Utilization of biologic disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs in patients with rheumatoid arthritis and cancer

Trends in the use of biologic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs in patients with rheumatoid arthritis and recently diagnosed colorectal, lung, or prostate cancer

INTRODUCTION

Biologic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (bDMARD) are often discontinued when a patient with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) is diagnosed with cancer. Our aim was to determine trends in bDMARD utilization in patients with RA and recently diagnosed cancer.

METHOD

We examined two national claims databases to identify adults with RA and recently diagnosed colorectal, lung, or prostate cancer (Optum's de-identified Clinformatics® Data Mart Database 2008-2022, and Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results Program (SEER) Medicare-linked 2008-2017). We determined time trends in bDMARD and tumor necrosis factor inhibitor (TNFi) prescriptions during the first 3 years after cancer with Cochram-Armitage tests and multivariable logistic regression. Cancer cohorts were analyzed separately.

RESULTS

We included 3595 patients in all six cohorts (in Clinformatics® 503 with colorectal, 468 with lung, and 440 with prostate cancer; in SEER-Medicare 580 with colorectal, 1010 with lung, and 594 with prostate cancer). No significant increase was observed in bDMARD or TNFi utilization over time. Overall, use of bDMARD within the first 3 years of follow-up ranged from 16.7% (Clinformatics® lung cohort) to 29.7% (SEER-Medicare colorectal cohort). The major predictor of bDMARD utilization was prior use in the 3 months before cancer diagnosis (p < 0.001 for all cancers) and earlier cancer stage (p < 0.001 in colorectal and lung cancer and p = 0.05 in prostate cancer).

CONCLUSIONS

Use of bDMARD in patients with RA and recently diagnosed common cancers has not increased since 2008. Additional evidence on the safety of bDMARD in patients with early cancer is needed to ensure appropriate management of their RA. Key Points • Use of bDMARD and TNFi in patients with RA and early colorectal, lung, or prostate cancer has been stable since 2008, with no significant increases over time. • The major determinant of receiving bDMARD after cancer diagnosis was prior treatment with bDMARD in the prior 3 months before cancer. • Patients with advanced cancer stage and distant metastases were less likely to receive bDMARD and TNFi than those at early stages of disease.

Utilization of Biologic Disease-Modifying Antirheumatic Therapy in Patients With Rheumatoid Arthritis and Recently Diagnosed Breast Cancer

OBJECTIVE

Biologic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (bDMARDs) are immunosuppressants, and there have been concerns that they might impact tumor immunity in patients with cancer with rheumatoid arthritis (RA). The purpose of this study was to describe the utilization trends of bDMARD in patients with RA after breast cancer (BC) diagnosis.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective cohort study of adults with RA and BC (2008 onward) from Optum's de-identified Clinformatics® Data Mart Database (CDM); the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results Program (SEER) Medicare; and the Texas Cancer Registry (TCR) Medicare databases. We evaluated bDMARD utilization trends during the first three years after BC. We conducted multivariable logistic regression to evaluate the association of utilization with patient characteristics.

RESULTS

A total 1,412 patients were identified in CDM and 1,439 patients in SEER/TCR-Medicare. During the three months before BC diagnosis, 28.2% (CDM) and 26.9% (SEER/TCR-Medicare) patients had received bDMARDs. Within the first three years after diagnosis, 24.1% (CDM) and 26.4% (SEER/TCR-Medicare) were receiving bDMARDs. About 70% of the patients in the two cohorts received glucocorticoids with no significant time trend increases. The largest predictor of bDMARD utilization was prior use before BC (CDM: odds ratio [OR] 27.15, 95% confidence interval [CI] 19.29-38.19; SEER/TCR: OR 18.98, 95% CI 13.72-26.26). Regional and distant BC compared to in situ or localized were also associated with lower bDMARDs utilization in SEER/TCR-Medicare (OR 0.54, 95% CI 0.36-0.82; OR 0.31, 95% CI 0.13-0.77, respectively).

CONCLUSION

The utilization of tumor necrosis factor inhibitors and other bDMARDs in patients with RA and recent BC has not increased since 2008. Glucocorticoids utilization remained high. The largest predictor of bDMARD utilization was prior use before BC.

Use of Disease-modifying Antirheumatic Drugs After Cancer Diagnosis in Rheumatoid Arthritis Patients

Objective

There is no recommendation for the use of disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs) in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) who developed cancer. We examined changes in the DMARDs prescription patterns associated with cancer diagnosis in RA patients.

