Magnetic resonance imaging of the hand and wrist in a randomized, double-blind, multicenter, placebo-controlled trial of infliximab for rheumatoid arthritis: Comparison of dynamic contrast enhanced assessments with semi-quantitative scoring

Chan Beals, Richard Baumgartner, Charles Peterfy, Andra Balanescu, Gavrila Mirea, Alexandru Harabagiu, Serghei Popa, Amy Cheng, Dai Feng, Edward Ashton, Julie DiCarlo, Marie-Helene Vallee, Bernard J Dardzinski, Chan Beals, Richard Baumgartner, Charles Peterfy, Andra Balanescu, Gavrila Mirea, Alexandru Harabagiu, Serghei Popa, Amy Cheng, Dai Feng, Edward Ashton, Julie DiCarlo, Marie-Helene Vallee, Bernard J Dardzinski

Abstract

The objective of this study was to compare the scope and the discriminative power of Dynamic Contrast Enhanced Magnetic Resonance Imaging (DCE-MRI) to those of semi-quantitative MRI scoring for evaluating treatments for rheumatoid arthritis (RA) in multicenter randomized clinical trials (RCTs). Sixty-one patients with active RA participated in a double-blind, parallel group, randomized, multicenter methodology study receiving infliximab or placebo through 14 weeks. The most symptomatic wrist and metacarpophalangeal joints (MCPs) were imaged using MRI. In addition to clinical assessments with DAS28(CRP), the severity of inflammation was measured as synovial leak of gadolinium based contrast agent (GBCA) using DCE-MRI (Ktrans, primary endpoint) at weeks 0, 2, 4, and 14. Two radiologists independently scored synovitis, osteitis and erosion using RA MRI Score (RAMRIS) and cartilage loss using a 9-point MRI scale (CARLOS). Infliximab showed greater decrease from baseline in DAS28(CRP), DCE-MRI Ktrans of wrist and MCP synovium, and RAMRIS synovitis and osteitis at all visits compared with placebo (p<0.001). Treatment effect sizes of infliximab therapy were similar for DAS28(CRP) (1.08; 90% CI (0.63-1.53)) and MRI inflammation endpoints: wrist Ktrans (1.00 (0.55-1.45)), RAMRIS synovitis (0.85 (0.38-1.28)) and RAMRIS osteitis (0.99 (0.52-1.43)). Damage measures of bone erosion (RAMRIS) and cartilage loss (CARLOS) were reduced with infliximab compared to with placebo at 14 weeks (p≤0.025). DCE-MRI and RAMRIS were equally sensitive and responsive to the anti-inflammatory effects of infliximab. RAMRIS and CARLOS showed suppression of erosion and cartilage loss, respectively, at 14 weeks. (ClinicalTrials.gov registration: NCT01313520).

Conflict of interest statement

Competing Interests: C. Beals, R. Baumgartner, A. Cheng, D. Feng, M.-H. Vallee, and B. Dardzinski are currently (or were at the time the study was conducted) employees of Merck Sharp & Dohme Corp., a subsidiary of Merck & Co., Inc., Kenilworth, NJ, who may own stock and/or hold stock options in Merck. C. Peterfy and J. DiCarlo are employees of Spire Sciences, Inc., employed by the study sponsor Merck to analyze study results; E. Ashton is an employee of VirtualScopics, employed by Merck to analyze study results; A. Balanescu, G. Mirea, A. Harabagiu, and S. Popa claim no conflicts of interest. There are no additional declarations from the authors relevant to this research relating to employment, consultancy, products in development, patents, or revenues from marketed products to declare. This does not alter our adherence to PLOS ONE policies on sharing data and materials, with the following exception: To protect the privacy and confidentiality of research participants, there are restrictions on the availability of data from this study (see Merck’s data sharing policy at http://engagezone.msd.com/ds_documentation.php). Requests for data access can be submitted to: dataaccess@merck.com.

