Skip to content

A Study of MabThera (Rituximab) in Patients With Rheumatoid Arthritis Who Have Had an Inadequate Response to a Single Anti-TNF Inhibitor

An Open-label Study to Evaluate the Safety of MabThera, and Its Effect on Treatment Response, in Patients With Rheumatoid Arthritis Following Inadequate Response to a Single Anti-TNF Agent

Status
Completed
Phases
Phase 3
Study type
Interventional
Source
ClinicalTrials.gov
Registry ID
NCT02079532
Enrollment
302
Registered
2014-03-05
Start date
2006-11-30
Completion date
2010-11-30
Last updated
2016-07-29

For informational purposes only — not medical advice. Sourced from public registries and may not reflect the latest updates. Terms

Conditions

Rheumatoid Arthritis

Brief summary

This study will evaluate the efficacy and safety of MabThera in patients with active rheumatoid arthritis who have had an inadequate response to one prior anti-TNF alpha inhibitor. MabThera-naive patients will be stratified into 3 arms, according to previous inadequate response to a)etanercept, b)infliximab or c)adalimumab. Patients will be treated with MabThera (1g infusion) on day 1 and day 15, and will continue their basic methotrexate therapy. The anticipated time on study treatment is 2+ years, and the target sample size is 100-500 individuals.

Interventions

1 g was given by intravenous infusion on Days 1 and 15

Sponsors

Hoffmann-La Roche
Lead SponsorINDUSTRY

Study design

Allocation
NA
Intervention model
SINGLE_GROUP
Primary purpose
TREATMENT
Masking
NONE

Eligibility

Sex/Gender
ALL
Age
18 Years to 75 Years
Healthy volunteers
No

Inclusion criteria

* adult patients, 18-75 years of age; * rheumatoid arthritis for \>=6 months; * previous inadequate response to a single anti-TNF alpha inhibitor; * methotrexate at a stable dose range 7.5-25 mg/week.

Exclusion criteria

* other chronic inflammatory articular disease or systemic autoimmune disease; * previous treatment with MabThera or intolerance to MabThera; * corticosteroids\>=10 mg/day prednisolone within last 2 weeks, or corticosteroids at unstable doses within last 2 weeks;

Design outcomes

Primary

MeasureTime frameDescription
Change From Baseline to Week 24 in Disease Activity Score Based on 28-Joint Count (DAS28)Week 24The DAS28 consists of swollen joint count (SJC) and tender joint count (TJC) measurements, the erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR) in millimeters per hour (mm/hr), and the Patient's Global Assessment of Disease Activity (participant-ated rheumatoid arthritis \[RA\] activity assessment) with transformed scores ranging 0 to 10; higher scores indicated greater affectation due to disease activity). DAS28 less than or equal to (≤)3.2 equals (=) low disease activity, DAS28 greater than (\>)3.2 to 5.1 = moderate to high disease activity.