Methods

We reviewed the medical records of 2,161 RA patients who visited rheumatology clinic between January 2008 and February 2017 and found 40 patients who developed cancer during RA treatment. In these patients, we examined DMARDs prescription patterns before and right after cancer diagnosis and at recent outpatient clinic visits.

Results

Before cancer diagnosis, methotrexate (MTX)-combined conventional synthetic DMARDs (csDMARDs) were most commonly prescribed (22, 55.0%) and biological DMARDs (biologics) in nine patients (22.5%). For cancer treatment, 19 patients received chemotherapy (including adjuvant chemotherapy) and 21 patients had surgery only. Right after cancer diagnosis, changes in the DMARDs prescription patterns were similar in discontinuation (13, 32.5%), switching (14, 35.0%), and maintenance (13, 32.5%). DMARDs were discontinued more frequently in the chemotherapy group (9/19, 47.4%) than the surgery only group (4/2, 19.0%) (p<0.05). Among the 13 patients who discontinued DMARDs, nine (69.2%) resumed DMARDs after a median of 5.5 months (interquartile range [IQR] 2.9, 18.3) due to arthritis flare. At a median of 4.6 years (IQR 3.3, 6.7) after cancer diagnosis, 25 patients were evaluated at recent outpatient clinic visits. Four patients received no DMARD, three MTX monotherapies, 11 csDMARDs combination therapies, and seven biologics.

Conclusion

A significant number of RA patients who developed cancer during RA treatment were still receiving DMARDs including biologics after cancer diagnosis.

Physicians' Biological Drug Preference in Patients With Rheumatoid Arthritis and Spondyloarthritis With a History of Malignancy: Perspectives From the Treasure Database

OBJECTIVE

Because of concerns about malignancy risks, using biological disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (bDMARDs) in patients with a history of malignancy remains a challenging issue in rheumatology practice. This study aimed to investigate bDMARD preferences of physicians when treating of rheumatoid arthritis (RA) and spondyloarthritis (SpA) patients with a history of malignancy.

METHODS

The data for this cross-sectional study were gathered from the TReasure database using a date range of December 2017 and January 2020. Biological disease-modifying antirheumatic drug preferences were analyzed for 40 RA patients and 25 SpA patients with a history of malignancy.

RESULTS

The most frequently prescribed bDMARD was rituximab, which was given to 28 RA patients (70%). For 25 patients (62.5%), the time between the diagnosis of malignancy and starting on a bDMARD regimen was less than 60 months, with a median interval of 43.5 months. Among SpA patients, the preferred bDMARDs were secukinumab and etanercept, which were each administered to 7 patients (28%). For 13 SpA patients (52%), the time between the diagnosis of malignancy and starting on bDMARDs was less than 60 months, with a median interval of 97 months.

CONCLUSIONS

The observed bDMARD preferences may be related to the therapeutic effects of rituximab on lymphoproliferative malignancies, the protective effects of secukinumab on tumor progression, and the short half-life of etanercept. Biological disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs should be used in RA and SpA patients with malignancy in case of high inflammatory activity.

Impact of rheumatoid arthritis and biologic and targeted synthetic disease modifying antirheumatic agents on cancer risk and recurrence

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Several new therapeutic drugs are now available for the management of rheumatoid arthritis (RA). Given that RA has been associated with an increased risk of certain cancers like lymphoma and lung cancer, concern remains about the safety of (newer) immunosuppressants used in RA management as it relates to the risk of cancer.

RECENT FINDINGS

Most meta-analyses of randomized clinical trials of tumor necrosis factor inhibitors (TNFi) have not observed an association between TNFi and risk of incident cancer. Studies of non-TNFi biologic disease modifying antirheumatic drugs (bDMARDs) and targeted synthetic DMARDs and cancer are also reassuring but limited and of short-term follow-up. Regarding the use of DMARDs in patients with RA and a prior malignancy, retrospective studies have shown that TNFi use is not associated with recurrence.

SUMMARY

There is a need for ongoing studies on the safety of non-TNFi bDMARDs and targeted synthetic disease modifying anti-rheumatic drugs and recurrent cancer. Further research is also needed to guide the patients, rheumatologists, and oncologists regarding the safest DMARDs to choose for patients with RA and a recent diagnosis of cancer.

