewers
    • Advertisers
    • Classified Ads
    • Reprints and Translations
    • Permissions
    • Meetings
    • FAQ
    • Policies
  • Subscribers
    • Subscription Information
    • Purchase Subscription
    • Your Account
    • Terms and Conditions
  • About Us
    • About Us
    • Editorial Board
    • Letter from the Editor
    • Duncan A. Gordon Award
    • Privacy/GDPR Policy
    • Accessibility
  • Contact Us
  • JRheum Supplements
  • Services

User menu

  • My Cart
  • Log In

Search

  • Advanced search
The Journal of Rheumatology
  • JRheum Supplements
  • Services
  • My Cart
  • Log In
The Journal of Rheumatology

Advanced Search

  • Home
  • Content
    • First Release
    • Current
    • Archives
    • Collections
    • Audiovisual Rheum
    • COVID-19 and Rheumatology
  • Resources
    • Guide for Authors
    • Submit Manuscript
    • Payment
    • Reviewers
    • Advertisers
    • Classified Ads
    • Reprints and Translations
    • Permissions
    • Meetings
    • FAQ
    • Policies
  • Subscribers
    • Subscription Information
    • Purchase Subscription
    • Your Account
    • Terms and Conditions
  • About Us
    • About Us
    • Editorial Board
    • Letter from the Editor
    • Duncan A. Gordon Award
    • Privacy/GDPR Policy
    • Accessibility
  • Contact Us
  • Follow jrheum on Twitter
  • Visit jrheum on Facebook
  • Follow jrheum on LinkedIn
  • Follow jrheum on YouTube
  • Follow jrheum on Instagram
  • Follow jrheum on RSS
Research ArticleArticle

Differences in Predictive Factors for Sustained Clinical Remission with Abatacept Between Younger and Elderly Patients with Biologic-naive Rheumatoid Arthritis: Results from the ABROAD Study

