Dr. Larry W. Moreland from the University of Alabama at Birmingham and colleagues evaluated the safety and effectiveness of etanercept in 344 rheumatoid arthritis patients who were enrolled in initial clinical trials and were "continuing to receive etanercept as of the cutoff date for this report. The longest individual treatment was for 8.2 years.
Long-term use of etanercept did not increase the risk of serious infections. Likewise, the cancer risk did not exceed that expected for the general population, the results indicate, and death rates were similar to those in the general population.
More than two thirds of the patients had a treatment response at year 1, the researchers note, and disease activity decreased significantly by year 1 and remained lower through year 7.
"In most patients that enrolled in the extension, there was sustained improvement in rheumatoid arthritis," the authors conclude. "In this selected population, etanercept was well tolerated with no increase in the rates of serious adverse events."
Although the results are reassuring, "it is still early, and further data are required before we can be confident in our knowledge of the true risks of these agents," write Dr. Kimme L. Hyrich and Dr. Alan J. Silman from the University of Manchester, UK in a related editorial. "We still have more to learn about the risks of infections."
"The possibility is real that long-term control of disease activity will result in improved prognoses for patients with rheumatoid arthritis," the editorial concludes. "Only through long-term observation of patients receiving these agents will issues be addressed."
SOURCE: The Journal of Rheumatology, May 2006.
Good to hear. Now if only it would make my RA symptoms subside
I read an article once on methotrexate that said the average liver problems didn't come until around year 10 of use for most patients. It states that at least one person used it for 8.2 years, but I really would like to know how many more were using that long.
I'm only 33, so i have at least 30 years to go on drugs. My doc wants me to do remicade cuz i get a discount but it sounds horrible. This one might be ok to do, but I still worry about long term.
I am saying "no" to rem and Hem, but maybe yes to this one, hopefully i won't need to make that decision for years to come so i can see a real long term on it's use.
Not to mention i can't afford it since i pay cash.
Thanks for posting this, it gives me hope on a biologic not hurting me in the long run. [QUOTE=phxgirl 1]
I s it a safe drug in general or in comparison to the others.
[/QUOTE]
I'm thinking maybe this came out due to the recent news about Humira and Remicade increasing cancer risk? Trying to put Enbrel in a better light maybe?
That's what i was thinking, I would love to see long term results on everything over 10 years.
Even the cancer numbers in some reports for rem etc. are saying high, other tests say normal, we need a good long term of a bunch of people in this test.
I'm not so happy with Enbrel. I liked Remicade much better and responded much faster. I've been on Enbrel and I just feel like it does anything for me. I have gotten infections from it.
I think it depends on individual's response.
Shanbr, the one thing to keep in mind is that you want be agressive early in this disease because that is when the most damage occurs. You might not be looking at 30 years on meds. They find the right combination for you now, while you are young, and you might not have to worry so much. You might even see the cure this. Wouldn't that be great!
Copyright ArthritisInsight.com