Trial reportArthritis & rheumatology (Hoboken, N.J.)2018
A Randomized Phase IIb Study of Mavrilimumab and Golimumab in Rheumatoid Arthritis.
Trial report in Arthritis & rheumatology (Hoboken, N.J.), 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 45 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
45 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 108 citations in OpenAlex.
- Pooled it
- Pooled it
- Efficacy of pharmacological treatment in rheumatoid arthritis: a systematic literature research informing the 2019 update of the EULAR recommendations for management of rheumatoid arthritis.Annals of the rheumatic diseases · 2020Pooled it
- Anti-GM-CSF otilimab versus tofacitinib or placebo in patients with active rheumatoid arthritis and an inadequate response to conventional or biologic DMARDs: two phase 3 randomised trials (contRAst 1 and contRAst 2).Annals of the rheumatic diseases · 2023Trial
- Efficacy and safety of mavrilimumab in giant cell arteritis: a phase 2, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial.Annals of the rheumatic diseases · 2022Trial
- Pharmacodynamic biomarkers and differential effects of TNF- and GM-CSF-targeting biologics in rheumatoid arthritis.International journal of rheumatic diseases · 2019Trial
- Characterization of Phenotypes and Functional Activities of Leukocytes From Rheumatoid Arthritis Patients by Mass Cytometry.Frontiers in immunology · 2019Trial
- Pathogenic GM-CSF drives functional diversification of inflammatory macrophages in autoimmune arthritis.Science advances · 2026Article
- Targeting GM-CSF in Rheumatoid Arthritis: Advances in Cytokine-Directed Immunotherapy and Clinical Implications.Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- Tissue macrophages: origin, heterogenity, biological functions, diseases and therapeutic targets.Signal transduction and targeted therapy · 2025Review
- GM-CSFTheranostics · 2025Review
- Serum GM-CSF level is a predictor of treatment response to tocilizumab in rheumatoid arthritis patients: a prospective observational cohort study.Arthritis research & therapy · 2024Observational
- Review
- Review
- The Role of Neutrophils in Spondyloarthritis: A Journey across the Spectrum of Disease Manifestations.International journal of molecular sciences · 2023Review
- NLRC4-mediated activation of CD1c+ DC contributes to perpetuation of synovitis in rheumatoid arthritis.JCI insight · 2022Article
- Blocking GM-CSF receptor α with mavrilimumab reduces infiltrating cells, pro-inflammatory markers and neoangiogenesis in ex vivo cultured arteries from patients with giant cell arteritis.Annals of the rheumatic diseases · 2022Article
- Preferable outcome of Janus kinase inhibitors for a group of difficult-to-treat rheumatoid arthritis patients: from the FIRST Registry.Arthritis research & therapy · 2022Article
- Repolarization of Unbalanced Macrophages: Unmet Medical Need in Chronic Inflammation and Cancer.International journal of molecular sciences · 2022Review
- GM-CSF impairs erythropoiesis by disrupting erythroblastic island formation via macrophages.Journal of translational medicine · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors at 5 institutions in 4 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveThis 24-week, phase IIb, double-blind study was undertaken to evaluate the efficacy and safety of mavrilimumab (a monoclonal antibody to granulocyte-macrophage colony-stimulating factor receptor α) and golimumab (a monoclonal antibody to tumor necrosis factor [anti-TNF]) in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) who have had an inadequate response to disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs) (referred to as DMARD-IR) and/or inadequate response to other anti-TNF agents (referred to as anti-TNF-IR).
methodsPatients with active RA and a history of DMARD-IR (≥1 failed regimen) or DMARD-IR (≥1 failed regimen) and anti-TNF-IR (1-2 failed regimens) were randomized 1:1 to receive either mavrilimumab 100 mg subcutaneously every other week or golimumab 50 mg subcutaneously every 4 weeks alternating with placebo every 4 weeks, administered concomitantly with methotrexate. The primary end points were the American College of Rheumatology 20% improvement (ACR20), 50% improvement, and 70% improvement response rates at week 24, percentage of patients achieving a Disease Activity Score in 28 joints using C-reactive protein level (DAS28-CRP) of <2.6 at week 24, percentage of patients with a score improvement of >0.22 on the Health Assessment Questionnaire (HAQ) disability index (DI) at week 24, and safety/tolerability measures. This study was not powered to formally compare the 2 treatments.
resultsAt week 24, differences in the ACR20, ACR50, and ACR70 response rates between the mavrilimumab treatment group (n = 70) and golimumab treatment group (n = 68) were as follows: in all patients, -3.5% (90% confidence interval [90% CI] -16.8, 9.8), -8.6% (90% CI -22.0, 4.8), and -9.8% (90% CI -21.1, 1.4), respectively; in the anti-TNF-IR group, 11.1% (90% CI -7.8, 29.9), -8.7% (90% CI -28.1, 10.7), and -0.7% (90% CI -18.0, 16.7), respectively. Differences in the percentage of patients achieving a DAS28-CRP of <2.6 at week 24 between the mavrilimumab and golimumab groups were -11.6% (90% CI -23.2, 0.0) in all patients, and -4.0% (90% CI -20.9, 12.9) in the anti-TNF-IR group. The percentage of patients achieving a >0.22 improvement in the HAQ DI score at week 24 was similar between the treatment groups. Treatment-emergent adverse events were reported in 51.4% of mavrilimumab-treated patients and 42.6% of golimumab-treated patients. No deaths were reported, and no specific safety signals were identified.
conclusionThe findings of this study demonstrate the clinical efficacy of both treatments, mavrilimumab at a dosage of 100 mg every other week and golimumab at a dosage of 50 mg every 4 weeks, in patients with RA. Both regimens were well-tolerated in patients who had shown an inadequate response to DMARDs and/or other anti-TNF agents.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.