Real-world data reveals the complexity of disease modifying anti-rheumatic drug treatment patterns in juvenile idiopathic arthritis: an observational study

OBJECTIVE: Pharmacological treatment is a cornerstone of care for children with juvenile idiopathic arthritis (JIA). The objective of this study is to evaluate prescription patterns of conventional and biologic disease modifying anti-rheumatic drugs (c-DMARDs and b-DMARDs) for patients with JIA. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective cohort study of children diagnosed with JIA at a rheumatology pediatric clinic. Eligibility criteria were defined as children and youth newly diagnosed with enthesis-related arthritis, polyarticular, or oligoarticular JIA between 2011 and 2019, with at least one year of observation. Data on c-DMARDs and b-DMARDs prescriptions were obtained from electronic medical charts. We used descriptive statistics, Kaplan-Meier survival methods, and Sankey diagrams to describe treatment prescription patterns. RESULTS: A total of 325 patients with JIA were included, with a median observation time of 3.7 years. The most frequently prescribed c-DMARD and b-DMARD were methotrexate and etanercept, respectively. Within the first year of rheumatology care, 62% and 21% of patients had a c-DMARD and a b-DMARD prescribed, respectively. These proportions varied greatly by JIA subtype. Among the 147 (147/325, 45%) patients that had at least one b-DMARD prescribed, 24% were prescribed a second, and 7% a third-line of b-DMARD. A total of 112 unique treatment sequences were observed, with c-DMARD monotherapy followed by the addition of either a b-DMARD (56%) or another c-DMARD (30%) being the two most prevalent patterns in this cohort. CONCLUSION: We observed a variety of treatment trajectories, with many patients experiencing multiple treatment lines, illustrating the complexity of the overall JIA treatment path

Genetic architecture distinguishes systemic juvenile idiopathic arthritis from other forms of juvenile idiopathic arthritis: Clinical and therapeutic implications

Objectives Juvenile idiopathic arthritis (JIA) is a heterogeneous group of conditions unified by the presence of chronic childhood arthritis without an identifiable cause. Systemic JIA (sJIA) is a rare form of JIA characterised by systemic inflammation. sJIA is distinguished from other forms of JIA by unique clinical features and treatment responses that are similar to autoinflammatory diseases. However, approximately half of children with sJIA develop destructive, long-standing arthritis that appears similar to other forms of JIA. Using genomic approaches, we sought to gain novel insights into the pathophysiology of sJIA and its relationship with other forms of JIA. Methods We performed a genome-wide association study of 770 children with sJIA collected in nine countries by the International Childhood Arthritis Genetics Consortium. Single nucleotide polymorphisms were tested for association with sJIA. Weighted genetic risk scores were used to compare the genetic architecture of sJIA with other JIA subtypes. Results The major histocompatibility complex locus and a locus on chromosome 1 each showed association with sJIA exceeding the threshold for genome-wide significance, while 23 other novel loci were suggestive of association with sJIA. Using a combination of genetic and statistical approaches, we found no evidence of shared genetic architecture between sJIA and other common JIA subtypes. Conclusions The lack of shared genetic risk factors between sJIA and other JIA subtypes supports the hypothesis that sJIA is a unique disease process and argues for a different classification framework. Research to improve sJIA therapy should target its unique genetics and specific pathophysiological pathways

Pharmacological treatment patterns in patients with juvenile idiopathic arthritis in the Netherlands: A real-world data analysis

