Search

Objective: The objective of this study was to ascertain pegloticase persistence and adverse events associated with concomitant immunomodulatory drug treatment in patients with gout., Methods: We conducted a retrospective analysis of patients with gout using the American College of Rheumatology's Rheumatology Informatics System for Effectiveness registry from January 2016 through June 2020. The first pegloticase infusion defined the index date. Based on concomitant immunomodulatory drug treatment, we identified three exposure groups: (1) immunomodulatory drug initiators (patients initiating an immunomodulatory prescription ±60 days from the index date), (2) prevalent immunomodulatory drug recipients (patients receiving their first immunomodulatory drug prescription >60 days before the index date with at least one prescription within ±60 days of the index date), and (3) immunomodulatory nonrecipients (patients receiving pegloticase without concomitant immunomodulatory drugs). We calculated the proportion of patients who achieved serum urate levels ≤6 mg/dL and who had laboratory abnormalities (white blood cell count <3.4 x 10 9 /L, platelet count <135,000, hematocrit level <30%, alanine aminotransferase or aspartate aminotransferase level ≥1.5 times the upper limit normal value) within 180 days after the index date. Cox regression analyzed time to pegloticase discontinuation, controlling for potential confounders., Results: We identified 700 pegloticase recipients (91 immunomodulatory drug initiators, 33 prevalent immunomodulatory drug recipients, and 576 nonrecipients), with a median follow-up of 14 months. Immunomodulatory drug recipients were less likely to discontinue pegloticase. The adjusted hazard ratios of pegloticase discontinuation associated with concomitant immunomodulatory drug initiation and prevalent treatment were 0.52 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.37-0.75) and 0.69 (95% CI 0.42-1.16), respectively. Laboratory abnormalities were uncommon (<5%) and were not higher in concomitant immunomodulatory drug treatment., Conclusion: Consistent with clinical trials, results from this large observational registry suggest that concomitant immunomodulatory drug treatment improves pegloticase persistence., (© 2024 The Authors. Arthritis Care & Research published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of American College of Rheumatology.)

Objective: The study objective was to update a method to identify comorbid conditions using only medication information in circumstances in which diagnosis codes may be undercaptured, such as in single-specialty electronic health records (EHRs), and to compare the distribution of comorbidities across Rx-Risk versus other traditional comorbidity indices., Methods: Using First Databank, RxNorm, and its web-based clients, RxNav and RxClass, we mapped Drug Concept Unique Identifiers (RxCUIs), National Drug Codes (NDCs), and Anatomical Therapeutic Chemical (ATC) codes to Rx-Risk, a medication-focused comorbidity index. In established rheumatoid arthritis (RA) and osteoarthritis (OA) cohorts within the Rheumatology Informatics System for Effectiveness registry, we then compared Rx-Risk with other comorbidity indices, including the Charlson Comorbidity Index, Rheumatic Disease Comorbidity Index (RDCI), and Elixhauser., Results: We identified 965 unique ingredient RxCUIs representing the 46 Rx-Risk comorbidity categories. After excluding dosage form and ingredient related RxCUIs, 80,911 unique associated RxCUIs were mapped to the index. Additionally, 187,024 unique NDCs and 354 ATC codes were obtained and mapped to the index categories. When compared to traditional comorbidity indices in the RA cohort, the median score for Rx-Risk (median 6.00 [25th percentile 2, 75th percentile 9]) was much greater than for Charlson (median 0 [25th percentile 0, 75th percentile 0]), RDCI (median 0 [25th percentile 0, 75th percentile 0]), and Elixhauser (median 1 [25th percentile 1, 75th percentile 1]). Analyses of the OA cohort yielded similar results. For patients with a Charlson score of 0 (85% of total), both the RDCI and Elixhauser were close to 1, but the Rx-Risk score ranged from 0 to 16 or more., Conclusion: The misclassification and under-ascertainment of comorbidities in single-specialty EHRs can largely be overcome by using a medication-focused comorbidity index., (© 2023 American College of Rheumatology.)

