Abatacept Users Research Articles

Abatacept retention and clinical effectiveness in patients with rheumatoid arthritis in a real-world setting in Taiwan.

To evaluate real-world abatacept retention and clinical outcomes in patients with rheumatoid arthritis in Taiwan. This prospective, observational study enrolled patients with rheumatoid arthritis aged ≥20 years who received abatacept in real-world practice. The primary endpoint was the abatacept retention rate at 24 months. Patients were categorized into subgroups based on abatacept treatment status and previous biological disease-modifying antirheumatic drug (bDMARD) therapy. Risk factors affecting abatacept retention were determined by regression analysis. A total of 212 patients were enrolled. The overall abatacept retention rate at 24 months among all patients was 59.9% (95% confidence interval 53.0%-66.6%). Patients who were ongoing users of abatacept and bDMARD-naïve had the highest retention rate (76.3%); of these, 31.6% achieved low disease activity or remission after 2 years. Previous treatment with bDMARDs was associated with an increased risk of abatacept discontinuation (hazard ratio 1.99; p = .002). The most common reasons for abatacept discontinuation were drug switch (11.3%) and loss to follow-up (6.1%). Abatacept was well-tolerated with no new safety signals. The 24-month retention rate of abatacept was 59.9%; abatacept was associated with improved clinical outcomes and was well-tolerated in the real-world setting in Taiwan.

Infection outcomes in patients with rheumatoid arthritis treated with abatacept and other disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs: Results from a 10-year international post-marketing study

ObjectiveTo evaluate risk of infections requiring hospitalization and opportunistic infections, including tuberculosis, in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) treated with abatacept versus conventional synthetic (cs) disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs) and other biologic/targeted synthetic (b/ts) DMARDs. MethodsFive international observational data sources were used: two biologic registries (Sweden, Germany), a disease registry (USA) and two healthcare claims databases (Canada, USA). Crude incidence rates (IRs) per 1000 patient-years, with 95 % CIs, were used to estimate rate ratios (RRs) comparing abatacept versus csDMARDs or other b/tsDMARDs. RRs were adjusted for demographic factors, comorbidities, and other potential confounders and then pooled across data sources using a random effects model (REM). ResultsThe data sources included 6450 abatacept users, 136,636 csDMARD users and 54,378 other b/tsDMARD users, with a mean follow-up range of 2.2–6.2 years. Across data sources, the IRs for infections requiring hospitalization ranged from 16 to 56 for abatacept, 19–46 for csDMARDs, and 18–40 for other b/tsDMARDs. IRs for opportunistic infections were 0.4–7.8, 0.3–4.3, and 0.5–3.8; IRs for tuberculosis were 0.0–8.4, 0.0–6.0, and 0.0–6.3, respectively. The pooled adjusted RR (95 % CI), only reported for infections requiring hospitalization, was 1.2 (0.6–2.2) for abatacept versus csDMARDs and 0.9 (0.6–1.3) versus other b/tsDMARDs. ConclusionsData from this international, observational study showed similar hospitalized infection risk for abatacept versus csDMARDs or other b/tsDMARDs. IRs for opportunistic infections, including tuberculosis, were low. These data are consistent with the known safety profile of abatacept.

Diabetes-Related Complications and Costs in Medicare Beneficiaries with Comorbid Rheumatoid Arthritis and Diabetes Treated with Abatacept Versus Other Targeted DMARDs.

