Nocebos in rheumatology: emerging concepts and their implications for clinical practice

The challenge of pharmacotherapy for musculoskeletal pain: an overview of unmet needs

Musculoskeletal disorders are characterized by several impairments, including pain, affecting muscles, bones, joints and adjacent connective tissue, resulting in temporary or permanent functional limitations and disability. Musculoskeletal pain is particularly prevalent worldwide and greatly impacts the quality of life, social participation and economic burden. To date, several issues persist about the classification of musculoskeletal pain and its management strategies and resources. The treatment of musculoskeletal pain conditions is complex and often requires a multimodal approach, including pharmacological and non-pharmacological therapy that might be ineffective in many cases, resulting in poor patient satisfaction and controversial expectations about the potential benefits of available interventions. This manuscript provides an overview of unmet needs in managing musculoskeletal pain, particularly focusing on pharmacotherapeutic pitfalls in this context.

Nocebo-associated treatment discontinuation with subcutaneous anti-osteoporotic drugs. A systematic review and meta-analysis of placebo-arm dropouts in randomized-controlled trials

OBJECTIVE

Nocebo is a concept of therapeutics referring to unpleasant symptoms attributed by a patient to a drug, due to negative anticipation. Patients receiving oral anti-osteoporotic drugs in randomized controlled trials (RCT) can experience adverse events leading to dropout, implying that nocebo contributes to treatment discontinuation for these drugs. In this study we aim to investigate the nocebo effect of subcutaneous anti-osteoporotic drugs with a higher compliance rate than orally administered drugs.

STUDY DESIGN

We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, SCOPUS, and Cochrane databases for double-blind trials investigating subcutaneous anti-osteoporotic drugs for osteoporosis (namely, denosumab, teriparatide, abaloparatide and romosozumab) published up to May 2023.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE

Dropouts due to reported adverse events in the placebo arms ("nocebo dropouts").

RESULTS

Data from 17 trials were extracted. Among 10,529 placebo-treated patients the pooled nocebo-dropout percentage was 3 % for denosumab (average: 0.03; 95 % CI: 0.01-0.05), 1 % for romosozumab (average: 0.01; 95 % CI: 0.00-0.03) and 6 % for teriparatide and abaloparatide (average: 0.06; 95 % CI: 0.05-0.07). Nocebo-dropouts were significantly higher in men than women (6 % vs. 3 %, respectively, p = 0.012), in older (mean age >68 years) than in younger patients (5 % vs. 1 %, respectively, p = 0.017) and in those with more severe osteoporosis (based on the percentage of participants with prior fragility-related fractures in the study cohort) compared with patients with no prior fracture history (4 % vs. 1 %, respectively, p = 0.046).

CONCLUSION

Nocebo responses may contribute to treatment discontinuation with subcutaneous anti-osteoporotic drugs in clinical practice. Higher nocebo-related dropout rates in the higher-risk RCT population (older patients, males, those with prior fractures) show that nocebo mechanisms have the potential to hinder therapeutic efforts to specific populations who would benefit most. Prospero registration number CRD42020212843.

Anti-tumor necrosis factor α: originators versus biosimilars, comparison in clinical response assessment in a multicenter cohort of patients with inflammatory arthropathies

OBJECTIVE

To compare etanercept and adalimumab biosimilars (SB4 and ABP501) and respective bioriginators in terms of safety and efficacy in a real-life contest.

METHODS

We consequently enrolled patients affected by rheumatoid arthritis, psoriatic arthritis, and ankylosing spondylitis, treated with SB4, and ABP501, or with corresponding originators, belonging to the main biological prescribing centers in the Lazio region (Italy), from 2017 to 2020. Data were collected at recruitment and after 4, 8, 12, and 24 months of therapy.

RESULTS

The multicenter cohort was composed by 455 patients treated with biosimilars [SB4/ABP501 276/179; female/male 307/146; biologic disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drug (b-DMARD) naïve 56%, median age/ interquartile range 55/46-65 years] and 436 treated with originators (etanercept/adalimumab 186/259, female/ male 279/157, b-DMARD naïve 67,2%, median age/interquartile range 53/43-62 years). No differences were found about safety, but the biosimilar group presented more discontinuations due to inefficacy (p<0.001). Female gender, being a smoker, and being b-DMARD naïve were predictive factors of reduced drug survival (p=0.05, p=0.046, p=0.001 respectively). The retention rate at 24 months was 81.1% for bioriginators and 76.5% for biosimilars (median retention time of 20.7 and 18.9 months, respectively) (p=0.002). Patients with remission/low disease activity achievement at 4 months showed a cumulative survival of 90% to biosimilar therapy until 24 months (p=0.001); early adverse reactions instead represented a cause of subsequent drug discontinuation (p=0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Real-life data demonstrated a similar safety profile between biosimilars and originators, but a reduced biosimilar retention rate at 24 months. Biosimilars could be considered a valid, safe, and less expensive alternative to originators, allowing access to treatments for a wider patient population.

Placebo and nocebo in the treatment of migraine: How much does real world effectiveness depend on contextual effects?

PURPOSE

Treatments in medicine impact individuals beyond their intended effects, due to phenomena such as the placebo and nocebo effects. The placebo effect arises from the positive expectation of a treatment being beneficial, while the nocebo effect stems from the negative expectation of a treatment causing harm. Both in real-world practice and clinical trials, treatments can lead to outcomes unrelated to their intended mechanism of action, which we categorize as placebo and nocebo responses. These responses, combined with the inherent fluctuation in a condition's natural progression, regression to the mean, and random comorbidities, make up a significant part of the therapeutic experience. Particularly in pain management, placebo and nocebo effects play a substantial role. By addressing modifiable contextual factors such as patient expectations, lifestyle choices, and the therapeutic relationship, healthcare providers can enhance the effectiveness of migraine treatments, paving the way for a more comprehensive, individualized approach to patient care. We must also consider non-modifiable factors like personal experiences, beliefs, and information from social media and the internet.

CONCLUSION

This review offers a summary of our current understanding of the placebo and nocebo effects in migraine management.

The PROPER Study: A 48-Week, Pan-European, Real-World Study of Biosimilar SB5 Following Transition from Reference Adalimumab in Patients with Immune-Mediated Inflammatory Disease

BACKGROUND

The non-interventional PROPER study generated real-world evidence on clinical outcomes following transition in routine practice from reference adalimumab to the EMA-approved SB5 biosimilar adalimumab in patients with immune-mediated inflammatory disease.

METHODS

Adults with rheumatoid arthritis (RA), axial spondyloarthritis (axSpA), psoriatic arthritis (PsA), Crohn's disease (CD), or ulcerative colitis (UC) were enrolled at 63 sites across Europe. Eligible patients received ≥ 16 weeks of routine treatment with reference adalimumab before transitioning to SB5, and were followed for 48 weeks post-transition. The primary objective was to evaluate candidate predictors (clinically relevant baseline variables with incidence ≥ 15% by indication cohort) associated with persistence on SB5 at 48 weeks post-initiation. Key primary outcome measures were persistence on SB5 (estimated by Kaplan-Meier methodology) and clinical characteristics and disease activity scores at the time of transition to SB5 treatment (baseline).

RESULTS

A total of 955 eligible patients were enrolled (RA, n = 207; axSpA, n = 127; PsA, n = 162; CD, n = 447; UC, n = 12), of whom 932 (97.6%) completed follow-up and 722 (75.6%) were still receiving SB5 at week 48. Kaplan-Meier estimates (95% confidence interval, CI) of persistence on SB5 at week 48 for RA, axSpA, PsA, and CD were 0.86 (0.80-0.90), 0.80 (0.71-0.86), 0.81 (0.74-0.86), and 0.72 (0.67-0.76), respectively. The single candidate predictor associated with probability of SB5 discontinuation before week 48 was female sex [RA, axSpA, and CD cohorts; HR (95% CI): 3.53 (1.07-11.67), 2.38 (1.11-5.14), and 2.21 (1.54-3.18), respectively]. Disease activity scores remained largely unchanged throughout the study, with proportions by cohort in remission at baseline versus week 48 being 59.2% versus 57.2%, 81.0% versus 78.0%, 94.7% versus 93.7%, and 84.0% versus 85.1% for patients with RA, axSpA, PsA, and CD, respectively. Similarly, the SB5 dosing regimen remained unchanged for the majority of patients from baseline to week 48, the most common regimen being 40 mg every 2 weeks. In total, 232 patients (24.3%) reported at least one adverse drug reaction, and most events were mild; eight patients (3.9%) in the RA cohort experienced nine serious adverse events (SAEs; two possibly related to SB5); eight patients (4.9%) in the PsA cohort experienced nine SAEs (one possibly related to SB5); 22 patients (4.9%) in the CD cohort experienced 27 SAEs (four possibly related to SB5); and no SAEs were observed in the UC cohort.

CONCLUSIONS

With the exception of female sex in RA, axSpA, and CD, none of the candidate predictors were associated with SB5 discontinuation. Persistence on SB5 was high, treatment effectiveness was maintained, and no safety signals were detected.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT04089514.

[PHARAO study: drug treatment of inflammatory rheumatic diseases : Guideline-conform treatment with biologics follows availability of biosimilars]

BACKGROUND

With the introduction of tumor necrosis factor (TNF) alpha inhibitors, the treatment of inflammatory rheumatic diseases (IRD) has undergone a fundamental change. Several of the originally high-priced biologics are now accessible as lower cost biosimilars, removing a significant impediment to prescription.