Secondary

MeasureTime frameDescription
Percentage of Participants With European League Against Rheumatism (EULAR) Response of Good or ModerateWeeks 8, 16, and 24The DAS28-based EULAR response criteria were used to measure individual responses as none, good, and moderate, depending on the extent of change from baseline and the level of disease activity reached. Good responders experienced a change from baseline of \>1.2 with a DAS28 score ≤3.2 and moderate responders experienced a change from baseline \>1.2 with DAS28 \>3.2 to ≤5.1 or a change from baseline \>0.6 to ≤1.2 with a DAS28 score of ≤5.1.
Percentage of Participants With Low Disease Activity (DAS28 ≤3.2) at Week 24Week 24Percentage of participants with low disease activity defined as DAS28 ≤3.2 at follow-up Week 24. The DAS28 consists of SJC and TJC measurements, the ESR in mm/hr, and the Patient's Global Assessment of Disease Activity (participant rated arthritis activity assessment) with transformed scores ranging 0 to 10; higher scores indicated greater affectation due to disease activity).
Percentage of Participants Achieving Remission (DAS28 <2.6) at Week 24Week 24Percentage of participants with remission defined as DAS28 \<2.6 at follow-up Week 24. The DAS28 consists of SJC and TJC measurements, the ESR in mm/hr, and the Patient's Global Assessment of Disease Activity (participant rated arthritis activity assessment) with transformed scores ranging 0 to 10; higher scores indicated greater affectation due to disease activity). DAS28 ≤3.2 = low disease activity, DAS28 \>3.2 to 5.1 = moderate to high disease activity.
Percentage of Participants Achieving a Response By EULAR CategoryWeeks 8, 16, and 24Percentage of participants achieving a response by EULAR category, including 'moderate', 'good', or no response at follow-up Weeks 8, 16, and 24. The DAS28-based EULAR response criteria were used to measure individual response as none, good, and moderate, depending on the extent of change from baseline and the level of disease activity reached. Good responders had a change from baseline \>1.2 with a DAS28 score ≤ 3.2; moderate responders had a change from baseline \>1.2 with a DAS28 score of \>3.2 to ≤5.1 or a change from baseline \>0.6 to ≤1.2 with a DAS28 score of ≤5.1; non-responders had a change from baseline ≤0.6 or change from baseline \>0.6 and ≤1.2 with a DAS28 score of \>5.1.
Health Assessment Questionnaire - Disability Index (HAQ-DI) ScoreScreening and Weeks 8, 16, and 24The HAQ-DI score consists of questions referring to 8 categories: dressing/grooming, arising, eating, walking, hygiene, reach, grip, and common daily activities. For each of the categories, participants reported the amount of difficulty they had in performing 2 or 3 specific sub-category items. The standard disability score was calculated from the 8 categories by dividing the sum of the individual categories by the number of categories answered, yielding a score from 0 (without any difficulty) to 3 (unable to do).
Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy - Fatigue (FACIT-F) ScoreScreening and Weeks 8, 16, and 24The FACIT fatigue scale is base on a 13-item questionnaire to assess the therapy-induced fatigue. Participants were requested to score each question on a scale ranging from 0 (best) to 4 (worst). The scoring system of the FACIT fatigue scale adds up to a total scale ranging from 0 (best) to 52 (worst). The assessment was originally developed for chronic illnesses and is now validated for patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA). The questionnaire was provided in a German translation.
SF-36 Domain ScoresScreening and Weeks 8, 16, and 24The SF-36 is a multi-purpose, short-form health survey with 36 questions. It yields an 8-scale profile of functional health and well-being scores (domains) as well as psychometrically based physical and mental health summary measures. The SF-36 taps 8 health concepts: physical functioning, bodily pain, physical role functioning, emotional role functioning, emotional well-being, social functioning, vitality, and general health perceptions. The 8 scales are further summarized to two distinct higher-ordered clusters: the physical and mental composite t-scores (PCS and MCS). The range for all 8 domains as well as for the composite t-scores is from 0 to 100 with 100 as best possible health status and 0 as worst health status.
Short-Form 36 (SF-36) Physical Composite Scores (PCS) and Mental Composite Scores (MCS)Screening and Weeks 8, 16, and 24The SF-36 is a multi-purpose, short-form health survey with 36 questions. It yields an 8-scale profile of functional health and well-being scores (domains) as well as psychometrically based physical and mental health summary measures. The SF-36 taps 8 health concepts: physical functioning, bodily pain, physical role functioning, emotional role functioning, emotional well-being, social functioning, vitality, and general health perceptions. The 8 scales are further summarized to 2 distinct higher-ordered clusters: the physical and mental composite t-scores (PCS and MCS). The range for all 8 domains as well as for the composite t-scores is from 0 to 100 with 100 as best possible health status and 0 as worst health status.
DAS28 ScoreScreening and Weeks 8, 16, and 24The DAS28 consists of SJC and TJC measurements, the ESR in mm/hr, and the Patient's Global Assessment of Disease Activity (participant-rated RA assessment) with transformed scores ranging 0 to 10; higher scores indicated greater affectation due to disease activity). DAS28 ≤3.2 = low disease activity, DAS28 \>3.2 to 5.1 = moderate to high disease activity.
Swollen Joint Count (SJC)Screening and Weeks 8, 16, and 24The 28 joints to be assessed for tenderness and swelling were shoulder, elbow, wrist, metacarpophalangeal (MCP) joints 1-5, proximal interphalangeal (PIP) joints 1-5, and knee on both sides of the body. The sum of swollen joints, each, ranged from 0 to 28 with 0 as best possible health status and 28 as worst health status.
Tender Joint Count (TJC)Screening and Weeks 8, 16, and 24The 28 joints to be assessed for tenderness and swelling were shoulder, elbow, wrist, metacarpophalangeal (MCP) joints 1-5, proximal interphalangeal (PIP) joints 1-5, and knee on both sides of the body. The sum of tender joints ranged from 0 to 28 with 0 as best possible health status and 28 as worst health status.
Physician's Global Assessment of Disease ActivityScreening and Weeks 8, 16, and 24Physicians assessed the disease (RA) activity on a 100 mm horizontal VAS. The left-hand extreme of the line (0 mm) was described as no disease activity (symptom-free and no arthritis symptoms) and the right hand extreme (100 mm) as maximum disease activity (maximum arthritis disease activity).
Patient's Assessment of Disease ActivityScreening and Weeks 8, 16, and 24Participants were to assess the disease (RA) activity on a 100 mm horizontal VAS. The left-hand extreme of the line (0 mm) was described as no disease activity (symptom-free and no arthritis symptoms) and the right hand extreme (100 mm) as maximum disease activity (maximum arthritis disease activity).
Patient's Assessment of PainScreening and Weeks 8, 16, and 24Participants were to assess their current level of pain on a 100 mm horizontal VAS. The left-hand extreme of the line (0 mm) was described as no pain and the right-hand (100 mm) as unbearable pain.
C-Reactive Protein (CRP)Screening, Days 1 and 15, and Weeks 8, 16, and 24Mean CRP as measured as an acute phase reactant by mg per deciliter (mg/dL) at screening, Days 1 and 15, and Weeks 8, 16, and 24.
Erythrocyte Sedimentation Rate (ESR)Screening, Days 1 and 15, and Weeks 8, 16, and 24Mean ESR, as an acute phase reactant, measured in mm/hr at screening, Days 1 and 15, and Weeks 8, 16, and 24.
Rheumatoid Factor (RF)Screening and Weeks 8, 16, and 24Mean RF as measured by international unit per milliliter (IU/mL) at screening and Weeks 8, 16, and 24.
Percentage of Participants Achieving American College of Rheumatology (ACR) 20 Percent (%), 50% or 70% Response (ACR20/ACR50/ACR70)Weeks 8, 16, and 24ACR20/50/70 response: ≥20%, ≥50%, or ≥70% improvement, respectively, in tender or swollen joint counts and ≥20%, ≥50%, or ≥70% improvement, respectively, in 3 of the following 5 criteria: 1) Physician's Global Assessment of Disease Activity, 2) Patient's Global Assessment of Disease Activity, 3) Patient's Assessment of Pain, 4) participant assessment of functional disability via a HAQ-DI, and 5) C-reactive protein or ESR at each visit.

