AB0330 Characteristics of a moderate rheumatoid arthritis patient population who lost remission or low disease activity: Data from the consortium of rheumatology researchers of north america, INC. (CORRONA)

Comparison of Healthcare Utilization and Costs Between RA Patients Receiving Biological and Conventional Synthetic DMARDs: A Nationwide Population-Based Cohort Study in Taiwan

Background: The therapy with biological disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs (bDMARDs) has proven to rapidly reduce articular symptoms/signs, decrease morbidities, and improve health outcome in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) and be cost-effective in Western countries. However, the difference in healthcare utilization and costs between conventional synthetic DMARDs (csDMARDs) and bDMARDs in the treatment of RA patients in Taiwan remains largely unexplored.

Methods: Two cohorts of RA patients and their matched controls were identified from the National Health Insurance Research database (NHIRD). The csDMARD cohort comprised of patients who submitted claims during 1997–2003 for cyclosporine≥50 mg/day with concomitant use of ≥2 csDMARDs for ≥28 days (n=1,569), whilst the bDMARD cohort comprised of patients who had ≥1 claim during 2003–2011 for bDMARD (n = 1,530). The per-patient per-year healthcare utilization and costs were estimated by bootstrapping method, with a comparison being undertaken between csDMARD and bDMARD.

Results: The incremental number of hospitalization days was reduced from 2.3 days for csDMARD to 0.58 day for bDMARD. When compared to csDMARD-treated patients, the incremental total costs and RA-related medication costs were significantly higher in bDMARD-treated patients (US$9,081 vs. US$2,481; US$8,992 vs. US$1,883). However, the combined incremental healthcare utilization costs and non-RA medication costs were significantly lower in bDMARDs-treated patients compared to csDMARD-treated patients (US$374.7 vs. US$1,156.2).

Conclusion: Although total costs increased as a result of introducing biologics in RA treatment, biologics have undoubtedly given rise to the benefits of reduced healthcare utilization. The increase in medication costs from biologics was offset by the lower costs of healthcare utilization. Our findings suggest that the medication costs of biologics may be alleviated by an improvement in clinical outcomes.

Assessing prognosis and prediction of treatment response in early rheumatoid arthritis: systematic reviews

BACKGROUND

Rheumatoid arthritis (RA) is a chronic, debilitating disease associated with reduced quality of life and substantial costs. It is unclear which tests and assessment tools allow the best assessment of prognosis in people with early RA and whether or not variables predict the response of patients to different drug treatments.

OBJECTIVE

To systematically review evidence on the use of selected tests and assessment tools in patients with early RA (1) in the evaluation of a prognosis (review 1) and (2) as predictive markers of treatment response (review 2).

DATA SOURCES

Electronic databases (e.g. MEDLINE, EMBASE, The Cochrane Library, Web of Science Conference Proceedings; searched to September 2016), registers, key websites, hand-searching of reference lists of included studies and key systematic reviews and contact with experts.

STUDY SELECTION

Review 1 - primary studies on the development, external validation and impact of clinical prediction models for selected outcomes in adult early RA patients. Review 2 - primary studies on the interaction between selected baseline covariates and treatment (conventional and biological disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs) on salient outcomes in adult early RA patients.

RESULTS

Review 1 - 22 model development studies and one combined model development/external validation study reporting 39 clinical prediction models were included. Five external validation studies evaluating eight clinical prediction models for radiographic joint damage were also included. c-statistics from internal validation ranged from 0.63 to 0.87 for radiographic progression (different definitions, six studies) and 0.78 to 0.82 for the Health Assessment Questionnaire (HAQ). Predictive performance in external validations varied considerably. Three models [(1) Active controlled Study of Patients receiving Infliximab for the treatment of Rheumatoid arthritis of Early onset (ASPIRE) C-reactive protein (ASPIRE CRP), (2) ASPIRE erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ASPIRE ESR) and (3) Behandelings Strategie (BeSt)] were externally validated using the same outcome definition in more than one population. Results of the random-effects meta-analysis suggested substantial uncertainty in the expected predictive performance of models in a new sample of patients. Review 2 - 12 studies were identified. Covariates examined included anti-citrullinated protein/peptide anti-body (ACPA) status, smoking status, erosions, rheumatoid factor status, C-reactive protein level, erythrocyte sedimentation rate, swollen joint count (SJC), body mass index and vascularity of synovium on power Doppler ultrasound (PDUS). Outcomes examined included erosions/radiographic progression, disease activity, physical function and Disease Activity Score-28 remission. There was statistical evidence to suggest that ACPA status, SJC and PDUS status at baseline may be treatment effect modifiers, but not necessarily that they are prognostic of response for all treatments. Most of the results were subject to considerable uncertainty and were not statistically significant.