OBJECTIVE

The present study investigated whether the availability of biosimilars is associated with an improvement in the care of IRD. Moreover, the subjective acceptance of biosimilars by physicians and patients was investigated and compared with objectifiable parameters.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Pseudonymized claims data of the Bavarian Association of Statutory Health Insurance Physicians from 2014 to 2019 as well as a paper and pencil survey of patients and rheumatologists formed the data basis of the study.

RESULTS

During the observation period, the proportion of diagnosed patients receiving drug therapy increased from 38.5% to 43.2%. Also, the care changed in terms of the prescribed agents. Conventional drug therapy declined overall and, in particular, glucocorticoid prescriptions decreased from 39.3% in 2014 to 34.3% in 2019. At the same time, the proportion of targeted treatments increased from 12.3% to 20.4%. The median duration of basic treatment before first-time bDMARD use dropped from 3.15 years in 2014 to 2.17 years in 2019.

CONCLUSION

Over the observation period, in which three biosimilars entered the market, the care of patients with IRD improved both quantitatively and qualitatively. The market share of biosimilars increased in parallel with this development. With an overall high acceptance of biosimilars, the assessment of the disease course by physicians and patients indicates a slight subjectively perceived advantage of therapy with originals compared to biosimilars, which, however, is not confirmed when standardized scores are applied. A possible explanation for this might be a nocebo effect, which could be minimized by suitable communication strategies.

Amplified gut feelings under inflammation and depressed mood: A randomized fMRI trial on interoceptive pain in healthy volunteers

BACKGROUND

Inflammation and depressed mood constitute clinically relevant vulnerability factors for enhanced interoceptive sensitivity and chronic visceral pain, but their putative interaction remains untested in human mechanistic studies. We tested interaction effects of acute systemic inflammation and sad mood on the expectation and experience of visceral pain by combining experimental endotoxemia with a mood induction paradigm.

METHODS

The double-blind, placebo-controlled, balanced crossover fMRI-trial in N=39 healthy male and female volunteers involved 2 study days with either intravenous administration of low-dose lipopolysaccharide (LPS, 0.4ng/kg body weight; inflammation condition) or saline (placebo condition). On each study, day two scanning sessions were conducted in an experimentally induced negative (i.e., sad) and in a neutral mood state, accomplished in balanced order. As a model of visceral pain, rectal distensions were implemented, which were initially calibrated to be moderately painful. In all sessions, an identical series of visceral pain stimuli was accomplished, signaled by predictive visual conditioning cues to assess pain anticipation. We assessed neural activation during the expectation and experience of visceral pain, along with unpleasantness ratings in a condition combining an inflammatory state with sad mood and in control conditions. All statistical analyses were accomplished using sex as covariate.

RESULTS

LPS administration led to an acute systemic inflammatory response (inflammation X time interaction effects for TNF-α, IL-6, and sickness symptoms, all p<.001). The mood paradigm effectively induced distinct mood states (mood X time interaction, p<.001), with greater sadness in the negative mood conditions (both p<.001) but no difference between LPS and saline conditions. Significant main and interaction effects of inflammation and negative mood were observed for pain unpleasantness (all p<.05). During cued pain anticipation, a significant inflammation X mood interaction emerged for activation of the bilateral caudate nucleus and right hippocampus (all p_FWE<.05). Main effects of both inflammation and mood were observed in multiple regions, including insula, midcingulate cortex, prefrontal gyri, and hippocampus for inflammation, and midcingulate, caudate, and thalamus for mood (all p_FWE<0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

Results support an interplay of inflammation and sad mood on striatal and hippocampal circuitry engaged during visceral pain anticipation as well as on pain experience. This may reflect a nocebo mechanism, which may contribute to altered perception and interpretation of bodily signals. At the interface of affective neuroscience and the gut-brain axis, concurrent inflammation and negative mood may be vulnerability factors for chronic visceral pain.

Outcomes Following Adalimumab Bio-originator to Biosimilar Switch-A Comparison Using Real-world Patient- and Physician-Reported Data in European Countries

INTRODUCTION

The aim of this work is to compare real-world outcomes of patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) receiving adalimumab (ADA) bio-originator (non-switchers) to those who had switched from ADA bio-originator to an ADA biosimilar (switchers) on the basis of the hypothesis that these outcomes would differ.

METHODS

Data were drawn from the Adelphi RA Disease Specific Programme™, a point-in-time survey of physicians and their patients in Europe (France, Germany, Italy, Spain, UK) in 2020. Physicians completed a questionnaire for their next ten adult patients with RA, followed by four additional patients who had switched from ADA bio-originator to an ADA biosimilar (switchers). Physician- and patient-reported outcomes (PROs) for switchers and non-switchers were compared by propensity score matching.

RESULTS

Three hundred and three rheumatologists provided data for 160 non-switchers and 225 switchers, 140 patients provided data; 51 non-switchers, 89 switchers. According to physician-reported disease activity, non-switchers were more likely to improve on their current ADA treatment than switchers (68%, n = 108 vs. 26%, n = 59 p < 0.001) and less likely to worsen (1%, n = 2 vs. 9%, n = 20; p < 0.01). Physician-reported patient adherence was significantly lower amongst switchers versus non-switchers (0.66 vs. 0.78, respectively; p = 0.04). More non-switchers than switchers were reported by their physicians to be consistent in taking their RA medicine (p < 0.001). Compared with non-switchers, PRO measures indicated quality of life was worse (EQ-5D Visual Analogue Scale: 62.9 vs. 71.9; p < 0.001) and activity impairment was greater (Work Productivity Activity Index: 31.0 vs. 24.4; p = 0.02) for switchers, with trends for poorer health status and greater pain.

CONCLUSIONS

Non-medical switching in RA treatment may lead to unforeseen outcomes that should be considered by health decision-makers.

Real-world experience of rituximab biosimilar GP2013 in rheumatoid arthritis patients naïve to or switched from reference rituximab

Randomized controlled trials showed high comparability of biosimilar rituximab (bs-RTX) GP2013 to biologic originator RTX (bo-RTX). Data on effectiveness of switching from bo-RTX to bs-RTX, starting therapy with bs-RTX, and bs-RTX drug survival in real-world setting are sparse. To explore long-term drug effectiveness and survival of bs-RTX GP2013 in rheumatoid arthritis (RA) patients both naïve to and mandatory switched from bo-RTX, and to clarify reasons for treatment cessation. Retrospective observational cohort study including RA outpatient clinic patients treated with bs-RTX between 2018 and 2021 in Norway. Patients were examined and monitored using recommended measures for disease activity and patient-reported outcomes (PROs). For description of population medians and interquartile range were used. Difference between observation times was assessed with Signed-Rank test, drug survival with Kaplan-Meier survival analysis. Reasons for discontinuation were ascertained. Among 110 patients, at baseline, 88 were mandatory switched from bo-RTX and 22 were RTX-naïve. During 2-year follow-up, disease activity and PROs measures remained stable in switchers subgroup and improved in subgroup starting bs-RTX for the first time. Overall drug survival was 80.0% after 1 year and 57.7% after 2 years and was significantly higher in bs-RTX-switched than in bs-RTX-naïve patients (p = 0.036). Two most frequently reported reasons for drug discontinuation were remission (38.6%) and doctor's decision (27.1%). RA patients treated with bs-RTX had satisfactory treatment response and drug retention rates which supports equivalence of bs-RTX GP2013 to bo-RTX, both in patients naïve to and mandatory switched from bo-RTX.

Meta-analysis of placebo-arm dropouts in osteoporosis randomized-controlled trials and implications for nocebo-associated discontinuation of anti-osteoporotic drugs in clinical practice

Dropout from placebo arms in randomized-controlled trials is a surrogate for nocebo responses, resulting from patients' negative expectations to treatment. Among 16,460 placebo-treated patients in oral anti-osteoporotic drug trials, nocebo dropouts were 8% on average, being higher in older patients. This implies that nocebo may contribute to the osteoporosis treatment gap in clinical practice.

PURPOSE

Osteoporosis is a common disease requiring long-term treatment. Despite the availability of effective anti-osteoporotic drugs, adherence to treatment is low. Nocebo, a behavior mostly related to the negative expectations to a certain treatment, decreases adherence and negatively affects treatment outcomes and health-related care costs in chronic diseases. Since in double-blind placebo-controlled randomized trials any unfavorable outcome leading to discontinuation in placebo arms is considered as nocebo, we aimed to investigate the size of nocebo response in patients participating in osteoporosis trials.

METHODS

We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, SCOPUS, and Cochrane databases for dropouts due to reported adverse events in the placebo arms (nocebo dropouts) in all double-blind trials investigating anti-osteoporotic drugs published between January 1993 and March 2022. Only data on bisphosphonates and selective estrogen receptor modulators (SERMs) were analyzed (Prospero registration number CRD42020212843).

