Cost of treating rheumatoid arthritis in the primary care public health system in Ireland: A time-driven activity-based cost analysis

Background

Chronic diseases are at epidemic proportions and continuing to increase in both incidence and prevalence globally. Therefore, there is a growing need to assess and improve on the value currently provided within chronic care pathways. Examining the costs associated with care pathways is a critical part of assessing this value in order to better understand and introduce potential cost-saving interventions.

Objectives

Examining one such chronic disease, Rheumatoid Arthritis (RA), this study aimed to assess the cost associated with RA in primary care within the Health Service Executive (HSE) in Ireland.

Methods

Following mapping of the care pathway, patient vignettes based on exemplar RA patient types were used to conduct semi-structed interviews with every member (N = 21) of the primary care RA pathway. Time-Driven Activity-Based Costing (TDABC) was then used to calculate the overall cost of each patient (vignette) type.

Results

RA is an expensive condition regardless of disease stage. However, newly diagnosed patients as well as those with advanced disease in need of surgical interventions demonstrated the highest costs in terms of primary care personnel use. Additionally, patients prescribed Biological Disease-Modifying Anti-Rheumatic Drugs (bDMARDs) cost significantly more than those on Conventional Synthetic Disease-Modifying Anti-Rheumatic Drugs (csDMARDs) regardless of disease stage or personnel resource use.

Conclusion

RA and a subset of RA patients that exert the highest healthcare costs are growing in prevalence. Therefore, this study contributes by assessing the costs associated with RA in HSE primary care that can facilitate better understanding the current value being provided and improve upon the current care pathway to cut future costs.

Efficacy of switching from originator etanercept to biosimilar YLB113 in real-world patients with rheumatoid arthritis: A retrospective 12 months follow-up study

Purpose: To investigate the disease activity in real-world patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) who switched from originator etanercept (ETN) to biosimilar YLB113. Methods: Forty one RA patients who switched from ETN to YLB113 were divided into 2 groups based on the Disease Activity Score based on the 28-joint count (DAS28) 12 months after switching (R group: DAS28 < 2.6, N group: DAS28 ≥ 2.6), and the baseline characteristics were statistically examined. A receiver operating characteristics (ROC) analysis was performed to estimate the cut-off value of DAS28 at baseline to achieve remission 12 months after switching. Results: There was no significant difference in the DAS28 at baseline and 12 months after switching (p = .83). Sixteen out of the 20 patients in remission at baseline achieved remission after switching. A univariate analysis revealed the rheumatoid factor (p = .04) and DAS28 (p < .001) at baseline were significantly lower in the R group than in the N group. Furthermore, logistic regression analysis revealed DAS28 was an independent factor (p = .004) for achieving remission 12 months after switching. An ROC curve analysis showed the optimal cut-off value for DAS28 at baseline to achieve remission at 12 months after switching was 2.5. Conclusions: RA patients who achieved remission using originator ETN, were able to maintain remission even if they switched to YLB113.

Development of a nursing practice scale for rheumatoid arthritis treatment with biological disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs

OBJECTIVE

The objective of the study was to develop a nursing practice scale for rheumatoid arthritis treatment with biological disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs.

METHODS

An anonymous self-administered questionnaire survey was administered to 1826 nurses, 960 of whom were Certified Nurses by Japan Rheumatism Foundation (CNJRFs) and 866 were registered nurses (RNs). Using exploratory factor analysis, criterion validity, and known-groups technique, we assessed the reliability and validity of the self-created 19-item nursing practice scale to evaluate the care provided to patients with rheumatoid arthritis receiving biological disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs based on the nurse's role as clarified from a literature review of relevant studies.

RESULTS

A total of 698 (38.4%) responses were collected from 407 CNJRFs and 291 RNs. Exploratory factor analysis was conducted on 18 items to examine three factors: 'nursing to enhance patients' capacity for self-care', 'nursing in which patients participate in decision-making', and 'nursing in which team medical care is promoted'. Cronbach's α was .95. The Spearman's coefficient was ρ = .738 for criterion validity. Using the known-groups technique, CNJRFs had higher total scale scores than RNs (P < .05).

CONCLUSIONS

The results confirmed the reliability, criterion validity, and construct validity of the scale.

Consensus statement on the use of biosimilar drugs in immune-mediated diseases in Spain

OBJECTIVE

To improve knowledge about biosimilar medicines and to generate a consensus framework on their use.

METHODS

Qualitative study. A multidisciplinary group of experts in biosimilar medicines was established (1dermatologist, 1hospital pharmacist, 1rheumatologist, and 1gastroenterologist) who defined the sections and topics of the document. A narrative literature review was performed in Medline to identify articles on biosimilar medicines. Systematic reviews, controlled, pre-clinical, clinical, and real-life studies were selected. Based on the results of the review, several general principles and recommendations were generated. The level of agreement was tested in a Delphi that was extended to 66 health professionals who voted from 1 (totally disagree) to 10 (totally agree). Agreement was defined if at least 70% of the participants voted ≥7.

RESULTS

The literature review included 555 articles. A total of 10 general principles and recommendations were voted upon. All reached the level of agreement established. The document includes data on the main characteristics of biosimilar medicines (definition, development, approval, indication extrapolation, interchangeability, financing, and traceability); published evidence (biosimilarity, efficacy, effectiveness, safety, immunogenicity, efficiency, switch); barriers and facilitators to its use; and data on information for patients.

CONCLUSIONS

Authorized biosimilar medicines meet all the characteristics of quality, efficacy, and safety. They also significantly help improve patient access to biological therapies and contribute to health system sustainability.

Expanding access to biotherapeutics in low-income and middle-income countries through public health non-exclusive voluntary intellectual property licensing: considerations, requirements, and opportunities

Biotherapeutics, such as recombinant proteins and monoclonal antibodies, have become mainstays of modern medicine as shown by their increasing number in the WHO Model List of Essential Medicines. However, despite frequently offering clinical advantages over standards of care, they remain largely out of reach for populations in low-income and middle-income countries (LMICs), partly because of high costs. Accordingly, the WHO Model List of Essential Medicines Expert Committee has requested that the Medicines Patent Pool explore intellectual property licensing to address this challenge. We therefore investigated how licensing could successfully improve affordability of and timely access to biotherapeutics in LMICs, by leveraging expert consultations, literature analysis, and internal technical knowledge. The key elements identified as relevant to support access to affordable biosimilars in LMICs through licensing include: prioritising potential biotherapeutic targets according to their potential for public health impact; supporting biosimilar product and clinical development (including through technology transfer to expedite regulatory approval); and facilitating biosimilars' entry and use in LMICs (by meeting procurement, supply chain, and health system requirements).

The whole experience of public hospital physicians from several specialties with biopharmaceutical effectiveness, safety, adverse drug reactions and interchangeability: A qualitative study

Background

Although there is increasing support for biosimilar medicines by the Iraqi Ministry of Health (MOH), there is scarce information about whether physicians accept these medicines and support movement toward replacing reference medicines with their biosimilar counterparts.

Objectives

The study objectives were to 1) explore in-depth the perceptions of Iraqi physicians working in public hospitals about the difference in effectiveness and safety between biosimilar medicines and their reference biological counterparts, 2) evaluate physicians' barriers to prescribing biosimilar medicines, 3) assess the adherence of physicians to the new pharmacovigilance regulations on reporting biopharmaceutical adverse drug reactions (ADRs) and 4) identify any barriers facing physicians to reporting biopharmaceutical- ADRs.