Figures

Fig 1. Study diagram.
Fig 1. Study diagram.
Fig 2. Mean changes from baseline (SE)…
Fig 2. Mean changes from baseline (SE) in DAS28(CRP) and Dynamic Contrast Enhanced assessments of the wrist and metacarpophalengeal joint (MCP) in subjects with rheumatoid arthritis treated with infliximab 3 mg/kg (N = 30) or placebo (N = 31).
Fig 3. Baseline vs Week 14 DCE-MRI.
Fig 3. Baseline vs Week 14 DCE-MRI.
Enhancing Synovium (green regions of interest) decreased dramatically from baseline to Week 14 in a clinical responder treated with infliximab (left), but was largely unchanged in a non-responder treated with placebo (right). Responder was defined as change from baseline in DAS28(CRP) >1.2 and non-responder as

Fig 4. Mean changes from baseline (SE)…

Fig 4. Mean changes from baseline (SE) in Rheumatoid Arthritis MRI Score (RAMRIS) of synovitis…

Fig 4. Mean changes from baseline (SE) in Rheumatoid Arthritis MRI Score (RAMRIS) of synovitis at the wrist and metacarpophalengeal joint (MCP) in subjects with rheumatoid arthritis treated with infliximab 3 mg/kg (N = 30) or placebo (N = 31).

Fig 5. Cumulative probability of change from…

Fig 5. Cumulative probability of change from baseline in RAMRIS synovitis.

The change in RAMRIS…

Fig 5. Cumulative probability of change from baseline in RAMRIS synovitis.
The change in RAMRIS synovitis, osteitis and erosions between baseline and 14 weeks is shown by the percent of subjects less than the threshold of change for Placebo and Infliximab.

Fig 6. Effect sizes of treatment responses…

Fig 6. Effect sizes of treatment responses for various measures of rheumatoid arthritis for infliximab…

Fig 6. Effect sizes of treatment responses for various measures of rheumatoid arthritis for infliximab 3 mg/kg vs placebo.
See statistical methods.
Fig 4. Mean changes from baseline (SE)…
Fig 4. Mean changes from baseline (SE) in Rheumatoid Arthritis MRI Score (RAMRIS) of synovitis at the wrist and metacarpophalengeal joint (MCP) in subjects with rheumatoid arthritis treated with infliximab 3 mg/kg (N = 30) or placebo (N = 31).
Fig 5. Cumulative probability of change from…
Fig 5. Cumulative probability of change from baseline in RAMRIS synovitis.
The change in RAMRIS synovitis, osteitis and erosions between baseline and 14 weeks is shown by the percent of subjects less than the threshold of change for Placebo and Infliximab.
Fig 6. Effect sizes of treatment responses…
Fig 6. Effect sizes of treatment responses for various measures of rheumatoid arthritis for infliximab 3 mg/kg vs placebo.
See statistical methods.