RESULTS

Data from 44 trials were extracted. In 16,460 placebo-treated patients, the pooled nocebo-dropout was 8% both for bisphosphonates (average: 0.08; range 0.01-0.27; 95%CI 0.06-0.10) and SERMs (average: 0.08; range 0.03-0.15; 95%CI 0.05-0.13). Nocebo-dropouts were higher in bisphosphonate trials enrolling individuals ≥ 65 years (11%) (n = 18) compared to trials enrolling younger individuals (6%) (n = 18) (average: 0.11; 95%CI 0.08-0.13 vs. average: 0.06; 95%CI 0.05-0.08, respectively, p = 0.001). Participants' sex, dosing-intervals, publication year, or severity of osteoporosis had no impact on the nocebo-dropouts.

CONCLUSION

Almost 1 in 10 osteoporosis patients receiving placebo in trials of bisphosphonates and SERMs experiences AEs leading to dropout, implying that nocebo contributes to treatment-discontinuation in clinical practice. Efforts to identify and minimize nocebo, especially in older patients, are warranted.

Placebo and nocebo responses in randomized controlled trials of non-tumor necrosis factor biologics and Janus kinase inhibitors in patients with active rheumatoid arthritis showing insufficient response to tumor necrosis factor inhibitors: A meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

This study evaluated the frequency and magnitude of placebo and nocebo responses in placebo-controlled RCTs of non-tumor necrosis factor (TNF) biologics and Janus kinase (JAK) inhibitors in rheumatoid arthritis (RA) patients with insufficient response to TNF inhibitors.

METHODS

A meta-analysis on rates of placebo response, adverse effects (AEs), severe AEs (SAEs), and withdrawal due to AEs in placebo-controlled RCTs of non-TNF biologics and JAK inhibitors in patients with RA and an insufficient response to TNF inhibitors was conducted.

RESULTS

In 9 RCTs containing 3442 patients the pooled incidence of ACR20 response rate in placebo-treated patients was 22.1 (95% CI 16.4-29.1%) and 27.9% (95% CI 24.5-31.6%) in RCTs of non-TNF and JAK inhibitors, respectively. Strong negative correlation was observed between ACR20 response and AE rates in the placebo arm, indicating that the greater the placebo response, the weaker the nocebo response (r = -0.762, P = 0.017). Strong positive correlation was observed between ACR20 response in the placebo and active comparator arms, indicating that the greater the placebo response, the greater the treatment response (r = 0.737, P = 0.003). The pooled estimate in placebo-treated patients with ≥1 AE was 71.8 (95% CI 57.4-82.7%) and 58.7% (95% CI 52.8-64.3%) in RCTs of non-TNF and JAK inhibitors, respectively. The pooled estimate in placebo-treated patients withdrawing due to an AE was 3.8 (95% CI 2.7-5.3%) and 4.0% (95% CI 2.7-6.0%) in RCTs of non-TNF and JAK inhibitors, respectively. Strong positive correlation was observed between AE rates in the placebo and active arms, indicating that the greater the nocebo response, the stronger the AE rate in the active arm (r = 0.855, P = 0.003).

CONCLUSION

There were higher placebo and less nocebo effects of JAK vs. non-TNF inhibitors in RA patients with an insufficient response to TNF inhibitors, and the greater the placebo response, the weaker the nocebo response and the greater the efficacy.

Real-world evidence of the use of the infliximab biosimilar SB2: data from the PERFUSE study

Objective

PERFUSE is a non-interventional study of 1233 adult patients (rheumatology, n = 496; IBD, n = 737) receiving routine infliximab (IFX) biosimilar SB2 therapy. The aim of this report was to investigate the 12-month persistence, effectiveness and safety outcomes of routine SB2 treatment in patients with chronic inflammatory rheumatic disease.

Methods

Patients with a diagnosis of RA, PsA or axial spondyloarthritis (axSpA) were assigned to one of three study cohorts according to whether SB2 treatment initiated after September 2017 had been the first IFX treatment (IFX naïve) or followed transition from reference IFX (IFX ref) or another IFX biosimilar (IFX bs). Outcomes to month 12 (±2) included persistence (primary outcome), SB2 dose, disease status, immunogenicity and safety.

Results

At month 12, persistence on SB2 in IFX-naïve, IFX ref and IFX bs cohorts, respectively, [mean percentage (95% CI)] by indication was as follows: 59% (36.1, 76.2), 75% (57.5, 86.1) and 85% (69.6, 93.0) for RA (n = 98); 64% (34.3, 83.3), 87% (65.6, 95.7) and 83% (60.0, 93.1) for PsA (n = 62); and 56% (44.4, 66.5), 80% (70.8, 86.1) and 80% (72.5, 85.6) for axSpA (n = 336). Disease activity was comparable at baseline and month 12 within the IFX ref and bs subgroups of all cohorts by indication. No immunogenicity concerns or new safety signals were detected.

Conclusion

SB2 was safe and effective in IFX-naïve patients and in patients transitioned from prior IFX ref or bs.

Trial registration

clinicaltrials.gov, NCT03662919.

Nocebo response intensity and influencing factors in the randomized clinical trials of irritable bowel syndrome: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Objective

To estimate the magnitude of the nocebo response and explore its influencing factors in irritable bowel syndrome (IBS).

Methods

The PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library databases were searched up to March 2021. We performed a random effects meta-analysis of the proportion of adverse events (AEs) in placebo-treated patients with IBS who are involved in parallel-designed, randomized, placebo-controlled trials investigating pharmacological interventions and evaluated the effect of trial characteristics on the magnitude of the nocebo response rate.

Results

A total of 6,107 studies were identified from the databases. After evaluation, 53 met the eligibility criteria and were included. The overall pooled nocebo response rate was 32% (95% CI: 26-38%). The most commonly reported AEs were headache (9%), nasopharyngitis (7%), abdominal pain (4%), and nausea (4%). The nocebo response rate was low compared with that in the treatment group applying probiotics, antispasmodics, and Traditional Chinese medicine, but high compared with that in antibiotic treatment group. The nocebo rate in patients using diaries to record AEs was lower than the average, and was higher in patients recording through checkup.

Discussion

Patients with IBS have significant nocebo response intensity in clinical trials. Based on findings in this study, we recommend the researchers pay attention to the common AEs and carefully analyze the relation to the intervention.

The Non-medical Switch from Reference Adalimumab to Biosimilar Adalimumab is Highly Successful in a Large Cohort of Patients with Stable Inflammatory Rheumatic Joint Diseases: A Real-Life Observational Study

Introduction

The adalimumab biosimilar (ADAbio) Amgevita® has a similar efficacy and safety profile as the adalimumab reference (ADA) Humira®. We studied the clinical consequences of a non-medical switch from ADA to ADAbio in adult patients with mainly established rheumatoid arthritis (RA), psoriatic arthritis (PsA), and spondyloarthritis (SpA).

Methods

Patients that received treatment with ADA for at least three months were switched to ADAbio. Data was collected retrospectively from 1 year before the switch up to 6 months after.

Results

A total of 603 patients were switched from ADA to ADAbio (switch group). During a 1-year follow-up, over 93% of all patients underwent a successful transition in terms of disease activity and safety from ADA to biosimilar, supporting the bioequivalence of both drugs in patients with stable inflammatory rheumatic joint diseases. Forty patients (6.6%) switched back to ADA (re-switch group). There were no objective changes in disease activity score in 28 joints using C-reactive protein (DAS28-CRP), or adverse effects before and after the switch between both groups.

Conclusions

In line with earlier reports, the transition to ADAbio went successful in the majority of patients with stable inflammatory rheumatic joint diseases. Patient-reported symptoms without objective signs that indicate a flare of disease activity after the switch to ADAbio are probably explained by nocebo effects. A pre-emptive approach to counteract nocebo effects and stimulate placebo response may have a positive impact on health outcomes for patients and preserve the economic benefits of cost savings that can be achieved by prescribing a biosimilar instead of the reference drug.

The second decade of anti-TNF-a therapy in clinical practice: new lessons and future directions in the COVID-19 era

Since the late 1990s, tumor necrosis factor alpha (TNF-α) inhibitors (anti-TNFs) have revolutionized the therapy of immune-mediated inflammatory diseases (IMIDs) affecting the gut, joints, skin and eyes. Although the therapeutic armamentarium in IMIDs is being constantly expanded, anti-TNFs remain the cornerstone of their treatment. During the second decade of their application in clinical practice, a large body of additional knowledge has accumulated regarding various aspects of anti-TNF-α therapy, whereas new indications have been added. Recent experimental studies have shown that anti-TNFs exert their beneficial effects not only by restoring aberrant TNF-mediated immune mechanisms, but also by de-activating pathogenic fibroblast-like mesenchymal cells. Real-world data on millions of patients further confirmed the remarkable efficacy of anti-TNFs. It is now clear that anti-TNFs alter the physical course of inflammatory arthritis and inflammatory bowel disease, leading to inhibition of local and systemic bone loss and to a decline in the number of surgeries for disease-related complications, while anti-TNFs improve morbidity and mortality, acting beneficially also on cardiovascular comorbidities. On the other hand, no new safety signals emerged, whereas anti-TNF-α safety in pregnancy and amid the COVID-19 pandemic was confirmed. The use of biosimilars was associated with cost reductions making anti-TNFs more widely available. Moreover, the current implementation of the “treat-to-target” approach and treatment de-escalation strategies of IMIDs were based on anti-TNFs. An intensive search to discover biomarkers to optimize response to anti-TNF-α treatment is currently ongoing. Finally, selective targeting of TNF-α receptors, new forms of anti-TNFs and combinations with other agents, are being tested in clinical trials and will probably expand the spectrum of TNF-α inhibition as a therapeutic strategy for IMIDs.

