Search

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: To evaluate the risk of incident dementia associated with the use of biologics or targeted synthetic DMARDs (b/tsDMARD) compared to conventional synthetic (cs) DMARDS only in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA)., Methods: We analyzed claims data from the Center for Medicare & Medicare Services (CMS) from 2006-2017. Patients with RA were identified as adults ≥40 years old and two RA diagnoses by a rheumatologist > 7 and < 365 days apart. Patients with a prior diagnosis of dementia were excluded. Use of cs/b/tsDMARDs was the exposure of interest. Person-time was classified as either: 1) b/tsDMARD exposed, which included tumor necrosis factor alpha inhibitors (TNFi)-bDMARDs, non-TNFi-bDMARDs or tsDMARDs with or without csDMARDs; 2) csDMARD-exposed: any csDMARD without b/tsDMARD. Patients could contribute time to different exposure groups if they changed medications. Incident dementia was defined as: 1 inpatient OR 2 outpatients ICD-9-CM or ICD-10 claims for dementia, OR prescription of a dementia-specific medication (rivastigmine, galantamine, memantine, donepezil, tacrine). Age-adjusted incident rates (IR) were calculated, and univariate and multivariate Cox proportional hazard models were used to calculate Hazard Ratios (HR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI)., Results: We identified 141,326 eligible RA patients; 80% female and 75.3% white, median age 67 years and mean (SD) exposure time of 1.1 (1.5) years. There were 233,271 initiations of c/b/tsDMARDS and 3,794 cases of incident dementia during follow up. The crude IR of dementia was 2.0 (95% CI 1.9-2.1) per 100 person-years for patients on csDMARDs and 1.3 (95% CI 1.2-1.4) for patients on any b/tsDMARD. Patients on b/tsDMARDs had an adjusted 19% lower risk for dementia than patients on csDMARDs [HR 0.81 (95% CI 0.76-0.87)]. Subgroup analysis found comparable risk reductions between TNFi, non-TNFi, and tsDMARDs. on the risk of dementia., Conclusions and Relevance: The incidence of dementia in patients with RA was lower in patients receiving b/tsDMARDs when compared to patients on csDMARD only. No differences were observed between different classes of b/tsDMARDs, suggesting that decreased risk is possibly explained by the overall decrease in inflammation rather than a specific mechanism of action of these drugs., Competing Interests: Conflict of Interest Disclosures S.E.S. receives research support from Astra-Zeneca. I.N.M. received consulting fees from Sobi. H.Y. receives research grants from Pfizer and BMS. J.R.C. received research grants and consulting fees from AbbVie, Amgen, BMS, Corrona, Eli Lilly, Janssen, Myriad, Pfizer, Regeneron, Roche, UCB. All other authors declare no conflicts of interest., (Copyright © 2022. Published by Elsevier Inc.)

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: We estimated meaningful change thresholds (MCTs) for Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) Fatigue and Pain Interference in rheumatoid arthritis (RA)., Methods: The responsiveness of several patient-reported outcomes (PROs) was assessed among 521 patients with RA in the Arthritis, Rheumatism, and Aging Medical Information Systems (ARAMIS) cohort. PROMIS Fatigue (7-item) and Pain Interference (6-item) short form instruments were administered at baseline, 6 months, and 12 months. Self-reported retrospective changes over the previous 6 months (a lot better/worse, a little better/worse, stayed the same) were obtained at 6 and 12 months' follow-up. We estimated MCTs using the mean change in PROMIS scores for patients who rated their change "a little better" or "a little worse.", Results: Baseline fatigue and pain interference scores were near normal (median 54 and 56, respectively). At 6 months, 7.9% of patients reported their fatigue was a little better compared to baseline (mean change [SD]: -2.6 [4.8]) and 22.8% a little worse (1.7 [5.6]). Pain was a little better for 11.5% of patients (-1.9 [6.1]) and a little worse for 24.2% of patients (0.6 [5.7]). At 12 months, results were similar. Thus, the MCT range was 1-2 points for both fatigue and pain interference. Correlations between change scores and retrospective ratings were low (0.13-0.29), indicating possible underestimation of MCT., Conclusion: The group-level MCT for PROMIS Fatigue and Pain Interference is roughly 2-3 points and corresponds to a small effect size, which is consistent with earlier work demonstrating an MCT of 2 points for PROMIS Physical Functioning., (© 2021 The Journal of Rheumatology.)