Methods

This qualitative study included face-to-face and virtual semi-structured interviews involving physicians from different disciplines who had experience with biological or biosimilar medicines. The interviews were conducted between November 6, 2020, and February 7, 2021. Thematic analyses were used to analyze qualitative data generated from the interviews.

Results

The study sample included 36 physicians (6 women and 30 men) from seven different specialties at ten governmental hospitals mainly in Baghdad, and one physician was from Mosul, Iraq. Because most physicians had insufficient experience with biosimilar medications and were not sure about their effectiveness, the majority were hesitant to prescribe them. Most physicians preferred to prescribe reference biological medicines initially. However, the initial prescribing and switching between a reference and counterpart biosimilar relies on its availability. They chose biosimilar medications that have been approved by the U.S. FDA or EMA. Most physicians were unaware about the new pharmacovigilance regulations to report adverse biopharmaceutical reactions. The physicians tended to underreport biopharmaceutical ADRs and believed that inadequate physician-pharmacist collaboration negatively impacts preventing and reporting ADRs.

Conclusions

Medicine procurement in healthcare settings should focus on sustainably securing high-quality biopharmaceuticals rather than looking only at costs to enhance physician experience and patient clinical outcomes. Promoting documentation, monitoring, and physician-pharmacist collaboration is pivotal to prevent, monitor, and treat biopharmaceutical ADRs.

•

It explored the experience of physicians with the safety and effectiveness of biopharmaceutical medications.

•

It was the first in-depth, field-based study investigating the facilitators and barriers of biosimilar medicines prescribing among Iraqi physicians.

•

The study findings help to assess the impact of the regulations of the Iraqi Pharmacovigilance Center regarding biopharmaceuticals.

•

The study can explain in depth the barriers facing physicians to report ADRs related to biopharmaceutical medications

•

It can assist health officials to approve and procure biopharmaceuticals in a way helps physicians and satisfy patient needs

Awareness and Knowledge of Pharmacists toward Biosimilar Medicines: A Survey in Jordan

Aims

Pharmacists in all clinical settings are recognized drug experts and integral educators of biosimilar medicines. Therefore, the objective of this study was to assess pharmacists' knowledge, predictors of knowledge, and views toward biosimilar medicines in Jordan.

Methods

A cross-sectional study was conducted in Jordan during October-December 2020. An Internet-based self-administrated questionnaire on knowledge and views was distributed using social media groups to the pharmacists among different areas in Jordan. A descriptive and univariate analysis was performed. Binary logistic regression was conducted to determine the predictors of knowledge including all variables with p < 0.20 on univariate analysis.

Results

A total 536 responses were received, 502 of which were completed (93.7% response rate). A total of 52.6% of the pharmacists were knowledgeable about biosimilar medicines and the mean of knowledge level was 6.47 ± 1.62 (range 2-10). Multivariate analysis identified that respondents who had heard about biosimilars before (OR = 1.942, 95% CI = 1.231-3.063, p < 0.05) was more likely to be knowledgeable. Respondents who had not taken the course or the postgraduating training course about biosimilars that were less likely to be knowledgeable (OR = 0.548, 95% CI = 0.357-0.839, p < 0.05). A positive response was noted in pharmacist's view regarding the implementation of biosimilar medicines in healthcare setting, biosimilar medicine prescription related to decreased costs, self-study about biosimilar medicine, and incorporating biosimilar education program at the pharmacy school curriculum universities level.

Conclusions

Pharmacists' views and knowledge vary regarding the particularities and key issues on biosimilar medicines in Jordan. Incorporating biosimilar course in pharmacy school curriculum could improve their acceptance for future pharmacy jobs.

Janus kinase versus TNF inhibitors: where we stand today in rheumatoid arthritis

INTRODUCTION

In recent decades, Rheumatoid arthritis (RA) treatment landscape has evolved with the induction of new biological and targeted therapies that provide significant therapeutic benefits in patients with sustained disease.

AREAS COVERED

Tumor necrosis factor inhibitors (TNFi) were the first biologics used in the treatment of RA. Although they present a significant efficacy, an insufficient response of some patients led to further research and discovery of targeted therapies, such as Janus kinase inhibitors (JAKi), which act at a molecular level, regulating many cytokines. Clinical benefits have been seen with both TNFi and JAKi as monotherapy and combined with conventional synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs. Still, some significant side effects have been reported with JAKi, and several questions remain about their safety and selectivity in action. This review summarizes the current knowledge on the mechanism of action, the clinical efficacy, and safety of TNFi vs. JAKi.

EXPERT OPINION

TNFi and JAKi are particularly useful in treating inflammatory arthropathies. Both drug categories are recommended by ACR and EULAR institutions in RA patients suffering from moderate to severe disease. Safety data in long-term studies are required to determine the optimal benefit to the risk profile of JAKi use.

Exploring the effect of Crinum latifolia in obesity: possible role of oxidative, angiogenic, and inflammatory pathways

Obesity is a multifaceted disease encompassing deposition of an unnecessary amount of fat which upsurges the possibility of other complications, viz., hypertension and certain type of cancers. Although obesity results from combination of genetic factors, improper diet and inadequate physical exercise also play a major role in its onset. The present study aims at exploring the anti-obesity activity of Crinum latifolia leaf extract in obese rats. The leaves were extracted using hydroalcoholic extraction which was later diluted with water and given to obese rats. The dosing was started from the 4^th week (by oral administration of extract of Crinum latifolia (100 mg/kg and 200 mg/kg) and combination of Crinum latifolia leaf extract 200 mg/kg and orlistat 30 mg/kg) till the 10^th week. Various angiogenic, antioxidant, biochemical, and inflammatory biomarkers were assessed at the end of the study. The obese symptoms were progressively reduced in treatment groups when compared to disease control groups. The angiogenic parameters and inflammatory parameters were consequently reduced in treatment groups. The oxidative parameters superoxide dismutase (SOD) and catalase were gradually increased, while levels of TBARS were reduced in treatment groups showing antioxidant nature of leaf hydroalcoholic extract. The Crinum latifolia leaf extract possesses anti-obesity properties and therefore can be used as a therapeutic option in the management of obesity.

Tailored first-line biologic and targeted synthetic disease modifying anti-rheumatic drugs therapy in patients with rheumatoid arthritis: 2021 updated ITABIO statements

INTRODUCTION

In 2015, the Italian board for the TAilored BIOlogic therapy (ITABIO) proposed evidence-based decisional statements for first-line tailored biologic therapy in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA). Taking into account the new licensed drugs, the aim of the present review was to update the previous statements.

AREAS COVERED

A narrative review of the most recent evidence on the efficacy and safety of old and newly licensed drugs for the treatment of articular and extra-articular RA was performed. In addition, host-related variables potentially driving the therapy choice, such as the infection risk, the cardiovascular risk, the risk of deep vein thrombosis, thromboembolism, pregnancy, and obesity were analyzed. Consequently, several statements for personalized therapy were formulated, thus providing a decisional algorithm useful for proper personalized therapy of RA patients in clinical practice.

EXPERT OPINION

Several clinical variables related to specific drug and host characteristics may drive the choice toward anti-TNF and non-anti-TNF biologics, or anti-JAKs, thus allowing to personalize the therapy. Consequently, the right therapy for the right patient would ensure a successful therapeutic intervention.

Effectiveness, safety and economic analysis of Benepali in clinical practice

OBJECTIVE

To assess the effectiveness, safety and cost of Etanercept biosimilar in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA), spondyloarthritis (SpA) and psoriatic arthritis (PsA) compared to the standard drug in real clinical practice.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Retrospective observational study. Case series of 138 patients with RA, SpA or PsA treated with at least one dose of Benepali® (n = 79) or Enbrel® (n = 59). Drug retention time was the primary efficacy endpoint compared to the biosimilar and the original. The proportion of patients achieving low disease activity or remission after 52 weeks was used as the secondary outcome. Safety was assessed by means of the adverse effects incidence rate. A cost minimization analysis was performed.

