Healthcare resource utilization, healthcare costs and dose escalation in psoriasis patients initiated on ustekinumab versus adalimumab: a retrospective claim study

Dose escalation of biologic treatment in patients with moderate-to-severe psoriasis in Japan

Patients receiving interleukin (IL)-inhibiting biologics for moderate-to-severe psoriasis (PsO) may be treated with escalated doses to optimize outcomes. This study evaluated escalation prevalence in a Japanese claims analysis of patients with PsO diagnosis preceding IL-inhibiting biologic treatment and ≥1 post-induction maintenance claim (index date) with sufficient data availability from January 2014 to May 2022. Patients with non-persistence were excluded. Expected daily dose (EDD) was calculated as the recommended maintenance dose divided by the treatment interval. Dose escalation was defined as ≥2 claims showing a ≥20% increase in the observed average daily dose (ADD) over the EDD (with sensitivities requiring ≥1 claim and ≥30%). Significant differences were tested using multivariable regressions. The study included 982 unique patients treated with brodalumab (BRO; n = 104), guselkumab (GUS; n = 207), ixekizumab (IXE; n = 159), risankizumab (RIS; n = 135), secukinumab (SEC; n = 215) and ustekinumab (UST; n = 196). Within 12 months, dose escalation was observed for all IL-inhibiting biologics other than GUS and RIS: 44.4% for UST, 37.2% for IXE, 3.4% for SEC and 1.4% for BRO. In multivariable-adjusted analyses, odds of dose escalation were significantly lower for all products relative to UST. In sensitivities, escalation was observed for all products except RIS.

Drug Survival of Adalimumab, Secukinumab, and Ustekinumab in Psoriasis as Determined by Either Dose Escalation or Drug Discontinuation during the First 3 Years of Treatment - a Nationwide Cohort Study

The real-world efficacy of biologics may be insufficiently assessed through common drug survival studies. The objective was thus to examine the real-world performance of biologics in the treatment of psoriasis using the composite endpoint of either discontinuation or off-label dose escalation. Using a prospective nationwide registry (DERMBIO, 2007-2019), we included patients with psoriasis treated with adalimumab, secukinumab, and/or ustekinumab, which have all been used as first-line therapy during the inclusion period. The primary endpoint was a composite of either off-label dose escalation or discontinuation of treatment, whereas the secondary outcomes were dose escalation and discontinuation, respectively. Kaplan-Meier curves were used for the presentation of unadjusted drug survival curves. Cox-regression models were used for risk assessment. In 4,313 treatment series (38.8% women, mean age 46.0 years, and 58.3% bio-naivety), we found that the risk of the composite endpoint was lower for secukinumab when compared with ustekinumab (hazard ratio [HR] 0.66, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.59-0.76), but higher for adalimumab (HR 1.15, 95% CI 1.05-1.26). However, the risk of discontinuation was higher for secukinumab (HR 1.24, 95% CI 1.08-1.42) and adalimumab (HR 2.01, 95% CI 1.82-2.22). For bio-naive patients treated with secukinumab, the risk of discontinuation was comparable to that of ustekinumab (HR 0.95, 95% CI 0.61-1.49).

Healthcare resource utilization and costs among patients with psoriasis treated with ixekizumab or adalimumab over 2 years of follow-up in real-world settings

AIMS

To compare long-term healthcare resource utilization (HCRU) and costs among patients who initiated ixekizumab (IXE) or adalimumab (ADA) for treatment of psoriasis in the United States.

METHODS

Adult patients with psoriasis who had ≥1 claim for IXE or ADA were identified from IBM MarketScan claims databases prior to the COVID-19 pandemic (1 March 2016-31 October 2019). The index date was the date of first claim for the index drug of interest. Inverse probability of treatment weighting was employed to balance treatment cohorts. All-cause and psoriasis-related HCRU and costs were examined for 24 months of follow-up. Costs were reported as per patient per month. Costs of psoriasis-related biologics were adjusted using published Institute for Clinical and Economic Review (ICER) discount factors. Index drug costs were adjusted for adherence and ICER discount rates.

