EN | UA
EN | UA

Help Support

Back

Comparison of Rituximab and Tocilizumab in anti-TNF inadequate responders with rheumatoid arthritis

Comparison of Rituximab and Tocilizumab in anti-TNF inadequate responders with rheumatoid arthritis Comparison of Rituximab and Tocilizumab in anti-TNF inadequate responders with rheumatoid arthritis
Comparison of Rituximab and Tocilizumab in anti-TNF inadequate responders with rheumatoid arthritis Comparison of Rituximab and Tocilizumab in anti-TNF inadequate responders with rheumatoid arthritis

The goal of this multicentre, phase 4, open-label, 48-week, biopsy-driven randomized controlled trial was to assess if tocilizumab (interleukin-6 receptor inhibitor) is superior to rituximab in terms of improving clinical outcomes in RA patients who had unsatisfactory response to anti-tumor necrosis factor (TNF) stratified for synovial B-cell status.

See All

Key take away

The histological classification of rheumatoid arthritis (RA) synovial tissue was impervious in assessing therapeutic response, but the sequencing-based grouping had significant connections with clinical responses. Also, low or no B-cell lineage expression signature tocilizumab illustrated superiority than rituximab concerning the number of patients with CDAI 50%, and other secondary endpoints.

Background

The goal of this multicentre, phase 4, open-label, 48-week, biopsy-driven randomized controlled trial was to assess if tocilizumab (interleukin-6 receptor inhibitor) is superior to rituximab in terms of improving clinical outcomes in RA patients who had unsatisfactory response to anti-tumor necrosis factor (TNF) stratified for synovial B-cell status.

Method

In this study (rituximab vs tocilizumab in anti-TNF inadequate responder patients with rheumatoid arthritis; R4RA), 164 RA patients (aged 18 years or older) were included. The patients were labeled histologically as B-cell poor or rich after a standard synovial biopsy. Subjects were stratified into two groups: (i) Rituximab group (n=83): Participants received two 1000 mg rituximab infusions at an interval of  two weeks, and (ii) Tocilizumab group (n=81): Participants received tocilizumab 8 mg/kg infusions at an interval of four weeks.

To improve the precision of the stratification of B-cell poor and rich patients, RNA sequencing of the standard synovial biopsies was done and again classified by B-cell molecular signature. In B-cell poor population, tocilizumab's superiority over rituximab was evaluated at 16 weeks. A 50% improvement in Clinical Disease Activity Index (CDAI 50%) from the starting point was the major outcome parameter.

Result

In patients histologically categorized as B-cell poor, no substantial differences in CDAI 50% were witnessed between rituximab and tocilizumab group. But, as compared to the rituximab arm, the tocilizumab arm had a remarkably greater response rate for CDAI 50% in the synovial biopsies categorized as B-cell poor with RNA sequencing.

No statistically significant difference was found in terms of the incidence of adverse events and serious adverse events between both the groups, as illustrated below:

Conclusion

RNA sequencing-based stratification displayed a stronger link with clinical responses than with histopathological classification in RA patients. Furthermore, for patients categorized as B-cell poor in synovial tissue tocilizumab was more effective as compared to rituximab.

Source:

Lancet

Article:

Rituximab versus tocilizumab in anti-TNF inadequate responder patients with rheumatoid arthritis (R4RA): 16-week outcomes of a stratified, biopsy-driven, multicentre, open-label, phase 4 randomised controlled trial

Authors:

Frances Humby et al.

Comments (0)

You want to delete this comment? Please mention comment Invalid Text Content Text Content cannot me more than 1000 Something Went Wrong Cancel Confirm Confirm Delete Hide Replies View Replies View Replies en ru ua
Try: