• Skip to primary navigation
  • Skip to main content
  • Skip to primary sidebar
  • Skip to footer

Johns Hopkins Arthritis Center

Show Search
Hide Search
  • Disease Information
    • Rheumatoid Arthritis
    • Psoriatic Arthritis
    • Ankylosing Spondylitis
    • Osteoarthritis
    • Gout
    • Osteoporosis
  • Patient Corner
    • Drug Information Sheets
    • Managing Your Arthritis
    • RheumTV – Patient Education Video Library
  • Our Research
    • Patient-Centered Outcomes Research
    • Current Research Studies
    • The Camille Julia Morgan Arthritis Research and Education Fund
  • About Us
    • Appointment Information
    • Contact Us
    • Our Faculty
    • Our Staff
    • Rheumatology Specialty Centers
  • Donate
Home / Arthritis News / FDA APPROVED: Subcutaneous Abatacept for the Treatment of Rheumatoid Arthritis

FDA APPROVED: Subcutaneous Abatacept for the Treatment of Rheumatoid Arthritis

September 26, 2011 By Arthritis Center

Abatacept is a selective T-cell co-stimulation modulator that has demonstrated efficacy for the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis in patients who have failed treatment with methotrexate. Until recently, abatacept was only available as a monthly intravenous infusion. In August 2011, the FDA approved the use of subcutaneous abatacept for the treatment of moderate to severe rheumatoid arthritis. The Phase III trial comparing the efficacy and safety of subcutaneous and intravenous abatacept is summarized below [Genovese MC, et al. Subcutaneous abatacept versus intravenous abatacept: A phase IIIb non-inferiority study in patients with an inadequate response to methotrexate. Arthritis & Rheumatism 2011 (Epub ahead of print)].

Methods:

Adult patients with active RA (≥ 10 swollen and ≥ 12 tender joints and CRP ≥ 0.8 mg/dL) despite more than 3 months of treatment with methotrexate (at doses ≥ 15mg/week) were randomized to receive abatacept by subcutaneous injection (after intravenous loading dose 10mg/kg on day 1; then 125 mg subcutaneous on day 1 and 8; then 125mg subcutaneous weekly) or intravenous infusion (10mg/kg on day 1, 15, 29; then monthly). The study design was randomized, double-blind, double-dummy study; therefore patients in both groups received subcutaneous or intravenous placebo, as appropriate.  The study was powered to be a non-inferiority comparison. The primary endpoint was ACR 20 response at month 6. ACR 50, ACR 70, and HAQ-DI (also at month 6) were secondary endpoints. Safety assessments were completed regularly for both groups and included injection site reactions and infusion reactions.

Results:

1457 RA patients were randomized for treatment with abatacept (n=736 subcutaneous; n=721 intravenous). The proportion of patients achieving an ACR 20 response at Month 6 was 76.0% (95% CI 72.9, 79.2) for the group receiving subcutaneous abatacept and 75.8% (95% CI 72.6, 79.0) for the group receiving intravenous abatacept. Similarly, the ACR 50 and 70 responses were comparable between the two groups. The proportion of patients in each group with improvements in HAQ-DI was comparable (68.2% subcutaneous vs 63.8% intravenous). The safety profile was also similar between the two groups. The most commonly reported adverse events in either group were headache, nasopharyngitis, upper respiratory infections, and gastrointestinal symptoms. No patients discontinued the drug due to serious infections in the subcutaneous group but four patients did in the intravenous group; although overall the frequency of infections was comparable between the two groups and were generally mild or moderate. Injection site reactions were reported in 2.6% of patients in the subcutaneous group and 2.5% of the patients receiving placebo. All injection site reactions were mild or moderate and did not result in discontinuation of the drug.

Conclusions:

This non-inferiority study comparing the subcutaneous and intravenous delivery methods of abatacept found them to be equally efficacious for the treatment of RA in patients with an inadequate response to methotrexate. Importantly, the safety profile was similar for both groups and the overall incidence of injection site reactions was low.

Editorial Comment:

Abatacept is the first biologic to be available in both subcutaneous and intravenous formulations. Infusions can be a logistical challenge for some patients, particularly those with full-time employment, child-care responsibilities, and elderly with poor mobility and transportation limitations. Self-administered subcutaneous injections can circumvent some of these issues. The selection of a biologic agent for the treatment of RA is ultimately a joint decision between the patient and provider with consideration of several issues including disease severity, response to previous treatments, and patient comfort with drug administration (injection vs infusion). The FDA approval of a subcutaneous form of abatacept allows providers to have more options when considering treatment for RA, and this can only help patients in the long run.

Receive the Latest News from Johns Hopkins Rheumatology

Receive the Latest News from Johns Hopkins Rheumatology

Join our mailing list to receive the latest news and updates from Johns Hopkins Rheumatology.

Interested In

You have Successfully Subscribed!

Arthritis Center

Founded in 1998, the Arthritis Center at Johns Hopkins is dedicated to providing quality education to patients and healthcare providers alike.

Use of this Site

All information contained within the Johns Hopkins Arthritis Center website is intended for educational purposes only. Physicians and other health care professionals are encouraged to consult other sources and confirm the information contained within this site. Consumers should never disregard medical advice or delay in seeking it because of something they may have read on this website.

Primary Sidebar

Recent News

Exercise Tips for Arthritis Patients

How Does Exercise Affect my Joints? How Frequently Should I Be Exercising? Should I Lose Weight for Exercise to be

Risks and Benefits of Biologic Medications

Victoria Ruffing, RN, BC, Director of Patient Education at the Johns Hopkins Arthritis Center, shares the risks and benefits of biologic for

How to Manage Rheumatoid Arthritis Flares

Through research, doctors have a clearer understanding of how flares can impact a patient on a personal and emotional level. Dr. Uzma Haque

Complementary & Alternative Medicines for Psoriatic Arthritis

There are many complementary & alternative medicines and practices that have been found to be beneficial in curbing arthritis pain,

I can’t be a runner because I have Rheumatoid Arthritis (RA), right?

Dr. Manno discusses running and Rheumatoid Arthritis. Is it an option for the RA patient?

News Categories

  • Ankylosing Spondylitis News
  • Fibromyalgia News
  • Gout News
  • Lupus News
  • Osteoarthritis News
  • Osteoporosis News
  • Psoriatic Arthritis News
  • Rheumatoid Arthritis News
RheumTV Logo

Rheum.TV is an informational platform created to educate patients living with a rheumatic disease. With over 100 disease education videos produced by the team at Johns Hopkins Rheumatology.

Visit Rheum.TV

Footer

Johns Hopkins Rheumatology

  • Johns Hopkins Rheumatology
  • Johns Hopkins Lupus Center
  • Johns Hopkins Lyme Disease Research Center
  • Johns Hopkins Myositis Center
  • Johns Hopkins Scleroderma Center
  • Johns Hopkins Sjögren’s Syndrome Center
  • Johns Hopkins Vasculitis Center

Connect With Us

  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • YouTube

Johns Hopkins Medicine

© 2023 Johns Hopkins Arthritis Center
Patient Privacy