A systematic review of the effectiveness of adalimumab
A systematic review of the effectiveness of adalimumab A systematic review of the effectiveness of adalimumab
62 Effectiveness significant advantages over sequential monotherapy with DMARDs or step-up combination DMARD use. Meta-analysis of infliximab results The principles of analysis and data presentation of infliximab trials are the same as described in the section ‘Data analysis’ (p. 14), towards the beginning of this chapter. Infliximab versus other active treatment The licence for infliximab stipulates that infliximab has to be used in conjunction with methotrexate, thus head-to-head comparison between infliximab and methotrexate is not considered here. However, relevant data from a small, dose-ranging study 137 are summarised in Table 74 (Appendix 4). Infliximab 3 mg kg –1 at 0, 2 and 6 weeks was more effective in all efficacy outcomes than a single infusion of methylprednisolone (1 g i.v.) in a small open-label RCT by Durez and colleagues. 139 Infliximab versus placebo (with concurrent, ongoing methotrexate) Two trials (START 105,111 and ATTRACT 133 ) compared infliximab at licensed dose to placebo in patients who had had an inadequate response to methotrexate treatment. The results for these primary analyses (licensed dose) are summarised in Table 15 and the upper parts of Figures 35–45. Additional data from a small, dose-ranging study 136 for the comparison between infliximab alone (not licensed use) and placebo without concomitant methotrexate are not considered here but are summarised in Table 74 (Appendix 4). Efficacy Infliximab was significantly more effective than placebo for all the efficacy outcomes being meta-analysed. Tolerability Significant heterogeneity in withdrawal for any reasons was observed between ATTRACT and START (test for heterogeneity p = 0.03). Infliximab was better tolerated than placebo in ATTRACT but not in the START. Safety No significant differences were found between infliximab and placebo in any of the safety outcomes being meta-analysed. The number of patients who had malignancy [Commercial-inconfidence information removed]. Sensitivity analyses Three trials (Maini, 137 Kavanaugh 138 and Taylor 140 ) included comparisons between infliximab and placebo at Review: Infliximab for rheumatoid arthritis 2006 Comparison: 03 Infliximab i.v. licensed dose only (3 mg kg –1 every 8 weeks) + MTX vs Placebo + MTX, end of trial Outcome: 01 ACR20 responder Study or subcategory Infliximab n/N Placebo n/N 01 With concurrent, ongoing MTX START, 111 [22 weeks] (+) ATTRACT, 132,133 [54 weeks] (+) Subtotal (95% CI) Total events: 235 (infliximab), 102 (placebo) Test for heterogeneity: 2 = 0.07, df = 1 (p = 0.79), I2 199/343 87/341 36/86 15/88 429 429 = 0% Test for overall effect: z = 8.63 (p < 0.00001) 02 With concurrent, newly initiated MTX (infliximab + MTX vs MTX) Quinn, 2005, 141 [54 weeks] (+) ASPIRE, 135 [54 weeks] (+) Subtotal (95% CI) Total events: 227 (infliximab), 153 (placebo) Test for heterogeneity: 2 = 0.19, df = 1 (p = 0.66), I2 8/10 6/10 219/351 147/274 361 284 = 0% Test for overall effect: z = 2.29 (p = 0.02) Total (95% CI) Total events: 462 (infliximab), 255 (placebo) Test for heterogeneity: 2 = 35.12, df = 3 (p < 0.00001), I2 790 713 = 91.5% Test for overall effect: z = 8.20 (p < 0.00001) FIGURE 35 ACR20 RR: infliximab licensed dose versus placebo (with concurrent MTX) RR (fixed) 95% CI 0.1 0.2 0.5 1 2 5 10 Favours placebo Favours infliximab Weight % 31.94 5.43 37.37 2.20 60.44 62.63 100.00 RR (fixed) 95% CI 2.27 (1.86 to 2.78) 2.46 (1.45 to 4.15) 2.30 (1.90 to 2.78) 1.33 (0.74 to 2.41) 1.16 (1.01 to 1.33) 1.17 (1.02 to 1.34)