RESULTS

No differences were observed regarding treatment retention time between drugs (median [95% confidence interval, 95% CI] at 12.0 months [10.2-12.0] for the biosimilar and 12.0 months [12.0-12.0] for the original). Similar improvements, in terms of inflammatory activity and physical function, were obtained after 52 weeks except for patients with SpA and PsA who, in general, experienced improvements of BASDAI and ASDAS with the original compared with the biosimilar. No significant differences were observed in the total number of adverse effects (.43 events/patient-years versus the biosimilar and .53 versus the original). Using the biosimilar in place of the original drug resulted in a net savings of 118,383.55 € (1,747.20 €/patient-years) for the hospital.

CONCLUSION

The biosimilar Benepali is as effective and safe as the original and much more cost-effective.

Fine Comparison of the Efficacy and Safety Between GB242 and Infliximab in Patients with Rheumatoid Arthritis: A Phase III Study

INTRODUCTION

This phase III trial (NCT04178850) evaluated the efficacy, safety, and immunogenicity of GB242, an infliximab biosimilar, vs. infliximab (Remicade^®) reference product in patients with moderate-to-severe active rheumatoid arthritis (RA) combination with methotrexate (MTX) therapy.

METHODS

Patients were randomized in a 1:1 ratio to receive either GB242 or INF (3 mg/kg). Therapeutic equivalence of clinical response according to the American College of Rheumatology 20% (ACR20) response rate at week 30 was declared if the two-sided 95% CI for the treatment difference was within ± 14%. The comparison of GB242 with INF also included the proportion of patients achieving a week 30 ACR 50 response, ACR70 response, change in Disease Activity Score 28 (DAS28), as well as safety and immunogenicity.

RESULTS

A total of 570 subjects were randomized into GB242 (N = 285) or INF (N = 285) and 283 subjects in each group were analyzed. At week 30, the ACR20 was 62.54% for the GB242 group (95% CI 56.62-68.20%) and 56.89% for the INF group (95% CI 50.90-62.74%). The difference between the two groups was 5.65% with a 95% CI of - 2.48 to 13.74. ACR50 response was 37.12% for GB242 and 32.86% for INF at week 30. ACR70 response was 19.79% for GB242 and 16.96% for INF at week 30, respectively. The incidence of treatment-emergent adverse events was comparable (77.4% in GB242 vs. 80.2% in INF) and detection of antidrug antibodies (ADA) to infliximab up to week 30 (60.8% in GB242 vs. 59.4% in INF) was comparable.

CONCLUSIONS

GB242 demonstrated equivalent efficacy to INF at week 30. Moreover, GB242 was well tolerated, with a similar immunogenicity and safety profile comparable to INF.

Efficacy and Safety of Etanercept Biosimilars Compared With the Originator for Treatment of Juvenile Arthritis: A Prospective Observational Study

OBJECTIVE

Analysis of etanercept biosimilars in pediatric patients with juvenile idiopathic arthritis (JIA) in comparison with the etanercept originator in terms of efficacy and safety.

METHODS

Patients diagnosed with JIA who started treatment with either the etanercept originator or a biosimilar after January 1, 2017, were selected from the German BIKER registry (Biologics in Paediatric Rheumatology Registry). Furthermore, patients who started therapy with the originator and switched to a biosimilar during the course of therapy were identified. For both patient groups, disease activity and safety were examined and compared separately.

RESULTS

After January 1, 2017, 348 patients started treatment with the etanercept originator (n = 293) or a biosimilar (n = 55). Another 57 patients switched to a biosimilar during the course of therapy. A significant decrease or a stable remission of disease activity was observed in both patient groups. The safety profiles were comparable, and frequencies and types of adverse events (AEs) and serious AEs were similar in patients starting therapy with the originator or a biosimilar. Only injection site reactions occurred slightly more frequently under biosimilar therapy, without having an impact on therapy adherence. In patients who switched therapy, the AE rate per 100 patient-years was comparable before (26.4) and after (32.1) the switch.

CONCLUSION

In patients with JIA who require treatment with etanercept, the originator is still used much more frequently. However, our study highlights the equivalence of etanercept biosimilars for therapy for JIA. Increased use of these biosimilars in pediatric patients can therefore be recommended without hesitation.

Knowledge, attitudes, and practices of pharmacists toward biosimilar medicines in Nigeria

BACKGROUND

Biopharmaceutical medicines have transformed the treatment of various long-term diseases, despite their high cost and limited availability. Due to their cost saving potentials, biosimilar medicines represent a new wave of therapy for several diseases in the next few years. Thus, pharmacists are uniquely placed to promote and enhance their uptake.

OBJECTIVES

The objectives of this study were to assess Nigerian pharmacists' biosimilar medicine knowledge, attitudes, and practices.

METHODS

This was a cross-sectional, national online survey of conveniently sampled pharmacists in Nigeria. Data were collected with a validated 31-item biosimilar medicine knowledge, attitude, and practice questionnaire. The Pearson correlation (r) analysis was conducted to investigate the association among knowledge, attitude, and practice. A P value of < 0.05 was considered statistically significant.

RESULTS

Of the 600 pharmacists who were invited to participate in the survey, 411 completed the questionnaire giving a response rate of 68.5%. The mean knowledge score was 6.2 ± 3.0 out of a maximum score of 14. Most of the participants (n = 268, 65.2%) had overall knowledge scores of 1 to 7. The mean attitude score was 35.0 ± 8.8 out of a maximum score of 55, whereas that of practice was 18.7 ± 5.3 out of a maximum score of 30. Knowledge was significantly positively correlated with practice (r = 0.360).

CONCLUSION

Most of the surveyed pharmacists had poor knowledge of biosimilar medicines, while their reported fair attitude did not translate to good practice.

High-Expenditure Disease in the EU-28: Does Drug Spend Correspond to Clinical and Economic Burden in Oncology, Autoimmune Disease and Diabetes?

BACKGROUND

Drug costs are increasing in Europe, and there is a heightened need to reduce pressure on healthcare systems. In 2017, oncology, autoimmune disease, and diabetes featured as the three highest therapy areas for drug spend in the EU-28. However, the absolute 1-year drug spend growth for diabetes did not feature within the ten fastest growing therapy areas.

OBJECTIVE

This study explores the association between drug spend and disease burden in oncology, autoimmune disease, and diabetes in the EU-28.

METHODS

Oncology, autoimmune disease and diabetes therapeutic areas were investigated using four methodologies. Historical and forecasted drug spend was analysed using the IQVIA MIDAS® drug sales database. Clinical and economic burden was estimated from targeted literature reviews. Trend analyses compared changes in drug spend with clinical burden using the Global Burden of Disease tool as the epidemiological reference. Cost per quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) from UK health technology assessments were compared to interpret the health economic value.

RESULTS

Oncology had the highest historical drug spend and growth compared with autoimmune disease and diabetes. Total drug spend and growth in oncology is forecasted to exceed diabetes by twofold. Increasing oncology drug spend historically did not correspond with reductions in mortality and morbidity. Diabetes had the lowest drug spend and greatest QALY/€1000 spent benefit.

CONCLUSION

This study indicates that drug spend may not correlate to clinical burden across diseases. Future research could stimulate debate on whether more equitable drug funding may improve disease management.

