Impact of Switching From an Initial Tumor Necrosis Factor Inhibitor on Health Care Resource Utilization and Costs Among Patients With Rheumatoid Arthritis.

PURPOSE: Despite improved clinical outcomes for the majority of patients, nearly 30% of patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) who initiate tumor necrosis factor antagonist (anti-TNF) biologic agents fail to respond to their first-line anti-TNF and switch to another anti-TNF or a non-TNF biologic. How this change affects health care costs and resource utilization is unknown. We therefore compared RA patients taking first-line anti-TNFs who switched to a second anti-TNF versus those patients who switched to an alternate biologic. METHODS: Health care claims data were obtained from a large US database for eligible adults with confirmed RA diagnoses who initiated anti-TNF treatment and switched to another biologic. Health care costs and utilization during the first 12 months' postswitch were compared. Generalized linear models were used to adjust for differences in demographic and clinical characteristics before switching. FINDINGS: Patients who switched to a second anti-TNF rather than a non-TNF biologic were generally younger (53.0 vs. 55.3 years; P < 0.0001) and less likely to be female (79.7% vs. 82.7%; P = 0.0490). Of the 3497 eligible patients who switched from first-line anti-TNFs, 2563 (73.3%) switched to another anti-TNF and 934 (26.7%) switched to a non-TNF. Adalimumab was the most frequently prescribed (43.4%) second-line anti-TNF, and abatacept was the most common non-anti-TNF (71.4%). Patients who switched to a second anti-TNF remained on their first medication for a significantly shorter period (342.5 vs 420.6 days; P < 0.0001) and had lower comorbidity indices and higher disease severity at baseline than those who switched to a non-anti-TNF. After adjusting for baseline differences, patients who switched to second anti-TNFs versus a non-TNF incurred lower RA-related costs ($20,938.9 vs $22,645.2; P = 0.0010) and total health care costs ($34,894.6 vs $38,437.2; P = 0.0010) 1 year postswitch. These differences were driven by increased physician office visit costs among the non-TNF group. IMPLICATIONS: Among the anti-TNF initiators who switched therapy, more patients switched to a second anti-TNF than to a non-TNF. Switching to a second anti-TNF treatment was associated with lower all-cause and RA-related health care costs and resource utilization than switching to a non-TNF. Because switching therapy may be unavoidable, finding a treatment algorithm mitigating this increase to any extent should be considered. These data are limited by their retrospective design. Additional confounding variables that could not be controlled for may affect results.

Estimating the occurrence of renal complications among persons with ankylosing spondylitis.

OBJECTIVE: The few published estimates of the risk of renal complications in ankylosing spondylitis (AS) are established on clinic-based studies. Our objective was to estimate the age- and sex-specific risks of renal complications in a population-based cohort of AS subjects in Québec between 1996 and 2006, relative to the general population. METHODS: A retrospective cohort design was implemented using population-based administrative data collected from 1996 to 2006 in Québec, Canada. The study cohort included subjects diagnosed with AS on physician billing records, and the comparison cohort comprised a 1% random sample of subjects without AS. Age- and sex-stratified prevalence ratios for acute kidney injury, chronic kidney disease, amyloidosis, and hypertensive renal disease were compared between subjects with and without AS. RESULTS: The AS cohort included 4,836 men and 3,780 women. Renal complications were diagnosed among 3.4% of men and 2.1% of women with AS compared with 2.0% and 1.6% of persons without AS, respectively. Renal complications were 72% more prevalent among persons with AS and an increase was observed in each of the conditions. The magnitude of the risk of renal complications was highest among younger individuals and decreased with advancing age. CONCLUSION: These findings indicate that renal complications may be elevated among persons with AS, especially at younger ages. Despite the limitations of administrative data pertaining to onset of disease, these findings warrant further investigation because of their clinical relevance.

Matching-adjusted indirect comparison of adalimumab vs etanercept and infliximab for the treatment of psoriatic arthritis.

