Disease-modifying Antirheumatic Drugs Cohort Research Articles

Psoriatic arthritis risk in psoriasis patients prescribed acitretin versus disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs: a nationwide cohort study.

To compare the risk of PsA in psoriasis (PsO) patients treated with acitretin vs DMARDs. This retrospective study used Taiwan's National Health Insurance Research Database from 1997 to 2013. Adult PsO patients without PsA prescribed acitretin or DMARDs for ≥30 days within a year were assigned to the acitretin cohort or DMARDs cohort, respectively. Patients in the acitretin cohort prescribed DMARDs for >7 days, or in the DMARDs cohort prescribed acitretin for >7 days, were excluded. Cumulative incidence of PsA were determined within both cohorts using the Kaplan-Meier method. The hazard ratio (HR) comparing acitretin to DMARDs was calculated with Cox regression models, adjusting for demographic and clinical covariates including the use of NSAIDs and comorbidities. The study included 1948 patients in each cohort. The 5-year cumulative incidence of PsA in the acitretin cohort was lower than that in the reference cohort (7.52% vs 9.93%; P = 0.005), with a more pronounced difference in the subpopulation receiving NSAIDs treatment. However, in subpopulations without NSAIDs treatment, the 5-year cumulative incidence of PsA in the acitretin cohort was comparable to the DMARDs cohort (5.26% vs 6.98%; P = 0.106). Acitretin was not associated with PsA development in PsO (HR 0.83, 95% confidence interval 0.65-1.05). This risk remained consistent regardless of adjustments for NSAID treatment and comorbidities. Other independent risk factors for PsA included female and NSAIDs treatment. Compared with DMARDs, acitretin was not associated with increased PsA risk in PsO patients.

Commensurate incidence and outcomes of liver enzyme elevation between anti-tumor necrosis factor users with or without prior hepatitis B virus infections

Background and objectivePotential hepatoxicity is an important clinical concern when administering immunosuppressive therapies to patients infected by hepatitis B virus (HBV). Tumor necrosis factor inhibitors (anti-TNF) increase the likelihood of hepatitis consequent to HBV reactivation, but reported risks and outcomes vary. We determined the risks of liver enzyme elevation in anti-rheumatic drug users from an HBV-endemic region with differing HBV serostatus.MethodsWe established retrospective cohorts with rheumatoid arthritis, ankylosing spondylitis, or psoriasis/psoriatic arthritis who: 1) received anti-TNF agents from 1 January 2004 to 30 June 2013; 2) received care from 1 June 2011 to 30 June 2013 but only ever used conventional disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs (DMARDs). Serology results defined three subgroups: HBV surface antigen positive (HBsAg+), HBsAg negative/HBV core antibody positive (HBsAg−/HBcAb+), or uninfected. We compared incidences of serum alanine aminotransferase (ALT) exceeding twice the upper reference limit between HBV serostatus subgroups in each treatment cohort.ResultsAmong 783 patients treated with anti-TNF (n = 472) or DMARDs only (n = 311), HBsAg−/HBcAb+ anti-TNF users had incidence of ALT elevation commensurate with uninfected counterparts (6.1 vs. 6.0/100 person-years), compared to 19.6/100 person-years in HBsAg+ patients (standardized rate ratio 3.3, 95% CI 1.3–8.2); none effected had severe or fatal hepatitis and ALT levels in all HBsAg−/HBcAb+ patients remained stable, mostly normalizing spontaneously, or after moderating treatment. Patterns of of ALT elevation associated with differing HBV serostatus in the DMARD cohort, resembled those in anti-TNF users.ConclusionsIn this large HBV-endemic cohort, the absolute incidence of ALT elevation in anti-TNF users was more than three-fold higher in HBsAg+ patients than in uninfected counterparts; however, no such association was evident in patients with HBsAg−/HBcAb+ serotype, whose risk and outcomes of liver enzyme elevation were similar to uninfected patients, suggesting that anti-TNF use by HBsAg−/HBcAb+ patients is probably safe.