Objective: Patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) who also have diabetes mellitus (DM) might have worse clinical outcomes and adverse events compared to patients with RA who do not have DM. We evaluated the effects of DM on Health Assessment Questionnaire (HAQ) changes and outpatient infection rates in patients with RA., Methods: Using the American College of Rheumatology's Rheumatology Informatics System for Effectiveness (RISE) electronic health record-based registry, we identified patients with RA who had ≥ 1 rheumatologist visit with a HAQ measured in 2016 (index visit), ≥ 1 previous visit, and a subsequent outcome visit with the same HAQ measured at 12 months (± 3 months). We identified DM by diagnosis codes, medications, or laboratory values. Outpatient infection was defined by diagnosis codes or antiinfective medications. We calculated mean HAQ change and incidence rate (IR) of outpatient infections among patients with and without DM. Generalized linear models and Cox regression were used to calculate the adjusted mean HAQ change and HRs., Results: We identified 3853 RA patients with DM and 18,487 without DM. The mean HAQ change between index and outcome visit among patients with DM was 0.03 and without DM was 0.002 ( P < 0.01). We identified 761 outpatient infections for patients with DM with an IR of 22.6 (95% CI 21.0-24.2) per 100 person-years and 3239 among patients without DM with an IR of 19.8 (95% CI 19.1-20.5). The adjusted HR of outpatient infections among patients with DM was 0.99 (95% CI 0.91-1.07), compared to patients without DM., Conclusion: Patients with RA with concomitant DM had greater worsening, or less improvement, in their functional status, suggesting additional interventions may be needed for RA patients with DM to optimize treatment and management of other comorbidities., (Copyright © 2021 by the Journal of Rheumatology.)

Objective: Methotrexate (MTX) has been associated with reduced risk for cardiovascular disease (CVD) events among patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) not exposed to biologic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (bDMARDs). The effect of concomitant MTX on CVD risk among RA patients initiating bDMARDs remains unknown., Methods: A retrospective cohort study was conducted to assess the effect of MTX on CVD risk using 2006-2015 Medicare claims data for patients with RA initiating bDMARD. The main exposure was current use of MTX, updated in a time-varying fashion. The primary outcome was a composite of incident myocardial infarction (MI), stroke, and fatal CVD. Secondary outcomes were each event that comprised the primary outcome. Incidence rates (IR) and 95% CI were calculated using Poisson regression. Associations between MTX and risk of CVD were assessed using Cox regression., Results: A total of 88,255 bDMARD initiations and 1861 CVD events were included in this study. Mean age was 64.6 (12.3) years, 84.0% were female, and 68.2% were non-Hispanic White. The crude IRs (95% CI) for CVD were 17.9 (16.9-18.8) and 12.1 (11.1-13.2) per 1000 patient-years among MTX unexposed and exposed, respectively. The multivariable adjusted HR (95% CI) for CVD events associated with MTX was 0.76 (0.68-0.85). Multivariable adjusted HRs were 0.78 (0.66-0.91), 0.74 (0.62-0.88), 0.77 (0.68-0.86), and 0.82 (0.73-0.93) for MI, stroke, MI or stroke, and a composite CVD outcome, respectively. Results were robust in sensitivity and subgroup analyses., Conclusion: Among patients with RA receiving biologics, concomitant MTX use was associated with a 24% lower risk for CVD events., (Copyright © 2021 by the Journal of Rheumatology.)

Background: Low-dose glucocorticoids are frequently used for the management of rheumatoid arthritis (RA) and other chronic conditions, but the safety of long-term use remains uncertain., Objective: To quantify the risk for hospitalized infection with long-term use of low-dose glucocorticoids in patients with RA receiving stable disease-modifying antirheumatic drug (DMARD) therapy., Design: Retrospective cohort study., Setting: Medicare claims data and Optum's deidentified Clinformatics Data Mart database from 2006 to 2015., Patients: Adults with RA receiving a stable DMARD regimen for more than 6 months., Measurements: Associations between glucocorticoid dose (none, ≤5 mg/d, >5 to 10 mg/d, and >10 mg/d) and hospitalized infection were evaluated using inverse probability-weighted analyses, with 1-year cumulative incidence predicted from weighted models., Results: 247 297 observations were identified among 172 041 patients in Medicare and 58 279 observations among 44 118 patients in Optum. After 6 months of stable DMARD use, 47.1% of Medicare patients and 39.5% of Optum patients were receiving glucocorticoids. The 1-year cumulative incidence of hospitalized infection in Medicare patients not receiving glucocorticoids was 8.6% versus 11.0% (95% CI, 10.6% to 11.5%) for glucocorticoid dose of 5 mg or less per day, 14.4% (CI, 13.8% to 15.1%) for greater than 5 to 10 mg/d, and 17.7% (CI, 16.5% to 19.1%) for greater than 10 mg/d (all P < 0.001 vs. no glucocorticoids). The 1-year cumulative incidence of hospitalized infection in Optum patients not receiving glucocorticoids was 4.0% versus 5.2% (CI, 4.7% to 5.8%) for glucocorticoid dose of 5 mg or less per day, 8.1% (CI, 7.0% to 9.3%) for greater than 5 to 10 mg/d, and 10.6% (CI, 8.5% to 13.2%) for greater than 10 mg/d (all P < 0.001 vs. no glucocorticoids)., Limitation: Potential for residual confounding and misclassification of glucocorticoid dose., Conclusion: In patients with RA receiving stable DMARD therapy, glucocorticoids were associated with a dose-dependent increase in the risk for serious infection, with small but significant risks even at doses of 5 mg or less per day. Clinicians should balance the benefits of low-dose glucocorticoids with this potential risk., Primary Funding Source: National Institute of Arthritis and Musculoskeletal and Skin Diseases.