Masahiro Sekiguchi, Takao Fujii, Kiyoshi Matsui, Kosaku Murakami, Satoshi Morita, Koichiro Ohmura, Yutaka Kawahito, Norihiro Nishimoto, Tsuneyo Mimori, Hajime Sano and The ABROAD Study Investigators
The Journal of Rheumatology November 2016, 43 (11) 1974-1983; DOI: https://doi.org/10.3899/jrheum.160051
Masahiro Sekiguchi
From the Division of Rheumatology, Department of Internal Medicine, Hyogo College of Medicine, Hyogo; Department of Rheumatology and Clinical Immunology, and the Department of Biomedical Statistics and Bioinformatics, Graduate School of Medicine, Kyoto University; Department of Inflammation and Immunology, Graduate School of Medical Science, Kyoto Prefectural University of Medicine, Kyoto; Osaka Rheumatology Clinic and Institute of Medical Science, Osaka; Tokyo Medical University, Tokyo, Japan.
M. Sekiguchi, MD, PhD, Hyogo College of Medicine; T. Fujii, MD, PhD, Graduate School of Medicine, Kyoto University; K. Matsui, MD, PhD, Hyogo College of Medicine; K. Murakami, MD, PhD, Graduate School of Medicine, Kyoto University; S. Morita, MD, PhD, Graduate School of Medicine, Kyoto University; K. Ohmura, MD, PhD, Graduate School of Medicine, Kyoto University; Y. Kawahito, MD, PhD, Graduate School of Medical Science, Kyoto Prefectural University of Medicine; N. Nishimoto, MD, PhD, Osaka Rheumatology Clinic and Institute of Medical Science, Tokyo Medical University; T. Mimori, MD, PhD, Graduate School of Medicine, Kyoto University; H. Sano, MD, PhD, Hyogo College of Medicine. Dr. Sekiguchi and Dr. Fujii contributed equally to this study.
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • For correspondence: masa-s@hyo-med.ac.jp
Takao Fujii
From the Division of Rheumatology, Department of Internal Medicine, Hyogo College of Medicine, Hyogo; Department of Rheumatology and Clinical Immunology, and the Department of Biomedical Statistics and Bioinformatics, Graduate School of Medicine, Kyoto University; Department of Inflammation and Immunology, Graduate School of Medical Science, Kyoto Prefectural University of Medicine, Kyoto; Osaka Rheumatology Clinic and Institute of Medical Science, Osaka; Tokyo Medical University, Tokyo, Japan.
M. Sekiguchi, MD, PhD, Hyogo College of Medicine; T. Fujii, MD, PhD, Graduate School of Medicine, Kyoto University; K. Matsui, MD, PhD, Hyogo College of Medicine; K. Murakami, MD, PhD, Graduate School of Medicine, Kyoto University; S. Morita, MD, PhD, Graduate School of Medicine, Kyoto University; K. Ohmura, MD, PhD, Graduate School of Medicine, Kyoto University; Y. Kawahito, MD, PhD, Graduate School of Medical Science, Kyoto Prefectural University of Medicine; N. Nishimoto, MD, PhD, Osaka Rheumatology Clinic and Institute of Medical Science, Tokyo Medical University; T. Mimori, MD, PhD, Graduate School of Medicine, Kyoto University; H. Sano, MD, PhD, Hyogo College of Medicine. Dr. Sekiguchi and Dr. Fujii contributed equally to this study.
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Kiyoshi Matsui
From the Division of Rheumatology, Department of Internal Medicine, Hyogo College of Medicine, Hyogo; Department of Rheumatology and Clinical Immunology, and the Department of Biomedical Statistics and Bioinformatics, Graduate School of Medicine, Kyoto University; Department of Inflammation and Immunology, Graduate School of Medical Science, Kyoto Prefectural University of Medicine, Kyoto; Osaka Rheumatology Clinic and Institute of Medical Science, Osaka; Tokyo Medical University, Tokyo, Japan.
M. Sekiguchi, MD, PhD, Hyogo College of Medicine; T. Fujii, MD, PhD, Graduate School of Medicine, Kyoto University; K. Matsui, MD, PhD, Hyogo College of Medicine; K. Murakami, MD, PhD, Graduate School of Medicine, Kyoto University; S. Morita, MD, PhD, Graduate School of Medicine, Kyoto University; K. Ohmura, MD, PhD, Graduate School of Medicine, Kyoto University; Y. Kawahito, MD, PhD, Graduate School of Medical Science, Kyoto Prefectural University of Medicine; N. Nishimoto, MD, PhD, Osaka Rheumatology Clinic and Institute of Medical Science, Tokyo Medical University; T. Mimori, MD, PhD, Graduate School of Medicine, Kyoto University; H. Sano, MD, PhD, Hyogo College of Medicine. Dr. Sekiguchi and Dr. Fujii contributed equally to this study.
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Kosaku Murakami
From the Division of Rheumatology, Department of Internal Medicine, Hyogo College of Medicine, Hyogo; Department of Rheumatology and Clinical Immunology, and the Department of Biomedical Statistics and Bioinformatics, Graduate School of Medicine, Kyoto University; Department of Inflammation and Immunology, Graduate School of Medical Science, Kyoto Prefectural University of Medicine, Kyoto; Osaka Rheumatology Clinic and Institute of Medical Science, Osaka; Tokyo Medical University, Tokyo, Japan.
M. Sekiguchi, MD, PhD, Hyogo College of Medicine; T. Fujii, MD, PhD, Graduate School of Medicine, Kyoto University; K. Matsui, MD, PhD, Hyogo College of Medicine; K. Murakami, MD, PhD, Graduate School of Medicine, Kyoto University; S. Morita, MD, PhD, Graduate School of Medicine, Kyoto University; K. Ohmura, MD, PhD, Graduate School of Medicine, Kyoto University; Y. Kawahito, MD, PhD, Graduate School of Medical Science, Kyoto Prefectural University of Medicine; N. Nishimoto, MD, PhD, Osaka Rheumatology Clinic and Institute of Medical Science, Tokyo Medical University; T. Mimori, MD, PhD, Graduate School of Medicine, Kyoto University; H. Sano, MD, PhD, Hyogo College of Medicine. Dr. Sekiguchi and Dr. Fujii contributed equally to this study.
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Satoshi Morita
From the Division of Rheumatology, Department of Internal Medicine, Hyogo College of Medicine, Hyogo; Department of Rheumatology and Clinical Immunology, and the Department of Biomedical Statistics and Bioinformatics, Graduate School of Medicine, Kyoto University; Department of Inflammation and Immunology, Graduate School of Medical Science, Kyoto Prefectural University of Medicine, Kyoto; Osaka Rheumatology Clinic and Institute of Medical Science, Osaka; Tokyo Medical University, Tokyo, Japan.
M. Sekiguchi, MD, PhD, Hyogo College of Medicine; T. Fujii, MD, PhD, Graduate School of Medicine, Kyoto University; K. Matsui, MD, PhD, Hyogo College of Medicine; K. Murakami, MD, PhD, Graduate School of Medicine, Kyoto University; S. Morita, MD, PhD, Graduate School of Medicine, Kyoto University; K. Ohmura, MD, PhD, Graduate School of Medicine, Kyoto University; Y. Kawahito, MD, PhD, Graduate School of Medical Science, Kyoto Prefectural University of Medicine; N. Nishimoto, MD, PhD, Osaka Rheumatology Clinic and Institute of Medical Science, Tokyo Medical University; T. Mimori, MD, PhD, Graduate School of Medicine, Kyoto University; H. Sano, MD, PhD, Hyogo College of Medicine. Dr. Sekiguchi and Dr. Fujii contributed equally to this study.
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Koichiro Ohmura
From the Division of Rheumatology, Department of Internal Medicine, Hyogo College of Medicine, Hyogo; Department of Rheumatology and Clinical Immunology, and the Department of Biomedical Statistics and Bioinformatics, Graduate School of Medicine, Kyoto University; Department of Inflammation and Immunology, Graduate School of Medical Science, Kyoto Prefectural University of Medicine, Kyoto; Osaka Rheumatology Clinic and Institute of Medical Science, Osaka; Tokyo Medical University, Tokyo, Japan.
M. Sekiguchi, MD, PhD, Hyogo College of Medicine; T. Fujii, MD, PhD, Graduate School of Medicine, Kyoto University; K. Matsui, MD, PhD, Hyogo College of Medicine; K. Murakami, MD, PhD, Graduate School of Medicine, Kyoto University; S. Morita, MD, PhD, Graduate School of Medicine, Kyoto University; K. Ohmura, MD, PhD, Graduate School of Medicine, Kyoto University; Y. Kawahito, MD, PhD, Graduate School of Medical Science, Kyoto Prefectural University of Medicine; N. Nishimoto, MD, PhD, Osaka Rheumatology Clinic and Institute of Medical Science, Tokyo Medical University; T. Mimori, MD, PhD, Graduate School of Medicine, Kyoto University; H. Sano, MD, PhD, Hyogo College of Medicine. Dr. Sekiguchi and Dr. Fujii contributed equally to this study.
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Yutaka Kawahito
From the Division of Rheumatology, Department of Internal Medicine, Hyogo College of Medicine, Hyogo; Department of Rheumatology and Clinical Immunology, and the Department of Biomedical Statistics and Bioinformatics, Graduate School of Medicine, Kyoto University; Department of Inflammation and Immunology, Graduate School of Medical Science, Kyoto Prefectural University of Medicine, Kyoto; Osaka Rheumatology Clinic and Institute of Medical Science, Osaka; Tokyo Medical University, Tokyo, Japan.
M. Sekiguchi, MD, PhD, Hyogo College of Medicine; T. Fujii, MD, PhD, Graduate School of Medicine, Kyoto University; K. Matsui, MD, PhD, Hyogo College of Medicine; K. Murakami, MD, PhD, Graduate School of Medicine, Kyoto University; S. Morita, MD, PhD, Graduate School of Medicine, Kyoto University; K. Ohmura, MD, PhD, Graduate School of Medicine, Kyoto University; Y. Kawahito, MD, PhD, Graduate School of Medical Science, Kyoto Prefectural University of Medicine; N. Nishimoto, MD, PhD, Osaka Rheumatology Clinic and Institute of Medical Science, Tokyo Medical University; T. Mimori, MD, PhD, Graduate School of Medicine, Kyoto University; H. Sano, MD, PhD, Hyogo College of Medicine. Dr. Sekiguchi and Dr. Fujii contributed equally to this study.
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Norihiro Nishimoto
From the Division of Rheumatology, Department of Internal Medicine, Hyogo College of Medicine, Hyogo; Department of Rheumatology and Clinical Immunology, and the Department of Biomedical Statistics and Bioinformatics, Graduate School of Medicine, Kyoto University; Department of Inflammation and Immunology, Graduate School of Medical Science, Kyoto Prefectural University of Medicine, Kyoto; Osaka Rheumatology Clinic and Institute of Medical Science, Osaka; Tokyo Medical University, Tokyo, Japan.
M. Sekiguchi, MD, PhD, Hyogo College of Medicine; T. Fujii, MD, PhD, Graduate School of Medicine, Kyoto University; K. Matsui, MD, PhD, Hyogo College of Medicine; K. Murakami, MD, PhD, Graduate School of Medicine, Kyoto University; S. Morita, MD, PhD, Graduate School of Medicine, Kyoto University; K. Ohmura, MD, PhD, Graduate School of Medicine, Kyoto University; Y. Kawahito, MD, PhD, Graduate School of Medical Science, Kyoto Prefectural University of Medicine; N. Nishimoto, MD, PhD, Osaka Rheumatology Clinic and Institute of Medical Science, Tokyo Medical University; T. Mimori, MD, PhD, Graduate School of Medicine, Kyoto University; H. Sano, MD, PhD, Hyogo College of Medicine. Dr. Sekiguchi and Dr. Fujii contributed equally to this study.
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Tsuneyo Mimori
From the Division of Rheumatology, Department of Internal Medicine, Hyogo College of Medicine, Hyogo; Department of Rheumatology and Clinical Immunology, and the Department of Biomedical Statistics and Bioinformatics, Graduate School of Medicine, Kyoto University; Department of Inflammation and Immunology, Graduate School of Medical Science, Kyoto Prefectural University of Medicine, Kyoto; Osaka Rheumatology Clinic and Institute of Medical Science, Osaka; Tokyo Medical University, Tokyo, Japan.
M. Sekiguchi, MD, PhD, Hyogo College of Medicine; T. Fujii, MD, PhD, Graduate School of Medicine, Kyoto University; K. Matsui, MD, PhD, Hyogo College of Medicine; K. Murakami, MD, PhD, Graduate School of Medicine, Kyoto University; S. Morita, MD, PhD, Graduate School of Medicine, Kyoto University; K. Ohmura, MD, PhD, Graduate School of Medicine, Kyoto University; Y. Kawahito, MD, PhD, Graduate School of Medical Science, Kyoto Prefectural University of Medicine; N. Nishimoto, MD, PhD, Osaka Rheumatology Clinic and Institute of Medical Science, Tokyo Medical University; T. Mimori, MD, PhD, Graduate School of Medicine, Kyoto University; H. Sano, MD, PhD, Hyogo College of Medicine. Dr. Sekiguchi and Dr. Fujii contributed equally to this study.
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Hajime Sano
From the Division of Rheumatology, Department of Internal Medicine, Hyogo College of Medicine, Hyogo; Department of Rheumatology and Clinical Immunology, and the Department of Biomedical Statistics and Bioinformatics, Graduate School of Medicine, Kyoto University; Department of Inflammation and Immunology, Graduate School of Medical Science, Kyoto Prefectural University of Medicine, Kyoto; Osaka Rheumatology Clinic and Institute of Medical Science, Osaka; Tokyo Medical University, Tokyo, Japan.
M. Sekiguchi, MD, PhD, Hyogo College of Medicine; T. Fujii, MD, PhD, Graduate School of Medicine, Kyoto University; K. Matsui, MD, PhD, Hyogo College of Medicine; K. Murakami, MD, PhD, Graduate School of Medicine, Kyoto University; S. Morita, MD, PhD, Graduate School of Medicine, Kyoto University; K. Ohmura, MD, PhD, Graduate School of Medicine, Kyoto University; Y. Kawahito, MD, PhD, Graduate School of Medical Science, Kyoto Prefectural University of Medicine; N. Nishimoto, MD, PhD, Osaka Rheumatology Clinic and Institute of Medical Science, Tokyo Medical University; T. Mimori, MD, PhD, Graduate School of Medicine, Kyoto University; H. Sano, MD, PhD, Hyogo College of Medicine. Dr. Sekiguchi and Dr. Fujii contributed equally to this study.
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
From the Division of Rheumatology, Department of Internal Medicine, Hyogo College of Medicine, Hyogo; Department of Rheumatology and Clinical Immunology, and the Department of Biomedical Statistics and Bioinformatics, Graduate School of Medicine, Kyoto University; Department of Inflammation and Immunology, Graduate School of Medical Science, Kyoto Prefectural University of Medicine, Kyoto; Osaka Rheumatology Clinic and Institute of Medical Science, Osaka; Tokyo Medical University, Tokyo, Japan.
M. Sekiguchi, MD, PhD, Hyogo College of Medicine; T. Fujii, MD, PhD, Graduate School of Medicine, Kyoto University; K. Matsui, MD, PhD, Hyogo College of Medicine; K. Murakami, MD, PhD, Graduate School of Medicine, Kyoto University; S. Morita, MD, PhD, Graduate School of Medicine, Kyoto University; K. Ohmura, MD, PhD, Graduate School of Medicine, Kyoto University; Y. Kawahito, MD, PhD, Graduate School of Medical Science, Kyoto Prefectural University of Medicine; N. Nishimoto, MD, PhD, Osaka Rheumatology Clinic and Institute of Medical Science, Tokyo Medical University; T. Mimori, MD, PhD, Graduate School of Medicine, Kyoto University; H. Sano, MD, PhD, Hyogo College of Medicine. Dr. Sekiguchi and Dr. Fujii contributed equally to this study.
  • Article
  • Figures & Data
  • Supplemental
  • Info & Metrics
  • References
  • PDF
  • eLetters
PreviousNext
Loading