Retrospective analysis to describe associations between tumor necrosis factor alpha inhibitors and COPD-related hospitalizations.

BackgroundLimited information exists on the impact of tumor necrosis factor inhibition on COPD exacerbations. This retrospective study characterized this impact among COPD patients with underlying autoimmune conditions, exposed to tumor necrosis factor inhibitors (TNFi) and/or non-biologic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs).Patients and methodsAdult COPD patients with ≥1 diagnosis for rheumatoid arthritis (RA), psoriasis (PsO), psoriatic arthritis (PsA), or ankylosing spondylitis (AS) before or within 6 months following the index COPD diagnosis were identified from the Truven Health MarketScan® databases. Patients were required to have a second claim for RA, PsO, PsA, AS, or DMARD use (biologic or non-biologic) prior to or up to 6 months following the index date. Incidence of COPD-related hospitalizations and emergency room (ER) visits was evaluated in relation to treatment with TNFi and/or DMARDs and other potential risk factors.ResultsThe study cohort included 40,687 patients (untreated, 37.7%; non-biologic DMARD, 35.4%; TNFi + non-biologic DMARD, 18%; TNFi, 8.8%). The proportion of patients with a COPD-related hospitalization and the incidence of COPD-related hospitalization (per 100 person-years) were lowest in the TNFi cohort (8.6%; 3.54, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 3.16–3.95) and the TNFi + non-biologic DMARD cohort (8.4%; 2.85, 95% CI: 2.63–3.08). In multivariate models, treatment with TNFi + non-biologic DMARD reduced the risk of COPD-related hospitalization or ER visits by 32% relative to non-biologic DMARDs (hazard ratio: 0.68; 95% CI: 0.61–0.75).ConclusionIn real-world settings, TNFi monotherapy confers similar risk for COPD-related hospitalization or ER visits as a non-biologic DMARD. Decreased risk was found among those treated with both TNFi and a non-biologic DMARD.

Economic Burden and Treatment Patterns of Cycling between Conventional Synthetic Disease-modifying Antirheumatic Drugs Among Biologic-treated Patients with Rheumatoid Arthritis

PurposeTo assess the economic outcomes and treatment patterns among patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) who used 1, 2, or 3 or more conventional synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs) before receiving a biologic therapy. MethodsAdult patients with ≥2 RA diagnoses (International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision, Clinical Modification [ICD-9-CM] codes 714.xx) on different dates, ≥1 claim for a conventional synthetic DMARD, and ≥1 claim for a biologic DMARD were identified from a large commercial claims database. The initiation date of the first biologic DMARD was defined as the index date. Based on the number of distinct conventional synthetic DMARDs initiated between the first RA diagnosis and the index date, patients were classified into 3 cohorts: those who used 1, 2, or 3 or more conventional synthetic DMARDs. Baseline characteristics were measured 6 months preindex date and compared between the 3 cohorts. All-cause health care costs (in 2014 US$) were compared during the follow-up period (12 months postbiologic initiation) using multivariable gamma models adjusting for baseline characteristics. Time to discontinuation of the index biologic DMARD and time to switching to a new DMARD were compared using multivariable Cox proportional hazards models. FindingsThe 1, 2, and 3 or more conventional synthetic DMARD cohorts included 6215; 3227; and 976 patients, respectively. At baseline, patients in the 3 or more conventional synthetic DMARD cohort had the least severe RA, as indicated by the lowest claims-based index for RA severity score (1 vs 2 vs 3 or more = 6.1 vs 5.9 vs 5.8). During the study period, there was a significant association between number of conventional synthetic DMARDs and higher all-cause total health care costs (adjusted mean difference, 1 vs 2: $772; P < 0.001; 2 vs 3 or more: $2390; P < 0.001). The all-cause medical and pharmacy costs were also significantly higher with the increasing number of conventional synthetic DMARDs. Patients who cycled more conventional synthetic DMARDs were also more likely to switch treatment after biologic initiation (1 vs 2: adjusted hazard ratio = 0.89; P = 0.005; 2 vs 3 or more: adjusted hazard ratio = 0.89; P = 0.087). There were no differences in index biologic discontinuation between the 3 cohorts. ImplicationsPatients with RA who cycled more conventional synthetic DMARDs had increased economic burden in the 12 months following biologic initiation and were more likely to switch therapy. These results highlight the importance of timely switching to biologic DMARDs for the treatment of RA.