OBJECTIVES: No head-to-head trial has compared the efficacy of adalimumab vs etanercept and infliximab for psoriatic arthritis (PsA). This study implements a matching-adjusted indirect comparison technique to address that gap. METHODS: Patient-level data from a placebo-controlled trial of adalimumab (ADEPT) were re-weighted to match average baseline characteristics from pivotal published trials of etanercept and infliximab. ADEPT patients were re-weighted by odds of enrollment in comparator trials, estimated using logistic regression. Matched-on characteristics included PsA duration, age, gender, severity, active psoriasis, and concomitant treatment. After matching, placebo-adjusted treatment arms were compared at weeks 12 (or 14) and 24. Outcomes included ACR20/50/70, PsARC, HAQ, and modified TSS. PASI50/75/90 were compared for patients with active psoriasis. Cost per responder (CPR) was assessed in the US and Germany using matching-adjusted end-points and drug list prices. Statistical significance was assessed using weighted t-tests. RESULTS: After matching, adalimumab-treated patients had greater placebo-adjusted rates of ACR70 and PASI50/75/90 at week 24 compared with etanercept (all p < 0.05). Adalimumab patients had a higher placebo-adjusted rate of ACR70 than infliximab at week 14 (p = 0.034). Adalimumab treatment had lower CPR for ACR70 and PASI50/75/90 compared with etanercept at week 24, in both the US and Germany (all p < 0.02). Adalimumab had lower CPR than infliximab for all outcomes at week 24 (all p < 0.05). CONCLUSION: Adalimumab is associated with higher ACR70 and PASI50/75/90 response rates than etanercept at week 24 and a higher ACR70 response rate than infliximab at week 14. Adalimumab has significant advantages over etanercept and infliximab in CPR across multiple end-points. KEY LIMITATIONS: The matching-adjusted indirect comparison method cannot account for unobserved differences in patient characteristics across trials, and only a head-to-head randomized clinical trial can fully avoid the limitations of indirect comparisons. CPR findings are limited to the US and German markets, and may not be generalizable to other markets with different relative pricing.

Association of joint space narrowing with impairment of physical function and work ability in patients with early rheumatoid arthritis: protection beyond disease control by adalimumab plus methotrexate.

OBJECTIVES: Tumour necrosis factor inhibition plus methotrexate is believed to inhibit radiographic progression independent of inflammation. This analysis assessed whether these protective effects are exerted on bone (joint erosion; JE) and/or cartilage (joint space narrowing; JSN), and what the independent effects of JE/JSN progression are on longer-term patient-reported outcomes. METHODS: PREMIER was a 2-year, randomised, controlled trial of adalimumab plus methotrexate (ADA+MTX) versus the monotherapies. The impact of treatment on the relationships between time-averaged disease activity (TA-DAS28(CRP)) and changes in JE/JSN and associations of JE/JSN with the disability index of the health assessment questionnaire (HAQ-DI) at baseline and weeks 52 and 104 were assessed through non-parametric approaches of analysis of variance and quantile regression. JE/JSN association with employment status was evaluated at baseline and weeks 52 and 104 through logistic regression. RESULTS: Increasing tertiles of TA-DAS28(CRP) were associated with JE and JSN progression in the monotherapy groups, a phenomenon largely absent in ADA+MTX-treated patients. Although JSN was not associated with HAQ-DI at baseline, it was at 52 and 104 weeks. In contrast, JE was not associated with HAQ-DI at any time point examined. Odds of being employed at baseline, 52 weeks and 104 weeks were significantly associated with lower JSN, but not JE, scores. CONCLUSIONS: ADA+MTX inhibited both JE and JSN progression independently of disease activity. JSN played a more prominent role in patient-reported outcomes than JE. Preventing the onset or worsening of JSN probably represents a critical aspect of effective disease management of early rheumatoid arthritis patients.

Cost per responder associated with biologic therapies for Crohn's disease, psoriasis, and rheumatoid arthritis.

