Clinical Rheumatology

, Volume 38, Issue 2, pp 297–305 | Cite as

The persistence of golimumab compared to other tumour necrosis factor-α inhibitors in daily clinical practice for the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis, ankylosing spondylitis and psoriatic arthritis: observations from the Slovenian nation-wide longitudinal registry of patients treated with biologic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs—

  • Žiga RotarEmail author
  • Matija Tomšič
  • Sonja Praprotnik
  • on behalf of the Slovenian Rheumatologists
Original Article
Part of the following topical collections:
  1. Rheumatology in Slovenia: Clinical practice and translational research


To assess the persistence of golimumab and other tumour necrosis factor-α inhibitors (TNFis) in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA), ankylosing spondylitis (AS) and psoriatic arthritis (PsA) in Slovenia. We analysed prospectively the collected data of all patients treated with golimumab and other TNFis from 1 January 2010 to 31 July 2018 from the mandatory national registry. We assessed the treatment persistence stratified by treatment type, indication and prior exposure to bDMARDs using the Kaplan-Meier method and Cox proportional regression hazards’ models adjusted for the well-appreciated confounders. We also assessed its effectiveness at 1 year after the initiation of therapy. During the 7-year observation period, 24 Slovenian rheumatologists from eight centres contributed data on 368, and 1654 patients treated for 849, and 3321 person-years with golimumab and other TNFis, respectively. The overall proportions of RA, AS and PsA patients being persistent on golimumab vs. other TNFis at 2 years after starting the therapy did not differ significantly and were 53%, 67% and 59% vs. 47%, 65% and 59%, respectively. The crude and adjusted hazard ratios for golimumab discontinuation did not differ significantly between bDMARD-naïve and bDMARD-experienced patients for any of the indications. In contrast, bDMARD-experienced AS and PsA patients treated with other TNFis were significantly more likely to discontinue treatment. The persistence of golimumab in patients with RA, AS and PsA in Slovenia was comparable with its persistence in more affluent Western European countries. We observed a better persistence of golimumab compared to other TNFis in bDMARD-experienced AS and PsA patients.


Ankylosing spondylitis Biologic agents Psoriatic arthritis Rheumatoid arthritis 



We are very grateful to all Slovenian Rheumatologists who contributed data into the


The study was financially supported by MSD. MSD had no influence on the study design or manuscript preparation.

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

ZR has received speaker fees from Abbvie, CellGen, Celtrion, Eli-Lilly, Jansen, Medis, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer and Roche. SP has received consultant or speaker fees from Abbvie, Eli-Lilly, Jansen, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche. MT has received consultant or speaker fees from Abbvie, Eli-Lilly, Johnson & Johnson, Medis, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer and Roche paid to Revmatic d.o.o. has received funding for clinical research paid to Društvo za razvoj revmatologije from AbbVie, Celgene, Celtrion, Eli Lilly, Johnson & Johnson, Medis, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer and Roche.