OBJECTIVE: To investigate medication prescription patterns among children with JIA, including duration, sequence and reasons for medication discontinuation. METHODS: This study is a single-centre, retrospective analysis of prospective data from the electronic medical records of JIA patients receiving systemic therapy aged 0-18 years between 1 April 2011 and 31 March 2019. Patient characteristics (age, gender, JIA subtype) and medication prescriptions were extracted and analysed using descriptive statistics, Sankey diagrams and Kaplan-Meier survival methods. RESULTS: Over a median of 4.2 years follow-up, the 20 different medicines analysed were prescribed as monotherapy (n = 15) or combination therapy (n = 48 unique combinations) among 236 patients. In non-systemic JIA, synthetic DMARDs were prescribed to almost all patients (99.5%), and always included MTX. In contrast, 43.9% of non-systemic JIA patients received a biologic DMARD (mostly adalimumab or etanercept), ranging from 30.9% for oligoarticular persistent ANA-positive JIA, to 90.9% for polyarticular RF-positive JIA. Among systemic JIA, 91.7% received a biologic DMARD (always including anakinra). When analysing medication prescriptions according to their class, 32.6% involved combination therapy. In 56.8% of patients, subsequent treatment lines were initiated after unsuccessful first-line treatment, resulting in 68 unique sequences. Remission was the most common reason for DMARD discontinuation (44.7%), followed by adverse events (28.9%) and ineffectiveness (22.1%). CONCLUSION: This paper reveals the complexity of pharmacological treatment in JIA, as indicated by: the variety of mono- and combination therapies prescribed, substantial variation in medication prescriptions between subtypes, most patients receiving two or more treatment lines, and the large number of unique treatment sequences

Real-world data reveals the complexity of disease modifying anti-rheumatic drug treatment patterns in juvenile idiopathic arthritis: an observational study

Objective: Pharmacological treatment is a cornerstone of care for children with juvenile idiopathic arthritis (JIA). The objective of this study is to evaluate prescription patterns of conventional and biologic disease modifying anti-rheumatic drugs (c-DMARDs and b-DMARDs) for patients with JIA. Methods: We conducted a retrospective cohort study of children diagnosed with JIA at a rheumatology pediatric clinic. Eligibility criteria were defined as children and youth newly diagnosed with enthesis-related arthritis, polyarticular, or oligoarticular JIA between 2011 and 2019, with at least one year of observation. Data on c-DMARDs and b-DMARDs prescriptions were obtained from electronic medical charts. We used descriptive statistics, Kaplan–Meier survival methods, and Sankey diagrams to describe treatment prescription patterns. Results: A total of 325 patients with JIA were included, with a median observation time of 3.7 years. The most frequently prescribed c-DMARD and b-DMARD were methotrexate and etanercept, respectively. Within the first year of rheumatology care, 62% and 21% of patients had a c-DMARD and a b-DMARD prescribed, respectively. These proportions varied greatly by JIA subtype. Among the 147 (147/325, 45%) patients that had at least one b-DMARD prescribed, 24% were prescribed a second, and 7% a third-line of b-DMARD. A total of 112 unique treatment sequences were observed, with c-DMARD monotherapy followed by the addition of either a b-DMARD (56%) or another c-DMARD (30%) being the two most prevalent patterns in this cohort. Conclusion: We observed a variety of treatment trajectories, with many patients experiencing multiple treatment lines, illustrating the complexity of the overall JIA treatment path

Costs of Hospital-Associated Care for Patients With Juvenile Idiopathic Arthritis in the Dutch Health Care System

Objective: The aim of this study was to quantify costs of hospital-associated care for juvenile idiopathic arthritis (JIA), provide insights in patient-level variation in costs, and investigate costs over time from the moment of JIA diagnosis. Results were reported for all JIA patients in general and by subtype. Methods: This study was a single-center, retrospective analysis of prospective data from electronic medical records of children with JIA, ages 0–18 years, between April 1, 2011 and March 31, 2019. Patient characteristics (age, sex, JIA subtype) and hospital-based resource use (consultations, medication, radiology procedures, laboratory testing, surgeries, emergency department [ED] visits, hospital stays) were extracted and analyzed. Unit prices were obtained from Dutch reimbursement lists and pharmaceutical and hospital list prices. Results: The analysis included 691 patients. The mean total cost of hospital care was €3,784/patient/year, of which €2,103 (55.6%) was attributable to medication. Other costs involved pediatric rheumatologist visits (€633/patient/year [16.7%]), hospital stays (€439/patient/year [11.6%]), other within-hospital specialist visits (€324/patient/year [8.6%]), radiology procedures (€119/patient/year [3.1%]), laboratory tests (€114/patient/year [3.0%]), surgeries (€46/patient/year [1.2%]), and ED visits (€6/patient/year [0.2%]). Mean annual total costs varied between JIA subtypes and between individuals and were the highest for systemic JIA (€7,772/patient/year). Over the treatment course, costs were the highest in the first month after JIA diagnosis. Conclusion: Hospital care costs of JIA vary substantially between individuals, between subtypes, and over the treatment course. The highest annual costs were for systemic JIA, primarily attributable to medication (i.e., biologics). Costs of other hospital-associated care were comparable regardless of subtype