Background: Rheumatoid factor (RF) and anti-cyclic citrullinated peptide (CCP) antibody tests are often measured at the time of rheumatoid arthritis (RA) diagnosis but may not be repeated and therefore not available in electronic health record (EHR) data; lab test results are unavailable in most administrative claims databases. ICD10 coding allows discrimination between rheumatoid factor positive (M05) ("seropositive") and seronegative (M06) patients, but the validity of these codes has not been examined., Methods: Using the ACR's Rheumatology Informatics System for Effectiveness (RISE) EHR-based registry and U.S. MarketScan data where some patients have lab test results, we assembled two cohorts. Seropositive RA was defined having a M05 diagnosis code on the second rheumatologist encounter, M06 similarly identified seronegative RA, and RF and anti-CCP lab test results were the gold standard. We calculated sensitivity (Se) and positive predicted value (PPV) of the M05/M06 diagnosis codes., Results: We identified 43,581 eligible RA patients (RISE) and 1185 (MarketScan) with RF or anti-CCP lab test results available. Using M05 as the proxy for seropositive RA, sensitivity = 0.76, PPV = 0.82 in RISE, and Se = 0.73, PPV = 0.84 in MarketScan. Results for M06 as a proxy for seronegative RA were comparable in RISE, albeit somewhat lower in MarketScan. Over 3 consecutive visits, approximately 90% of RA patients were coded consistently using either M05 or M06 at each visit., Conclusion: Under ICD10, M05 and M06 diagnosis codes are reasonable proxies to identify seropositive and seronegative RA with high sensitivity and positive predictive values if lab test results are not available.

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.)

Background: Rheumatoid arthritis (RA) disease activity and associated systemic inflammation has been associated with serious infection (SIEs), myocardial infarction (MI) and coronary heart disease (CHD) events based on a few registry studies or clinical trials. There are few data from large-scale population-based studies given feasibility challenges in conducting such investigations., Methods: Multibiomarker disease activity (MBDA) test scores (n=77 641) were linked to Medicare for US patients with RA. Outcomes of interest were hospitalised pneumonia/sepsis (SIE), MI and a composite CHD outcome. The MBDA score ranges from 1 to 100 and was analysed as time-varying. Cox proportional hazards models evaluated the association between MBDA score and SIEs, MI and CHD events, controlling for potential confounders. A sensitivity analysis excluded C reactive protein (CRP) from the MBDA score., Results: There were 17 433 and 16 796 patients eligible for the SIE and MI/CHD analyses, respectively. Mean (SD) age was 69 (11) years, 79% were women, 81% were white and 38% were disabled. Over 16 424 person-years of follow-up, there were 452 SIE events, 132 MIs and 181 CHD events. Higher MBDA scores were associated with SIEs (HR=1.32, 95% CI 1.23 to 1.41 per 10 unit MBDA score change). For MI/CHD events, a threshold effect was present; higher disease activity by MBDA score was associated with increased MI (HR=1.52, 95% CI 0.92 to 2.49) and CHD rates (HR=1.54, 95% CI 1.01 to 2.34, comparing scores ≥30 vs <30). Analyses of the MBDA score without CRP yielded similar results., Conclusion: Higher MBDA scores were associated with hospitalised infection, MI and CHD events in a large, predominantly older, US RA population., Competing Interests: Competing interests: JRC: consultant and research grants from Myriad Genetics., (© Article author(s) (or their employer(s) unless otherwise stated in the text of the article) 2018. All rights reserved. No commercial use is permitted unless otherwise expressly granted.)

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: Opioid prescribing recently has come under intense scrutiny. However, longitudinal patterns of prescription opioid receipt in a population-based cohort of patients with chronic pain, such as those with rheumatoid arthritis (RA), have not been well characterized. The aim of this study was to examine both trends over time and variability in individual physician prescribing of short-term and long-term use of opioids., Methods: We identified a cohort of RA patients based on 2006-2014 Medicare data and evaluated longitudinal time trends in "regular" use of opioids. A separate analysis conducted in 2014 assessed rheumatologist-specific variability in regular use of opioid prescriptions in patients with RA., Results: We identified 97,859 RA patients meeting the eligibility criteria. The mean age of the patients was 67 years, 80% were female, 82% were white, and 12% were African American. The most commonly used opioids were those that combined acetaminophen with hydrocodone or propoxyphene. Regular opioid prescribing increased slowly but peaked in 2010 before propoxyphene was withdrawn from the market. Following the withdrawal of propoxyphene, receipt of hydrocodone and tramadol increased commensurately, and overall opioid use declined only slightly. Factors associated with regular use of opioids included younger age, female sex, African American race, back pain, fibromyalgia, anxiety, and depression. Variability between US rheumatologists (n = 4,024) in prescribing the regular use of opioids for their RA patients was high; in the average rheumatologist's practice, 40% of RA patients used prescription opioids regularly. In almost half of the patients, at least some opioid prescriptions were written by a rheumatologist, and 14% received opioids that were co-prescribed concurrently by more than 1 physician., Conclusion: In the US, opioid use in older patients with RA peaked in 2010 and is now declining slightly. Withdrawal of propoxyphene from the US market in 2010 had minimal effect on overall opioid use, because use of propoxyphene was replaced by increased use of other opioids., (© 2017, American College of Rheumatology.)