Objectives: The association between disease activity and infection risk among patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) is not clear, and it is challenging to determine because of confounding due to the effects of RA treatments and comorbidities., Methods: Using patients with RA in the CorEvitas registry with Medicare coverage in 2006-2019, we identified eligible patients who had at least 1 visit with moderate disease activity based on the Clinical Disease Activity Index (CDAI; CDAI >10 and ≤22). Follow-up started at the subsequent CorEvitas visit. Hospitalized infection during follow-up was assessed in linked Medicare data. We calculated the incidence rate of hospitalized infection for patients in remission, and low and moderate disease activity, and estimated the effect of time-varying CDAI on hospitalized infection by controlling for baseline and time-dependent confounders using marginal structural models (MSMs)., Results: A total of 3,254 patients with RA were eligible for analysis, among which 529 hospitalized infections were identified during follow-up. The crude incidence of hospitalized infection was 3.8 per 100 person-years for patients in remission, 6.6 for low disease activity, and 8.0 for moderate disease activity. Using MSMs and compared with being in remission, the hazard ratio of hospitalized infection associated with low disease activity was 1.60 (95% confidence interval [95% CI] 1.13-2.28) and with moderate disease activity was 1.83 (95% CI 1.30-2.64)., Conclusion: The risk of hospitalized infection was higher for patients with RA in low or moderate disease activity than for those in remission after accounting for the interplay of disease activity, RA treatments, treatment switching, and other potential confounders., (© 2022 American College of Rheumatology.)

Objective: To determine whether multimorbidity is associated with treatment changes and achieving target disease activity thresholds in patients with active rheumatoid arthritis (RA)., Methods: We conducted a retrospective cohort study of adults with active RA within the Rheumatology Informatics System for Effectiveness (RISE) registry. Multimorbidity was measured using RxRisk, a medication-based index of chronic disease. We used multivariable logistic regression models to assess the associations of multimorbidity with the odds of initiating a new disease-modifying antirheumatic drug (DMARD) in active RA, and among those initiating a new DMARD, the odds of achieving low disease activity or remission., Results: We identified 15,626 patients using the Routine Assessment of Patient Index Data 3 (RAPID3) cohort and 5,733 patients using the Clinical Disease Activity Index (CDAI) cohort. All patients had active RA, of which 1,558 (RAPID3) and 834 (CDAI) initiated a new DMARD and had follow-up disease activity measures. Patients were middle aged, female, and predominantly White, and on average received medications from 6 to 7 RxRisk categories. Multimorbidity was not associated with new DMARD initiation in active RA. However, a greater burden of multimorbidity was associated with lower odds of achieving treatment targets (per 1-unit RxRisk: RAPID3 cohort odds ratio [OR] 0.95 [95% confidence interval (95% CI) 0.91, 0.98]; CDAI cohort OR 0.94 [95% CI 0.90, 0.99]). Those with the highest burden of multimorbidity had the lowest odds of achieving target RA disease activity (RAPID3 cohort OR 0.54 [95% CI 0.34, 0.85]; CDAI cohort OR 0.65 [95% CI 0.37, 1.15])., Conclusion: These findings from a large, real-world registry illustrate the potential impact of multimorbidity on treatment response and indicate that a more holistic management approach targeting multimorbidity may be needed to optimize RA disease control in these patients., (© 2021 American College of Rheumatology.)

Objective: Glucocorticoids are recommended for short-term use in rheumatoid arthritis (RA), but many patients continue receiving long-term therapy. We evaluated the variability in glucocorticoid prescribing across rheumatologists to inform interventions to limit long-term glucocorticoid use to the lowest dose necessary., Methods: Two cohorts were created using Medicare data from 2006 to 2015. Using cohort 1 (RA patients receiving disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs [DMARDs]), we calculated each rheumatologist's "provider preference" for glucocorticoids (frequency of use compared to other providers), using the ratio of observed to expected number of patients receiving glucocorticoids to account for case mix. In cohort 2 (RA patients receiving stable DMARD therapy), we evaluated whether provider preference for glucocorticoids could independently predict use of ≥5 mg/day of glucocorticoids 6-9 months after initiation of DMARD therapy., Results: Using cohort 1 (1,272,644 yearly observations; 385,597 patients), we calculated provider preference among 6,875 rheumatologists (28,936 yearly observations). Provider preference was highly variable, with physicians at the lowest and upper quartiles prescribing glucocorticoids 33% less often to 31% more often (25th and 75th percentiles, respectively) than expected. In cohort 2 (155,539 patients receiving stable DMARD therapy), provider preference was strongly associated with glucocorticoid use ≥5 mg/day at 6-9 months, with a predicted probability of use of 22% (95% confidence interval [95% CI] 21.7-22.7) versus 11% (95% CI 10.2-10.9) for a patient seeing a provider in the highest versus lowest quintile of preference., Conclusion: Glucocorticoid prescribing for RA varies greatly among rheumatologists, and provider preference is one of the strongest predictors of a patient's long-term glucocorticoid use. These findings raise quality of care concerns and highlight the need for stronger evidence to guide RA treatment., (© 2020, American College of Rheumatology.)

