Patient- versus physician-reported outcomes in rheumatoid arthritis patients treated with recombinant interleukin-1 receptor antagonist (anakinra) therapy
Open Access
- 2 March 2004
- journal article
- research article
- Published by Oxford University Press (OUP) in Rheumatology
- Vol. 43 (6) , 704-711
- https://doi.org/10.1093/rheumatology/keh152
Abstract
Objectives. To determine whether patient-reported outcomes may differentiate treatment response better than physician-reported outcomes for rheumatoid arthritis (RA) patients being treated with anakinra. Methods. A meta-analysis was conducted using data obtained from three separate randomized controlled clinical trials (RCTs) (n = 1007). Outcomes from 6-month assessments were grouped into four categories: American College of Rheumatology (ACR) response criteria, patient-reported measures (patient-reported pain, patient global assessment, and assessment of physical function using the Health Assessment Questionnaire), physician-reported measures (tender and swollen joint counts and physician global assessment), and laboratory tests (C-reactive protein and erythrocyte sedimentation rate). Effect sizes were calculated using changes from baseline and pooled standard deviations for each of these types of outcome. Results. Active treatment with anakinra was superior to placebo by ACR20 responses in all three RCTs. Effect sizes for patient-reported outcomes were greater than for physician-reported outcomes, and also greater than ACR20 in three of five anakinra cohorts. Across the RCTs, placebo responses were greater with physician-reported than with patient-reported outcomes. In the two studies evaluating patients with longer-standing disease, differences between pooled effect sizes for patient-reported and physician-reported outcomes were even more pronounced. Conclusions. In three pivotal RCTs, active treatment with anakinra resulted in greater improvements in patient-reported than physician-reported outcomes compared with placebo. These observations confirm those previously reported from RCTs evaluating conventional DMARDs, demonstrating better discrimination of treatment effect with patient-reported outcomes.Keywords
This publication has 21 references indexed in Scilit:
- An index of the three core data set patient questionnaire measures distinguishes efficacy of active treatment from that of placebo as effectively as the American College of Rheumatology 20% response criteria (ACR20) or the Disease Activity Score (DAS) in a rheumatoid arthritis clinical trialArthritis & Rheumatism, 2003
- The effects of disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs on the Health Assessment Questionnaire score. Lessons from the leflunomide clinical trials databaseRheumatology, 2002
- Treatment of active rheumatoid arthritis with leflunomide: two year follow up of a double blind, placebo controlled trial versus sulfasalazineAnnals of the Rheumatic Diseases, 2001
- Slowing of disease progression in rheumatoid arthritis patients during long-term treatment with leflunomide or sulfasalazineScandinavian Journal of Rheumatology, 2001
- Clinical improvement as reflected in measures of function and health-related quality of life following treatment with leflunomide compared with methotrexate in patients with rheumatoid arthritis: Sensitivity and relative efficiency to detect a treatment effect in a twelve-month, placebo-controlled trialArthritis & Rheumatism, 2000
- The links between joint damage and disability in rheumatoid arthritisRheumatology, 2000
- Treatment of Active Rheumatoid Arthritis With Leflunomide Compared With Placebo and MethotrexateArchives of internal medicine (1960), 1999
- Function and health-related quality of life: Results from a randomized controlled trial of leflunomide versus methotrexate or placebo in patients with active rheumatoid arthritisArthritis & Rheumatism, 1999
- Estimates of the prevalence of arthritis and selected musculoskeletal disorders in the United StatesArthritis & Rheumatism, 1998
- American college of rheumatology preliminary definition of improvement in rheumatoid arthritisArthritis & Rheumatism, 1995