Abstract
The introduction in the therapeutic armamentarium of TNF inhibitors (TNFi) has greatly advanced the chance of obtaining a control of clinical manifestations and of structural damage progression in an important proportion of patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) Methotrexate (MTX)-poor responders. However not more than 50% of TNFi treated patients can reach relevant clinical benefits. Therefore the unmet medical question is: should we continue the therapeutic approach with a second or a third TNFi, or should we use other drugs, and change the mode of action of the second drug? These are practical issues that still do not have a definite answer. The real problem is that up to this moment no real biomarker is available to make the appropriate choice. The only clear-cut biomarker is represented by the positivity of rheumatoid factor (RF) or anti citrullinated peptide autoantibodies (ACPA). Seropositive patients seem to respond better than seronegative ones to B cell depletion therapy (Rituximab). This paper discusses the pros and cons of switching or swapping in RA patients poorly responder to the first TNFi.
Original language | English |
---|---|
Pages (from-to) | 558-562 |
Number of pages | 5 |
Journal | Autoimmunity Reviews |
Volume | 11 |
Issue number | 8 |
DOIs | |
Publication status | Published - Jun 2012 |
Keywords
- Animals
- Antirheumatic Agents/pharmacology
- Arthritis, Rheumatoid/drug therapy
- Drug Discovery
- Drug Substitution
- Humans
- Immunotherapy/trends
- Methotrexate/therapeutic use
- Treatment Failure
- Tumor Necrosis Factor-alpha/antagonists & inhibitors