Etanercept (ETN) with methotrexate (MTX) is better than ETN monotherapy in patients with active rheumatoid arthritis despite MTX therapy: a randomized trial. Etanercept therapy in rheumatoid arthritis. A randomized, controlled trial. A trial of etanercept, a recombinant tumor necrosis factor receptor:Fc fusion protein, in patients with rheumatoid arthritis receiving methotrexate. Randomized phase 2 trial of anti-tumor necrosis factor therapy for cachexia in patients with early rheumatoid arthritis. Efficacy, safety and patient-reported outcomes of combination etanercept and sulfasalazine versus etanercept alone in patients with rheumatoid arthritis: a double-blind randomised 2-year study. Therapeutic effect of the combination of etanercept and methotrexate compared with each treatment alone in patients with rheumatoid arthritis: double-blind randomised controlled trial. A comparison study of a recombinant tumor necrosis factor receptor:Fc fusion protein (rhTNFR:Fc) and methotrexate in treatment of patients with active rheumatoid arthritis in China. Comparison of methotrexate monotherapy with a combination of methotrexate and etanercept in active, early, moderate to severe rheumatoid arthritis (COMET): a randomised, double-blind, parallel treatment trial. A comparison of etanercept and methotrexate in patients with early rheumatoid arthritis.
The superiority of the combination therapy of methotrexate (MTX) and anti-tumor necrosis factor (TNF) biological agents over anti-TNF monotherapy in MTX-naïve patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) has been demonstrated. We investigated the efficacy and safety of continuation versus discontinuation of MTX at the commencement of etanercept (ETN) in patients with active RA despite MTX therapy. In total, 151 patients with active RA despite treatment with MTX were randomized to either ETN 25 mg twice a week and MTX 6-8 mg/week (the E + M group) or ETN alone (the E group). Co-primary endpoints included the European League Against Rheumatism (EULAR) good response rate and the American College of Rheumatology (ACR) 50 response rate at week 24. Demographic and clinical features between groups at baseline were similar. The EULAR good response rates were significantly higher in the E + M group (52%) than in the E group (33%) at week 24 (p = 0.0001). Although the ACR50 response rate, one of the co-primary endpoints, and the ACR70 response rate at week 24 were not significantly greater in the E + M group (64 and 38%, respectively) than in the E group (48 and 26%, respectively), the ACR20 response rate was significantly greater in the E + M group (90%) than in the E group (64%; p = 0.0002). Safety profiles were similar for the groups. Thus, MTX should be continued at the commencement of ETN therapy, even in RA patients who show an inappropriate response to MTX. In a phase II study, etanercept (recombinant human tumor necrosis factor receptor [p75]:Fc fusion protein) safely produced rapid, dose-dependent improvement in rheumatoid arthritis over 3 months.
                To confirm the benefit of etanercept therapy of longer duration and simplified dosing in patients with rheumatoid arthritis.
                Randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial with blinded joint assessors.
                13 North American centers.
                234 patients with active rheumatoid arthritis who had an inadequate response to disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs.
                Twice-weekly subcutaneous injections of etanercept, 10 or 25 mg, or placebo for 6 months.
                The primary end points were 20% and 50% improvement in disease activity according to American College of Rheumatology (ACR) responses at 3 and 6 months. Other end points were 70% ACR responses at 3 and 6 months and other measures of disease activity at 3 and 6 months.
                Etanercept significantly reduced disease activity in a dose-related fashion. At 3 months, 62% of the patients receiving 25 mg of etanercept and 23% of the placebo recipients achieved 20% ACR response (P < 0.001). At 6 months, 59% of the 25-mg group and 11% of the placebo group achieved a 20% ACR response (P < 0.001); 40% and 5%, respectively, achieved a 50% ACR response (P < 0.01). The respective mean percentage reduction in the number of tender and swollen joints at 6 months was 56% and 47% in the 25-mg group and 6% and -7% in the placebo group (P < 0.05). Significantly more etanercept recipients achieved a 70% ACR response, minimal disease status (0 to 5 affected joints), and improved quality of life. Etanercept was well tolerated, with no dose-limiting toxic effects.