IntroductionTargeted DMARD (tDMARD) use in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) and type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) may increase whole-body insulin sensitivity. Evidence comparing the T2DM-related clinical and economic impact of abatacept versus other tDMARDs is limited. This study compared differences in T2DM-related healthcare resource utilization (HCRU) and costs in patients with RA and T2DM.MethodsThis retrospective study used 100% Medicare Fee-for-Service claims (parts A/B/D) to identify patients ≥ 65 age, diagnosed with RA and T2DM, and were either TNFi-experienced (switched from a TNFi to another tDMARD) or tDMARD-naïve, initiating their first tDMARD (abatacept, TNFi, or non-TNFi) between 2010 and 2017. Abatacept users were propensity-score (PS) matched to TNFi and other non-TNFi users separately on baseline demographics, comorbidities, medications, T2DM-related HCRU, and costs. Post-index follow-up: until discontinuation of index treatment, disenrollment, death, or end of study period, whichever occurred first. T2DM-related complications and HCRU were assessed. Costs were normalized to per-patient-per-month (PPPM) and inflated to 2019 US$.ResultsThe TNFi-experienced group included 2169 abatacept/TNFi and 2118 abatacept/other non-TNFi PS-matched pairs; the tDMARD-naïve group included 2667 abatacept/TNFi and 2247 abatacept/other non-TNFi PS-matched pairs. For TNFi-experienced patients, T2DM-related complication rates for inpatient settings PPPM trended lower for abatacept than TNFi (21 vs. 24, p = 0.046) and other non-TNFi groups (21 vs. 26; p < 0.0001). T2DM-related total costs PPPM for TNFi-experienced patients demonstrated lower trends for abatacept than TNFi ($489 vs. $594, p = 0.016) and other non-TNFi users ($493 vs. $606, p = 0.012).ConclusionsMedicare beneficiaries with RA and T2DM who switch to/initiate abatacept as their first tDMARD have directionally lower rates and costs of T2DM-related complications compared with patients switching to/initiating other tDMARDs. Abatacept treatment may help reduce clinical and economic burdens associated with T2DM in patients with RA.Supplementary InformationThe online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s40744-022-00453-w.

Treatment with biologic DMARDs may not adversely affect lung nodules in rheumatoid arthritis patients.

Lung nodules (LNs) impose diagnostic and therapeutic challenges in patients with rheuma- toid arthritis (RA) due to unpredictable outcomes. Potential induction of nodulosis with the use of con- ventional synthetic DMARDs (csDMARD) and lack of knowledge regarding the effect of biologic disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs (bDMARDs)/tofacitinib on the LN raise concerns and have an impact on treatment decisions. This study aims to evaluate the possible effects of the bDMARDs/tofa- citinib and csDMARDS on LNs observed in RA patients. Electronic health records of RA patients who had LNs detected on computed tomography (CT) between January 2015 and December 2020 were evaluated retrospectively. Patients with follow- up CT images were included in the study. Baseline and follow-up images were meticulously examined for the number, size, attenuation, and cavity formation. Clinical, histopathologic, and laboratory find- ings were analyzed. Forty-two RA patients with LNs were studied, 21 were on bDMARDs/tofacitinib (11 females, mean age: 59.7 6 8.4) and 21 were on csDMARDs (12 females, mean age: 71.4 6 8.3). The proportion of patients with progressed nodules during follow-up was comparable between groups (six patients in bDMARDs/tofacitinib vs seven patients in csDMARDs). Progression of LNs was observed in six patients in the bDMARDs/tofacitinib group: three in anti-TNFa, two in rituximab, and one in abatacept users and none in tofacitinib users. Our results suggest that the risk of progression in LNs in RA patients with use of bDMARDs/tofacitinib might not impose a higher risk compared to csDMARDs. Moreover, bDMARDs/ tofacitinib might result in regression in LNs.

