The effect of etanercept on work productivity in patients with early active rheumatoid arthritis: results from the COMET study

Association between patient-reported outcomes and impairments in work and activity in patients with rheumatoid arthritis in clinical remission: A retrospective analysis using the IORRA database

OBJECTIVES

To explore the patient-reported outcomes (PROs) associated with work productivity and activity impairment (WPAI) in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) in clinical remission.

METHODS

We enrolled patients with RA ≥18 years and with a simplified disease activity index ≤3.3 from the Institute of Rheumatology, Rheumatoid Arthritis data set collected in October 2017. The pain-visual analogue scale, patients' global assessment visual analogue scale (VAS), Japanese version of the Healthcare Assessment Questionnaire (J-HAQ) Disability Index, and duration of morning joint stiffness were selected as the PROs. To evaluate work productivity and activity, the WPAI for RA instrument (WPAI-RA) was used. To assess the contribution of each PRO to the WPAI-RA score, an analysis of variance model was constructed.

RESULTS

The mean age of the 2614 patients was 62.4 years; 85.1% were female. Median values of the WPAI-RA score were 1.1% for absenteeism, 6.5% for presenteeism, 7.4% for work impairment, and 10.2% for activity impairment. Morning joint stiffness contributed the most to absenteeism (18.0%), while pain-VAS contributed the most to presenteeism (57.4%), work productivity loss (51.1%), and daily activity impairment (53.7%). J-HAQ was the second most contributing factor to presenteeism (17.4%), work productivity loss (16.3%), and daily activity impairment (26.0%).

CONCLUSIONS

The pain-VAS and J-HAQ highly contributed to WPAI in patients with RA in clinical remission.

Projecting direct medical costs and productivity benefits of improving access to advanced therapy for rheumatoid arthritis: a projection modelling study

INTRODUCTION

To ensure the sustainability of the AT access improvement, it is important that health system stakeholders have timely, analyzed information accessible for reference and decision-making support. In this study, we projected the direct costs required as well as the expected direct medical cost-offset and productivity benefits resulting from improving the disease control.

METHODS

We implemented a deterministic, prevalence-based mathematical model to project the annual cost of rheumatoid arthritis (RA) management within the public healthcare system in Malaysia. We also calculated the annual productivity loss due to uncontrolled RA in monetary value. Using the projection model, we compared the projected costs of the status quo scenario vs. several scenarios of improved advanced therapy (AT) access over a 5-year period.

RESULTS

We projected that between 10,765 and 11,024 RA patients in Malaysia over the period of 2020-2024 will need access to AT due to treatment failure with conventional synthetic disease modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs). The projected net total medical cost under the status quo scenario were 163.5 million annually on average (approximately MYR 15,000 per patient per year). Cost related to health service utilization represented the heaviest component, amounting to 71.8% followed by drug cost (24.7%). Under the access improvement scenarios, drug cost constituted a higher proportion of the total medical, ranging from 25.6% to 30.4%. In contrast, the cost of health service utilization shown a reverse pattern (reducing to between 66.3% and 70.1%). Productivity costs were also expected to reduce as AT access improved leading to better outcomes. Treatment shifts to targeted synthetic DMARDs in anticipation of price adjustment appeared to have a cost saving advantage to the health system if all other parameters remain unchanged.

DISCUSSION

Improving AT access for RA patients towards the aspirational target appeared to be feasible given the current health budget in Malaysia. Broader socio-economic consequences of productivity and income loss should be included as an important part of the policy consideration. The financial implication of different AT utilization mixes and the anticipated price adjustment will likely result in some cost saving to the health system.

Reporting of Determinants of Health Inequities in Rheumatoid Arthritis Randomized Controlled Trials in Canada: A Scoping Review

OBJECTIVE

More than ever, it is important to consider inclusion and diversity in rheumatology research. We reviewed and synthesized randomized controlled trials (RCTs) for rheumatoid arthritis (RA) in Canada with the aim of characterizing participants and identifying how determinants of health inequities are reported.

METHODS

We conducted a scoping review following the Arksey and O'Malley framework. We searched Medline (1990 to December 2021), Embase (1990 to December 2021), and CENTRAL (inception to December 2021) for articles meeting inclusion criteria of: 1) used an RCT design; 2) evaluated pharmacologic or nonpharmacologic interventions; 3) included participants with RA; and 4) conducted in Canada. Data extraction was guided by the Campbell and Cochrane Equity Methods Group's PROGRESS-Plus framework on determinants that lead to health inequities (e.g., place of residence; race; occupation; gender/sex; religion; education; socioeconomic status; and social capital).

RESULTS

Of 6,290 unique records, 42 were eligible for inclusion. We grouped studies according to 3 time periods: before 2000; 2000-2010; and 2011 to present. Participants of included studies were mostly middle-aged, female, and White. Sex and age were the most widely reported determinants in 41 studies. Other determinants reported were race (15 studies), education (11 studies), socioeconomic status (7 studies), and occupation (6 studies). Religion, features of relationships, and time-dependent relationships were not reported in any study.

CONCLUSION

This scoping review suggests limited reporting on determinants of health inequities in RCTs for RA in Canada. Establishing reporting standards for equity factors in RCTs is important for addressing health inequities and informing accessible research and care for patients with RA.

How to analyze work productivity loss due to health problems in randomized controlled trials? A simulation study

Background

An increasing number of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) have measured the impact of interventions on work productivity loss. Productivity loss outcome is inflated at zero and max loss values. Our study was to compare the performance of five commonly used methods in analysis of productivity loss outcomes in RCTs.

Methods

We conducted a simulation study to compare Ordinary Least Squares (OLS), Negative Binominal (NB), two-part models (the non-zero part following truncated NB distribution or gamma distribution) and three-part model (the middle part between zero and max values following Beta distribution). The main number of observations each arm, N_obs, that we considered were 50, 100 and 200. Baseline productivity loss was included as a covariate.

