['The aim of this study was to test the hypothesis that the reason for non-response (caused by immunogenicity or not) to a first tumour necrosis factor (TNF) inhibitor defines whether a second TNF inhibitor will be effective.', "This cohort study consisted of 292 consecutive patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA), all treated with etanercept. A total of 89 patients (30%) were treated previously with infliximab or adalimumab ('switchers'), and the remaining 203 (70%) were anti-TNF naive. All switchers were divided into two groups: with and without antibodies against the previous biological. Differences in clinical response to etanercept between switchers with and without antibodies and patients who were anti-TNF naive were assessed after 28 weeks of treatment using changes in Disease Activity Score in 28 joints (DAS28).", 'After 28 weeks of treatment, response to etanercept did not differ between patients who were anti-TNF naive and switchers with anti-drug antibodies (ΔDAS28=2.1 ± 1.3 vs ΔDAS28=2.0 ± 1.3; p = 0.743). In contrast, switchers without anti-drug antibodies had a diminished response to etanercept treatment compared to patients who were TNF naive (ΔDAS28 =1.2±1.3 vs ΔDAS28 = 2.1 ± 1.3; p = 0.001) and switchers with antibodies (ΔDAS28 =1.2±1.3 vs ΔDAS28 = 2.0 ± 1.3; p = 0.017).'] Does the presence or absence of antibodies to infliximab or adalimumab determine the outcome of switching to etanercept?