Outcomes of COVID-19 in patients with rheumatoid arthritis: A multicenter research network study in the United States

ObjectivesTo investigate outcomes of Coronavirus Disease-2019 (COVID-19) in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) as compared to the general population. Additionally, outcomes were explored among RA patients stratified by sex, race, and medications use through sub-cohort analyses. MethodsThis comparative cohort study used a US multicenter research network (TriNetX) to extract data on all adult RA patients who were diagnosed with COVID-19, and adults without RA who were diagnosed with COVID-19 (comparative cohort) anytime from January 20, 2020 to April 11, 2021. COVID-19 outcomes were assessed within 30 days after its diagnosis. Baseline characteristics that included demographics and comorbidities were controlled in propensity score matching. ResultsA total of 9730 RA patients with COVID-19 and 656,979 non-RA with COVID-19 were identified. Before matching, the risk of all outcomes including mortality (RR: 2.11, 95%CI: 1.90 to 2.34), hospitalization (RR: 1.60, 1.55 to 1.66), intensive care unit-ICU admission (RR: 1.86, 1.71 to 2.05), mechanical ventilation (RR: 1.62, 1.44 to 1.82), severe COVID-19 (RR: 1.89, 1.74 to 2.06), acute kidney injury (RR: 2.13, 1.99 to 2.29), kidney replacement therapy/hemodialysis (RR: 1.40, 1.03 to 1.89), acute respiratory distress syndrome-ARDS (RR: 1.76, 1.53 to 2.02), ischemic stroke (RR: 2.62, 2.24 to 3.07), venous thromboembolism-VTE (RR: 2.30, 2.07 to 2.56), and sepsis (RR: 1.97, 1.81 to 2.13) was higher in RA compared to non-RA. After matching, the risks did not differ in both cohorts except for VTE (RR: 1.18, 1.01 to 1.38) and sepsis (RR: 1.27, 1.12 to 1.43), which were higher in the RA cohort. Male sex, black race, and glucocorticoid use increased the risk of adverse outcomes. The risk of hospitalization was higher in rituximab or interleukin 6 inhibitors (IL-6i) users compared to tumor necrosis factor inhibitors (TNFi) users, with no significant difference between Janus kinase inhibitors (JAKi) or abatacept users and TNFi users. ConclusionThis large cohort study of RA-COVID-19 found that the risk of all outcomes was higher in the RA compared to the non-RA cohort before matching, with no difference in the majority of outcomes after matching, implying the risk being attributed to adjusted factors. However, the risk of VTE and sepsis was higher in RA cohort even after matching, indicating RA as an independent risk factor. Male sex, black race, and glucocorticoid use were associated with adverse outcomes in RA with COVID-19. Rituximab or IL-6i users were associated with an increased risk of hospitalization compared to TNFi users.

Risk and cost of infection-related hospitalizations in medicare beneficiaries with comorbid rheumatoid arthritis treated with abatacept versus other targeted disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs

Objective This study evaluated infection-related hospitalization risk and cost in tumor necrosis factor inhibitor (TNFi)-experienced and targeted DMARD (tDMARD) naïve rheumatoid arthritis (RA) patients that were treated with abatacept, TNFi, or other non-TNFi. Methods This retrospective study used 100% Medicare Fee-for-Service claims to identify patients ≥65 age, diagnosed with RA, and were either 1) TNFi-experienced, who switched from a TNFi to another tDMARD (subsequent tDMARD claim served as index), or 2) tDMARD naïve (first therapy claim served as index), who initiated either abatacept, TNFi, or non-TNFi as their first tDMARD, between 2010 and 2017. Follow-up ended at the date of disenrollment, death, end of study period, or end of index treatment, whichever occurred first. Infection-related hospitalizations included pneumonia, bacterial respiratory, sepsis, skin and soft tissue, joint or genitourinary infections. A Cox proportional hazard model and two part generalized linear model were developed to estimate adjusted infection-related hospitalization risk and costs. Costs were normalized to per-patient-per-month (PPPM) and inflated to 2019 US$. Results The infection-related hospitalizations rate was lower during follow-up than during baseline periods for abatacept users, but was reversed for both TNFi and other non-TNFi users in both TNFi-experience and tDMARD naïve (p value < .001 based on Breslow-Day test for homogeneity of odds ratios). Infection-related hospitalization PPPM cost was significantly lower in abatacept treated patients compared to TNFi (TNFi-experienced: by $74; tDMARD naïve: $42) and other non-TNFi (TNFi-experienced: by $68; tDMARD naïve: $60). The adjusted infection-related hospitalization risk was significantly higher for RA patients treated with TNFi (TNFi-experienced HR: 1.48; 95% CI: 1.26–1.75, p < .0001; tDMARD naïve HR:1.59; 95% CI: 1.43–1.77, p < .0001) and other non-TNFi (TNFi-experienced HR:1.46; CI:1.28–1.66; tDMARD naïve HR:1.63; 95% CI: 1.44–1.83) than with abatacept. Conclusion RA Medicare Fee-For-Service beneficiaries who either switched or initiated abatacept have a lower infection-related hospitalization risk and cost compared to patients who switched to or initiated other tDMARDs.