  1. 1.
    Inman RD, Davis JC, Van Der Heijde D et al (2008) Efficacy and safety of golimumab in patients with ankylosing spondylitis: results of a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase III trial. Arthritis Rheum 58:3402–3412. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Keystone EC, Genovese MC, Klareskog L, Hsia EC, Hall ST, Miranda PC, Pazdur J, Bae SC, Palmer W, Zrubek J, Wiekowski M, Visvanathan S, Wu Z, Rahman MU, GO-FORWARD Study (2009) Golimumab, a human antibody to tumour necrosis factor {alpha} given by monthly subcutaneous injections, in active rheumatoid arthritis despite methotrexate therapy: the GO-FORWARD study. Ann Rheum Dis 68:789–796. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Braun J, Deodhar A, Inman RD, van der Heijde D, Mack M, Xu S, Hsu B (2012) Golimumab administered subcutaneously every 4 weeks in ankylosing spondylitis: 104-week results of the GO-RAISE study. Ann Rheum Dis 71:661–667. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Kavanaugh A, Van Der Heijde D, McInnes IB et al (2012) Golimumab in psoriatic arthritis: one-year clinical efficacy, radiographic, and safety results from a phase III, randomized, placebo-controlled trial. Arthritis Rheum 64:2504–2517. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Emery P, Fleischmann RM, Moreland LW, Hsia EC, Strusberg I, Durez P, Nash P, Amante EJB, Churchill M, Park W, Pons-Estel BA, Doyle MK, Visvanathan S, Xu W, Rahman MU (2009) Golimumab, a human anti-tumor necrosis factor α monoclonal antibody, injected subcutaneously every four weeks in methotrexate-naive patients with active rheumatoid arthritis: twenty-four-week results of a phase III, multicenter, randomized, double-blind. Arthritis Rheum 60:2272–2283. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Kay J, Fleischmann R, Keystone E, Hsia EC, Hsu B, Zhou Y, Goldstein N, Braun J (2016) Five-year safety data from 5 clinical trials of subcutaneous Golimumab in patients with rheumatoid arthritis, psoriatic arthritis, and ankylosing spondylitis. J Rheumatol 43:2120–2130. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Vashisht P, Sayles H, Cannella AC, Mikuls TR, Michaud K (2016) Generalizability of patients with rheumatoid arthritis in biologic agent clinical trials. Arthritis Care Res 68:1478–1488. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Manara M, Caporali R, Favalli EG, et al (2017) Two-year retention rate of golimumab in rheumatoid arthritis, psoriatic arthritis and ankylosing spondylitis: data from the LORHEN registry. Clin Exp RheumatolGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Iannone F, Santo L, Anelli MG, Bucci R, Semeraro A, Quarta L, D’Onofrio F, Marsico A, Carlino G, Casilli O, Cacciapaglia F, Zuccaro C, Falappone PC, Cantatore FP, Muratore M, Lapadula G (2017) Golimumab in real-life settings: 2 years drug survival and predictors of clinical outcomes in rheumatoid arthritis, spondyloarthritis, and psoriatic arthritis. Semin Arthritis Rheum 47:108–114. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Mourao AF, Ribeiro C, Borges J et al (2016) Real-life effectiveness of golimumab in biologic-naive rheumatoid arthritis patients-data from reuma.Pt, a portuguese registry. Ann Rheum Dis.
  11. 11.
    Dalén J, Svedbom A, Black CM, Lyu R, Ding Q, Sajjan S, Sazonov V, Kachroo S (2016) Treatment persistence among patients with immune-mediated rheumatic disease newly treated with subcutaneous TNF-alpha inhibitors and costs associated with non-persistence. Rheumatol Int 36:987–995. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Aaltonen K, Joensuu J, Pirilä L, Kauppi M, Uutela T, Varjolahti-Lehtinen T, Yli-Kerttula T, Isomäki P, Nordström D, Sokka T (2016) Drug survival on tumour necrosis factor inhibitors in patients with rheumatoid arthritis in Finland. Scand J Rheumatol 46:359–363. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Putrik P, Ramiro S, Kvien TK, Sokka T, Uhlig T, Boonen A, Equity in Clinical Eligibility Criteria for RA treatment Working Group (2014) Variations in criteria regulating treatment with reimbursed biologic DMARDs across European countries. Are differences related to country’s wealth? Ann Rheum Dis 73:2010–2021. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Rotar Z, Hočevar A, Rebolj Kodre A et al (2015) Retention of the second-line biologic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs in patients with rheumatoid arthritis failing one tumor necrosis factor alpha inhibitor: data from the BioRx.Si registry. Clin Rheumatol 34:1787–1793. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Aletaha D, Neogi T, Silman AJ, Funovits J, Felson DT, Bingham CO, Birnbaum NS, Burmester GR, Bykerk VP, Cohen MD, Combe B, Costenbader KH, Dougados M, Emery P, Ferraccioli G, Hazes JM, Hobbs K, Huizinga TW, Kavanaugh A, Kay J, Kvien TK, Laing T, Mease P, Menard HA, Moreland LW, Naden RL, Pincus T, Smolen JS, Stanislawska-Biernat E, Symmons D, Tak PP, Upchurch KS, Vencovsky J, Wolfe F, Hawker G (2010) 2010 rheumatoid arthritis classification criteria: an American College of Rheumatology/European league against rheumatism collaborative initiative. Ann Rheum Dis 69:1580–1588. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Arnett FC, Edworthy SM, Bloch DA, Mcshane DJ, Fries JF, Cooper NS, Healey LA, Kaplan SR, Liang MH, Luthra HS, Medsger TA, Mitchell DM, Neustadt DH, Pinals RS, Schaller JG, Sharp JT, Wilder RL, Hunder GG (1988) The American rheumatism association 1987 revised criteria for the classification of rheumatoid arthritis. Arthritis Rheum 31:315–324CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Taylor W, Gladman D, Helliwell P, Marchesoni A, Mease P, Mielants H, CASPAR Study Group (2006) Classification criteria for psoriatic arthritis: development of new criteria from a large international study. Arthritis Rheum 54:2665–2673. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    van der Linden S, Valkenburg HA, Cats A (1984) Evaluation of diagnostic criteria for ankylosing spondylitis. A proposal for modification of the New York criteria. Arthritis Rheum 27:361–368CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Svedbom A, Storck C, Kachroo S, Govoni M, Khalifa A (2017) Persistence with golimumab in immune-mediated rheumatic diseases: a systematic review of real-world evidence in rheumatoid arthritis, axial spondyloarthritis, and psoriatic arthritis. Patient Prefer Adherence 11:719–729. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Kay J, Rahman MU (2010) Golimumab: a novel human anti-TNF-alpha monoclonal antibody for the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis, ankylosing spondylitis, and psoriatic arthritis. Core Evid 4:159–170Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Calip GS, Adimadhyam S, Xing S, Rincon JC, Lee WJ, Anguiano RH (2017) Medication adherence and persistence over time with self-administered TNF-alpha inhibitors among young adult, middle-aged, and older patients with rheumatologic conditions. Semin Arthritis Rheum 47:157–164. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Rémy A, Avouac J, Gossec L Combe B clinical relevance of switching to a second tumour necrosis factor-alpha inhibitor after discontinuation of a first tumour necrosis factor-alpha inhibitor in rheumatoid arthritis: a systematic literature review and meta-analysis. Clin Exp Rheumatol 29:96–103Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Rendas-Baum R, Wallenstein GV, Koncz T, Kosinski M, Yang M, Bradley J, Zwillich SH (2011) Evaluating the efficacy of sequential biologic therapies for rheumatoid arthritis patients with an inadequate response to tumor necrosis factor-α inhibitors. Arthritis Res Ther 13:R25. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Rudwaleit M, Van den Bosch F, Kron M et al (2010) Effectiveness and safety of adalimumab in patients with ankylosing spondylitis or psoriatic arthritis and history of anti-tumor necrosis factor therapy. Arthritis Res Ther 12:R117. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Glintborg B, Østergaard M, Krogh NS, Tarp U, Manilo N, Loft AGR, Hansen A, Schlemmer A, Fana V, Lindegaard HM, Nordin H, Rasmussen C, Ejstrup L, Jensen DV, Petersen PM, Hetland ML (2013) Clinical response, drug survival and predictors thereof in 432 ankylosing spondylitis patients after switching tumour necrosis factor α inhibitor therapy: results from the Danish nationwide DANBIO registry. Ann Rheum Dis 72:1149–1155. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Lie E, Van Der Heijde D, Uhlig T et al (2011) Effectiveness of switching between TNF inhibitors in ankylosing spondylitis: data from the NOR-DMARD register. Ann Rheum Dis 70:157–163. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Reddy SM, Crean S, Martin AL, Burns MD, Palmer JB (2016) Real-world effectiveness of anti-TNF switching in psoriatic arthritis: a systematic review of the literature. Clin Rheumatol 35:2955–2966. CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© International League of Associations for Rheumatology (ILAR) 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of RheumatologyUniversity Medical Centre LjubljanaLjubljanaSlovenia
  2. 2.Faculty of MedicineUniversity LjubljanaLjubljanaSlovenia

Personalised recommendations