Demographics, treatment patterns, and healthcare utilization and cost of repository corticotropin injection in patients with systemic lupus erythematosus or rheumatoid arthritis

Acthar Gel (RCI): A Narrative Literature Review of Clinical and Economic Evidence

Acthar^® Gel (repository corticotropin injection [RCI]) is a naturally sourced complex mixture of adrenocorticotropic hormone analogs and other pituitary peptides used to treat patients with serious and rare inflammatory and autoimmune conditions. This narrative review summarizes the key clinical and economic findings among 9 indications: infantile spasms (IS), multiple sclerosis (MS) relapses, rheumatoid arthritis (RA), systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE), dermatomyositis and polymyositis (DM/PM), ocular inflammatory diseases (primarily uveitis and severe keratitis), symptomatic sarcoidosis, and proteinuria in nephrotic syndrome (NS). Key studies of clinical efficacy and healthcare resource utilization and cost from 1956 to 2022 are discussed. Evidence supports the efficacy of RCI across all 9 indications. RCI is recommended as first-line treatment for IS and is associated with improved outcomes for the other 8 indications, including increased recovery rates in MS relapse; improved disease control in RA, SLE, and DM/PM; real-world effectiveness in patients with uveitis and severe keratitis; improved lung function and reduced corticosteroid use in symptomatic sarcoidosis; and increased rates of partial remission of proteinuria in NS. For many indications, RCI may improve clinical outcomes during exacerbations or when conventional treatments have failed to show a benefit. RCI is also associated with a reduction in the use of biologics, corticosteroids, and disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs. Economic data suggest RCI is a cost-effective, value-based treatment option for MS relapse, RA, and SLE. Other economic benefits have been demonstrated for IS, MS relapses, RA, SLE, and DM/PM, including reduced hospitalizations, lengths of stay, inpatient and outpatient services, and emergency department visits. RCI is considered safe and effective and features economic benefits for numerous indications. Its ability to control relapse and disease activity makes RCI an important nonsteroid treatment option that could help preserve functioning and well-being among patients with inflammatory and autoimmune conditions.

Cost-Effectiveness of Acthar Gel Versus Standard of Care for the Treatment of Exacerbations in Moderate-to-Severe Systemic Lupus Erythematosus

INTRODUCTION

Despite current standard of care (SoC), there is an unmet need for the treatment of active systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE). The study assessed the cost-effectiveness of Acthar^® Gel (repository corticotropin injection) versus SoC treatment in patients with active, moderate-to-severe SLE from the US payer and societal perspectives over 2 and 3 years.

METHODS

Cost-effectiveness model was developed using a probabilistic cohort-level state-transition approach. Patients received Acthar Gel in an exacerbation state, and the outcomes were assessed at the end of a 3-month cycle for response achievement based on the probability of treatment success with Acthar Gel. Patients may sustain the response or experience an exacerbation. For the base case scenario, moderate-to-severe SLE was defined as British Isles Lupus Assessment Group (BILAG)-2004 ≥ 20 or SLE Disease Activity Index 2000 (SLEDAI-2K) ≥ 10 and clinical response was based on SLE responder index (SRI)-4. Clinical response, productivity loss, and utility were derived from a phase 4 SLE trial; cost and disutility estimates were sourced from the literature.

RESULTS

From a payer perspective, Acthar Gel versus SoC resulted in an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of $133,110 per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) and $94,818 per QALY over 2 and 3 years, respectively. From a societal perspective, Acthar Gel versus SoC results in an ICER of $70,827 per QALY and $32,525 per QALY over 2 and 3 years, respectively. Results from the sensitivity and scenario analyses are consistent with those of the base case model.

CONCLUSIONS

Acthar Gel is a cost-effective, value-based treatment option for appropriate patients with moderate-to-severe SLE at a willingness-to-pay threshold of $150,000 over 2-3 years from the US payer and societal perspectives. Acthar Gel results in the reduction of direct medical and indirect costs.

FDA-APPROVED INDICATIONS OF ADRENOCORTICOTROPIC HORMONE (ACTH) AS A DRUG: DOES IT HAVE A PLACE IN DISEASE MANAGEMENT TODAY?

ACTH is a pituitary hormone important for proper function of adrenal glands, cortisol production as well as human physiology in general.  It is involved in the pathogenesis of several endocrine disorders like Cushing syndrome and can be a useful diagnostic tool for diseases like primary adrenal insufficiency.  Although popular as a hormone in endocrine system physiology and testing, ACTH has been used as a drug since the 1950s.  Except for steroid-releasing properties, its mechanism of action involves a steroid-independent anti-inflammatory and possible immune-modulatory effect.  Pharmaceutic ACTH has a wide range of indications approved by FDA and usually comes in the form of subcutaneous injections.  In this narrative review, we accumulated what we considered as important data from reviews, cases and trials involving the most basic FDA-approved ACTH indications.  A special emphasis was given on rheumatologic indications of ACTH.  More large data studies need to be performed to assess ACTH usefulness, efficacy, safety and cost-effectiveness as a drug.  

