We have located links that may give you full text access.
Comparative Study
Journal Article
Multicenter Study
Observational Study
Infliximab Versus Adalimumab in the Treatment of Refractory Inflammatory Uveitis: A Multicenter Study From the French Uveitis Network.
Arthritis & Rheumatology 2016 June
OBJECTIVE: To analyze the factors associated with response to anti-tumor necrosis factor (anti-TNF) treatment and compare the efficacy and safety of infliximab (IFX) and adalimumab (ADA) in patients with refractory noninfectious uveitis.
METHODS: This was a multicenter observational study of 160 patients (39% men and 61% women; median age 31 years [interquartile range 21-42]) with uveitis that had been refractory to other therapies, who were treated with anti-TNF (IFX 5 mg/kg at weeks 0, 2, 6, and then every 5-6 weeks [n = 98] or ADA 40 mg every 2 weeks [n = 62]). Factors associated with complete response were assessed by multivariate analysis. Efficacy and safety of IFX versus ADA were compared using a propensity score approach with baseline characteristics taken into account. Subdistribution hazard ratios (SHRs) and 95% confidence intervals (95% CIs) were calculated.
RESULTS: The main etiologies of uveitis included Behçet's disease (BD) (36%), juvenile idiopathic arthritis (22%), spondyloarthropathy (10%), and sarcoidosis (6%). The overall response rate at 6 and 12 months was 87% (26% with complete response) and 93% (28% with complete response), respectively. The median time to complete response was 2 months. In multivariate analysis, BD and occurrence of >5 uveitis flares before anti-TNF initiation were associated with complete response to anti-TNF (SHR 2.52 [95% CI 1.35-4.71], P = 0.004 and SHR 1.97 [95% CI 1.02-3.84], P = 0.045, respectively). Side effects were reported in 28% of patients, including serious adverse events in 13%. IFX and ADA did not differ significantly in terms of occurrence of complete response (SHR 0.65 [95% CI 0.25-1.71], P = 0.39), serious side effects (SHR 0.22 [95% CI 0.04-1.25], P = 0.089), or event-free survival (SHR 0.55 [95% CI 0.28-1.08], P = 0.083).
CONCLUSION: Anti-TNF treatment is highly effective in refractory inflammatory uveitis. BD is associated with increased odds of response. IFX and ADA appear to be equivalent in terms of efficacy.
METHODS: This was a multicenter observational study of 160 patients (39% men and 61% women; median age 31 years [interquartile range 21-42]) with uveitis that had been refractory to other therapies, who were treated with anti-TNF (IFX 5 mg/kg at weeks 0, 2, 6, and then every 5-6 weeks [n = 98] or ADA 40 mg every 2 weeks [n = 62]). Factors associated with complete response were assessed by multivariate analysis. Efficacy and safety of IFX versus ADA were compared using a propensity score approach with baseline characteristics taken into account. Subdistribution hazard ratios (SHRs) and 95% confidence intervals (95% CIs) were calculated.
RESULTS: The main etiologies of uveitis included Behçet's disease (BD) (36%), juvenile idiopathic arthritis (22%), spondyloarthropathy (10%), and sarcoidosis (6%). The overall response rate at 6 and 12 months was 87% (26% with complete response) and 93% (28% with complete response), respectively. The median time to complete response was 2 months. In multivariate analysis, BD and occurrence of >5 uveitis flares before anti-TNF initiation were associated with complete response to anti-TNF (SHR 2.52 [95% CI 1.35-4.71], P = 0.004 and SHR 1.97 [95% CI 1.02-3.84], P = 0.045, respectively). Side effects were reported in 28% of patients, including serious adverse events in 13%. IFX and ADA did not differ significantly in terms of occurrence of complete response (SHR 0.65 [95% CI 0.25-1.71], P = 0.39), serious side effects (SHR 0.22 [95% CI 0.04-1.25], P = 0.089), or event-free survival (SHR 0.55 [95% CI 0.28-1.08], P = 0.083).
CONCLUSION: Anti-TNF treatment is highly effective in refractory inflammatory uveitis. BD is associated with increased odds of response. IFX and ADA appear to be equivalent in terms of efficacy.
Full text links
Related Resources
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app