Objective: Health information technology has enabled efficient measurement of patient-reported outcomes (PROs). The National Institutes of Health Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) is becoming more widely adopted for research and routine care, and some PROMIS instruments might be substituted for lengthier, legacy PRO instruments., Methods: Four PROMIS computer-adaptive testing (CAT) instruments (pain interference, physical function, sleep disturbance, and fatigue) and the Routine Assessment of Patient Index Data 3 (RAPID3), along with pain intensity and patient global assessment score, were administered to participants in the ArthritisPower registry. The RAPID3 was predicted using different combinations of these variables to create a new score (CAT-PROMIS RAPID3). Kappa statistics and Bland-Altman 95% limits of agreement were used to measure agreement between the observed versus predicted RAPID3., Results: A total of 6,154 eligible patients contributed 11,275 observations. The mean ± SD age was 52.7 ± 10.5 years, and 93% of patients were women. The median assessment times ranged from 29 seconds (PROMIS sleep disturbance) to 116 seconds (RAPID3). As single pairwise comparisons, the PROMIS CATs examined were modestly correlated (r approximately 0.4-0.7) to one other and RAPID3. Together with the pain intensity and patient global assessment, the PROMIS instruments explained a high fraction of total variance (R 2 = 0.97) of the RAPID3 score. In the model with the highest agreement (κ = 0.93) between the observed RAPID3 and the CAT-PROMIS predicted RAPID3, Bland-Altman 95% limits of agreement showed minimal residual differences and no systematic biases., Conclusion: There was excellent agreement between the observed RAPID3 and predicted RAPID3 scores estimated using several PROMIS instruments. The Multidimensional Health Assessment Questionnaire and patient global assessment components of RAPID3 may be unnecessary if PROMIS scores are available., (© 2019, American College of Rheumatology.)

Objective: Despite strong recommendations for routine measurement of rheumatoid arthritis (RA) disease activity and associated treatment changes to attain remission/low disease activity, the measurement tools that clinicians use to evaluate RA patients' disease activity and frequency of treatment change have not been well characterized. Therefore, we evaluated different measurement tools that physicians used to assess RA disease activity and associated RA treatment changes., Methods: Using data from the Rheumatology Informatics System for Effectiveness (RISE) registry from January 2016 through June 2017, and using the following criteria: age ≥18 years, diagnosis of RA (International Classification of Diseases, Ninth and Tenth Revision, codes), ≥2 RISE visits, and ≥1 RA disease activity measure scored in 2016, we classified eligible patients' drug use at the index visit as monotherapy or combination therapy with conventional synthetic (cs) and biologic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (bDMARDs). Outcomes include change in treatment over 12 months. Mixed models identified factors associated with treatment change., Results: Among 50,996 eligible patients, 27,274 had longitudinal data. The most commonly used measures were RAPID3 (78.9%) and the Clinical Disease Activity Index (CDAI) (34.2%). The frequency of treatment change during follow-up was relatively low (35.6-54.6%), even for patients with moderate/high disease activity according to RAPID3 or CDAI scores. Older patients (age ≥75 years; adjusted odds ratio [OR adj ] 0.63 [95% confidence interval (95% CI) 0.50-0.78]) and those already receiving combination therapy with csDMARDs (OR adj 0.45 [95% CI 0.33-0.61]) or combination therapy with bDMARDs (OR adj 0.30 [95% CI 0.24-0.38]) were less likely to change RA treatment even after multivariable adjustment., Conclusion: Using the American College of Rheumatology's national RISE registry, one- to two-thirds of RA patients failed to change their treatment, even when experiencing moderate/high disease activity. Multimodal interventions directed at both patients and providers are needed to encourage shared decision-making, goal-directed care, and to overcome barriers to treatment escalation., (© 2019, American College of Rheumatology.)