Perspectives of Pediatric Rheumatologists on Initiating and Tapering Biologics in Patients with Juvenile Idiopathic Arthritis: A Formative Qualitative Study

Background: Few studies have examined pediatric rheumatologists’ approaches to treatment decision making for biologic therapy for patients with juvenile idiopathic arthritis (JIA). This study presents the qualitative research undertaken to support the development of a Best–Worst Scaling (BWS) survey for tapering in JIA. The study objectives were to (1) describe the treatment decision-making process of pediatric rheumatologists to initiate and taper biologics; and (2) select attributes for a BWS survey. Methods: Pediatric rheumatologists across Canada were recruited to participate in interviews using purposeful sampling. Interviews were conducted until saturation was achieved. Interview recordings were transcribed verbatim and transcripts were analyzed using deductive thematic analysis. Initial codes were organized into themes and subthemes using an iterative process. Attributes for the BWS survey were developed from these themes and a literature review was conducted in parallel to inform survey development. Further refinement of the attributes was done through consultation with the research team. Results: Five pediatric rheumatologists participated in the interviews. Shared decision making was part of the approach to initiating and tapering biologics in their practice. Tapering approaches differed; some pediatric rheumatologists preferred to stop biologics immediately, while others tapered by reducing dose and/or increasing the dose interval over time. A total of 14 attributes were developed for the BWS. Thirteen attributes were selected from the themes that emerged from the qualitative interviews and one attribute was included after review with the research team. Attributes related to patient characteristics included JIA subtype, time in remission, history or presence of joint damage or erosive disease, how challenging it was to achieve remission, and history of flares. Contextual attributes included accessibility of biologics and willingness to taper biologics. Conclusion: This study contributes to the limited literature on pediatric rheumatologists’ approaches to treatment decision making for biologics in JIA and identifies attributes that affect the decision to both initiate and taper. Further research is planned to implement the BWS survey to understand the importance of the attributes identified. Additional investigation is required to determine if these characteristics align with patient and parent preferences

Quantifying hospital-associated costs, and accompanying travel costs and productivity losses, before and after withdrawing TNF-α inhibitors in juvenile idiopathic arthritis

Objective: To quantify differences in hospital-associated costs, and accompanying travel costs and productivity losses, before and after withdrawing TNF-α inhibitors (TNFi) in JIA patients.Methods: This was a retrospective analysis of prospectively collected data from electronic medical records of paediatric JIA patients treated with TNFi, which were immediately discontinued, spaced (increased treatment interval) or tapered (reduced subsequent doses). Costs of hospital-associated resource use (consultations, medication, radiology procedures, laboratory testing, procedures under general anaesthesia, hospitalization) and associated travel costs and productivity losses were quantified during clinically inactive disease until TNFi withdrawal (pre-withdrawal period) and compared with costs during the first and second year after withdrawal initiation (first and second year post-withdrawal).Results: Fifty-six patients were included of whom 26 immediately discontinued TNFi, 30 spaced and zero tapered. Mean annual costs were €9165/patient on active treatment (pre-withdrawal) and decreased significantly to €5063/patient (−44.8%) and €6569/patient (−28.3%) in the first and second year post-withdrawal, respectively (P < 0.05). Of these total annual costs, travel costs plus productivity losses were €834/patient, €1180/patient, and €1320/patient in the three periods respectively. Medication comprised 80.7%, 61.5% and 72.4% of total annual costs in the pre-withdrawal, first and second year post-withdrawal period, respectively.Conclusion: In the first two years after initiating withdrawal, the total annual costs were decreased compared with the pre-withdrawal period. However, cost reductions were lower in the second year compared with the first year post-withdrawal, primarily due to restarting or intensifying biologics. To support biologic withdrawal decisions, future research should assess the full long-term societal cost impacts, and include all biologics

