Search

Abstract Introduction The aim of this work is to evaluate baricitinib safety with respect to venous thromboembolism (VTE), major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE), and serious infection relative to tumor necrosis factor inhibitors (TNFi) in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA). Methods Patients with RA from 14 real-world data sources (three disease registries, eight commercial and three government health insurance claims databases) in the United States (n = 9), Europe (n = 3), and Japan (n = 2) were analyzed using a new user active comparator design. Propensity score matching (1:1) controlled for potential confounding. Meta-analysis of incidence rate ratios (IRR) and incidence rate differences (IRD) for each outcome, from each data source was executed using modified Poisson regression and Cochran–Mantel–Haenszel analysis. Results Of 9013 eligible baricitinib-treated patients, 7606 were propensity score-matched with TNFi-treated patients, contributing 5879 and 6512 person-years of baricitinib and TNFi exposure, respectively. Across data sources, 97 patients (56 baricitinib) experienced VTE during follow-up, 93 experienced MACE (54 baricitinib), and 321 experienced serious infection (176 baricitinib). Overall IRRs comparing baricitinib with TNFi treatment were 1.51 (95% CI 1.10, 2.08) for VTE, 1.54 (95% CI 0.93, 2.54) for MACE, and 1.36 (95% CI 0.86, 2.13) for serious infection. IRDs for VTE, MACE, and serious infection, respectively, were 0.26 (95% CI −0.04, 0.57), 0.22 (95% CI −0.07, 0.52), and 0.57 (95% CI −0.07, 1.21) per 100 person-years greater for baricitinib than TNFi. Conclusions Overall results suggest increased risk of VTE with baricitinib versus TNFi, with consistent point estimates from the two largest data sources. A numerically greater risk was observed for MACE and serious infection when comparing baricitinib versus TNFi, with different point estimates from the two largest data sources. Findings from this study and their impact on clinical practice should be considered in context of limitations and other evidence regarding the safety and efficacy of baricitinib and other Janus kinase inhibitors. Trial registration: EU PAS Register ( http://encepp.eu ), identifier #32271.

Xiaomei Peng, Haya Ascher-Svanum, Douglas Faries, Robert R Conley, Kory J SchuhEli Lilly and Company, Indianapolis, IN, USAPurpose: To assess change in hospitalization and cost of care from 6 months pre- to 6 months post-initiation on any depot antipsychotic among schizophrenia patients.Patients and methods: Using a large United States commercial claims and encounters database, patients younger than 65 years diagnosed with schizophrenia were identified. Patients initiated on a depot antipsychotic were studied in a mirror-image design to assess change in hospitalization rates, mean duration hospitalized, and hospitalization cost. McNemar’s test and paired t-tests compared the proportions of patients hospitalized and the mean duration. Paired t-test and bootstrapping methods compared costs.Results: In these patients (n = 147), psychiatric hospitalizations declined from 49.7% pre-initiation to 22.4% post-initiation (P < 0.001), and the mean hospitalized duration for psychiatric purposes numerically declined from 7.3 to 4.7 days (P = 0.05). Total health care costs declined from $11,111 to $7884 (P < 0.05) driven by reduction in costs for psychiatric hospitalizations from $5384 to $2538 (P < 0.05).Conclusion: Initiation of depot antipsychotic therapy appeared to be associated with a decline in hospitalization rates and costs. Current findings suggest that treatment with depot antipsychotics may be a cost-effective option for a subgroup of patients with schizophrenia who are at high risk of nonadherence with their oral antipsychotic medication regimen.Keywords: mirror-image, claims database, treatment outcomes, depot antipsychotics