Objective: To determine the proportion of primary lipid screening among patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) and compare it with those among patients with diabetes mellitus (DM) and patients with neither RA nor DM, and to assess whether primary lipid screening varied according to the health care provider (rheumatologist versus non-rheumatologist)., Methods: We analyzed claims data from US private and public health plans from 2006-2010. Eligibility requirements included continuous medical and pharmacy coverage for ≥12 months (baseline period) and >2 physician diagnoses and relevant medications to define RA, DM, RA and DM, or neither condition. Among the 330,695 eligible participants, we calculated the proportion with a lipid profile ordered during the 2 years following baseline. Time-varying Cox proportional hazard models were used to determine the probability of hyperlipidemia screening in participants with RA according to provider specialty., Results: More than half of the patients were ages 41-71 years. Among patients with RA (n = 12,182), DM (n = 62,834), RA and DM (n = 1,082), and those who did not have either condition (n = 167,811), the proportion screened for hyperlipidemia was 37%, 60%, 55%, and 41%, respectively. Patients with RA who visited a rheumatologist and a non-rheumatology clinician during follow-up had a 55% (95% confidence interval 1.36-1.78) higher screening probability than those who only visited a rheumatologist., Conclusion: Primary lipid screening was suboptimal among patients with RA. It was also lower for patients with DM and minimally different from the general population. Screening was higher for RA patients who received care from both a rheumatologist and a non-rheumatologist (e.g., primary care physician)., (© 2018, American College of Rheumatology.)

Objective: Increased incidence of herpes zoster (HZ) has been observed with JAK inhibitors such as tofacitinib. However, whether concomitant methotrexate (MTX) and/or glucocorticoids confer additional (additive or multiplicative) risk is unclear. We evaluated HZ risk in tofacitinib users with and without MTX and glucocorticoids., Methods: Within MarketScan and Medicare data (2011-2016), we identified all patients with rheumatologist-diagnosed rheumatoid arthritis initiating treatment with tofacitinib (index date); demographics and baseline covariates were evaluated in the year prior to the index date. HZ was ascertained using International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision or Tenth Revision codes with antiviral drug use (±7 days). Multivariable Cox regression was used to evaluate hazard ratios (HRs) for HZ in tofacitinib users with and without current concomitant MTX and glucocorticoids, controlling for baseline covariates., Results: We studied 8,030 new tofacitinib users (83.3% women). The mean ± SD age was 60.3 ± 12.6 years. HZ incidence in tofacitinib users was numerically lowest in the absence of glucocorticoids (3.4 per 100 patient-years with MTX; 3.7 per 100 patient-years without MTX). An approximately 2-fold increased incidence of HZ was observed for tofacitinib users receiving either glucocorticoids alone (6.0 per 100 patient-years) or both MTX plus glucocorticoids (6.5 per 100 patient-years). The adjusted HR for HZ in tofacitinib users was unchanged (HR 0.99 [95% confidence interval (95% CI) 0.64-1.54]) when given only with MTX, but was increased (HR 1.96 [95% CI 1.33-2.88]) for tofacitinib plus glucocorticoids. Older age and female sex were also risk factors, while prior vaccination was associated with a strong trend for lower risk., Conclusion: In tofacitinib users, HZ occurred at a rate of approximately 4% per year and was further doubled with glucocorticoid exposure. Concomitant MTX did not confer additional risk. Zoster vaccination may decrease risk., (© 2018, American College of Rheumatology.)

Objective: Multiple studies have shown seemingly unfavorable changes in lipid profiles associated with interleukin-6 receptor (IL-6R) antagonists and some other therapies for rheumatoid arthritis. The aim of this study was to assess the real-world cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk associated with tocilizumab, the first anti-IL-6R medication approved for the treatment of RA., Methods: We conducted a cohort study using 2006-2015 Medicare and MarketScan claims for patients with RA in whom treatment with biologic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs was initiated after January 1, 2010. The primary outcome was a composite of myocardial infarction, stroke, and fatal CVD, assessed using a validated method. The influence of potential confounding due to RA disease activity was assessed in a subgroup analysis (~5-10% of biologic therapy initiations) using the multi-biomarker disease activity (MBDA) score., Results: A total of 88,463 patients with RA were included. The crude incidence rate (IR) per 1,000 patient-years for composite CVD events among Medicare patients ranged from 11.8 (95% confidence interval [95% CI] 9.7-14.4) for etanercept users to 17.3 (95% CI 15.2-19.7) for infliximab users. The crude IR for pooled users of a tumor necrosis factor inhibitor was 15.0 (95% CI 13.9-16.3). Compared to tocilizumab, the corresponding adjusted hazard ratios (HRs) were 1.01 (95% CI 0.79-1.28) for abatacept, 1.16 (95% CI 0.89-1.53) for rituximab, 1.10 (95% CI 0.80-1.51) for etanercept, 1.33 (95% CI 0.99-1.80) for adalimumab, and 1.61 (95% CI 1.22-2.12) for infliximab. There were no statistically significant differences in the risk of CVD between tocilizumab and any other biologic when MarketScan data were used. Results were robust in numerous subgroup analyses and after external adjustment to control for RA disease activity in the subgroup of patients with linked MBDA test results (n = 4,156)., Conclusion: Tocilizumab was associated with a CVD risk comparable to that for etanercept as well as a number of other biologics used for the treatment of RA., (© 2018, American College of Rheumatology.)