Countries

Germany

Participant flow

Participants by arm

ArmCount
Rituximab + MTX
Participants received rituximab, 1 g, IV, and methylprednisolone 100 mg, IV, on Days 1 and 15. Participants should have also been receiving MTX as mandatory background therapy. MTX was to have been started at least 3 months prior to the first infusion and must have been given at stable doses for at least 4 weeks prior to the first infusion.
302
Total302

Withdrawals & dropouts

PeriodReasonFG000
Overall StudyAdditional or changed therapy2
Overall StudyAdministrative problems1
Overall StudyAdverse Event7
Overall StudyInclusion into ReFIRST3
Overall StudyLack of Efficacy9
Overall StudyOther3
Overall StudyProtocol Violation3
Overall StudyWithdrawal by Subject1

Baseline characteristics

CharacteristicRituximab + MTX
Age, Continuous54.4 years
STANDARD_DEVIATION 18.77
Race/Ethnicity, Customized
Asian
1 participants
Race/Ethnicity, Customized
Caucasian
301 participants
Sex: Female, Male
Female
228 Participants
Sex: Female, Male
Male
74 Participants

Adverse events

Event typeEG000
affected / at risk
deaths
Total, all-cause mortality
— / —
other
Total, other adverse events
62 / 302
serious
Total, serious adverse events
36 / 302

Outcome results

Primary

Change From Baseline to Week 24 in Disease Activity Score Based on 28-Joint Count (DAS28)

The DAS28 consists of swollen joint count (SJC) and tender joint count (TJC) measurements, the erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR) in millimeters per hour (mm/hr), and the Patient's Global Assessment of Disease Activity (participant-ated rheumatoid arthritis \[RA\] activity assessment) with transformed scores ranging 0 to 10; higher scores indicated greater affectation due to disease activity). DAS28 less than or equal to (≤)3.2 equals (=) low disease activity, DAS28 greater than (\>)3.2 to 5.1 = moderate to high disease activity.

Time frame: Week 24

Population: Intent to Treat (ITT) population: all participants who signed informed consent, received at least 1 dose of study drug, and where DAS28 was measured at least once under study medication (Weeks 8, 16, or 24 or unscheduled or withdrawal visit up to Week 24); those with no RA or no DAS28 score at screening were excluded, regardless if treated or not.

ArmMeasureValue (MEAN)Dispersion
Rituximab + MTXChange From Baseline to Week 24 in Disease Activity Score Based on 28-Joint Count (DAS28)-1.56 scores on a scaleStandard Deviation 1.4
Secondary

C-Reactive Protein (CRP)

Mean CRP as measured as an acute phase reactant by mg per deciliter (mg/dL) at screening, Days 1 and 15, and Weeks 8, 16, and 24.

Time frame: Screening, Days 1 and 15, and Weeks 8, 16, and 24

Population: ITT population; n=number of participants assessed at a given visit.

ArmMeasureGroupValue (MEAN)Dispersion
Rituximab + MTXC-Reactive Protein (CRP)Screening (n=289)1.82 mg/dLStandard Deviation 2.35
Rituximab + MTXC-Reactive Protein (CRP)Day 1 (n=233)1.60 mg/dLStandard Deviation 1.96
Rituximab + MTXC-Reactive Protein (CRP)Day 15 (n=286)1.81 mg/dLStandard Deviation 2.27
Rituximab + MTXC-Reactive Protein (CRP)Week 8 (n=283)1.31 mg/dLStandard Deviation 1.44
Rituximab + MTXC-Reactive Protein (CRP)Week 16 (n=281)1.21 mg/dLStandard Deviation 1.65
Rituximab + MTXC-Reactive Protein (CRP)Week 24 (n=269)1.30 mg/dLStandard Deviation 1.77
Secondary

DAS28 Score

The DAS28 consists of SJC and TJC measurements, the ESR in mm/hr, and the Patient's Global Assessment of Disease Activity (participant-rated RA assessment) with transformed scores ranging 0 to 10; higher scores indicated greater affectation due to disease activity). DAS28 ≤3.2 = low disease activity, DAS28 \>3.2 to 5.1 = moderate to high disease activity.

Time frame: Screening and Weeks 8, 16, and 24

Population: ITT population; n (number) = number of participants assessed at a given visit.