Introduction: Treat to target guidelines recommend achieving remission or low disease activity in rheumatoid arthritis (RA). However, the reduction in adverse events and costs associated with lower disease activity is unclear., Methods: We used Corrona linked to Medicare data to identify RA patients. Time varying disease activity was measured using Clinical Disease Activity Index (CDAI); outcomes included all-cause hospitalization, a composite of hospitalization or emergency department (ED) visits, mortality, and medical costs. Outcome-specific Cox proportional models evaluated the adjusted hazard ratios between disease activity and outcomes, controlling for potential confounders including comorbidities grouped into four patient phenotypes. Costs were analyzed with mixed models using a Gaussian distribution with log transformation., Results: Depending on outcome, 4593 RA patients contributed up to 12 001 person years. Median age was 71 years, 75% women. At baseline, approximately 50-60% of patients were in remission or low disease activity. There was a dose-response relationship between RA disease activity (remission, low, moderate, and high) and the incidence of hospitalizations (13.1, 17.8, 21.2, 27.5 per 100 py, respectively); all adjusted hazard ratios were significant: 0.68 (remission), 0.87 (low), and 1.24 (high) compared with moderate disease activity. Similar trends were observed for ED visits and mortality. The crude difference in annual medical costs between remission ($11 145) and moderate disease activity ($17 646) was $-6 500; the adjusted difference (95%CI) was $-3133 (-4737.72, -1528.43)., Conclusion: Leveraging the benefits of linking registry and administrative data together, lower disease activity in RA was associated with incrementally reduced risks of all-cause hospitalization, ED visits, mortality, and medical costs in a dose-dependent fashion. Copyright © 2016 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., (Copyright © 2016 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.)

Objective: To evaluate gastrointestinal (GI) perforation in rheumatoid arthritis (RA) patients receiving tofacitinib, tocilizumab, or other biologic agents., Methods: Using health plan data from 2006 through 2014, RA patients without prior GI perforation were identified. Those in whom treatment with tofacitinib or a biologic agent was being initiated were followed up for incident GI perforation with hospitalization. Crude incidence rates were calculated by exposure. Adjusted Cox proportional hazards models were used to evaluate the association between GI perforation and exposures. Hazard ratios (HRs) with 95% confidence intervals (95% CIs) were calculated., Results: A cohort of 167,113 RA patients was analyzed. Among them, 4,755 began treatment with tofacitinib, 11,705 with tocilizumab, 115,047 with a tumor necrosis factor inhibitor (TNFi), 31,214 with abatacept, and 4,392 with rituximab. Compared to TNFi recipients, abatacept recipients were older, tofacitinib and rituximab recipients were younger, and tocilizumab recipients were similar in age. Patients beginning treatment with a non-TNFi agent were more likely to have previously received biologic agents than patients beginning treatment with a TNFi. The incidence of GI perforation per 1,000 patient-years was 0.86 (tofacitinib), 1.55 (tocilizumab), 1.07 (abatacept), 0.73 (rituximab), and 0.83 (TNFi). Most perforations occurred in the lower GI tract: the incidence of lower GI tract perforation per 1,000 patient-years was 0.86 (tofacitinib), 1.26 (tocilizumab), 0.76 (abatacept), 0.48 (rituximab), and 0.46 (TNFi). Lower GI tract perforation risk was significantly elevated with tocilizumab treatment, and numerically elevated with tofacitinib treatment, versus treatment with TNFi. Adjusted HRs were 2.51 (95% CI 1.31-4.80) for tocilizumab and 1.94 (95% CI 0.49-7.65) for tofacitinib. Older age (HR 1.16 per 5 years [95% CI 1.10-1.22]), diverticulitis/other GI conditions (HR 3.25 [95% CI 1.62-6.50]), and prednisone use at >7.5 mg/day (HR 2.29 [95% CI 1.39-3.78]) were associated with lower GI tract perforation. The incidence of upper GI tract perforation was similar among all drug exposures., Conclusion: The risk of lower GI tract perforation associated with tocilizumab treatment, and possibly tofacitinib treatment, is elevated compared to that associated with TNF blockade., (© 2016, American College of Rheumatology.)

