1,134 research outputs found

    Will savings from biosimilars offset increased costs related to dose escalation? A comparison of infliximab and golimumab for rheumatoid arthritis

    Get PDF
    INTRODUCTION: Biosimilar infliximab has the potential for appreciable cost savings compared to its reference biologic, but dose escalation is common and increases costs. We compared frequency of dose escalation and associated Medicare-approved amount so as to determine the break-even point at which infliximab dose escalation would offset the cost savings of using a biosimilar, referent to alternatively using golimumab. METHODS: We studied Medicare enrollees with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) initiating infliximab or golimumab. Frequency of dose escalation was summarized descriptively over 18 months, as were Medicare-approved amounts for reimbursement. Analyses were repeated conditioning on high adherence (i.e., non-discontinuation, \u3e 10-week gap). Multivariable-adjusted logistic regression and mixed models evaluated factors associated with infliximab dose escalation. RESULTS: A total of 5174 infliximab and 2843 golimumab initiators were observed. Dose escalation was rare for golimumab (5%) but common for infliximab (49%), and was even more common (72%) for infliximab among patients who persisted on treatment. Regardless of dose escalation, the adjusted least square mean dollar amounts were appreciably higher for golimumab (28,146)thanforinfliximab(28,146) than for infliximab (21,216) and greater among persistent patients (cost difference $9269, favoring infliximab). Only when patients escalated infliximab to \u3e /= 8 mg/kg every 6 weeks was golimumab IV at break-even or less expensive. After controlling for multiple factors, physician ownership of the infusion center was associated with greater likelihood of infliximab dose escalation (odds ratio = 1.25, 95% CI 1.09-1.44). CONCLUSION: Despite frequent dose escalation with infliximab that often increase its dose by threefold or more, the savings from the current price of its biosimilar substantially offsets the costs of an alternative infused TNFi biologic for which no biosimilar is available

    Design characteristics of the CORRONA CERTAIN study: a comparative effectiveness study of biologic agents for rheumatoid arthritis patients

    Get PDF
    BACKGROUND: Comparative effectiveness research has recently attracted considerable attention. The Comparative Effectiveness Registry to study Therapies for Arthritis and Inflammatory Conditions (CERTAIN) is an ongoing prospective cohort study of adult patients with Rheumatoid Arthritis (RA). METHODS/DESIGN: CERTAIN uses the existing Consortium of Rheumatology Researchers of North America (CORRONA) network of participating private and academic sites in order to recruit patients fulfilling the 1987 ACR criteria that have at least moderate disease activity. Patients starting or switching biologic agents either anti-TNF therapy or a non anti-TNF biologic are eligible for enrollment, depending on the treatment selected by their physician. Enrollment is expected to be completed by March of 2014, and 2711 patients will participate in the study. As of October 7th 2013, 2234 patients have been enrolled. Patient visits and laboratory blood work are mandated every three months for one year. Safety data is collected through one year and beyond. The primary comparative effectiveness endpoint is attainment of low RA disease activity at one year among patients who have been exposed to at least one prior TNF-alpha inhibitor agent prior to enrollment. Multiple secondary effectiveness and safety endpoints will be addressed by investigating the entire population enrolled (naive and biologic experienced). DISCUSSION: The unique design features of CERTAIN will inform comparative effectiveness and safety questions for choosing biologic agents for the management of RA

    Aerial Surveys of the Ocean and Atmosphere off Central California

    Get PDF
    The long-term goal is to enhance our understanding of airsea interaction in the littoral zone by means of applying simple dynamical theories to high-quality observations obtained in the field. The Monterey Bay serves as our natural laboratory for these purposes. The grant is one of a continuing series of programs to study the bay funded by the National Ocean Partnership Program NOPP and the ONR Naval Ocean Modeling and Prediction NOMP Program.Grant #s: N0001403WR20002, N0001403WR20006, N0001403WR2020

    Comparative effectiveness of abatacept versus tocilizumab in rheumatoid arthritis patients with prior TNFi exposure in the US Corrona registry