ArmMeasureGroupValue (MEAN)Dispersion
Rituximab + MTXDAS28 ScoreScreening (n=291)5.87 scores on a scaleStandard Deviation 1.05
Rituximab + MTXDAS28 ScoreWeek 8 (n=277)4.57 scores on a scaleStandard Deviation 1.3
Rituximab + MTXDAS28 ScoreWeek 16 (n=271)4.17 scores on a scaleStandard Deviation 1.31
Rituximab + MTXDAS28 ScoreWeek 24 (n=266)4.30 scores on a scaleStandard Deviation 1.47
Secondary

Erythrocyte Sedimentation Rate (ESR)

Mean ESR, as an acute phase reactant, measured in mm/hr at screening, Days 1 and 15, and Weeks 8, 16, and 24.

Time frame: Screening, Days 1 and 15, and Weeks 8, 16, and 24

Population: ITT population; n=number of participants assessed at a given visit.

ArmMeasureGroupValue (MEAN)Dispersion
Rituximab + MTXErythrocyte Sedimentation Rate (ESR)Screening (n=291)30.20 mm/hrStandard Deviation 20.56
Rituximab + MTXErythrocyte Sedimentation Rate (ESR)Day 1 (n=225)28.07 mm/hrStandard Deviation 19.51
Rituximab + MTXErythrocyte Sedimentation Rate (ESR)Day 15 (n=277)30.61 mm/hrStandard Deviation 21.46
Rituximab + MTXErythrocyte Sedimentation Rate (ESR)Week 8 (n=279)24.85 mm/hrStandard Deviation 16.68
Rituximab + MTXErythrocyte Sedimentation Rate (ESR)Week 16 (n=276)22.28 mm/hrStandard Deviation 16.58
Rituximab + MTXErythrocyte Sedimentation Rate (ESR)Week 24 (n=268)23.64 mm/hrStandard Deviation 17.36
Secondary

Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy - Fatigue (FACIT-F) Score

The FACIT fatigue scale is base on a 13-item questionnaire to assess the therapy-induced fatigue. Participants were requested to score each question on a scale ranging from 0 (best) to 4 (worst). The scoring system of the FACIT fatigue scale adds up to a total scale ranging from 0 (best) to 52 (worst). The assessment was originally developed for chronic illnesses and is now validated for patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA). The questionnaire was provided in a German translation.

Time frame: Screening and Weeks 8, 16, and 24

Population: ITT population; n=number of participants assessed at a given visit.

ArmMeasureGroupValue (MEAN)Dispersion
Rituximab + MTXFunctional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy - Fatigue (FACIT-F) ScoreScreening (n=286)23.81 scores on a scaleStandard Deviation 11.35
Rituximab + MTXFunctional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy - Fatigue (FACIT-F) ScoreWeek 8 (n=282)20.87 scores on a scaleStandard Deviation 11.14
Rituximab + MTXFunctional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy - Fatigue (FACIT-F) ScoreWeek 16 (n=272)18.92 scores on a scaleStandard Deviation 11.46
Rituximab + MTXFunctional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy - Fatigue (FACIT-F) ScoreWeek 24 (n=262)18.53 scores on a scaleStandard Deviation 11.48
Secondary

Health Assessment Questionnaire - Disability Index (HAQ-DI) Score

The HAQ-DI score consists of questions referring to 8 categories: dressing/grooming, arising, eating, walking, hygiene, reach, grip, and common daily activities. For each of the categories, participants reported the amount of difficulty they had in performing 2 or 3 specific sub-category items. The standard disability score was calculated from the 8 categories by dividing the sum of the individual categories by the number of categories answered, yielding a score from 0 (without any difficulty) to 3 (unable to do).

Time frame: Screening and Weeks 8, 16, and 24

Population: ITT population; n=number of participants assessed at a given visit.

ArmMeasureGroupValue (MEAN)Dispersion
Rituximab + MTXHealth Assessment Questionnaire - Disability Index (HAQ-DI) ScoreScreening (n=288)1.60 scores on a scaleStandard Deviation 0.67
Rituximab + MTXHealth Assessment Questionnaire - Disability Index (HAQ-DI) ScoreWeek 8 (n=286)1.43 scores on a scaleStandard Deviation 0.66
Rituximab + MTXHealth Assessment Questionnaire - Disability Index (HAQ-DI) ScoreWeek 16 (n=276)1.33 scores on a scaleStandard Deviation 0.66
Rituximab + MTXHealth Assessment Questionnaire - Disability Index (HAQ-DI) ScoreWeek 24 (n=269)1.32 scores on a scaleStandard Deviation 0.7
Secondary

Patient's Assessment of Disease Activity

Participants were to assess the disease (RA) activity on a 100 mm horizontal VAS. The left-hand extreme of the line (0 mm) was described as no disease activity (symptom-free and no arthritis symptoms) and the right hand extreme (100 mm) as maximum disease activity (maximum arthritis disease activity).

Time frame: Screening and Weeks 8, 16, and 24

Population: ITT population; n=number of participants assessed at a given visit.

ArmMeasureGroupValue (MEAN)Dispersion
Rituximab + MTXPatient's Assessment of Disease ActivityScreening (n=291)63.49 mmStandard Deviation 20.88
Rituximab + MTXPatient's Assessment of Disease ActivityWeek 8 (n=286)46.19 mmStandard Deviation 23.51
Rituximab + MTXPatient's Assessment of Disease ActivityWeek 16 (n=278)41.25 mmStandard Deviation 24.99
Rituximab + MTXPatient's Assessment of Disease ActivityWeek 24 (n=270)41.47 mmStandard Deviation 25.5
Secondary

Patient's Assessment of Pain

Participants were to assess their current level of pain on a 100 mm horizontal VAS. The left-hand extreme of the line (0 mm) was described as no pain and the right-hand (100 mm) as unbearable pain.