Pain and Fatigue Improvements in Patients Treated with Repository Corticotropin Injection Across Five Indications: A Narrative Review

Repository corticotropin injection (RCI; Acthar^® Gel) is approved by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) for use in 19 indications, including for the treatment of selected patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA), systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE), symptomatic sarcoidosis, uveitis, and keratitis. Despite treatment with disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs, many patients with RA, SLE, and other chronic inflammatory rheumatic diseases continue to be affected by severe pain and fatigue, indicating a need for other therapies. To examine the clinical data regarding the impact of RCI treatment on pain and fatigue in selected populations, this review included English-language peer-reviewed publications of clinical trials of any size and cohort studies with more than 10 patients that included pain and/or fatigue based on patient-reported outcomes (PROs) and/or physician-assessed measures in adults following treatment with RCI for RA, SLE, symptomatic sarcoidosis, uveitis, or keratitis. Literature searches identified eight studies that met these criteria. Four studies (reported in five publications) were in patients with RA or SLE, two in patients with sarcoidosis, one in patients with uveitis, and one in patients with noninfectious keratitis. Across the different types of studies assessed (clinical trials, chart reviews, real-world evidence), the results were consistent with respect to the impact of RCI treatment on improving pain and fatigue. As summarized in this review, data from patient- and physician-reported outcome measures in eight studies demonstrate that, in addition to improving more traditional efficacy measures, RCI may also improve pain and fatigue in patients with RA, SLE, symptomatic sarcoidosis, uveitis, and noninfectious keratitis.

Rheumatoid arthritis (RA) and systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) are chronic autoimmune diseases. Clinical studies of drugs for these diseases do not often ask patients how they feel after treatment. Despite treatment, many people with these diseases have pain and feel tired. Repository corticotropin injection (RCI) is a prescription drug for patients with RA, SLE, and other chronic immune diseases. We reviewed the results of published studies with data on pain and fatigue from patients treated with RCI. Four studies were in patients with RA or SLE. Two studies were in patients with symptomatic sarcoidosis. One study was in patients with uveitis. One study was in patients with noninfectious keratitis. These eight studies show that adding RCI to standard treatment lowers pain and fatigue in some patients. It would be helpful to measure pain and fatigue in future clinical studies of drugs for patients with chronic immune diseases.

Real-world treatment patterns for repository corticotropin injection in patients with rheumatoid arthritis

Introduction

Repository corticotropin injection (RCI, Acthar^® Gel) is a naturally sourced mixture of adrenocorticotropic hormone analogues and other pituitary peptides with anti-inflammatory and immunomodulatory effects. In a recent clinical trial, RCI was safe and effective for the treatment of refractory rheumatoid arthritis (RA). This study aims to describe real-world use and outcomes of patients with RA who were prescribed RCI in clinical practice through retrospective analysis of an electronic medical record database.

Methods

Patients with RA who were prescribed RCI were identified through the Columbus^TM electronic medical record repository, representing approximately 100 rheumatology practices. Demographics, medications, comorbidities, disease histories, laboratory evaluations, clinical outcomes and patient-reported outcomes were evaluated from 12 months pre-RCI to 12 months post-RCI initiation.

Results

The RCI cohort (n=63) comprised predominantly white women, aged 54 years on average, at 6 years from RA diagnosis, with high disease activity at baseline according to Clinical Disease Activity Index (CDAI) and Routine Assessment of Patient Index Data 3 (RAPID3) scores. Within the 12 months pre-RCI initiation, 87% of patients were prescribed disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs and 67% were prescribed glucocorticoids. Twelve months post-RCI initiation, glucocorticoid, opioid and non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug prescriptions decreased; disease-modifying antirheumatic drug prescriptions remained stable. Reductions in CDAI, RAPID3, physician global assessment, tender joint count, swollen joint count, and pain visual analogue scale scores were observed 12 months post-RCI initiation. Few discontinuations were due to side effects. Study limitations included small sample size and incomplete electronic medical record data.

Conclusion

These findings support the safety and effectiveness of RCI for short-term adjunctive treatment of refractory RA and provide patient-management insights from routine clinical practice.

Cost-Effectiveness of Repository Corticotropin Injection versus Standard of Care for the Treatment of Active Rheumatoid Arthritis

INTRODUCTION

Patients with active rheumatoid arthritis (RA) often have inadequately controlled symptoms and are unable to achieve remission or low disease activity despite aggressive treatment. This results in irreversible joint damage, adversely affecting patients' physical and social functioning. The objective was to estimate the cost-effectiveness of repository corticotropin injection (RCI) versus standard of care (SoC) in patients with active RA from the United States (US) payer and societal perspectives over two to three years.

METHODS

An individual-level microsimulation was developed to generate individual trajectories for patients with RA, using data from a published Phase 4 trial of RCI. These trajectories report a patient's disease pathway and associated cost and quality-of-life outcomes. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of RCI versus SoC was assessed using the literature-derived direct medical and indirect costs, and quality-adjusted life-years (QALY) derived from a Phase 4 trial of RCI. The uncertainty in base case estimates of the parameters was evaluated in the sensitivity analysis.

