Using Adalimumab Serum Concentration to Choose a Subsequent Biological DMARD in Rheumatoid Arthritis Patients Failing Adalimumab Treatment (ADDORA-switch)

November 17, 2023 updated by: Reade Rheumatology Research Institute

Using Adalimumab Serum Concentration to Choose a Subsequent Biological DMARD in Rheumatoid Arthritis Patients Failing Adalimumab Treatment: a Blinded Randomized Superiority Trial

A potential application of therapeutic drug monitoring is to predict efficacy after switch to another biological in the case of inefficacy of the previous TNF-inhibitor (TNFi) in rheumatoid arthritis (RA) patients. It has been shown that when antidrug antibodies against adalimumab are detected (resulting in lower drug serum concentrations) in patients failing adalimumab, a normal response to a next TNF blocker can be anticipated. However, when clinical response is unsatisfactory and no antidrug antibodies against the first TNFi are detected (generally drug levels are adequate in this case), this predicts a lower response to a next TNFi. This means drug resistant failure in the former, compared to class resistant failure in latter category of patients. The current RA treatment strategy after failure of the first TNF-inhibitor is to start either a second TNFi or a non-TNFi. However, by channelling patients with sufficient adalimumab concentration to a non-TNFi will provide higher chance of disease control. Patients with very low or undetectable drug levels have an equal or potential higher chance of disease control with a drug of the same class (i.e. another TNFi).

Study Overview

Status

Active, not recruiting

Detailed Description

Over the last decades biopharmaceuticals such as agents against tumor necrosis factor (TNF), are frequently prescribed to optimize rheumatoid arthritis treatment. Although TNFi such as adalimumab, etanercept and infliximab, have improved the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis, a proportion of patients discontinue the treatment because of inefficacy or intolerance.

Where TNFi have failed, mainly two treatment approaches are available: switch to another TNFi or to a biological with a different mode of action (notably rituximab, abatacept or tocilizumab) or to a target synthetic DMARDs. The EULAR recommendation for the management of rheumatoid arthritis advocate that any biologic agent including a subsequent TNFi can be used with equal chance for effect in case of non-response to a previous TNFi. This recommendation is based on three randomized controlled trails, but it should be noted that systematic reviews also including non-randomized controlled studies sometimes concluded that non-TNFi are more effective after TNFi failure than a second TNFi.

Of note, currently there are no strong predictors available for response to bDMARDS in RA. This study focuses on non-response after adalimumab, as this is the most prescribed TNFi worldwide.

Although it seems that indeed on a group level response to a non-TNFi is comparable to a second TNFi after the first TNFi has failed, using therapeutic drug monitoring could identify subgroups of patient who would benefit more from either a non-TNFi or a TNF-i as next treatment. The underlying pathophysiological mechanisms for this hypothesis are explored in this study.

Nonresponse on adalimumab in RA can have different causes. Firstly, the patient might not be sensitive to TNF blockade at all, or the patient develops this trait later on (primary nonresponse or secondary nonresponse). In these patients, switching to a non-TNFi might conceptually be superior to starting a second TNFi. However, in other patients nonresponse (either primary or secondary) might be caused by inefficient drug concentration because of development of antidrug antibodies against adalimumab. In these patients a TNFi might be just as effective as a non-TNFi, as these patients have drug- but not class failure. Thus, testing of adalimumab levels might be helpful in channelling patients to their most optimal treatment.

Above mentioned hypothesis has been tested in three studies (5) of which one concerned adalimumab in RA. This study showed that response to a second TNFi was indeed higher in patients with antidrug antibodies (ADA) and low adalimumab levels, and lower in patients with adequate adalimumab levels. However, a diagnostic study comparing a serum concentration guided versus usual care switching strategy has not yet been performed.

In this multi-centre, double blinded randomized controlled trial it will be evaluated whether clinical outcome after switching to a subsequent biological treatment is superior with a switching strategy using adalimumab concentration compared to usual care switching strategy.

Patients with rheumatoid arthritis starting another bDMARD (biologic disease modifying antirheumatic drugs) after adalimumab failure (defined as DAS28-CRP >2.9) are randomly assigned to usual care (with randomized switch to etanercept or to a non-TNFi) or 'drug concentration' guided switch.

Data regarding disease status, functioning, adverse events and use of co-medication/rescue medication will be collected during this study.

Study Type

Interventional

Enrollment (Actual)

86

Phase

  • Phase 4

Contacts and Locations

This section provides the contact details for those conducting the study, and information on where this study is being conducted.

Study Locations

    • Gelderland
      • Ubbergen, Gelderland, Netherlands, 6574NA
        • Sint Maartenskliniek
    • Noord- Holland
      • Amsterdam, Noord- Holland, Netherlands, 1056AB
        • Reade Rheumatology Research Institute

Participation Criteria

Researchers look for people who fit a certain description, called eligibility criteria. Some examples of these criteria are a person's general health condition or prior treatments.