Objective: Breast cancer recurrence may be promoted by immunosuppression due to decreased immune surveillance. The aim of this study was to examine the rates of breast cancer recurrence in patients with immune-mediated disease and treated breast cancer who received therapy with methotrexate, thiopurines, or anti-tumor necrosis factor (anti-TNF)., Methods: Three retrospective cohort studies within Medicare (2000-2012) included women with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) or inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) who underwent surgery for primary breast cancer. Recurrent or second primary breast cancers occurring more than 365 days after the initial surgery were identified. Separate Cox regression models were used to examine the risk of cancer recurrence in patients treated with methotrexate, thiopurines, or anti-TNF agents after surgery, each compared with no use. Analyses were matched for type of breast surgery and receipt and type of adjuvant therapy., Results: Across all medication groups, 107 women experienced breast cancer recurrence during 5,196 person-years. The incidence rates were 20.3 and 19.6 per 1,000 person-years in methotrexate users and nonusers, respectively, 32.3 and 17.6 in thiopurine users and nonusers, respectively, and 22.3 and 19.5 in anti-TNF users and nonusers, respectively. There was no significantly increased risk of breast cancer recurrence with use of methotrexate (adjusted hazard ratio [HR] 1.07, 95% confidence interval [95% CI] 0.67-1.69), anti-TNF therapy (HR 1.13, 95% CI 0.65-1.97), or thiopurines (HR 2.10, 95% CI 0.62-7.14)., Conclusion: The risk of breast cancer recurrence in patients who received methotrexate, thiopurine, or anti-TNF therapy was not statistically significantly increased, although we cannot rule out a 2-fold or greater increased risk in those treated with thiopurines. These data provide reassurance to clinicians choosing to start methotrexate or anti-TNF therapy in RA or IBD patients with treated breast cancer., Competing Interests: Ms. Brensinger, Drs. Clark, Boursi, Chen, and Xie report no potential conflicts of interest., (© 2016, American College of Rheumatology.)

Objectives: To compare the coronary heart disease risk among patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) initiating common biologic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs of different mechanisms., Methods: We conducted a retrospective cohort study of patients with RA enrolled in Medicare, a public health plan covering >90% of US residents 65 years or older, from 2006 to 2012 who (1) initiated a biologic, (2) had complete medical and pharmacy coverage for at least 12 months before biologic initiation and (3) were free of coronary heart disease at the time of initiation. We compared the incidence rates (IRs) of (1) acute myocardial infarction (AMI) and (2) a composite outcome of AMI or coronary revascularisation and used multivariable adjusted Cox regression models to examine the associations between the type of biologic and the two outcomes., Results: We identified 47 193 eligible patients with RA with mean age 64 (SD 13) years; 85% were women. Crude IRs for AMI ranged from 5.7 to 8.8 cases per 1000 person-years (PYs). AMI risk was significantly elevated among antitumour necrosis factor (anti-TNF) initiators overall (adjusted HR (aHR) 1.3; 95% CI 1.0 to 1.6) and individually among etanercept (aHR 1.3; 95% CI 1.0 to 1.8) and infliximab (aHR 1.3; 95% CI 1.0 to 1.6) compared with abatacept initiators. Crude IRs for the composite outcome ranged from 7.6 to 14.5 per 1000 PYs. Tocilizumab initiators were at reduced risk of the composite outcome compared with abatacept initiators (aHR 0.64, 95% CI 0.41 to 0.99)., Discussion: Findings from this observational study of patients with RA suggested that anti-TNF biologics may be associated with higher AMI risk compared with abatacept., (Published by the BMJ Publishing Group Limited. For permission to use (where not already granted under a licence) please go to http://www.bmj.com/company/products-services/rights-and-licensing/)

Objective: To evaluate the risks of herpes zoster (HZ) and herpes simplex virus (HSV) infection associated with tofacitinib compared with biologic agents among patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA)., Methods: Using health plan data from 2010 to 2014, patients with RA initiating tofacitinib or biologics with no history of HZ or HSV were identified, as were incident cases of HZ or HSV. Crude incidence rates were calculated by drug exposure. Cox proportional hazards models evaluated the adjusted association between tofacitinib and HZ, and a composite outcome of HZ or HSV., Results: A total of 2526 patients initiating tofacitinib were compared with initiations of other biologics: anti-tumour necrosis factor (TNF) (n=42 850), abatacept (n=12 305), rituximab (n=5078) and tocilizumab (n=6967). Patients receiving tofacitinib were somewhat younger (mean age 55 years) versus those on other biologics, and somewhat less likely to use concomitant methotrexate (MTX) (39% vs 43%-56%, depending on drug). Crude incidence of HZ associated with tofacitinib was 3.87/100 patient-years (py). After multivariable adjustment, HZ risk was significantly elevated, HR 2.01 (95% CI 1.40 to 2.88) compared with abatacept. Rates and adjusted HRs for all other RA biologics were comparable with each other and abatacept. Older age, female sex, prednisone >7.5 mg/day, prior outpatient infection and greater number of hospitalisations were also associated with increased HZ risk. Incidence rates for the combined outcome were greatest for tofacitinib (7.61/100 py) and also significantly elevated after adjustment (HR=1.40, 95% CI 1.09 to 1.81)., Conclusions: The rate of zoster associated with tofacitinib was approximately double that observed in patients using biologics., (Published by the BMJ Publishing Group Limited. For permission to use (where not already granted under a licence) please go to http://www.bmj.com/company/products-services/rights-and-licensing/)

