Applying science in practice: the optimization of biological therapy in rheumatoid arthritis

Two Sides of the Same Coin? A Dual Multiple Criteria Decision Analysis of Novel Treatments Against Rheumatoid Arthritis in Physicians and Patients

PURPOSE

Available treatment options for rheumatoid arthritis (RA) differ in important aspects. In this sense, each RA treatment option is accompanied by a spectrum of characteristics that collectively constitute its comprehensive "value," as viewed from the physician's or the patient's perspective. The objective of this study was to perform a multiple criteria decision analysis of different RA treatments from the perspective of physicians and patients and to outline the respective aspects of value for each treatment METHODS: A literature review was performed for constructing a set of criteria (N = 8) for the multiple criteria decision analysis. Workshops for the elicitation of preferences occurred separately for physicians and patients. A performance matrix was populated via 2 network meta-analyses plus converged clinical opinion. Criteria were hierarchically classified by application of pairwise comparisons, and criteria weights were attributed by point allocation through convergence of opinions. Performances in both panels were scored by using a 100-point scale. A linear additive value function was used for the calculation of total value estimates.

FINDINGS

Both panels provided their consensus. The hierarchical classification of attributes from the physician perspective placed the highest values on the criteria of severe adverse events, clinical efficacy, route of administration, and cost per year for the third-party payer. From the patient perspective, the highest ranking criteria were clinical efficacy, severe adverse events, percentage of patients remaining with the same targeted immune modulator for 1 year ("drug survival"), and cost per year for the third-party payer.

IMPLICATIONS

In an era of multiple options and varying preferences, RA treatments must be evaluated by taking into consideration patients' preferences as well, as to cover the full spectrum of value elements rather than simply clinical outcomes. The results of this analysis show that physicians and patients share similarities but also marked differences in terms of the aspects of treatment that they perceive as more valuable.

Association of 17 Definitions of Remission with Functional Status in a Large Clinical Practice Cohort of Patients with Rheumatoid Arthritis

Objective.

To compare the association between different remission criteria and physical function in patients with rheumatoid arthritis followed in clinical practice.

Methods.

Longitudinal data from the METEOR database were used. Seventeen definitions of remission were tested: American College of Rheumatology/European League Against Rheumatism (ACR/EULAR) Boolean-based; Simplified/Clinical Disease Activity Index (SDAI/CDAI); and 14 Disease Activity Score (DAS)-based definitions. Health Assessment Questionnaire (HAQ) ≤ 0.5 was defined as good functional status. Associations were investigated using generalized estimating equations. Potential confounders were tested and sensitivity analyses performed.

Results.

Data from 32,915 patients (157,899 visits) were available. The most stringent definition of remission was the ACR/EULAR Boolean-based definition (1.9%). The proportion of patients with HAQ ≤ 0.5 was higher for the most stringent definitions, although it never reached 100%. However, this also meant that, for the most stringent criteria, many patients in nonremission had HAQ ≤ 0.5. All remission definitions were associated with better function, with the strongest degree of association observed for the SDAI (adjusted OR 3.36, 95% CI 3.01–3.74).

Conclusion.

The 17 definitions of remission confirmed their validity against physical function in a large international clinical practice setting. Achievement of remission according to any of the indices may be more important than the use of a specific index. A multidimensional approach, targeted at wider goals than disease control, is necessary to help all patients achieve the best possible functional status.

Suppressing Inflammation in Rheumatoid Arthritis: Does Patient Global Assessment Blur the Target? A Practice-Based Call for a Paradigm Change

OBJECTIVE

In current management paradigms of rheumatoid arthritis (RA), patient global assessment (PGA) is crucial to decide whether a patient has attained remission (target) or needs reinforced therapy. We investigated whether the clinical and psychological determinants of PGA are appropriate to support this important role.

METHODS

This was a cross-sectional, single-center study including consecutive ambulatory RA patients. Data collection comprised swollen 28-joint count (SJC28), tender 28-joint count (TJC28), C-reactive protein (CRP) level, PGA, pain, fatigue, function, anxiety, depression, happiness, personality traits, and comorbidities. Remission was categorized using American College of Rheumatology/European League Against Rheumatism Boolean-based criteria: remission, near-remission (only PGA >1), and nonremission. A binary definition without PGA (3v-remission) was also studied. Univariable and multivariable analyses were used to identify explanatory variables of PGA in each remission state.

RESULTS

A total of 309 patients were included (remission 9.4%, near-remission 37.2%, and nonremission 53.4%). Patients in near-remission were indistinguishable from remission regarding disease activity, but described a disease impact similar to those in nonremission. In multivariable analyses, PGA in near-remission was explained (R²_adjusted = 0.50) by fatigue, pain, anxiety, and function. Fatigue and pain had no relationship with disease activity measures.

CONCLUSION

In RA, a consensually acceptable level of disease activity (SJC28, TJC28, and CRP level ≤1) does not equate to low disease impact: a large proportion of these patients are considered in nonremission solely due to PGA. PGA mainly reflects fatigue, pain, function, and psychological domains, which are inadequate to define the target for immunosuppressive therapy. This consideration suggests that clinical practice should be guided by 2 separate remission targets: inflammation (3v-remission) and disease impact.

Discontinuation rates of biologics in patients with rheumatoid arthritis: are TNF inhibitors different from non-TNF inhibitors?