RESULTS

The analyses included 407 IXE and 2,702 ADA users. IXE users had significantly higher inpatient admission rate (all-cause HCRU: 14.9% vs. 11.0%; p =0.012) and greater mean length of stay per admission (days, 6.6 vs. 4.1; p =0.004) than ADA users. ICER-adjusted costs were significantly higher in IXE than ADA users (all-cause costs: $4,132 vs. $3,610; p <0.001; psoriasis-related costs $3,077 vs. $2,700; p <0.001). After adjusting for ICER and adherence, IXE and ADA drug costs were comparable ($3,636 vs. $3,677; p =0.714).

LIMITATIONS

Study relied on administrative claims data, subjected to data coding limitations and data entry errors. Rebates, patient assistance programs, and commission to wholesalers are not always captured in claims. Adjustment made by ICER discount factors may lead to double-discounting if the discounts have been applied in claim payments.

CONCLUSIONS

All-cause HCRU was higher in IXE than ADA users. Healthcare costs were also higher in IXE than ADA users after ICER adjustment, over 24 months. Cost differences were largely driven by higher treatment adherence associated with IXE. Index drug costs were comparable after ICER and adherence adjustments.

Dose Adjustment of Biologic Treatments for Moderate-to-Severe Plaque Psoriasis in the Real World: A Systematic Review

INTRODUCTION

Dose escalation and reduction of biologic treatments are frequent in clinical practice. The aim of this systematic review is to summarise evidence on dose adjustment of biologic treatments for moderate-to-severe plaque psoriasis in the real-world.

METHODS

A systematic review of real-world evidence on dose adjustment of biologics for plaque psoriasis was performed. Searches were conducted in BIOSIS Previews^®, Embase^®, International Pharmaceutical Abstracts, MEDLINE^®, and SciSearch^® in March 2020. Real-world studies that reported biologic dose adjustment for moderate-to-severe plaque psoriasis were included.

RESULTS

The search identified 162 papers, and 20 studies with 30,912 patients were included from 2014 to 2020. More studies reported on dose escalation than dose reduction. For adalimumab, 3-54% of patients had dose reduction while 0-37% had dose escalation. For infliximab, only two studies reported a dose reduction, with rates of 22-29%, while dose escalation rates varied from 14 to 67%. Dose reduction rates of 5-49% were reported for etanercept while 0-55% of patients had doses escalated. For ustekinumab, dose escalation and reduction rates ranged from 3 to 37% and 7 to 42%, respectively. Two studies reported on dose adjustment for secukinumab; in one 52% of patients initiated on 150 mg instead of the recommended 300 mg, while another reported no dose increase.

CONCLUSIONS

Dose adjustment of biologics for psoriasis is common, with escalation more frequently reported than reduction. Dose escalation may have economic and safety consequences, while dose reduction may impact efficacy. These aspects are important to consider when making decisions on treatment dosing.

Reduced doses of biological therapies in psoriasis may increase efficiency without decreasing drug survival

Off-label treatment with reduced doses of biological therapies for moderate-severe psoriasis is used, but its efficacy, safety, and persistence are not well known. We have compared reduced doses with standard an escalated doses and study predictive factors for a successful reduction of doses lasting more than 6 months. We included 303 subcutaneous treatments (33% with reduced doses and 29% with escalated doses). Eighty (80.8%) reduced treatments were successful. Patients with longer evolution of the disease or patients treated with drugs different from adalimumab presented an increased risk of failure. Median drug survival did not differ between the different dosing schedules. Adverse events percentage was higher in the group treated with standard doses. Unlike previous literature, ustekinumab is the drug most commonly used at reduced doses in the present study. We have found similar efficacy rates in patients with dose modification compared with patients with standard dose, without further persistence problems. Our results suggest that reduction of dose should be done early, at the time of reaching a good response (PASI 90 or PASI <3 in two consecutive visits) as this dosing seems to be safe and portends no problems regarding persistence or adverse effects.