Comparative cancer risk associated with methotrexate, other non-biologic and biologic disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs

ObjectiveThere is little information comparing the potential risk of cancer across conventional and biologic disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs (DMARDs) in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA). Methotrexate has not been the focus of most contemporary pharmacoepidemiologic studies of cancer. MethodsWe conducted a comparative effectiveness study with cancer as the outcome. A large observational cohort of RA was followed up from 2001 to 2010. Reports of any cancer prompted a confirmation process that included adjudication of the primary cancer records. We used a propensity score (PS) with relevant covariates and cohort trimming to improve the balance between DMARD cohorts. Cox proportional hazard regression models were constructed to estimate the risk of cancer with various DMARDs, all compared with methotrexate. ResultsWe identified 6806 DMARD courses for analysis (1566 methotrexate; 904 nbDMARDs; 3761 TNF antagonists; 408 abatacept; and 167 rituximab). Non-biologic DMARDs (HR 0.17, 95% CI 0.05–0.65) and TNF antagonists (HR 0.29, 95% CI 0.05–0.65) were associated with a reduced adjusted risk of cancer compared with methotrexate. Abatacept (HR 1.55, 95% CI 0.40–5.97) and rituximab (HR 0.42, 95% CI 0.07–2.60) were similar in risk of cancer with methotrexate. These results were robust to sensitivity analyses. After controlling for DMARD exposures, risk factors for cancer included male gender, age, and alcohol consumption. ConclusionsCancer risk was elevated for methotrexate users compared with nbDMARDs and TNF antagonists.

Treatment Patterns and Health Care Costs for Patients With Psoriatic Arthritis on Biologic Therapy: A Retrospective Cohort Study

BackgroundBiologic therapies have been used in patients with psoriatic arthritis (PsA) who have been inadequately treated with conventional disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs (DMARDs). ObjectiveExamine treatment patterns and health care costs among patients with PsAs who initiated biologic therapy either as monotherapy or adjunctively with traditional DMARDs. MethodsThe MarketScan® database was used to identify adults with PsA who initiated therapy with a biologic (with first use identified as index date). Patients were required to have a 6-month pre-period with no biologic use and 1 year insurance eligibility pre- and post-index date. Cohorts of patients initiating biologic therapy either as monotherapy or adjunctively with traditional DMARDs were created. Medication use patterns including discontinuation, switching, and restarting were identified during the 1-year follow-up period. Cox proportional hazards models were conducted to compare time to discontinuation of index biologic, and logistic models were used to compare the rate of discontinuation and biologic switching between the 2 cohorts. All-cause and PsA-related costs were compared between the 2 cohorts using propensity score-adjusted bootstrapping methods. All comparisons were made after adjusting for age, sex, Charlson comorbidity index, and PsA-related total cost over 1-year pre-index date. ResultsAmong the 3164 PsA patients identified, 67.7% initiated biologics as monotherapy and 32.3% initiated biologics adjunctively with traditional DMARDs. The number of patients on pain medications, topical medications, and traditional DMARDs was significantly lower post index date compared to pre-index date (P < 0.01), while use of antihypertensives, antidiabetics, and statins increased after patients initiated biologic therapy. In 1-year post-period, approximately half of the patients (50.9%) who initiated a biologic continued their index biologic with an average time to discontinuation of 279.8 days for all patients. Rates of discontinuation, switching, and restart were 33.1%, 9.9%, and 6.1%, respectively, for all patients. Rates of switching and restart were similar between the 2 cohorts, but a significantly lower rate of discontinuation was observed in the biologic plus traditional DMARDs cohort than the biologic monotherapy cohort. Pharmacy expenditures were higher for the biologic + DMARD cohort than the biologic-monotherapy cohort ($14,486 vs $14,062; P = 0.0348). No statistically significant differences for either all-cause or PsA-specific costs were observed across the treatment cohorts. ConclusionsTraditional DMARDs used in combination with biologic therapy appear to reduce rates of biologic therapy discontinuation.