Abstract

Objective. To differentiate predictive factors for sustained clinical remission between elderly and younger patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) receiving abatacept (ABA) as an initial biological disease-modifying antirheumatic drug.

Methods. The study involved 277 biologic-naive patients with RA with high or moderate disease activity, who were treated with intravenous ABA and evaluated for 48 weeks in 43 Japanese hospitals and rheumatology clinics (the ABatacept Research Outcomes as a First-line Biological Agent in the Real WorlD study: UMIN000004651). Predictive factors associated with sustained clinical remission defined by the 28-joint Disease Activity Score with C-reactive protein (DAS28-CRP) during the 24–48–week or 36–48–week periods were determined in elderly (≥ 65 yrs, n = 148) and younger patient groups (< 65 yrs, n = 129) using logistic regression analysis.

Results. Clinical remission was achieved at 24 and 48 weeks in 35.1% and 36.5% of patients in the elderly group and 34.9% and 43.4% in the younger group, respectively. In elderly patients, anticitrullinated protein antibody (ACPA) positivity and a lower DAS28-CRP score were significantly associated with sustained clinical remission; however, a lower Health Assessment Questionnaire-Disability Index (HAQ-DI) score was not related to sustained clinical remission. In younger patients, lower DAS28-CRP and HAQ-DI scores were predictive factors for sustained clinical remission, whereas ACPA positivity was not a useful predictive factor for sustained clinical remission.

Conclusion. Although the effectiveness of ABA in biologic-naive patients with RA was equally recognized in elderly and younger patients, the baseline clinical characteristics associated with sustained clinical remission were substantially different.

Key Indexing Terms:
  • RHEUMATOID ARTHRITIS
  • ABATACEPT
  • CLINICAL REMISSION
  • METHOTREXATE
  • ANTICITRULLINATED PROTEIN ANTIBODIES
  • HEALTH ASSESSMENT QUESTIONNAIRE-DISABILITY INDEX

Rheumatoid arthritis (RA) is a systemic autoimmune disease characterized mainly by chronic joint inflammation. In the synovial membrane of patients with RA, hyperplasia and inflammatory cell infiltration have been observed, including activated T cells, which are involved in the pathogenesis of RA1. Activated T cells proliferate and induce monocytes, macrophages, and synovial fibroblasts to produce proinflammatory cytokines, such as tumor necrosis factor-α (TNF-α), interleukin 1 (IL-1), and IL-61, and the stimulation of osteoclastogenesis and matrix metalloproteinase secretion2. Therefore, the suppression of T cell activation is considered a reasonable therapeutic target. Abatacept (ABA) is a soluble human recombinant fusion protein in which the extracellular domain of human cytotoxic T lymphocyte-associated molecule 4 is bound to the Fc portion of human IgG1. The safety and efficacy of ABA in patients with RA have been demonstrated in many worldwide studies for those who are methotrexate (MTX)-naive3, MTX-inadequate responders4,5, or anti-TNF-α–inadequate responders6. ABA is the fifth biological disease-modifying antirheumatic drug (bDMARD) adopted in Japan; it has been administered mainly to patients with RA who have experienced adverse events (AE) or an inadequate response to previous bDMARD such as TNF inhibitors or anti-IL-6 receptor antibodies. Consequently, no published reports have fully assessed the effectiveness of ABA in a Japanese multicenter study exclusively in biologic-naive patients with RA.

There are no specific recommendations for treatment of elderly patients with RA. In Japan, safety profiles are sometimes developed for the treatment of elderly patients with RA, especially those who have comorbidities such as renal dysfunction and chronic lung disease. Additionally, increasing age is a strong independent risk factor for serious infection in patients with RA7. Consequently, the strategies for treatment of elderly patients with RA tend to focus more on safety when compared with younger patients8. Based on the results of previous studies5,9,10, treatment with ABA is thought to be safer than with TNF inhibitors. Therefore, treatment with ABA tends to be favorable for elderly patients with RA.

The aims of our present study were to identify the predictive factors associated with sustained clinical remission for biologic-naive patients with RA and to compare them between elderly (≥ 65 yrs) and younger patients (< 65 yrs).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The ABROAD study

The ABROAD (the ABatacept Research Outcomes as a First-line Biological Agent in the Real WorlD) study was a prospective, multicenter, open-label observational cohort study performed between December 2010 and October 2014. The study aimed to evaluate the effectiveness and safety of an intravenous (IV) infusion of ABA in biologic-naive Japanese patients with RA. Forty-three institutions participated, and all enrolled patients met either the 1987 American College of Rheumatology (ACR) classification criteria or the 2010 ACR/European League Against Rheumatism (EULAR) classification criteria11,12. All patients had moderate (MDA) or high disease activity (HDA) and had no treatment history with bDMARD and tofacitinib, although patients treated with MTX or other conventional DMARD (cDMARD) were included. The clinical effectiveness and safety of ABA treatment were evaluated over 48 weeks. Before enrollment, written informed consent was obtained from all the patients according to the Declaration of Helsinki. The study design was first approved by the Ethics Committee of Hyogo College of Medicine on November 2010, and then approved by each participating center or institution. The ABROAD study was registered with the University hospital Medical Information Network Clinical Trial Registry (UMIN000004651).

Treatment protocol

ABA was administered by an IV infusion according to the standard protocol on days 1, 15, and 29, and every 4 weeks thereafter. All enrolled patients continued to receive their background RA therapy upon study entry. A stable dose of a glucocorticoid (GC; ≤ 10 mg prednisolone equivalent daily) given for at least 28 days before treatment with ABA was permitted. However, during the study period, the new addition of MTX or GC or an increase in the dose above its baseline amount were not permitted. All the cDMARD (e.g., salazosulfapyridine) other than MTX and tofacitinib could be added during the study period.

Assessment of ABA effectiveness

Disease activity of all the patients was evaluated using the 28-joint Disease Activity Score with C-reactive protein (DAS28-CRP) and was categorized as HDA (DAS28-CRP > 4.1), MDA (2.7 ≤ DAS28-CRP ≤ 4.1), low disease activity (LDA; DAS28-CRP < 2.7), or remission (DAS28-CRP < 2.3)13. The participants’ physical function was assessed using the Health Assessment Questionnaire-Disability Index (HAQ-DI)14. The DAS28-CRP and HAQ-DI scores were recorded at baseline and then at 4, 12, 24, 36, and 48 weeks after the initiation of ABA. The clinical effectiveness of ABA was compared between elderly (≥ 65 yrs) and younger patients (< 65 yrs). Associations between the baseline patient profiles, including the disease activity, concomitant MTX use, and laboratory findings at baseline, and sustained clinical remission were examined using logistic regression analysis. Sustained clinical remission was defined as clinical remission (DAS28-CRP) that was achieved at 48 weeks and continued over 12 weeks during the final 24 weeks of the study period. Instances of drug withdrawal were not included in the assessment of sustained clinical remission, even if clinical remission was observed when the drug was discontinued.