Results

All models performed similarly well when baseline productivity loss was set at the mean value. When baseline productivity loss was set at other values and N_obs = 50 with ≤5 subjects having max loss, two-part models performed best if the proportion of zero loss> 50% in at least one arm and otherwise, OLS performed best. When N_obs = 100 or 200, the three-part model performed best if the two arms had equal scale parameters for their productivity loss outcome distributions between zero and max values.

Conclusions

Our findings suggest that when treatment effect at any given values of one single covariate is of interest, the model selection depends on the sample size, the proportions of zero loss and max loss, and the scale parameter for the productivity loss outcome distribution between zero and max loss in each arm of RCTs.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12874-021-01330-w.

The Future of Biosimilars: Maximizing Benefits Across Immune-Mediated Inflammatory Diseases

Biologics have transformed the treatment of immune-mediated inflammatory diseases such as rheumatoid arthritis (RA) and inflammatory bowel disease (IBD). Biosimilars-biologic medicines with no clinically meaningful differences in safety or efficacy from licensed originators-can stimulate market competition and have the potential to expand patient access to biologics within the parameters of treatment recommendations. However, maximizing the benefits of biosimilars requires cooperation between multiple stakeholders. Regulators and developers should collaborate to ensure biosimilars reach patients rapidly without compromising stringent quality, safety, or efficacy standards. Pharmacoeconomic evaluations and payer policies should be updated following biosimilar market entry, minimizing the risk of imposing nonmedical barriers to biologic treatment. In RA, disparities between treatment guidelines and national reimbursement criteria could be addressed to ensure more uniform patient access to biologics and enable rheumatologists to effectively implement treat-to-target strategies. In IBD, the cost-effectiveness of biologic treatment earlier in the disease course is likely to improve when biosimilars are incorporated into pharmacoeconomic analyses. Patient understanding of biosimilars is crucial for treatment success and avoiding nocebo effects. Full understanding of biosimilars by physicians and carefully considered communication strategies can help support patients initiating or switching to biosimilars. Developers must operate efficiently to be sustainable, without undermining product quality, the reliability of the supply chain, or pharmacovigilance. Developers should also facilitate information sharing to meet the needs of other stakeholders. Such collaboration will help to ensure a sustainable future for both the biosimilar market and healthcare systems, supporting the availability of effective treatments for patients.

Comparative Effectiveness of Combining MTX with Biologic Drug Therapy Versus Either MTX or Biologics Alone for Early Rheumatoid Arthritis in Adults: a Systematic Review and Network Meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Comparative effectiveness of early rheumatoid arthritis (RA) treatments remains uncertain.

PURPOSE

Compare benefits and harms of biologic drug therapies for adults with early RA within 1 year of diagnosis.

DATA SOURCES

English language articles from the 2012 review to October 2017 identified through MEDLINE, Cochrane Library and International Pharmaceutical Abstracts, gray literature, expert recommendations, reference lists of published literature, and supplemental evidence data requests.

STUDY SELECTION

Two persons independently selected studies based on predefined inclusion criteria.

DATA EXTRACTION

One reviewer extracted data; a second reviewer checked accuracy. Two independent reviewers assigned risk of bias ratings.

DATA SYNTHESIS

We identified 22 eligible studies with 9934 participants. Combination therapy with tumor necrosis factor (TNF) or non-TNF biologics plus methotrexate (MTX) improved disease control, remission, and functional capacity compared with monotherapy of either MTX or a biologic. Network meta-analyses found higher ACR50 response (50% improvement) for combination therapy of biologic plus MTX than for MTX monotherapy (relative risk range 1.20 [95% confidence interval (CI), 1.04 to 1.38] to 1.57 [95% CI, 1.30 to 1.88]). No significant differences emerged between treatment discontinuation rates because of adverse events or serious adverse events. Subgroup data (disease activity, prior therapy, demographics, serious conditions) were limited.

LIMITATIONS

Trials enrolled almost exclusively selected populations with high disease activity. Network meta-analyses were derived from indirect comparisons relative to MTX due to the dearth of head-to-head studies comparing interventions. No eligible data on biosimilars were found.

CONCLUSIONS

Qualitative and network meta-analyses suggest that the combination of MTX with TNF or non-TNF biologics reduces disease activity and improves remission when compared with MTX monotherapy. Overall adverse event and discontinuation rates were similar between treatment groups.

REGISTRATION

PROSPERO (available at http://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/display_record.php?ID=CRD42017079260 ).

Indirect Costs of Rheumatoid Arthritis Depending on Type of Treatment-A Systematic Literature Review

The economic burden of rheumatoid arthritis (RA) on society is high. Disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs) are the cornerstone of therapy. Biological DMARDs are reported to prevent disability and improve quality of life, thus reducing indirect RA costs. We systematically reviewed studies on the relationship between RA and indirect costs comparing biological treatment with standard care. Studies, economic analyses, and systematic reviews published until October 2018 through a MEDLINE search were included. A total of 153 non-duplicate citations were identified, 92 (60%) were excluded as they did not meet pre-defined inclusion criteria. Sixty-one articles were included, 17 of them (28%) were reviews. After full-text review, 28 articles were included, 11 of them were reviews. Costs associated with productivity loss are substantial; in several cases, they may represent over 50% of the total. The most common method of estimation is the Human Capital method. However, certain heterogeneity is observed in the method of estimating, as well as in the resultant figures. Data from included trials indicate that biological therapy is associated with improved labor force participation despite an illness, in which the natural course of disease is defined by progressive work impairment. Use of biological DMARDs may lead to significant indirect cost benefits to society.

