Article Text

PDF
SAT0261 Abatacept is A Suitable Biologic Disease Modifying Anti-Rheumatic Drugs in Patients with Anti-Ss-A Antibodies-Positive Rheumatoid Arthritis
  1. Y. Horai1,
  2. A. Takatani1,
  3. A. Nishino1,
  4. Y. Nakashima1,
  5. T. Suzuki1,
  6. K. Fujikawa2,
  7. T. Tsukada2,
  8. M. Tsuboi3,
  9. N. Matsuoka3,
  10. K. Migita4,
  11. T. Aramaki5,
  12. Y. Ueki5,
  13. S.-Y. Kawashiri1,
  14. N. Iwamoto1,
  15. K. Ichinose1,
  16. M. Tamai1,
  17. H. Nakamura1,
  18. T. Origuchi6,
  19. A. Kawakami1
  1. 1Department of Immunology and Rheumatology, Nagasaki University Graduate School of Biomedical Sciences, Nagasaki
  2. 2Isahaya Health Insurance General Hospital, Isahaya
  3. 3Nagasaki Medical Hospital of Rheumatology, Nagasaki
  4. 4National Hospital Organization Nagasaki Medical Center, Omura
  5. 5Sasebo Chuo Hospital, Sasebo
  6. 6Department of Rehabilitation Sciences, Nagasaki University Graduate School of Biomedical Sciences, Nagasaki, Japan

Abstract

Background Recent report indicates that the presence of anti-SS-A antibodies are an independent factor associated with an insufficient response to tumour necrosis factor (TNF) inhibitors in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) (Ref. 1). Since anti-SS-A antibodies are frequently found in patients with RA (20%), other classes of biologic disease modifying anti-rheumatic drugs (DMARDs) than TNF inhibitors may be indicative for active anti-SS-A antibodies-positive RA patients.

Objectives To investigate whether abatacept (ABT) is effective for anti-SS-A antibodies-positive RA patients comparing with anti-SS-A antibodies-negative RA patients.

Methods This is a prospective observational study and consists of 50 RA patients (42 females and 8 males) who had been administrated with ABT. Eighteen patients were anti-SS-A antibodies-positive whereas 32 were anti-SS-A antibodies-negative, respectively. Patients gave their informed consent to be subjected to the protocol. We have selected the anti-SS-A antibodies-negative RA patients whose baseline variables, including disease duration and clinical disease activity at baseline, were comparable with anti-SS-A antibodies-positive RA patients. The continuation rate and clinical disease activity including SDAI were evaluated during 6 months treatment of ABT. Statistical analysis included last observation carried forward (LOCF) method.

Results At baseline, there was no statistical difference of SDAI in both groups: 20.47 in the anti-SS-A antibodies-positive RA group and 21.92 in the anti-SS-A antibodies-negative RA group, respectively (p =0.9554, Student's t test). At 6 months, although there was no statistically significant difference between the 2 groups, SDAI tended to be lowered in the anti-SS-A antibodies-positive RA group as compared with anti-SS-A antibodies-negative RA group (9.11 in the former vs 12.11 in the latter, p =0.2036, Welch's t test). It is interesting to note that the discontinuation rate for ABT due to lack of efficacy or adverse events at 6 months was significantly lower in anti-SS-A antibodies-positive RA group as compared with anti-SS-A antibodies-negative group (p =0.0475, Welch's t test).

Conclusions In comparison with TNF inhibitors, the present data suggest that ABT is a suitable biologic DMARDs in patients with anti-SS-A antibodies-positive RA.

References

  1. Matsudaira R, Tamura N, Sekiya F, et al. Anti-Ro/SSA antibodies are an independent factor associated with an insufficient response to tumor necrosis factor inhibitors in patients with rheumatoid arthritis. J Rheumatol 2011; 38: 2346-54.

Disclosure of Interest None declared

DOI 10.1136/annrheumdis-2014-eular.3956

Statistics from Altmetric.com

Request permissions

If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.