Objective: To identify the perspectives of patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) on electronic recording of between-visit disease activity and other patient-reported outcomes (PROs) and on sharing this information with health care providers or peers., Methods: Patients with RA were recruited to participate in focus groups from December 2014 to April 2015. The topic guide and analysis were based on the Andersen-Newman framework. Sessions were audiorecorded, transcribed, independently coded, and analyzed for themes., Results: Thirty-one patients participated in 7 focus groups. Their mean ± SD age was 51 ± 13.1 years, 94% were women, 52% were African American, 11% were Hispanic, and 37% were white. Three themes emerged: provider communication, information-seeking about RA, and social and peer support. Participants expressed a willingness to track disease activity data to share with health care providers electronically if providers would act on the information. Participants envisioned symptom tracking and information sharing as a mechanism to relay and obtain reliable information about RA. Participants were also interested in electronic communication between visits if it facilitated learning about symptom management and enhanced opportunities for social support among patients with RA., Conclusion: Patients with RA may be amenable to electronic collection and sharing of PRO-type data between clinical encounters if it facilitates communication with health care providers and provides access to reliable information about RA. Providing patients with social support was important for enhancing PROs collection by helping them overcome barriers by using electronic devices and overcome reservations about the value of these data., (© 2018, American College of Rheumatology.)

Objective: The 2013 American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association cholesterol treatment guidelines recommend statins for patients with diabetes mellitus ages 40-75 years due to their elevated cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk. We compared the incidence of hospitalized acute myocardial infarction (MI), stroke, and coronary revascularization according to whether patients had diabetes mellitus, rheumatoid arthritis (RA), both, or neither., Methods: Using 2006-2010 private and public health plan claims, we identified 4 mutually exclusive retrospective cohorts ages >40 years: patients with RA and diabetes mellitus, RA only, diabetes mellitus only, or neither condition. Patients with prevalent CVD were excluded. Outcomes included acute MI and stroke, identified from inpatient discharge diagnosis codes, and coronary revascularization from procedure codes. Across the 4 cohorts, we calculated incidence rates (IRs) of the outcomes, standardized to the 2010 US census age and sex distribution., Results: We identified 920,772 eligible participants. The age- and sex-standardized IRs (per 1,000 person-years) for MI were highest among patients with RA and diabetes mellitus (IR 12.6 [95% confidence interval (95% CI) 10.7-14.7]), followed by patients with diabetes mellitus only (IR 10.7 [95% CI 10.3-11.0]), RA only (IR 5.7 [95% CI 5.2-6.3]), and with neither condition (IR 4.2 [95% CI 4.1-4.3])., Conclusion: Findings from the present study suggest that while CVD risk in RA is elevated, it is lower in magnitude compared to the CVD risk associated with diabetes mellitus. Therefore, considering RA a diabetes mellitus risk-equivalent with respect to hyperlipidemia management may not be appropriate., (© 2018, American College of Rheumatology.)

Objective: The optimal timing of tumor necrosis factor antagonists before elective surgery is unknown. This study evaluated the association between infliximab timing and serious infection after elective hip or knee arthroplasty., Methods: A retrospective cohort study evaluated US Medicare patients with rheumatoid arthritis, inflammatory bowel disease, psoriasis, psoriatic arthritis, or ankylosing spondylitis who received infliximab within 6 months of elective knee or hip arthroplasty from 2007 to 2013. Propensity-adjusted analyses examined whether infliximab stop timing (time between the most recent infusion and surgery) was associated with hospitalized infection within 30 days or prosthetic joint infection (PJI) within 1 year., Results: Hospitalized infection within 30 days occurred after 270 of 4,288 surgeries (6.3%). Infliximab stop timing <4 weeks versus 8-12 weeks was not associated with an increase in infection within 30 days (propensity-adjusted odds ratio [OR] 0.90 [95% confidence interval (95% CI) 0.60-1.34]). The rate of PJI was 2.9 per 100 person-years and was not increased in patients with stop timing <4 weeks versus 8-12 weeks (hazard ratio [HR] 0.98 [95% CI 0.52-1.87]). Glucocorticoid dosage >10 mg/day was associated with increased risk of 30-day infection (OR 2.11 [95% CI 1.30-3.40]) and PJI (HR 2.70 [95% CI 1.30-5.60]). Other risk factors for infection included elderly age, comorbidities, revision surgery, and previous hospitalized infection., Conclusion: Administering infliximab within 4 weeks of elective knee or hip arthroplasty was not associated with a higher risk of short- or long-term serious infection compared to withholding infliximab for longer time periods. Glucocorticoid use, especially >10 mg/day, was associated with an increased infection risk., (© 2017, American College of Rheumatology.)