    Get PDF
    BACKGROUND: We compared the effectiveness of abatacept (ABA) vs tocilizumab (TCA) in tumor necrosis factor inhibitor (TNFi) experienced patients. METHODS: We identified rheumatoid arthritis (RA) patients from a large observational US cohort (1 January 2010-31 May 2014) who had discontinued at least one TNFi and initiated ABA or TCZ in moderate or high disease activity based on the Clinical Disease Activity Index (CDAI) and had no prior exposure to the comparator drug. Using propensity score matching (1:1) stratified by prior TNF use (1 TNFi vs ≥2 TNFis), effectiveness at 6 months after initiation was evaluated. Mean change in CDAI over 6 months following initiation was the primary outcome, with secondary outcomes of achievement of low disease activity/remission (CDAI ≤ 10) and mean change in modified Health Assessment Questionnaire (mHAQ) score. RESULTS: The 264 pairs of propensity score-matched ABA and TCZ initiators were well matched with no substantial differences in the baseline characteristics, defined as standardized differences \u3e0.1 in the stratification. Both treatment groups had similar mean change in CDAI at 6 months (-11.3 in ABA vs -9.9 in TCZ; mean difference -1.27, 95% CI -3.65, 1.11). Similar proportions of both treatment groups achieved low disease activity/remission (adjusted odds ratio for ABA vs TCZ 0.99, 95% CI 0.69, 1.43). Mean change in mHAQ was -0.12 in ABA initiators vs -0.11 in TCZ initiations (mean difference -0.01, 95% CI -0.09, 0.06). CONCLUSIONS: Patients receiving either ABA or TCZ had substantial improvement in clinical disease activity. In this propensity score-matched sample, similar outcomes were observed for both treatment cohorts

    The comparative effectiveness of abatacept versus anti-tumour necrosis factor switching for rheumatoid arthritis patients previously treated with an anti-tumour necrosis factor

    Get PDF
    OBJECTIVE: We compared the effectiveness of abatacept (ABA) versus a subsequent anti-tumour necrosis factor inhibitor (anti-TNF) in rheumatoid arthritis (RA) patients with prior anti-TNF use. METHODS: We identified RA patients from a large observational US cohort (2/1/2000-8/7/2011) who had discontinued at least one anti-TNF and initiated either ABA or a subsequent anti-TNF. Using propensity score (PS) matching (n:1 match), effectiveness was measured at 6 and 12 months after initiation based on mean change in Clinical Disease Activity Index (CDAI), modified American College of Rheumatology (mACR) 20, 50 and 70 responses, modified Health Assessment Questionnaire (mHAQ) and CDAI remission in adjusted regression models. RESULTS: The PS-matched groups included 431 ABA and 746 anti-TNF users at 6 months and 311 ABA and 493 anti-TNF users at 12 months. In adjusted analyses comparing response following treatment with ABA and anti-TNF, the difference in weighted mean change in CDAI (range 6-8) at 6 months (0.46, 95% CI -0.82 to 1.73) and 12 months was similar (-1.64, 95% CI -3.47 to 0.19). The mACR20 responses were similar at 6 (28-32%, p=0.73) and 12 months (35-37%, p=0.48) as were the mACR50 and mACR70 (12 months: 20-22%, p=0.25 and 10-12%, p=0.49, respectively). Meaningful change in mHAQ was similar at 6 and 12 months (30-33%, p=0.41 and 29-30%, p=0.39, respectively) as was CDAI remission rates (9-10%, p=0.42 and 12-13%, p=0.91, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: RA patients with prior anti-TNF exposures had similar outcomes if they switched to a new anti-TNF as compared with initiation of ABA

    Tocilizumab in rheumatoid arthritis: A case study of safety evaluations of a large postmarketing data set from multiple data sources

    Get PDF
    AbstractObjectivesTo evaluate the magnitude of serious adverse events (SAEs) observed in postmarketing reports of tocilizumab (TCZ) for rheumatoid arthritis (RA) in relation to SAEs observed in TCZ clinical trials and external epidemiology data.MethodsA total of 64,000 patient-years (PY) of TCZ exposure was needed to determine, with 90% power, whether rates of SAEs of interest (eg, death, hepatic, gastrointestinal, and cardiovascular) were ≥50% higher (agreed with the Food and Drug Administration) than expected. Reporting rates were calculated for spontaneously reported SAEs, open-label or unblinded postmarketing clinical trials (phase 3b/4), and a Japanese postmarketing surveillance program in the global postmarketing safety database. Event rates were calculated for the registrational placebo-controlled trials and long-term extension data. External comparators for anti-tumor necrosis factor (aTNF)-treated RA patients were derived from a US-based health care insurance claims database or published literature.ResultsThe global postmarketing safety database provided 65,099 PY of TCZ exposure; the aTNF external comparator population provided 53,360 PY. Spontaneous reporting rates per 100 PY (95% confidence interval) were 8.3 (8.1, 8.5) SAEs, 0.39 (0.34, 0.44) deaths, 0.06 (0.04, 0.08) serious hepatic events, 0.15 (0.12, 0.18) serious gastrointestinal events, 0.09 (0.07, 0.12) serious myocardial infarctions, 0.15 (0.12, 0.18) serious strokes, and 0.07 (0.05, 0.09) cardiac deaths in the global postmarketing safety database. These were of similar magnitude to corresponding rates from registrational clinical trials, the aTNF external comparator population, and published literature.ConclusionsSAE rates observed among postmarketing TCZ users were similar to those of various comparison populations. Predetermined design of studies to compare postmarketing AEs using multiple data sources is a useful strategy that can be applied to other medications