RESULTS

Over two years, RCI has an incremental QALY gain of 1.591 and incremental cost of $183,965 and $117,443 from payer and societal perspective, respectively, resulting in an ICER of $115,629/QALY and $73,817/QALY compared to SoC. Over three years, RCI has an incremental QALY gain of 2.336 and incremental cost of $202,315 and $104,506 from payer and societal perspective, respectively, resulting in an ICER of $86,607/QALY and $44,737/QALY compared to SoC. Results from the probabilistic sensitivity analysis are consistent with those of the base case model.

CONCLUSION

RCI is a cost-effective strategy for patients with persistently active RA who are previously treated with disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs and corticosteroids compared to SoC over two to three years from the payer and societal perspectives at a US willingness-to-pay threshold of $150,000/QALY. Further, the economic benefit of RCI is realized with improvement in a patient's clinical and health outcomes.

Economic burden of fatigue or morning stiffness among patients with rheumatoid arthritis: a retrospective analysis from real-world data

Objective: Determine healthcare resource utilization (HCRU) and costs associated with fatigue and stiffness among patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA).Methods: A retrospective claims analysis compared RA patients with fatigue or stiffness to matched RA control patients with neither. Claims from a large US commercial insurance database identified new cases of stiffness/fatigue among newly diagnosed patients. Study patients had ≥2 medical claims for RA ≥45 days apart, continuous insurance coverage ≥12 months before RA index (baseline period) and ≥12 months after fatigue/stiffness index (follow-up period). Controls had no diagnosis of fatigue or stiffness ≥12 months before index. Cases had ≥1 claim of fatigue/stiffness after RA index; the first such claim was the index date. Multivariate logistic regressions, adjusting for baseline demographics, comorbidities, medication use and HCRU, were used to predict the propensity of having a fatigue/stiffness diagnosis. Controls were propensity-score matched to cases. Generalized linear models estimated all-cause and RA-specific costs associated with resource use as well as prescription drugs, adjusting for any unbalanced covariates after propensity-score matching.Results: Approximately 32% of newly diagnosed RA patients suffer from fatigue/stiffness. Matched cohorts were analyzed: fatigue vs. control; stiffness vs. control; fatigue and stiffness vs. control. After RA diagnosis, hospitalizations increased: 83% for fatigue, 117% for stiffness and 148% for both; total office visits increased 63%, 113% and 135%, respectively. Greater HCRU yielded significantly greater (all p < .001) per-patient-per-year hospitalization costs vs. matched controls: fatigue ($2554 vs. $1293); stiffness ($2792 vs. $892); fatigue and stiffness ($3322 vs. $1033). Per-patient-per-year costs of office visits increased significantly (all p < .001) vs. matched controls: fatigue ($1373 vs. $908); stiffness ($1580 vs. $761); fatigue and stiffness ($1989 vs. $921).Conclusions: RA patients with fatigue and/or stiffness report more HCRU and incur significantly higher medical costs than RA patients without them.

A Retrospective Medical Record Review of Utilization Patterns and Medical Resource Use Associated with Repository Corticotropin Injection among Patients with Rheumatologic Diseases in the United States

INTRODUCTION

Repository corticotropin injection (RCI) has anti-inflammatory and immune-modulatory effects and is approved for multiple indications, including several rheumatologic conditions. The aims of this nationally representative, retrospective, observational study were to describe patient characteristics, RCI treatment patterns, and barriers to RCI use in patients with rheumatologic disease, and to compare medical resource use (MRU) before and after RCI therapy.

METHODS

A random sample of US physicians was recruited to abstract the medical records of deidentified patients with a diagnosis of rheumatoid arthritis (RA), psoriatic arthritis (PsA), dermatomyositis/polymyositis (DM/PM), or systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) who had been treated with RCI in the previous 24 months. Patient characteristics and patterns of RCI use were identified. Mean MRU in the 3 months before and after RCI therapy was compared using paired-samples t tests.

RESULTS

A total of 449 physicians abstracted the medical records of 217 RA, 190 PsA, 254 DM/PM, and 95 SLE patients. In all groups combined, patients had received a mean of 3.3 treatment medications before initiating RCI. Most patients (75%-94%) were receiving RCI for the first time, indicating that repeated courses of RCI were uncommon. RCI was used as bridge therapy in 18% of patients. Approximately 24% of patients encountered an obstacle in accessing RCI, primarily insurance-related. After RCI therapy, the number of hospitalizations and hospital days were significantly reduced for all cohorts (all P < 0.05), and the number of outpatient visits was significantly lower for all cohorts (P < 0.05) except the SLE cohort (P = 0.3230). Study limitations include potentially incomplete data in the medical records and a relatively short duration for capturing MRU changes.

CONCLUSIONS

RCI was used primarily as late-line therapy in patients with rheumatologic diseases. Medical resource use was significantly lower in the 3 months after therapy compared with 3 months prior. This finding suggests that RCI may improve disease control and warrants further evaluation.

FUNDING

Mallinckrodt Pharmaceuticals.