Real-World Patterns and Economic Burden Associated With Treatment Failure With Advanced Therapies in Patients With Moderate-to-Severe Ulcerative Colitis.

Background: Some patients lose response during treatment for moderate-to-severe ulcerative colitis (UC). We aimed to characterize real-world treatment failure patterns and associated economic burdens during use of first-line advanced therapies for UC. Methods: IBM MarketScan Commercial and Medicare Supplemental Databases were used to identify adults initiating ≥ 1 advanced therapy for UC (January 1, 2010-September 30, 2019). Treatment failure was defined as augmentation with non-advanced therapy, discontinuation, dose escalation/interval shortening, failure to taper corticosteroids, UC-related surgery, or UC-related urgent care ≤ 12 months after treatment initiation. The index date was the date of treatment failure (treatment failure cohort) or 12 months after treatment initiation (persistent cohort). Treatment failure rates were assessed using Kaplan-Meier analyses. All-cause and UC-related healthcare resource utilization (HCRU) and costs 12 months post-index were also assessed. Results: Analysis of treatment failure patterns included data from 6745 patients; HCRU and cost analyses included data from 5302 patients (treatment failure cohort, n = 4295; persistent cohort, n = 1007). In the overall population, 75% experienced treatment failure within the first 12 months (median: 5.1 months). Augmentation with non-advanced therapy (39%) was the most common first treatment failure event. The treatment failure cohort had significantly (P < .001) higher mean costs than the persistent cohort (all-cause, $74 995 vs $56 169; UC-related, $57 096 vs $47 347) mainly attributed to inpatient admissions and outpatient visits. Dose escalation/interval shortening accounted for the highest total costs ($101 668) across treatment failure events. Conclusions: Advanced therapies for moderate-to-severe UC are associated with high rates of treatment failure and significant economic burden. More efficacious and durable treatments are needed.

Real-world clinical outcomes and healthcare costs in patients with Crohn's disease treated with vedolizumab versus ustekinumab in the United States.

OBJECTIVE: To compare real-world treatment persistence, dose escalation, rates of opportunistic or serious infections, and healthcare costs in patients with Crohn's disease (CD) receiving vedolizumab (VDZ) vs ustekinumab (UST) in the United States. METHODS: A retrospective observational study in adults with CD initiated on VDZ or UST on/after 26 September 2016, was performed using the IBM Truven Health MarketScan databases (1 January 2009-30 September 2018). Rates of treatment persistence, dose escalation, opportunistic or serious infection-related encounters, and healthcare costs per patient per month (PPPM) were evaluated. Entropy balancing was used to balance patient characteristics between cohorts. Event rates were assessed using weighted Kaplan-Meier analyses and compared between cohorts using log-rank tests. Healthcare costs were compared between cohorts using weighted 2-part models. RESULTS: 589 VDZ and 599 UST patients were included (172 [29.2%] and 117 [19.5%] were bio-naïve, respectively). After weighting, baseline characteristics were comparable between cohorts. No significant difference in rates of treatment persistence (12-month: VDZ, 76.5%; UST, 82.1%; p = .17), dose escalation (12-month: VDZ, 29.3%; UST, 32.7%; p = .97), or opportunistic or serious infection-related encounters were observed between VDZ and UST. Total mean healthcare costs were significantly lower for patients treated with VDZ vs UST (mean cost difference = -$5051 PPPM; p < .01). Findings were consistent in bio-naïve patients. CONCLUSIONS: In this real-world study, similar treatment persistence, dose escalation, and rates of opportunistic or serious infections were observed with VDZ- and UST-treated patients with CD. However, VDZ was associated with a significantly lower cost outlay for healthcare systems.