                Etanercept can safely provide rapid, significant, and sustained benefit in patients with active rheumatoid arthritis. Patients treated with methotrexate for rheumatoid arthritis often improve but continue to have active disease. This study was undertaken to determine whether the addition of etanercept, a soluble tumor necrosis factor receptor (p75):Fc fusion protein (TNFR:Fc), to methotrexate therapy would provide additional benefit to patients who had persistent rheumatoid arthritis despite receiving methotrexate.
                In a 24-week, double-blind trial, we randomly assigned 89 patients with persistently active rheumatoid arthritis despite at least 6 months of methotrexate therapy at a stable dose of 15 to 25 mg per week (or as low as 10 mg per week for patients unable to tolerate higher doses) to receive either etanercept (25 mg) or placebo subcutaneously twice weekly while continuing to receive methotrexate. The primary measure of clinical response was the American College of Rheumatology criteria for a 20 percent improvement in measures of disease activity (ACR 20) at 24 weeks.
                The addition of etanercept to methotrexate therapy resulted in rapid and sustained improvement. At 24 weeks, 71 percent of the patients receiving etanercept plus methotrexate and 27 percent of those receiving placebo plus methotrexate met the ACR 20 criteria (P<0.001); 39 percent of the patients receiving etanercept plus methotrexate and 3 percent of those receiving placebo plus methotrexate met the ACR 50 criteria (for a 50 percent improvement) (P<0.001). Patients receiving etanercept plus methotrexate had significantly better outcomes according to all measures of disease activity. The only adverse events associated with etanercept were mild injection-site reactions, and no patient withdrew from the study because of adverse events associated with etanercept.
                In patients with persistently active rheumatoid arthritis, the combination of etanercept and methotrexate was safe and well tolerated and provided significantly greater clinical benefit than methotrexate alone. Tumor necrosis factor (TNF) is an important mediator of cachexia, and its blockade prevents catabolism in animal models. However, little evidence shows that anti-TNF therapy is effective in treating cachexia in humans.
                The main aim of this study was to investigate the effect of etanercept, a synthetic soluble TNF receptor, on body composition in patients with early rheumatoid arthritis (RA).
                Twenty-six patients were randomly assigned to 24 wk of treatment with etanercept or methotrexate; the latter is the first-line therapy for RA. Body composition, physical function, disease activity, systemic inflammation, and the circulating insulin-like growth factor (IGF) system were measured at baseline (week 0) and at follow-up (weeks 12 and 24). Twelve patients in each treatment group (9 F, 3 M) completed the study.
                Overall, no important changes in body composition were observed, despite a transient increase in IGF-I at week 12 (P < 0.01). However, the secondary analysis of those patients (6/treatment group) who gained weight during follow-up showed a significant effect of etanercept on the composition of the weight gained: 44% of weight gained in the etanercept group was fat-free mass, as compared with only 14% in the methotrexate group (P = 0.04). Etanercept and methotrexate were equally effective in controlling the disease and improving physical function.
                Anti-TNF therapy with etanercept is not superior to that with methotrexate for the treatment of rheumatoid cachexia over a period of 6 mo. However, TNF blockade seems to normalize the anabolic response to overfeeding and, if these findings are confirmed, may be useful in conditions characterized by anorexia and weight loss. To determine the efficacy and safety of etanercept and etanercept plus sulfasalazine versus sulfasalazine in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) despite sulfasalazine therapy.
                Patients were randomly assigned to etanercept (25 mg twice weekly; sulfasalazine was discontinued at baseline), etanercept plus sulfasalazine (unchanged regimen of 2-3 g/day) or sulfasalazine in a double-blind, randomised, 2-year study in adult patients with active RA despite sulfasalazine therapy. Efficacy was assessed using the American College of Rheumatology criteria, disease activity scores (DAS) and patient-reported outcomes (PRO).