No evidence of association between anti–tumor necrosis factor treatment and mortality in patients with rheumatoid arthritis: Results from the British Society for Rheumatology Biologics Register

ObjectiveTo study the association between anti–tumor necrosis factor (anti-TNF) therapy and mortality in a national cohort of patients with rheumatoid arthritis.MethodsWe prospectively followed up 12,672 patients who were beginning anti-TNF therapy and 3,522 biologic-naive patients receiving disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs) until either July 31, 2008, or death, whichever occurred first. Notification of death and cause of death was received from the UK National Death Register. Mortality was compared using Cox proportional hazards models. Inverse probability of treatment weighting was used to adjust for the confounding effects of baseline differences between groups, including age, sex, disease severity, disability, and comorbidity. Missing baseline data were accounted for using multiple imputation.ResultsWhen compared with the DMARD cohort, the anti-TNF cohort was younger (median age 57 years versus 61 years), had greater disease activity (median Disease Activity Score in 28 joints 6.6 versus 5.1), and had greater disability (median Health Assessment Questionnaire score 2.1 versus 1.6). Patients in the DMARD cohort were more likely to have a history of myocardial infarction (4.8% versus 3.1%) and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (8.1% versus 4.8%) but were less likely to have had depression (16.5% versus 18.9%). There were 9,445 and 50,803 person-years of followup in the DMARD and anti-TNF cohorts, respectively, during which time 204 DMARD-treated and 856 anti-TNF–treated patients died. The weighted mortality hazard ratios in the anti-TNF cohort were as follows: all-cause 0.86 (95% confidence interval [95% CI] 0.64–1.16), circulatory disease 0.73 (95% CI 0.44–1.23), neoplasm 0.65 (95% CI 0.39–1.09), and respiratory disease 0.81 (95% CI 0.36–1.83).ConclusionOur results indicate that, compared with standard DMARD therapy, treatment with anti-TNF therapies was not associated with an increase in mortality.

Influence of anti–tumor necrosis factor therapy on cancer incidence in patients with rheumatoid arthritis who have had a prior malignancy: Results from the British Society for rheumatology biologics register

ObjectiveTo explore the influence of anti–tumor necrosis factor (anti-TNF) therapy upon the incidence of cancer in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) and prior malignancy.MethodsUsing data from the British Society for Rheumatology Biologics Register, a national prospective observational study established in 2001, we identified 293 patients with a prior malignancy from over 14,000 patients with RA. We compared rates of incident malignancy in 177 anti-TNF–treated patients and 117 patients with active RA treated with traditional disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs), all with prior malignancy. One patient switched therapy and contributed to both cohorts.ResultsThe rates of incident malignancy were 25.3 events/1,000 person-years in the anti-TNF cohort and 38.3/1,000 person-years in the DMARD cohort, generating an age- and sex-adjusted incidence rate ratio of 0.58 (95% confidence interval 0.23–1.43) for the anti-TNF–treated cohort compared with the DMARD cohort. Of the patients with prior melanomas, 3 (18%) of 17 in the anti-TNF cohort developed an incident malignancy, compared with 0 of 10 in the DMARD cohort.ConclusionThe way in which UK rheumatologists are selecting patients with RA and prior malignancy to receive anti-TNF therapy is not leading to an increased risk of incident malignancy. Although reassuring, these results should not be interpreted as indicating that it is safe to treat all RA patients with prior malignancy with anti-TNF therapy.