Achieving comprehensive remission or low disease activity in rheumatoid patients and its impact on workability - Saudi Rheumatoid Arthritis Registry

Purpose

Ability to work is an important endpoint in rheumatoid arthritis (RA). It is not clear what outcome measures should be used to guide treatment in order to maximize workability. This study addressed the impact of RA on workability in a Saudi population and examined the correlation between objective measures of disease activity and reduced workability. This will allow better understanding of treatment targets that will translate into improved workability.

Patients and methods

Data were collected through a digital patient record keeper: The Rheumatoid Arthritis Saudi Database. Male and female patients, ≥18 years of age, that met the American College for Rheumatology criteria for diagnosis of RA, were recruited, regardless of treatment. Demographic and disease-specific data were collected. Disease Activity Score-28 (DAS-28) was used to define patients as low (DAS-28 ≤3.2) vs high (DAS-28 >3.2) disease activity. Health assessment questionnaire (HAQ) score, visual analog scale (VAS) score, and musculoskeletal ultrasound 7 joint score were documented also. The work productivity and activity impairment (WPAI) score was used to measure absenteeism, presenteeism, overall work impairment, and activity impairment. DAS-28 score was correlated with WPAI score and linear regression used to identify the demographic and measures of treatment response that predict improvement in WPAI score.

Results

Higher absenteeism and more activity impairment were seen for patients with persistent DAS-28 >3.2 (non-achievers). HAQ and VAS scores correlated with presenteeism, overall work impairment, and activity impairment.

Conclusion

Disease activity, as defined by DAS-28 score, correlates with absenteeism and work impairment in a Saudi population. However, on linear regression analysis, HAQ and VAS scores were the only measures predictive of work impairment. These scores should be used to monitor response to treatment regimens that aim to maximize work potential for Saudi individuals.

Health Management of Workers with Presenteeism is a New Challenge in Occupational Health

There has been a growing interest in presenteeism in recent years in both the occupational health and management fields. However, the term "presenteeism" was introduced in Japan relatively recently, and only limited knowledge on the subject has since been accumulated. This review will outline the current knowledge on presenteeism and discuss the significance of addressing presenteeism in occupational health in Japan. A common definition of presenteeism is the state that showing up at the office while having health problems, and some have added a decline in productivity. Several methods have been proposed to convert a degree of presenteeism into monetary value in terms of a health economics perspective, but there is no consistent method. A new approach is needed to evaluate and support workers who are experiencing presenteeism.

The Comparative Safety of TNF Inhibitors in Ankylosing Spondylitis-a Meta-Analysis Update of 14 Randomized Controlled Trials

TNF inhibitors have been used in ankylosing spondylitis (AS). The efficacy of TNF inhibitors was already evaluated by meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs). However, the safety of TNF inhibitors is still unclear. Therefore, we aimed to evaluate and update the safety data from RCTs of TNF inhibitors in patients treated for AS. A systematic literature search was conducted from 1990 through May 31, 2016. All studies included were randomized, double-blind, controlled trials of patients with ankylosing spondylitis that evaluated adalimumab, certolizumab pegol, etanercept, golimumab, or infliximab treatment. The overall serious adverse events, the risk of serious infection events, and the risk of malignancy and discontinuation rates were abstracted, and risk estimates were calculated by Peto odds ratios (ORs). Fourteen randomized controlled trials involving 2032 subjects receiving TNF inhibitors and 1030 subjects receiving placebo and/or traditional disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs (DMARDs) were included. The overall serious adverse events (OR, 1.34; 95% CI, 0.87-2.05), the risk of serious infection events (OR, 1.59; 95% CI, 0.63-4.01), the risk of malignancy (OR, 0.98; 95% CI, 0.25-3.85), and discontinuation due to adverse events (OR, 1.55; 95% CI, 0.95-2.54) in patients treated with TNF inhibitors as a group were not significantly different from those treated with placebo in the control group. TNF inhibitors were generally safe for treatment of ankylosing spondylitis. These data may help guide clinical comparative decision making in the management of AS.

Economic impact of adalimumab treatment in Japanese patients with rheumatoid arthritis from the adalimumab non-interventional trial for up-verified effects and utility (ANOUVEAU) study

OBJECTIVES

The objective of this study is to evaluate the economic impact of adalimumab (ADA) on Japanese rheumatoid arthritis (RA) patients.

METHODS

ANOUVEAU was a 48-week multicenter, prospective, observational, single-cohort study. Work-related outcomes including absenteeism, presenteeism, overall work impairment (OWI), and activity impairment (AI) were evaluated using the RA-related work productivity and activity impairment (WPAI/RA). The amount of productivity loss was estimated via multiplication of absenteeism, presenteeism and OWI by the national average occupational wage for paid worker (PW) and part time worker (PTW), and via multiplication of AI by the estimated wage for domestic work for home maker (HM).

RESULTS

In this analysis, 1196 patients were included. At week 48, measures of productivity loss due to absenteeism, presenteeism, OWI, and AI were significantly improved by administrating ADA to RA patients in all employment types (PW, PTW, and HM), compared to baseline (p < .01). Productivity loss of Japanese society by RA disease was estimated to be $9.80 billion. The annual decrease in productivity loss through ADA administration to Japanese RA patients was estimated to be $3.76 billion.

CONCLUSIONS

The socioeconomic burden of RA is high, but ADA treatment may reduce productivity loss related to RA.

Infliximab Versus Conventional Combination Treatment and Seven-Year Work Loss in Early Rheumatoid Arthritis: Results of a Randomized Swedish Trial

Objective

To compare long‐term work loss in methotrexate‐refractory early rheumatoid arthritis (RA) patients randomized to the addition of infliximab or conventional combination treatment.

Methods

This study was a multicenter, 2‐arm, parallel, randomized, active‐controlled, open‐label trial. RA patients with <1‐year symptom duration were recruited from 15 rheumatology clinics in Sweden between 2002–2005. Patients who did not achieve low disease activity after 3–4 months of methotrexate therapy were randomized to the addition of infliximab or conventional combination treatment with sulfasalazine plus hydroxychloroquine. Yearly sick leave and disability pension days >7 years after randomization were retrieved from nationwide registers kept by the Swedish Social Insurance Agency.