Eligibility Criteria

Ages Eligible for Study

16 years and older (Child, Adult, Older Adult)

Accepts Healthy Volunteers

No

Description

Inclusion Criteria:

  • rheumatoid arthritis patient, according to American College of Rheumatology (ACR) 1987 and/or EULAR/ACR 2010 criteria;
  • recently failed treatment with adalimumab (defined as DAS28-CRP >2.9) and not treated with a subsequent bDMARD or target synthetic DMARD (tsDMARD)
  • Received adalimumab for at least 10 weeks in standard dosing (40mg subcutaneously every other week, either in monotherapy or combined with methotrexate or leflunomide)
  • Stop adalimumab due to inefficacy, either alone or combined with side effects
  • who has agreed to participate (written informed consent);
  • age 16 years or older.

Exclusion Criteria:

  • Treatment with another TNF-inhibitor prior to adalimumab
  • Treatment with all non-TNFi options (abatacept, rituximab, sarilumab and tocilizumab) prior to adalimumab
  • scheduled surgery during the follow-up of the study or other pre-planned reasons for treatment discontinuation
  • life expectancy shorter than follow-up period of the study;
  • no possibility to safely receive an TNF-inhibitor or a non TNF-inhibitor

Study Plan

This section provides details of the study plan, including how the study is designed and what the study is measuring.

How is the study designed?

Design Details

  • Primary Purpose: Treatment
  • Allocation: Randomized
  • Interventional Model: Parallel Assignment
  • Masking: Quadruple

Arms and Interventions

Participant Group / Arm
Intervention / Treatment
Active Comparator: Usual care group
Based on a secondary randomization schedule patients are treated with etanercept or a non-TNFi (abatacept, rituximab, tocilizumab, or sarilumab)
In the usual care group, switch to subsequent biological is based on secondary randomisation
Experimental: 'Drug concentration guided' group
Patients with a concentration <1.0 mg/L switch to etanercept and patients with a concentration ≥ 1.0 start a non-TNFi (abatacept, rituximab, tocilizumab, or sarilumab)
In the 'drug concentration guided' group, switching to subsequent biological is based on adalimumab trough concentration

What is the study measuring?

Primary Outcome Measures

Outcome Measure
Measure Description
Time Frame
mean time weighted DAS28-CRP
Time Frame: 24 weeks
difference in mean time weighted DAS28-CRP between the two groups
24 weeks

Secondary Outcome Measures

Outcome Measure
Measure Description
Time Frame
Good or moderate response according the EULAR response criteria
Time Frame: 12 en 24 weeks
Percentage of patients with good or moderate response according the EULAR response criteria
12 en 24 weeks
Minimal disease activity (DAS28-CRP<2.9)
Time Frame: 24 weeks
Percentage of patients with minimal disease activity (DAS28-CRP<2.9)
24 weeks
Non-responders
Time Frame: 24 weeks
Percentage of patients with no response according to EULAR response criteria
24 weeks
Number of adverse events
Time Frame: 24 weeks
The number of adverse events
24 weeks
Severity of adverse events
Time Frame: 24 weeks
Severity of adverse events
24 weeks
Cumulative dose co-medication
Time Frame: 24 weeks
Cumulative dose of co-medication
24 weeks
Times co-medication is used
Time Frame: 24 weeks
Number of times co-medication is used
24 weeks
Cumulative dose of rescue medication
Time Frame: 24 weeks
Cumulative dose of rescue medication
24 weeks
Times rescue medication is used
Time Frame: 24 weeks
Number of times co-medication is used
24 weeks

Collaborators and Investigators

This is where you will find people and organizations involved with this study.

Investigators

  • Principal Investigator: Alfons A Den Broerder, PhD, Sint Maartenskliniek
  • Principal Investigator: Gertjan Wolbink, PhD, Reade Rheumatology Research Institute

Publications and helpful links

The person responsible for entering information about the study voluntarily provides these publications. These may be about anything related to the study.

Study record dates

These dates track the progress of study record and summary results submissions to ClinicalTrials.gov. Study records and reported results are reviewed by the National Library of Medicine (NLM) to make sure they meet specific quality control standards before being posted on the public website.

Study Major Dates

Study Start (Actual)

July 31, 2020

Primary Completion (Estimated)

May 1, 2024

Study Completion (Estimated)

May 1, 2024

Study Registration Dates

First Submitted

January 8, 2020

First Submitted That Met QC Criteria

January 31, 2020

First Posted (Actual)

February 5, 2020

Study Record Updates

Last Update Posted (Actual)

November 18, 2023

Last Update Submitted That Met QC Criteria

November 17, 2023

Last Verified

November 1, 2023

More Information

Terms related to this study

Plan for Individual participant data (IPD)

Plan to Share Individual Participant Data (IPD)?

YES

IPD Plan Description

To avoid duplication of research, the gathered data will be shared once all desirable data analysis have been performed and the results are published

IPD Sharing Time Frame

Six months after the study is published the data will be shared

IPD Sharing Access Criteria

Researchers with demonstrable interest in autoimmunity, biologicals, or therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM) can contact the investigators of the trial if they are interested in gaining access to the data. Depending on their research objectives the data will be shared

IPD Sharing Supporting Information Type

  • STUDY_PROTOCOL
  • SAP

Drug and device information, study documents

Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated drug product

No

Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated device product

No

This information was retrieved directly from the website clinicaltrials.gov without any changes. If you have any requests to change, remove or update your study details, please contact register@clinicaltrials.gov. As soon as a change is implemented on clinicaltrials.gov, this will be updated automatically on our website as well.

Clinical Trials on Rheumatoid Arthritis

Clinical Trials on Usual care

Subscribe