Statistical analysis

Statistical analysis of the 2-group comparison was performed using the paired Student t test (or Wilcoxon rank sum test when appropriate) for paired data and the Student t test (or Mann-Whitney U test when appropriate) for unpaired data. The chi-square test (or Fisher’s exact test when appropriate) was used to compare categorical data. Missing data on clinical characteristics of patients who discontinued their participation before 48 weeks or could not be evaluated through regular visits were imputed using a last observation carried forward analysis. The log-rank test was used to compare the retention rate of ABA treatment and each withdrawal rate because of AE or infection. Multivariate logistic regression analysis with stepwise backward selection was performed to identify the variables at baseline that were potentially associated with sustained clinical remission. All statistical tests were 2-sided, and significance was defined as p < 0.05. All analyses were performed using JMP 11 (SAS Institute Inc.).

RESULTS

Characteristics of the patients

In our present study, 277 biologic-naive patients with RA with HDA or MDA were evaluated. Their demographic and clinical characteristics at baseline are shown in Table 1. The mean and median ages of the participants were 63.2 ± 13.3 years and 65 years, respectively. The proportion of patients whose age was in the 70s was 31.0%, which was the highest percentage of any age group by decade (Supplementary Figure 1, available online at jrheum.org). The percentage of concomitant MTX use was 69.0% with a mean dose of 7.8 ± 2.7 mg/week, whereas GC use was 55.2% with a mean dose of 5.1 ± 2.4 mg/day. Rheumatoid factor (RF) and anticitrullinated protein antibody (ACPA) positivity rates among patients with measurements were 79.2% and 84.4%, respectively.

View this table:
  • View inline
  • View popup
Table 1.

Patients’ profiles in the ABROAD study. A significance test was performed between the elderly and younger patient groups. Values are mean ± SD: median unless otherwise specified.

One hundred forty-eight patients (53.4%) were ≥ 65 years old (elderly group) and 129 (46.6%) were < 65 years old (younger group). The ratio of men to women, RA disease activity, and disease duration were similar between the groups. The mean HAQ-DI score was higher in the elderly patient group than in the younger patient group (1.24 ± 0.73 vs 0.94 ± 0.73, p = 0.0011). The percentage of concomitant GC use and the mean GC dosage were similar between the groups. However, MTX was more frequently used in the younger patient group than in the elderly patient group (81.4% vs 58.1%, p < 0.0001). At the initiation of ABA treatment, 1 patient in the elderly group used 2 cDMARD concomitant with MTX, and 10 and 1 used 2 and 3 cDMARD without MTX, respectively. In the younger group, 5 patients used 2 cDMARD with MTX, and 3 and 2 patients used 2 and 3 cDMARD without MTX, respectively. Eleven patients were administered additional cDMARD, other than MTX, during the study period [tacrolimus (n = 7), salazosulfapyridine (n = 3), and mizoribine (n = 1); Supplementary Table 1, available online at jrheum.org]. Although ACPA and RF positivity rates were similar between the groups, a highly positive ACPA (≥ 13.5 U/ml; > 3× the upper limit of normal12) was more frequently recognized in the elderly group than in the younger group.

Clinical effectiveness and safety

Figures 1A and 1B illustrate the number of patients who achieved sustained remission on each time course.

Figure 1.
  • Download figure
  • Open in new tab
  • Download powerpoint
Figure 1.

A. Patients’ disposition. Sustained clinical remission was defined as clinical remission (DAS28-CRP < 2.3) that was achieved at 48 weeks and continued over 12 weeks during the final 24 weeks in the study period. Cases of treatment withdrawal were not considered to have achieved sustained clinical remission, even if clinical remission was observed when the drug was discontinued. Seventy-five of the 202 patients who completed the study achieved sustained clinical remission. The reasons for discontinuing treatment other than AE and a lack of efficacy were lost to followup (n = 8), withdrawal of consent (n = 7), remission/major improvement (n = 3), economic reason (n = 2), other (n = 4), and unknown (n = 4). B. Evaluation points in our cohort. Fifty-eight and 17 patients achieved sustained clinical remission during weeks 24–48 and 36–48, respectively. Triangles indicate the points of attained clinical remission. DAS28: 28-joint Disease Activity Score; CRP: C-reactive protein; AE: adverse events; RA: rheumatoid arthritis.

Clinical effectiveness of ABA treatment at each evaluation point is shown in Figure 2. After ABA treatment, the mean DAS28-CRP score significantly decreased from 4.58 ± 1.14 at baseline to 3.57 ± 1.15 at Week 4 (p < 0.0001) and to 2.79 ± 1.27 at Week 48 (data not shown). At weeks 4, 12, 24, and 48, DAS28-CRP–defined clinical remission rates were 11.9%, 28.5%, 35.0%, and 39.7%, respectively, and LDA rates were 23.1%, 45.5%, 50.5%, and 53.8%, respectively (Figure 2A). As shown in Figure 2B, the clinical remission rate at each point and the sustained clinical remission rate after 24 weeks were equivalent in both elderly and younger patients. Additionally, the LDA achievement rate at each point did not differ between the 2 age groups (Supplementary Figure 2, available online at jrheum.org). Treatment with ABA significantly lowered the mean HAQ-DI score from 1.10 ± 0.74 at baseline to 0.90 ± 0.73 at Week 4 (p < 0.0001), and it continued to decrease to 0.74 ± 0.72 at Week 48 during the course of treatment. The percentage of patients achieving functional remission (HAQ-DI ≤ 0.5) was increased to 50.2% at 48 weeks (Figure 2C). However, in the elderly group, the functional remission rate was significantly lower than in the younger group during the entire study period, although it persistently increased from 20.5% at baseline to 40.9% at Week 48 (Figure 2D).

Figure 2.
  • Download figure
  • Open in new tab
  • Download powerpoint
Figure 2.

Clinical effectiveness of ABA in biologic-naive patients with rheumatoid arthritis. A. The change in the proportion of patients who achieved clinical remission and LDA after ABA treatment. All the patients had moderate disease activity or high disease activity at baseline, and 35.0% and 39.7% of patients achieved clinical remission at 24 and 48 weeks, respectively. B. Comparison of the clinical remission rate between the elderly and younger patient groups. Sustained remission was defined as clinical remission (DAS28-CRP < 2.3) that was achieved at 48 weeks and continued over 12 weeks during the final 24 weeks in the study period. There were 27.7% of elderly patients and 31.8% of younger patients who achieved sustained remission. C. The change in the mean values of the HAQ-DI score and the proportion of patients achieving functional remission after ABA treatment. D. Comparison of the functional remission rate between the elderly and younger patient groups. ABA: abatacept; LDA: low disease activity; DAS28: 28-joint Disease Activity Score; CRP: C-reactive protein; HAQ-DI: Health Assessment Questionnaire-Disability Index; LOCF: last observation carried forward.

Baseline predictive factors for achieving sustained clinical remission in each age group

The predictive factors for sustained clinical remission were determined in each age group (Table 2). In univariate logistic analysis, significant variables affecting the sustained clinical remission for elderly patients were ACPA positivity, the DAS28-CRP score, and the HAQ-DI score. However, significant variables associated with sustained clinical remission for younger patients were concomitant MTX use, Steinbrocker stage I or II, the DAS28-CRP score, the HAQ-DI, and disease duration. RF positivity was not associated with sustained clinical remission in either age group in univariate analysis. HAQ-DI was significantly correlated with both the DAS28-CRP score and disease duration in both age groups. Therefore, multivariable logistic regression analysis was performed separately in 2 models, which included DAS28-CRP and disease duration (Model A) and HAQ-DI alone (Model B). The multivariable logistic regression analysis (Model A) indicated that that ACPA positivity (OR 8.141, p = 0.0138) was a useful independent predictive factor of sustained clinical remission in elderly patients, and a higher DAS28-CRP score at baseline was negatively associated with achieving sustained clinical remission in both elderly and younger patients (in elderly patients, OR 0.560, p = 0.0069; in younger patients, OR 0.460, p < 0.0001). In younger patients, concomitant MTX use (OR 3.183, p = 0.0588) had a tendency to be associated with sustained clinical remission, although the difference was not statistically significant. In the second multivariable logistic regression analysis (Model B), ACPA positivity (OR 6.792, p = 0.0270) was the only useful independent predictive factor for achieving sustained clinical remission in elderly patients, while in younger patients, a higher HAQ-DI score at baseline (OR 0.188, p < 0.0001) was negatively associated with sustained clinical remission.