Results

Of 210 working‐age patients, 109 were randomized to infliximab (mean age 48.4 years, 73% women) and 101 to conventional treatment (mean age 48.7 years, 77% women). The year before randomization, the mean number of annual work days lost was 127 in the infliximab arm and 118 in the conventional treatment group (mean difference 9 [95% confidence interval (95% CI) −23, 39]). Compared to the year before randomization, the mean changes at 7 years were −25 days in the infliximab and −26 days in the conventional treatment group (adjusted mean difference 10 [95% CI −25, 46]). The cumulative mean for work‐loss days was 846 in the infliximab group and 701 in the conventional treatment group (adjusted mean difference 104 [95% CI −56, 284]).

Conclusion

Long‐term work loss improved significantly in early RA patients randomized to infliximab plus methotrexate or conventional combination therapy. No difference was detected between strategies, and the level of work‐loss days remained twice that observed in the general population.

Systematic review and network meta-analysis of the efficacy and safety of tumour necrosis factor inhibitor-methotrexate combination therapy versus triple therapy in rheumatoid arthritis

OBJECTIVE

Clinical trials have not consistently demonstrated differences between tumour necrosis factor inhibitor (TNFi) plus methotrexate and triple therapy (methotrexate plus hydroxychloroquine plus sulfasalazine) in rheumatoid arthritis (RA). The study objective was to estimate the efficacy, radiographic benefits, safety and patient-reported outcomes of TNFi-methotrexate versus triple therapy in patients with RA.

METHODS

A systematic review and network meta-analysis (NMA) of randomised controlled trials of TNFi-methotrexate or triple therapy as one of the treatment arms in patients with an inadequate response to or who were naive to methotrexate was conducted. American College of Rheumatology 70% response criteria (ACR70) at 6 months was the prespecified primary endpoint to evaluate depth of response. Data from direct and indirect comparisons between TNFi-methotrexate and triple therapy were pooled and quantitatively analysed using fixed-effects and random-effects Bayesian models.

RESULTS

We analysed 33 studies in patients with inadequate response to methotrexate and 19 in patients naive to methotrexate. In inadequate responders, triple therapy was associated with lower odds of achieving ACR70 at 6 months compared with TNFi-methotrexate (OR 0.35, 95% credible interval (CrI) 0.19 to 0.64). Most secondary endpoints tended to favour TNFi-methotrexate in terms of OR direction; however, no clear increased likelihood of achieving these endpoints was observed for either therapy. The odds of infection were lower with triple therapy than with TNFi-methotrexate (OR 0.08, 95% CrI 0.00 to 0.57). There were no differences observed between the two regimens in patients naive to methotrexate.

CONCLUSIONS

In this NMA, triple therapy was associated with 65% lower odds of achieving ACR70 at 6 months compared with TNFi-methotrexate in patients with inadequate response to methotrexate. Although secondary endpoints numerically favoured TNFi-methotrexate, no clear differences were observed. The odds of infection were greater with TNFi-methotrexate. No differences were observed for patients naive to methotrexate. These results may help inform care of patients who fail methotrexate first-line therapy.

Impact of etanercept tapering on work productivity in patients with early rheumatoid arthritis: results from the PRIZE study

Objective

To assess changes in work productivity in patients who have achieved response using etanercept (ETN) 50 mg+methotrexate (MTX) (phase I) are randomised to ETN 25 mg+MTX versus MTX versus placebo (phase II) and then withdrawn from treatment (phase III).

Methods

Patients included in the analysis were in employment entering phase II of the PRIZE trial and had one or more follow-ups. Phase II was a 39-week, randomised and double-blind comparison of the 3 dose-reduction treatments. Phase III was a 26-week observational study where treatment was withdrawn. The Valuation of Lost Productivity was completed approximately every 13 weeks to estimate productivity impacts from a societal perspective.

Results

A total of 120 participants were included in our analyses. During phase II, ETN25+MTX or MTX improved paid work productivity by over 100 hours compared with placebo, amounting to a gain of €1752 or €1503, respectively. ETN25+MTX compared with placebo gains €1862 in total paid/unpaid productivity. At week 52, the 3-month paid work productivity loss was 21.8, 12.8 and 14.0 hours, respectively. The productivity loss increased at week 64 from week 52, dropped at week 76 for all treatment groups and then continued rising after week 76 for the placebo group (71.9 hours at week 91) but not for the other 2 groups (21.9 hours for ETX25+MTX and 27.6 hours for MTX).

Conclusions

The work productivity gain in phase I as a result of ETN50+MTX was marginally lost in the dose-reduction treatment groups, ETN25+MTX and MTX, but substantially lost in the placebo group during phase II.

Trial registration number

NCT00913458; Results.

Etanercept: a review of its use in autoimmune inflammatory diseases

With its approval more than 15 years ago, subcutaneous etanercept (Enbrel(®)) was the first biological disease-modifying antirheumatic drug (bDMARD) and the first tumour necrosis factor inhibitor to be approved for use in rheumatic diseases. Etanercept remains an important cost-effective treatment option in adult patients with rheumatoid arthritis, ankylosing spondylitis, psoriatic arthritis or plaque psoriasis, and in paediatric patients with juvenile idiopathic arthritis or plaque psoriasis. In all of these populations, etanercept (with or without methotrexate) effectively reduced signs and symptoms, disease activity and disability, and improved health-related quality of life, with these benefits sustained during long-term treatment. The safety profile of etanercept during short- and long-term treatment was consistent with the approved product labelling, with adverse events being of a predictable and manageable nature. The introduction of etanercept and other bDMARDs as therapeutic options for patients with autoimmune rheumatic diseases and spondyloarthropathies revolutionized disease management and these agents continue to have a central role in treatment strategies. This article reviews the extensive clinical experience with etanercept in these patient populations.