doses or dosing schedules other than that in the licence. Sensitivity analyses which include patients from these trials are summarised in Table 75 (licensed dose and above) and Table 76 (all doses including sublicensed dose) (Appendix 4). Results are generally consistent with the primary analyses. However, when doses above the licensed doses are included, infliximab was associated with a slight [Commercial-inconfidence information removed] in any infection (RR [Commercial-in-confidence information removed]). Contrary to the observations from TEMPO, data from ATTRACT indicated that there was an inverse relationship between absolute HAQ © Queen’s Printer and Controller of HMSO 2006. All rights reserved. Health Technology Assessment 2006; Vol. 10: No. 42 TABLE 15 Meta-analyses: infliximab i.v. licensed dose (3 mg kg –1 every 8 weeks) versus placebo with ongoing MTX in MTX partial responders/non-responders, end of trial Comparison or outcome Studies N included Statistical method Effect size (95% CI) in analysis ACR20 responder 2111,133 858 RR (fixed) 2.30 (1.90 to 2.78)* ACR50 responder 2111,133 858 RR (fixed) 3.20 (2.30 to 4.44)* ACR70 responder 2111,133 858 RR (fixed) 3.16 (1.89 to 5.27)* RD ACR20 responder 2111,133 858 RD (fixed) 0.31 (0.25 to 0.37)* RD ACR50 responder 2111,133 858 RD (fixed) 0.20 (0.15 to 0.26)* RD ACR70 responder 2111,133 858 RD (fixed) 0.09 (0.05 to 0.13)* SJC, mean change from baseline 2111,133 830 WMD (fixed) –5.08 (–6.23 to –3.94)* Patient’s global assessment, mean change 2111,133 from baseline 829 WMD (fixed) –1.52 (–1.89 to –1.15)* HAQ, mean change from baseline 2 111,133 818 WMD (fixed) –0.27 (–0.35 to –0.19)* DAS28, end of study result 0 0 Not estimable No data available Modified van de Heijde–Sharp score, 1133 mean change from baseline 135 WMD (fixed) –5.70 (–8.58 to –2.82)* Withdrawal for any reasons 2 111,133 895 RR (random) 0.76 (0.36 to 1.60) Withdrawal due to lack of efficacy 1133 174 RR (fixed) 0.54 (0.33 to 0.90)* Withdrawal due to adverse events 2111,133 895 RR (fixed) 1.55 (0.82 to 2.93) Death 2111,133 895 RR (fixed) 0.33 (0.05 to 2.06) SAEs 2111,133 895 RR (fixed) 0.84 (0.56 to 1.26) Malignancy: all 2111,133 895 RR (fixed) 2.48 (0.49 to 12.70) Malignancy: skin cancer excluding melanoma 2111,133 895 RR (fixed) 1.49 (0.25 to 8.80) Malignancy: all cancer excluding 2111,133 non-melanoma skin cancer 895 RR (fixed) 2.32 (0.34 to 15.62) Serious infection 2 111,133 895 RR (fixed) 0.61 (0.26 to 1.46) Any infection 2111,133 896 RR (fixed) [Commercial-inconfidence information removed] * Statistically significant result (p < 0.05). improvement and disease duration in infliximabtreated patients. Infliximab plus methotrexate versus methotrexate (newly initiated methotrexate) ASPIRE 135 and the study by Quinn and colleagues 141 compared the combination of infliximab and methotrexate with methotrexate alone in methotrexate-naïve, early RA patients. The results of primary analyses (at licensed dose) are summarised in Table 16 and are also shown in the lower parts of Figures 35–45. Efficacy Infliximab combined with methotrexate is more effective than methotrexate alone. The differences between the combination and 63
- Page 27: disease between clinic appointments
- Page 30 and 31: 14 Effectiveness in juvenile arthri
- Page 32 and 33: 16 Effectiveness adalimumab plus me
- Page 34 and 35: 18 Effectiveness Monoclonal Antibod
- Page 36 and 37: 20 TABLE 1 Description of included
- Page 38 and 39: 22 TABLE 2 Quality of included RCTs
- Page 40 and 41: 24 Effectiveness change in modified
- Page 42 and 43: 26 Effectiveness TABLE 4 Meta-analy
- Page 44 and 45: 28 Effectiveness Review: Adalimumab
- Page 46 and 47: 30 Effectiveness Review: Adalimumab
- Page 48 and 49: 32 TABLE 6 Effectiveness Descriptio
- Page 50 and 51: 34 TABLE 6 Effectiveness Descriptio
- Page 52 and 53: 36 TABLE 7 Effectiveness Quality of
- Page 54 and 55: 38 Effectiveness etanercept trials.