View this table:
  • View inline
  • View popup
Table 2.

Logistic regression analysis of baseline characteristics associated with sustained clinical remission with abatacept treatment. An increase in the continuous variable (i.e., the DAS28-CRP, HAQ-DI, and disease duration) represented a lower sustained clinical remission rate. Univariate analysis variables were included in a multivariable logistic model, and the model was developed using a stepwise selection process. The multivariate logistic regression model contained 5 variables (female sex, concomitant MTX use, ACPA positivity, RF positivity, and Steinbrocker stage I or II). In addition to these variables, Model A included DAS28-CRP and disease duration, while Model B contained HAQ-DI.

Retention rate and safety of treatment with ABA in different age groups

Figure 3 shows the retention rate of ABA treatment and the withdrawal rate owing to AE during the study period in each age group. Retention rates at 48 weeks in the elderly and younger patient groups were 72.3% and 73.6%, respectively (p = 0.713). No significant difference was found in the withdrawal rate of treatment with ABA owing to AE in each age group (elderly group: 9.5%, younger group: 4.7%, p = 0.123). The reasons for discontinuation of treatment because of AE are summarized in Table 3. There were 3 deaths in the elderly patient group during the course of the study; the causes of death for each patient were Pneumocystis jirovecii pneumonia, interstitial pneumonia, and acute myocardial infarction (MI). All patients who died were over 80 years old. The patient who developed interstitial pneumonia received MTX therapy and did not have an abnormal shadow on chest radiography at the beginning of the ABA treatment. Therefore, this may be a case of adverse reaction induced by ABA, and MTX may have been involved. The patient who died of acute MI had severe atherosclerosis and an ascending aortic aneurysm before treatment with ABA. Thus, although different from the other cases, MI may not have been caused by ABA. Four patients in the elderly patient group and 1 in the younger patient group discontinued ABA treatment because of infection. The most frequently reported infections were pneumonia (elderly group: 3 patients, younger group: 1 patient) and pyogenic arthritis (elderly group: 1 patient). There was no statistically significant difference in withdrawal rate because of infection between age groups (elderly group: 3.4%, younger group: 0.8%, p = 0.137).

Figure 3.
  • Download figure
  • Open in new tab
  • Download powerpoint
Figure 3.

Retention rates and incidence of adverse events over 48 weeks of abatacept treatment. A. Retention rate in different age groups. Retention rates based on all unfavorable causes at 48 weeks: 72.3% in the elderly and 73.6% in the younger group. B. Withdrawal rate because of adverse events in different age groups. Withdrawal rate because of AE at 48 weeks: 9.5% in the elderly and 4.7% in the younger group.

View this table:
  • View inline
  • View popup
Table 3.

Summary of patients discontinuing treatment because of adverse events in each age group. Values are n unless otherwise specified.

DISCUSSION

To our knowledge, our present study is the first to assess the effectiveness and safety of ABA for biologic-naive Japanese patients with RA in a multicenter trial. Our effectiveness data seemed equivalent to those found for TNF inhibitors; the RECONFIRM-2 study showed that 27.8% of biologic-naive Japanese patients with RA achieved clinical remission at 22 weeks and 27.6% at 54 weeks with infliximab (IFX) treatment15. In the DANBIO registry, 39%, 33%, and 27% of patients with RA who received adalimumab (ADA), etanercept (ETN), and IFX, respectively, as the first biologic treatment obtained clinical remission (DAS28 < 2.6) at 12 months16. In addition, several studies have shown that the efficacy of TNF inhibitors was inferior in elderly patients with RA compared to younger patients with RA16,17,18, whereas other reports have demonstrated that the effectiveness was equally observed, irrespective of age19,20. As for tocilizumab (TCZ) treatment, there are a few reports on effectiveness data that compare elderly and younger patients with RA. Pers, et al reported that the effectiveness of TCZ was inferior in elderly patients with RA compared with younger patients with RA21. In our study, although the rate of clinical remission seemed slightly higher in younger patients than in elderly patients at 48 weeks, the effectiveness of ABA at 24 weeks, which is the timepoint for treatment decision making, was not associated with age in biologic-naive patients with RA. Although our study was performed in biologic-naive patients with RA, the proportion of elderly patients (≥ 65 yrs) was higher than that of other previous registries with ABA22,23,24. We speculate that a reason for this is that TNF inhibitors tend to be used less frequently for elderly patients with RA because in Japan, older age was reported as one of the risk factors for serious infection from the postmarketing surveillance programs for IFX, ETN, and ADA25,26,27.

Our study, however, clearly showed that the predictive factors associated with sustained clinical remission after 24 weeks are different between elderly and younger patients. Being biologic-naive was an independent predictive factor for achieving LDA or a favorable EULAR response at 24 weeks28, whereas concomitant MTX use was independently associated with the improvement of clinical effectiveness from 24 weeks after initiating ABA treatment onward29. The Orencia and Rheumatoid Arthritis (ORA) registry, a nationwide prospective cohort study that investigated the longterm safety and effectiveness of ABA for treating RA and was designed by the French Society of Rheumatology, showed that anticyclic citrullinated peptide antibody (anti-CCP) positivity was associated with a EULAR response at 6 months and a high ABA survival rate30. Because our study and these reports do not include radiography data for the joints, we selected patients with sustained clinical remission, which is strongly recommended by the EULAR guideline31, because it can be linked to the inhibition of structural joint destruction32. Of note, our results suggest that the predictive factors for a clinical response to ABA are similar to the previous items, but they were different according to patients’ ages.

First, ACPA positivity was an independent predictive factor in elderly patients, but not in younger patients. In fact, accumulating data suggest that ACPA-positive patients may respond better to ABA and rituximab33,34,35. ACPA positivity, therefore, may be associated with sustained clinical remission in a certain subset of patients treated with ABA; however, it should be elucidated why ACPA positivity is linked to the effectiveness of ABA only in elderly patients. In the 2-year AMPLE study (Abatacept versus Adalimumab Comparison in Biologic-naïve RA Subjects with Background Methotrexate), patients with a high concentration of anti-CCP2 at baseline had a better clinical response with ABA than those with a lower concentration of anti-CCP2 at baseline36. In our study, the proportion of patients with a highly positive ACPA was higher in the elderly group than in the younger group, which may contribute to the superior effectiveness of ABA in elderly patients compared with younger patients. In contrast with our results, in the ORA registry including 2-year followup data23, ACPA positivity was not a predictive factor for good or moderate EULAR response with ABA in very elderly patients (≥ 75 yrs). On the other hand, in elderly patients (65–74 yrs), ACPA positivity was a predictive factor for a good or moderate EULAR response. Thus, we could not directly compare these results with the results of our study because of the differences in both the categorization of patients’ ages and the followup period.

ABA can be used as monotherapy, and ABA efficacy with and without MTX was comparable in the DANBIO37 and ORA Registries30. The Assessing Very Early Rheumatoid arthritis Treatment (AVERT) study, a phase IIIb, randomized, controlled trial that evaluated drug-free remission with a subcutaneous infusion of ABA in MTX-naive patients with early RA, indicated that the clinical efficacy of ABA concomitant with MTX treatment was superior to ABA monotherapy when administered continuously for 12 months38. In our present study, the additional effect of MTX on ABA was not apparent. The aim of our present study was not direct comparison between the effectiveness of ABA with and without MTX. However, as demonstrated by our results, concomitant MTX tended to be associated with the achievement of sustained clinical remission in younger patients. Therefore, MTX use may be recommended, if possible, especially in younger patients with RA.