Intensive therapy for moderate established rheumatoid arthritis: the TITRATE research programme

Background

Rheumatoid arthritis is a major inflammatory disorder and causes substantial disability. Treatment goals span minimising disease activity, achieving remission and decreasing disability. In active rheumatoid arthritis, intensive management achieves these goals. As many patients with established rheumatoid arthritis have moderate disease activity, the TITRATE (Treatment Intensities and Targets in Rheumatoid Arthritis ThErapy) programme assessed the benefits of intensive management.

Objectives

To (1) define how to deliver intensive therapy in moderate established rheumatoid arthritis; (2) establish its clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness in a trial; and (3) evaluate evidence supporting intensive management in observational studies and completed trials.

Design

Observational studies, secondary analyses of completed trials and systematic reviews assessed existing evidence about intensive management. Qualitative research, patient workshops and systematic reviews defined how to deliver it. The trial assessed its clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness in moderate established rheumatoid arthritis.

Setting

Observational studies (in three London centres) involved 3167 patients. These were supplemented by secondary analyses of three previously completed trials (in centres across all English regions), involving 668 patients. Qualitative studies assessed expectations (nine patients in four London centres) and experiences of intensive management (15 patients in 10 centres across England). The main clinical trial enrolled 335 patients with diverse socioeconomic deprivation and ethnicity (in 39 centres across all English regions).

Participants

Patients with established moderately active rheumatoid arthritis receiving conventional disease-modifying drugs.

Interventions

Intensive management used combinations of conventional disease-modifying drugs, biologics (particularly tumour necrosis factor inhibitors) and depot steroid injections; nurses saw patients monthly, adjusted treatment and provided supportive person-centred psychoeducation. Control patients received standard care.

Main outcome measures

Disease Activity Score for 28 joints based on the erythrocyte sedimentation rate (DAS28-ESR)-categorised patients (active to remission). Remission (DAS28-ESR < 2.60) was the treatment target. Other outcomes included fatigue (measured on a 100-mm visual analogue scale), disability (as measured on the Health Assessment Questionnaire), harms and resource use for economic assessments.

Results

Evaluation of existing evidence for intensive rheumatoid arthritis management showed the following. First, in observational studies, DAS28-ESR scores decreased over 10–20 years, whereas remissions and treatment intensities increased. Second, in systematic reviews of published trials, all intensive management strategies increased remissions. Finally, patients with high disability scores had fewer remissions. Qualitative studies of rheumatoid arthritis patients, workshops and systematic reviews helped develop an intensive management pathway. A 2-day training session for rheumatology practitioners explained its use, including motivational interviewing techniques and patient handbooks. The trial screened 459 patients and randomised 335 patients (168 patients received intensive management and 167 patients received standard care). A total of 303 patients provided 12-month outcome data. Intention-to-treat analysis showed intensive management increased DAS28-ESR 12-month remissions, compared with standard care (32% vs. 18%, odds ratio 2.17, 95% confidence interval 1.28 to 3.68; p = 0.004), and reduced fatigue [mean difference –18, 95% confidence interval –24 to –11 (scale 0–100); p < 0.001]. Disability (as measured on the Health Assessment Questionnaire) decreased when intensive management patients achieved remission (difference –0.40, 95% confidence interval –0.57 to –0.22) and these differences were considered clinically relevant. However, in all intensive management patients reductions in the Health Assessment Questionnaire scores were less marked (difference –0.1, 95% confidence interval –0.2 to 0.0). The numbers of serious adverse events (intensive management n = 15 vs. standard care n = 11) and other adverse events (intensive management n = 114 vs. standard care n = 151) were similar. Economic analysis showed that the base-case incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was £43,972 from NHS and Personal Social Services cost perspectives. The probability of meeting a willingness-to-pay threshold of £30,000 was 17%. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio decreased to £29,363 after including patients’ personal costs and lost working time, corresponding to a 50% probability that intensive management is cost-effective at English willingness-to-pay thresholds. Analysing trial baseline predictors showed that remission predictors comprised baseline DAS28-ESR, disability scores and body mass index. A 6-month extension study (involving 95 intensive management patients) showed fewer remissions by 18 months, although more sustained remissions were more likley to persist. Qualitative research in trial completers showed that intensive management was acceptable and treatment support from specialist nurses was beneficial.

Limitations

The main limitations comprised (1) using single time point remissions rather than sustained responses, (2) uncertainty about benefits of different aspects of intensive management and differences in its delivery across centres, (3) doubts about optimal treatment of patients unresponsive to intensive management and (4) the lack of formal international definitions of ‘intensive management’.

Conclusion

The benefits of intensive management need to be set against its additional costs. These were relatively high. Not all patients benefited. Patients with high pretreatment physical disability or who were substantially overweight usually did not achieve remission.

Future work

Further research should (1) identify the most effective components of the intervention, (2) consider its most cost-effective delivery and (3) identify alternative strategies for patients not responding to intensive management.

Trial registration

Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN70160382.

Funding

This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Programme Grants for Applied Research programme and will be published in full in Programme Grants for Applied Research; Vol. 9, No. 8. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

Assessment of patients affected by rheumatoid arthritis eligible for biotechnological agents and evaluation of their healthcare resource utilization and related costs

OBJECTIVE

To provide estimates of patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) eligible for biotechnological therapy and to evaluate their healthcare costs.

METHOD

An observational analysis was performed based on data-linkage between administrative databases of selected Italian Regional/Local healthcare departments. Data were then re-proportioned to the Italian population. Patients with RA diagnosis defined by discharge diagnosis and/or exemption code during 01/01/2013- 31/12/2017 were included. The criteria applied to evaluate the elegibility for biotechnological therapy were: 1) methotrexate (MTX)-treatment failure ≥6 months and start of a different conventional-synthetic diseasemodifying antirheumatic drugs (csDMARD); 2) corticosteroid ≥6 months with dosage ≥7.5 mg/die; 3) MTX-contraindication (therapy or hospitalization for renal damage/interstizial lung disease/hepatic failure). Mean annual costs per patient included drugs, hospitalizations, outpatient services.

RESULTS

Data re-proportioned to the Italian population estimated 318,328 RA patients: 43,361 with, 274,967 without biotechnological agents. Among the latter, 26,487(9.6%) patients met ≥1 criteria applied for eligibility: 1,896 had MTX-treatment failure and started another csDMARD; 15,833 received corticosteroid ≥7.5 mg/die; 7,788 had MTX-contraindication. Regarding patients fulfilling two criteria, 107 had MTX-treatment failure followed by another csDMARDs and corticosteroid ≥7.5 mg/die, 53 were treated with another csDMARDs after MTX-treatment failure and also presented MTX-contraindication, 810 had corticosteroid ≥7.5 mg/die and MTX-contraindication. Mean total annual costs for patients estimated eligible for biotechnological therapy was € 3,132, of which € 177 related to drugs indicated for RA and € 2,955 related to other direct costs.

CONCLUSIONS

According to our estimates, around 10% RA patients not currently treated with biotechnological agents are eligible for such therapies, highlighting a trend of under-use in clinical practice for RA management.

Retention Rate and Safety of Biosimilar CT-P13 in Rheumatoid Arthritis: Data from the Korean College of Rheumatology Biologics Registry

Objective

The aim was to evaluate long-term drug retention, discontinuation, efficacy and safety of CT-P13 and reference infliximab in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) enrolled in the Korean College of Rheumatology Biologics (KOBIO) registry.