Tuberculosis comorbidity with rheumatoid arthritis: Gene signatures, associated biomarkers, and screening

Rheumatoid arthritis (RA) is known to be related to an elevated risk of infections because of its pathobiology and the use of immunosuppressive therapies. Reactivation of latent tuberculosis (TB) infection is a serious issue in patients with RA, especially after receiving anti-TNFs therapy. TNF blocking reinforces the TB granuloma formation and maintenance and the growth of Mycobacterium tuberculosis (Mtb). After intercurrent of TB infection, the standard recommendation is that the treatment with TNF inhibitors to be withheld despite its impressive effect on suppression of inflammation until the infection has resolved. Knowing pathways and mechanisms that are common between two diseases might help to find the mechanistic basis of this comorbidity, as well as provide us a new approach to apply them as therapeutic targets or diagnostic biomarkers. Also, screening for latent TB before initiation of an anti-TNF therapy can minimize complications. This review summarizes the shared gene signature between TB and RA and discusses the biomarkers for early detection of this infection, and screening procedures as well.

Overall survival in patients with rheumatoid arthritis and solid malignancies receiving biologic disease-modifying antirheumatic therapy

INTRODUCTION/OBJECTIVES

The effects of biologic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (bDMARDs) in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) and cancer are largely unknown. We examined overall survival (OS) in patients with RA and solid malignancies receiving bDMARDs.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective cohort study of patients with RA and solid malignancies seen at MD Anderson Cancer Center between 2002 and 2014. Cox proportional hazard regression models, stratified by tumor type and stage, were fit evaluating use of bDMARDs as a time fixed and time varying covariate.

RESULTS

We identified 431 RA patients with solid malignancies: 111 (26%) received bDMARDs after their cancer diagnosis. Median OS from cancer diagnosis was 16.1 years. Of the patients receiving bDMARDs, most had localized disease, and only 14 (13%) had advanced cancer. In the stratified Cox models no statistically significant differences were observed between patients who received tumor necrosis factor inhibitors (TNFi) or patients who received nonTNFi, compared with those who did not receive bDMARDs (hazard ratio (HR), 0.67; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.31, 1.44; HR, 1.10; 95% CI, 0.26, 4.60 respectively). In breast cancer patients, those receiving TNFi or nonTNFi had a numerically higher but statistically nonsignificant HR compared with those who did not receive bDMARD: HR, 1.40 (95% CI, 0.42, 4.73), and HR, 1.37 (95% CI, 0.22, 8.42) respectively.

CONCLUSION

No significant differences in OS were observed between patients who received bDMARDs and those who did not. Additional data is needed to evaluate other cancer outcomes such as recurrence and progression, and patients with advanced cancer. Key Points •We found no statistically significant differences in OS between patients with RA and concomitant solid malignancies who received bDMARDs and those who did not. •Most patients who received bDMARDs had been diagnosed with early stage cancer •As few patients with advanced cancer received bDMARDs safety for this group cannot be established •No significant differences were observed between TNFi and nonTNFi, but the sample size was small.

Safety Profile of Biologics Used in Rheumatology: An Italian Prospective Pharmacovigilance Study

Post-marketing surveillance activities are essential to detect the risk/benefit profile of biologic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (bDMARDs) in inflammatory arthritis. The aim of this study was to evaluate adverse events (AEs) in patients treated with bDMARDs in rheumatology during a prospective pharmacovigilance study from 2016 to 2018. Descriptive statistical analyses were performed to evaluate bDMARDs-related variables of patients without AEs/failures vs patients with AEs and failures. The risk profile among biologics was assessed by comparing patients treated with each bDMARD to patients treated with etanercept. A total of 1155 patients were enrolled, mostly affected by rheumatoid arthritis (46.0%). AEs and failures were experienced by 8.7% and 23.3%, respectively. The number of comorbidities significantly influenced the onset of AEs, while anxiety-depressive, gastrointestinal disease, and fibromyalgia influenced onset of failures. The probability of developing an AE was significantly lower in patients treated with secukinumab, while the probability of developing treatment failure was significantly lower in patients treated with golimumab, secukinumab and tocilizumab. A total of 216 AEs were reported (25.5% serious), mostly regarding infections (21.8%), musculoskeletal (17.6%) and skin (16.2%) disorders. Serious AEs included neutropenia (12.7%), lymphocytosis (9.1%) and uveitis (7.3%). The obtained results revealed known AEs but real-world data should be endorsed for undetected safety concerns.