Background: Hypersensitivity reactions (HSRs) can occur with any of the available biologic agents used to treat rheumatoid arthritis (RA). We compared drug-specific risks for HSRs among RA patients enrolled in the US Medicare program., Methods: Using Medicare data, we identified new users of infused infliximab, abatacept, rituximab, tocilizumab, golimumab, and injected biologic agents. After identifying HSRs using validated algorithms, for each biologic agent, we calculated the cumulative incidence over 6 months and the incidence rates (IRs) in 0-1, 2-14, and 15-30 days of administration. For each biologic agent administration, followup started on the infusion/injection date and ended at HSR, subsequent biologic agent administration, death, coverage loss, 30-day followup, or December 31, 2013, whichever occurred first. Adjusted robust Poisson regression was used to compare the HSR risks across biologic agents. A sensitivity analysis was conducted using a nested case-crossover design., Results: We identified 725,591 biologic agent administrations and 248 HSRs among 80,587 new users of biologic agents. Of these, 26.9% occurred in users of intravenous abatacept, 4.6% in rituximab, 5.8% in intravenous tocilizumab, 22.9% in infliximab, and 39.7% in injectable anti-tumor necrosis factor inhibitors (anti-TNFi). The cumulative incidence of HSRs over 6 months for all biologic agents was low (<1%).The IRs for HSRs ranged from 2.4 (abatacept) to 239.5 (rituximab) per 10 6 person-days. After adjustment, and using injectable anti-TNFi over 0-30 days as the referent, rituximab, infliximab, abatacept, and tocilizumab infusions were associated with a statistically significant higher risk of HSR. The sensitivity analysis yielded similar results., Conclusion: Among RA patients taking biologic agents, rituximab and infliximab were most strongly associated with HSRs. The absolute IRs of HSR events for all biologic agent exposures were low., (© 2016, American College of Rheumatology.)

Objective: To evaluate whether the risks of herpes zoster (HZ) differed by biologic agents with different mechanisms of action (MOAs) in older rheumatoid arthritis (RA) patients., Methods: Using Medicare data from 2006-2011, among RA patients with prior biologic agent use and no history of cancer or other autoimmune diseases, this retrospective cohort study identified new treatment episodes of abatacept, adalimumab, certolizumab, etanercept, golimumab, infliximab, rituximab, and tocilizumab. Followup started on initiation of the new biologic agent and ended at any of the following: first incidence of HZ, a 30-day gap in current exposure, death, a diagnosis of other autoimmune disease or cancer, loss of insurance coverage, or December 31, 2011. We calculated the proportion of RA patients vaccinated for HZ in each calendar year prior to biologic agent initiation and HZ incidence rate for each biologic agent. We compared HZ risks among therapies using Cox regression adjusted for potential confounders., Results: Of 29,129 new biologic treatment episodes, 28.7% used abatacept, 15.9% adalimumab, 14.8% rituximab, 12.4% infliximab, 12.2% etanercept, 6.1% tocilizumab, 5.8% certolizumab, and 4.4% golimumab. The proportion of RA patients vaccinated for HZ prior to biologic agent initiation ranged from 0.4% in 2007 to 4.1% in 2011. We identified 423 HZ diagnoses with the highest HZ incidence rate for certolizumab (2.45 per 100 person-years) and the lowest for golimumab (1.61 per 100 person-years). Neither the crude incidence rate nor the adjusted hazard ratio differed significantly among biologic agents. Glucocorticoid use had a significant association with HZ., Conclusion: Among older patients with RA, the HZ risk was similar across biologic agents, including those with different MOAs., (© 2015, American College of Rheumatology.)