Estimating the monetary value of the annual productivity gained in patients with early rheumatoid arthritis receiving etanercept plus methotrexate: interim results from the PRIZE study

Objective

To measure and value the impact of combined etanercept (ETN) and methotrexate (MTX) therapy on work productivity in patients with early rheumatoid arthritis (RA) over 52 weeks.

Methods

MTX- and biological-naïve patients with RA (symptom onset ≤12 months; Disease Activity Score based on a 28-joint count (DAS28) >3.2) received open-label ETN50/MTX for 52 weeks. The Valuation of Lost Productivity (VOLP) questionnaire, measuring paid and unpaid work productivity impacts, was completed approximately every 13 weeks. Bootstrapping methods were used to test changes in VOLP outcomes over time. One-year productivity impacts were compared between responders (DAS28 ≤3.2) at week 13 and non-responders using zero-inflated models for time loss and two-part models for total costs of lost productivity.

Results

196 patients were employed at baseline and had ≥1 follow-up with VOLP. Compared with baseline, at week 52, patients gained 33.4 h per 3 months in paid work and 4.2 h per week in unpaid work. Total monetary productivity gains were €1322 per 3 months. Over the 1-year period, responders gained paid (231 h) and unpaid work loss (122 h) compared with non-responders, which amounted to a gain of €3670 for responders.

Conclusions

This is the first clinical trial to measure and value the impact of biological treatment on all the labour input components that affect overall productivity. Combination therapy with ETN50/MTX was associated with a significant productivity gain for patients with early RA who were still observed at week 52. Over the 1-year treatment period, responders at week 13 suffered significantly less productivity loss than non-responders suggesting this gain was related to treatment response.

Trial registration number

ClinicalTrials.gov number NCT00913458

Estimating productivity costs in health economic evaluations: a review of instruments and psychometric evidence

Health economic evaluations (i.e. cost-effectiveness appraisal of an intervention) are useful aids for decision makers responsible for the allocation of scarce healthcare resources. The relevance of including health-related productivity costs (or benefits) in these evaluations is increasingly recognized and, as such, reliable and valid instruments to quantify productivity costs are needed. Over the years, a number of work productivity instruments have emerged in the literature, along with a growing body of psychometric evidence. The overall aim of this paper is to provide a review of available instruments with potential for estimating health-related productivity costs. This included the Health and Labor Questionnaire, Health and Work Performance Questionnaire, Health-Related Productivity Questionnaire Diary, Productivity and Disease Questionnaire, Quantity and Quality method, Stanford Presenteeism Scale 13, Valuation of Lost Productivity, Work and Health Interview, Work Limitations Questionnaire, Work Productivity and Activity Impairment Questionnaire, and Work Productivity Short Inventory. Critical discussions on the instruments' overall strengths and limitations, applicability for health economic evaluations, as well as the methodological quality of existing psychometric evidence were provided. Lastly, a set of reflective questions were proposed for users to consider when selecting an instrument for health economic evaluations.

The comparative safety of tumor necrosis factor inhibitors in rheumatoid arthritis: a meta-analysis update of 44 trials

OBJECTIVE

The study objective was to evaluate and update the safety data from randomized controlled trials of tumor necrosis factor inhibitors in patients treated for rheumatoid arthritis.

METHODS

A systematic literature search was conducted from 1990 to May 2013. All studies included were randomized, double-blind, controlled trials of patients with rheumatoid arthritis that evaluated adalimumab, certolizumab pegol, etanercept, golimumab, or infliximab treatment. The serious adverse events and discontinuation rates were abstracted, and risk estimates were calculated by Peto odds ratios (ORs).

RESULTS

Forty-four randomized controlled trials involving 11,700 subjects receiving tumor necrosis factor inhibitors and 5901 subjects receiving placebo or traditional disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs were included. Tumor necrosis factor inhibitor treatment as a group was associated with a higher risk of serious infection (OR, 1.42; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.13-1.78) and treatment discontinuation due to adverse events (OR, 1.23; 95% CI, 1.06-1.43) compared with placebo and traditional disease-modifying antirheumatic drug treatments. Specifically, patients taking adalimumab, certolizumab pegol, and infliximab had an increased risk of serious infection (OR, 1.69, 1.98, and 1.63, respectively) and showed an increased risk of discontinuation due to adverse events (OR, 1.38, 1.67, and 2.04, respectively). In contrast, patients taking etanercept had a decreased risk of discontinuation due to adverse events (OR, 0.72; 95% CI, 0.55-0.93). Although ORs for malignancy varied across the different tumor necrosis factor inhibitors, none reached statistical significance.

CONCLUSIONS

These meta-analysis updates of the comparative safety of tumor necrosis factor inhibitors suggest a higher risk of serious infection associated with adalimumab, certolizumab pegol, and infliximab, which seems to contribute to higher rates of discontinuation. In contrast, etanercept use showed a lower rate of discontinuation. These data may help guide clinical comparative decision making in the management of rheumatoid arthritis.

Work productivity loss in early arthritis during the first 3 years of disease: a study from a French National Multicenter Cohort

OBJECTIVE

To assess work productivity (WP) loss during the first 3 years of disease in a cohort of patients with early arthritis (EA) diagnosed between 2002 and 2005.

METHODS

The ESPOIR (Etude et Suivi des Polyarthrites Indifférenciées Récentes) cohort included 813 EA patients; we included those of working age at baseline in the present study. WP loss was assessed by 3 components: sick leave, permanent disability, and early retirement. The proportion of affected patients and the mean number of days off work were assessed for each component. WP costs were estimated and determinants of positive and extreme costs were assessed by logistic regression models.