Time frame: Screening and Weeks 8, 16, and 24

Population: ITT population; n=number of participants assessed at a given visit.

ArmMeasureGroupValue (MEAN)Dispersion
Rituximab + MTXPatient's Assessment of PainScreening (n=291)62.78 mmStandard Deviation 20.8
Rituximab + MTXPatient's Assessment of PainWeek 8 (n=287)47.30 mmStandard Deviation 23.26
Rituximab + MTXPatient's Assessment of PainWeek 16 (n=276)42.11 mmStandard Deviation 25.14
Rituximab + MTXPatient's Assessment of PainWeek 24 (n=269)41.76 mmStandard Deviation 25.52
Secondary

Percentage of Participants Achieving American College of Rheumatology (ACR) 20 Percent (%), 50% or 70% Response (ACR20/ACR50/ACR70)

ACR20/50/70 response: ≥20%, ≥50%, or ≥70% improvement, respectively, in tender or swollen joint counts and ≥20%, ≥50%, or ≥70% improvement, respectively, in 3 of the following 5 criteria: 1) Physician's Global Assessment of Disease Activity, 2) Patient's Global Assessment of Disease Activity, 3) Patient's Assessment of Pain, 4) participant assessment of functional disability via a HAQ-DI, and 5) C-reactive protein or ESR at each visit.

Time frame: Weeks 8, 16, and 24

Population: ITT population

ArmMeasureGroupValue (NUMBER)
Rituximab + MTXPercentage of Participants Achieving American College of Rheumatology (ACR) 20 Percent (%), 50% or 70% Response (ACR20/ACR50/ACR70)ACR20, Week 838.8 percentage of participants
Rituximab + MTXPercentage of Participants Achieving American College of Rheumatology (ACR) 20 Percent (%), 50% or 70% Response (ACR20/ACR50/ACR70)ACR20, Week 1647.8 percentage of participants
Rituximab + MTXPercentage of Participants Achieving American College of Rheumatology (ACR) 20 Percent (%), 50% or 70% Response (ACR20/ACR50/ACR70)ACR20, Week 2446.4 percentage of participants
Rituximab + MTXPercentage of Participants Achieving American College of Rheumatology (ACR) 20 Percent (%), 50% or 70% Response (ACR20/ACR50/ACR70)ACR50, Week 813.7 percentage of participants
Rituximab + MTXPercentage of Participants Achieving American College of Rheumatology (ACR) 20 Percent (%), 50% or 70% Response (ACR20/ACR50/ACR70)ACR50, Week 1619.9 percentage of participants
Rituximab + MTXPercentage of Participants Achieving American College of Rheumatology (ACR) 20 Percent (%), 50% or 70% Response (ACR20/ACR50/ACR70)ACR50, Week 2424.4 percentage of participants
Rituximab + MTXPercentage of Participants Achieving American College of Rheumatology (ACR) 20 Percent (%), 50% or 70% Response (ACR20/ACR50/ACR70)ACR70, Week 82.7 percentage of participants
Rituximab + MTXPercentage of Participants Achieving American College of Rheumatology (ACR) 20 Percent (%), 50% or 70% Response (ACR20/ACR50/ACR70)ACR70, Week 168.2 percentage of participants
Rituximab + MTXPercentage of Participants Achieving American College of Rheumatology (ACR) 20 Percent (%), 50% or 70% Response (ACR20/ACR50/ACR70)ACR70, Week 2410.0 percentage of participants
Secondary

Percentage of Participants Achieving a Response By EULAR Category

Percentage of participants achieving a response by EULAR category, including 'moderate', 'good', or no response at follow-up Weeks 8, 16, and 24. The DAS28-based EULAR response criteria were used to measure individual response as none, good, and moderate, depending on the extent of change from baseline and the level of disease activity reached. Good responders had a change from baseline \>1.2 with a DAS28 score ≤ 3.2; moderate responders had a change from baseline \>1.2 with a DAS28 score of \>3.2 to ≤5.1 or a change from baseline \>0.6 to ≤1.2 with a DAS28 score of ≤5.1; non-responders had a change from baseline ≤0.6 or change from baseline \>0.6 and ≤1.2 with a DAS28 score of \>5.1.

