Dosing of Intravenous Tocilizumab in a Real-World Setting of Rheumatoid Arthritis: Analyses from the Corrona Registry

Comparative effectiveness of TNF inhibitor vs IL-6 receptor inhibitor as monotherapy or combination therapy with methotrexate in biologic-experienced patients with rheumatoid arthritis: An analysis from the CorEvitas RA Registry

OBJECTIVE

Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in biologic-naïve rheumatoid arthritis (RA) patients with high disease activity and inadequate response/intolerance to methotrexate have shown interleukin-6 (IL-6) receptor inhibitors (IL-6Ri) to be superior to tumor necrosis factor inhibitors (TNFi) as monotherapy. This observational study aimed to compare the effectiveness of TNFi vs IL-6Ri as mono- or combination therapy in biologic/targeted synthetic (b/ts) -experienced RA patients with moderate/high disease activity.

METHODS

Eligible b/ts-experienced patients from the CorEvitas RA registry were categorized as TNFi and IL-6Ri initiators, with subgroups initiating as mono- or combination therapy. Mixed-effects regression models evaluated the impact of treatment on Clinical Disease Activity Index (CDAI), patient-reported outcomes, and disproportionate pain (DP). Unadjusted and covariate-adjusted effects were reported.

RESULTS

Patients initiating IL-6Ri (n = 286) vs TNFi monotherapy (n = 737) were older, had a longer RA history and higher baseline CDAI, and were more likely to initiate as third-line therapy; IL-6Ri (n = 401) vs TNFi (n = 1315) combination therapy initiators had higher baseline CDAI and were more likely to initiate as third-line therapy. No significant differences were noted in the outcomes between TNFi and IL-6Ri initiators (as mono- or combination therapy).

CONCLUSION

This observational study showed no significant differences in outcomes among b/ts-experienced TNFi vs IL-6Ri initiators, as either mono- or combination therapy. These findings were in contrast with the previous RCTs in biologic-naïve patients and could be explained by the differences in the patient characteristics included in this study. Further studies are needed to help understand the reasons for this discrepancy in the real-world b/ts-experienced population.

Safety and efficacy of tocilizumab for rheumatoid arthritis: a systematic review and meta-analysis of clinical trial studies

The present systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted to assess the effect of tocilizumab (TCZ) in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA). We systematically searched all potential articles in the main databases, including PubMed, Scopus, EMBASE, Web of Sciences (ISI), and Cochrane Center. The search was subsequently updated in December 2020. The initial review and extraction of information were performed independently by two authors to collect the first author and publication year; sample size; mean age of the intervention and control groups; the dose of TCZ, and the follow-up duration. Outcomes of interest include the ACR20, ACR50, ACR70, total complication rate, and the occurrence of remission. Any disagreements between the reviewers were resolved by discussion and re-check of the article and consultation with a third reviewer. After reviewing and culling, 15 clinical trials comparing the clinical efficacy of TCZ and its comparators in the treatment of patients with RA entered the qualitative and quantitative synthesis. Tocilizumab 8 mg was statistically better than 4 mg or placebo for ACR responses. Significant clinical adverse events in patients with RA treated with TCZ, such as abnormal liver function tests (LFTs) and infections, were more frequent than in comparator groups. This systematic review and meta-analysis suggest that the combination therapy of TCZ with other drugs such as methotrexate and disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs has been studied for various clinical effects concerning safety and clinically significant adverse events. Although the data are promising, long-term performance and safety data need to be fully identified, as well as the risks and benefits of TCZ, especially appropriate timing, dosage, and regimen.

Real-World Dose Modification Patterns of Subcutaneous Tocilizumab Among Patients with Rheumatoid Arthritis

BACKGROUND

The treatment of rheumatoid arthritis is based on the use of disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs). Tocilizumab can be used as monotherapy or in combination with conventional synthetic DMARDs for the treatment of moderate-to-severe active rheumatoid arthritis. Subcutaneous (SC) and intravenous forms of the drug are available, but the SC form is more widely used.

OBJECTIVE

To understand the real-world dose modification patterns of SC tocilizumab in the treatment of patients with rheumatoid arthritis in the United States.

METHODS

Data were obtained from the Truven (now IBM) MarketScan and Optum Clinformatics databases. Patients were included if they had ≥1 pharmacy claims for SC tocilizumab and met other inclusion criteria. The mean, standard deviation, and median values were reported for the continuous variables, and frequency was reported for the categorical variables. Kaplan-Meier analysis was used to analyze the time to first dose modification. Logistic regression modeling was used to identify predictors of the likelihood of dose modification.

RESULTS

The study included 1266 patients in the Truven database and 512 patients in the Optum database who had commercial or Medicare Advantage or supplemental insurance. Of the patients who started treatment with biweekly SC tocilizumab (48% each in the Truven and Optum databases), 37% in Truven and 40% in Optum had dose escalation to a weekly dose. Of those who started weekly SC tocilizumab (43% in the Truven and 49% in the Optum databases), 3% (Truven) and 4% (Optum) had dose reduction. The remaining patients started alternative SC tocilizumab doses. Overall, 60% and 68% of patients in the Truven and Optum cohorts, respectively, initiated or escalated to the higher weekly dose of tocilizumab; the mean time to dose escalation was 126 days and 112 days, respectively. In the Truven cohort, corticosteroid use, age, and anemia were the main predictors for dose escalation. In the Optum cohort, female patients had increased odds of dose escalation compared with male patients.