Unraveling Negative Expectations and Nocebo-Related Effects in Musculoskeletal Pain

This Perspective adapts the ViolEx Model, a framework validated in several clinical conditions, to better understand the role of expectations in the recovery and/or maintenance of musculoskeletal (MSK) pain. Here, particular attention is given to the condition in which dysfunctional expectations are maintained despite no longer being supported by confirmatory evidence (i.e., belief-lifting the arm leads to permanent tendon damage; evidence-after the patient lifts the arm no tendon damage occurs). While the ViolEx Model suggests that cognitive immunization strategies are responsible for the maintenance of dysfunctional expectations, we suggest that such phenomenon can also be understood from a Bayesian Brain perspective, according to which the level of precision of the priors (i.e., expectations) is the determinant factor accounting for the extent of priors' updating (i.e., we merge the two frameworks, suggesting that highly precise prior can lead to cognitive immunization responses). Importantly, this Perspective translates the theory behind these two frameworks into clinical suggestions. Precisely, it is argued that different strategies should be implemented when treating MSK pain patients, depending on the nature of their expectations (i.e., positive or negative and the level of their precision).

Influence of information provided prior to switching from Humira to biosimilar adalimumab on UK patients' satisfaction: a cross-sectional survey by patient organisations

OBJECTIVES

To investigate the perceptions and experiences of people with specific immune-mediated inflammatory diseases during the process of switching from Humira to biosimilar adalimumab.

DESIGN

Cross-sectional survey.

SETTING

An anonymised, self-administered, web-based survey.

PARTICIPANTS

The participants were drawn from members and non-members of either the National Rheumatoid Arthritis Society, the National Axial Spondyloarthritis Society, Crohn's and Colitis UK, or Psoriasis Association. Birdshot Uveitis Society and Olivia's Vision also signposted to the survey links.

RESULTS

A total of 899 people living with various immune mediated inflammatory diseases participated in this survey. Thirty-four per cent of respondents reported poor overall satisfaction with their biosimilar adalimumab after the switch, associated with complaints related to the switching process including lack of shared decision making, scarcity of information provided by or signposted to by the department instigating the switch as well as lack of training with the new injection device. Where training with the new device had been provided, there were significantly reduced reports of pain when injecting the new biosimilar (OR 0.20, 95% CI 0.07 to 0.55), side effects (OR 0.17, 95% CI 0.06 to 0.47) and difficulty in using the new injection device (OR 0.25, 95% CI 0.15 to 0.41). Self-reported side effects were reduced by (OR 0.13, 95% CI 0.05 to 0.38) when written information was provided by healthcare professionals and by (OR 0.15, 95% CI 0.05 to 0.42) with provision of verbal information. Difficulty in using the new injection device was also reduced by provision of satisfactory information such as written documents (OR 0.38, 95% CI 0.23 to 0.63) or by verbal communication with healthcare professionals (OR 0.45, 95% CI 0.27 to 0.73). Finally, provision of satisfactory written or verbal information was associated with a reduction in any negative perception regarding symptom control with the new biosimilar by (OR 0.05, 95% CI 0.004 to 0.57) and by (OR 0.15, 95% CI 0.03 to 0.84), respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Patient reported experiences of the process of switching from originator to biosimilar emphasise the importance of clear communication, training and information in order to optimise perception and maximise achievable outcomes with the new treatment.

Perceptions About Biosimilar Medicines Among Belgian Patients in the Ambulatory Care

Background and objectives: Biosimilar medicines have been on the European market for 15 years. Despite the extensive and positive experience with biosimilars across Europe, their uptake remains limited in Belgium. One of the possible factors limiting uptake in clinical practice is the inadequate understanding and lack of trust in biosimilars among patients. This study aimed to assess the level of knowledge and perceptions about biosimilar medicines among Belgian patients in the ambulatory care.

Methods: This study consisted of online questionnaires among Belgian patients in the ambulatory care (i.e., rheumatoid arthritis, ankylosing spondylitis, psoriatic arthritis, plaque psoriasis, Crohn’s disease, ulcerative colitis, diabetes mellitus type I and II). The results were collected between December 2020 and February 2021. The data were analyzed with descriptive and inferential statistics.

Results: In total, 657 patients across all disease areas of interest participated in this study. Only 38% of patients had heard of biosimilars before. Of those patients, most (58%) were aware that biosimilars are as safe and effective as their reference product. The vast majority of respondents (68%) would agree with transitioning to a biosimilar if their physician prescribed it, only 3% would never agree with a transition to a biosimilar. If a physician would propose to change their current originator biological therapy with its biosimilar, nearly all patients (95%) want their physician to explain the decision and inform them. For additional information about biosimilars, Belgian patients prefer brochures or folders (41%), or available resources on the internet (35%). Physicians were indicated as the preferred source of information (95%), followed by pharmacists (51%), academia (39%), and patient associations (35%). Most patients require information regarding the safety and efficacy (78%), price and reimbursement (64%), and the clinical development process (56%) of the biosimilar.

Conclusion: Belgian patients require information about biosimilar medicines. However, most patients are open and positive towards transitioning their current biological therapy with its biosimilar if sufficiently supported by their healthcare providers.

The placebo and nocebo effects in functional urology

A placebo is an inert substance normally used in clinical trials for comparison with an active substance. However, a placebo has been shown to have an effect on its own; commonly known as the placebo effect. A placebo is an essential component in the design of conclusive clinical trials but has itself become the focus of intense research. The placebo effect is partly the result of positive expectations of the recipient on the state of health. Conversely, a nocebo effect is when negative expectations from a substance lead to poor treatment outcomes and/or adverse events. Randomized controlled trials in functional urology have demonstrated the importance of the placebo and nocebo effects across different diseases such as overactive bladder, urinary incontinence, lower urinary tract symptoms and interstitial cystitis/painful bladder syndrome, as well as male and female sexual dysfunction. Understanding the true nature of the placebo-nocebo complex and the scope of its effect in functional urology could help urologists to maximize the positive effects of this phenomenon while minimizing its potentially negative effects.

Patients Retransitioning from Biosimilar TNFα Inhibitor to the Corresponding Originator After Initial Transitioning to the Biosimilar: A Systematic Review

Background

Transitioning patients from an originator to a corresponding biosimilar has been extensively studied in both randomized controlled trials and observational studies. Although transitioning is considered well-tolerated, with no negative impacts on efficacy and/or safety, 2.6–25.8% of patients restart treatment with the originator (retransitioning). Retransitioning to the originator can be considered an indication of biosimilar treatment failure or dissatisfaction with biosimilar treatment. Increasing our knowledge of patients who retransition might help to reduce the number of patients retransitioning.

Objective

Our objective was to estimate the cumulative incidence of patients who retransitioned from a tumor necrosis factor (TNF)-α inhibitor biosimilar to originator and to explore potential patient, disease, and treatment and implementation strategy factors associated with retransitioning.

Method

We conducted a systematic literature search in the PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane Central Register of controlled trials databases until March 2021. Studies on TNFα inhibitors, biosimilar transitioning, and retransitioning were included. Transitioning was defined as switching from an originator to a biosimilar, and retransitioning was defined as switching from an originator to a biosimilar and back to the originator. Characteristics of the studies were descriptively analyzed. Studies were weighted by the number of patients transitioning, and the primary outcome was the median cumulative incidence of retransitioning. For each of the factors related to patient, disease, and treatment and implementation strategy, studies were stratified according to the categories of that factor. The weighted medians and interquartile ranges (IQRs) of the cumulative incidence of retransitioning in these studies were calculated and compared to explore whether a potential association existed between these factors and the cumulative incidence of retransitioning.

Results

Of 994 screened publications, 37 were included. The weighted median cumulative incidence of retransitioning was 7.6% (IQR 6.8–17.2). Studies that included only patients with inflammatory bowel disease (6.6 vs. 15.1–17.7% for other indications), included only patients with stable disease (7.0 vs. 13.7% for including all patients), and did not offer retransitioning at the introduction of the biosimilar (7.0 vs. 11.1% for studies that offered retransitioning) reported less retransitioning. In addition, the incidence of retransitioning was lower when extra laboratory monitoring was part of the implementation strategy (1.6 vs. 6.1%) and when gainsharing (patients’ healthcare directly benefits from financial savings from transitioning) (1.4 vs. 7.2% for studies without gainsharing) was applied.

Conclusions

In studies on transitioning patients from TNFα originator to biosimilar, 8% of patients retransitioned. Retransitioning appeared to be lower in studies that included only patients with stable disease and in studies that did not offer patients the option of retransitioning at the introduction of the biosimilar. In addition, retransitioning appeared to be lower in studies that implemented extra laboratory monitoring as part of the biosimilar implementation strategy. Clinicians should consider implementing these suggestions as they might reduce retransitioning rates and improve the introduction of biosimilars in clinical practice.

PROSPERO registration ID: CRD42021226381

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s40259-021-00508-4.

COVID-19 vaccine safety and nocebo-prone associated hesitancy in patients with systemic rheumatic diseases: a cross-sectional study

Objective

To describe the rate and type of adverse effects (AEs) and the frequency of disease flares after COVID-19 vaccination and to assess the reasons for vaccination hesitancy (non-vaccination) in SRD patients.