RESULTS

Among the 664 patients included, 81.6% were in the workforce at baseline. During the first 3 years of disease, 45% reported at least 1 sick leave day and 11% reported permanent disability. Only a few patients (1%) reported early retirement. The mean number of days on sick leave due to EA decreased regularly from 44 to 13, whereas the mean number of days on permanent disability tripled from 10 to 33. The mean annual cost was 1,333 (95% confidence interval 1,075-1,620). Sick leave longer than 30 days due to EA before inclusion and a decrease in mental and physical scores of the Medical Outcomes Study Short Form 36 at inclusion were independent determinants of positive and extreme costs in multivariate models.

CONCLUSION

WP loss is substantial in EA patients and is due to permanent disability before the third year of disease. Work absence and poor mental and physical health status at baseline are major determinants of WP costs.

Measuring the effect of therapy in rheumatoid arthritis clinical trials from the patient's perspective

OBJECTIVE

Health measurements used to evaluate the effectiveness of rheumatoid arthritis (RA) therapies often fail to reflect patients' priorities, despite recommendations towards more patient-centered assessments. The goals of the current review are: (1) to present guidelines, tools, and required steps for successful implementation of patient-reported outcome (PRO) measurement in RA clinical trials; and (2) to identify gaps between recommendations and current practices.

METHODS

The first objective was addressed by reviewing existing frameworks for assessment of health-related quality of life among patients with RA and guidelines on the evaluation of PRO instruments, with a focus on evidence required to demonstrate the adequacy of PRO-based labeling claims. The second goal was addressed by conducting an empirical investigation of the overlap between patients' perspectives and current practices regarding PROs in RA studies, elaborated from systematic literature searches. The first search identified qualitative studies that reported direct input from patients with RA, while the second identified the main health outcomes measured in RA trials, with a focus on biologic therapy.

RESULTS

Our review revealed a set of outcomes that have thus far not been widely used to assess treatment benefit in RA, despite evidence of their importance to patients. The psychometric properties of PRO instruments used to evaluate commonly assessed domains are presented, as are recommendations for PRO tools that assess domains less often measured in RA studies.

CONCLUSIONS

Although the validity of some PRO tools among patients with RA is well established, further work needs to be done in several health domains which have traditionally received insufficient attention.

Worker Productivity Outcome Measures: OMERACT Filter Evidence and Agenda for Future Research

The objective of the Outcome Measures in Rheumatology (OMERACT) Worker Productivity working group is to identify worker productivity outcome measures that meet the requirements of the OMERACT filter. At the OMERACT 11 Workshop, we focused on the at-work limitations/productivity component of worker productivity (i.e., presenteeism) — an area with diverse conceptualization and instrumentation approaches. Various approaches to quantify at-work limitations/productivity (e.g., single-item global and multi-item measures) were examined, and available evidence pertaining to OMERACT truth, discrimination, and feasibility were presented to conference participants. Four candidate global measures of presenteeism were put forth for a plenary vote to determine whether current evidence meets the OMERACT filter requirements. Presenteeism globals from the Work Productivity and Activity Impairment Questionnaire (72% support) and Rheumatoid Arthritis-specific Work Productivity Survey (71% support) were endorsed by conference participants; however, neither the presenteeism global item from the Health and Work Performance Questionnaire nor the Quantity and Quality method achieved the level of support required for endorsement at the present time. The plenary was also asked whether the central item from the Work Ability Index should also be considered as a candidate measure for potential endorsement in the future. Of participants at the plenary, 70% supported this presenteeism global measure. Progress was also made in other areas through discussions at individual breakout sessions. Topics examined include the merits of various multi-item measures of at-work limitations/productivity, methodological issues related to interpretability of outcome scores, and approaches to appraise and classify contextual factors of worker productivity. Feedback gathered from conference participants will inform the future research agenda of the working group.

A Narrative Literature Review of the Impact of Anti-TNFα Treatment on the Occupational Performance of People with Rheumatoid Arthritis or Ankylosing Spondylitis

Introduction:

Anti-TNFα treatment has revolutionised the disease pathway for some people with rheumatoid arthritis and ankylosing spondylitis, although physiological improvements do not always readily translate into re-engagement in occupational activities. This review explores the evidence base for the impact of anti-TNFα on occupational performance.

Method:

Literature was searched from 2000–11. A four-stage process resulted in the review of 19 articles. The Weight of Evidence framework was used to assess quality and relevance to the review question.

Findings:

People on anti-TNFα treatment experience increased engagement in functional, psychological and social domains. Most studies focused on employment issues, with conflicting evidence about how well anti-TNFα protected against work disability and very limited evidence that anti-TNFα enabled return to paid work. The increase in productivity was to the detriment of other occupational domains, with resulting occupational imbalance.

Conclusion:

The assumption that clinical improvement is relatively trouble free is incorrect, as some people on anti-TNFα treatment continue to experience difficulties in all occupational domains, particularly work. People on anti-TNFα treatment do not routinely have access to occupational therapy services. Further research needs to explore the nuanced experiences of treatment and the role of occupational therapy in maximising the treatment potential of anti-TNFα.

Etanercept for the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis

BACKGROUND

Etanercept is a soluble tumour necrosis factor alpha-receptor disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drug (DMARD) for the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis (RA).

OBJECTIVES

The purpose of this review was to update the previous Cochrane systematic review published in 2003 assessing the benefits and harms of etanercept for the treatment of RA. In addition, we also evaluated the benefits and harms of etanercept plus DMARD compared with DMARD monotherapy in those people with RA who are partial responders to methotrexate (MTX) or any other traditional DMARD.

SEARCH METHODS

Five electronic databases were searched from 1966 to February 2003 with no language restriction. The search was updated to January 2012. Attempts were made to identify other studies by contact with experts, searching reference lists and searching trial registers.

