A systematic review of the factors associated with the initiation of biologicals in patients with rheumatological conditions

Objectives

Biologicals play a crucial role in managing some of the rheumatological diseases, thus it is important for clinicians, healthcare institutions and policy-makers to understand why biologicals are initiated or refused so as to make better decisions to improve patients' disease outcomes. Although there have been many studies investigating factors associated with the initiation of biologicals for patients with rheumatological conditions, there have been no systematic reviews that provide a comprehensive summary. We aim to provide a summary of factors associated with biologicals' initiation for patients with rheumatological conditions.

Methods

We performed a literature search in PubMed, Embase and PsycINFO. We identified and screened studies according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA). Factors were presented according to patient, disease-related, therapy-related, healthcare team-related and system in-place factors.

Results

A total 1755 articles were reviewed and 24 articles were found to be relevant to our objective. Forty four factors reviewed were placed into five main categories: patient factors (n=13); disease-related factors (n=11); therapy-related factors (n=7); healthcare team-related factors (n=4) and system in-place-related factors (n=9). The factors studied by the published papers found to be associated with decisions to initiate biologicals varied widely.

Conclusion

Forty two factors of five different categories were found to be associated with biologicals' initiation for patients with rheumatological conditions. Clinicians need to be mindful of the complex nature of these factors to optimise therapy of patients with rheumatological conditions. Healthcare institutions and policy- makers ought to be aware of any potential barriers to successful biologicals' treatment and address them accordingly.

[The first biologic for rheumatoid arthritis: factors influencing the therapeutic decision]

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Biologics (disease modifying antirheumatic drugs, bDMARD) have been in use in Germany for the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis (RA) since 2001, usually after failure of at least one conventional synthetic (cs)DMARD. We analyzed temporal changes in factors that influence the decision for either a first bDMARD or a further csDMARD.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

We analyzed data from 9513 bDMARD-naive RA patients in the German biologics register RABBIT who switched to a new therapy. For three recruitment periods (2001-2003, 2004-2006 and 2009-2015) factors influencing the therapeutic decision were analyzed by means of machine learning methods and logistic regression analysis.

RESULTS

In all recruitment periods the number of previous csDMARDs, high dosages of glucocorticoids (>7.5 mg/day) and a higher DAS28 (>5.1) were significantly associated with the decision for a first bDMARD. Over time, the chance of receiving a bDMARD increased in patients with moderate disease activity, moderate glucocorticoid dosages (5-7.5 mg/day) and those with comorbidities, such as congestive heart failure or prior malignancy. Men had a higher chance of receiving a bDMARD than women only in the first recruitment period. Private health insurance, high education and gainful employment were significantly associated with more frequent prescription of bDMARDs in all recruitment periods.

DISCUSSION

The time-dependent changes in the impact of disease activity, concomitant drugs, gender and comorbidity on the prescription of bDMARDs mirror the increasing therapeutic options and the growing experience in the application of the new substances in patients at higher risk. The influence of demographic and social factors may reflect safety concerns in patients at increased risk of adverse events but also the need to economize drug costs..

Identifying patients with rheumatoid arthritis with moderate disease activity at risk of significant radiographic progression despite methotrexate treatment

Objectives

To determine the baseline factors predictive of significant radiographic progression (SRP) in patients with moderately active rheumatoid arthritis (RA) despite receiving methotrexate (MTX).

Methods

Patients from the MTX arm of the Trial of Etanercept and Methotrexate with Radiographic Patient Outcomes (TEMPO) trial with sustained moderate RA (defined as ≥3.2 mean disease activity score in 28 joints ≤5.1 during the last 6 months of the first year) were analysed for SRP (mTSS >3.0 overall) after 2 and 3 years. Baseline predictors for SRP were identified by univariate and multivariate analyses. All variables shown to be significantly associated with SRP were categorised based on clinically relevant cut-offs and tertiles and were included in a matrix risk model.

Results

228 patients were assigned MTX treatment, 210 patients were in the radiographic intention-to-treat population, and 96 of these had sustained moderate RA. SRP occurred in 25 (26%) and 33 (34%) patients after 2 and 3 years of MTX treatment, respectively. Univariate and multivariate analyses found that C reactive protein (CRP) and rheumatoid factor (RF) positivity at baseline were predictive of SRP after 2 and 3 years (p<0.05 for all). The matrix risk model showed that RF positivity and CRP levels >40 mg/L at baseline were significantly associated with SRP after 2 (p<0.05 for both; R²=0.24) and 3 years (p<0.05 for both; R²=0.22). The baseline erosion score was not found to be predictive of SRP.

Conclusions

Patients with sustained moderate RA despite receiving MTX treatment are at risk of SRP, with both RF positivity and high CRP levels shown to be predictive of this.