Takeuchi, et al reported that a lower DAS28 score and a lower HAQ-DI score at baseline were independent predictive factors for achieving clinical remission at 52 weeks of TCZ treatment39. In multiple logistic regression analysis in our present study, a lower clinical disease activity and lower HAQ-DI score were also shown to be important factors, but their association with sustained remission depended on patients’ age. Both factors were distinctly related to sustained clinical remission in younger patients. However, in elderly patients, the effect of a lower HAQ-DI on achieving sustained clinical remission was smaller than that of lower clinical disease activity. Therefore, the favorable characteristics for ABA treatment in elderly patients are not similar to those in younger patients.

In the ABROAD study cohort, 3 deaths were reported during the study period. Mortality was higher in our study than in previous reports3,4,5,40, and this may be because our cohort included patients older than those in the previous reports. Lahaye, et al reported that the incidence of death in the ORA registry was higher with age, and mortality among very elderly patients (≥ 75 yrs) treated with ABA was 8.65 per 100 patient-years23. Hence, we considered that mortality in our study was not necessarily high. The discontinuation rate of ABA treatment because of AE or infection appeared to be high in elderly patients in comparison with younger patients, although there was no statistically significant difference. Based on the results of previous studies5,9,10, ABA treatment is thought to be safer than TNF inhibitors. However, ABA treatment should be closely monitored, similarly to treatment with TNF inhibitors, especially in elderly patients.

Our study has some limitations. First, radiographic data were absent. Given the importance of a joint protective effect for demonstrating clinical effectiveness, the ability to evaluate radiographic changes in patients treated with ABA will be necessary in the future. Second, in patients treated without MTX, the reasons MTX was not used are unknown. Hence, we could not indicate how the reasons not to treat with MTX influenced the ability to reach sustained remission. Finally, the proportion of patients without ACPA positivity might be too small to produce a strong result. In addition, ACPA was not measured in about one-third of patients before initiation of ABA treatment; thus, the number of participants who could be evaluated was substantially decreased.

The ABROAD study demonstrated that ABA shows a sustained clinical effect over 24 weeks in biologic-naive patients with RA, irrespective of age. ABA treatment may be strongly recommended for elderly patients with MDA who are ACPA-positive, as well as younger patients with a low HAQ-DI and MDA.

ONLINE SUPPLEMENT

Supplementary data for this article are available online at jrheum.org.

Acknowledgment

The authors wish to acknowledge the patients and the members of the ABROAD Study Group.

APPENDIX 1.

List of study collaborators. The ABROAD Study Group: K. Maeda, H. Nakahara, S. Higa, Y. Hamano, M. Nishide, S. Nozaki, NTT West Osaka Hospital; A. Yamamoto, Y. Kukita, T. Seno, H. Nagahara, Kyoto Prefectural University of Medicine; H. Hashimoto, Rinku Hashimoto Rheumatology Orthopedics; A. Yokota, Yokota Clinic; K. Miki, Amagasaki Central Hospital; N. Shinmyo, T. Fujimura, Kashiba Asahigaoka Hospital; H. Goto, M. Tada, T. Koike, Y. Sugioka, T. Okano, Osaka City University; T. Fujimoto, Nara Medical University; Y. Ozaki, Y. Son, Kansai Medical University; M. Kitano, Hyogo College of Medicine; S. Irimajiri, Rinku General Medical Center; T. Hidaka, Zenjinkai Shimin-no-Mori Hospital; Y. Nozaki, M. Funauchi, S. Hino, M. Sugiyama, T. Shiga, Kinki University School of Medicine; T. Kuroiwa, Yukioka Hospital; I. Yoshii, Yoshii Hospital; M. Hashimoto, N. Yamakawa, Kyoto University; K. Ohmura, Jyujyo Takeda Rehabilitation Hospital; K. Hatta, T. Azuma, Tenri Hospital; T. Igawa, K. Inoue, Osaka Rehabilitation Hospital; T. Takeuchi, Hayaishi Hospital; M. Tanaka, Kanazawa Medical University; K. Higami, Higami Hospital; M. Namiki, T. Yamazaki, Takarazuka City Hospital; T. Nakatani, T. Saito, Kishiwada City Hospital; Y. Imura, T. Nakajima, Osaka Red Cross Hospital; S. Namiuchi, K. Akashi, M. Nakata, Osaka Saiseikai Nakatsu Hospital; T. Takeuchi, Osaka Medical College; A. Omoto, Japanese Red Cross Kyoto Daiichi Hospital; A. Nanpei, Osaka Rosai Hospital; S. Watanabe, Watanabe Orthopedic Clinic; K. Ushio, Ushio Orthopedic Clinic; Y. Hideki, Nijoekimae Clinic; S. Oshima, Osaka Minami Medical Center; S. Kashiwagi, Amagasaki Iryou-Seikyou Hospital; H. Yokoyama, Yokoyama Orthopaedic Clinic; M. Morimoto, Kobe City Medical Center West Hospital; Y. Uesugi, Saiseikai Noe Hospital; S. Mokuda, M. Onishi, Dogo Spa Hospital; H. Yanagita, National Hospital Organization Utano Hospital; K. Sugimoto, Fukui General Hospital; T. Sasaki, Nishinomiya Watanabe Hospital; A. Hashiramoto, Kobe University.

  • Accepted for publication July 6, 2016.