Methods

Patients included adults with RA who received CT-P13 or reference infliximab between December 2012 and December 2017. Drug retention, efficacy (Disease Activity Score in 28 joints [DAS28]–erythrocyte sedimentation rate [ESR] or DAS28–C-reactive protein [CRP] and American College of Rheumatology [ACR] core set measure), and adverse events (AEs) were assessed over 4-years’ follow-up.

Results

Data from 199 RA patients (CT-P13: n = 147; reference infliximab: n = 52) were analyzed. Median treatment duration was 1.22 years for CT-P13 and 1.40 years for reference infliximab (p = 0.67). Overall, 82% of patients received first-line therapy. Drug retention of CT-P13 versus reference infliximab was comparable for the overall population (p = 0.84) and for first-line (p = 0.66) and subsequent treatment lines (p = 0.96). Treatment changes or discontinuations occurred in 65.2% of patients with CT-P13 and 69.6% with reference infliximab. The most common reason for treatment changes or discontinuing treatment was lack of efficacy (CT-P13: 31.9%; reference infliximab: 34.8%). CT-P13 demonstrated comparable improvements in DAS28-ESR, DAS28-CRP and ACR responses to reference infliximab. Overall, 19 grade 3 AEs were reported for CT-P13 and eight for reference infliximab.

Conclusion

Long-term data from patients with RA treated in routine clinical practice in Korea showed that CT-P13 had a comparable drug retention rate to reference infliximab, with similar efficacy and an acceptable safety profile.

ClinicalTrials.gov identifier

NCT01965132.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1007/s40259-019-00393-y) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Efficacy and safety of a single switch from etanercept originator to etanercept biosimilar in a cohort of inflammatory arthritis

AntiTNF-α biosimilars are broadly available for the treatment of inflammatory arthritis. There are a lot of data concerning the maintenance of clinical efficacy after switching from originators to biosimilars; therefore, such a transition is increasingly encouraged both in the US and Europe. However, there are reports about flares and adverse events (AE) as a non-medical switch remains controversial due to ethical and clinical implications (efficacy, safety, tolerability). The aim of our work was to evaluate the disease activity trend after switching from etanercept originator (oETA-Enbrel) to its biosimilar (bETA-SP4/Benepali) in a cohort of patients in Turin, Piedmont, Italy. In this area, the switch to biosimilars is stalwartly encouraged. We switched 87 patients who were in a clinical state of stability from oETA to bETA: 48 patients were affected by Rheumatoid Arthritis (RA),26 by Psoriatic Arthritis (PsA) and 13 by Ankylosing Spondylitis (AS).We evaluated VAS-pain, Global-Health, CRP, number of swollen and tender joints, Disease Activity Score on 28 joints (DAS28) for RA, Disease Activity in Psoriatic Arthritis (DAPSA) for PsA, Health Assessment Questionnaire (HAQ) and Health Assessment Questionnaire for the spondyloarthropathies (HAQ-S),Bath Ankylosing Spondylitis Disease Activity Index (BASDAI) for AS patients. 11/85 patients (12.6%) stopped treatment after switching to biosimilar etanercept. No difference was found between oETA and bETA in terms of efficacy. However, some arthritis flare and AE were reported. Our data regarding maintenance of efficacy and percentage of discontinuation were in line with the existing literature.

Retention Rate and Efficacy of the Biosimilar CT-P13 Versus Reference Infliximab in Patients with Ankylosing Spondylitis: A Propensity Score-Matched Analysis from the Korean College of Rheumatology Biologics Registry

Background

Long-term, real-world data are required to support the use of CT-P13 in chronic conditions such as ankylosing spondylitis. However, real-world evidence may be influenced by selection bias, which can confound outcomes. The aim of the current analysis was to confirm the long-term comparability of CT-P13 and reference infliximab treatment in patients with ankylosing spondylitis, using propensity score matching to adjust for baseline differences between groups.

Methods

A propensity score–matching analysis was conducted on data from patients with ankylosing spondylitis in the Korean College of Rheumatology Biologics registry who received CT-P13 or reference infliximab. Drug retention, reasons for biologic therapy changes or discontinuation, and efficacy parameters were analyzed overall and by treatment line with up to 4 years of follow-up. Adverse events were recorded for each treatment group.

Results

Propensity score matching was effective in matching 124 CT-P13–treated and 124 reference infliximab-treated patients. Median treatment duration and drug retention were similar between CT-P13 and reference infliximab. Three-year retention rates (95% confidence interval [CI]) were 64.2% (53.5–73.0) for CT-P13 and 55.6% (42.9–66.6) for reference infliximab. Overall, 17.1% (CT-P13) and 29.3% (reference infliximab) of patients discontinued biologic therapy, and 20.0% (CT-P13) and 15.2% (reference infliximab) changed biologic therapy. Efficacy assessments were generally similar between groups; both treatments were well tolerated.

Conclusions

Propensity score–matching analysis confirmed that CT-P13 treatment was not associated with significant differences in drug retention, treatment duration, most efficacy parameters, or safety versus reference infliximab in Korean patients with ankylosing spondylitis, building evidence for the long-term comparability of these treatments.

Trial registration

ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT01965132.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1007/s40259-020-00432-z) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Identifying Patient Access Barriers for Tumor Necrosis Factor Alpha Inhibitor Treatments in Rheumatoid Arthritis in Five Central Eastern European Countries

Introduction

Although there is a significant utilization gap of biologic medicines in the EU, many studies estimate equity in patient access to biopharmaceuticals only based on their availability on the national list of reimbursed medicines. Hidden access barriers may facilitate financial sustainability of pharmaceuticals in less affluent EU countries; however, they have rarely been documented in scientific publications. Our objective was to explore these access barriers for tumor necrosis factor (TNF) alpha inhibitors in rheumatoid arthritis (RA) in five Central and Eastern European countries.

Methods

A detailed interview guide was developed based on multi-stakeholder workshops and a targeted literature review. In each participant country 3-3-3-3 interviews with payers, rheumatologists, patients/patient representatives, and industry representatives were conducted. Responses were aggregated at a country level and validated by primary investigators in each country.

Results

Limited number of RA centers and consequently significant travelling time and cost for patients in distant geographical areas, uneven budget allocation among centers, limited capacity of nurses, narrowed patient population in national financial protocols compared to international clinical guidelines in initiating or continuing biologics, high administrative burden in prescribing biologics and limited health literacy of patients were the most relevant barriers to timely patient access in at least three participant countries.

Conclusion

Assessing only the availability of TNF alpha inhibitors on the national list of reimbursed medicines provides limited information about real-world patient access to these medicines. Revealing hidden access barriers may contribute to initiate policy actions which could reduce inequity in patient access.

Comparative Efficacy and Safety of Biosimilar Rituximab and Originator Rituximab in Rheumatoid Arthritis and Non-Hodgkin's Lymphoma: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Rituximab is a biologic medicine widely used for the treatment of autoimmune diseases and lymphoma. Several biosimilars of rituximab have been developed and marketed with the expiration of the originator rituximab's patent; thus, systematic combination and analysis of the latest data on the efficacy and safety of biosimilars and the demonstration of the interchangeability of biosimilar agents are required.

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this study was to collate available data from head-to-head randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and evaluate the efficacy and safety of biosimilar rituximab compared with the reference drug in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) and non-Hodgkin's lymphoma (NHL).

METHODS

The PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, and Google Scholar databases were searched to identify head-to-head RCTs that directly compare the efficacy and safety of biosimilar rituximab and its originator. The efficacy outcome for RA was the American College of Rheumatology (ACR) response rates and the outcome for NHL was the response rate. The occurrence of adverse events (AEs) and anti-drug antibodies (ADAs) were evaluated for the safety outcome. Data on the pharmacokinetic profile were also included as a secondary outcome.