LIMITATIONS

The meta-analysis in review 1 was limited by the availability of only a small number of external validation studies. Studies rarely investigated the interaction between predictors and treatment.

SUGGESTED RESEARCH PRIORITIES

Collaborative research (including the use of individual participant data) is needed to further develop and externally validate the clinical prediction models. The clinical prediction models should be validated with respect to individual treatments. Future assessments of treatment by covariate interactions should follow good statistical practice.

CONCLUSIONS

Review 1 - uncertainty remains over the optimal prediction model(s) for use in clinical practice. Review 2 - in general, there was insufficient evidence that the effect of treatment depended on baseline characteristics.

STUDY REGISTRATION

This study is registered as PROSPERO CRD42016042402.

FUNDING

The National Institute for Health Research Health Technology Assessment programme.

Economic Burden and Treatment Patterns of Cycling between Conventional Synthetic Disease-modifying Antirheumatic Drugs Among Biologic-treated Patients with Rheumatoid Arthritis

PURPOSE

To assess the economic outcomes and treatment patterns among patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) who used 1, 2, or 3 or more conventional synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs) before receiving a biologic therapy.

METHODS

Adult patients with ≥2 RA diagnoses (International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision, Clinical Modification [ICD-9-CM] codes 714.xx) on different dates, ≥1 claim for a conventional synthetic DMARD, and ≥1 claim for a biologic DMARD were identified from a large commercial claims database. The initiation date of the first biologic DMARD was defined as the index date. Based on the number of distinct conventional synthetic DMARDs initiated between the first RA diagnosis and the index date, patients were classified into 3 cohorts: those who used 1, 2, or 3 or more conventional synthetic DMARDs. Baseline characteristics were measured 6 months preindex date and compared between the 3 cohorts. All-cause health care costs (in 2014 US$) were compared during the follow-up period (12 months postbiologic initiation) using multivariable gamma models adjusting for baseline characteristics. Time to discontinuation of the index biologic DMARD and time to switching to a new DMARD were compared using multivariable Cox proportional hazards models.

FINDINGS

The 1, 2, and 3 or more conventional synthetic DMARD cohorts included 6215; 3227; and 976 patients, respectively. At baseline, patients in the 3 or more conventional synthetic DMARD cohort had the least severe RA, as indicated by the lowest claims-based index for RA severity score (1 vs 2 vs 3 or more = 6.1 vs 5.9 vs 5.8). During the study period, there was a significant association between number of conventional synthetic DMARDs and higher all-cause total health care costs (adjusted mean difference, 1 vs 2: $772; P < 0.001; 2 vs 3 or more: $2390; P < 0.001). The all-cause medical and pharmacy costs were also significantly higher with the increasing number of conventional synthetic DMARDs. Patients who cycled more conventional synthetic DMARDs were also more likely to switch treatment after biologic initiation (1 vs 2: adjusted hazard ratio = 0.89; P = 0.005; 2 vs 3 or more: adjusted hazard ratio = 0.89; P = 0.087). There were no differences in index biologic discontinuation between the 3 cohorts.

IMPLICATIONS

Patients with RA who cycled more conventional synthetic DMARDs had increased economic burden in the 12 months following biologic initiation and were more likely to switch therapy. These results highlight the importance of timely switching to biologic DMARDs for the treatment of RA.