Comparison of Health Care Costs Among Patients with Psoriasis Initiating Ixekizumab, Secukinumab, or Adalimumab

BACKGROUND

As more biologics become available for the treatment of psoriasis (PsO), there is a lack of direct comparisons of health care costs between patients who are treated by different medications, including ixekizumab (IXE), secukinumab (SEC), and adalimumab (ADA).

OBJECTIVE

To compare the real-world health care costs of patients with PsO initiating IXE with those of patients initiating either SEC or ADA.

METHODS

Patients diagnosed with PsO between July 1, 2015, and May 31, 2018, were identified from the IBM MarketScan commercial and Medicare databases. Two weighted patient sample sets were constructed based on drug claims between March 1, 2016, and May 31, 2018: IXE versus SEC and IXE versus ADA. Within each sample, the first claim of eligible drugs was set as the index date. Patients were aged ≥ 18 years and had ≥ 12 months of continuous eligibility before and after the index date. Patients with other indications for the index drug in the preperiod or with use of the index drug within 90 days before the index date were excluded. Inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) was employed to balance cohorts. All-cause and PsO-related health care costs per member per month (PMPM) incurred during the 12-month follow-up period were assessed. Monthly PsO-related pharmacy costs were adjusted using drug discount rates published by the Institute for Clinical and Economic Review (ICER). Annual index drug costs were estimated by adjusting for medication possession ratio and ICER discount rates. All costs were weighted by IPTW.

RESULTS

Two study samples were identified: 357 IXE users were compared with 763 SEC users, and 388 IXE users were separately compared with 2,578 ADA users. Before weighting, IXE users were demographically and clinically similar to SEC users but were older and had worse health status than ADA users. Cohorts were balanced postweighting. After weighting, mean monthly all-cause health care costs were $7,313 and $6,477 (P = 0.002) and mean PsO-related costs were $6,303 and $5,437 (P < 0.001), for IXE and SEC users, respectively. Similarly, mean monthly all-cause health care costs were $6,535 and $5,557 (P = 0.026) and mean PsO-related costs were $5,792 and $4,754 (P = 0.017), for IXE and ADA users, respectively. After applying ICER adjustments, mean monthly PsO-related costs were comparable between groups: $3,637/IXE versus $3,443/SEC (P = 0.132) and $3,320/IXE versus $3,287/ADA (P = 0.907).

CONCLUSIONS

After adjusting for drug discount programs (through application of ICER discount rate), this real-world study estimated that average monthly PsO-related costs during the first year of treatment were similar between patients treated with IXE compared with those treated with SEC or ADA.

DISCLOSURES

Funding for this study was provided to IBM Watson Health by Eli Lilly and Company. The analysis was conducted independently by IBM Watson Health. Eli Lilly and Company and IBM Watson Health collaborated on study design and interpretation of results. Shi, Lew, and Zimmerman were employed by IBM Watson Health and received funding from Eli Lilly and Company to conduct this study. Zhu, Burge, Malatestinic, Lin, Goldblum, and Murage were employed by Eli Lilly and Company while this study was conducted. Blauvelt has served as a scientific adviser and/or clinical study investigator for AbbVie, Aclaris, Akros, Allergan, Almirall, Amgen, Arena, Athenex, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Celgene, Dermavant, Dermira, Eli Lilly and Company, FLX Bio, Galderma, Genentech/Roche, GlaxoSmithKline, Janssen, Leo, Meiji, Merck Sharp & Dohme, Novartis, Pfizer, Purdue Pharma, Regeneron, Revance, Sandoz, Sanofi Genzyme, Sienna Pharmaceuticals, Sun Pharma, UCB Pharma, Valeant, and Vidac, and as a paid speaker for AbbVie, Regeneron, and Sanofi Genzyme. A portion of these results were presented at the 2019 International Society for Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research Annual Meeting; May 18-22, 2019; New Orleans, LA, and the 2019 Academy of Managed Care Pharmacy Annual Meeting; March 25-28, 2019; San Diego, CA.