INTRODUCTION: Biologic therapies have demonstrated efficacy and safety in several chronic systemic disorders. The authors indirectly compared response rates and costs per responder associated with biologic treatments for moderate-to-severe Crohn's disease (CD), psoriasis (Ps), and/or rheumatoid arthritis (RA). METHODS: A systematic literature search was performed to identify phase 3 randomized controlled trials of biologics for CD (adalimumab, infliximab), Ps (adalimumab, etanercept, infliximab, ustekinumab 45 mg, ustekinumab 90 mg), or methotrexate-refractory RA (abatacept, adalimumab, certolizumab, etanercept, golimumab, infliximab, rituximab, tocilizumab). Food and Drug Administration-approved dosing schedules were evaluated. Published response rates were extracted, with response defined in CD, Ps, and RA as: ≥70-point reduction in CD Activity Index at 12 months; ≥75% improvement in Psoriasis Area and Severity Index at 3 months; and ≥50% improvement in American College of Rheumatology component scores at 6 months. Within each indication, mixed-treatment comparison meta-analyses were conducted to derive pooled estimates and 95% CIs of response rate difference versus placebo for each biologic, adjusting for cross-trial variation in control-arm response rates. Cost per responder was estimated for each biologic as projected per patient drug costs (2011 US$) divided by response rate difference. RESULTS: Altogether, 23 publications were selected. In CD, 12-month cost per responder was estimated at $116,291 (95% CI $71,637-208,348) for adalimumab and $125,169 (95% CI $60,532-267,101) for infliximab. Among biologics approved in Ps, 3-month cost per responder was lowest for adalimumab ($9,756; 95% CI $8,668-11,131), infliximab ($12,828; 95% CI $11,772-13,922), and ustekinumab 45 mg ($13,821; 95% CI $12,599-15,167). In RA, biologics with the lowest 6-month cost per responder were adalimumab ($27,853; 95% CI $19,284-40,270), etanercept ($29,140; 95% CI $14,170-61,030), and tocilizumab ($31,363; 95% CI $14,713-64,232). CONCLUSION: Meta-analyses of clinical trials found considerable variation in cost-effectiveness of biologic therapies for CD, Ps, and RA. These results may help determine biologic utilization in these chronic diseases.

Clinical and economic burden of extra-articular manifestations in ankylosing spondylitis patients treated with anti-tumor necrosis factor agents.

OBJECTIVE: To assess concomitant extra-articular manifestation (EAM) rates in patients with ankylosing spondylitis (AS) treated with anti-tumor necrosis factor (anti-TNF) agents and examine the economic burden of uveitis and inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) in French and German AS patients. METHODS: Previous analyses of uveitis and IBD in AS patients treated with infliximab, etanercept or adalimumab were identified in PubMed/Medline (January 2000 to August 2011). A supplemental analysis incorporated more recent adalimumab clinical trial data (ATLAS [NCT00085644] and RHAPSODY [NCT00478660]). For resource utilization/costs associated with EAMs, the search was expanded to general spondyloarthritis (SpA) conditions (i.e., AS, reactive or psoriatic arthritis, psoriatic spondylitis, IBD and undifferentiated SpA). Direct and indirect yearly costs associated with AS-associated uveitis and IBD were estimated based on interviews with French and German clinicians and literature review. RESULTS: The pooled average rate of anterior uveitis (AU) flares for patients treated with anti-TNF therapy in two meta-analyses and supplemental adalimumab clinical trials was 4.9/100-patient-years (PYs). AU rates (per 100-PYs) were 3.4, 3.7 and 5.7 for infliximab (p=0.26 vs etanercept; p=0.86 vs adalimumab), adalimumab (p=0.033 vs etanercept) and etanercept, respectively. IBD flares (per 100-PYs) were 0.2 for infliximab (p<0.001 vs etanercept; p=0.18 vs adalimumab), 0.63 for adalimumab (p=0.009 vs etanercept) and 2.2 for etanercept. No studies assessing EAM-associated resource utilization or costs in AS patients were found. Direct medical costs associated with IBD treatment ranged from €483 (Germany) to €6443 (France). Clinician-estimated AS-related uveitis direct medical costs were €1410 (Germany) and €1812 (France). CONCLUSIONS: Clinical data synthesis demonstrated significantly lower AU flare rates with adalimumab vs etanercept and significantly lower IBD rates with both adalimumab and infliximab vs etanercept. Economic analysis indicated substantial costs associated with AU and IBD flares secondary to AS in France and Germany. Future economic evaluations of anti-TNF agents should incorporate EAMs and subsequent treatment costs. Limitations include restricted availability of randomized, placebo-controlled clinical trial data, inclusion of data from open-label studies, lack of real-world (i.e., non-trial-based) EAM rates and a lack of EAM-specific direct and indirect costs with which to compare the results presented herein.

Changes in utilization and costs for patients with rheumatoid arthritis, 1997 to 2006.