RESULTS

Eleven head-to-head RCTs with 3163 patients were included (1744 patients with RA and 1419 patients with NHL). Biosimilars of rituximab showed similar efficacy in the clinical response in both RA and NHL. The pooled risk ratio (RR) of the ACR 20% response rate (ACR20) response in patients with RA at weeks 24 and 48 was 0.99 (p = 0.70, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.92-1.06) and 1.04 (p = 0.73, 95% CI 0.83-1.31), respectively. The pooled RR of the overall response at week 24 in NHL patients was 1.02 (p = 0.31, 95% CI 0.98-1.07). No significant differences were found in the formation of ADAs (RR 0.86, p = 0.20, 95% CI 0.68-1.08) or AEs (RR 1.04, p = 0.30, 95% CI 0.97-1.12).

CONCLUSION

This systematic review and conventional meta-analysis demonstrated the overall similarity of the long-term efficacy and safety of biosimilar rituximab to those of originator rituximab in RA and NHL patients by combining direct evidence from head-to-head trials. PROSPERO registration No. CRD42019125138.

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.

Real world, big data cost of pharmaceutical treatment for rheumatoid arthritis in Greece

Introduction

Rheumatoid Arthritis (RA) is a highly prevalent autoimmune disease associated with joint inflammation and destruction. Treatment for RA, especially with biologic agents (biologics), improves patient functionality and quality of life and averts costly complications or disease progression. Cost of RA pharmaceutical treatment has rarely been reported on the basis of real-world, big data. This study reports on the real-world, big data RA pharmaceutical treatment cost in Greece.

Methods

The Business Intelligence database of the National Organization for Healthcare Services Provision (EOPYY) was used to identify and provide analytics on patients on treatment for RA. EOPYY is responsible for funding healthcare and pharmaceutical care services for approximately 95% of the population in the country. ICD-10 codes were applied to identify patients with RA and at least one reimbursed prescription between 1 June 2014 and 31 May 2015.

Results

35,873 unique patients were recorded as undergoing treatment for RA. Total reimbursed treatment cost for the study period was €81,206,363.70, of which €52,732,142.18 (64.94%) was for treatment with biologics. Of that cost, €39,724,489.71 (48.32%) accounted for treatment with anti-TNFs and/or methotrexate/corticosteroids.

Conclusion

Real world, big data analysis confirms that the major driver of RA pharmaceutical cost is, as expected, the cost of treatment with biologics. It is critical to be able to match this cost to the treatment outcome it produces to ensure an optimal, no-waste, evidence-based allocation of healthcare resources to need.

Potential cost-savings from the use of the biosimilars filgrastim, infliximab and insulin glargine in Canada: a retrospective analysis

BACKGROUND

In 2014 and 2015, biosimilars for the drugs filgrastim, infliximab, and insulin glargine were approved for use in Canada. The introduction of biosimilars in Canada could provide significant cost savings for the Canadian healthcare system over originator biologic drugs, however it is known that the use of biosimilars varies widely across the world. The aim of this study was to estimate the use of biosimilars in Canada and potential cost-savings from their use.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective analysis of Canadian drug purchases for filgrastim, infliximab, and insulin glargine from July 2016 to June 2018. This was a cross-sectional study and the time horizon was limited to the study period. As a result, no discounting of effects over time was included. Canadian drugstore and hospital purchases data, obtained from IQVIA™, were used to estimate the costs per unit and unit volume for biosimilars and originator biologic drugs within each province. Potential cost-savings were calculated as a product of the units of reference originator product purchased and the cost difference between the originator biologic and its corresponding biosimilar.

RESULTS

The purchase of biosimilars varied by each province in Canada, ranging from a low of 0.1% to a high of 81.6% of purchases. In total, $1,048,663,876 Canadian dollars in savings could have been realized with 100% use of biosimilars over the originator products during this 2 year time period. The potential savings are highest in the province of Ontario ($349 million); however, even in smaller markets (PEI and Newfoundland), $28 million could have potentially been saved. Infliximab accounted for the vast majority of the potential cost-savings, whereas the purchases of the biosimilar filgrastim outpaced that of the originator drug in some provinces. In sensitivity analyses assuming only 80% of originator units would be eligible for use as a biosimilar, $838 million dollars in cost savings over this two-year time period would still have been realized.

CONCLUSIONS

The overall use of biosimilar drugs in Canada is low. Policy makers, healthcare providers, and patients need to be informed of potential savings by increased use of biosimilars, particularly in an increasingly costly healthcare system.

Real-World Evidence on Etanercept Biosimilar SB4 in Etanercept-Naïve or Switching Patients: A Systematic Review

INTRODUCTION

In 2016, SB4 (Benepali®) became the first etanercept (ETN) biosimilar to obtain marketing authorisation in Europe. Despite robust analytical and clinical comparisons, outstanding questions remain on SB4 use in routine practice.

METHODS

A systematic search for publications on real-world evidence of SB4 effectiveness, safety and drug survival was undertaken using search terms (SB4 OR Benepali OR biosimilar etanercept OR innovator etanercept) in the BIOSIS® Toxicology, BIOSIS Previews®, Embase® and MEDLINE® databases up to 17 January 2019.

RESULTS

Of 959 articles identified, eight journal articles, two journal letters and 23 congress abstracts were selected on criteria of original real-world evidence with a clinical focus. As expected with real-world evidence, quality scoring showed that the evidence had high external validity but lower internal validity. A total of 13,552 patients were described across nine European countries and all approved SB4 indications: 2499 were ETN-naïve and 11,053 switched from reference ETN to SB4 (switchers). Switch acceptance rates (a combination of clinicians offering and patients accepting initiation on SB4) ranged between 51.6% and 99.0%; patient support programmes positively contributed to acceptance. Disease activity was generally similar pre- and post-switch (typically 3-month timeframe). Retention rates across studies were at least 75% (up to 12 months follow-up). No new safety signals were identified. Differences in discontinuation rates versus historic controls reported in some studies may have been influenced by differences in treatment practices, lack of clinician confidence and nocebo effects.

CONCLUSION

Nearly 2500 ETN-naïve patients have been initiated on SB4 and outcomes are similar to those patients receiving reference ETN. Overall this systematic review of real-world evidence provides additional reassurance that SB4 is as effective and safe as reference ETN in both switched and naïve patients.

FUNDING

Biogen International GmbH.

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.

Does a mandatory non-medical switch from originator to biosimilar etanercept lead to increase in healthcare use and costs? A Danish register-based study of patients with inflammatory arthritis

Objectives

In year 2016, Danish national guidelines included a mandatory switch of patients with inflammatory rheumatic diseases treated with originator etanercept (ETA) to biosimilar SB4 in routine care. We aimed to explore if switching lead to increased healthcare utilisation and costs.

Methods

Observational cohort study. Adult patients who switched from ETA to SB4 were identified in the Danish nationwide DANBIO registry. In the National Patient Registry, we identified health utilisation (hospital admissions/hospital days/outpatient visits/prescription medication use) and comorbidities. Estimation of health utilisation included average use and costs 1 year before/after switch, changes after the switch, and whether patient characteristics affected changes. Analyses were by adjusted two-step gamma distributed regression models, and for changes over time a generalized estimation equations (GEE) model was applied. Impact of comorbidities was explored as interaction terms in the model. Medication costs of ETA and SB4 were not included in model.

