Search

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: 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: 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 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.)

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.)

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.

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.)