Methods

Telephone interviews were conducted of SRD patients consecutively enrolled (15/06/2021–1/7/2021). Participants were asked about the type of AEs and disease flare after vaccination. Reasons for vaccination hesitancy were recorded. Univariate and mutivariable analyses examined associations of demographic, clinical and other features, with occurrence of AEs, disease flare and non-vaccination. For the latter, association with negative vaccination behaviour (not influenza vaccinated for the last 2 years) and nocebo-prone behaviour (denoting AEs attributed to negative expectations [Q-No questionnaire]) was also tested.

Results

561 out of 580 contacted patients were included in the study. 441/561 (78.6%) patients were vaccinated [90% (Pfizer, Moderna), 10% (Astra-Zeneca)]. AEs were reported by 148/441 (33.6%), with rates being comparable between the three vaccines. AEs were more common in females and those with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease [OR, 95% CI; females: 2.23 (1.30–3.83); COPD: 3.31 (1.24–8.83)]. Disease flare was reported in 9/441 (2%) patients. For those unvaccinated, fear that the vaccine would be harmful (53.3%), could cause disease flare (24.2%) and/or could cause thrombosis (21.7%) were the main reasons to do so. Multivariable analysis identified as independent variables for non-vaccination: nocebo-prone behaviour (OR; 95% CI, 3.88; 1.76–8.55), negative vaccination behaviour (6.56; 3.21–13.42) and previous COVID-19 infection (2.83; 1.13–7.05). Higher educational status was protective (0.49; 0.26–0.92).

Conclusion

No new safety signals for COVID-19 vaccination were observed. Vaccination campaign should target SRD patients with nocebo-prone and negative influenza vaccination behaviour.

Adverse events of active and placebo groups in SARS-CoV-2 vaccine randomized trials: A systematic review

Background

For safety assessment in clinical trials, adverse events (AEs) are reported for the drug under evaluation and compared with AEs in the placebo group. Little is known about the nature of the AEs associated with clinical trials of SARS-CoV-2 vaccines and the extent to which these can be traced to nocebo effects, where negative treatment-related expectations favor their occurrence.

Methods

In our systematic review, we compared the rates of solicited AEs in the active and placebo groups of SARS-CoV-2 vaccines approved by the Western pharmaceutical regulatory agencies.We implemented a search strategy to identify trial-III studies of SARS-CoV-2 vaccines through the PubMed database. We adopted the PRISMA Statement to perform the study selection and the data collection and identified three trial: two mRNA-based (37590 participants) and one adenovirus type (6736 participants).

Findings

Relative risks showed that the occurrence of AEs reported in the vaccine groups was higher compared with the placebo groups. The most frequently AEs in both groups were fatigue, headache, local pain, as injection site reactions, and myalgia. In particular, for first doses in placebo recipients, fatigue was reported in 29% and 27% in BNT162b2 and mRNA-1273 groups, respectively, and in 21% of Ad26.COV2.S participants. Headache was reported in 27% in both mRNA groups and in 24% of Ad26.COV2.S recipients. Myalgia was reported in 10% and 14% in mRNA groups (BNT162b2 and mRNA-1273, respectively) and in 13% of Ad26.COV2.S participants. Local pain was reported in 12% and 17% in mRNA groups (BNT162b2 and mRNA-1273, respectively), and in 17% of Ad26.COV2.S recipients. These AEs are more common in the younger population and in the first dose of placebo recipients of the mRNA vaccines.

Interpretation

Our results are in agreement with the expectancy theory of nocebo effects and suggest that the AEs associated with COVID-19 vaccines may be related to the nocebo effect.

Funding

Fondazione CRT - Cassa di Risparmio di Torino, IT (grant number 66346, "GAIA-MENTE" 2019).

Nocebo-Prone Behavior Associated with SARS-CoV-2 Vaccine Hesitancy in Healthcare Workers

Among healthcare workers (HCWs), SARS-CoV-2 vaccine hesitancy may be linked to a higher susceptibility to nocebo effects, i.e., adverse events (AEs) experienced after medical treatments due to negative expectations. To investigate this hypothesis a cross-sectional survey was performed with a self-completed questionnaire that included a tool (Q-No) for the identification of nocebo-prone individuals. A total of 1309 HCWs (67.2% women; 43.4% physicians; 28.4% nurses; 11.5% administrative staff; 16.6% other personnel) completed the questionnaires, among whom 237 (18.1%) had declined vaccination. Q-No scores were ≥15 in 325 participants (24.8%) suggesting nocebo-prone behavior. In a multivariate logistic regression model with Q-No score, age, gender, and occupation as independent variables, estimated odds ratios (ORs) of vaccination were 0.43 (i.e., less likely, p < 0.001) in participants with Q-No score ≥ 15 vs. Q-No score < 15, 0.58 in females vs. males (p = 0.013), and 4.7 (i.e., more likely) in physicians vs. other HCWs (p < 0.001), independent of age, which was not significantly associated with OR of vaccination. At least one adverse effect (AE) was reported by 67.5% of vaccinees, mostly local pain and flu-like symptoms. In a multivariate logistic regression model, with Q-No score, age, gender, and occupation as independent variables, estimated ORs of AE reporting were 2.0 in females vs. males (p < 0.001) and 1.47 in physicians vs. other HCWs (p = 0.017) independently of age and Q-No score, which were not significantly associated with OR of AE. These findings suggest that nocebo-prone behavior in HCWs is associated with SARS-CoV-2 vaccination hesitancy indicating a potential benefit of a campaign focused on nocebo-prone people.

Multidisciplinary team intervention to reduce the nocebo effect when switching from the originator infliximab to a biosimilar

Objectives

To evaluate an intervention to reduce the nocebo effect (NE) when switching from the originator infliximab (OI) to the infliximab biosimilar SB2 in chronic inflammatory rheumatic disease (CIRD).

Methods

An intervention was built with healthcare professionals (HPs) and a patient representative, based on a systematic review of interventions reducing the NE in musculoskeletal diseases and semi-directed questioning of five patients. Our strategy consisted of training HPs, switch information given by the nurses, a consistent vocabulary. All CIRD patients switched from OI to SB2 were included for the intervention. The primary outcome was the SB2 retention rate (RR) at 34 weeks. Secondary outcomes were the SB2 RR at 12 months, discontinuation rates due to a possible NE and comparison with a historical cohort of CIRD patients receiving the OI and 6 published European cohorts.

Results

45 patients were included from March 2018 (rheumatoid arthritis, n=17, spondylarthritis, n=28). After 34 weeks, the SB2 RR was 91.2%, similar to the historical cohort RR (p=0.41) but higher than the 3 European cohort RRs (p<0.05). At 12 months, the SB2 RR was 84.5% vs 88.4% for the historical cohort (p=0.52). SB2 discontinuation due to a possible NE was 6.6% after 12 months.

Conclusions

A tailored communication with a prominent role of nurses reduced the NE in non-medical switches from the OI to SB2 as compared to published results. The RR was similar to the historical cohort RR. The methodology used to construct this intervention may help improve the outcomes of switches with upcoming biosimilars.

Treatment journey in rheumatoid arthritis with biosimilars: from better access to good disease control through cost savings and prevention of nocebo effects

Early diagnosis and treatment of rheumatoid arthritis (RA) are of critical importance to halt the progression of the disease. Optimal use of advanced imaging techniques or biomarkers may facilitate early diagnosis of RA. Even though many disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs (DMARDs) are available for RA treatment, biological DMARDs (bDMARDs) offer expanding therapeutic options and good outcomes in patients with RA who do not have a sufficient response to conventional synthetic DMARDs. However, high costs of bDMARDs have limited patient access to optimised disease management and increased the cost burden for healthcare systems. The advent of biosimilars led to significant cost savings driven by price competition among the reference products, which could be beneficial for healthcare systems. Healthcare provider (HCP)–patient communication and informed shared decision-making are crucial to prevent the occurrence of a nocebo effect, which results from negative perceptions that patients may have and could lead to less effective outcomes. Research has demonstrated that effective communication between HCPs and patients utilising positive framing can improve acceptance by patients to be initiated on or switched to a biosimilar and can help to integrate biosimilars into routine clinical practice to maximise benefits for patients with RA.

The response to TNF blockers depending on their comparator in rheumatoid arthritis clinical trials: the lessebo effect, a meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

To compare the effect of the biological reference agents (infliximab, etanercept, adalimumab) in rheumatoid arthritis (RA) in pivotal superiority placebo-controlled trials (reference agent vs placebo) vs their effect in equivalence active comparator-controlled trials (reference agent vs biosimilar).

METHODS

The PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane, databases were searched for randomized, double-blind, controlled trials up to March 2020 comparing a biological reference agent vs placebo or biosimilar. The study assessed the American College of Rheumatology (ACR) 20/50/70 responses of the reference agent in these groups (Reference-pbo and Reference-bs, respectively). The effect of the reference agent in both groups was estimated with 95% confidence intervals (95%CI), pooled using random-effects models and then compared using a meta-regression model.

RESULTS

We included 31 trials. The main characteristics of the population (disease duration and activity, % seropositivity and methotrexate dose) of the population in both groups were similar. The meta-analysis found a better ACR20 response to the biological originator in the Reference-bs group with a global rate of 70% (95%CI, 66-74) compared with 59% (95%CI, 55-62) in the reference-pbo group (p= 0.001). A significant difference was also found for ACR 50 [44% (95%CI, 39-50) vs 35% (95%CI, 31-39) respectively, p< 0.01].