BACKGROUND: Rheumatoid arthritis (RA) is a chronic autoimmune disease that often results in joint pain, inflammation and bone erosions. Perhaps the most notable change in RA treatment during the last decade is the advent of biologics, and, in particular, anti-tumour necrosis factor agents. Given these advances, it is useful to assess how healthcare and work-loss costs of patients with RA have changed. OBJECTIVE: Our objective was to assess changes in healthcare utilization and costs from 1997 to 2006 for patients diagnosed with RA. METHODS: Two cohorts (1997 and 2006) of patients with RA and matched controls were identified from two administrative claims databases along with subsamples of employed patients and matched controls. The analysis focused on the more homogeneous employee subsample. We compared annual excess co-morbidity rates, resource utilization and healthcare and work-loss costs per patient between the 1997 (n = 279) and 2006 cohorts (n = 837) with difference-in-differences methodology. Results with p < 0.05 were considered statistically significant. RESULTS: In the employee subsample, there were no statistically significant differences in the excess prevalence of non-RA co-morbidities or Charlson Co-morbidity Index results, except for cardiovascular disease, which decreased by 11.1%. Excess number of ED visits and days hospitalized decreased by 1.1 visits/patient and 0.9 days/patient, respectively, while rheumatologist visits increased by 0.9 visits/patient. Excess per-patient direct costs were unchanged. However, drug costs increased by $US633/patient, but medical costs decreased by $US618/patient (not significant) [year 2006 values]. CONCLUSION: For employed patients with RA, there were significant reductions in per-patient excess hospital days, as well as ED visits, and no changes in excess total direct costs over time. New treatments introduced during the study period may be associated with cost savings that offset changes in employee utilization of drug and medical services. In addition, the reductions in excess ED visits and hospital days suggest improvements in patient quality of life.

Analysis of drug and administrative costs allowed by U.S. Private and public third-party payers for 3 intravenous biologic agents for rheumatoid arthritis.

BACKGROUND: Rheumatoid arthritis (RA) is a common chronic condition with substantial morbidity that can now be treated with disease-modifying biologic agents that target tumor necrosis factor (TNF) or related mechanisms. The anti-TNF biologic agents are available in either intravenous (IV) or subcutaneous dose forms. The biologic agents with an indication for rheumatoid arthritis and administered only by IV infusion in medical offices include abatacept, infliximab, and rituximab. Although the literature on RA treatments, their outcomes, and aspects of their costs is substantial, the costs of administration by the IV route have not been directly studied. OBJECTIVE: To assess the detailed costs of administering IV biologic agents for the treatment of RA in relation to the total cost of the medication itself in the United States. METHODS: The sample included all patients with at least 1 medical claim with an ICD-9-CM diagnosis code for RA (codes 714.XX) in any claim field and at least 1 claim for infliximab, abatacept, or rituximab (HCPCS codes J1745, J0129, and J9310, respectively) at any time from January 1, 2006, through December 31, 2008, in a database associated with billing and claims administration for 72 U.S. medical clinics. Costs were determined using the payer allowed payment, which is the total contractual amount that the provider should receive, including the patient cost share. Costs were measured as the average cost per IV administration visit and in relation to the dose of medication billed. The authors verified that an RA diagnosis was present on 100% of infusion claims for the study drugs. RESULTS: Over the study period for claims with dates of service from January 1, 2006, through December 31, 2008, 72 medical clinics had claims for a total of 4,248 unique patients with RA and a total of 33,354 clinic visits in which these patients received at least 1 infusion of 1 of 3 biologic agents (26,586 for infliximab, 4,807 for abatacept, and 1,961 for rituximab). Mean (SD) total payment for all drugs and other cost components was $2,874 ($1,515) per visit, of which IV administration costs were $226 (7.9%); the mean cost of the biologic agent itself was $2,616 (91.0%), and other visit-related services were $33 (1.1%). For individual agents, the total costs of visits were $2,828, $1,827, and $6,076; and the costs of IV administration were $224, $171, and $390, respectively, for infliximab, abatacept, and rituximab. CONCLUSION: For patients who received an IV biologic agent to treat RA, IV administration costs accounted for 7.9% of the total cost of the visit.

Employer model of workplace impacts of anti-TNF therapy for rheumatoid arthritis.