Randomised controlled trial of tumour necrosis factor inhibitors against combination intensive therapy with conventional disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs in established rheumatoid arthritis: the TACIT trial and associated systematic reviews

BACKGROUND

Rheumatoid arthritis (RA) is initially treated with methotrexate and other disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs). Active RA patients who fail such treatments can receive tumour necrosis factor inhibitors (TNFis), which are effective but expensive.

OBJECTIVE

We assessed whether or not combination DMARDs (cDMARDs) give equivalent clinical benefits at lower costs in RA patients eligible for TNFis.

DESIGN

An open-label, 12-month, pragmatic, randomised, multicentre, two-arm trial [Tumour necrosis factor inhibitors Against Combination Intensive Therapy (TACIT)] compared these treatment strategies. We then systematically reviewed all comparable published trials.

SETTING

The TACIT trial involved 24 English rheumatology clinics.

PARTICIPANTS

Active RA patients eligible for TNFis.

INTERVENTIONS

The TACIT trial compared cDMARDs with TNFis plus methotrexate or another DMARD; 6-month non-responders received (a) TNFis if in the cDMARD group; and (b) a second TNFi if in the TNFi group.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

The Heath Assessment Questionnaire (HAQ) was the primary outcome measure. The European Quality of Life-5 Dimensions (EQ-5D), joint damage, Disease Activity Score for 28 Joints (DAS28), withdrawals and adverse effects were secondary outcome measures. Economic evaluation linked costs, HAQ changes and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs).

RESULTS

In total, 432 patients were screened; 104 started on cDMARDs and 101 started on TNFis. The initial demographic and disease assessments were similar between the groups. In total, 16 patients were lost to follow-up (nine in the cDMARD group, seven in the TNFi group) and 42 discontinued their intervention but were followed up (23 in the cDMARD group and 19 in the TNFi group). Intention-to-treat analysis with multiple imputation methods used for missing data showed greater 12-month HAQ score reductions with initial cDMARDs than with initial TNFis [adjusted linear regression coefficient 0.15, 95% confidence interval (CI) -0.003 to 0.31; p = 0.046]. Increases in 12-month EQ-5D scores were greater with initial cDMARDs (adjusted linear regression coefficient -0.11, 95% CI -0.18 to -0.03; p = 0.009) whereas 6-month changes in HAQ and EQ-5D scores and 6- and 12-month changes in joint damage were similar between the initial cDMARD group and the initial TNFi group. Longitudinal analyses (adjusted general estimating equations) showed that the DAS28 was lower in the initial TNFi group in the first 6 months (coefficient -0.63, 95% CI -0.93 to -0.34; p < 0.001) but there were no differences between the groups in months 6-12. In total, 36 patients in the initial cDMARD group and 44 in the initial TNFi group achieved DAS28 remission. The onset of remission did not differ between groups (p = 0.085 on log-rank test). In total, 10 patients in the initial cDMARD group and 18 in the initial TNFi group experienced serious adverse events; stopping therapy because of toxicity occurred in 10 and six patients respectively. Economic evaluation showed that the cDMARD group had similar or better QALY outcomes than TNFi with significantly lower costs at 6 and 12 months. In the systematic reviews we identified 32 trials (including 20-1049 patients) on early RA and 19 trials (including 40-982 patients) on established RA that compared (1) cDMARDs with DMARD monotherapy; (2) TNFis/methotrexate with methotrexate monotherapy; and (3) cDMARDs with TNFis/methotrexate. They showed that cDMARDs and TNFis had similar efficacies and toxicities.

CONCLUSIONS

Active RA patients who have failed methotrexate and another DMARD achieve equivalent clinical benefits at a lower cost from starting cDMARDs or from starting TNFis (reserving TNFis for non-responders). Only a minority of patients achieve sustained remission with cDMARDs or TNFis; new strategies are needed to maximise the frequency of remission.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Current Control Trials ISRCTN37438295.

FUNDING

This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 18, No. 66. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

Outcome and safety of TNFα antagonist therapy in 475 consecutive outpatients (with rheumatoid arthritis or spondyloarthropathies) treated by a single physician according to their eligibility for clinical trials

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the effectiveness and safety of TNFα antagonists in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) or spondyloarthropathies (SpA) treated by a single physician, according to the presence of the inclusion and non-inclusion criteria used to select patients for pivotal clinical trials.

METHODS

Effectiveness was evaluated based on four categories defined by the DAS28-ESR and BASDAI values, from a very good response (mean DAS-28-ESR less than 3.2 and mean BASDAI less than 2.0) to failure (DAS28-ESR unchanged or greater than 5.1 and BASDAI unchanged). Serious adverse events were defined as events that required permanent TNFα antagonist discontinuation or that led to sequelae, hospital admission, or death.