                Demographic variables and baseline disease characteristics were comparable among treatment groups; mean DAS 5.1, 5.2 and 5.1 for etanercept (n = 103), etanercept plus sulfasalazine (n = 101) and sulfasalazine (n = 50), respectively. Withdrawal due to lack of efficacy was highest with sulfasalazine (26 (52%) vs 6 (6%) for either etanercept group, p<0.001). Patients receiving etanercept or etanercept plus sulfasalazine had a more rapid initial response, which was sustained at 2 years, than those receiving sulfasalazine: mean DAS 2.8, 2.5 versus 4.5, respectively (p<0.05); ACR 20 response was achieved by 67%, 77% versus 34% of patients, respectively (p<0.01) Overall, PRO followed a similar pattern; a clinically significant improvement in health assessment questionnaire was achieved by 76%, 78% versus 40% of patients, respectively (p<0.01). Commonly reported adverse events occurring in the etanercept groups were injection site reactions and pharyngitis/laryngitis (p<0.01).
                Etanercept and etanercept plus sulfasalazine are efficacious for the long-term management of patients with RA. The addition of etanercept or substitution with etanercept should be considered as treatment options for patients not adequately responding to sulfasalazine. Etanercept and methotrexate are effective in the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis but no data exist on concurrent initiation or use of the combination compared with either drug alone. We aimed to assess combination treatment with etanercept and methotrexate versus the monotherapies in patients with rheumatoid arthritis.
                In a double-blind, randomised, clinical efficacy, safety, and radiographic study, 686 patients with active rheumatoid arthritis were randomly allocated to treatment with etanercept 25 mg (subcutaneously twice a week), oral methotrexate (up to 20 mg every week), or the combination. Clinical response was assessed by criteria of the American College of Rheumatology (ACR). The primary efficacy endpoint was the numeric index of the ACR response (ACR-N) area under the curve (AUC) over the first 24 weeks. The primary radiographic endpoint was change from baseline to week 52 in total joint damage and was assessed with the modified Sharp score. Analysis was by intention to treat.
                Four patients did not receive any drug; thus 682 were studied. ACR-N AUC at 24 weeks was greater for the combination group compared with etanercept alone and methotrexate alone (18.3%-years [95% CI 17.1-19.6] vs 14.7%-years [13.5-16.0], p<0.0001, and 12.2%-years [11.0-13.4], p<0.0001; respectively). The mean difference in ACR-N AUC between combination and methotrexate alone was 6.1 (95% CI 4.5-7.8, p<0.0001) and between etanercept and methotrexate was 2.5 (0.8-4.2, p=0.0034). The combination was more efficacious than methotrexate or etanercept alone in retardation of joint damage (mean total Sharp score -0.54 [95% CI -1.00 to -0.07] vs 2.80 [1.08 to 4.51], p<0.0001, and 0.52 [-0.10 to 1.15], p=0.0006; respectively). The mean difference in total Sharp score between combination and methotrexate alone was -3.34 (95% CI -4.86 to -1.81, p<0.0001) and between etanercept and methotrexate was -27 (-3.81 to -0.74, p=0.0469). The number of patients reporting infections or adverse events was similar in all groups.
                The combination of etanercept and methotrexate was significantly better in reduction of disease activity, improvement of functional disability, and retardation of radiographic progression compared with methotrexate or etanercept alone. These findings bring us closer to achievement of remission and repair of structural damage in rheumatoid arthritis. The objective of this study is to evaluate the efficacy and safety of rhTNFR:Fc: a recombinant tumor necrosis factor receptor:Fc fusion protein compared with methotrexate (MTX) in patients with rheumatoid arthritis in China. We treated 238 patients with active rheumatoid arthritis with either twice weekly subcutaneous injection rhTNFR:Fc (25 mg) or weekly oral MTX (mean 15 mg per week) for 24 weeks (registration number: 2003L01264). Clinical responses were defined as the percent improvement in disease activity according to the criteria of the American College of Rheumatology (ACR-N). As compared with MTX-treated patients, more patients who received rhTNFR:Fc had ACR20 improvement in disease activity during the first 2 weeks (P < 0.05). Similarly, more patients treated with rhTNFR:Fc having ACR20, ACR50, ACR70 improvement in disease activity during 8 weeks (P < 0.05). At the end of 12-week treatment, patients received rhTNFR:Fc also had significant improvement at ACR20 (P < 0.05). Compared with oral MTX, patients received rhTNFR:Fc also had significant improvement at ACR70 at the end of 24 weeks treatment (P < 0.05). In conclusion, compared with oral MTX subcutaneous injection, rhTNFR:Fc acted more rapidly to release symptoms and signs of active RA in Chinese patients, and well tolerated in patients with rheumatoid arthritis in China. Remission and radiographic non-progression are goals in the treatment of early rheumatoid arthritis. The aim of the combination of methotrexate and etanercept in active early rheumatoid arthritis (COMET) trial is to compare remission and radiographic non-progression in patients treated with methotrexate monotherapy or with methotrexate plus etanercept.