Results

1620 patients were included (mean age 55 years (SD 14.7), 40% male). Costs before and after switching were mainly driven by outpatient visits (67%/72% of all costs). Monthly fluctuations of costs were similar before/after switch. After switching, use (8%) and costs (7%) of outpatient services increased, whereas costs of admissions (55%) and medication (5%) decreased. Patients with longer ETA treatment duration had an increase in use and costs of healthcare resources, whereas gender and comorbidities had no impact. Higher age was associated with an increase in costs of inpatient services.

Conclusion

We demonstrated no obvious changes in overall use and costs of healthcare services following switch from originator to biosimilar etanercept.

Biological therapy in the treatment of psoriatic arthritis: economic and epidemiological considerations

Background: Biological therapies have a significant economic and clinical burden but, in general, lose their effectiveness over time. This study evaluated the medication persistence and costs associated to use of anti-TNF agents for psoriatic arthritis (PsA) treatment. Methods: A historical cohort composed of individuals in Brazil with PsA diagnosis was developed during the period between 2010 and 2015. The difference among the anti-TNF agents was verified by the log-rank test. The predictors of medication non-persistence were identified by Cox regression. The costs were compared by variance analysis with Bonferroni correction. Results: 11,008 patients were analyzed. Adalimumab (51%) was the most used anti-TNF agent. Individuals using adalimumab presented higher medication persistence as compared to etanercept and infliximab. The costs with anti-TNF agents corresponded to 90% of the total costs and were similar among anti-TNF agents. The non-persistence predictors were female sex, younger patients, to live in the Northeastern and Northern regions of Brazil, to use infliximab and etanercept, and have more comorbidities. Conclusion: The direct costs with anti-TNF agents were the main component of total costs. Outpatient and inpatient costs increase when medication persistence decreases. A considerable price reduction of anti-TNF agents has been observed over the years.

Biosimilars in the management of chronic inflammatory diseases: The Dutch experience

These days, the use of biosimilars for the treatment of bio-naive patients is well established. However, the transition of patients being treated with a bio-originator to its biosimilar is still a topic of discussion. The main issue is which approach to use when initiating the non-medical transition. The first real-world examples contain both mandatory and non-mandatory approaches, resulting in a variety of acceptance and discontinuation rates. At this moment a non-mandatory approach, based on shared decision making, is preferred by international guidelines and the Task Force on the Use of Biosimilars to Treat Rheumatological Diseases. However, clear definitions of mandatory and non-mandatory are lacking, as a result of which these terms may be wrongly used in some studies. This article aims to provide an overview of transition approaches used in the Netherlands, and how the approach used relates to acceptance and discontinuation rates of the biosimilar.

Era of biosimilars in rheumatology: reshaping the healthcare environment

Compared with the original approved biological drug on which it is based, a biosimilar has highly similar physicochemical characteristics and biological activity, as well as equivalent efficacy and no clinically meaningful differences in safety and immunogenicity. Before they are approved, biosimilars must undergo a rigorous development process using state-of-the-art technologies to establish biosimilarity to the reference biological product. After approval, biosimilars must comply with good pharmacological practices for biological drugs. Several biosimilar disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (bsDMARDs) based on the tumour necrosis factor inhibitors adalimumab, etanercept and infliximab have been approved for use in patients with rheumatic diseases. Substantial cost savings can be made if biological-naive patients begin treatment with bsDMARDs, and patients receiving original biological DMARDs (bDMARDs) are switched to bsDMARDs. Despite the consistently similar efficacy, safety and immunogenicity of bsDMARDs relative to their respective original bDMARDs, switching from a reference bDMARD to a bsDMARD can result in nocebo responses, such as subjective increase of disease activity and pain-related adverse events. This may have a negative impact on adherence to bsDMARDs in clinical trials and clinical practice. To ensure optimal and rational integration of bsDMARDs into rheumatology practice and realise the full cost-saving efficacy of these drugs, rheumatologists must be aware that careful communication of the cost-saving efficacy and safety of bsDMARDs to their patients is the key to a successful long-term switch to bsDMARD therapy.

Biosimilars for the Management of Inflammatory Bowel Diseases: Economic Considerations

Biological drugs revolutionized the treatment of inflammatory bowel diseases (IBD) such as Crohn's disease and ulcerative colitis. However, not all clinically eligible patients have access to biologicals due to significant costs and budget impact. Biosimilars are highly comparable to their originator product in terms of clinical efficacy and safety. Biosimilars are priced 15-75% lower than their reference product, which makes them a less costly alternative and is expected to offer better patients access to biologicals. The total projected cost savings are significant. If the achieved budget savings were used to cover more biological therapy, several additional IBD patients could be treated. Currently, the main barriers to the increasing uptake of biosimilars are the few incentives of the key stakeholders, while physicians' and patients' skepticism towards biosimilars seems to be changing. Over the coming years, biosimilars are expected to gain a growing importance in the treatment of IBD, contributing to a better access to treatment, improving population-level health gain and sustainability of health systems. This review summarizes the results of the literature on the economic considerations of biosimilars in IBD and the role of biosimilar infliximab in the treatment of IBD.

An open-label extension study to demonstrate long-term safety and efficacy of ABP 501 in patients with rheumatoid arthritis

BACKGROUND

ABP 501 was evaluated in a phase 3 single-arm, open-label extension (OLE) study to collect additional safety and efficacy data in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA).

METHODS

Subjects completing the final visit in the parent phase 3 randomized, double-blind, controlled equivalence study comparing the efficacy and safety of the biosimilar ABP 501 with adalimumab reference product (RP) were enrolled in this open-label extension (OLE) study. All subjects received 40 mg ABP 501 every other week for 68 weeks. Key safety endpoints included treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs), serious adverse events (SAEs), and anti-drug antibody (ADA) incidences. Efficacy endpoints included ACR20 (at least 20% improvement in American College of Rheumatology core set measurements from baseline) and Disease Activity Score 28-joint count C-reactive protein (DAS28-CRP) change from baseline.

RESULTS

Among 466/467 patients treated with ABP 501, 229 transitioned from the ABP 501 arm of the parent study (ABP 501/ABP 501) and 237 from the adalimumab RP arm (RP/ABP 501); 412/467 (88.2%) patients completed the study. The overall TEAE incidence was 63.7% (297/466); grade ≥ 3 TEAE incidence was 9.0% (42/466). The incidence of TEAEs leading to discontinuation of investigational product was 3.6% (17/466). The SAE incidence was 9.9% (46/466). Overall, 18.2% (85/466) of subjects developed binding ADAs and 6.9% (32/466) developed neutralizing ADAs in the OLE study. The ACR20 response rate was 73.3% (340/464 subjects) at OLE baseline, and 78.8% (327/415 subjects) at week 70 of the OLE study. The overall mean DAS28-CRP change from the parent study baseline was - 2.25 at the OLE study baseline (n = 440), - 2.36 at week 4 (n = 463), - 2.41 at week 24 (n = 450), - 2.55 at week 48 (n = 433), and - 2.60 at week 70 (n = 412). Efficacy was maintained throughout the study.

CONCLUSIONS

Efficacy previously demonstrated in the parent study was maintained in this OLE study with no new safety findings. Long-term safety, immunogenicity, and efficacy were similar in the ABP 501/ABP 501 and RP/ABP 501 groups. The single switch from RP to ABP 501 did not impact immunogenicity.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrial.gov, NCT02114931.