REFERENCES

  1. 1.↵
    1. Choy EH,
    2. Panayi GS
    . Cytokine pathways and joint inflammation in rheumatoid arthritis. N Engl J Med 2001;344:907–16.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  2. 2.↵
    1. Goldring SR,
    2. Gravallese EM
    . Pathogenesis of bone erosions in rheumatoid arthritis. Curr Opin Rheumatol 2000;12:195–9.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  3. 3.↵
    1. Westhovens R,
    2. Robles M,
    3. Ximenes AC,
    4. Nayiager S,
    5. Wollenhaupt J,
    6. Durez P,
    7. et al.
    Clinical efficacy and safety of abatacept in methotrexate-naïve patients with early rheumatoid arthritis and poor prognostic factors. Ann Rheum Dis 2009;68:1870–7.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  4. 4.↵
    1. Kremer JM,
    2. Genant HK,
    3. Moreland LW,
    4. Russell AS,
    5. Emery P,
    6. Abud-Mendoza C,
    7. et al.
    Effects of abatacept in patients with methotrexate-resistant active rheumatoid arthritis. Ann Intern Med 2006;144:865–76.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  5. 5.↵
    1. Schiff M,
    2. Keiserman M,
    3. Codding C,
    4. Songcharoen S,
    5. Berman A,
    6. Nayiager S,
    7. et al.
    Efficacy and safety of abatacept or infliximab vs placebo in ATTEST: a phase III, multi-centre, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled study in patients with rheumatoid arthritis and an inadequate response to methotrexate. Ann Rheum Dis 2008;67:1096–103.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  6. 6.↵
    1. Genovese MC,
    2. Becker JC,
    3. Schiff M,
    4. Luggen M,
    5. Sherrer Y,
    6. Kremer J,
    7. et al.
    Abatacept for rheumatoid arthritis refractory to tumor necrosis factor alpha inhibition. N Engl J Med 2005;353:1114–23.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  7. 7.↵
    1. Sugihara T,
    2. Harigai M
    . Targeting low disease activity in elderly-onset rheumatoid arthritis: current and future roles of biological disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs. Drugs Aging 2016;33:97–107.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  8. 8.↵
    1. Boots AM,
    2. Maier AB,
    3. Stinissen P,
    4. Masson P,
    5. Lories RJ,
    6. De Keyser F
    . The influence of ageing on the development and management of rheumatoid arthritis. Nat Rev Rheumatol 2013;9:604–13.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  9. 9.↵
    1. Schiff M,
    2. Weinblatt ME,
    3. Valente R,
    4. van der Heijde D,
    5. Citera G,
    6. Elegbe A,
    7. et al.
    Head-to-head comparison of subcutaneous abatacept versus adalimumab for rheumatoid arthritis: two-year efficacy and safety findings from AMPLE trial. Ann Rheum Dis 2014;73:86–94.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  10. 10.↵
    1. Yun H,
    2. Xie F,
    3. Delzell E,
    4. Chen L,
    5. Levitan EB,
    6. Lewis JD,
    7. et al.
    Risk of hospitalised infection in rheumatoid arthritis patients receiving biologics following a previous infection while on treatment with anti-TNF therapy. Ann Rheum Dis 2015;74:1065–71.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  11. 11.↵
    1. Arnett FC,
    2. Edworthy SM,
    3. Bloch DA,
    4. McShane DJ,
    5. Fries JF,
    6. Cooper NS,
    7. et al.
    The American Rheumatism Association 1987 revised criteria for the classification of rheumatoid arthritis. Arthritis Rheum 1988;31:315–24.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  12. 12.↵
    1. Aletaha D,
    2. Neogi T,
    3. Silman AJ,
    4. Funovits J,
    5. Felson DT,
    6. Bingham CO 3rd,
    7. et al.
    2010 Rheumatoid arthritis classification criteria: an American College of Rheumatology/European League Against Rheumatism collaborative initiative. Arthritis Rheum 2010;62:2569–81.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  13. 13.↵
    1. Inoue E,
    2. Yamanaka H,
    3. Hara M,
    4. Tomatsu T,
    5. Kamatani N
    . Comparison of disease activity score (DAS)28- erythrocyte sedimentation rate and DAS28- C-reactive protein threshold values. Ann Rheum Dis 2007;66:407–9.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  14. 14.↵
    1. Matsuda Y,
    2. Singh G,
    3. Yamanaka H,
    4. Tanaka E,
    5. Urano W,
    6. Taniguchi A,
    7. et al.
    Validation of a Japanese version of the Stanford Health Assessment Questionnaire in 3,763 patients with rheumatoid arthritis. Arthritis Rheum 2003;49:784–8.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  15. 15.↵
    1. Tanaka Y,
    2. Takeuchi T,
    3. Inoue E,
    4. Saito K,
    5. Sekiguchi N,
    6. Sato E,
    7. et al.
    Retrospective clinical study on the notable efficacy and related factors of infliximab therapy in a rheumatoid arthritis management group in Japan: one-year clinical outcomes (RECONFIRM-2). Mod Rheumatol 2008;18:146–52.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  16. 16.↵
    1. Hetland ML,
    2. Christensen IJ,
    3. Tarp U,
    4. Dreyer L,
    5. Hansen A,
    6. Hansen IT,
    7. et al;
    8. All Departments of Rheumatology in Denmark
    . Direct comparison of treatment responses, remission rates, and drug adherence in patients with rheumatoid arthritis treated with adalimumab, etanercept, or infliximab: results from eight years of surveillance of clinical practice in the nationwide Danish DANBIO registry. Arthritis Rheum 2010;62:22–32.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  17. 17.↵
    1. Bathon JM,
    2. Fleischmann RM,
    3. Van der Heijde D,
    4. Tesser JR,
    5. Peloso PM,
    6. Chon Y,
    7. et al.
    Safety and efficacy of etanercept treatment in elderly subjects with rheumatoid arthritis. J Rheumatol 2006;33:234–43.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  18. 18.↵
    1. Radovits BJ,
    2. Kievit W,
    3. Fransen J,
    4. van de Laar MA,
    5. Jansen TL,
    6. van Riel PL,
    7. et al.
    Influence of age on the outcome of antitumour necrosis factor alpha therapy in rheumatoid arthritis. Ann Rheum Dis 2009;68:1470–3.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  19. 19.↵
    1. Hyrich KL,
    2. Watson KD,
    3. Silman AJ,
    4. Symmons DP;
    5. British Society for Rheumatology Biologics Register
    . Predictors of response to anti-TNF-alpha therapy among patients with rheumatoid arthritis: results from the British Society for Rheumatology Biologics Register. Rheumatology 2006;45:1558–65.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  20. 20.↵
    1. Köller MD,
    2. Aletaha D,
    3. Funovits J,
    4. Pangan A,
    5. Baker D,
    6. Smolen JS
    . Response of elderly patients with rheumatoid arthritis to methotrexate of TNF inhibitors compared with younger patients. Rheumatology 2009;48:1575–80.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  21. 21.↵
    1. Pers YM,
    2. Schaub R,
    3. Constant E,
    4. Lambert J,
    5. Godfrin-Valnet M,
    6. Fortunet C,
    7. et al.
    Efficacy and safety of tocilizumab in elderly patients with rheumatoid arthritis. Joint Bone Spine 2015;82:25–30.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  22. 22.↵
    1. Horák P,
    2. Skácelová M,
    3. Hejduk K,
    4. Smržová A,
    5. Pavelka K
    . Abatacept and its use in the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis (RA) in the Czech Republic-data from the ATTRA registry. Clin Rheumatol 2013;32:1451–8.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  23. 23.↵
    1. Lahaye C,
    2. Soubrier M,
    3. Mulliez A,
    4. Bardin T,
    5. Cantagrel A,
    6. Combe B,
    7. et al;
    8. French Society of Rheumatology
    . Effectiveness and safety of abatacept in elderly patients with rheumatoid arthritis enrolled in the French Society of Rheumatology’s ORA registry. Rheumatology 2016;55:874–82.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  24. 24.↵
    1. Nüßlein HG,
    2. Alten R,
    3. Galeazzi M,
    4. Lorenz HM,
    5. Nurmohamed MT,
    6. Bensen WG,
    7. et al.
    Prognostic factors for abatacept retention in patients who received at least one prior biologic agent: an interim analysis from the observational, prospective ACTION study. BMC Musculoskelet Disord 2015;16:176.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  25. 25.↵
    1. Takeuchi T,
    2. Tatsuki Y,
    3. Nogami Y,
    4. Ishiguro N,
    5. Tanaka Y,
    6. Yamanaka H,
    7. et al.
    Postmarketing surveillance of the safety profile of infliximab in 5000 Japanese patients with rheumatoid arthritis. Ann Rheum Dis 2008;67:189–94.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  26. 26.↵
    1. Koike T,
    2. Harigai M,
    3. Inokuma S,
    4. Ishiguro N,
    5. Ryu J,
    6. Takeuchi T,
    7. et al.
    Postmarketing surveillance of safety and effectiveness of etanercept in Japanese patients with rheumatoid arthritis. Mod Rheumatol 2011;21:343–51.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  27. 27.↵
    1. Koike T,
    2. Harigai M,
    3. Ishiguro N,
    4. Inokuma S,
    5. Takei S,
    6. Takeuchi T,
    7. et al.
    Safety and effectiveness of adalimumab in Japanese rheumatoid arthritis patients: postmarketing surveillance report of 7740 patients. Mod Rheumatol 2014;24:390–8.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  28. 28.↵
    1. Takahashi N,
    2. Kojima T,
    3. Kaneko A,
    4. Kida D,
    5. Hirano Y,
    6. Fujibayashi T,
    7. et al.
    Clinical efficacy of abatacept compared to adalimumab and tocilizumab in rheumatoid arthritis patients with high disease activity. Clin Rheumatol 2014;33:39–47.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  29. 29.↵
    1. Takahashi N,
    2. Kojima T,
    3. Kaneko A,
    4. Kida D,
    5. Hirano Y,
    6. Fujibayashi T,
    7. et al.
    Longterm efficacy and safety of abatacept in patients with rheumatoid arthritis treated in routine clinical practice: effect of concomitant methotrexate after 24 weeks. J Rheumatol 2015;42:786–93.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  30. 30.↵
    1. Gottenberg JE,
    2. Ravaud P,
    3. Cantagrel A,
    4. Combe B,
    5. Flipo RM,
    6. Schaeverbeke T,
    7. et al.
    Positivity for anti-cyclic citrullinated peptide is associated with a better response to abatacept: data from the ‘Orencia and Rheumatoid Arthritis’ registry. Ann Rheum Dis 2012;71:1815–9.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  31. 31.↵
    1. Smolen JS,
    2. Breedveld FC,
    3. Burmester GR,
    4. Bykerk V,
    5. Dougados M,
    6. Emery P,
    7. et al.
    Treating rheumatoid arthritis to target: 2014 update of the recommendations of an international task force. Ann Rheum Dis 2016;75:3–15.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  32. 32.↵
    1. Lillegraven S,
    2. Prince FH,
    3. Shadick NA,
    4. Bykerk VP,
    5. Lu B,
    6. Frits ML,
    7. et al.
    Remission and radiographic outcome in rheumatoid arthritis: application of the 2011 ACR/EULAR remission criteria in an observational cohort. Ann Rheum Dis 2012;71:681–6.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  33. 33.↵
    1. Gardette A,
    2. Ottaviani S,
    3. Tubach F,
    4. Roy C,
    5. Nicaise-Roland P,
    6. Palazzo E,
    7. et al.
    High anti-CCP antibody titres predict good response to rituximab in patients with active rheumatoid arthritis. Joint Bone Spine 2014;81:416–20.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  34. 34.↵
    1. Couderc M,
    2. Mathieu S,
    3. Pereira B,
    4. Glace B,
    5. Soubrier M
    . Predictive factors of rituximab response in rheumatoid arthritis: results from a French university hospital. Arthritis Care Res 2013;65:648–52.
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  35. 35.↵
    1. Chatzidionysiou K,
    2. Lie E,
    3. Nasonov E,
    4. Lukina G,
    5. Hetland ML,
    6. Tarp U,
    7. et al.
    Highest clinical effectiveness of rituximab in autoantibody-positive patients with rheumatoid arthritis and in those for whom no more than one previous TNF antagonist has failed: pooled data from 10 European registries. Ann Rheum Dis 2011;70:1575–80.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  36. 36.↵
    1. Sokolove J,
    2. Schiff M,
    3. Fleischmann R,
    4. Weinblatt ME,
    5. Connolly SE,
    6. Johnsen A,
    7. et al.
    Impact of baseline anti-cyclic citrullinated peptide-2 antibody concentration on efficacy outcomes following treatment with subcutaneous abatacept or adalimumab: 2-year results from the AMPLE trial. Ann Rheum Dis 2016;75:709–14.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  37. 37.↵
    1. Leffers HC,
    2. Ostergaard M,
    3. Glintborg B,
    4. Krogh NS,
    5. Foged H,
    6. Tarp U,
    7. et al;
    8. all departments of rheumatology in Denmark
    . Efficacy of abatacept and tocilizumab in patients with rheumatoid arthritis treated in clinical practice: results from the nationwide Danish DANBIO registry. Ann Rheum Dis 2011;70:1216–22.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  38. 38.↵
    1. Emery P,
    2. Burmester GR,
    3. Bykerk VP,
    4. Combe BG,
    5. Furst DE,
    6. Barré E,
    7. et al.
    Evaluating drug-free remission with abatacept in early rheumatoid arthritis: results from the phase 3b, multicentre, randomised, active-controlled AVERT study of 24 months, with a 12-month, double-blind treatment period. Ann Rheum Dis 2015;74:19–26.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  39. 39.↵
    1. Takeuchi T,
    2. Tanaka Y,
    3. Amano K,
    4. Hoshi D,
    5. Nawata M,
    6. Nagasawa H,
    7. et al.
    Clinical, radiographic and functional effectiveness of tocilizumab for rheumatoid arthritis patients—REACTION 52-week study. Rheumatology 2011;50:1908–15.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  40. 40.↵
    1. Weinblatt M,
    2. Combe B,
    3. Covucci A,
    4. Aranda R,
    5. Becker JC,
    6. Keystone E
    . Safety of the selective costimulation modulator abatacept in rheumatoid arthritis patients receiving background biologic and nonbiologic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs: A one-year randomized, placebo-controlled study. Arthritis Rheum 2006;54:2807–16.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
PreviousNext
Back to top

