Predictors of Anti-TNF Therapy Failure among Inflammatory Bowel Disease (IBD) Patients in Saudi Arabia: A Single-Center Study.

BACKGROUND: The advent of monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) has revolutionized the management of many immune-mediated diseases such as inflammatory bowel disease (IBD). Infliximab and adalimumab were the first mAbs approved for the management of IBD, and are still commonly prescribed for the treatment of both Crohn's disease (CD) and ulcerative colitis (UC). Although mAbs have demonstrated high effectiveness rates in the management of IBD, some patients fail to respond adequately to mAbs, resulting in disease progression and the flare-up of symptoms. OBJECTIVE: The objective was to explore the predictors of treatment failure among IBD patients on infliximab (INF) and adalimumab (ADA)-as demonstrated via colonoscopy with a simple endoscopic score (SES-CD) of ≥1 for CD and a Mayo score of ≥2 for UC-and compare the rates of treatment failure among patients on those two mAbs. METHODS: This was a prospective cohort study among IBD patients aged 18 years and above who had not had any exposure to mAbs before. Those patients were followed after the initiation of biologic treatment with either INF or ADA until they were switched to another treatment due to failure of these mAbs in preventing the disease progression. Univariate and multiple logistic regressions were conducted to examine the predictors and rates of treatment failure. RESULTS: A total of 146 IBD patients (118 patients on INF and 28 on ADA) met the inclusion criteria and were included in the analysis. The mean age of the patients was 31 years, and most of them were males (59%) with CD (75%). About 27% and 26% of the patients had penetrating and non-stricturing-non-penetrating CD behavior, respectively. Patients with UC had significantly higher odds of treatment failure compared to their counterparts with CD (OR = 2.58, 95% CI [1.06-6.26], p = 0.035). Those with left-sided disease had significantly higher odds of treatment failure (OR = 4.28, 95% CI [1.42-12.81], p = 0.0094). Patients on ADA had higher odds of treatment failure in comparison to those on INF (OR = 26.91, 95% CI [7.75-93.39], p = 0.0001). CONCLUSION: Infliximab was shown to be more effective in the management of IBD, with lower incidence rates of treatment failure in comparison to adalimumab.

The cost-effectiveness of biologic versus non-biologic treatments and the health-related quality of life among a sample of patients with inflammatory bowel disease in a tertiary care center in Saudi Arabia.

AIMS: This study's objectives were to examine and compare the cost-effectiveness of biologic and non-biologic therapies in the improvement of the health-related quality of life (HRQoL) of patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) in Saudi Arabia. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This retrospective cohort study analyzed data from the medical records of patients with IBD treated at a tertiary-care hospital in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia. Drug utilization costs and HRQoL scores were evaluated at baseline and after six months of treatment. Patients' HRQoL was measured using the Arabic version of the standardized EuroQol 5 Dimensional 3 Level (EQ-5D-3L) questionnaire with a visual analog scale (VAS). RESULTS: Eighty-seven patients with Crohn's disease (CD) and 69 patients with ulcerative colitis (UC) were included in the study (N = 156), and 59 (37.82%) were treated with biologics. Similar effects of both types of medications were found on the HRQoL domains of mobility, usual activities, and pain and discomfort, while biologics outperformed non-biologics on the self-care domain. The mean utilization cost of a biologic-based treatment over a six-month period was SAR 25,690.46 (USD 6,850.79) higher than that of the non-biologic treatment (95% confidence interval (CI): 24,548.55-27,465.11), and the change in the ED-5D-3L VAS score from baseline to follow-up was 4.78 points (95% CI: 1.96-14.00). A probabilistic sensitivity analysis demonstrated that IBD therapy with biologic-based treatment is always more expensive, but also more effective in improving HRQoL 99.45% of the time. Adalimumab was found to be less cost effective than infliximab in the management of CD. LIMITATIONS: Information bias cannot be ruled out, as this investigation was a retrospective cohort study with a relatively small sample that was not randomized. CONCLUSIONS: The results of this analysis can serve as a foundation to introduce HRQoL-based recommendations for the use of biologics in the management of IBD in Saudi Arabia.

Drug utilization and cost associated with inflammatory bowel disease management in Saudi Arabia.

BACKGROUND: There has been an increase in incidence and prevalence of inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) outside the western countries. Treatment costs are an essential component for healthcare planning and priority setting. The utilization patterns and annual administration and cost of IBD medications are largely unknown in countries with an increasing incidence of disease, Saudi Arabia being an example. AIM: To evaluate the use of non-biologic and biologic agents and their associated annual administration costs in a sample of patients with Crohn's disease (CD) and ulcerative colitis (UC) in Saudi Arabia. METHODS: Single-center retrospective chart review was performed to determine the use of biologic and non-biologic medications among IBD patients in a tertiary care hospital in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia. Daily and the annual acquisition cost of different IBD therapeutic agents was calculated. The utilization rates and cost of each type of medication by CD and UC patients were compared. RESULTS: Data of 258 CD patients and 249 UC patients were analyzed. Infliximab and adalimumab were the most commonly prescribed biologics among the study sample, however, their utilization rates were significantly higher among CD than UC patients (36.82% vs. 11.24%, and 20.54% vs. 9.64%, respectively, P < 0. 01). Azathioprine utilization rate was also higher among CD patients compared to their UC counterparts (71.71% vs. 40.16%, respectively, P < 0.01). However, the utilization rate of mesalazine in the UC patients was significantly higher than their CD counterparts (85.53% vs. 14.34% for CD, P < 0.01). The annual cost of biologics (including administration and lab test cost) ranged from 5572 USD for ustekinumab to 18,424 USD for vedolizumab. On the other hand, the annual cost of non-biologics ranged from 16 USD for prednisone to 527 USD for methotrexate. CONCLUSION: Biologics are extensively used in the management of IBD, particularly CD, and their utilization costs are significantly higher than non-biologics. Future studies should examine the cost effectiveness of IBD medications especially in countries with increasing incidence such as Saudi Arabia.