CONCLUSION

Effect of the reference biologic agent was better when compared with an active drug to a placebo. This could be linked to an increased placebo effect in active comparator-controlled studies or a nocebo effect in placebo-controlled studies. This effect can be called the Lessebo effect.

Hypothalamic-Pituitary-Adrenal Activity in Adverse Events Reporting after Placebo Administration

Participants of clinical trials who receive a placebo treatment often report a variety of adverse events, sometimes called nocebo effects. The reason why these adverse events occur is not clear, and understanding the underlying mechanisms represents a challenge that is likely to improve the interpretation of clinical trials as well as medical practice. Here, we studied 192 healthy subjects who received placebo oxygen through a mask after reading (READ) or not reading (NO-READ) a list of possible adverse events of oxygen breathing: headache, chest pain, abdominal pain, and cough. The whole hypothalamus-pituitary-adrenal axis was assessed just before and right after placebo breathing by measuring the hypothalamic corticotropin-releasing hormone (CRH), pituitary adrenocorticotropic hormone (ACTH), and adrenal cortisol (COR). In addition, both state and trait anxiety were assessed. We found that 64.5% of the NO-READ group reported no adverse events, 30.2% had one, and only 5.2% had two adverse events. In contrast, only 20.8% of the READ group reported no adverse events, whereas 1, 2, 3, and 4 adverse events were reported with a frequency of 21.8%, 19.8%, 19.8%, and 17.7%, respectively. In addition, when the READ group reported three and four adverse events, CRH, ACTH, and COR were significantly increased compared to the NO-READ group, along with an increase in state anxiety scores. These data indicate that hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal activity and state anxiety are increased in those subjects who report many adverse events after reading a list of adverse events, thus highlighting a possible neuroendocrine mechanism after placebo administration.

The Automatic Substitution of Biosimilars: Definitions of Interchangeability are not Interchangeable

In the USA, an interchangeability designation provides biosimilar sponsors with a pathway for achieving what is standard for small-molecule generics: pharmacy-level auto-substitution for an innovator. No other major health authority links interchangeability to automatic substitution, as all require the involvement of the prescriber or patient in a medication change. This editorial considers the clinical impact and practicality of auto-substitution. First, interchangeability is linked to non-medical switching (NMS), the practice of switching treatment in patients with stable disease for non-clinical reasons. NMS may generate negative sentiment in those unwilling or reluctant to switch, which can adversely impact treatment outcomes (i.e., nocebo effect). Indeed, in real-world studies of tumor necrosis factor inhibitors, discontinuation rates have been shown to be higher in patients switched to biosimilars for non-medical reasons than in historical cohorts maintained on innovators. Second, interchangeability may impede pharmacovigilance and traceability, as not all jurisdictions require innovators and biosimilars to have distinct biologic names. Third, an interchangeability designation from the US Food and Drug Administration only permits a biosimilar to be automatically substituted for its innovator, not other biosimilars (if available). Pharmacist education would be needed to avoid off-label, automatic substitution among biosimilars of a single innovator. Last, once granted, an interchangeability designation exists in perpetuity under current US federal law. However, the supply chains of innovators and biosimilars are maintained independently, with no requirement for reconfirmation of biosimilarity or interchangeability. We feel that additional guidance is needed for the auto-substitution of biosimilars and innovators to become a reality.

How do nocebo effects in placebo groups of randomized controlled trials provide a possible explicative framework for the COVID-19 pandemic?

Introduction: Randomized clinical trials (RCTs) are useful to study the role of individual and contextual factors in which therapies vs placebos are administered and to provide an important perspective for understanding the phenomenon of nocebo-related risks.Areas covered: The results of nocebo effects in RCT placebo groups, measured in terms of adverse events (AEs) and dropouts, will be presented as an explicative framework for the COVID-19 pandemic. Currently, SARS-CoV-2 vaccines are the only RCTs routinely conducted during the pandemic. Information about efficacy and safety of different vaccines represents a fertile ground for nocebo phenomena. Individual and contextual factors will be emphasized in order to understand the presence of a refusal of immunization associated with a specific vaccine considered less effective and safe. Critical aspects and some guidelines will be presented in order to counteract the nocebo effects and to improve adherence to drug treatments and the vaccination campaign.Expert opinion: The nocebo effect could explain the presence of strong resistance in European countries to immunization with a vaccine perceived as less effective, compared to others. Increased awareness of the nocebo effect would be relevant as it could lead to a greater participation in the vaccination campaign and in protecting individuals against SARS-CoV-2 infection.

Placebo and nocebo responses in randomized controlled trials of Janus kinase inhibitor monotherapy for rheumatoid arthritis : A meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

The goal of this meta-analysis was to assess the frequency and magnitude of placebo and nocebo responses in placebo-controlled randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of Janus kinase (JAK) inhibitor monotherapy for rheumatoid arthritis (RA) METHODS: We performed a meta-analysis on the rates of placebo response, adverse effects (AEs), severe AEs (SAEs) and withdrawal due to AEs in placebo-controlled randomized clinical trials (RCTs) of JAK inhibitor therapy for RA.

RESULTS

Five RCTs contained a total of 1422 patients (746 trial participants and 676 controls). The pooled incidence of an American College of Rheumatology 20% (ACR20) response rate was 33.0% (95% CI 19.6-44.9%) in placebo-treated patients and 68.3% (95% CI 61.4-74.1%) in active drug-treated patients. A strong negative correlation was observed between drug efficacies (ACR20 response) and AE rates in the placebo arm, indicating that the stronger the placebo response, the weaker the nocebo response (r = -0.906, P = 0.034). The pooled estimate of at least one AE was 54.1% (95% CI 44.6-63.4%) in placebo-treated patients and 54.5% (95% CI 46.2-62.6%) in active drug-treated patients. The pooled SAE rate was 3.9% (95% CI 2.7-5.7%) in placebo-treated patients and 3.8% (95% CI 2.5-5.7%) in active comparator-treated patients. The pooled estimate of withdrawal owing to an AE was 4.1% (95% CI 1.4-11.3%) in placebo-treated patients and 2.1% (95% CI 0.8-5.4%) in active drug-treated patients. However, there were no differences in the pooled risk of AE, SAEs, or withdrawal owing to AEs between the active comparator and placebo groups. A strong positive correlation was observed in AE rates between the placebo and active arms, indicating that the stronger the nocebo response, the higher the AE rate in the active arm (r = 0.957, P = 0.012).

CONCLUSION

The frequency of placebo and nocebo responses was 33.0 and 54.1%, respectively, in JAK monotherapy trials for RA. The findings indicated that the strengths of placebo and nocebo responses are inversely proportional and that clinically significant differences were absent between AE, SAE, and dropout owing to AEs.

Experiences and perceptions of patients with psoriatic arthritis participating in a trial of faecal microbiota transplantation: a nested qualitative study

OBJECTIVES

Patients' first-hand experiences of faecal microbiota transplantation (FMT) performed in a rheumatological care setting have yet to be elucidated. The objectives were to explore participants' perceptions of being part of an FMT trial thereby identifying potential trial participation effects and enlightening the patient perspective on the outlook for future FMT trials in rheumatic diseases.

DESIGN

In a qualitative study nested within a double-blind, randomised, placebo-controlled trial (RCT) testing FMT as a potential new antirheumatic treatment, semistructured telephone interviews were conducted following the trial participants' final 26-week visit. Qualitative researchers, who did not take part in the main trial, performed the interviews and the primary analysis. The experiences explored related to the conduct of the RCT and changes in the participants' everyday life. The analysis was carried out using a thematic approach.

SETTING

A Danish rheumatology university outpatient clinic with nationwide inclusion.

PARTICIPANTS

The study included 10 patients with psoriatic arthritis (PsA) who were unaware of their treatment allocation (FMT/sham transplantation) and completed the final 26-week trial visit.

RESULTS

Participation in the RCT influenced the patients' understanding of PsA and induced positive changes in their everyday life. Renewed hopes for the future in addition to a feeling of enhanced care contributed to significant trial participation effects. FMT was deemed a tolerable and safe treatment.

CONCLUSIONS

Discrepancies between the clinical and the research setting should be considered when discussing the clinical relevance of the results of the RCT. Overall, patients with PsA who have participated in an RCT testing FMT find the treatment acceptable and safe encouraging more research into the field of microbiota-targeted interventions in rheumatic diseases.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT03058900; Pre-results.

Informing Patients about Biosimilar Medicines: The Role of European Patient Associations

Biosimilar medicines support the sustainability of national healthcare systems, by reducing costs of biological therapies through increased competition. However, their adoption into clinical practice largely depends on the acceptance of healthcare providers and patients. Patients are different from health care professionals (HCPs), who are informing themselves professionally. For patients, the biosimilar debate only becomes actual when they are confronted with disease and drug choices. This paper provides a literature review on how patients are and should be informed about biosimilars, searching in scientific databases (i.e., Medline, Embase). Several large surveys have shown a lack of knowledge and trust in biosimilars among European patients in recent years. This review identified five main strategies to inform patients about biosimilars: (1) provide understandable information, (2) in a positive and transparent way, (3) tailored to the individual’s needs, (4) with one voice, and (5) supported by audiovisual material. Moreover, the importance of a multistakeholder approach was underlined by describing the role of each stakeholder. Patients are a large and diffuse target group to be reached by educational programs. Therefore, patient associations have become increasingly important in correctly informing patients about biosimilar medicines. This has led to widespread biosimilar information for patients among European patient associations. Therefore, a web-based screening of European Patients’ Forum (EPF) and International Alliance of Patients’ Organizations (IAPO) member organizations on publicly available information about biosimilars was performed. We found that the level of detail, correctness, and the tone of the provided information varied. In conclusion, it is paramount to set up a close collaboration between all stakeholders to communicate, develop, and disseminate factual information about biosimilars for patients.