Objective: To examine whether concomitant methotrexate (MTX) use is associated with better biologic persistence and whether self-administered anti-tumor necrosis factor (anti-TNF) therapies are used at reduced doses in real-world clinical care settings, not just clinical trials., Methods: We conducted a retrospective cohort study among rheumatoid arthritis (RA) patients using Medicare claims data from 2006 to 2012. Subjects were new initiators of etanercept, infliximab, adalimumab, abatacept, and tocilizumab with at least 12 months of continuous medical and pharmacy coverage after treatment initiation. We examined the association between concomitant MTX use and persistence on biologic agents using Cox proportional hazards regression, adjusting for demographics and baseline comorbidities. We further identified a subgroup of patients who initiated and were adherent on etanercept or adalimumab for at least 12 months and examined the proportion of patients who subsequently used these therapies at reduced doses continuously for an additional 12, 18, and 24 months., Results: Of 26,510 eligible RA patients, 10,511 initiated biologic monotherapy. Overall, patients who initiated biologic monotherapy were 1.4 (95% confidence interval [95% CI] 1.3-1.5) times more likely to discontinue at 1 year compared to those who initiated combination therapy, and 1.8 (95% CI 1.7-2.0) times more likely if starting infliximab monotherapy. Approximately 10-20% of patients who initiated and adhered to etanercept and adalimumab for ≥12 months subsequently received reduced-dose therapy for an 12 additional months and beyond., Conclusion: In real-world practice, concomitant MTX was associated with improved persistence on biologic therapy, especially for infliximab users; reduced-dose injectable anti-TNF therapy was used by a substantial proportion of RA patients., (© 2015, American College of Rheumatology.)

Objective: Linkages between registries and administrative data may provide a valuable resource for comparative effectiveness research. However, personal identifiers that uniquely identify individuals are not always available. Here we describe methods to link a de-identified arthritis registry and US Medicare data. The linked data set was also used to evaluate the generalizability of the registry to the US Medicare population., Methods: Rheumatoid arthritis (RA) patients participating in the Consortium of Rheumatology Researchers of North America (CORRONA) registry were linked to Medicare data restricted to rheumatology claims or claims for RA. Deterministic linkage was performed using age, sex, provider identification number, and geographic location of the CORRONA site. We then searched for visit dates in Medicare matching visit dates in CORRONA, requiring ≥1 exact matching date. Linkage accuracy was quantified as a positive predictive value in a subcohort (n = 1,581) with more precise identifiers., Results: CORRONA participants with self-reported Medicare (n = 11,001) were initially matched to 30,943 Medicare beneficiaries treated by CORRONA physicians. A total of 8,431 CORRONA participants matched on ≥1 visit; 5,317 matched uniquely on all visits. The number of patients who linked and linkage accuracy (from the subcohort) were high for patients with >2 visits (n = 3,458, 98% accuracy), exactly 2 visits (n = 822, 96% accuracy), and 1 visit (n = 1,037, 79% accuracy) that matched exactly on calendar date. Demographics and comorbidity profiles of registry participants were similar to nonparticipants, except participants were more likely to take disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs and biologic agents., Conclusion: Linkage between a national, de-identified outpatient arthritis registry and Medicare data on multiple nonunique identifiers appears feasible and valid., (Copyright © 2014 by the American College of Rheumatology.)

Objective: To examine the patterns of methotrexate (MTX) use among rheumatoid arthritis (RA) patients., Methods: Using data from RA patients enrolled in a US commercial health plan and the US Medicare program, we identified RA patients initiating oral MTX. Persistence with MTX (oral or subcutaneous [SC]) was defined as no gap for ≥90 days., Results: New oral MTX users in Medicare (n = 20,431) were 76.9% women, had a mean ± SD age of 69.7 ± 11.7 years, and contributed a median followup of 2.6 years (interquartile range 1.7-3.5 years). Only 38% received dosages ≥20 mg/week at any time. Approximately 50% of patients discontinued MTX at 1 year, although more than one-third of patients subsequently restarted. New commercially insured oral MTX users (n = 4,048) were similar to Medicare patients, except for age. Among Medicare patients, 19% starting oral MTX subsequently initiated a biologic agent, mostly anti-tumor necrosis factor (85%). Of these, only 50% received MTX at a dosage of ≥20 mg/week, and only 21% of individuals switched to SC MTX (4%) or received hydroxychloroquine (8%), sulfasalazine (5%), or leflunomide (8%) prior to biologic agents. In commercially insured patients, 35% initiated a biologic agent, mostly anti-tumor necrosis factor therapies (90%). Of these, 43% never received MTX ≥20 mg/week., Conclusion: Titration to a higher-dose oral MTX and use of SC MTX among RA patients were infrequent and may have been underutilized. Further work to optimize MTX dosing before patients are switched to a biologic agent may be warranted., (Copyright © 2014 by the American College of Rheumatology.)