    Immunosuppressive treatment and the risk of diabetes in rheumatoid arthritis

    Get PDF
    OBJECTIVE: Inflammation and anti-inflammatory treatments might influence the risk of diabetes. The objective of this study was to assess factors associated with incident diabetes in rheumatoid arthritis (RA). METHODS: The study population consisted of RA patients from a multi-center cohort study, Corrona. To assess risk associated with disease modifying antirheumatic drug (DMARD) exposure, we assessed five mutually exclusive DMARD groups. Additionally, we assessed the risk associated with body mass index (BMI, \u3c 25, 25-30, \u3e 30 kg/m2) and glucocorticoid usage. Incident cases of diabetes were confirmed through adjudication, and Cox regression models were fit to estimate the risk of incident diabetes. RESULTS: We identified 21,775 DMARD treatment regimens, the mean (SD) age at the index visit was 58 (13) years, disease duration 10 (10) years, and 30% used oral glucocorticoids at the time. Eighty-four incident cases of diabetes were confirmed within the treatment exposure periods. The hazard ratio (HR, 95% confidence interval) for diabetes was significantly reduced in patients receiving TNF inhibitors, HR 0.35 (0.13, 0.91), compared to patients treated with non-biologic DMARDs other than hydroxychloroquine and methotrexate. Hydroxychloroquine, methotrexate and use of other biologic DMARDs had a numerically reduced risk compared to the same group. Patients prescribed \u3e /=7.5 mg of glucocorticoids had a HR of 2.33 (1.68, 3.22) of incident diabetes compared with patients not prescribed oral glucocorticoids. RA patients with a BMI \u3e 30 had a HR of 6.27 (2.97, 13.25) compared to patients with BMI \u3c /=25. CONCLUSION: DMARDs, glucocorticoids and obesity influenced the risk of incident diabetes in a large cohort of RA patients. Monitoring for the occurrence of diabetes should be part of routine RA management with a focus on specific subgroups

    Antibody response to pneumococcal and influenza vaccination in patients with rheumatoid arthritis receiving abatacept

    Get PDF
    Background Patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA), including those treated with biologics, are at increased risk of some vaccine-preventable infections. We evaluated the antibody response to standard 23-valent pneumococcal polysaccharide vaccine (PPSV23) and the 2011–2012 trivalent seasonal influenza vaccine in adults with RA receiving subcutaneous (SC) abatacept and background disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs (DMARDs). Methods Two multicenter, open-label sub-studies enrolled patients from the ACQUIRE (pneumococcal and influenza) and ATTUNE (pneumococcal) studies at any point during their SC abatacept treatment cycle following completion of ≥3 months’ SC abatacept. All patients received fixed-dose abatacept 125 mg/week with background DMARDs. A pre-vaccination blood sample was taken, and after 28 ± 3 days a final post- vaccination sample was collected. The primary endpoint was the proportion of patients achieving an immunologic response to the vaccine at Day 28 among patients without a protective antibody level to the vaccine antigens at baseline (pneumococcal: defined as ≥2-fold increase in post-vaccination titers to ≥3 of 5 antigens and protective antibody level of ≥1.6 μg/mL to ≥3 of 5 antigens; influenza: defined as ≥4-fold increase in post-vaccination titers to ≥2 of 3 antigens and protective antibody level of ≥1:40 to ≥2 of 3 antigens). Safety and tolerability were evaluated throughout the sub-studies. Results Pre- and post-vaccination titers were available for 113/125 and 186/191 enrolled patients receiving the PPSV23 and influenza vaccine, respectively. Among vaccinated patients, 47/113 pneumococcal and 121/186 influenza patients were without protective antibody levels at baseline. Among patients with available data, 73.9 % (34/46) and 61.3 % (73/119) met the primary endpoint and achieved an immunologic response to PPSV23 or influenza vaccine, respectively. In patients with pre- and post-vaccination data available, 83.9 % in the pneumococcal study demonstrated protective antibody levels with PPSV23 (titer ≥1.6 μg/mL to ≥3 of 5 antigens), and 81.2 % in the influenza study achieved protective antibody levels (titer ≥1:40 to ≥2 of 3 antigens) at Day 28 post-vaccination. Vaccines were well tolerated with SC abatacept with background DMARDs. Conclusions In these sub-studies, patients with RA receiving SC abatacept and background DMARDs were able to mount an appropriate immune response to pneumococcal and influenza vaccines. Trial registration NCT00559585 (registered 15 November 2007) and NCT00663702 (registered 18 April 2008)
    • …
    corecore