Time frame: Weeks 8, 16, and 24

Population: ITT population

ArmMeasureGroupValue (NUMBER)
Rituximab + MTXPercentage of Participants Achieving a Response By EULAR CategoryModerate response, Week 845.4 percentage of participants
Rituximab + MTXPercentage of Participants Achieving a Response By EULAR CategoryModerate response, Week 1644.3 percentage of participants
Rituximab + MTXPercentage of Participants Achieving a Response By EULAR CategoryModerate response, Week 2444.0 percentage of participants
Rituximab + MTXPercentage of Participants Achieving a Response By EULAR CategoryGood response, Week 813.7 percentage of participants
Rituximab + MTXPercentage of Participants Achieving a Response By EULAR CategoryGood response, Week 1623.7 percentage of participants
Rituximab + MTXPercentage of Participants Achieving a Response By EULAR CategoryGood response, Week 2420.6 percentage of participants
Rituximab + MTXPercentage of Participants Achieving a Response By EULAR CategoryNo response, Week 836.1 percentage of participants
Rituximab + MTXPercentage of Participants Achieving a Response By EULAR CategoryNo response, Week 1625.1 percentage of participants
Rituximab + MTXPercentage of Participants Achieving a Response By EULAR CategoryNo response, Week 2426.8 percentage of participants
Secondary

Percentage of Participants Achieving Remission (DAS28 <2.6) at Week 24

Percentage of participants with remission defined as DAS28 \<2.6 at follow-up Week 24. The DAS28 consists of SJC and TJC measurements, the ESR in mm/hr, and the Patient's Global Assessment of Disease Activity (participant rated arthritis activity assessment) with transformed scores ranging 0 to 10; higher scores indicated greater affectation due to disease activity). DAS28 ≤3.2 = low disease activity, DAS28 \>3.2 to 5.1 = moderate to high disease activity.

Time frame: Week 24

Population: ITT population

ArmMeasureValue (NUMBER)
Rituximab + MTXPercentage of Participants Achieving Remission (DAS28 <2.6) at Week 2411.7 percentage of participants
Secondary

Percentage of Participants With European League Against Rheumatism (EULAR) Response of Good or Moderate

The DAS28-based EULAR response criteria were used to measure individual responses as none, good, and moderate, depending on the extent of change from baseline and the level of disease activity reached. Good responders experienced a change from baseline of \>1.2 with a DAS28 score ≤3.2 and moderate responders experienced a change from baseline \>1.2 with DAS28 \>3.2 to ≤5.1 or a change from baseline \>0.6 to ≤1.2 with a DAS28 score of ≤5.1.

Time frame: Weeks 8, 16, and 24

Population: ITT population; n=number of participants assessed at a given visit

ArmMeasureGroupValue (NUMBER)
Rituximab + MTXPercentage of Participants With European League Against Rheumatism (EULAR) Response of Good or ModerateWeek 8 (n=172)59.1 percentage of participants
Rituximab + MTXPercentage of Participants With European League Against Rheumatism (EULAR) Response of Good or ModerateWeek 16 (n=198)68.0 percentage of participants
Rituximab + MTXPercentage of Participants With European League Against Rheumatism (EULAR) Response of Good or ModerateWeek 24 (n=188)64.6 percentage of participants
Secondary

Percentage of Participants With Low Disease Activity (DAS28 ≤3.2) at Week 24

Percentage of participants with low disease activity defined as DAS28 ≤3.2 at follow-up Week 24. The DAS28 consists of SJC and TJC measurements, the ESR in mm/hr, and the Patient's Global Assessment of Disease Activity (participant rated arthritis activity assessment) with transformed scores ranging 0 to 10; higher scores indicated greater affectation due to disease activity).

Time frame: Week 24

Population: ITT population

ArmMeasureValue (NUMBER)
Rituximab + MTXPercentage of Participants With Low Disease Activity (DAS28 ≤3.2) at Week 2421.6 percentage of participants
Secondary

Physician's Global Assessment of Disease Activity

Physicians assessed the disease (RA) activity on a 100 mm horizontal VAS. The left-hand extreme of the line (0 mm) was described as no disease activity (symptom-free and no arthritis symptoms) and the right hand extreme (100 mm) as maximum disease activity (maximum arthritis disease activity).

Time frame: Screening and Weeks 8, 16, and 24

Population: ITT population; n=number of participants assessed at a given visit.

ArmMeasureGroupValue (MEAN)Dispersion
Rituximab + MTXPhysician's Global Assessment of Disease ActivityScreening (n=291)63.99 mmStandard Deviation 15.4
Rituximab + MTXPhysician's Global Assessment of Disease ActivityWeek 8 (n=286)39.20 mmStandard Deviation 19.85
Rituximab + MTXPhysician's Global Assessment of Disease ActivityWeek 16 (n=280)33.03 mmStandard Deviation 19.96
Rituximab + MTXPhysician's Global Assessment of Disease ActivityWeek 24 (n=271)35.75 mmStandard Deviation 23.92
Secondary

Rheumatoid Factor (RF)

Mean RF as measured by international unit per milliliter (IU/mL) at screening and Weeks 8, 16, and 24.

Time frame: Screening and Weeks 8, 16, and 24

Population: ITT population; n=number of participants assessed at a given visit.

ArmMeasureGroupValue (MEAN)Dispersion
Rituximab + MTXRheumatoid Factor (RF)Week 16 (n=259)88.22 IU/mLStandard Deviation 174.99
Rituximab + MTXRheumatoid Factor (RF)Screening (n=279)178.23 IU/mLStandard Deviation 352.61
Rituximab + MTXRheumatoid Factor (RF)Week 8 (n=255)109.84 IU/mLStandard Deviation 213.32
Rituximab + MTXRheumatoid Factor (RF)Week 24 (n=258)87.52 IU/mLStandard Deviation 187.94
Secondary

SF-36 Domain Scores

The SF-36 is a multi-purpose, short-form health survey with 36 questions. It yields an 8-scale profile of functional health and well-being scores (domains) as well as psychometrically based physical and mental health summary measures. The SF-36 taps 8 health concepts: physical functioning, bodily pain, physical role functioning, emotional role functioning, emotional well-being, social functioning, vitality, and general health perceptions. The 8 scales are further summarized to two distinct higher-ordered clusters: the physical and mental composite t-scores (PCS and MCS). The range for all 8 domains as well as for the composite t-scores is from 0 to 100 with 100 as best possible health status and 0 as worst health status.

