Comparison of characteristics of international and national databases for rheumatoid arthritis: a systematic literature review

Determinants of biological drug survival in rheumatoid arthritis: evidence from a Hungarian rheumatology center over 8 years of retrospective data

Objective

To compare drug survival of biological therapies in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA), and analyze the determinants of discontinuation probabilities and switches to other biological therapies.

Materials and methods

Consecutive RA patients initiating first biological treatment in one rheumatology center between 2006 and 2013 were included. Log-rank test was used to analyze the differences between the survival curves of different biological drugs. Cox regression was applied to analyze the discontinuation due to inefficacy, the occurrence of adverse events, or to any reasons.

Results

A total of 540 patients were included in the analysis. The most frequently used first-line biological treatments were infliximab (N=176, 33%), adalimumab (N=150, 28%), and etanercept (N=132, 24%). Discontinuation of first tumor necrosis factor-alpha (TNF-α) treatment was observed for 347 (64%) patients, due to inefficacy (n=209, 60%), adverse events (n=103, 30%), and other reasons (n=35, 10%). Drug survival rates for TNF-α and non-TNF-α therapies were significantly different, and were in favor of non-TNF-α therapies. Every additional number of treatment significantly increased the risk of inefficacy by 27% (p<0.001) and of adverse events by 35% (p=0.002). After the discontinuation of the initial TNF-α treatment, switching to rituximab and tocilizumab was associated with significantly longer treatment duration than switching to a second TNF-α. The non-TNF-α therapies resulted in significantly longer treatment duration, due to both less adverse events and longer maintenance of effectiveness.

Conclusion

Non-TNF-α therapies resulted in significantly longer treatment duration, and lost their effectiveness later. Increase in the number of switches significantly increased the risk of discontinuation of any biological therapy.

Consistency and Utility of Data Items Across European Rheumatoid Arthritis Clinical Cohorts and Registers

OBJECTIVE

To identify overlaps, discrepancies, and perceived utility of the currently collected data in European clinical rheumatoid arthritis (RA) cohorts and registers. Heterogeneity of data collection and data representation may limit comparative and collaborative RA research. Defining data standards is important and should be informed by which data items are currently collected and their perceived utility in scientific analyses.

METHODS

A web survey was sent to 27 European RA registers/clinical cohorts, requesting information on which specific data items were collected, how and with what frequency they were collected, how often data were missing, and if the items collected were regarded as useful for research.

RESULTS

Twenty-five of 27 contacted RA cohorts/registers from 16 different European countries, totaling 189,633 patients (range 130-55,000), completed the survey. Items collected by the majority of data sources and used frequently for research were composite disease activity scores, acute-phase reactants, joint counts, information on RA-specific treatments, physical function, and patient global assessment of disease activity. Many of the collected items showed large variability in terms of measurement and time point of collection. Among all items collected, disease activity, RA treatment, and joint counts were regarded as the most important. When not collected, smoking, imaging, and comorbidities were the top-ranked variables felt to have been worth collecting.

CONCLUSION

Even though certain items are regularly collected, the mode of data collection and the data definition are heterogeneous. Harmonization of data collection across European clinical RA data sources is therefore pivotal for future collaborative studies.