OBJECTIVE: Rheumatoid arthritis (RA) greatly affects patients' abilities to perform work, which can translate into substantial employer costs. We developed a customizable model that allows employers to calculate workplace impacts of RA therapies in employees with RA. METHODS: Costs of medical leave (absenteeism)/disability, reduced productivity, job turnover, and work-equipment adaptations for employees with RA were calculated. Costs of the tumor necrosis factor antagonist adalimumab were compared with those of other RA treatments. Default parameters were based on literature, clinical trials, government sources, and employers' data. RESULTS: Annual per-employee workplace cost was $9071 for adalimumab versus $16,335 for other RA therapies. Costs included reduced productivity (57%), absenteeism/disability (21%), and job turnover (21%). CONCLUSION: RA imposes a large financial burden on employers, predominantly owing to lost productivity. When compared with other RA therapies, adalimumab substantially reduced employers' costs.

Workplace impacts of anti-TNF therapies in rheumatoid arthritis: review of the literature.

BACKGROUND: Rheumatoid arthritis (RA) causes pain and serious functional impacts and substantially affects patients' daily lives, including their ability to work. OBJECTIVE: This review examines recent studies of patients with RA treated with TNF antagonists and the impacts these therapies have on the workplace. METHODS: A total of 133 articles and 14 poster abstracts were reviewed that matched specific criteria. RESULTS/CONCLUSION: The results of early studies of TNF antagonists varied regarding their effects on patients with RA in the workplace. However, recent studies of adalimumab showed positive impacts across a range of workplace burdens. Treatments such as adalimumab may help employees with RA to remain in the workforce and lead to reduced workplace costs to the employers and employees.

Cost-effectiveness of sequential therapy with tumor necrosis factor antagonists in early rheumatoid arthritis.

OBJECTIVE: To estimate the comparative lifetime cost-effectiveness of sequenced therapy with tumor necrosis factor (TNF) antagonists as the initial therapeutic intervention for patients with early rheumatoid arthritis (RA). METHODS: Because patients with RA switch regimens many times throughout the course of disease, sequenced therapeutic interventions were modeled, continuing until the last effective agent failed or death occurred. The model used published clinical outcomes from short-term, randomized controlled trials. Direct treatment costs and costs of lost productivity were modeled for each of 5 alternative treatment sequences. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios are expressed as quality-adjusted lifeyears (QALY) gained. RESULTS: Treatment sequences that included TNF antagonists produced a greater number of QALY than conventional disease modifying antirheumatic drug regimens alone. The cost-effectiveness of sequenced therapy initiated with adalimumab plus methotrexate (MTX) extendedly dominated both infliximab-plus-MTX-initiated and etanercept sequences. The cost of adalimumab plus MTX per QALY was US $47,157 excluding productivity losses, and $19,663 including productivity losses. A supplementary sequence that incorporated adalimumab-plus-MTX-initiated first-line therapy followed by another TNF antagonist as second-line therapy was modeled; this sequence resulted in additional QALY gained and extendedly dominated all single-TNF strategies. CONCLUSION: Of the 3 single-TNF antagonist sequences, the adalimumab-plus-MTX-initiated sequence was cost-effective in producing the greatest number of QALY. Multiple TNF strategies, such as the supplementary sequence modeled in this analysis, may be cost-effective in producing even greater health gain.

Retrospective claims data analysis of dosage adjustment patterns of TNF antagonists among patients with rheumatoid arthritis.