Effects of Patients' Expectation in Dermatology: Evidence from Experimental and Clinical Placebo Studies and Implications for Dermatologic Practice and Research

Patients' expectations towards the benefit of a treatment are key determinants of placebo responses and can affect the development and course of medical conditions and the efficacy and tolerability of active medical treatment. The mechanisms mediating these placebo and nocebo effects have been best described in the field of experimental pain and placebo analgesia. However, also in dermatology experimental and clinical studies demonstrate that various skin diseases such as inflammatory dermatoses and allergic reactions can be modulated by patients' expectations. Dermatologists should consider the important modulatory role of patients' expectations on the efficacy and tolerability of specific treatments and the key role of verbal information, patients' prior treatment experiences (associative learning), and the quality and quantity of doctor-patient communication in shaping treatment expectation. As a consequence, techniques aiming at maximizing patients' expectation effects should be implemented into daily clinical routine. By contrast, in clinical studies expectation effects should be maximally controlled and harmonized to improve the "assay sensitivity" to detect new compounds. Further translational studies, also in dermatoses that have not been investigated yet, are needed to better characterize the mechanisms underlying patients' expectation and to gain further insights into potential clinical implications of these effects in dermatologic conditions. Therefore, in this review, we provide a brief overview on the concept of expectation effects on treatment outcome in general, summarize what is already known about this topic for dermatologic diseases, and finally present the relevance of this topic in clinical dermatology.

Efficacy and safety of subcutaneous infliximab versus adalimumab, etanercept and intravenous infliximab in patients with rheumatoid arthritis: a systematic literature review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVES

There are few comparative data for tumor necrosis factor inhibitors in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA).

METHODS

Historical data for reference product/biosimilar intravenous infliximab, or adalimumab and etanercept, were pooled and compared with phase 3 study results for a subcutaneous (SC) formulation of the infliximab biosimilar CT-P13, in a systematic review and meta-analysis (PROSPERO: CRD42019149621).

RESULTS

The authors identified 13 eligible controlled trials that randomized over 5400 participants to prespecified treatments of interest. Comparison with pooled historical data suggested a numerical advantage for CT-P13 SC over intravenous infliximab for almost every prespecified efficacy outcome evaluated, including Disease Activity Score in 28 joints (C-reactive protein/erythrocyte sedimentation rate), Clinical/Simplified Disease Activity Index scores, American College of Rheumatology responses, and multiple measures of disease remission and low disease activity; for the majority of outcomes, there was no overlap in 95% confidence intervals between groups. A numerical advantage for CT-P13 SC was also observed for safety outcomes (adverse events, infections, and discontinuations). Similar, but less marked, trends were observed for comparison with historical efficacy and safety data for adalimumab/etanercept.

CONCLUSION

CT-P13 SC offers an improved or similar benefit-to-harm ratio compared with infliximab (intravenous) and adalimumab/etanercept, for the treatment of moderate-to-severe RA.

A pharmacokinetic evaluation of the rituximab biosimilar CT-P10 in the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis

INTRODUCTION

CT-P10 is the first biosimilar of rituximab (RTX) for the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis (RA). The application of valuable biosimilar for the treatment of RA may decrease economic burden of society, and disease activity of RA. Thus, it is worthwhile to identify the economic advantage and further requirement for the proper use of CT-P10 in real world.

AREAS COVERED

Literature searching was performed to identify suitable references written in English for this review article. Rituximab, biosimilar, CT-P10, and rheumatoid arthritis were used as keywords. Current state of RA treatment, position of RTX in the recommendations for the treatment of RA, current status of RTX biosimilar development were assessed before evaluating CT-P10 itself. Physicochemical property, pharmacokinetic profile through phase I to phase III studies, pharmacodynamics, toxicology data, clinical efficacy, and safety were reviewed.

EXPERT OPINION

As the first biosimilar to originator RTX, CT-P10 may be a useful alternative for the treatment of RA in all indications for originator RTX. In addition, more studies are required to identify long-term effectiveness and safety of CT-P10 in real world. It is also important to find out new indications of CT-P10 and effective mechanisms to lessen nocebo effect against biosimilar including CT-P10.

Nocebo-Prone Behaviour in Patients with Autoimmune Rheumatic Diseases during the COVID-19 Pandemic

BACKGROUND

The COVID-19 pandemic is associated with emotional distress and significant disruptions in health-care services. These are key players in the development of nocebo phenomena. We aimed to investigate nocebo-prone behaviour in patients with autoimmune rheumatic diseases (ARD) amid the COVID-19 pandemic-associated lockdown.

METHODS

Consecutive patients were telephone-interviewed during the COVID-19 pandemic in Greece. Clinical and socioeconomic characteristics (eg, level of education) were recorded. For nocebo behaviour, a four-item validated questionnaire (Q-No, cut-off score>15), was used. Results were compared with pre-COVID-19 Q-No scores collected from patients followed-up in our department.

RESULTS

Nocebo behaviour was detected in 51/500 (10.2%) individuals. In patients with nocebo behaviour, use of anti-hypertensives was less common (17.6% vs 31.8%, p=0.04), but a higher level of education was more common (58.8% vs 35.9%, p=0.002), compared with patients with Q-No score ≤15; the latter retained statistical significance in multivariate regression analysis (p=0.009, OR [95%CI]: 2.29, [1.23-4.25]). Total Q-No scores were higher in the COVID-19-period compared to the pre-COVID-19 era [median (range); 12 (4-20) vs 11 (4-20), p=0.02]. Among 78 patients with available Q-No questionnaires in the pre-COVID-19 era, 11 (14.1%) displayed nocebo behaviour, which increased to 16 (20.5%) amid the COVID-19 pandemic. Interim development of nocebo behaviour was also associated with higher educational level (p=0.049, OR: 3.65, 95%CI: 1.005-13.268).

CONCLUSION

A considerable proportion of ARD patients manifested nocebo-prone behaviour during the COVID-19 pandemic, which was more common among those with high educational level.

Evolution of infliximab biosimilar in inflammatory bowel disease: from intravenous to subcutaneous CT-P13

INTRODUCTION

Biologic drugs have significantly improved the treatment of ulcerative colitis (UC) and Crohn's disease (CD). However, the availability of these drugs is limited by their high cost. Infliximab was the first biologic to be approved for inflammatory bowel diseases (IBD). After its patent expired other manufactures developed biosimilar versions, among which CT-P13, and licensed them thorough an expedite process.

AREAS COVERED

The aim of this review is to summarize the available evidence on CT-P13 use in IBD, with particular interest in the phase II trials of a subcutaneous version of CT-P13.

EXPERT OPINION

Biosimilars, such as CT-P13, are an important resource for health-care systems. Although CT-P13 approval in IBD was based on extrapolation, subsequent studies confirmed its clinical equivalence to originator infliximab. A new subcutaneous formulation of CT-P13 showed promising results in phase I and II trials in both CD and UC. Clinical efficacy and safety were comparable and interestingly serum drug doses appeared to be more stable than conventional intravenous CT-P13. If these preliminary results will be confirmed, the first sub-cutaneous version of infliximab could soon be available for IBD.

Nocebo phenomena may be enhanced in aging: Implications for clinical practice

Nocebo effects, denoting unfavourable outcomes after a medical intervention because of negative expectations rather than a direct pharmacologic action, are an important cause of dropout from clinical trials and non-adherence to medication, and may be especially pertinent for older adults. Several characteristics of aging individuals and their medical care have a potential to augment nocebo susceptibility, such as depression and anxiety, neurodegenerative diseases and chronic pain states, adverse healthcare experiences, generic drug use, age-related stereotypes, and strained patient-physician communication. Nocebo-related research in older adults is hindered by under-representation in clinical trials, medical complexity of geriatric patients, and lack of validated tools to accurately assess susceptibility and efficacy of preventive efforts.

Real-World Budget Impact of the Adoption of Insulin Glargine Biosimilars in Primary Care in England (2015-2018)

BACKGROUND

Lantus, the reference insulin glargine used for the treatment of diabetes, lost its patent protection in 2014, opening the market to biosimilar competitors.

OBJECTIVE

First, to analyze the adoption rates of insulin glargine biosimilars in primary care in England and estimate the savings realized and missed, since an insulin glargine biosimilar was first used, and second, to assess potential variations in adoption rates across Clinical Commissioning Groups (CCGs).

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

Data sets capturing information on all insulin glargine items prescribed by all general practitioners up to December 2018 were used. Total costs of insulin glargine and uptake rates of biosimilars were calculated. The real-world budget impact was estimated assuming the cost of reference insulin glargine for all items and comparing the total costs in this scenario with the total costs in the real world. The missed savings were estimated assuming the cost of biosimilars for all insulin glargine items. Choropleth maps were generated to assess potential variations in uptake across CCGs.

