Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Clinical Trial
. 2010 Sep;69(9):1629-35.
doi: 10.1136/ard.2009.119933. Epub 2010 May 20.

Efficacy and safety of different doses and retreatment of rituximab: a randomised, placebo-controlled trial in patients who are biological naive with active rheumatoid arthritis and an inadequate response to methotrexate (Study Evaluating Rituximab's Efficacy in MTX iNadequate rEsponders (SERENE))

P Emery  1 , A Deodhar, W F Rigby, J D Isaacs, B Combe, A J Racewicz, K Latinis, C Abud-Mendoza, L J Szczepanski, R A Roschmann, A Chen, G K Armstrong, W Douglass, H Tyrrell
Affiliations
Clinical Trial

Efficacy and safety of different doses and retreatment of rituximab: a randomised, placebo-controlled trial in patients who are biological naive with active rheumatoid arthritis and an inadequate response to methotrexate (Study Evaluating Rituximab's Efficacy in MTX iNadequate rEsponders (SERENE))

P Emery et al. Ann Rheum Dis. 2010 Sep.

Erratum in

  • Ann Rheum Dis. 2011 Aug;70(8):1519

Abstract

Objectives: This phase III study evaluated the efficacy and safety of rituximab plus methotrexate (MTX) in patients with active rheumatoid arthritis (RA) who had an inadequate response to MTX and who were naïve to prior biological treatment.

Methods: Patients with active disease on stable MTX (10-25 mg/week) were randomised to rituximab 2 x 500 mg (n=168), rituximab 2 x 1000 mg (n=172), or placebo (n=172). From week 24, patients not in remission (Disease Activity Score (28 joints) > or =2.6) received a second course of rituximab; patients initially assigned to placebo switched to rituximab 2 x 500 mg. The primary end point was American College of Rheumatology 20 (ACR20) response at week 24. All patients were followed until week 48.

Results: At week 24, both doses of rituximab showed statistically superior efficacy (p<0.0001) to placebo (ACR20: 54%, 51% and 23%; rituximab (2 x 500 mg) + MTX, rituximab (2 x 1000 mg) + MTX and placebo + MTX, respectively). Secondary end points were also significantly improved for both rituximab groups compared with placebo. Further improvements in both rituximab arms were observed from week 24 to week 48. Rituximab + MTX was well tolerated, demonstrating comparable safety to placebo + MTX through to week 24, and between rituximab doses through to week 48.

Conclusions: Rituximab (at 2 x 500 mg and 2 x 1000 mg) plus MTX significantly improved clinical outcomes at week 24, which were further improved by week 48. No significant differences in either clinical or safety outcomes were apparent between the rituximab doses.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Competing interests: PE has received research grants and consulting fees from Roche and research grants from Abbott. AD has received payments for educational lectures, teleconferences and serving on advisory boards for Genentech, a company that may have a commercial interest in the results of this research. This potential conflict of interest has been reviewed and managed by OHSU. WFR has received speaker fees from Genentech, Abbott, Biogen Idec and Bristol-Myers Squibb; clinical trial payments from Genentech, Abbott, Roche and Bristol-Myers Squibb; and consulting fees from Genentech, Roche, Biogen Idec and Amgen. JDI has received consulting fees from Roche and speaker fees from Roche and Biogen Idec. BC has received speaker fees and consulting fees from Abbott, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Roche, Schering-Plough, UCB and Wyeth. KL has received speaker fees from Genentech, Abbott, Centocor and Bristol-Myers Squibb; clinical trial payments from Genentech, Centocor, Bristol-Myers Squibb and Amgen; and consulting fees from Genentech. AC is an employee of Genentech, a member of the Roche Group; GKA, WD and HT are employees of Roche. AJR, CA-M, LJS and RAR have no competing interests to declare.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
American College of Rheumatology (ACR) 20/50/70 responses at week 24 and week 48 in patients receiving placebo (n=172), rituximab 2×500 mg (n=167) or rituximab 2×1000 mg (n=170) (all plus a stable dose of methotrexate 10−25 mg/week), non-responder imputation (intention-to-treat population). ***p≤0.0001 vs placebo.
Figure 2
Figure 2
Mean change from baseline in Disease Activity Score (28 joints) erythrocyte sedimentation rate (DAS28-ESR) over time through to week 48, last observation carried forward imputation (intention-to-treat population). MTX, methotrexate.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

Comment in

References

    1. Edwards JC, Szczepanski L, Szechinski J, et al. Efficacy of B-cell-targeted therapy with rituximab in patients with rheumatoid arthritis. N Engl J Med 2004;350:2572–81 - PubMed
    1. Cohen SB, Emery P, Greenwald MW, et al. Rituximab for rheumatoid arthritis refractory to anti-tumor necrosis factor therapy: results of a multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase III trial evaluating primary efficacy and safety at twenty-four weeks. Arthritis Rheum 2006;54:2793–806 - PubMed
    1. Emery P, Fleischmann R, Filipowicz-Sosnowska A, et al. The efficacy and safety of rituximab in patients with active rheumatoid arthritis despite methotrexate treatment: results of a phase IIB randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, dose-ranging trial. Arthritis Rheum 2006;54:1390–400 - PubMed
    1. Felson DT, Anderson JJ, Boers M, et al. The American College of Rheumatology preliminary core set of disease activity measures for rheumatoid arthritis clinical trials. The Committee on Outcome Measures in Rheumatoid Arthritis Clinical Trials. Arthritis Rheum 1993;36:729–40 - PubMed
    1. Wells GA, Tugwell P, Kraag GR, et al. Minimum important difference between patients with rheumatoid arthritis: the patient's perspective. J Rheumatol 1993;20:557–60 - PubMed

Publication types

MeSH terms