Abatacept, rituximab and tocilizumab and infection risk in rheumatoid arthritis

  • Grøn KL & al.
  • Rheumatology (Oxford)
  • 25 Nov 2019

  • curated by Sarfaroj Khan
  • UK Clinical Digest
Access to the full content of this site is available only to registered healthcare professionals. Access to the full content of this site is available only to registered healthcare professionals.

Takeaway

  • Patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) treated with non-TNF-inhibitor (non-TNFi) biologic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs were at a higher risk for overall infections.
  • The risk appeared higher with rituximab vs abatacept and tocilizumab during the first and second year of treatment.

Why this matters

  • Only a few studies have investigated the overall risk for infection (prescription of antibiotics or hospitalisation due to infection) in patients initiating non-TNF-inhibitor therapy.

Study design

  • An observational cohort study identified 3696 treatment episodes among 2716 patients with RA (abatacept, n=1115; rituximab, n=1017; tocilizumab, n=1564).
  • Main outcome: occurrence of the first infection at 12 and 24 months.
  • Funding: AbbVie and others.

Key results

  • Adjusted incidence rate (aIR) per 100 person-years (PY) was as follows:
    • at first 12 months: abatacept (aIR, 76; 95% CI, 69-84); rituximab (aIR, 87; 95% CI, 79-96); tocilizumab (aIR, 77; 95% CI, 71-84).
    • at first 24 months: abatacept (aIR, 66; 95% CI, 61-72); rituximab (aIR, 76; 95% CI, 70-80); tocilizumab (aIR, 69; 95% CI, 65-75).
  • After 12 months, the overall risk for infections was lower with:
    • abatacept vs rituximab (RR, 0.94; 95% CI, 0.81-1.08) and
    • tocilizumab vs rituximab (RR, 0.94; 95% CI, 0.81-1.03).
  • After 24 months, the overall risk for infections reduced with:
    • abatacept vs rituximab (RR, 0.95; 95% CI, 0.83-1.10),
    • tocilizumab vs rituximab (RR, 0.98; 95% CI, 0.86-1.12) and
    • abatacept vs tocilizumab (RR, 0.98; 95% CI, 0.86-1.10).
  • The risk for infections was higher for all combined drugs among:
    • switchers vs biologics-naïve (RR, 1.27; 95% CI, 1.13-1.44) and
    • smokers vs never smokers (RR, 1.13; 95% CI, 1.00-1.27).

Limitations

  • Risk for information bias and residual confounding.