- Page 56 and 57: 40 Effectiveness TABLE 9 Summary of
- Page 58 and 59: 42 Effectiveness Review: Etanercept
- Page 60 and 61: 44 Effectiveness Review: Etanercept
- Page 62 and 63: 46 Effectiveness Review: Etanercept
- Page 64 and 65: 48 Effectiveness Review: Etanercept
- Page 66 and 67: 50 Effectiveness Review: Etanercept
- Page 68 and 69: 52 Effectiveness Review: Etanercept
- Page 70 and 71: 54 Effectiveness TABLE 11 Summary o
- Page 72 and 73: 56 TABLE 12 Description of included
- Page 74 and 75: 58 TABLE 13 Quality of included RCT
- Page 76 and 77: 60 Effectiveness per week and escal
- Page 80 and 81: 64 Effectiveness Review: Infliximab
- Page 82 and 83: 66 Effectiveness Review: Infliximab
- Page 84 and 85: 68 Effectiveness FIGURE 44 Malignan
- Page 86 and 87: 70 TABLE 17 Effectiveness Summary o
- Page 89 and 90: Summary of review of existing econo
- Page 91 and 92: TABLE 20 Summary of published ICERs
- Page 93 and 94: TABLE 21 Published etanercept econo
- Page 95 and 96: TABLE 23 Published economic analyse
- Page 97 and 98: TABLE 25 Treatment sequences: adali
- Page 99 and 100: management of RA, i.e. 1st and 2nd
- Page 101 and 102: To estimate the long-term consequen
- Page 103 and 104: TABLE 32 TNF inhibitors as last act
- Page 105 and 106: TABLE 34 Basic structure of the mod
- Page 107 and 108: een quit on grounds of toxicity, ad
- Page 109 and 110: TABLE 39 Strategy set: adalimumab a
- Page 111 and 112: TABLE 43 Beta distributions for HAQ
- Page 113 and 114: TABLE 44 Early cessation of DMARDs:
- Page 115 and 116: TABLE 46 Unit costs for tests and v
- Page 117 and 118: following properties, according to
- Page 119 and 120: TABLE 52 Base case: TNF inhibitors
- Page 121 and 122: TABLE 54 Base case: TNF inhibitors
- Page 123 and 124: TABLE 59 Third TNF inhibitor follow
- Page 125 and 126: TABLE 65 Sensitivity analyses: TNF
- Page 127 and 128: TABLE 67 Sensitivity analyses: TNF
doses or dosing schedules o<strong>the</strong>r than that in<br />
<strong>the</strong> licence. Sensitivity analyses which include<br />
patients from <strong>the</strong>se trials are summarised in<br />
Table 75 (licensed dose and above) and Table 76<br />
(all doses including sublicensed dose) (Appendix<br />
4). Results are generally consistent with <strong>the</strong><br />
primary analyses. However, when doses above<br />
<strong>the</strong> licensed doses are included, infliximab was<br />
associated with a slight [Commercial-inconfidence<br />
information removed] in any infection<br />
(RR [Commercial-in-confidence information<br />
removed]).<br />
Contrary to <strong>the</strong> observations from TEMPO, data<br />
from ATTRACT indicated that <strong>the</strong>re was an<br />
inverse relationship between absolute HAQ<br />
© Queen’s Printer and Controller <strong>of</strong> HMSO 2006. All rights reserved.<br />
Health Technology Assessment 2006; Vol. 10: No. 42<br />