Objective: The risks of hospitalized infection associated with biologic agents used to treat rheumatoid arthritis (RA) are unclear. The aim of this study was to determine whether the associated risk of hospitalized infections differed between specific biologic agents used to treat RA., Methods: In a retrospective cohort study using Medicare data from 2006-2011 for all enrolled patients with RA, new episodes of treatment with etanercept, adalimumab, certolizumab, golimumab, infliximab, abatacept, rituximab, and tocilizumab were identified. Patients were required to have received another biologic agent previously and to have been continuously enrolled in Medicare medical and pharmacy plans during the baseline period and throughout followup. Followup started on the date of initiation of treatment with the new biologic agent (after previous treatment with a different biologic agent) and ended on the date of the earliest hospitalized infection, at 12 months, after an exposure gap of >30 days, or at the time of death or loss of Medicare coverage. Cox regression analysis was used to calculate the adjusted hazard ratio (HR) for hospitalized infection, adjusting for an infection risk score and other confounders., Results: Of 31,801 new biologic treatment episodes in patients who had previously received another biologic agent, 12.0% were with etanercept, 15.2% with adalimumab, 5.9% with certolizumab, 4.4% with golimumab, 12.4% with infliximab, 28.9% with abatacept, 14.8% with rituximab, and 6.3% with tocilizumab. During followup, we identified 2,530 hospitalized infections; incidence rates ranged from 13.1 per 100 person-years (abatacept) to 18.7 per 100 person-years (rituximab). After adjustment, etanercept (HR 1.24, 95% confidence interval [95% CI] 1.07-1.45), infliximab (HR 1.39, 95% CI 1.21-1.60), and rituximab (HR 1.36, 95% CI 1.21-1.53) had significantly higher HRs for hospitalized infection compared with abatacept., Conclusion: In RA patients with prior exposure to a biologic agent, exposure to etanercept, infliximab, or rituximab was associated with a greater 1-year risk of hospitalized infection compared with the risk associated with exposure to abatacept., (© 2016, American College of Rheumatology.)

Aims: Older and disabled rheumatoid arthritis (RA) patients are often not present in large numbers in clinical trials or registries. A novel, claims-based clinical effectiveness algorithm provides the potential to compare the effectiveness of different biologics among this population using large administrative databases., Method: Using Medicare 2006-2010 data for 100% of patients with RA, we identified biologic naïve users of abatacept, adalimumab, etanercept and infliximab, defined as no biologic use during the 12 months before the biologic initiation. The effectiveness was evaluated at 365 days after biologic initiation, determined using a validated claims-based algorithm. We compared the proportion meeting effectiveness criteria for each biologic using robust Poisson regression to compute risk ratios (RRs) adjusted for potential confounders. One year cost per effectively treated patient was calculated by different biologics., Results: The study included biologic naïve users of abatacept (n = 2129), adalimumab (n = 2944), etanercept (n = 3517) and infliximab (n = 5654). The algorithm classified the medications as 26% effective for abatacept, 24% for adalimumab, 28% for etanercept and 23% for infliximab, indicating comparable effectiveness. However, after adjustment and compared with infliximab, the RRs for effectiveness were 1.17 (95% CI 1.06, 1.30) for abatacept, 1.11 (95% CI 1.02, 1.23) for adalimumab and 1.27 (95% CI 1.17, 1.39) for etanercept. Older patients had a higher effectiveness than patients who were disabled (RR = 1.18, 95% CI 1.08, 1.28). Infliximab had highest cost per effectively treated patient., Conclusion: Abatacept, adalimumab and etanercept are more effective than infliximab among RA patients initiating biologics. Effectiveness was significantly higher among older patients compared with disabled RA Medicare patients., (© 2015 The British Pharmacological Society.)

Background: The risk of subsequent infections in rheumatoid arthritis (RA) patients who receive biologic therapy after a serious infection is unclear., Objective: To compare the subsequent risk of hospitalised infections associated with specific biologic agents among RA patients previously hospitalised for infection while receiving anti-tumour necrosis factor (anti-TNF) therapy., Methods: Using 2006-2010 Medicare data for 100% of beneficiaries with RA enrolled in Medicare, we identified patients hospitalised with an infection while on anti-TNF agents. Follow-up began 61 days after hospital discharge and ended at the earliest of: next infection, loss of Medicare coverage or 18 months after start of follow-up. We calculated the incidence rate of subsequent hospitalised infection for each biologic and used Cox regression to control for potential confounders., Results: 10 794 eligible hospitalised infections among 10183 unique RA patients who contributed at least 1 day of biologic exposure during follow-up. We identified 7807 person-years of exposure to selected biologics--333 abatacept, 133 rituximab and 7341 anti-TNFs (1797 etanercept, 1405 adalimumab, 4139 infliximab)--and 2666 associated infections. Mean age across biologic exposure cohorts was 64-69 years. The crude incidence rate of subsequent hospitalised infection ranged from 27.1 to 34.6 per 100 person-years. After multivariable adjustment, abatacept (HR: 0.80, 95% CI 0.64 to 0.99) and etanercept (HR: 0.83, 95% CI 0.72 to 0.96) users had significantly lower risks of subsequent infection compared to infliximab users., Conclusions: Among RA patients who experienced a hospitalised infection while on anti-TNF therapy, abatacept and etanercept were associated with the lowest risk of subsequent infection compared to other biologic therapies., (Published by the BMJ Publishing Group Limited. For permission to use (where not already granted under a licence) please go to http://group.bmj.com/group/rights-licensing/permissions.)