References

    1. Federal Drug Administration. Guidance for Industry Rheumatoid Arthritis: Developing Drug Products for Treatment. FDA website. May 2013. Available at: . [Last accessed 16 October 2016]
    1. Ostergaard M, Peterfy C, Conaghan P, McQueen F, Bird P, Ejbjerg B, et al. OMERACT Rheumatoid Arthritis Magnetic Resonance Imaging Studies. Core set of MRI acquisitions, joint pathology definitions, and the OMERACT RA-MRI scoring system. J Rheumatol. 2003;30:1385–6.
    1. Peterfy CG, DiCarlo JC, Olech E, Bagnard MA, Gabriele A, Gaylis N. Evaluating joint-space narrowing and cartilage loss in rheumatoid arthritis by using MRI. Arthritis Res Ther. 2012;14:R131 doi:
    1. Tamai K, Yamato M, Yamaguchi T, Ohno W. Dynamic magnetic resonance imaging for the evaluation of synovitis in patients with rheumatoid arthritis. Arthritis Rheum. 1994;37:1151–7.
    1. Gaffney K, Cookson J, Blades S, Coumbe A, Blake D. Quantitative assessment of the rheumatoid synovial microvascular bed by gadolinium-DTPA enhanced magnetic resonance imaging. Ann Rheum Dis. 1998;57:152–7.
    1. Ostergaard M, Stoltenberg M, Løvgreen-Nielsen P, Volck B, Sonne-Holm S, Lorenzen I. Quantification of synovitis by MRI: correlation between dynamic and static gadolinium-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging and microscopic and macroscopic signs of synovial inflammation. Magn Reson Imaging. 1998;6:743–54.
    1. Veale DJ, Reece RJ, Parsons W, Radjenovic A, O'Connor PJ, Orgles CS, et al. Intra-articular primatised anti-CD4: efficacy in resistant rheumatoid knees. A study of combined arthroscopy, magnetic resonance imaging, and histology. Ann Rheum Dis. 1999;58:342–9.
    1. Axelsen MB, Stoltenberg M, Poggenborg RP, Kubassova O, Boesen M, Bliddal H, et al. Dynamic gadolinium-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging allows accurate assessment of the synovial inflammatory activity in rheumatoid arthritis knee joints: a comparison with synovial histology. Scand J Rheumatol. 2012;41:89–94. doi:
    1. Meijer KI, van der Leij C, de Hair MJ, Tas SW, Maas M, Gerlag DM, et al. Dynamic contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imagining using pharmacokinetic modeling: initial experience in early arthritis patients. Arthritis Rheumatol. 2016;68:587–96. doi:
    1. Peterfy CG, Olech E, DiCarlo JC, Merrill JT, Countryman PJ, Gaylis NB. Monitoring cartilage loss in the hands and wrists in rheumatoid arthritis with magnetic resonance imaging in a multi-center clinical trial: IMPRESS. Arthritis Res Ther. 2013;15:R44 doi:
    1. MacIsaac KD, Baumgartner R, Kang J, Loboda A, Peterfy C, DiCarlo J, et al. Pre-treatment whole blood gene expression is associated with 14-week response assessed by dynamic contrast enhanced magnetic resonance imaging in infliximab-treated rheumatoid arthritis patients. PLoS One. 2014;9:e113937 doi:
    1. Prevoo ML, van 't Hof MA, Kuper HH, van Leeuwen MA, van de Putte LB, van Riel PL. Modified disease activity scores that include twenty-eight-joint counts. Development and validation in a prospective longitudinal study of patients with rheumatoid arthritis. Arthritis Rheum. 1995;38:44–8.
    1. DiCarlo JC, Hargreaves BA, Butts Pauly K, Basilio J, Countryman PJ, Peterfy CG. Single-field of view MRI technique for rheumatoid arthritis clinical trials shortens hand/wrist imaging time. Ann Rheum Dis. 2012;71:S710.
    1. Ashton E, Durkin E, Kwok E, Evelhoch J. Conversion from signal intensity to Gd concentration may be unnecessary for perfusion assessment of tumors using DEC-MRI. Proceedings of the 15th Annual Meeting of ISMRM, Berlin, 2007.
    1. Ashton E, Raunig D, Ng C, Kelcz F, McShane T, Evelhoch J. Scan-rescan variability in perfusion assessment of tumors in MRI using both model and data-derived arterial input functions. J Magn Reson Imaging 2008;28:791–6. doi:
    1. Tofts PS, Brix G, Buckley DL, Evelhoch JL, Henderson E, Knopp MV, et al. Estimating kinetic parameters from dynamic contrast-enhanced T(1)-weighted MRI of a diffusable tracer: standardized quantities and symbols. J Magn Reson Imaging. 1999;10:223–32.