SELECTION CRITERIA

All controlled trials (minimum 24 weeks' duration) comparing four possible combinations: 1) etanercept (10 mg or 25 mg twice weekly) plus a traditional DMARD (either MTX or sulphasalazine) versus a DMARD, 2) etanercept plus DMARD versus etanercept alone, 3) etanercept alone versus a DMARD or 4) etanercept versus placebo.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently extracted data and assessed the risk of bias of the trials.

MAIN RESULTS

Three trials were included in the original version of the review. An additional six trials, giving a total of 2842 participants, were added to the 2012 update of the review. The trials were generally of moderate to low risk of bias, the majority funded by pharmaceutical companies. Follow-up ranged from six months to 36 months.BenefitAt six to 36 months the American College of Rheumatology (ACR) 50 response rate was statistically significantly improved with etanercept plus DMARD treatment when compared with a DMARD in those people who had an inadequate response to any traditional DMARD (risk ratio (RR) 2.0; 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.3 to 2.9, absolute treatment benefit (ATB) 38%; 95% CI 13% to 59%) and in those people who were partial responders to MTX (RR 11.7; 95% CI 1.7 to 82.5, ATB 36%). Similar results were observed when pooling data from all participants (responders or not) (ACR 50 response rates at 24 months: RR 1.9; 95% CI 1.3 to 2.8, ATB 29%; 36 months: RR 1.6; 95% CI 1.3 to 1.9, ATB 24%). Statistically significant improvement in physical function and a higher proportion of disease remission were observed in combination-treated participants compared with DMARDs alone ((mean difference (MD) -0.36; 95% CI -0.43 to -0.28 in a 0-3 scale) and (RR 1.92; 95% CI 1.60 to 2.31), respectively) in those people who had an inadequate response to any traditional DMARD. All changes in radiographic scores were statistically significantly less with combination treatment (etanercept plus DMARD) compared with MTX alone for all participants (responders or not) (Total Sharp Score (TSS) (scale = 0 to 448): MD -2.2, 95% CI -3.0 to -1.4; Erosion Score (ES) (scale = 0 to 280): MD -1.6; 95% CI -2.4 to -0.9; Joint Space Narrowing Score (JSNS) (scale = 0 to 168): MD -0.7; 95% CI -1.1 to -0.2), and with combination treatment compared with etanercept alone (TSS: MD -1.1; 95% CI -1.8 to -0.5; ES: MD -0.7; 95% CI -1.1 to -0.2; JSNS: MD -0.5, 95% CI -0.7 to -0.2). The estimate of irreversible physical disability over 10 years given the radiographic findings was 0.45 out of 3.0.When etanercept monotherapy was compared with DMARD monotherapy, there was generally no evidence of a difference in ACR50 response rates when etanercept 10 mg or 25 mg was used; at six months etanercept 25 mg was significantly more likely to achieve ACR50 than DMARD monotherapy but this difference was not found at 12, 24 or 36 months. TSS and ES radiographic scores were statistically significantly improved with etanercept 25 mg monotherapy compared with DMARD (TSS: MD -0.7; 95% CI -1.4 to 0.1; ES: MD -0.7; 95% CI -1.0 to -0.3) but there was no evidence of a statistically significant difference between etanercept 10 mg monotherapy and MTX.HarmsThere was no evidence of statistically significant differences in infections or serious infections between etanercept plus DMARD and DMARD alone at any point in time. Infection rates were higher in people receiving etanercept monotherapy compared with DMARD; however, there were no differences regarding serious infections. For those participants who had an inadequate response to DMARDs, the rate of total withdrawals was lower for the etanercept plus DMARD group compared with DMARD alone (RR 0.53; 95% CI 0.36 to 0.77, ATB 18%). No other statistically significant differences were observed in any of the assessed comparisons.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Etanercept 25 mg administered subcutaneously twice weekly together with MTX was more efficacious than either etanercept or MTX monotherapy for ACR50 and it slowed joint radiographic progression after up to three years of treatment for all participants (responders or not). There was no evidence of a difference in the rates of infections between groups.

Improving work participation for adults with musculoskeletal conditions

The impact of musculoskeletal disorders on work is demanding more attention from clinicians. For many rheumatologists, inflammatory arthritis is the most frequently encountered condition that interferes with work. However, the cumulative burden of non-inflammatory arthropathies and disorders such as back pain, osteoarthritis and limb pain as a whole results in a much greater economic and human cost to society than inflammatory disease. New conceptual approaches and research results support the view that work loss does not need to be a frequent consequence of a musculoskeletal disorder or disability. This is often accomplished through a biopsychosocial and interdisciplinary approach, involving interaction between those with a musculoskeletal condition, their clinicians and employers. This review outlines the challenges and draws on the results of empirical studies to highlight potential opportunities to promote sustained ability for patients to successfully remain on the job. It also outlines future research opportunities.

Maximizing early treatment with biologics in patients with rheumatoid arthritis: the ultimate breakthrough in joints preservation

Rheumatoid arthritis (RA) is a chronic, systemic, progressive inflammatory disease that, if left untreated, can lead to irreversible joint damage and serious disability. In Central and Eastern Europe, RA treatment varies widely, partly due to economic factors, restrictive treatment guidelines, and access to practicing rheumatologists. The recent treatment paradigm shift of treating to target in RA with early, aggressive therapy has proven to be a successful strategy for achieving optimal clinical outcomes. Several clinical studies demonstrate that utilizing this strategy with anti-tumor necrosis factor biologics leads to improved clinical, radiographic, and functional outcomes. Patient education is also a critical component of the treating to target strategy, and the patient's version of the treat-to-target recommendations is an important tool for successful implementation. This review discusses the evidence for the treat-to-target approach and describes areas to improve the disparity of treatment between patients in Western European compared with Central and Eastern European countries.