CONCLUSION

The dosing trends observed in this study show that physicians have taken advantage of the option to increase SC tocilizumab dosing, but only a few providers chose to reduce the dose. This trend in dose modification may increase the costs related to SC tocilizumab therapy.

Budget impact analysis of sarilumab for the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis in patients with an inadequate response to conventional synthetic DMARD or TNF inhibitor therapies

Objective

To estimate the 5-year budget impact (BI) on a US health plan of introducing sarilumab – a human immunoglobulin G1 anti-IL-6 receptor α monoclonal antibody – as combination treatment with conventional synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (csDMARDs) or monotherapy in patients with moderate-to-severe rheumatoid arthritis (RA).

Methods

BI analysis was conducted from a commercial payer perspective. Treatment-eligible populations included adult patients with moderate-to-severe RA and inadequate response (IR) to csDMARDs or tumor necrosis factor (TNF)-α inhibitors-IR. All licensed biologic treatments recommended by the American College of Rheumatology guidelines were included.

Results

For a hypothetical plan of one million members, 409 csDMARD-IR and 345 TNF-IR patients were annually eligible for combination therapy and 226 csDMARD and TNF-IR patients for monotherapy with sarilumab. Based on 2018 US direct treatment costs, the introduction of sarilumab was estimated to save $526,424, $322,637 and $264,306 over 5 years for csDMARD-IR combination therapy patients, TNF-IR combination therapy patients, and csDMARD-IR/TNF-IR monotherapy patients, respectively. As sarilumab absorbed a greater market share over the horizon, annual savings increased from years 1 to 5, $28,610 (−0.14%) to $194,646 (−0.83%) in csDMARD-IR, $16,986 (−0.11%) to $120,893 (−0.67%) in TNF-IR, and $14,256 (−0.13%) to $98,040 (−0.79%) in monotherapy. One-way sensitivity analyses revealed that the model was most sensitive to variations in sarilumab adherence.

Conclusion

Total cost savings of introducing sarilumab to a health-care plan accrued from years 1 to 5, attributable to the lower treatment cost, stable dosing paradigm, and price parity for the two available doses (150 and 200 mg every 2 weeks) compared with alternative biologic DMARDs that have substantial variability in dose titration/schedules.

A Review of Recent Advances Using Tocilizumab in the Treatment of Rheumatic Diseases

Tocilizumab (TCZ) is the first humanized anti-interleukin-6 (IL-6) receptor monoclonal antibody approved for the treatment of patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA), Castleman's disease, polyarticular and systemic juvenile idiopathic arthritis, and, most recently, giant cell arteritis as well as for the treatment of chimeric antigen receptor T cell therapy-induced cytokine release syndrome. The global clinical development program for TCZ provides a wealth of clinical data on intravenous TCZ, and more recent studies in patients with RA have provided evidence characterizing the role of intravenous TCZ as monotherapy in early disease and led to the introduction of a subcutaneous formulation of TCZ. In addition, recently published open-label extension and observational studies continue to support the long-term efficacy and safety of TCZ in both clinical trial and real-world settings. Given the involvement of IL-6-mediated signaling in inflammatory disorders, TCZ is also being investigated in other immunological diseases. In particular, a phase 2 trial on the safety and efficacy of subcutaneous TCZ in adults with systemic sclerosis shows clinically relevant improvements in skin sclerosis and lung function in these patients. Another anti-IL-6 receptor agent, sarilumab, targeting the IL6 receptor alpha subunit, was recently approved for the treatment of patients with RA, although long-term data for this biologic are not yet published. In this article we review the placement of TCZ in current treatment guidelines; recent clinical trial data, including quality of life in patients with RA; recent updates to the TCZ safety profile; recent investigations of TCZ in other immunological diseases; and the clinical development of other novel IL-6-targeted agents.

Sarilumab: Review of a Second IL-6 Receptor Antagonist Indicated for the Treatment of Rheumatoid Arthritis

Major Objectives: To review the efficacy, safety, and economics of sarilumab, an interleukin-6 (IL-6) receptor antagonist, in the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis (RA). Data Sources: PubMed (1966 to January 2018), Clinicaltrials.gov (January 2018), and Scopus (1970 to January 2018) were searched using sarilumab, Kevzara, REGN88, and SAR153191. Study Selection and Data Extraction: Human studies published in peer-reviewed publications in English were the primary sources for efficacy and safety. Data Synthesis: Data from randomized, double-blind, controlled, published clinical studies weeks demonstrated statistically significantly higher American College of Rheumatology (ACR) 20, ACR50, and Disease Activity Score-28 (DAS28) remission response rates and improvements in DAS28 and Health Assessment Questionnaire–Disability Index scores for sarilumab monotherapy versus adalimumab monotherapy (P < 0.05) and for sarilumab versus placebo in patients receiving methotrexate or other conventional synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs); P < 0.05. The ACR20 and ACR50 response rates were, respectively, 56-72% and 35-46% for sarilumab, 58% and 30% for adalimumab, and 33-34% and 15-18% for placebo. DAS28 remission rates were 20-34% for sarilumab, 7% for adalimumab, and 7-10% for placebo. Sarilumab has a higher risk for neutropenia than tocilizumab, the other IL-6 inhibitor, but a lower risk for dyslipidemia, injection site reactions, and gastrointestinal perforation. The acquisition costs of sarilumab are expected to be similar to those of most other biologic DMARDs. Conclusion: Sarilumab is an alternative to biologic DMARDs or targeted synthetic DMARDs in patients with moderate to severely active RA who have not responded adequately to prior conventional synthetic DMARDs or tumor necrosis factor-α inhibitors.