Objective: Self-injectable biologic agents have been covered by Medicare Part D since 2006. We hypothesized that this coverage benefit and related financial considerations would lead to increased use of self-injectable biologic agents overtime and would be influential in determining which rheumatoid arthritis (RA) patients received infusion versus self injected biologic agents., Methods: We used 100% of US Medicare data (2006–2009) to calculate the prevalence of use of different RA biologic agents and evaluated factors associated with receipt of infliximab versus etanercept or adalimumab among patients starting their first anti–tumor necrosis factor (anti-TNF) agent., Results: Through 2009, the prevalence of biologic agent use overall (~ 27%) and via infusion (16–17%) or self-injection(10–11%) remained unchanged among Medicare beneficiaries with RA. After adjusting for patient characteristics,stronger physician preference for infused biologic agents was related to physician reimbursement and associated with an increased likelihood of using infliximab as the first anti-TNF agent (odds ratio [OR] comparing the highest to lowest quartile of physician preference 7.3, 95% confidence interval [95% CI] 6.4–8.3). Lower-income patients who received state assistance for Medicare coverage had lower out-of-pocket payments for injectable biologic agents ($4.10/prescription) and were less likely to use infliximab (OR 0.41, 95% CI 0.37–0.45) compared with etanercept or adalimumab., Conclusion: The prevalence of injection and infusion biologic agents in RA remained stable in the Medicare program through 2009. The choice between an intravenous infusion versus an injectable anti-TNF agent as first-line treatment appeared to be strongly influenced by financial considerations affecting both patients and physicians.

Objective: Prior observational studies have shown an association between bisphosphonate adherence and fewer fractures. It is unclear if such studies reflect pharmacologic benefits or behavioral attributes, i.e., the healthy adherer effect. Our objective was to examine the association of therapy adherence and fracture risk among patients initiating therapies hypothesized to be favorable, unfavorable, or neutral toward fracture risk, in order to evaluate for a healthy adherer effect., Methods: In this observational study, we identified patients within Medicare 2006-2009 data who initiated any of 3 medication groups within 9 months after an osteoporotic fracture as follows: 1) oral bisphosphonates (n = 2,507), 2) selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs; n = 2,420), or 3) angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitor or calcium-channel blocker (CCB; n = 2,178). Cox regression analysis, adjusting for covariates, was used to compare fracture rates at the hip and major osteoporotic fracture sites (including hip, clinical vertebral, humerus, and wrist) during followup, comparing patients with high adherence versus low adherence within each medication group., Results: There were few baseline differences between those who had high adherence versus lower adherence. High adherence with bisphosphonates decreased fracture risk at both hip (hazard ratio [HR] 0.53, 95% confidence interval [95% CI] 0.32-0.96) and major fracture sites (HR 0.61, 95% CI 0.45-0.80). High adherence with SSRIs suggested increased fracture risk at both hip (HR 1.58, 95% CI 0.97-2.57) and major fracture sites (HR 1.32, 95% CI 0.96-1.83). High adherence with ACE inhibitors/CCBs was neutral toward fracture risk at both hip (HR 1.27, 95% CI 0.67-2.41) and major fracture sites (HR 1.00, 95% CI 0.67-1.49)., Conclusion: In this observational cohort of older individuals, the association between medication adherence and fracture risk differed by medication exposure, suggesting a limited role for the healthy adherer effect in observational studies of osteoporosis medications., (Copyright © 2012 by the American College of Rheumatology.)

Objective: To evaluate adherence to drug therapy among new users of zoledronate and intravenous (IV) ibandronate among US Medicare enrollees., Methods: We used data from the Medicare 5% random sample to evaluate new users of IV zoledronate and IV ibandronate with continuous Part A and Part B fee-for-service coverage. The outcome was adherence as quantified by the proportion of days covered (PDC) measured continuously and dichotomously (≥ 80%). Followup time extended from 18-27 months for all individuals. Factors associated with low adherence to zoledronate were evaluated with logistic regression., Results: We identified 775 new users of zoledronate and 846 new users of IV ibandronate. For both drugs, 30-48% of the first infusions were given in an outpatient infusion center, not in a physician's office. The mean PDC for zoledronate users was 82%, which was greater than the mean PDC for the IV ibandronate users (58-62% depending on the time period; P < 0.0001). Approximately 30% of zoledronate users did not receive a second infusion. Factors associated with low adherence to zoledronate included older age and receipt of the first infusion in an outpatient infusion center rather than a physician's office., Conclusion: Less frequently dosed IV bisphosphonates have not resolved the problem of suboptimal adherence with prescription osteoporosis medications. Interventions continue to be warranted to improve long-term adherence to osteoporosis treatments., (Copyright © 2012 by the American College of Rheumatology.)