    1. Ashton E and Shah V, Dynamic Contrast-Enhanced Magnetic Resonance Imaging in Analoui M, Bronzino JD, and Peterson DR, editors, Medical Imaging, Principles and Practice, CRC Press, 2012.
    1. Hodgson RJ, Connolly S, Barnes T, Eyes B, Campbell RS, Moots R. Pharmacokinetic modeling of dynamic contrast enhanced MRI of the hand and wrist in rheumatoid arthritis and the response to anti-tumor necrosis factor-α therapy. Magn Reson Med 2007;58:482–9. doi:
    1. Liang KY, Zeger SL. Longitudinal data analysis of continuous and discrete responses for pre-post designs. Indian J Stat 2000;62:134–48.
    1. Knottnerus JA, Bouter LM. The ethics of sample size: two-sided testing and one-sided thinking. J Clin Epidemiol 2001; 54:109–10.
    1. Bruynesteyn K, Boers M, Kostense P, van der Linden S, van der Heijde D. Deciding on progression of joint damage in paired films of individual patients: smallest detectable difference or change. Ann Rheum Dis 2005;64:179–82. doi:
    1. Cohen J. Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates; 1987.
    1. Fleischmann R, Cutolo M, Genovese MC, Lee EB, Kanik KS, Sadis S, et al. Phase IIb dose-ranging study of the oral JAK inhibitor tofacitinib (CP-690,550) or adalimumab monotherapy versus placebo in patients with active rheumatoid arthritis with an inadequate response to disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs. Arthritis Rheum 2012;64:617–29. doi:
    1. Maini RN, Taylor PC, Szechinski J, Pavelka K, Bröll J, Balint G et al. Double-blind randomized controlled clinical trial of the interleukin-6 receptor antagonist, tocilizumab, in European patients with rheumatoid arthritis who had an incomplete response to methotrexate. Arthritis Rheum 2006;54:2817–29. doi:
    1. Peterfy C, Østergaard M, Conaghan PG. MRI comes of age in RA clinical trials. Ann Rheum Dis 2013;72:794–6. doi:
    1. Greenwood MC, Rathi J, Hakim AJ, Scott DL, Doyle DV. Regression to the mean using the disease activity score in eligibility and response criteria for prescribing TNF-alpha inhibitors in adults with rheumatoid arthritis. Rheumatology 2007;46:1165–7. doi:
    1. Rahman MU, Buchanan J, Doyle MK, Hsia EC, Gathany T, Parasuraman S, et al. Changes in patient characteristics in anti-tumour necrosis factor clinical trials for rheumatoid arthritis: results of an analysis of the literature over the past 16 years. Ann Rheum Dis 2011;70:1631–40. doi:
    1. Bruynesteyn K, Landewé R, van der Linden S, van der Heijde D. Radiography as primary outcome in rheumatoid arthritis: acceptable sample sizes for trials with 3 months' follow up. Ann Rheum Dis 2004;63:1413–8. doi:
    1. Ranganath VK, Strand V, Peterfy CG, Deodhar A, Troum O, Østergaard M, et al. The utility of magnetic resonance imaging for assessing structural damage in randomized controlled trials in rheumatoid arthritis: Report from the imaging group of the American College of Rheumatology RA clinical trials task force. Arthritis Rheum 2013;65:2513–23.
    1. Peterfy C, Kavanaugh A, Smolen JS, Santra W, Kupper H, Emery P. Baseline levels of the inflammatory biomarker C-reactive protein are significantly correlated with magnetic resonance imaging measures of synovitis at baseline and after 26 weeks of treatment with adalimumab in patients with early rheumatoid arthritis. Arthritis Rheum 2011;62:S1612.
    1. Peterfy C, Tak PP, Ostergaard M, DiCarlo J, Otsa K, Navarro Sarabia F, et al. Rituximab (RTX) plus methotrexate (MTX) prevents bone erosion and join-space narrowing (JSN) and reduces synovitis, osteitis as shown on MRI: Results from a randomized, placebo-controlled trial in patients (PTS) with rheumatoid arthritis (RA-SCORE). Ann Rheum Dis 2011;70:S152.
    1. Peterfy C, Genovese MC, Keystone E, Taylor P, Berclaz P-Y, DiCarlo JC, et al. Magnetic resonance imaging substudy in a phase 2b dose-ranging study of baricitinib, an oral Janus Kinase 1/ janus Kinase 2 inhibitor, in combination with traditional disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs in patients with rheumatoid arthritis. Arthritis Rheum 2012;64:S1050–1