Crohn's disease (CD) causes inflammation in the digestive system. Vedolizumab (VDZ) and ustekinumab (UST) are therapies for patients with CD. Little is known about the clinical outcomes and healthcare costs of VDZ versus UST in the real world in the United States. We used health claims data and found that VDZ and UST had comparable real-world clinical outcomes. After 12 months of treatment, the proportions of patients with CD who stayed on treatment and those who needed to increase therapy dose were similar with VDZ and UST. The rate of infection was also similar between the two groups of patients. However, the monthly healthcare costs were $5051 less for patients treated with VDZ than with UST. This was mainly due to the lower cost of VDZ, which was almost half of that of UST. The lower treatment costs with VDZ may provide substantial savings for the healthcare system and patients specifically. Future cost-effectiveness studies on VDZ and UST are needed to aid treatment selection for patients with CD.

Effectiveness of Biologic Agents Among Hispanic Patients With Metastatic Colorectal Cancer.

BACKGROUND: Randomized clinical trials have defined the survival advantage with the addition of biologic drugs to chemotherapy in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). Under representation of Hispanics contributes to poorly defined outcomes in this group. We aim to determine whether the real-world benefit of biologics extends to Hispanics using a comparative effectiveness research approach. METHODS: This retrospective cohort study included all treatment centers contributing to SEER registry with available claims in the SEER-Medicare linked database (2001-2011) and 2 hospitals (2004-2016) catering to minorities. Metastatic CRC patients were classified as receiving chemotherapy or biochemotherapy (CT plus biologics; if initiated within 3 months of chemotherapy). The primary outcome was overall survival (OS) among the Hispanic patients calculated from time of administration of first dose of chemotherapy to death or last follow-up. A weighted Cox regression model was used to assess differences in survival. RESULTS: We identified 182 Hispanic patients with mCRC from the Patient Entitlement and Diagnosis Summary (PEDSF) file (n = 101) and hospital database (n = 81). Overall, 52% were women and 72% received biologics. The median OS was 11.3 and 17.0 months in chemotherapy and biochemotherapy group, respectively. Biochemotherapy offered a survival benefit compared with chemotherapy alone, with an average hazard rate reduction of 39% (95% CI 6%-60%, p = .0236) using inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) based analysis. CONCLUSION: In this cohort of Hispanic patients with mCRC, biochemotherapy was associated with longer survival. Clinicians may offer biochemotherapy therapy to all patients regardless of race/ethnicity to maximize clinical benefit.

Insurance Approval Delay of Biologic Therapy Dose Escalation Associated with Disease Activity in Patients with Inflammatory Bowel Disease.

BACKGROUND: Dose escalation of self-injectable biologic therapy for inflammatory bowel diseases may be required to counteract loss of response and/or low drug levels. Payors often require completion of a prior authorization (PA), which is a complex approval pathway before providing coverage. If the initial PA request is denied, clinic staff must complete a time and resource-intensive process to obtain medication approval. AIMS: This study measured time from decision to dose escalate to insurance approval and evaluated impact of approval time on disease activity. METHODS: This was a single-center retrospective analysis of adult patients with IBD prescribed an escalated dose of biologic therapy at an academic center with an integrated specialty pharmacy team from January to December 2018. Outcomes included time to insurance approval and the association between approval time and follow-up C-reactive protein (CRP) and Short Inflammatory Bowel Disease Questionnaire (SIBDQ) scores. Associations were tested using linear regression analyses. RESULTS: 220 patients were included, median age 39, 53% female, and 96% white. Overall median time from decision to dose escalate to insurance approval was 7 days [interquartile range (IQR) 1, 14]. Approval time was delayed when an appeal was required [median of 29 days (IQR 17, 43)]. Patients with a longer time to insurance approval were less likely to have CRP improvement (p = 0.019). Time to insurance approval did not significantly impact follow-up SIBDQ scores. CONCLUSION: Patients who had a longer time to insurance approval were less likely to have improvement in CRP, highlighting the negative clinical impact of a complex dose escalation process.

Validation of a Pathological Score for the Assessment of Bronchial Biopsies in Severe Uncontrolled Asthma: Beyond Blood Eosinophils.