Objective: Denosumab is a biologic agent used to treat osteoporosis. Its safety profile given concurrently with biologic drugs for rheumatoid arthritis (RA) has not been well studied. We evaluated hospitalized infections among patients treated with biologic agents for RA who initiated denosumab or zoledronic acid (ZA), a parenteral bisphosphonate without known associations with infection. We hypothesized that the rate of hospitalized infection with denosumab would be noninferior to ZA., Methods: We identified RA patients enrolled in Medicare in 2006-2012 treated with biologic agents who initiated denosumab or ZA. Cox proportional hazards models compared the risk for hospitalized infection, comparing denosumab users to ZA users and adjusting for potentially confounding factors. A noninferiority margin was specified a priori to demonstrate that denosumab had no greater infection risk than ZA if the upper bound of the 95% confidence interval (95% CI) of the hazard ratio (HR) was <1.5., Results: Eligible RA patients receiving biologic agents initiated denosumab (n = 1,354) or ZA (n = 4,460). Characteristics of the denosumab users were as follows: mean ± SD age 73.0 ± 8.9, 98.2% women, with a majority receiving infliximab (35.7%) or abatacept (18.6%). Denosumab users had a higher prevalence of prior infections (11.5% hospitalized and 48.3% outpatient) and infection-related risk factors. The crude rate of hospitalized infections for denosumab (14.9/100 person-years [95% CI 12.2-18.1]) was comparable to that for ZA (13.9/100 person-years [95% CI 12.5-15.4]). After adjustment, the HR of hospitalized infection for denosumab users was noninferior to that for ZA users (HR 0.89 [95% CI 0.69-1.15])., Conclusion: The rate of hospitalized infection among RA patients receiving denosumab concurrently with biologic agents for RA was not increased compared to those receiving zoledronate., (© 2015, 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.)

Background: Administrative claims contain detailed medication, diagnosis, and procedure data, but the lack of clinical outcomes for rheumatoid arthritis (RA) historically has limited their use in comparative effectiveness research. A claims-based algorithm was developed and validated to estimate effectiveness for RA from data for adherence, dosing, and treatment modifications., Objective: To implement the claims-based algorithm in a U.S. managed care database to estimate biologic cost per effectively treated patient., Methods: The cohort included patients with RA aged 18-63 years in the Optum Research Database who initiated biologic treatment between January 2007 and December 2010 and were continuously enrolled 6 months before through 12 months after the first claim for the biologic (the index date). Patients were categorized as effectively treated by the claims-based algorithm if they met all of the following 6 criteria in the 12-month post-index period: (1) a medication possession ratio ≥ 80% for subcutaneous biologics, or at least as many infusions as specified in U.S. labeling for intravenous biologics; (2) no increase in biologic dose; (3) no switch in biologics; (4) no new nonbiologic disease-modifying antirheumatic drug; (5) no new or increased oral glucocorticoid treatment; and (6) no more than 1 glucocorticoid injection. Drug costs (all biologics) and administration costs (intravenous biologics) were obtained from allowed amounts on claims. Biologic cost per effectively treated patient was defined as total 1-year biologic cost divided by the number of patients categorized by the algorithm as effectively treated with that index biologic. Sensitivity analysis was conducted to examine the total health care costs per effectively treated patient during the first year of biologic therapy., Results: A total of 5,474 individuals were included in the analysis. The index biologic was categorized as effective by the algorithm for 28.9% of patients overall, including 30.6% for subcutaneous biologics and 22.1% for intravenous biologics. The index biologic was categorized as effective in the first year for 32.7% of etanercept (794/2,425), 32.3% of golimumab (40/124), 30.2% of abatacept (89/295), 27.7% of adalimumab (514/1,857), and 19.0% of infliximab (147/773) patients. Mean 1-year biologic cost per effectively treated patient, as defined in the algorithm, was lowest for etanercept ($43,935), followed by golimumab ($49,589), adalimumab ($52,752), abatacept ($62,300), and infliximab ($101,402). The rank order in the sensitivity analysis was the same, except for golimumab and etanercept. , Conclusions: Using a claims-based algorithm in a large commercial claims database, etanercept was the most effective and had the lowest biologic cost per effectively treated patient with RA.

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.)

Objectives: To estimate biologic cost per effectively treated patient with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) using a claims-based algorithm for effectiveness., Methods: Patients with RA aged 18-63 years in the IMS PharMetrics Plus database were categorized as effectively treated if they met all six criteria: (1) a medication possession ratio ≥80% (subcutaneous) or at least as many infusions as specified in US labeling (intravenous); (2) no biologic dose increase; (3) no biologic switch; (4) no new non-biologic disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drug; (5) no new or increased oral glucocorticoid; and (6) ≤1 glucocorticoid injection. Biologic cost per effectively treated patient was defined as total cost of the index biologic (drug plus intravenous administration) divided by the number of patients categorized by the algorithm as effectively treated. Similar methods were used for the index biologic in the second year and for a second biologic after a switch., Results: Rates that the index biologic was categorized as effective in the first year were 31.0% etanercept (2243/7247), 28.6% adalimumab (1426/4991), 28.6% abatacept (332/1160), 27.2% golimumab (71/261), and 20.2% infliximab (474/2352). Mean biologic cost per effectively treated patient, per the algorithm, was $50,141 etanercept, $53,386 golimumab, $56,942 adalimumab, $73,516 abatacept, and $114,089 infliximab. Biologic cost per effectively treated patient, using this algorithm, was lower for patients who continued the index biologic in the second year and higher after switching., Conclusions: When a claims-based algorithm was applied to a large commercial claims database, etanercept was categorized as the most effective and had the lowest estimated 1-year biologic cost per effectively treated patient. This proxy for effectiveness from claims databases was validated against a clinical effectiveness scale, but analyses of the second year or the year after a biologic switch were not included in the validation. Costs of other medications were not included in cost calculations.