TABLE 15 Meta-analyses: infliximab i.v. licensed dose (3 mg kg –1 every 8 weeks) versus placebo with ongoing MTX in MTX partial<br />
responders/non-responders, end <strong>of</strong> trial<br />
Comparison or outcome Studies N included Statistical method Effect size (95% CI)<br />
in analysis<br />
ACR20 responder 2111,133 858 RR (fixed) 2.30 (1.90 to 2.78)*<br />
ACR50 responder 2111,133 858 RR (fixed) 3.20 (2.30 to 4.44)*<br />
ACR70 responder 2111,133 858 RR (fixed) 3.16 (1.89 to 5.27)*<br />
RD ACR20 responder 2111,133 858 RD (fixed) 0.31 (0.25 to 0.37)*<br />
RD ACR50 responder 2111,133 858 RD (fixed) 0.20 (0.15 to 0.26)*<br />
RD ACR70 responder 2111,133 858 RD (fixed) 0.09 (0.05 to 0.13)*<br />
SJC, mean change from baseline 2111,133 830 WMD (fixed) –5.08 (–6.23 to –3.94)*<br />
Patient’s global assessment, mean change 2111,133 from baseline<br />
829 WMD (fixed) –1.52 (–1.89 to –1.15)*<br />
HAQ, mean change from baseline 2 111,133<br />
818 WMD (fixed) –0.27 (–0.35 to –0.19)*<br />
DAS28, end <strong>of</strong> study result 0 0 Not estimable No data available<br />
Modified van de Heijde–Sharp score, 1133 mean change from baseline<br />
135 WMD (fixed) –5.70 (–8.58 to –2.82)*<br />
Withdrawal for any reasons 2 111,133 895 RR (random) 0.76 (0.36 to 1.60)<br />
Withdrawal due to lack <strong>of</strong> efficacy 1133 174 RR (fixed) 0.54 (0.33 to 0.90)*<br />
Withdrawal due to adverse events 2111,133 895 RR (fixed) 1.55 (0.82 to 2.93)<br />
Death 2111,133 895 RR (fixed) 0.33 (0.05 to 2.06)<br />
SAEs 2111,133 895 RR (fixed) 0.84 (0.56 to 1.26)<br />
Malignancy: all 2111,133 895 RR (fixed) 2.48 (0.49 to 12.70)<br />
Malignancy: skin cancer excluding melanoma 2111,133 895 RR (fixed) 1.49 (0.25 to 8.80)<br />
Malignancy: all cancer excluding 2111,133 non-melanoma skin cancer<br />
895 RR (fixed) 2.32 (0.34 to 15.62)<br />
Serious infection 2 111,133<br />
895 RR (fixed) 0.61 (0.26 to 1.46)<br />
Any infection 2111,133 896 RR (fixed) [Commercial-inconfidence<br />
information<br />
removed]<br />
* Statistically significant result (p < 0.05).<br />
improvement and disease duration in infliximabtreated<br />
patients.<br />
Infliximab plus methotrexate versus<br />
methotrexate (newly initiated methotrexate)<br />
ASPIRE 135 and <strong>the</strong> study by Quinn and<br />
colleagues 141 compared <strong>the</strong> combination <strong>of</strong><br />
infliximab and methotrexate with methotrexate<br />
alone in methotrexate-naïve, early RA patients.<br />
The results <strong>of</strong> primary analyses (at licensed dose)<br />
are summarised in Table 16 and are also shown in<br />
<strong>the</strong> lower parts <strong>of</strong> Figures 35–45.<br />
Efficacy Infliximab combined with methotrexate is<br />
more effective than methotrexate alone. The<br />
differences between <strong>the</strong> combination and<br />
63