Objective

To compare discontinuation rates of first and second biologics in rheumatoid arthritis (RA) by tumour-necrosis factor inhibitor (TNFi) status and identify predictors and reasons for discontinuation.

Methods

From 1998 to 2011, self-reported medication use for RA was assessed every 6 months via questionnaire in a longitudinal study in the USA. Time-on-drug analyses were conducted for individual biologics and groups, and annual rates reported. Time to discontinuation of TNFi and non-TNFi was compared, unadjusted and adjusted using propensity score analyses. Baseline and time-varying predictors of biologic discontinuation were derived through Cox regression.

Results

Of 2281 patients initiating their first biologic, 1100 (48%) discontinued and of 1097 initiating a second biologic, 537 (49%) discontinued. The annual discontinuation rate was 17% (median 4 years) for first biologic and 20% (median 3.3 years) for second biologic. TNFi had lower discontinuation rates than non-TNFi after propensity score adjustment: HR for first biologic 0.49 (0.34 to 0.71) and 0.68 (0.51 to 0.90) for second biologic. The annual discontinuation rate was significantly lower in patients starting their first biologic before January 2005 vs after (16 vs 25%, p=0.005). Predictors of discontinuation for the first biologic included smoking, higher comorbidity index, worse overall health and not using concomitant methotrexate.

Conclusions

In this large cohort, patients with RA tended to remain on their first and second biologics for relatively long periods suggesting the drugs’ effectiveness. Discontinuation rates were lower in patients using TNFi, and all rates increased after January 2005 when the number of biologics available increased.

Utilization and adherence patterns of subcutaneously administered anti-tumor necrosis factor treatment among rheumatoid arthritis patients

BACKGROUND

Adherence to therapy is a key requirement underlying achievement of clinical outcomes in randomized controlled drug registration trials. In postmarketing studies, comparison of adherence among therapies can become more complicated when drug dosing and administration schedules differ or when methods used to measure adherence are not consistently applied.

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this exploratory study was to investigate a broad range of utilization and adherence outcomes associated with subcutaneous biologic treatments for rheumatoid arthritis (RA).

METHODS

Adult patients (aged ≥18 years) exhibiting ≥2 claims with an RA diagnosis (code 714.x), at least 24 months of continuous medical and pharmacy eligibility, and 30-day supplies of adalimumab, etanercept, or golimumab were selected from the Optum Insight Clinformatics database. Adherence and utilization measures were calculated and compared across treatment groups.

RESULTS

A total of 1532 adalimumab, 2099 etanercept, and 261 golimumab patients met inclusion criteria. Compared with both adalimumab and etanercept patients, golimumab patients were significantly more likely to have a medication possession ratio of ≥0.80 (82% vs 71% vs 62%; P < 0.001) and significantly less likely to have ≥4 late medication refills (6.9% vs 17.7% vs 26.1%; P < 0.001 for all). Etanercept patients had significantly greater refill intervals (37.7 vs 34.9 and 35.1 days) and had the lowest proportion of adherent fills (70% vs 77% and 75%) compared with both golimumab and adalimumab patients (P < 0.001 for all). Bivariate effects were reproduced in multivariate models that controlled for treatment duration.

CONCLUSIONS

A number of statistically significant medication adherence differences were observed among golimumab, adalimumab, and etanercept patients in treatment for RA. Overall, golimumab patients appeared to be the most adherent group. Findings may be partially attributable to golimumab patients' likely increased disease severity, their prior experience with biologic medication, or golimumab's once-monthly dosing schedule, which requires fewer administrations than both adalimumab and etanercept.

Cytokines as biomarkers in rheumatoid arthritis

RA is a complex disease that develops as a series of events often referred to as disease continuum. RA would benefit from novel biomarker development for diagnosis where new biomarkers are still needed (even if progresses have been made with the inclusion of ACPA into the ACR/EULAR 2010 diagnostic criteria) and for prognostic notably in at risk of evolution patients with autoantibody-positive arthralgia. Risk biomarkers for rapid evolution or cardiovascular complications are also highly desirable. Monitoring biomarkers would be useful in predicting relapse. Finally, predictive biomarkers for therapy outcome would allow tailoring therapy to the individual. Increasing numbers of cytokines have been involved in RA pathology. Many have the potential as biomarkers in RA especially as their clinical utility is already established in other diseases and could be easily transferable to rheumatology. We will review the current knowledge's relation to cytokine used as biomarker in RA. However, given the complexity and heterogeneous nature of RA, it is unlikely that a single cytokine may provide sufficient discrimination; therefore multiple biomarker signatures may represent more realistic approach for the future of personalised medicine in RA.

Harms of TNF inhibitors in rheumatic diseases: a focused review of the literature

A focused review of the risk of harms of anti-TNF inhibitors in adult rheumatic diseases was performed. An increased risk of serious infections, tuberculosis and other opportunistic infections has been reported across various studies, with etanercept appearing to have a modestly better safety profile in terms of tuberculosis and opportunistic infections, and infliximab posing a higher risk of serious infections. Evidence suggests no increase in risk of cancer with anti-TNF biologics, but there is an increased risk of non-melanoma skin cancer. Elderly patients appear to be at increased risk of incident or worsening heart failure with anti-TNF biologic use.