BACKGROUND: Blood eosinophil count (BEC) is currently used as a surrogate marker of T2 inflammation in severe asthma but its relationship with tissue T2-related changes is elusive. Bronchial biopsy could add reliable information but lacks standardization. OBJECTIVES: To validate a systematic assessment of the bronchial biopsy for the evaluation of severe uncontrolled asthma (SUA) by standardizing a pathological score. METHODS: A systematic assessment of submucosal inflammation, tissue eosinophilic count/field (TEC), goblet cells hyperplasia, epithelial changes, basement membrane thickening, prominent airway smooth muscle and submucosal mucous glands was initially agreed and validated in representative bronchial biopsies of 12 patients with SUA by 8 independent pathologists. In a second phase, 62 patients with SUA who were divided according to BEC≥300cells/mm3 or less underwent bronchoscopy with bronchial biopsies and the correlations between the pathological findings and the clinical characteristics were investigated. RESULTS: The score yielded good agreement among pathologists regarding submucosal eosinophilia, TEC, goblet cells hyperplasia and mucosal glands (ICC=0.85, 0.81, 0.85 and 0.87 respectively). There was a statistically significant correlation between BEC and TEC (r=0.393, p=0.005) that disappeared after correction by oral corticosteroids (OCS) use (r=0.170, p=0.307). However, there was statistically significant correlation between FeNO and TEC (r=0.481, p=0.006) that was maintained after correction to OCS use (r=0.419, p=0.021). 82.4% of low-BEC had submucosal eosinophilia, 50% of them moderate to severe. CONCLUSION: A standardized assessment of endobronchial biopsy is feasible and could be useful for a better phenotyping of SUA especially in those receiving OCS.

Frequency of use and cost of biologic treatment for inflammatory bowel disease and inflammatory bowel disease-associated arthropathy in Colombia in 2019.

INTRODUCTION AND AIMS: Inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) has a high economic burden due to its chronicity. Treatment has evolved, thanks to the understanding of IBD pathogenesis and the advent of biologic therapy, albeit the latter increases direct costs. The aim of the present study was to calculate the total cost and cost per patient/year of biologic therapy for IBD and IBD-associated arthropathy in Colombia. METHODS: A descriptive study was conducted. The data were obtained from the Comprehensive Social Protection Information System of the Department of Health for the year 2019, utilizing the medical diagnosis codes of the International Classification of Diseases related to IBD and IBD-associated arthropathy as keywords. RESULTS: The prevalence of IBD and IBD-associated arthropathy was 61 cases per 100,000 inhabitants, with a female-to-male ratio of 1.5:1. Joint involvement was 3%, and 6.3% of the persons with IBD and IBD-associated arthropathy received biologic therapy. Adalimumab was the most widely prescribed biologic drug (49.2%). Biologic therapy had a cost of $15,926,302 USD and the mean cost per patient/year was $18,428 USD. Adalimumab had the highest impact on healthcare resource utilization, with a total cost of $7,672,320 USD. According to subtype, ulcerative colitis had the highest cost ($10,932,489 USD). CONCLUSION: Biologic therapy is expensive, but its annual cost in Colombia is lower than that of other countries due to the government's regulation of high-cost medications.

Perioperative Assessment and Optimization in Major Colorectal Surgery: Medication Management.

The colorectal surgeon is often faced with medications that can be challenging to manage in the perioperative period. In the era of novel agents for anticoagulation and immunotherapies for inflammatory bowel disease and malignancy, understanding how to advise patients about these medications has become increasingly complex. Here, we aim to provide clarity regarding the use of these agents and their perioperative management, with a particular focus on when to stop and restart them perioperatively. This review will begin with the management of both nonbiologic and biologic therapies used in the treatment of inflammatory bowel disease and malignancy. Then, discussion will shift to anticoagulant and antiplatelet medications, including their associated reversal agents. Upon finishing this review, the reader will have gained an increased familiarity with the management of common medications requiring modification by colorectal surgeons in the perioperative period.

Difficult to treat psoriatic arthritis - how should we manage?