RESULTS

Insulin glargine biosimilars generated savings of £900,000 between October 2015 (time of first prescription) and December 2018. The missed savings amounted to £25.6 million in this period, indicating that only 3.42% of the potential savings were achieved. The analyses demonstrated a large level of variation in the uptake of insulin glargine biosimilars across CCGs, with market shares ranging from 0 to 53.3% (December 2018).

CONCLUSIONS

These results may encourage decision makers in England to promote the use of best-value treatments in primary care and to reevaluate variation across CCGs.

Retention Rate and Efficacy of the Biosimilar CT-P13 Versus Reference Infliximab in Patients with Ankylosing Spondylitis: A Propensity Score-Matched Analysis from the Korean College of Rheumatology Biologics Registry

Background

Long-term, real-world data are required to support the use of CT-P13 in chronic conditions such as ankylosing spondylitis. However, real-world evidence may be influenced by selection bias, which can confound outcomes. The aim of the current analysis was to confirm the long-term comparability of CT-P13 and reference infliximab treatment in patients with ankylosing spondylitis, using propensity score matching to adjust for baseline differences between groups.

Methods

A propensity score–matching analysis was conducted on data from patients with ankylosing spondylitis in the Korean College of Rheumatology Biologics registry who received CT-P13 or reference infliximab. Drug retention, reasons for biologic therapy changes or discontinuation, and efficacy parameters were analyzed overall and by treatment line with up to 4 years of follow-up. Adverse events were recorded for each treatment group.

Results

Propensity score matching was effective in matching 124 CT-P13–treated and 124 reference infliximab-treated patients. Median treatment duration and drug retention were similar between CT-P13 and reference infliximab. Three-year retention rates (95% confidence interval [CI]) were 64.2% (53.5–73.0) for CT-P13 and 55.6% (42.9–66.6) for reference infliximab. Overall, 17.1% (CT-P13) and 29.3% (reference infliximab) of patients discontinued biologic therapy, and 20.0% (CT-P13) and 15.2% (reference infliximab) changed biologic therapy. Efficacy assessments were generally similar between groups; both treatments were well tolerated.

Conclusions

Propensity score–matching analysis confirmed that CT-P13 treatment was not associated with significant differences in drug retention, treatment duration, most efficacy parameters, or safety versus reference infliximab in Korean patients with ankylosing spondylitis, building evidence for the long-term comparability of these treatments.

Trial registration

ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT01965132.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1007/s40259-020-00432-z) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Context matters: the psychoneurobiological determinants of placebo, nocebo and context-related effects in physiotherapy

Background

Placebo and nocebo effects embody psychoneurobiological phenomena where behavioural, neurophysiological, perceptive and cognitive changes occur during the therapeutic encounter in the healthcare context. Placebo effects are produced by a positive healthcare context; while nocebo effects are consequences of negative healthcare context. Historically, placebo, nocebo and context-related effects were considered as confounding elements for clinicians and researchers. In the last two decades this attitude started to change, and the understanding of the value of these effects has increased. Despite the growing interest, the knowledge and the awareness of using the healthcare context to trigger placebo and nocebo effects is currently limited and heterogeneous among physiotherapists, reducing their translational value in the physiotherapy field.

Objectives

To introduce the placebo, nocebo and context-related effects by: (1) presenting their psychological models; (2) describing their neurophysiological mechanisms; (3) underlining their impact for the physiotherapy profession; and (4) tracing lines for future researches.

Conclusion

Several psychological mechanisms are involved in placebo, nocebo and context-related effects; including expectation, learning processes (classical conditioning and observational learning), reinforced expectations, mindset and personality traits. The neurophysiological mechanisms mainly include the endogenous opioid, the endocannabinoid and the dopaminergic systems. Neuroimaging studies have identified different brain regions involved such as the dorsolateral prefrontal cortex, the rostral anterior cingulate cortex, the periaqueductal gray and the dorsal horn of spine. From a clinical perspective, the manipulation of the healthcare context with the best evidence-based therapy represents an opportunity to trigger placebo effects and to avoid nocebo effects respecting the ethical code of conduct. From a managerial perspective, stakeholders, organizations and governments should encourage the assessment of the healthcare context aimed to improve the quality of physiotherapy services. From an educational perspective, placebo and nocebo effects are professional topics that should be integrated in the university program of health and medical professions. From a research perspective, the control of placebo, nocebo and context-related effects offers to the scientific community the chance to better measure the impact of physiotherapy on different outcomes and in different conditions through primary studies.

Comparison of the Efficacy and Safety of Adalimumab (Humira) and the Adalimumab Biosimilar Candidate (HS016) in Chinese Patients with Active Ankylosing Spondylitis: A Multicenter, Randomized, Double-Blind, Parallel, Phase III Clinical Trial

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of the biosimilar candidate of adalimumab (HS016) compared with adalimumab (Humira) for the treatment of active ankylosing spondylitis.

METHODS

A multicenter, randomized, double-blind, parallel, positive control, phase III clinical trial was conducted at 28 locations in China. Patients with active ankylosing spondylitis were randomized in a 2:1 ratio to subcutaneously receive 40 mg of either HS016 or adalimumab every other week for 24 weeks. The primary endpoint was to achieve at least a 20% improvement (ASAS20) in patients at 24 weeks according to the Assessment of Spondyloarthritis International Society criteria. The secondary endpoint included other efficacy assessment parameters, health evaluations, safety, pharmacokinetic, and immunogenicity parameters.

RESULTS

Following the random assignment of 648 patients into HS016 (n = 416) and adalimumab (n = 232) groups, no significant difference was found in the ASAS20 response rates at 24 weeks between the HS016 (364/416, 87.5%) and adalimumab (209/232, 90.1%) treatments and the difference between the response rates (- 2.59%; 90% confidence interval [CI] - 6.77 to 1.60) was within the predefined equivalence margin (± 15%). There were also no significant differences when the secondary endpoints were compared (all p > 0.05). Similarly, the rates of treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) were not significantly different between the two groups, with most TEAEs being mild to moderate. Only nine severe cases were found, including seven within the HS016 group, three (0.7%) of which were tuberculosis cases. Plasma concentrations of HS016 and adalimumab from weeks 12 to 14 were similar during the steady-state period and steady-state maximal concentration (Cmax,ss) was equivalent for HS016 (7356.6 ng/mL) and adalimumab (7600.3 ng/mL). The accumulated proportion of patients with positive human anti-human antibodies (HAHAs) at week 24 was 326/412 (79.1%) in the HS016 group and 183/229 (79.9%) in the adalimumab group (p > 0.05), while the accumulated proportion of patients with positive neutralizing antibody (NAb) tests were 72/412 (17.5%) in the HS016 group and 43/229 (18.8%) in the adalimumab group (p > 0.05).

CONCLUSION

HS016 resembled adalimumab in efficacy and safety over the 24-week treatment period.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

ChiCTR1900022520.

The nocebo effect and tobacco control-First, do no harm?

Since tobacco remains a leading cause of global morbidity and mortality, emphasis needs to be given to preventive approaches to tobacco consumption. Environmental and policy strategies with fear appeals are important contributors to reductions in smoking prevalence. Fear appeals are persuasive messages-often using graphic and emotionally evocative imagery and language-that attempt to scare their audiences into tobacco cessation. While the intentions of fear appeals are benign, their effects are not necessarily so; here, we argue that some fear appeals carry a significant risk of backfiring by eliciting nocebo effects among its viewers. In this context, it is important to recognize that there is currently no justification for disregarding potential nocebo effects. Therefore, we should improve our understanding of nocebo effects in the field of preventive medicine, as well as the impact of strategies aimed at mitigating their negative health effects.

Factors for starting biosimilar TNF inhibitors in patients with rheumatic diseases in the real world

Background

To identify factors for starting biosimilar TNF inhibitors (TNFI) in patients with rheumatic diseases.

Methods and finding

Using a national claims database, we identified patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) or ankylosing spondylitis (AS) who had used TNFIs since they were approved in Korea in 2004. We assessed changes in the proportion of each form of TNFI used between 2004 and 2017. We then selected patients starting on TNFIs between 2013 and 2017 to identify factors for starting biosimilars. In RA (n = 4,216), biosimilars were more likely to be initiated in clinics [odds ratio (OR) 2.54] and in the metropolitan area (OR, 2.02), but were less likely to be initiated in general hospitals (OR 0.40) or orthopedics (OR 0.44). In AS (n = 2,338), biosimilars were common at the hospital level (OR 2.20) and tended to increase over the years (OR 1.16), but were initiated less in orthopedics (OR 0.07). In addition, RA patients were more likely to initiate biosimilars in combination with methotrexate (OR 1.37), but biosimilars were not initiated frequently by patients with higher comorbidity scores (OR 0.97) or receiving glucocorticoids (OR 0.67). The patient factors favoring biosimilar in AS use were not clear.

Conclusions

In Korea, the proportion of biosimilar TNFIs has increased. Type of institution and physician specialty are more important than patient factors in affecting biosimilar use. In RA, biosimilar TNFIs tend to be initiated in combination with MTX, and are less likely to be initiated in patients taking glucocorticoids or in those with high comorbidities.