Comparative analysis of clinical profile, therapeutic management, and clinical prognosis of patients with seropositive or seronegative rheumatoid arthritis following the introduction of a first targeted therapy in a real-life setting.
Léonard Angelozzi, André Gillibert, Pauline Brevet, Julien Grosjean, Stefan Darmoni, Fabienne Jouen, Thierry Lequerré, Olivier Vittecoq
{"title":"Comparative analysis of clinical profile, therapeutic management, and clinical prognosis of patients with seropositive or seronegative rheumatoid arthritis following the introduction of a first targeted therapy in a real-life setting.","authors":"Léonard Angelozzi, André Gillibert, Pauline Brevet, Julien Grosjean, Stefan Darmoni, Fabienne Jouen, Thierry Lequerré, Olivier Vittecoq","doi":"10.1007/s10067-025-07390-3","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>To evaluate clinical prognosis following the introduction of a first targeted therapy (TT) according to the serological profile of rheumatoid arthritis (RA) and to analyze differences in efficacy of TT.</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>This single-center retrospective study included patients with RA who received a first TT between 2000 and 2020. Patients were seropositive (IgM and/or IgA rheumatoid factors plus anti-CCP) or seronegative (without autoantibodies). Various data were collected at baseline and during follow-up. The primary endpoint was remission (assessed by DAS28) at one and two years.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Among 259 patients, 164 (63.3%) were seropositive and presented higher disease activity and more frequent erosive involvement than seronegative patients at TT introduction. The most prescribed first TTs were etanercept for seronegative RA (47 ([49.5%) versus 41 (25%), p < 0.001) and abatacept for seropositive RA (41 (25%) versus 6 (6.3%), p < 0.001). Remission rates and TT switches were not significantly different between groups. Initial DAS28-CRP and number of painful joints were independent prognostic factors associated with absence of remission at one year (OR 0.46 (0.26, 0.80), p = 0.007) and two years (OR 0.90 (0.82, 0.98), p = 0.027) respectively. Among seropositive patients, the two-year remission rate was not significantly different according to the therapeutic class received (cellular- versus cytokine-targeted).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Patients with seropositive RA showed more active and severe disease than patients with seronegative RA at the introduction of a first TT. Although the choice of the first TT varied according to serological profile and time of analysis, clinical prognosis at one and two years was similar between groups. Key Points • Seropositive versus seronegative RA was more active at start of first targeted therapy. • First-line TTs were etanercept for seronegative RA and abatacept for seropositive RA. • Rate of targeted therapy switches was comparable between both groups. • Remission rates at 1 and 2 years were similar in seropositive and seronegative RA. • Remission rates were similar for cellular and cytokine inhibitors in seropositive RA.</p>","PeriodicalId":10482,"journal":{"name":"Clinical Rheumatology","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.9000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Clinical Rheumatology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10067-025-07390-3","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"RHEUMATOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Objectives: To evaluate clinical prognosis following the introduction of a first targeted therapy (TT) according to the serological profile of rheumatoid arthritis (RA) and to analyze differences in efficacy of TT.
Method: This single-center retrospective study included patients with RA who received a first TT between 2000 and 2020. Patients were seropositive (IgM and/or IgA rheumatoid factors plus anti-CCP) or seronegative (without autoantibodies). Various data were collected at baseline and during follow-up. The primary endpoint was remission (assessed by DAS28) at one and two years.
Results: Among 259 patients, 164 (63.3%) were seropositive and presented higher disease activity and more frequent erosive involvement than seronegative patients at TT introduction. The most prescribed first TTs were etanercept for seronegative RA (47 ([49.5%) versus 41 (25%), p < 0.001) and abatacept for seropositive RA (41 (25%) versus 6 (6.3%), p < 0.001). Remission rates and TT switches were not significantly different between groups. Initial DAS28-CRP and number of painful joints were independent prognostic factors associated with absence of remission at one year (OR 0.46 (0.26, 0.80), p = 0.007) and two years (OR 0.90 (0.82, 0.98), p = 0.027) respectively. Among seropositive patients, the two-year remission rate was not significantly different according to the therapeutic class received (cellular- versus cytokine-targeted).
Conclusions: Patients with seropositive RA showed more active and severe disease than patients with seronegative RA at the introduction of a first TT. Although the choice of the first TT varied according to serological profile and time of analysis, clinical prognosis at one and two years was similar between groups. Key Points • Seropositive versus seronegative RA was more active at start of first targeted therapy. • First-line TTs were etanercept for seronegative RA and abatacept for seropositive RA. • Rate of targeted therapy switches was comparable between both groups. • Remission rates at 1 and 2 years were similar in seropositive and seronegative RA. • Remission rates were similar for cellular and cytokine inhibitors in seropositive RA.
目的根据类风湿关节炎(RA)的血清学特征评估首次靶向治疗(TT)后的临床预后,并分析TT疗效的差异:这项单中心回顾性研究纳入了2000年至2020年间接受首次TT治疗的RA患者。患者为血清阳性(IgM和/或IgA类风湿因子加抗CCP)或血清阴性(无自身抗体)。在基线和随访期间收集各种数据。主要终点是一年和两年后的缓解(通过 DAS28 评估):在259名患者中,164人(63.3%)血清反应呈阳性,与血清反应阴性的患者相比,他们的疾病活动度更高,侵蚀性受累更频繁。血清反应呈阴性的 RA 患者首次处方最多的 TT 药物是依那西普(47(49.5%)对 41(25%),P与血清阴性 RA 患者相比,血清阳性 RA 患者在首次使用 TT 时病情更为活跃和严重。虽然首次 TT 的选择因血清学特征和分析时间而异,但各组患者在一年和两年后的临床预后相似。要点 - 血清阳性与血清阴性的 RA 在开始首次靶向治疗时更活跃。- 血清阴性 RA 的一线靶向治疗药物为依那西普,血清阳性 RA 的一线靶向治疗药物为阿帕他赛。- 两组患者的靶向治疗转换率相当。- 血清反应阳性和血清反应阴性RA患者1年和2年的缓解率相似。- 血清反应阳性和血清反应阴性 RA 患者的细胞抑制剂和细胞因子抑制剂缓解率相似。
期刊介绍:
Clinical Rheumatology is an international English-language journal devoted to publishing original clinical investigation and research in the general field of rheumatology with accent on clinical aspects at postgraduate level.
The journal succeeds Acta Rheumatologica Belgica, originally founded in 1945 as the official journal of the Belgian Rheumatology Society. Clinical Rheumatology aims to cover all modern trends in clinical and experimental research as well as the management and evaluation of diagnostic and treatment procedures connected with the inflammatory, immunologic, metabolic, genetic and degenerative soft and hard connective tissue diseases.