Purpose: The aim of this analysis was to implement a claims-based algorithm to estimate biologic cost per effectively treated patient for biologics approved for moderate to severe rheumatoid arthritis (RA)., Methods: This retrospective analysis included commercially insured adults (aged 18-63 years) with RA in a commercial database, who initiated biologic treatment with abatacept, adalimumab, etanercept, golimumab, or infliximab between 2007 and 2010. The algorithm defined effectiveness as having all of the following: high adherence, no biologic dose increase, no biologic switching, no new nonbiologic disease-modifying antirheumatic drug, no increased or new oral glucocorticoid use, and no more than 1 glucocorticoid injection. For each biologic, cost per effectively treated patient was defined as total drug and administration costs (from allowed amounts on claims), divided by the number of patients categorized as effectively treated., Findings: Of 15,351 patients, 12,018 (78.3%) were women, and the mean (SD) age was 49.7 (9.6) years. The algorithm categorized treatment as effective in the first year for 30% (1899/6374) of etanercept, 30% (1396/4661) of adalimumab, 20% (560/2765) of infliximab, 27% (361/1338) of abatacept, and 29% (62/213) of golimumab treated patients. The 1-year biologic cost per effectively treated patient, as defined by the algorithm, was nominally lower for subcutaneously injected biologics than for infused biologics. The 1-year biologic cost per effectively treated patient, as defined by the algorithm, was lowest for etanercept ($49,952), followed by golimumab ($50,189), adalimumab ($52,858), abatacept ($71,866), and infliximab ($104,333)., Implications: Algorithm-defined effectiveness was similar for biologics other than infliximab. The 1-year biologic cost per effectively treated patient, as defined by the algorithm, was nominally lower for subcutaneously injected biologics than for infused biologics., (Copyright © 2014 Elsevier HS Journals, Inc. All rights reserved.)

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.

Background: After U.S. licensure, parenterally administered medications are identified using non-specific drug codes. Accurately identifying these medications is critical to safety and effectiveness research. Methods to identify medications prior to assignment of specific drug codes have not been well described., Objectives: To describe a generalized approach using non-specific drug codes to identify parenteral therapies in Medicare claims and to assess the ability of that approach to identify tocilizumab (TCZ), a new biologic agent approved in 2010., Methods: We used 2008-2010 Medicare data for a cohort of rheumatoid arthritis patients for algorithm development. Our algorithm classified non-specific drug codes based upon: 1) ICD9 codes; 2) unit values (i.e. dose); 3) codes for infusion/injection procedures; 4) expected versus observed total reimbursement amount and reimbursement per unit. We assessed algorithm performance by linking to an arthritis registry to examine external validity., Results: Of 472 803 claims with non-specific drug codes, 9762 claims satisfied the TCZ algorithm. 74.3% of 9762 claims were classified as TCZ by exact unit price or allowed amount, 4.4% by unique doses, 21.3% by diagnosis code and small deviation from unit price or allowed amount. The algorithm demonstrated good performance characteristics: sensitivity 94% (95% CI 80-99), specificity 100% (99-100) and PPV 97% (84-100)., Conclusion: Claims-based algorithms in Medicare or similar data systems can accurately identify newly approved biologics administered parenterally prior to the assignment of specific drug codes., (Copyright © 2013 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.)

Purpose of Review: To provide an overview of recently published articles describing or applying newer methods for evaluating comparative effectiveness research (CER) in rheumatoid arthritis (RA)., Recent Findings: Historically, clinical trials in RA have compared newer therapies against placebo. Newer trials designed to increase the relevance of trial results to real-world settings include head-to-head comparisons, some that incorporate noninferiority, factorial and crossover designs. Extensions of traditional meta-analysis through network meta-analysis can combine direct and indirect evidence together and can compare multiple treatments with each other.Observational data used to support CER include disease registries, administrative claims data and electronic medical records. Pooling and linking across these data sources and applying newer epidemiologic methods to analyse such data can provide more valid inferences regarding optimal treatment regimens for RA., Summary: CER methods in RA include head-to-head clinical trials, advanced techniques to summarize and aggregate data across studies, enrich the data available in observational settings and enhance the methods used for analysis. Efforts to continue to apply and improve these methodologies will address key needs of clinicians, patients and health policy decision-makers to generate evidence regarding real-world risks and benefits.