RESULTS

The study included 475 patients, 230 with RA, 226 with SpA, 10 with juvenile-onset arthritis, and nine with unclassifiable arthritis. Mean number of TNFα antagonists used per patient was 1.3 and mean duration of TNFα antagonist treatment was 28±23 months. Overall, 41% of patients met the inclusion and non-inclusion criteria used in pivotal trials; the proportion was 43% in the RA group and 40% in the SpA group. These patients had a 3-fold higher rate of very good responses (54 versus 19%) and a 5-fold lower rate of failures (5 versus 25%) compared to the other patients. Of the 15 (3%) patients who died, none met pivotal trial criteria. The group that met pivotal trial criteria had a significantly lower rate of serious adverse events (11 versus 16%; Chi(2), p=0.0001), although age was similar in the two groups (53±16 years versus 57±14 years).

CONCLUSION

Patients meeting the selection criteria used in pivotal trials had a higher response rate and significantly fewer serious adverse events.

Comparison of anti-TNF treatment initiation in rheumatoid arthritis databases demonstrates wide country variability in patient parameters at initiation of anti-TNF therapy

OBJECTIVE

Characteristics of Canadian RA patients started on anti-tumor necrosis factor (TNF) treatment were compared with 12 other countries.

METHODS

Data from the Optimization of HUMIRA trial (OH) were compared with Canadian real world studies [Ontario Biologics Research Initiative (OBRI) and the Real-Life Evaluation of Rheumatoid Arthritis in Canadians Receiving HUMIRA (REACH)], and to data from American, Australian, British, Czech, Danish, Dutch, Finnish, German, Italian, Norwegian, Spanish, and Swedish RA databases. Patient characteristics and temporal trends at initiation of anti-TNF therapy were compared between countries.

RESULTS

Baseline Disease Activity Scores (DAS28) varied from 5.3 to 6.6. Lower disease severity was noted in databases from countries with less restrictive anti-TNF coverage: Dutch [based on previous disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARD) use, DAS28, swollen joint count (SJC), tender joint count (TJC), Health Assessment Questionnaire Disability Index (HAQ-DI), Danish (previous DMARD use, DAS28), Norwegian (DAS28, SJC, TJC, visual analog scale (VAS) of global health), and Swedish (DAS28, SJC, TJC, HAQ-DI)]. RA databases showed lower disease scores than did OH (P < 0.05). The US databases also showed lower disease severity (CORRONA: previous DMARD use, SJC, TJC; National Data Bank for Rheumatic Diseases: HAQ, P < 0.001). The UK and Czech Republic had restrictive coverage and higher mean baseline DAS28 than OH (P < 0.001). Baseline DAS28 in the registries with published data lowered over time (British, Norwegian, Danish, and Swedish) but less for the British (P < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

These results confirm that regional variation exists between the 13 countries analyzed in the initiation of treatment with anti-TNF agents among RA patients and suggest that in some cases this variation may be increasing. In some countries the mean baseline disease severity declined over time and regional reimbursement policies and differences in physician preferences may be influencing initiation of anti-TNF therapy in RA.

Pattern and predictors of the initiation of biologic agents for the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis in the United States: an analysis using a large observational data bank

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to identify factors associated with the initiation of biologic agents for the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis (RA) in a large US observational cohort.

METHODS

Semiannual patient-reported data in the ARAMIS (Arthritis, Rheumatism and Aging Medical Information System) data bank from January 1998 to January 2006 were analyzed retrospectively using pooled logistic regression (with adjustment for center-level and temporal effects) to identify patient-, disease-, and treatment-related characteristics associated with the initiation of biologics for the treatment of RA.

RESULTS

The analysis included 1545 patients from 7 US centers. By 2006, 41.4% of 679 patients remaining in the sample had received biologics. Initiation of biologics was significantly associated with greater disability in the previous 6-month period (per 1-unit increase in Health Assessment Questionnaire score: odds ratio [OR] = 1.45; 95% CI, 1.22-1.72; P < 0.01) and treatment in the previous period with steroids (OR = 2.24; 95% CI, 1.76-2.85; P < 0.01) or nonbiologic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (OR = 2.43; 95% CI, 1.71-3.46; P < 0.01). Two sociodemographic factors were significant predictors of decreased use of biologics: older age (per 10 years: OR = 0.74; 95% CI, 0.660.82; P < 0.01) and lower annual income (per $10,000 reduction: OR = 0.95; 95% CI, 0.91-1.00; P = 0.04). There were no significant differences with respect to sex, race, employment status, comorbidity, previous NSAID use, or treatment center.

CONCLUSIONS

Disease- and treatment-related factors were significant predictors of the initiation of biologics for RA. Independent of these factors, however, biologics were less often used in patients who were older and those with lower incomes. Use of biologics increased steadily over the period studied.