    1. Conaghan PG, Emery P, Ostergaard M, Keystone EC, Genovese MC, Hsia EC, et al. Assessment by MRI of inflammation and damage in rheumatoid arthritis patients with methotrexate inadequate response receiving golimumab: results of the GO-FORWARD trial. Ann Rheum Dis 2011;70:1968–74. doi:
    1. Genovese MC, Kavanaugh A, Weinblatt ME, Peterfy C, DiCarlo J, White ML, et al. An oral Syk kinase inhibitor in the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis: a three-month randomized, placebo-controlled, phase II study in patients with active rheumatoid arthritis that did not respond to biologic agents. Arthritis Rheum 2011;63:337–45. doi:
    1. Ostergaard M, Emery P, Conaghan PG, Fleischmann R, Hsia EC, Xu W, et al. Significant improvement in synovitis, osteitis, and bone erosion following golimumab and methotrexate combination therapy as compared with methotrexate alone: a magnetic resonance imaging study of 318 methotrexate-naive rheumatoid arthritis patients. Arthritis Rheum 2011;63:3712–22. doi:
    1. Hetland ML Ejbjerg B, Horslev-Petersen K, Jacobsen S, Vestergaard A, Jurik AG, et al. MRI bone oedema is the strongest predictor of subsequent radiographic progression in early rheumatoid arthritis. Results from a 2-year randomised controlled trial (CIMESTRA). Ann Rheum Dis 2009;68:384–90. doi:
    1. Conaghan PG, O'Connor P, McGonagle D, Astin P, Wakefield RJ, Gibbon WW, et al. Elucidation of the relationship between synovitis and bone damage: a randomized magnetic resonance imaging study of individual joints in patients with early rheumatoid arthritis. Arthritis Rheum 2003;48:64–71. doi:
    1. McQueen F, Clarke A, McHaffie A, Reeves Q, Williams M, Robinson E, et al. Assessment of cartilage loss at the wrist in rheumatoid arthritis using a new MRI scoring system. Ann Rheum Dis 2010;69:1971–5. doi:
    1. Cohen SB, Dore RK, Lane NE, Ory PA, Peterfy CG, Sharp JT et al. Denosumab treatment effects on structural damage, bone mineral density, and bone turnover in rheumatoid arthritis: a twelve-month, multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase II clinical trial. Arthritis Rheum 2008;58:1299–309. doi:
    1. Conaghan PG, Durez P, Alten RE, Burmester GR, Tak PP, Klareskog L, et al. Impact of intravenous abatacept on synovitis, osteitis and structural damage in patients with rheumatoid arthritis and an inadequate response to methotrexate: the ASSET randomised controlled trial. Ann Rheum Dis 2013;72:1287–94. doi:
    1. Ostergaard M, Stoltenberg M, Henriksen O, Lorenzen I. Quantitative assessment of synovial inflammation by dynamic gadolinium-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging. A study of the effect of intraarticular methylprednisolone on the rate of early synovial enhancement. Br J Rheumatol. 1996;35:50–9.
    1. Reece RJ, Kraan MC, Radjenovic A, Veale DJ, O'Connor PJ, Ridgway JP et al. Comparative assessment of leflunomide and methotrexate for the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis, by dynamic enhanced magnetic resonance imaging. Arthritis Rheum 2002;46:366–72.
    1. Kalden-Nemeth D, Grebmeier J, Antoni C, Manger B, Wolf F, Kalden JR. NMR monitoring of rheumatoid arthritis patients receiving anti-TNFalpha monoclonal antibody therapy. Rheumatol Int. 1997;16:249–55.
    1. Pokuri VK, Tomaszewski GM, Ait-Oudhia S, Groman A, Khushalani NI, Lugade AA, et al., Efficacy, Safety, and Potential Biomarkers of Sunitinib and Transarterial Chemoembolization (TACE) Combination in Advanced Hepatocellular Carcinoma (HCC): Phase II Trial. Am J Clin Oncol. 2016. March 24.
    1. Ricart AD, Ashton EA, Cooney MM, Sarantopoulos J, Brell JM, Feldman MA, et al. A phase I study of MN-029 (denibulin), a novel vascular-disrupting agent, in patients with advanced solid tumors. Cancer Chemother Pharmacol. 2011. October;68(4):959–70. doi:

Source: PubMed

3
S'abonner