Time frame: Screening and Weeks 8, 16, and 24

Population: ITT population; n=number of participants assessed at a given visit.

ArmMeasureGroupValue (MEAN)Dispersion
Rituximab + MTXSF-36 Domain ScoresPhysical functioning, Screening (n=289)39.04 scores on a scaleStandard Deviation 24.83
Rituximab + MTXSF-36 Domain ScoresPhysical functioning, Week 8 (n=284)43.60 scores on a scaleStandard Deviation 24.5
Rituximab + MTXSF-36 Domain ScoresPhysical functioning, Week 16 (n=276)44.64 scores on a scaleStandard Deviation 25.13
Rituximab + MTXSF-36 Domain ScoresPhysical functioning, Week 24 (n=268)47.37 scores on a scaleStandard Deviation 26.19
Rituximab + MTXSF-36 Domain ScoresBodily pain, Screening (n=290)25.94 scores on a scaleStandard Deviation 17.75
Rituximab + MTXSF-36 Domain ScoresBodily pain, Week 8 (n=285)37.24 scores on a scaleStandard Deviation 19
Rituximab + MTXSF-36 Domain ScoresBodily pain, Week 16 (n=275)44.25 scores on a scaleStandard Deviation 21.6
Rituximab + MTXSF-36 Domain ScoresBodily pain, Week 24 (n=267)44.06 scores on a scaleStandard Deviation 22.13
Rituximab + MTXSF-36 Domain ScoresPhysical role functioning, Screening (n=290)35.11 scores on a scaleStandard Deviation 22.42
Rituximab + MTXSF-36 Domain ScoresPhysical role functioning, Week 8 (n=284)43.72 scores on a scaleStandard Deviation 23.95
Rituximab + MTXSF-36 Domain ScoresPhysical role functioning, Week 16 (n=276)48.37 scores on a scaleStandard Deviation 23.48
Rituximab + MTXSF-36 Domain ScoresPhysical role functioning, Week 24 (n=269)49.63 scores on a scaleStandard Deviation 25.04
Rituximab + MTXSF-36 Domain ScoresEmotional role functioning, Screening (n=289)52.77 scores on a scaleStandard Deviation 31.23
Rituximab + MTXSF-36 Domain ScoresEmotional role functioning, Week 8 (n=282)59.13 scores on a scaleStandard Deviation 27.26
Rituximab + MTXSF-36 Domain ScoresEmotional role functioning, Week 16 (n=276)62.41 scores on a scaleStandard Deviation 27.57
Rituximab + MTXSF-36 Domain ScoresEmotional role functioning, Week 24 (n=268)61.29 scores on a scaleStandard Deviation 27.98
Rituximab + MTXSF-36 Domain ScoresEmotional well-being, Screening (n=289)56.11 scores on a scaleStandard Deviation 20.07
Rituximab + MTXSF-36 Domain ScoresEmotional well-being, Week 8 (n=285)60.43 scores on a scaleStandard Deviation 19.82
Rituximab + MTXSF-36 Domain ScoresEmotional well-being, Week 16 (n=276)63.02 scores on a scaleStandard Deviation 20.51
Rituximab + MTXSF-36 Domain ScoresEmotional well-being, Week 24 (n=268)64.03 scores on a scaleStandard Deviation 21.03
Rituximab + MTXSF-36 Domain ScoresSocial functioning, Screening (n=291)56.62 scores on a scaleStandard Deviation 27.23
Rituximab + MTXSF-36 Domain ScoresSocial functioning, Week 8 (n=285)64.04 scores on a scaleStandard Deviation 25.87
Rituximab + MTXSF-36 Domain ScoresSocial functioning, Week 16 (n=277)65.93 scores on a scaleStandard Deviation 26.1
Rituximab + MTXSF-36 Domain ScoresSocial functioning, Week 24 (n=270)66.99 scores on a scaleStandard Deviation 28.11
Rituximab + MTXSF-36 Domain ScoresVitality, Screening (n=290)38.49 scores on a scaleStandard Deviation 19.41
Rituximab + MTXSF-36 Domain ScoresVitality, Week 8 (n=285)43.42 scores on a scaleStandard Deviation 19.76
Rituximab + MTXSF-36 Domain ScoresVitality, Week 16 (n=276)48.25 scores on a scaleStandard Deviation 20.32
Rituximab + MTXSF-36 Domain ScoresVitality, Week 24 (n=268)48.22 scores on a scaleStandard Deviation 20.75
Rituximab + MTXSF-36 Domain ScoresGeneral health perceptions, Screening (n=291)39.14 scores on a scaleStandard Deviation 14.49
Rituximab + MTXSF-36 Domain ScoresGeneral health perceptions, Week 8 (n=285)45.61 scores on a scaleStandard Deviation 15.06
Rituximab + MTXSF-36 Domain ScoresGeneral health perceptions, Week 16 (n=272)48.54 scores on a scaleStandard Deviation 17.16
Rituximab + MTXSF-36 Domain ScoresGeneral health perceptions, Week 24 (n=269)48.30 scores on a scaleStandard Deviation 17.53
Secondary