Psoriatic arthritis (PsA) is a chronic, multi-domain immune-mediated inflammatory arthritis with a high disease burden. PsA patients have significant co-morbidities like obesity, depression, fibromyalgia which can impact disease activity assessment. The management of PsA has undergone a paradigm shift over the last decade due to the availability of multiple biologic and targeted synthetic disease modifying anti-rheumatic drugs. Despite the availability of multiple therapeutic agents, it is not uncommon to find patients not responding adequately and continuing to have active disease and/or high disease burden. In our review, we propose what is "difficult to treat PsA", discuss differential diagnosis, commonly overlooked factors, co-morbidities that affect treatment responses, and suggest a stepwise algorithm to manage these patients.

A Systematic Review of the Economic and Health-Related Quality of Life Impact of Advanced Therapies Used to Treat Moderate-to-Severe Ulcerative Colitis.

INTRODUCTION: The clinical benefits of advanced therapies (i.e., biologics and small-molecule drugs) in the treatment of moderate-to-severe ulcerative colitis (UC) have been demonstrated; however, there is less clarity regarding the economic and health-related quality of life (HRQoL) impact of these treatments. We conducted a systematic literature review to synthesize data on cost, healthcare resource utilization (HCRU), and HRQoL for patients who received approved advanced therapies for moderate-to-severe UC in the United States and Europe. METHODS: Databases including MEDLINE, Embase, the Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects (DARE), the National Health Service Economic Evaluation Database (NHS EED), and EconLit were searched systematically to identify observational studies published between January 1, 2010 and October 14, 2021 that assessed the impact of advanced therapies on cost, HCRU, and/or HRQoL in adults with moderate-to-severe UC. Supplementary gray literature searches of conference proceedings from the past 4 years (January 2018 to October 2021) were also performed. RESULTS: 47 publications of 40 unique cost/HCRU studies and 13 publications of nine unique HRQoL studies were included. Findings demonstrated that biologics have a positive impact on indirect costs (i.e., productivity, presenteeism, and absenteeism) and HRQoL. High costs of biologics were not always fully offset by reductions in cost and HCRU associated with disease management. For many patients, treatment switching and dose escalations were required, thus increasing drug costs, particularly when switching across treatment classes. CONCLUSION: These findings highlight a high unmet need for therapies for moderate-to-severe UC that can reduce the healthcare burden and impact on society. Further research is warranted, as the reported evidence was limited by the small sample sizes of some treatment groups within a study.

Although advanced therapies, such as biologics and small-molecule drugs, have shown clinical benefit in treating moderate-to-severe ulcerative colitis, their economic impact and effect on patients' quality of life is less clear. This study comprehensively reviewed the cost and use of healthcare resources associated with starting treatment with advanced therapies for ulcerative colitis, as well as the impact of these treatments on quality of life. We found that while biologics have a benefit on work productivity, work attendance, work absence, and quality of life, the high costs of biologics were not always fully met by reductions in disease management costs and healthcare resources. Many patients needed to switch treatments or required dose increases, which were expensive. There is a high unmet need for therapies for moderate-to-severe ulcerative colitis that can reduce healthcare costs, use of healthcare resources, and effect on society.

Bowel wall MRI T1 relaxation estimates for assessment of intestinal inflammation in pediatric Crohn's disease.

