Cost-Effectiveness of Early Treatment with Originator Biologics or Their Biosimilars After Methotrexate Failure in Patients with Established Rheumatoid Arthritis.

INTRODUCTION: Evidence supports the clinical benefits of early aggressive biologic treatment in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) who have an inadequate response to conventional synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (csDMARDs), but the cost-effectiveness of early intervention with originator biologics such as tumor necrosis factor inhibitors (TNFis) or their biosimilars has not been well studied. METHODS: We developed a Markov model to estimate lifetime costs and utilities for patients with established RA who do not respond to methotrexate (MTX) therapy. A cost-effectiveness analysis was conducted comparing a standard intervention pathway (addition of originator biologic TNFis to MTX monotherapy at 12 months) and two early intervention pathways (either addition of originator biologic TNFis or addition of biosimilar TNFis to MTX monotherapy at 6 months). RESULTS: Early intervention with an originator biologic TNFi at 6 months was associated with increases in total lifetime costs of £1692 and utilities of 0.10 quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) per patient compared with standard intervention at 12 months, resulting in an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of £17,335/QALY. Early intervention with a biosimilar TNFi increased costs by £70 and utilities by 0.10 QALYs per patient and was associated with an ICER of £713/QALY. CONCLUSION: Switching from MTX monotherapy to combination therapy with either an originator biologic or biosimilar TNFis at 6 months after csDMARD failure in patients with RA was cost-effective at a threshold of £30,000/QALY. FUNDING: Pfizer Inc.

Variability of intended copies for etanercept (Enbrel®): Data on multiple batches of seven products.

Fusion protein and monoclonal antibody-based tumor necrosis factor (TNF) inhibitors represent established treatment options for a range of inflammatory diseases. Regulatory authorities have outlined the structural characterization and clinical assessments necessary to establish biosimilarity of a new biotherapeutic product with the innovator biologic drug. Biologic products that would not meet the minimum World Health Organization's standard for evaluation of similar biotherapeutic products are available in some countries; in some cases relevant data to assess biosimilarity and appropriate regulatory approval pathways are lacking. Batches of seven intended copy (IC) products for etanercept (Enbrel®) were subjected to a subset of test methods used in the routine release and heightened characterization of Enbrel®, to determine key attributes of identity, quality, purity, strength, and activity. While a number of quality attributes of the IC lots tested met the release specifications for Enbrel®, none fell within these limits across all methods performed, and there were no IC lots that satisfied the criteria typically applied by the innovator to support comparability with Enbrel®. Although the consequences of these differences are largely unknown, the potential for unanticipated clinical outcomes should not be overlooked.

Evaluation of whether extremely high enthesitis or Bath Ankylosing Spondylitis Disease Activity Index (BASDAI) scores suggest fibromyalgia and confound the anti-TNF response in early non-radiographic axial spondyloarthritis.

OBJECTIVES: Differentiating between pain from spondyloarthritis (SpA) and pain from fibromyalgia is challenging. We evaluated patients with non-radiographic axial SpA (nr-axSpA) to determine the percentage of patients with extremely high enthesitis and/or Bath Ankylosing Spondylitis Disease Activity Index (BASDAI) scores, the relationship between extreme scores and depression, and the effect of extreme scores on treatment outcomes with etanercept. METHODS: Patients with nr-axSpA received double-blind etanercept 50 mg or placebo weekly and were divided into those who did vs did not have extreme scores at baseline. Extreme scores were defined as the highest quintile for enthesitis score (≥6), and/or scores ≥8 on three of five BASDAI items (excluding morning stiffness duration). Depression was assessed with the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale, depression subscale (HADS-D) and medication use. Week 12 outcomes included Assessment of SpondyloArthritis (ASAS) 40 and ASAS partial remission. RESULTS: At baseline, 35/213 (16.4%) patients met extreme enthesitis criteria, 31 (14.6%) met extreme BASDAI criteria, 12 (5.6%) met both, and 135 (63.4%) met neither. More patients with extreme scores than without met the HADS-D definition of depression: 35/68 (51.5%) vs. 27/118 (22.9%), p<0.0001. For patients with vs. without extreme scores who received etanercept, no significant difference existed in week 12 ASAS 40: 13/41 (31.7%) vs. 21/60 (35.0%), respectively, or ASAS partial remission: 8/41 (19.5%) vs. 19/60 (31.7%). CONCLUSIONS: Extreme enthesitis and/or BASDAI scores were associated with measurements of depression, but did not affect week 12 ASAS 40 or ASAS partial remission.

The APC and PreSAP trials: a post hoc noninferiority analysis using a comprehensive new measure for gastrointestinal tract injury in 2 randomized, double-blind studies comparing celecoxib and placebo.

BACKGROUND: Previous gastrointestinal (GI) outcomes of nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug (NSAID) trials have focused on upper GI events, although recent evidence suggests NSAID-related lower GI effects are important and clinically relevant. OBJECTIVE: We assessed the long-term GI adverse event (AE) profile of celecoxib in a nonarthritis population. The aim of this post hoc analysis was to determine the incidence of serious GI AEs, using a new Clinically Significant Upper and/or Lower GI Events end point. METHODS: Patients from 2 colorectal adenoma recurrence studies were included. Patients received celecoxib 200 mg/400 mg BID, 400 mg once daily, or placebo over 3 years. The analysis measured noninferiority, using a prespecified definition of noninferiority. Celecoxib was predefined to be noninferior to placebo if the upper limit of the 95% CI for the hazard ratio (HR) with celecoxib was <1.25, at any dose, compared with the placebo (calculated using the Cox proportional hazards model). RESULTS: A total of 3588 patients were included; in the primary analysis, the HR for celecoxib (any dose) compared with placebo was 1.22 (95% CI: 0.69-2.18; P = 0.4948). In the secondary dose analyses, the HR associated with a 400-mg daily dose, compared with placebo, was 1.04 (95% CI: 0.55-1.96; P = 0.9149); for 800 mg/d, the HR was 1.79 (95% CI: 0.82-3.89; P = 0.1427). In a third covariate analysis, low-dose aspirin use (HR = 2.33; 95% CI: 1.33-4.08) and age ≥65 years (HR = 1.82; 95% CI, 1.05-3.15) was suggested to have a statistically significant association with increased risk of GI AEs. Study limitations include retrospective evaluation and small sample size of patients with GI AEs. CONCLUSIONS: The noninferiority of celecoxib to placebo was not established because the HR for the time to the first Clinically Significant Upper and/or Lower GI Event was greater than the prespecified upper limit of 95% CI for noninferiority. In addition, HRs associated with daily doses of 400 or 800 mg celecoxib compared with placebo were not significant. However, a significantly increased risk of clinically significant upper and/or lower GI events was observed in low-dose aspirin users (≤162.5 mg average daily use) and in patients ≥65 years of age.