The economic burden of rheumatoid arthritis: beyond health care costs

Rheumatoid arthritis (RA) not only causes significant morbidity, but also leads to substantial losses in terms of productivity that have a negative impact on the individual and the society. In countries, such as Canada, the US, and the UK, it is known that the costs to the economy in terms of sick leave and work-related disability run into billions of dollars. However, putting an accurate figure on these losses is not entirely straightforward. Most health-related studies use the "human capital" approach, which treats human beings as assets. A figure for lost productivity is calculated by multiplying hours lost by the hourly wage rate. It is a method that is not without its critics because of its emphasis on earning power, which discriminates against non-earners. Another method is the "friction-cost" approach, whereby absenteeism is only recorded if the missed work requires extra hours undertaken, either by the employee himself, or by the others. A third method is the "willingness-to-pay" approach which values life according to an individual's preference to avoid illness with an imputed monetary valuation on the various health outcomes being considered. A number of studies have shown that biologic RA treatments provide productivity benefits in terms of maintaining employment, as well as reducing absenteeism and presenteeism. Going forward, an approach recently adopted by the present authors with encouraging preliminary results, the Valuation of Lost Productivity, takes into account a wide range of factors to provide a measure of productivity that is as accurate as possible.

Golimumab - a new tool in the armoury against inflammatory arthritis

The development of biological drugs blocking tumour necrosis factor-alpha (TNF-α) has had a dramatic impact on the treatment of inflammatory arthritis in recent years. Golimumab is a fully human monoclonal antibody which inhibits TNF-α. It is licensed for the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis, psoriatic arthritis, and ankylosing spondylitis. In this review we evaluate the results of phase III studies using golimumab and explore the place of golimumab in the treatment of these diseases.

The value of early intervention in RA--a window of opportunity

Rheumatoid arthritis (RA) is associated with progressive joint destruction, with functional status influenced by both disease activity and radiographic progression. The case for early aggressive treatment of RA is based on large amounts of good data in many countries. Studies with conventional disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs in early RA have shown improved outcomes compared with later treatment, especially if an aggressive approach with combinations of drugs is used. Early intervention with tumour necrosis factor (TNF) inhibitors has been shown to improve clinical outcomes, induce remission and prevent radiographic progression. It also improves patients' functional status, health-related quality of life, and reduces fatigue. Patients with RA have reduced productivity, an increased number of lost work days and retire early; enabling patients to work should be at the core of a therapy's cost-effectiveness. Introduction of anti-TNF therapy early in RA has been shown to decrease job loss and reduce the amount of working time missed. Although the drug costs of initial treatment with combination therapy including a TNF inhibitor are high, these may be compensated by the reduction in lost productivity, making such a strategy cost-effective overall. In addition, some patients who respond well to combination therapy may be able to stop the TNF inhibitor. It is important to assess the benefits of any intervention not just to healthcare costs but to society as a whole, and physicians should be advocates for optimal access to effective therapies for their patients.

Measuring and valuing productivity loss due to poor health: A critical review

The objective of this study is to review current measurement issues and valuation methods such as "human capital" and "friction cost" for estimating productivity loss due to illness. Since observed wages diverge from marginal productivity when allowances are made for sick days and workers are risk averse, or when a job type involves team production, unavailability of perfect substitutes, and/or time-sensitivity of output, productivity loss is likely to be underestimated. A multiplier adjusting wage to marginal productivity needs to be developed for practical use. We further consider the ramifications of measuring labour input loss due to illness in both paid and unpaid work as well as the inclusion of presenteeism to the more traditional approach of measuring only absenteeism. Although a number of instruments have been developed to measure presenteeism, they generate widely varying estimates of productivity loss. Further investigation is required to identify which instrument provides a better estimate. Finally, we provide recommendations on measurement methods such as using subjective measures due to the unavailability of objective measures and the appropriate recall periods. We conclude by proposing a generic measure instead of a disease-specific measure and discuss important perspective related issues.

Work disability remains a major problem in rheumatoid arthritis in the 2000s: data from 32 countries in the QUEST-RA study

INTRODUCTION

Work disability is a major consequence of rheumatoid arthritis (RA), associated not only with traditional disease activity variables, but also more significantly with demographic, functional, occupational, and societal variables. Recent reports suggest that the use of biologic agents offers potential for reduced work disability rates, but the conclusions are based on surrogate disease activity measures derived from studies primarily from Western countries.

METHODS

The Quantitative Standard Monitoring of Patients with RA (QUEST-RA) multinational database of 8,039 patients in 86 sites in 32 countries, 16 with high gross domestic product (GDP) (>24K US dollars (USD) per capita) and 16 low-GDP countries (<11K USD), was analyzed for work and disability status at onset and over the course of RA and clinical status of patients who continued working or had stopped working in high-GDP versus low-GDP countries according to all RA Core Data Set measures. Associations of work disability status with RA Core Data Set variables and indices were analyzed using descriptive statistics and regression analyses.

RESULTS

At the time of first symptoms, 86% of men (range 57%-100% among countries) and 64% (19%-87%) of women <65 years were working. More than one third (37%) of these patients reported subsequent work disability because of RA. Among 1,756 patients whose symptoms had begun during the 2000s, the probabilities of continuing to work were 80% (95% confidence interval (CI) 78%-82%) at 2 years and 68% (95% CI 65%-71%) at 5 years, with similar patterns in high-GDP and low-GDP countries. Patients who continued working versus stopped working had significantly better clinical status for all clinical status measures and patient self-report scores, with similar patterns in high-GDP and low-GDP countries. However, patients who had stopped working in high-GDP countries had better clinical status than patients who continued working in low-GDP countries. The most significant identifier of work disability in all subgroups was Health Assessment Questionnaire (HAQ) functional disability score.

CONCLUSIONS

Work disability rates remain high among people with RA during this millennium. In low-GDP countries, people remain working with high levels of disability and disease activity. Cultural and economic differences between societies affect work disability as an outcome measure for RA.