Costs of medication use among patients with juvenile idiopathic arthritis in the Dutch healthcare system

Background: This study aims to quantify medication costs in juvenile idiopathic arthritis (JIA), based on subtype. Research design and methods: This study is a single-center, retrospective analysis of prospective data from electronic medical records of JIA patients, aged 0–18 years between 1 April 2011 and 31 March 2019. Patient characteristics (age, gender, subtype) and medication use were extracted. Medication use and costs were reported as: 1) mean total annual costs; 2) between-patient heterogeneity in these costs; 3) duration of medication use; and, 4) costs over the treatment course. Results: The analysis included 691 patients. Mean total medication costs were €2,103/patient/year, including €1,930/patient/year (91.8%) spent on biologicals. Costs varied considerably between subtypes, with polyarticular rheumatoid-factor positive and systemic JIA patients having the highest mean costs (€5,020/patient/year and €4,790/patient/year, respectively). Mean annual medication costs over the patient’s treatment course ranged from €11,000/year (2.5% of patients). Etanercept and adalimumab were the most commonly used biologicals. Cost fluctuations over the treatment course were primarily attributable to biological use. Conclusions: Polyarticular rheumatoid-factor positive and systemic JIA patients had the highest mean total annual medication costs, primarily attributable to biologicals. Costs varied considerably between subtypes, individuals, and over the treatment course

Seeking the state of the art in standardized measurement of health care resource use and costs in juvenile idiopathic arthritis : A scoping review

Background: This study aims to describe current practice in identifying and measuring health care resource use and unit costs in economic evaluations or costing studies of juvenile idiopathic arthritis (JIA). Methods: A scoping review was conducted (in July 2018) in PubMed and Embase to identify economic evaluations, costing studies, or resource utilization studies focusing on patients with JIA. Only English language peer-reviewed articles reporting primary research were included. Data from all included full-text articles were extracted and analysed to identify the reported health care resource use items. In addition, the data sources used to obtain these resource use and unit costs were identified for all included articles. Results: Of 1176 unique citations identified by the search, 20 full-text articles were included. These involved 4 full economic evaluations, 5 cost-outcome descriptions, 8 cost descriptions, and 3 articles reporting only resource use. The most commonly reported health care resource use items involved medication (80%), outpatient and inpatient hospital visits (80%), laboratory tests (70%), medical professional visits (70%) and other medical visits (65%). Productivity losses of caregivers were much more often incorporated than (future) productivity losses of patients (i.e. 55% vs. 15%). Family borne costs were not commonly captured (ranging from 15% for school costs to 50% for transportation costs). Resource use was mostly obtained from family self-reported questionnaires. Estimates of unit costs were mostly based on reimbursement claims, administrative data, or literature. Conclusions: Despite some consistency in commonly included health care resource use items, variability remains in including productivity losses, missed school days and family borne costs. As these items likely substantially influence the full cost impact of JIA, the heterogeneity found between the items reported in the included studies limits the comparability of the results. Therefore, standardization of resource use items and unit costs to be collected is required. This standardization will provide guidance to future research and thereby improve the quality and comparability of economic evaluations or costing studies in JIA and potentially other childhood diseases. This would allow better understanding of the burden of JIA, and to estimate how it varies across health care systems