OBJECTIVE: To describe dosing patterns for tumor necrosis factor (TNF) antagonists in patients with rheumatoid arthritis from health care provider and payer point of interest. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: Using privately insured US claims data from 31 large employers covering 31 companies across the US, rheumatoid arthritis (RA) patients were identified and three cohorts were defined based on first TNF-antagonist treatment (adalimumab, etanercept, or infliximab) administered after January 1, 2003. Dosage-adjustment patterns were assessed during the following 12-month period. Changes in dosage (both increases and decreases) and maintenance of a stable dosage were evaluated. For the health care provider point of interest, a new algorithm was developed to assess treatment patterns with chronic injectable therapies that incorporated the potential inconsistency between days of supply and prescription-gap data, thus providing the actual use of TNF-antagonist treatment. For the payer, usage data addressed whether the TNF antagonist was used at a greater dosage than recommended. Differences in baseline characteristics and dosage change rates between cohorts were tested using Chi-Square tests for categorical variables and Wilcoxon tests for continuous variables. RESULTS: From the health care provider point of interest, 83.4% of adalimumab-treated patients (n = 205) initially received the recommended dosage, 10.2% received less, and 6.3% received more; 87.7% of etanercept-treated patients (n = 455) initially received the recommended dosage, 11.2% received less, and 1.1% received more; and 83.8% of infliximab-treated patients (n = 148) started with 2-4 vials (the recommended dosage is based on the weight of the patient, not total milligrams). All treatments had similar dosage decrease and discontinuation rates. Maintenance of stable dosage was lower for infliximab (20.9%) than adalimumab (37.1%) and etanercept (39.1%); both p < 0.01. The infliximab dosage-increase rate (35.1%) was greater than adalimumab (3.9%) and etanercept (0); both p < 0.01. From the payer point of interest, dosage-increase rate was greater for infliximab (28.3%) than adalimumab (8.7%) and etanercept (6.9%), both p < 0.01. CONCLUSIONS: Infliximab had greater dosage-increase rates than adalimumab and etanercept. Adalimumab and etanercept had similar dosage-increase rates. All treatments had similar dosage-decrease and discontinuation rates. Maintenance of stable dosage was lower for infliximab than for adalimumab and etanercept. The study has the usual limitation of claims data analysis in that clinical details might be insufficient to draw causal inference.

Adalimumab plus methotrexate improved SF-36 scores and reduced the effect of rheumatoid arthritis (RA) on work activity for patients with early RA.

OBJECTIVE: To compare the effect of adalimumab plus methotrexate (MTX) versus MTX monotherapy on health-related quality of life (HRQOL) and work activities in patients with early rheumatoid arthritis (RA). METHODS: Patients in this PREMIER study subanalysis (n = 525) were randomized to adalimumab 40 mg every other week plus MTX or MTX monotherapy. Medical Outcome Study Short-Form 36 Health Survey (SF-36) scores of RA patients were compared with US population norms at Weeks 12, 52, and 104. RESULTS: Physical Component Summary (PCS) scores at Week 12 for both groups improved from baseline and were significantly lower than US population scores (43.5 combination, 39.4 MTX, 49.4 US norm; p< 0.001). At Week 52, PCS score for adalimumab plus MTX was similar to that of the US population (47.5 vs 48.3; p = 0.25), while the PCS score for MTX was not similar to that of the US population (44.2 vs 48.3; p < 0.001). Criterion- and content-based interpretations for between-treatment differences in PCS scores suggest that those receiving combination therapy had fewer employment difficulties than those receiving MTX. CONCLUSION: After 2 years, HRQOL for patients with early RA treated with adalimumab plus MTX improved to US norms. Combination therapy had reduced the influence of RA on work activity.

Cost of care for patients with rheumatoid arthritis receiving TNF-antagonist therapy using claims data.

OBJECTIVE: To compare the cost of care for rheumatoid arthritis (RA) patients treated with adalimumab, infliximab, and etanercept. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: RA patients were identified from a privately insured database. Three mutually exclusive treatment cohorts were formed based on the date of first tumor necrosis factor (TNF) antagonist treatment (index date) after January 1, 2003. Baseline characteristics were assessed in the 3-month pretreatment period. Healthcare (i.e., medical service and prescription medications) utilization and cost were assessed for the following 12 months. RA-related medical cost included the total cost for medical service associated with RA diagnosis. RA-related healthcare cost included RA-related medical and drug cost. Uneven distribution of baseline characteristics were adjusted with the propensity score method. Cost was compared between treatment cohorts. RESULTS: Twelve-month TNF-antagonist therapy cost ($12 853 vs. 17 299, p = 0.002), total RA-related drug cost ($13 794 vs. 17 647, p = 0.006), total RA-related medical cost ($971 vs. 2920, p < 0.001), total RA-related healthcare cost ($14 764 vs. 20 566, p = 0.002), and total drug cost ($16 210 vs. 19 769, p = 0.028) were significantly less for adalimumab (n = 217) than infliximab (n = 234). Twelve-month healthcare cost for adalimumab was comparable to etanercept (n = 546). CONCLUSIONS: Annual healthcare cost for adalimumab patients was significantly less than for infliximab patients and was comparable to etanercept patients. This analysis is subject to the usual limitation of claims data analyses in that few clinical details are available and causal inference conclusions are limited.