SciELO - Scientific Electronic Library Online

 
vol.31 número3Comparación de pacientes con lupus eritematoso sistémico tratados en centros públicos versus centros privados de salud índice de autoresíndice de assuntospesquisa de artigos
Home Pagelista alfabética de periódicos  

Serviços Personalizados

Journal

Artigo

Indicadores

  • Não possue artigos citadosCitado por SciELO

Links relacionados

  • Não possue artigos similaresSimilares em SciELO

Compartilhar


Revista argentina de reumatología

versão impressa ISSN 0327-4411versão On-line ISSN 2362-3675

Resumo

SCHNEEBERGER, E.E. et al. Long-term persistence of biological agents in the treatment of patients with Rheumatoid Arthritis: a systematic literature review. Rev. argent. reumatolg. [online]. 2020, vol.31, n.3, pp.6-18. ISSN 0327-4411.

Treatment persistence is a surrogate marker for long-term treatment success. Objective: To assess the persistence of the biological agents used for treatment of patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) over 5 years period and to determine the main causes associated with persistence or discontinuation. Material and methods: A systematic literature review (SLR) was carried out, according to PRISMA recommendations, including Pubmed, Cochrane and Lilacs databases, and studies presented at the ACR, EULAR, PANLAR congresses (2018/2019) until January 2020. Two independent reviewers evaluated the identified publications, by title and abstract and full text, according to PICO methodology. Eligibility criteria were: studies including RA patients ≥ 18 years, treated with biological agents, which measured persistence/ discontinuation for a period of time equal to or greater than 5 years and who were in English or Spanish language. In the case of lack of agreement between the two reviewers, a third reviewer was consulted. The extracted information was analyzed using descriptive statistics, an average percentage of persistence for each biological agent at 5 years was calculated. Results: 56 articles were selected after removal of duplicates and exclusion by title/abstract, and by full text. Long-term extension phase of randomized controlled studies were 13, another 15 retrospective cohorts, 18 prospective cohorts and 10 retro-prospective cohorts and corresponded to a total of 72177 (range: 79-10396) patients with RA, with a mean age of 53.8 years ± 12.1, 78.2% female and an average RA disease duration of 9.7 years ± 8.4. In 33.9% of the studies, biological therapy was combined with conventional disease modifying anti-rheumatic drugs (c-DMARDs), in 3.6% monotherapy, 48.2% both modalities, and in 14.3% not reported. One study was in the 1st line (methotrexate näive), 29 studies in 2nd line (inadequate response to MTX and/or c-DMARDs), 5 in 3rd line (inadequate response to biological b-DMARDs), 12 in ≥2nd therapeutic line and in 9 studies did not specify this condition. In 30 studies which evaluated the 2nd therapeutic line, the highest persistence corresponded to tocilizumab (TCZ) 66.41% (95% CI 57.8-79.94), abatacept (ABA) 57.91% (95% CI 50.96-64.87) and golimumab (GOL) 54.38% (95% CI 48.58-60.19). In 10 studies, in which b-DMARD had been analyzed in 3rd therapeutic line, highest retention rates corresponded to rituximab (RTX) 61.19% (95% CI 57.53-66.22) and TCZ 61.1% (95% CI 58.81-63.32). Among studies that evaluated predictors, the most frequently associated with higher survival were: combined treatment with c-DMARD, etanercept versus infliximab and adalimumab and 2nd line of treatment vs. 3rd or 4th line whereas those associated with lower survival rates were: greater use of steroids, higher baseline disease activity, and female gender. Conclusions: In this SLR, the 5-year persistence of b-DMARD in patients with inadequate response to DMARs-c and DMARs-b was numerically greater for non-TNFi agents. And among TNFi, GOL presented a higher retention in 2nd therapeutic line.

Palavras-chave : persistence; biologic agents; rheumatoid arthritis.

        · resumo em Espanhol     · texto em Espanhol

 

Creative Commons License Todo o conteúdo deste periódico, exceto onde está identificado, está licenciado sob uma Licença Creative Commons