Clinical utility of therapy selection informed by predicted nonresponse to tumor necrosis factor-ɑ inhibitors: an analysis from the Study to Accelerate Information of Molecular Signatures (AIMS) in rheumatoid arthritis

Patient Perceptions of Rheumatoid Arthritis Blood Work: A Cross-Sectional Survey in the ArthritisPower Registry

OBJECTIVE

To examine how patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) perceive RA-related laboratory testing and the potential utility of a blood test to predict treatment response to a new RA medication.

METHODS

ArthritisPower members with RA were invited to participate in a cross-sectional survey on reasons for laboratory testing plus a choice-based conjoint analysis exercise to determine how patients value different attributes of a biomarker-based test to predict treatment response.

RESULTS

Most patients perceived that their doctors ordered laboratory tests to check for active inflammation (85.9%) or assess medication side effects (81.2%). The most commonly ordered blood tests used to monitor RA were complete blood counts, liver function tests, and those measuring C-reactive protein (CRP) and erythrocyte sedimentation rate. Patients felt CRP was most helpful in understanding their disease activity. Most worried their current RA medication would eventually stop working (91.4%) and they would waste time trying a new RA medication that may not work for them (81.7%). For patients who would require a future change in RA treatment, a majority (89.2%) reported that they would be very/extremely interested in a blood test that could help predict whether such new medication would be effective. Highly accurate test results (improving the chance RA medication will work from 50% to 85-95%) were more important to patients than low out-of-pocket cost (<$20) or minimal wait time (<7 days).

CONCLUSIONS

Patients consider RA-related blood work important for monitoring of inflammation and medication side effects. They worry about treatment effectiveness and would undergo testing to accurately predict treatment response.

Perspective: metabolomics has the potential to change the landscape of kidney transplantation diagnostics

Kidney transplantation is the most efficient renal replacement therapy. Current diagnostics for monitoring graft health are either invasive or lack precision. Metabolomics is an emerging discipline focused on the analysis of the small molecules involved in metabolism. Given the kidneys' central role in metabolic homeostasis and previous observations of altered metabolites correlating with restricted kidney graft function, metabolomics is highly promising for the discovery of novel biomarkers and the development of novel diagnostics. In this perspective, we summarize the known metabolic roles for the kidney, discuss biomarkers of graft health and immune status emerging from metabolomics research, and provide our perspective on how these and future findings can be integrated in clinical practice to enable precision diagnostics.

Healthcare resource utilisation and economic burden of patients with adequate and inadequate responses to biological and targeted synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs for rheumatoid arthritis in Japan

OBJECTIVE

To compare healthcare resource utilisation (HCRU) and direct costs between responders versus non-responders to advanced therapies for rheumatoid arthritis (RA).

METHODS

Patients initiating ≥1 advanced therapy (October 2018 - September 2019) with ≥1 RA claim (6-month pre-index period), ≥2 RA claims (any period), and ≥12 months follow-up were identified from the Medical Data Vision claims database. HCRU and all-cause and RA-related costs [direct medical, emergency department (ED), laboratory, and pharmacy] were compared between responders and non-responders. Adjusted incidence rate ratios (IRRs) for HCRU or cost were calculated via multivariable analyses.

RESULTS

Among 2446 patients [non-responders (n = 1817); responders (n = 629)], non-responders had significantly longer hospitalisation days [IRR: 1.8 (95% CI: 1.2 - 2.6)], and significantly more ED visits [2.5 (1.5 - 4.2)] and prescriptions [1.1 (1.1 - 1.2)]. Mean all-cause hospital/outpatient medical costs were significantly higher for non-responders [1.4 (1.3 - 1.6), ¥530,895 versus ¥357,009 ($3992 versus $2684) for responders; ¥173,886 ($1307) difference]; RA-related medical costs showed a similar trend [¥351,306 vs ¥253,030 ($2641 vs $1902); ¥98,276 ($739) difference]. No differences between responders and non-responders were observed in mean all-cause and RA-related pharmacy costs.

CONCLUSIONS

Non-responders to advanced therapies had greater HCRU and all-cause/RA-related direct costs as compared with responders, suggesting a need for more effective RA therapies to reduce the economic burden associated with non-response.

Decision Impact Analysis to Measure the Influence of Molecular Signature Response Classifier Testing on Treatment Selection in Rheumatoid Arthritis

INTRODUCTION

Clinical guidelines offer little guidance for treatment selection following inadequate response to conventional synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drug (csDMARD) in rheumatoid arthritis (RA). A molecular signature response classifier (MSRC) was validated to predict tumor necrosis factor inhibitor (TNFi) inadequate response. The decision impact of MSRC results on biologic and targeted synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drug (b/tsDMARD) selection was evaluated.

METHODS

This is an analysis of AIMS, a longitudinal, prospective database of patients with RA tested using the MSRC. This study assessed selection of b/tsDMARDs class after MSRC testing by surveying physicians, the rate of b/tsDMARD prescriptions aligning with MSRC results, and the percentage of physicians utilizing MSRC results for decision-making.

RESULTS

Of 1018 participants, 70.7% (720/1018) had treatment selected after receiving MSRC results. In this MSRC-informed cohort, 75.6% (544/720) of patients received a b/tsDMARD aligned with MSRC results, and 84.6% (609/720) of providers reported using MSRC results to guide treatment selection. The most prevalent reason reported (8.2%, 59/720) for not aligning treatment selection with MSRC results from the total cohort was health insurance coverage issues.

