The CEDAR Study: A Longitudinal Study of the Clinical Effects of Conventional DMARDs and Biologic DMARDs in Australian Rheumatology Practice

Cost-Utility Analysis of Biologic Disease-Modifying Antirheumatic Drugs for Patients With Psoriatic Arthritis in Thailand

OBJECTIVES

This study aimed to assess the cost-effectiveness of biologic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (bDMARDs) for treating patients with psoriatic arthritis who failed conventional synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (csDMARDs).

METHODS

A decision tree and Markov model were constructed to capture long-term costs and outcomes from a societal perspective. Patients with psoriatic arthritis who failed 2 previous csDMARDs were modeled over a 3-month cycle with a lifetime horizon. Clinical probabilities were derived from a published meta-analysis. Prices of bDMARDs were proposed by pharmaceutical companies. Other costs and utilities were based on data in Thailand. All costs and outcomes were discounted at a 3% annual rate. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratio and a series of sensitivity analyses were performed.

RESULTS

All 11 bDMARDs (3 infliximab originator and biosimilars, 2 etanercept originator and biosimilar, golimumab, 2 secukinumab 150 mg and 300 mg, 3 adalimumab biosimilars) gained better quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) with more costly than csDMARDs. Infliximab had the highest QALYs compared with other bDMARDs. Only secukinumab 150 mg showed the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio below the Thai threshold of 5152 US dollars per QALY. Cost of bDMARDs was the most influential factor.

CONCLUSIONS

At the current price, secukinumab 150 mg shows the value for money in the Thai context. Price negotiation is of great importance for other bDMARDs.

Reasons for Biologic and Targeted Synthetic Disease-modifying Antirheumatic Drug Cessation and Persistence of Second-line Treatment in a Rheumatoid Arthritis Dataset

OBJECTIVE

To provide real-world evidence about the reasons why Australian rheumatologists cease biologic (b) and targeted synthetic (ts) disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARD) when treating patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA), and to assess (1) the primary failure rate for first-line treatment, and (2) the persistence on second-line treatments in patients who stopped first-line tumor necrosis factor inhibitors (TNFi).

METHODS

This is a multicenter retrospective, noninterventional study of patients with RA enrolled in the Australian Optimising Patient outcome in Australian RheumatoLogy (OPAL) dataset with a start date of b/tsDMARD between August 1, 2010, and June 30, 2017. Primary failure was defined as stopping treatment within 6 months of treatment initiation.

RESULTS

Data from 7740 patients were analyzed; 6914 patients received first-line b/tsDMARD. First-line treatment was stopped in 3383 (49%) patients; 1263 (37%) were classified as primary failures. The most common reason was "lack of efficacy" (947/2656, 36%). Of the patients who stopped first-line TNFi, 43% (1111/2560) received second-line TNFi, which resulted in the shortest median time to stopping second-line treatment (11 months, 95% CI 9-12) compared with non-TNFi. The longest second-line median treatment duration after first-line TNFi was for patients receiving rituximab (39 months, 95% CI 27-74).

CONCLUSION

A large proportion of patients who stopped first-line TNFi therapy received another TNFi despite evidence for longer treatment persistence on second-line b/tsDMARD with a different mode of action. Lack of efficacy was recorded as the most common reason for making a switch in first-line treatment of patients with RA.

Physician Adherence to Treat-to-Target and Practice Guidelines in Rheumatoid Arthritis