Influence of anti-TNF therapy on mortality in patients with rheumatoid arthritis-associated interstitial lung disease: results from the British Society for Rheumatology Biologics Register

BackgroundAnti-tumour necrosis factor (anti-TNF) therapy has been associated with reports of rapid severe progression of rheumatoid arthritis-associated interstitial lung disease (RA-ILD). However, reports also exist of favourable responses to anti-TNF...

Infections requiring hospitalization in the abatacept clinical development program: an epidemiological assessment.

IntroductionPatients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) have an increased risk of infection and this risk appears to be higher with anti-TNF (tumor necrosis factor) agents. We pooled data from the cumulative abatacept RA clinical development program, both double-blind and open-label periods, to estimate the incidence rates (IRs) of infections requiring hospitalization including pneumonia and opportunistic infections, in comparison with RA patients treated with non-biologic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs) from several reference cohorts.MethodsInfections reported in seven abatacept clinical trials of RA patients (double-blind and open-label periods) were tabulated. Comparisons were made between the observed IRs in abatacept-treated patients and those in over 133,000 patients exposed to non-biologic DMARDs in six reference RA cohorts. Age- and sex-adjusted IRs of infections requiring hospitalization, including pneumonia (most frequent hospital infection), were used to estimate the expected IRs with abatacept by the method of indirect adjustment. Standardized incidence ratios (SIR) and 95% CI were calculated comparing incidence in the cumulative abatacept experience with incidence in each RA cohort.ResultsA total of 1,955 (double-blind period) and 4,134 (double-blind + open-label periods with a cumulative exposure of 8,392 person-years) abatacept-treated RA patients were analyzed. Observed IRs for infections requiring hospitalization during the double-blind period were 3.05 per 100-patient years for abatacept-treated patients and 2.15 per 100 patient years for placebo. In the cumulative population, observed IR for infections requiring hospitalization was 2.72 per 100-patient years. Rates for abatacept were similar to expected IRs based on other RA non-biologic DMARD cohorts.ConclusionsIRs of infections requiring hospitalization and pneumonia in abatacept trials are consistent with expected IRs based on reference RA DMARD cohorts. RA patients are at higher risk of infection compared with the general population, making the RA DMARD cohorts an appropriate reference group. The safety of abatacept, including incidence of infections requiring hospitalization, will continue to be monitored in a post-marketing surveillance program.

Malignancies in the rheumatoid arthritis abatacept clinical development programme: an epidemiological assessment

Objective:To provide context for the malignancy experience in the rheumatoid arthritis (RA) abatacept clinical development programme (CDP) by performing comparisons with similar RA patients and the general population.Methods:Malignancy outcomes included...

Laboratory Screening for Side Effects of Disease Modifying Antirheumatic Drugs in Daily Rheumatological Practice

To observe the actual laboratory screening for side effects of disease modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs) in daily rheumatological practice, a retrospective multi-center cohort study was performed on the laboratory tests in DMARD treated rheumatoid arthritis (RA) patients. RA patients were investigated by chart review if they started with a DMARD (cohort 1) or were treated with a DMARD for at least one year (cohort 2). Hematological, hepatic, and renal tests were collected. In cohort 1 and 2, 513 and 1209 patients were included, respectively. A fairly outlined screening profile was observed for each DMARD studied. Except for antimalarials, the testing frequency decreased with time in cohort 1. For all DMARDs the testing frequency in cohort 1 was higher than in cohort 2. In general, rheumatologists requested laboratory tests less frequently than is internationally recommended. This discrepancy raises questions about the relation between the efficacy and costs of laboratory screening for side effects of DMARDs in patients with RA.