Comparative safety of abatacept in rheumatoid arthritis with COPD: A real-world population-based observational study

ObjectiveThe ASSURE randomized trial of abatacept safety in rheumatoid arthritis (RA) reported more frequent respiratory adverse events with abatacept among the subgroup of 54 patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), leading to a label warning. We assessed the risk of adverse respiratory events associated with abatacept, compared with other biologic DMARDs (bDMARDs), among patients with RA and COPD in a real-world observational setting. MethodsWe formed a prevalent new-user cohort of patients with RA and COPD treated with bDMARDs within the US-based MarketScan databases from 2007 to 2014. Abatacept users were matched on time-conditional propensity scores to users of other bDMARDs. Adjusted hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) of adverse respiratory events comparing abatacept with other bDMARDs were estimated using the Cox model. ResultsThe cohort included 1807 patients initiating abatacept and 3547 matched patients initiating another bDMARD. The HR of the combined endpoint of hospitalized COPD exacerbation, bronchitis and hospitalized pneumonia or influenza with abatacept relative to other bDMARDs was 0.87 (95% CI: 0.68–1.12). For hospitalized COPD exacerbation it was 0.60 (95% CI: 0.32–1.11), 0.80 (95% CI: 0.56–1.14) for bronchitis, while for pneumonia or influenza it was 1.39 (95% CI: 0.91–2.13) if hospitalized and 1.05 (95% CI: 0.86–1.29) as outpatient. ConclusionThis large safety study from a real world setting finds no increased risk of adverse respiratory events with abatacept compared with other bDMARDs in patients with RA and COPD. This study does not substantiate the safety signal raised by the smaller ASSURE trial.

AB1105 Epidemiological Assessment of Baseline Characteristics of the Abatacept-Treated Patients in Select Real-World Rheumatoid Arthritis Data Sources

BackgroundRegistries in North America and Europe have reported that patients with RA initiating abatacept are in poorer health, more likely to be previously exposed to several biologics and to have...

AB0776 Work and activity impairment among patients with rheumatoid arthritis prescribed biologics: a patient survey

BackgroundThere is a paucity of comparative, real-world data that describe the relationship between choice of biologic therapy and patient-reported outcomes in RA.ObjectivesTo compare the level of impairment in work and...

FRI0529 Comparative risks for serious infections associated with biologics in high risk rheumatoid arthritis patients

BackgroundSerious infections are an important concern for patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) treated with biologic agents. However, insufficient data guide the optimal treatment in the high risk population.ObjectivesTo compare the...

FRI0250 Are rheumatoid arthritis patients who receive abatacept comparable with those on other biologics?

BackgroundObservational studies are critical in assessing medication safety and effectiveness. Non-random assignment can potentially lead to channeling bias. Understanding the characteristics of patients receiving similar treatments is important for addressing...

The comparative risk of serious infections among rheumatoid arthritis patients starting or switching biological agents

BackgroundIt is unclear whether anti-tumour necrosis factor alpha and biological agents with different mechanisms of action have similar safety. This study evaluated the incidence of hospitalised infections among rheumatoid arthritis...