CONCLUSION

This study showed that rheumatologists reported using the MSRC test to guide b/tsDMARD selection for patients with RA. In most cases, MSRC test results appeared to influence clinical decision-making according to physician self-report. Wider adoption of precision medicine tools like the MSRC could support rheumatologists and patients in working together to achieve optimal outcomes for RA.

Poor prognostic factors of pharmacokinetic origin predict outcomes in inflammatory bowel disease patients treated with anti-tumor necrosis factor-α

Introduction

We evaluated baseline Clearance of anti-tumor necrosis factors and human leukocyte antigen variant (HLA DQA1*05) in combination as poor prognostic factors (PPF) of pharmacokinetic (PK) origin impacting immune response (formation of antidrug antibodies) and disease control of inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) patients treated with infliximab or adalimumab.

Methods

Baseline Clearance was estimated in IBD patients before starting treatment using weight and serum albumin concentrations. HLA DQA1*05 carrier status (rs2097432 A/G or G/G variant) was measured using real time polymerase chain reaction. The outcomes consisted of immune response, clinical and biochemical remission (C-reactive protein<3 mg/L in the absence of symptoms), and endoscopic remission (SES-CD<3). Statistical analysis consisted of logistic regression and nonlinear mixed effect models.

Results and discussion

In 415 patients enrolled from 4 different cohorts (median age 27 [IQR: 15-43] years, 46% females), Clearance>0.326 L/day and HLA DQA1*05 carrier status were 2-fold more likely to have antidrug antibodies (OR=2.3, 95%CI: 1.7-3.4; p<0.001, and OR=1.9, 95%CI: 1.4-2.8; p<0.001, respectively). Overall, each incremental PPF of PK origin resulted in a 2-fold (OR=2.16, 95%CI: 1.7-2.7; p<0.11) [corrected] higher likelihood of antidrug antibody formation. The presence of both PPF of PK origin resulted in higher rates of antidrug antibodies (p<0.01) and lower clinical and biochemical remission (p<0.01). Each incremental increase in PPF of PK origin associated with lower likelihood of endoscopic remission (OR=0.4, 95%CI: 0.2-0.7; p<0.001). Prior biologic experience heightened the negative impact of PPF of PK origin on clinical and biochemical remission (p<0.01). Implementation of proactive therapeutic drug monitoring reduced it, particularly during maintenance and in the presence of higher drug concentrations (p<0.001). We conclude that PPF of PK origin, including both higher Clearance and carriage of HLA DQA1*05, impact outcomes in patients with IBD.

Real-World Treatment Effectiveness of Disease-Modifying Antirheumatic Drugs by Serostatus Among Patients With Rheumatoid Arthritis

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this study was to compare the clinical effectiveness of biologic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (bDMARDs) or Janus kinase inhibitors (JAKi) among seropositive versus seronegative patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) in a real-world setting.

METHODS

We used Optum's deidentified Clinformatics Data Mart Database (January 1, 2004, to March 31, 2021) linked with outpatient laboratory test results. The study population was adult patients with RA who initiated a bDMARD or JAKi. The index date was the dispensing of the first-ever study drug. At least 1-year continuous enrollment before and after the index date was required. Disenrollment due to death after the index date was allowed. Serostatus was defined using laboratory test results or the International Classification of Diseases, 10th Revision code M05x or M06.0x any time prior to the index date. Treatment effectiveness was measured based on a claims-based composite endpoint at 1-year post index, including nonoccurrence of any of the following: addition of conventional synthetic DMARDs, addition of or switching to new bDMARDs/JAKi, initiation of glucocorticoids, increased glucocorticoid dose, or death. Log-binomial regression models were constructed to estimate the risk ratio (RR) with 95% confidence interval (CI) comparing seropositive patients with seronegative patients, adjusting for more than 60 baseline covariates.

RESULTS

We identified a total of 7813 seropositive patients and 4202 seronegative patients. The mean (±SD) age was 56.7 (±14.0) years; 77.9% were female. The risk of 1-year treatment effectiveness was 70.2% among seropositive patients and 69.8% among seronegative patients. The adjusted RR (95% CI) was 1.00 (0.98-1.02).

CONCLUSION

In this real-world cohort study, seropositive and seronegative patients with RA had similar 1-year treatment effectiveness after initiating a bDMARD/JAKi.

Biomarkers to Predict DMARDs Efficacy and Adverse Effect in Rheumatoid Arthritis

Rheumatoid arthritis (RA), one of the most common immune system diseases, mainly affects middle-aged and elderly individuals and has a serious impact on the quality of life of patients. Pain and disability caused by RA are significant symptoms negatively affecting patients, and they are especially seen when inappropriate treatment is administered. Effective therapeutic strategies have evolved over the past few decades, with many new disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs) being used in the clinic. Owing to the breakthrough in the treatment of RA, the symptoms of patients who could not be treated effectively in the past few years have been relieved. However, some patients complain about symptoms that have not been reported, implying that there are still some limitations in the RA treatment and evaluation system. In recent years, biomarkers, an effective means of diagnosing and evaluating the condition of patients with RA, have gradually been used in clinical practice to evaluate the therapeutic effect of RA, which is constantly being improved for accurate application of treatment in patients with RA. In this article, we summarize a series of biomarkers that may be helpful in evaluating the therapeutic effect and improving the efficiency of clinical treatment for RA. These efforts may also encourage researchers to devote more time and resources to the study and application of biomarkers, resulting in a new evaluation system that will reduce the inappropriate use of DMARDs, as well as patients’ physical pain and financial burden.