Comparison of drug survival on adalimumab, etanercept, golimumab and infliximab in patients with axial spondyloarthritis.

Objectives: To compare drug survival in patients with axial spondyloarthritis treated with different TNF inhibitors in standard dosage.
Methods: Patients fulfilling the Assessment in SpondyloArthritis international Society classification criteria for axial spondyloarthritis in the Swiss Clinical Quality Management cohort were included in this study if a first TNF inhibitor on standard dosage was started after recruitment and if a baseline visit was available. Drug maintenance up to drug discontinuation or dose escalation was compared between TNF inhibitors with multiple adjusted Cox proportional hazards models and multiple imputation for missing baseline covariate data.
Results: A total of 966 patients were included (adalimumab 344, etanercept 237, golimumab 214, infliximab 171). Patients on certolizumab (n = 18) were excluded. Patients starting golimumab had lower disease activity as well as better physical function and quality of life in comparison to patients starting another drug. A higher proportion of patients starting infliximab had a history of extra-articular manifestations. Drug dosage was more often escalated during follow-up in patients treated with infliximab than with subcutaneously administered agents. However, no significant differences in time up to drug discontinuation or dose escalation were observed in multiple adjusted analyses if treatment was initiated after 2009, when all 4 TNF inhibitors were available: hazard ratio for infliximab versus etanercept 1.16 (95% confidence interval 0.80; 1.67), p = 0.44, for golimumab versus etanercept 0.80 (0.58; 1.10), p = 0.17 and for adalimumab versus etanercept 0.93 (0.69; 1.26), p = 0.66.
Conclusion: In axial spondyloarthritis, drug survival with standard doses of different TNF inhibitors is comparable.
Competing Interests: The authors of this manuscript have read the journal's policy and have the following competing interests: A.C. has received consulting and/or speaking fees from AbbVie, Celgene, Eli Lilly, Janssen-Cilag, Merck Sharp & Dohme, Novartis, Pfizer and UCB. M.J.N has received consulting and/or speaking fees from Abbvie, Novartis and Pfizer. Additional commercial support came the SCQM Foundation which is supported by the Swiss Society of Rheumatology and by AbbVie, Celgene, iQone, Eli Lilly, Merck Sharp & Dohme, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, Sandoz, Sanofi Genzyme, UCB. It has also been supported by Bristol-Myers-Squibb and Janssen-Cilag, and has received project-based financial supports from the Arco Foundation, Switzerland; as well as from the Swiss Balgrist Society, Switzerland. Additionally, this study was supported by Pfizer through an investigator-initiated research grant to SCQM. There are no patents, products in development or marketed products associated with this research to declare. A.S., B.M., G.T., M.H., P.M., P. Z. and R.M declare that they have no conflict of interest. This does not alter our adherence to PLOS ONE policies on sharing data and materials.