Short-Form 36 (SF-36) Physical Composite Scores (PCS) and Mental Composite Scores (MCS)

The SF-36 is a multi-purpose, short-form health survey with 36 questions. It yields an 8-scale profile of functional health and well-being scores (domains) as well as psychometrically based physical and mental health summary measures. The SF-36 taps 8 health concepts: physical functioning, bodily pain, physical role functioning, emotional role functioning, emotional well-being, social functioning, vitality, and general health perceptions. The 8 scales are further summarized to 2 distinct higher-ordered clusters: the physical and mental composite t-scores (PCS and MCS). The range for all 8 domains as well as for the composite t-scores is from 0 to 100 with 100 as best possible health status and 0 as worst health status.

Time frame: Screening and Weeks 8, 16, and 24

Population: ITT population; n=number of participants assessed at a given visit.

ArmMeasureGroupValue (MEAN)Dispersion
Rituximab + MTXShort-Form 36 (SF-36) Physical Composite Scores (PCS) and Mental Composite Scores (MCS)PCS, Screening (n=287)30.97 scores on a scaleStandard Deviation 8.14
Rituximab + MTXShort-Form 36 (SF-36) Physical Composite Scores (PCS) and Mental Composite Scores (MCS)PCS, Week 8 (n=279)34.24 scores on a scaleStandard Deviation 8.56
Rituximab + MTXShort-Form 36 (SF-36) Physical Composite Scores (PCS) and Mental Composite Scores (MCS)PCS, Week 16 (n=270)35.92 scores on a scaleStandard Deviation 8.43
Rituximab + MTXShort-Form 36 (SF-36) Physical Composite Scores (PCS) and Mental Composite Scores (MCS)PCS, Week 24 (n=264)36.36 scores on a scaleStandard Deviation 9
Rituximab + MTXShort-Form 36 (SF-36) Physical Composite Scores (PCS) and Mental Composite Scores (MCS)MCS, Screening (n=287)40.88 scores on a scaleStandard Deviation 13.16
Rituximab + MTXShort-Form 36 (SF-36) Physical Composite Scores (PCS) and Mental Composite Scores (MCS)MCS, Week 8 (n=279)43.50 scores on a scaleStandard Deviation 12.31
Rituximab + MTXShort-Form 36 (SF-36) Physical Composite Scores (PCS) and Mental Composite Scores (MCS)MCS, Week 16 (n=270)45.17 scores on a scaleStandard Deviation 12.32
Rituximab + MTXShort-Form 36 (SF-36) Physical Composite Scores (PCS) and Mental Composite Scores (MCS)MCS, Week 24 (n=264)44.92 scores on a scaleStandard Deviation 13.13
Secondary

Swollen Joint Count (SJC)

The 28 joints to be assessed for tenderness and swelling were shoulder, elbow, wrist, metacarpophalangeal (MCP) joints 1-5, proximal interphalangeal (PIP) joints 1-5, and knee on both sides of the body. The sum of swollen joints, each, ranged from 0 to 28 with 0 as best possible health status and 28 as worst health status.

Time frame: Screening and Weeks 8, 16, and 24

Population: ITT population; n=number of participants assessed at a given visit.

ArmMeasureGroupValue (MEAN)Dispersion
Rituximab + MTXSwollen Joint Count (SJC)Week 16 (n=282)4.22 swollen jointsStandard Deviation 4.07
Rituximab + MTXSwollen Joint Count (SJC)Screening (n=291)10.01 swollen jointsStandard Deviation 5.34
Rituximab + MTXSwollen Joint Count (SJC)Week 8 (n=288)5.16 swollen jointsStandard Deviation 4.73
Rituximab + MTXSwollen Joint Count (SJC)Week 24 (n=272)4.70 swollen jointsStandard Deviation 4.67
Secondary

Tender Joint Count (TJC)

The 28 joints to be assessed for tenderness and swelling were shoulder, elbow, wrist, metacarpophalangeal (MCP) joints 1-5, proximal interphalangeal (PIP) joints 1-5, and knee on both sides of the body. The sum of tender joints ranged from 0 to 28 with 0 as best possible health status and 28 as worst health status.

Time frame: Screening and Weeks 8, 16, and 24

Population: ITT population; n=number of participants assessed at a given visit.

ArmMeasureGroupValue (MEAN)Dispersion
Rituximab + MTXTender Joint Count (TJC)Screening (n=291)12.62 tender jointsStandard Deviation 6.31
Rituximab + MTXTender Joint Count (TJC)Week 8 (n=288)7.53 tender jointsStandard Deviation 6.71
Rituximab + MTXTender Joint Count (TJC)Week 16 (n=282)6.04 tender jointsStandard Deviation 6.31
Rituximab + MTXTender Joint Count (TJC)Week 24 (n=272)6.41 tender jointsStandard Deviation 6.37

Source: ClinicalTrials.gov · Data processed: Feb 4, 2026