OP0167 A randomized, double-blind, phase 1 study demonstrates equivalence in pharmacokinetics, safety, and efficacy of CT-P13 and infliximab in patients with ankylosing spondylitis

Tumour necrosis factor-α inhibitors for ankylosing spondylitis and non-radiographic axial spondyloarthritis: a systematic review and economic evaluation

BACKGROUND

Tumour necrosis factor (TNF)-α inhibitors (anti-TNFs) are typically used when the inflammatory rheumatologic diseases ankylosing spondylitis (AS) and non-radiographic axial spondyloarthritis (nr-AxSpA) have not responded adequately to conventional therapy. Current National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) guidance recommends treatment with adalimumab, etanercept and golimumab in adults with active (severe) AS only if certain criteria are fulfilled but it does not recommend infliximab for AS. Anti-TNFs for patients with nr-AxSpA have not previously been appraised by NICE.

OBJECTIVE

To determine the clinical effectiveness, safety and cost-effectiveness within the NHS of adalimumab, certolizumab pegol, etanercept, golimumab and infliximab, within their licensed indications, for the treatment of severe active AS or severe nr-AxSpA (but with objective signs of inflammation).

DESIGN

Systematic review and economic model.

DATA SOURCES

Fifteen databases were searched for relevant studies in July 2014.

REVIEW METHODS

Clinical effectiveness data from randomised controlled trials (RCTs) were synthesised using Bayesian network meta-analysis methods. Results from other studies were summarised narratively. Only full economic evaluations that compared two or more options and considered both costs and consequences were included in the systematic review of cost-effectiveness studies. The differences in the approaches and assumptions used across the studies, and also those in the manufacturer's submissions, were examined in order to explain any discrepancies in the findings and to identify key areas of uncertainty. A de novo decision model was developed with a generalised framework for evidence synthesis that pooled change in disease activity (BASDAI and BASDAI 50) and simultaneously synthesised information on function (BASFI) to determine the long-term quality-adjusted life-year and cost burden of the disease in the economic model. The decision model was developed in accordance with the NICE reference case. The model has a lifetime horizon (60 years) and considers costs from the perspective of the NHS and personal social services. Health effects were expressed in terms of quality-adjusted life-years.

RESULTS

In total, 28 eligible RCTs were identified and 26 were placebo controlled (mostly up to 12 weeks); 17 extended into open-label active treatment-only phases. Most RCTs were judged to have a low risk of bias overall. In both AS and nr-AxSpA populations, anti-TNFs produced clinically important benefits to patients in terms of improving function and reducing disease activity; for AS, the relative risks for ASAS 40 ranged from 2.53 to 3.42. The efficacy estimates were consistently slightly smaller for nr-AxSpA than for AS. Statistical (and clinical) heterogeneity was more apparent in the nr-AxSpA analyses than in the AS analyses; both the reliability of the nr-AxSpA meta-analysis results and their true relevance to patients seen in clinical practice are questionable. In AS, anti-TNFs are approximately equally effective. Effectiveness appears to be maintained over time, with around 50% of patients still responding at 2 years. Evidence for an effect of anti-TNFs delaying disease progression was limited; results from ongoing long-term studies should help to clarify this issue. Sequential treatment with anti-TNFs can be worthwhile but the drug survival response rates and benefits are reduced with second and third anti-TNFs. The de novo model, which addressed many of the issues of earlier evaluations, generated incremental cost-effectiveness ratios ranging from £19,240 to £66,529 depending on anti-TNF and modelling assumptions.

CONCLUSIONS

In both AS and nr-AxSpA populations anti-TNFs are clinically effective, although more so in AS than in nr-AxSpA. Anti-TNFs may be an effective use of NHS resources depending on which assumptions are considered appropriate.

FUTURE WORK RECOMMENDATIONS

Randomised trials are needed to identify the nr-AxSpA population who will benefit the most from anti-TNFs.

STUDY REGISTRATION

This study is registered as PROSPERO CRD42014010182.

FUNDING

The National Institute for Health Research Health Technology Assessment programme.

Biosimilars: a systematic review of published and ongoing clinical trials of antipsoriatics in chronic inflammatory diseases

Biosimilars for psoriasis treatment are currently being developed. Comparison of their efficacy and safety is a challenge. For approval, the European Medicines Agency (EMA) considers indirect evidence from other indications (for example, rheumatoid arthritis) as sufficient. Systematic review of biosimilars for psoriasis and other indications, review of ongoing trials in trial registers. Systematic search for randomized controlled trials (RCT) on biosimilars to adalimumab, etanercept, infliximab, and ustekinumab compared to their reference medication: (1) Publications in Medline, Medline In-Process, Embase, Cochrane Library (efficacy, safety, immunogenicity) and (2) ongoing studies in clinical trial registers. No trials on biosimilars in psoriasis patients were identified. As to the infliximab biosimilar, there is data on patients with ankylosing spondylitis and rheumatoid arthritis, indicating no clinically relevant differences regarding efficacy and safety. Currently, there are two registered studies of an adalimumab biosimilar and one study of an etanercept biosimilar in psoriasis patients. Further ongoing studies on biosimilars to adalimumab, etanercept, and infliximab - all in rheumatoid arthritis patients - were identified. There is currently only limited data regarding RCTs with biosimilars. Provision of further clinical data and inclusion of patients in patient registers will be crucial.

Biologic therapies for spondyloarthritis: what is new?

The course of axial spondyloarthritis (axSpA), including ankylosing spondylitis (AS), is strongly influenced by the degree of disease activity over time, which is mainly based on inflammation, and by the impairment of function, which is based on structural damage-mainly, new bone formation-and inflammation. In AS, nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory agents are currently recommended as the first choice of medical therapy, and there is also a clear role for regular exercise and physiotherapy in order to preserve and prevent loss of spinal mobility. For patients who have insufficiently responded to conventional medications, there are now four biologics approved for the treatment of patients with active AS in many countries, all directed against TNFα: infliximab, etanercept, adalimumab, and golimumab; studies with certolizumab are currently ongoing. Several studies with patients classified as nonradiographic axSpA have also shown a good response to TNF blockers; in patients with early disease and high CRP levels, the response rates were even better. Long-term studies with TNF blockers have shown declining retention rates over time but sustained clinical efficacy in the patients who remained on treatment. States of drug-free remission are rarely reached and only for relatively short periods of time. More studies including magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) are needed to further examine the lack of effect of anti-TNF treatment on radiographic progression in the axial skeleton. Whether the effect of an early intervention with biologics will prevent the development of bone growth in patients with nonradiographic axial SpA remains to be seen. Biologics other than TNF blockers are currently not recommended for the treatment of patients with axSpA, because of insufficient evidence of clinically relevant efficacy. The anti-IL-17a antibody secukinumab may be efficacious, on the basis of a proof-of-concept trial. Finally, first data on biosimilars of TNF blockers have recently been presented.