                542 outpatients who were methotrexate-naive and had had early moderate-to-severe rheumatoid arthritis for 3-24 months were randomly assigned to receive either methotrexate alone titrated up from 7.5 mg a week to a maximum of 20 mg a week by week 8 or methotrexate (same titration) plus etanercept 50 mg a week. Coprimary endpoints at 52 weeks were remission measured with the disease activity score in 28 joints (DAS28) and radiographic non-progression measured with modified total Sharp score. Treatment was allocated with a computerised randomisation and enrolment system, which masked both participants and carers. Analysis was done by modified intention to treat with last observation carried forward for missing data. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00195494).
                274 participants were randomly assigned to receive combined treatment and 268 methotrexate alone. 132 of 265 (50%, 95% CI 44-56%) patients who took combined treatment and were available for assessment achieved clinical remission compared with 73 of 263 (28%, 23-33%) taking methotrexate alone (effect difference 22.05%, 95%CI 13.96-30.15%, p<0.0001). 487 evaluable patients had severe disease (DAS28>5.1). 196 of 246 (80%, 75-85%) and 135 of 230 (59%, 53-65%), respectively, achieved radiographic non-progression (20.98%, 12.97-29.09%, p<0.0001). Serious adverse events were similar between groups.
                Both clinical remission and radiographic non-progression are achievable goals in patients with early severe rheumatoid arthritis within 1 year of combined treatment with etanercept plus methotrexate.
                Wyeth Research. Etanercept, which blocks the action of tumor necrosis factor, reduces disease activity in patients with long-standing rheumatoid arthritis. Its efficacy in reducing disease activity and preventing joint damage in patients with active early rheumatoid arthritis is unknown.
                We treated 632 patients with early rheumatoid arthritis with either twice-weekly subcutaneous etanercept (10 or 25 mg) or weekly oral methotrexate (mean, 19 mg per week) for 12 months. Clinical response was defined as the percent improvement in disease activity according to the criteria of the American College of Rheumatology. Bone erosion and joint-space narrowing were measured radiographically and scored with use of the Sharp scale. On this scale, an increase of 1 point represents one new erosion or minimal narrowing.
                As compared with patients who received methotrexate, patients who received the 25-mg dose of etanercept had a more rapid rate of improvement, with significantly more patients having 20 percent, 50 percent, and 70 percent improvement in disease activity during the first six months (P<0.05). The mean increase in the erosion score during the first 6 months was 0.30 in the group assigned to receive 25 mg of etanercept and 0.68 in the methotrexate group (P= 0.001), and the respective increases during the first 12 months were 0.47 and 1.03 (P=0.002). Among patients who received the 25-mg dose of etanercept, 72 percent had no increase in the erosion score, as compared with 60 percent of patients in the methotrexate group (P=0.007). This group of patients also had fewer adverse events (P=0.02) and fewer infections (P= 0.006) than the group that was treated with methotrexate.
                As compared with oral methotrexate, subcutaneous [corrected] etanercept acted more rapidly to decrease symptoms and slow joint damage in patients with early active rheumatoid arthritis.
Etanercept 25 mg administered subcutaneously twice weekly together with MTX was more efficacious than either etanercept or MTX monotherapy for ACR50 and it slowed joint radiographic progression after up to three years of treatment for all participants (responders or not). There was no evidence of a difference in the rates of infections between groups.