Comparative Price Analysis of Biological Products for Treatment of Rheumatoid Arthritis

Biological products for treatment of rheumatoid arthritis usually are cost effective for healthcare systems in Europe, but they are huge financial burden due to the high number of patients and the significant budget impact. The expected saving from introduction on the market of biosimilars are significant and are linked to better access and affordability. The aim of this study was to conduct comparative price analysis of biological products for rheumatoid arthritis therapy among seventeen EU countries. The point of view is that of the Bulgarian pricing and reimbursement system and the chosen countries are those from external reference basket for prices comparison at manufacturing level. All authorized biological products by EMA with therapeutic indication rheumatoid arthritis were selected. The access for treatment is evaluated as the availability of the product on the market and the prices level. We assessed the availability of all trade names in the price lists of the observed countries. The prices data was obtained from the official web pages of the responsible institutions up to date December 2017. The results show that four out of all six INNs have authorized biosimilars in EMA. Despite its earlier authorization biosimilar adalimumab is not present in any of the price lists of countries. From all eighteen countries only in Lithuania and Estonia there were no published prices of any of the selected medicinal products. Countries with higher number of biosimilar prices are Spain and France. Differences in manufacturers’ prices of reference biological products in selected countries in comparison with the lowest manufacturer price are higher with 22 to 69% while the retail prices between 62 and 95%. Differences are mostly notable for rituximab, and less notable for tocilizumab. Manufacturers’ and retail prices of biosimilar products were established only for three INNs (etanercept, rituximab, and infliximab). Manufacturers’ prices differ between 26 and 75%, while retail prices differ between 40 and 92% for biosimilars. Comparison of the differences between manufacturer prices of reference biological product and biosimilars shows 36% difference for etanercept, 39% for rituximab, and 31% for infliximab, while at retail level the differences are 11, 86, and 143%, respectively. The limitation of the study is that the prices are the official ones without discounts due to confidentiality and the real prices may be lower. The second limitation is that the methodology for pricing differs in the countries and this could also influence the prices on both levels (manufacturer and retail). Introduction of biosimilars on the national markets led to significant decrease in reimbursed prices paid by public funds and thus might benefit the patients’ access to biological therapy. The decrease of prices after biosimilars entrance on the market is not as notable as for commodity generics.

Acceptance rate and sociological factors involved in the switch from originator to biosimilar etanercept (SB4)

OBJECTIVE

To study acceptance rate and factors influencing acceptance of the switch from originator etanercept (Enbrel©) to biosimilar etanercept (SB4, Bénépali©) in patients with rheumatic disease.

METHODS

Patients with a well-controlled rheumatic disease consulting in our rheumatology department were offered the switch for SB4. After oral and written information concerning biosimilar, free choice to accept the switch was left to the patients. The main outcome was primary switch acceptance rate defined by switch acceptance during the initial consult. Real switch adherence, socio-cultural factors and beliefs influencing switch acceptance rate were retrieved during a telephonic interview at distance from the consultation.

RESULTS

Fifty-two patients were eligible for the switch: 32 (62%) with spondyloarthritis and 20 (38%) with rheumatoid arthritis. The primary acceptance rate was 92% (48/52). Patients refusing the switch were more likely to report a bad opinion on generic drugs (100% vs 11%, p < 0.001). Other patient characteristics were roughly identical except for a statistical trend in the refusal group toward older age (61.4vs 50.7years, p = 0.08) and longer disease duration (26vs 12.1years, p = 0.05). Despite initial acceptance, two patients did not begin SB4 after receiving negative information by their regular pharmacist. Real SB4 switch rate was 85% (44/52) and 86% (38/44) of patients reported a good experience of the switch.

CONCLUSIONS

Acceptance rate of the switch from originator to biosimilar etanercept is high. Patient information, physician and pharmacist knowledge on biosimilars should be taken into account in order to improve their diffusion.

Does a mandatory non-medical switch from originator to biosimilar infliximab lead to increased use of outpatient healthcare resources? A register-based study in patients with inflammatory arthritis

Objectives

National Danish guidelines in May 2015 dictated a mandatory switch from originator infliximab (INX) to biosimilar CT-P13 in patients with inflammatory rheumatic disease. We investigated if this non-medical switch changed use of outpatient hospital resources.

Methods

Observational cohort study. Switchers were identified in DANBIO. Rheumatic outpatient contacts, visits and services were identified in the National Patient Registry. The 6-month rate for (1) number of visits (or services) and (2) days with ≥1 visit (or service) were compared before/after switching (paired t-tests). Visits per week per patient before/after the switch date were analysed with graphical interrupted time-series analysis.

Results

In 769 switchers (372 males, median age 54 years (IQR 44–66)), 1484 outpatient contacts, 6718 visits and 9243 days with services (693 on switch date) were identified. Mean visit rate was 3.89 before and 3.95 after switch (p=0.35). Total number of services was 19 752 (2019 on switch date). Mean rates before/after switch for 16 service categories were small and differences close to zero. Visits per week per patient appeared similar before/after switch with peaks every ≈8 weeks (standard INX infusion interval).

Conclusion

Changes were marginal with no clinically relevant increase in use of outpatient health care resources 6 months after compared with 6 months before mandatory switch from originator to biosimilar infliximab.

Assessing the Value of Biosimilars: A Review of the Role of Budget Impact Analysis

Biosimilar drugs are highly similar to an originator (reference) biologic, with no clinically meaningful differences in terms of safety or efficacy. As biosimilars offer the potential for lower acquisition costs versus the originator biologic, evaluating the economic implications of the introduction of biosimilars is of interest. Budget impact analysis (BIA) is a commonly used methodology. This review of published BIAs of biosimilar fusion proteins and/or monoclonal antibodies identified 12 unique publications (three full papers and nine congress posters). When evaluated alongside professional guidance on conducting BIA, the majority of BIAs identified were generally in line with international recommendations. However, a lack of peer-reviewed journal articles and considerable shortcomings in the publications were identified. Deficiencies included a limited range of cost parameters, a reliance on assumptions for parameters such as uptake and drug pricing, a lack of expert validation, and a limited range of sensitivity analyses that were based on arbitrary ranges. The rationale for the methods employed, limitations of the BIA approach, and instructions for local adaptation often were inadequately discussed. To understand fully the potential economic impact and value of biosimilars, the impact of biosimilar supply, manufacturer-provided supporting services, and price competition should be included in BIAs. Alternative approaches, such as cost minimization, which requires evidence demonstrating similarity to the originator biologic, and those that integrate a range of economic assessment methods, are needed to assess the value of biosimilars.

Reviewing the evidence for biosimilars: key insights, lessons learned and future horizons

Biologic therapies have become central to the long-term management of many chronic diseases, including inflammatory rheumatic diseases. Over recent years, the development and licensing pathways for biosimilars have become more standardized, and several biosimilars have been made available for patients with inflammatory rheumatic diseases, such as RA. Pre-licensing requirements for biosimilars mandate the demonstration of comparability with reference products in terms of clinical activity, safety and immunogenicity, whereas post-marketing surveillance and risk minimization requirements are set in place to ensure that long-term, real-world safety data are collected to assess biosimilars in clinical practice. These measures should provide a foundation for physician confidence in biosimilars, which can be established further through clinical experience. Biosimilars may help to fill an unmet need by improving patient access to effective biologic treatments for chronic diseases. Greater access may result in additional clinical benefits, with appropriate use of biologic therapies according to treatment guidelines being associated with improved outcomes and the potential for reduced costs of care. Key challenges for the integration of biosimilars into everyday practice include questions about interchangeability, switching and automatic substitution. Several switching studies have shown that biosimilars can be used in place of reference products while maintaining efficacy and safety. Additional ongoing studies and registries may help to optimize the process of switching, and different funding models are examining the optimal mechanisms to ensure effective uptake of these new treatments.