Long-term persistence of biological agents in the treatment of patients with Rheumatoid Arthritis: a systematic review of the literature
Authors: Schneeberger E. E. , Acosta Felquer M. A. , Citera G. , Soriano E. , Mysler E. 
Published: December 2021

Treatment persistence is a surrogate marker for long-term treatment success. Objective: To assess the persistence of the biological agents used for treatment of patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) over 5 years period and to determine the main causes associated with persistence or discontinuation. Material and methods: A systematic literature review (SLR) was carried out, according to PRISMA recommendations, including Pubmed, Cochrane and Lilacs databases, and studies presented at the ACR, EULAR, PANLAR congresses (2018/2019) until January 2020. Two independent reviewers evaluated the identified publications, by title and abstract and full text, according to PICO methodology. Eligibility criteria were: studies including RA patients ≥ 18 years, treated with biological agents, which measured persistence/ discontinuation for a period of time equal to or greater than 5 years and who were in English or Spanish language. In the case of lack of agreement between the two reviewers, a third reviewer was consulted. The extracted information was analyzed using descriptive statistics, an average percentage of persistence for each biological agent at 5 years was calculated. Results: 56 articles were selected after removal of duplicates and exclusion by title/abs-tract, and by full text. Long-term extension phase of randomized controlled studies were 13, another 15 retrospective cohorts, 18 prospective cohorts and 10 retro-prospective cohorts and corresponded to a total of 72177 (range: 79-10396) patients with RA, with a mean age of 53.8 years ± 12.1, 78.2% female and an average RA disease duration of 9.7 years ± 8.4. In 33.9% of the studies, biological therapy was combined with conventional disease modifying anti-rheumatic drugs (c-DMARDs), in 3.6% monotherapy, 48.2% both modalities, and in 14.3% not reported. One study was in the 1st line (methotrexate näive), 29 studies in 2nd line (inadequate response to MTX and/or c-DMARDs), 5 in 3rd line (inadequate response to biological b-DMARDs), 12 in ≥2nd therapeutic line and in 9 studies did not specify this condition. In 30 studies which evaluated the 2nd therapeutic line, the highest persistence corresponded to tocilizumab (TCZ) 66.41% (95% CI 57.8-79.94), abatacept (ABA) 57.91% (95% CI 50.96-64.87) and golimumab (GOL) 54.38% (95% CI 48.58-60.19). In 10 studies, in which b-DMARD had been analyzed in 3rd therapeutic line, highest retention rates corresponded to rituximab (RTX) 61.19% (95% CI 57.53-66.22) and TCZ 61.1% (95% CI 58.81-63.32). Among studies that evaluated predictors, the most frequently associated with higher survival were: combined treatment with c-DMARD, etanercept versus infliximab and adalimumab and 2nd line of treatment vs. 3rd or 4th line whereas those associated with lower survival rates were: greater use of steroids, higher baseline disease activity, and female gender. Conclusions: In this SLR, the 5-year persistence of b-DMARD in patients with inadequa-te response to DMARs-c and DMARs-b was numerically greater for non-TNFi agents. And among TNFi, GOL presented a higher retention in 2nd therapeutic line.