Principles of treat-to-target (T2T) have been widely adopted in both multinational and regional guidelines for rheumatoid arthritis (RA). Several questionnaire studies among physicians and real-world data have suggested that an evidence-practice gap exists in RA management. Investigating physician adherence to T2T, which requires a process measure, is difficult. Different practice patterns among physicians are observed, while adherence to protocolized treatment declines over time. Rheumatologist awareness, agreement, and claims of adherence to T2T guidelines are not always consistent with medical records. Comorbidities, a difficult disease course, communication barriers, and individual preferences may hinder an intensive, proactive treatment stance. Interpreting deviations from protocolized treatment/T2T guidelines requires sufficient clinical context, though higher adherence seems to improve clinical outcomes. Nonmedical constraints in routine care may consist of barriers in healthcare structure and socioeconomic factors. Therefore, strategies to improve the institution of T2T should be tailored to local healthcare. Educational interventions to improve T2T adherence among physicians may show a moderate, although beneficial effect. Meanwhile, a proportion of patients with inadequately controlled RA exists, while management decisions may not be in accordance with T2T. Physicians tend to be aware of current guidelines, but their institution in routine practice seems challenging, which warrants attention and further study.

Persistence of Tofacitinib in the Treatment of Rheumatoid Arthritis in Open-Label, Long-Term Extension Studies up to 9.5 Years

Objective

Tofacitinib is an oral Janus kinase inhibitor for the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis (RA). This post hoc analysis evaluated tofacitinib persistence in patients with RA in long‐term extension (LTE) studies up to 9.5 years.

Methods

Data were pooled from two LTE studies: ORAL Sequel (NCT00413699) and Study A3921041 (NCT00661661). Patients received tofacitinib 5 or 10 mg twice daily (BID), as monotherapy or with background conventional synthetic disease‐modifying antirheumatic drugs. Kaplan‐Meier estimates for tofacitinib drug survival and reasons for discontinuation were evaluated. Baseline factors were analyzed as predictors of persistence.

Results

In 4967 tofacitinib‐treated patients entering LTE studies, mean (maximum) treatment duration was 3.5 (9.4) years. Median drug survival (95% confidence interval) was 4.9 (4.7, 5.1) years. Estimated 2‐ and 5‐year drug survival rates were 75.5% and 49.4%, respectively. Median drug survival was similar between the tofacitinib 5 and 10 mg BID groups, and slightly higher for patients receiving tofacitinib monotherapy versus combination therapy. Overall, 50.7% of patients discontinued tofacitinib; of these, 47.2% were due to adverse events and 7.1% for lack/loss of efficacy. An increased risk of discontinuation was associated with baseline diabetes, hypertension, negative anticyclic citrullinated peptide (anti‐CCP), negative rheumatoid factor (RF), and inadequate response to tumor necrosis factor inhibitors (TNFi‐IR).

Conclusion

Median drug survival of tofacitinib‐treated patients participating in LTE studies was approximately 5 years and was similar for tofacitinib dosed at 5 and 10 mg BID. Reduced drug survival was associated with negative anti‐CCP/RF status, TNFi‐IR, and certain comorbidities. These data support tofacitinib use for long‐term management of RA.

Persistence to subcutaneous biological agents in Hungarian patients treated for inflammatory arthritis

BACKGROUND

The aim of the study was to compare drug survival rate of subcutaneous tumor necrosis factor alpha inhibitors in rheumatoid arthritis, ankylosing spondylitis, and psoriatic arthritis patients in Hungary.

METHODS

This was a retrospective analysis using data collected from 5,647 patients over a period of 10 years who were treated with any of the following drugs: adalimumab (ADA), etanercept, certolizumab pegol (CZP), and golimumab (GLM). National Health Insurance Fund's hospital, drug reimbursement, and special reimbursement registry data have been used in this study. Drug survival rate was calculated according to Kaplan-Meier survival analysis. Propensity score matching was used to reduce the potential bias caused by the inhomogeneity resulting from demographic characteristics, patient pathways, or drug administration protocols. Both raw and propensity matched data were subject of pairwise comparison between the four subcutaneous therapies.

RESULTS

The overall rate of persistence for the 4 biological therapies was between 53% and 61% after 1 year and between 14% and 19% after 4 years (follow-up time). Pairwise comparisons between therapies showed significant differences with GLM-treated patients showing longer median survival times than patients on other therapies. After propensity matching, these differences remained statistically significant between GLM and ADA or CZP over 4 years.

CONCLUSION

Hungarian show longer persistence to GLM compared to ADA and CZP.