In this issue

The Journal of Rheumatology
Vol. 43, Issue 11
1 Nov 2016
  • Table of Contents
  • Table of Contents (PDF)
  • Index by Author
  • Editorial Board (PDF)
Print
Download PDF
Article Alerts
Sign In to Email Alerts with your Email Address
Email Article

Thank you for your interest in spreading the word about The Journal of Rheumatology.

NOTE: We only request your email address so that the person you are recommending the page to knows that you wanted them to see it, and that it is not junk mail. We do not capture any email address.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
Differences in Predictive Factors for Sustained Clinical Remission with Abatacept Between Younger and Elderly Patients with Biologic-naive Rheumatoid Arthritis: Results from the ABROAD Study
(Your Name) has forwarded a page to you from The Journal of Rheumatology
(Your Name) thought you would like to see this page from the The Journal of Rheumatology web site.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Citation Tools
Differences in Predictive Factors for Sustained Clinical Remission with Abatacept Between Younger and Elderly Patients with Biologic-naive Rheumatoid Arthritis: Results from the ABROAD Study
Masahiro Sekiguchi, Takao Fujii, Kiyoshi Matsui, Kosaku Murakami, Satoshi Morita, Koichiro Ohmura, Yutaka Kawahito, Norihiro Nishimoto, Tsuneyo Mimori, Hajime Sano, The ABROAD Study Investigators
The Journal of Rheumatology Nov 2016, 43 (11) 1974-1983; DOI: 10.3899/jrheum.160051

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero

 Request Permissions

Share
Differences in Predictive Factors for Sustained Clinical Remission with Abatacept Between Younger and Elderly Patients with Biologic-naive Rheumatoid Arthritis: Results from the ABROAD Study
Masahiro Sekiguchi, Takao Fujii, Kiyoshi Matsui, Kosaku Murakami, Satoshi Morita, Koichiro Ohmura, Yutaka Kawahito, Norihiro Nishimoto, Tsuneyo Mimori, Hajime Sano, The ABROAD Study Investigators
The Journal of Rheumatology Nov 2016, 43 (11) 1974-1983; DOI: 10.3899/jrheum.160051
del.icio.us logo Digg logo Reddit logo Twitter logo CiteULike logo Facebook logo Google logo Mendeley logo
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One
Bookmark this article

Jump to section

  • Article
    • Abstract
    • MATERIALS AND METHODS
    • RESULTS
    • DISCUSSION
    • ONLINE SUPPLEMENT
    • Acknowledgment
    • APPENDIX 1.
    • REFERENCES
  • Figures & Data
  • Supplemental
  • Info & Metrics
  • References
  • PDF
  • eLetters

Keywords

RHEUMATOID ARTHRITIS
ABATACEPT
CLINICAL REMISSION
METHOTREXATE
ANTICITRULLINATED PROTEIN ANTIBODIES
HEALTH ASSESSMENT QUESTIONNAIRE-DISABILITY INDEX

Related Articles

Cited By...

More in this TOC Section

  • Comparative Effectiveness of BNT162b2 and mRNA-1273 Vaccines Against COVID-19 Infection Among Patients With Systemic Autoimmune Rheumatic Diseases on Immunomodulatory Medications
  • Clinimetric Validation of the Assessment of Spondyloarthritis International Society Health Index in Patients With Radiographic Axial Spondyloarthritis in Ixekizumab Trials
  • Sex-Specific Differences in Patients With Psoriatic Arthritis: A Systematic Review
Show more Article

Similar Articles

Keywords

  • rheumatoid arthritis
  • ABATACEPT
  • CLINICAL REMISSION
  • methotrexate
  • anticitrullinated protein antibodies
  • HEALTH ASSESSMENT QUESTIONNAIRE-DISABILITY INDEX

Content

  • First Release
  • Current
  • Archives
  • Collections
  • Audiovisual Rheum
  • COVID-19 and Rheumatology

Resources

  • Guide for Authors
  • Submit Manuscript
  • Author Payment
  • Reviewers
  • Advertisers
  • Classified Ads
  • Reprints and Translations
  • Permissions
  • Meetings
  • FAQ
  • Policies

Subscribers

  • Subscription Information
  • Purchase Subscription
  • Your Account
  • Terms and Conditions

More

  • About Us
  • Contact Us
  • My Alerts
  • My Folders
  • Privacy/GDPR Policy
  • RSS Feeds
The Journal of Rheumatology
The content of this site is intended for health care professionals.
Copyright © 2022 by The Journal of Rheumatology Publishing Co. Ltd.
Print ISSN: 0315-162X; Online ISSN: 1499-2752
Powered by HighWire