RTI uses cookies to offer you the best experience online. By clicking “accept” on this website, you opt in and you agree to the use of cookies. If you would like to know more about how RTI uses cookies and how to manage them please view our Privacy Policy here. You can “opt out” or change your mind by visiting: http://optout.aboutads.info/. Click “accept” to agree.
Efficacy of Canakinumab vs. triamcinolone acetonide according to multiple gouty arthritis-related health outcomes measures
Hirsch, JD., Gnanasakthy, A., Lale, R., Choi, K., & Sarkin, AJ. (2014). Efficacy of Canakinumab vs. triamcinolone acetonide according to multiple gouty arthritis-related health outcomes measures. International Journal of Clinical Practice, 68(12), 1503-1507. https://doi.org/10.1111/ijcp.12521
Aim: Canakinumab (CAN), a selective, fully human, anti-IL-1 monoclonal antibody, has demonstrated long-term benefits in gouty arthritis (GA) patients, who have contraindications for, or are unresponsive or intolerant of, non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) or colchicine (two trials:beta-RELIEVED [n=228]; beta-RELIEVED II [n=226]). The trials collected different responses, including patient-reported outcomes (PRO). A composite response end-point (CRE) was used to interpret each patient's overall response to treatment. <br><br>Methods: Data from beta-RELIEVED trials were pooled for this retrospective analysis. The CRE representing overall change in GA-related health outcomes, from baseline to 12weeks, included clinical markers; PROs from the Gout Impact Scale (GIS); and the SF-36 bodily pain scale. Response to each variable (i.e. markedly important difference) was determined a priori. Variable values [1 (responder) or 0 (non-responder)] were summed to create a CRE score for each patient. <br><br>Results: For eight of 12 variables measured, the percentage of CAN responders was significantly greater than for TA (p<0.05). On average, patients receiving CAN met a higher percentage of response criteria (65%) than patients receiving triamcinolone acetonide (TA) (49%), p<0.001. Mean CRE scores were significantly higher for CAN vs. TA (mean [SD]; 4.7 [2.7] vs. 3.7 [2.4], p<0.001). Treatment differences remained even after serially removing individual responder variables and domains from the composite end-point, indicating that the differences between CAN and TA were robust. <br><br>Conclusion: CAN was superior to TA across multiple health-outcome variables comprising clinical markers and PRO over 12weeks in patients contraindicated, intolerant or unresponsive to NSAIDs and/or colchicine