PURPOSE: To compare bowel wall T1 relaxation estimates in young patients with newly diagnosed ileal CD to healthy control participants, characterize their change over time in response to biologic medical therapy, and evaluate their associations with clinical markers of intestinal inflammation. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Patients with newly diagnosed ileal CD and healthy control participants were prospectively recruited between December 2018 and October 2021. Patients underwent research MRI examinations of the bowel at baseline and at 6-weeks and 6-months into biologic medical treatment; control participants underwent single MRI examinations. MRI examinations included native T1 relaxometry of the terminal ileum using a modified Look-Locker inversion recovery (MOLLI) sequence. T1 estimates were measured on scanner-generated parametric maps. Clinical markers of intestinal inflammation were recorded at each visit. Group differences were assessed using the Mann-Whitney U test; the Friedman test was used to assess longitudinal changes in T1 estimates. Spearman correlation was used to evaluate associations between T1 estimates and inflammatory markers. RESULTS: Nineteen participants with CD (12 males; median age 14 years) and 15 control participants (7 males; median age 17 years) were included in the study. Bowel wall T1 estimates in CD patients (median 1302 ms) were significantly longer compared to control participants (median 1159 ms) (p < 0.001). In CD patients, T1 estimates changed over time after treatment (p = 0.001), with largest reductions between baseline and 6-weeks (p < 0.001). T1 estimates correlated with inflammatory markers, including erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ρ = 0.35; p = 0.01), c-reactive protein level (ρ = 0.34; p = 0.02), and weighted Pediatric Crohn's Disease Activity Index (ρ = 0.39; p = 0.005). T1 estimates did not correlate with serum albumin (ρ = - 0.28; p = 0.051) and fecal calprotectin (ρ = 0.07; p = 0.63). CONCLUSION: Bowel wall T1 estimates are abnormally increased in newly diagnosed ileal CD patients and decrease in response to medical therapy.

Biologics for severe, chronic plaque psoriasis: An Australian cost-utility analysis.

BACKGROUND: Biologics are a good therapeutic option for severe, chronic plaque psoriasis; however, they come with significant cost to the health care system. OBJECTIVE: To conduct a cost-utility analysis of outpatient biologics (adalimumab, etanercept, guselkumab, ixekizumab, risankizumab, secukinumab, tildrakizumab, and ustekinumab) available to adults with severe, chronic plaque psoriasis from the perspective of the Australian health care system. METHODS: A Markov cohort model was constructed to estimate the quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) and costs accrued for treatment pathways commencing with different first-line biologics, over a 96-week time horizon. The model adhered to the Australian Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme eligibility criteria and guidelines. RESULTS: A biologic treatment pathway commencing on tildrakizumab was the most cost-effective first-line treatment (Australian dollar 39,930; total utility of 1.57 QALYs over 96 weeks). First-line secukinumab and risankizumab had incremental cost-utility ratios of Australian dollar 194,524/QALY and Australian dollar 479,834/QALY, respectively, when compared with first-line tildrakizumab. LIMITATIONS: The efficacy and utility input parameters were derived from international randomized control trials and patients from the United Kingdom, respectively. Findings from this study cannot be generalized beyond Australia. CONCLUSION: Tildrakizumab may be considered as first-line treatment for adult patients with severe, chronic plaque psoriasis embarking on biologic therapy, from the economic perspective of the Australian health care system.

Effectiveness, safety and economic analysis of Benepali in clinical practice.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the effectiveness, safety and cost of Etanercept biosimilar in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA), spondyloarthritis (SpA) and psoriatic arthritis (PsA) compared to the standard drug in real clinical practice. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Retrospective observational study. Case series of 138 patients with RA, SpA or PsA treated with at least one dose of Benepali® (n = 79) or Enbrel® (n = 59). Drug retention time was the primary efficacy endpoint compared to the biosimilar and the original. The proportion of patients achieving low disease activity or remission after 52 weeks was used as the secondary outcome. Safety was assessed by means of the adverse effects incidence rate. A cost minimization analysis was performed. RESULTS: No differences were observed regarding treatment retention time between drugs (median [95% confidence interval, 95% CI] at 12.0 months [10.2-12.0] for the biosimilar and 12.0 months [12.0-12.0] for the original). Similar improvements, in terms of inflammatory activity and physical function, were obtained after 52 weeks except for patients with SpA and PsA who, in general, experienced improvements of BASDAI and ASDAS with the original compared with the biosimilar. No significant differences were observed in the total number of adverse effects (.43 events/patient-years versus the biosimilar and .53 versus the original). Using the biosimilar in place of the original drug resulted in a net savings of 118,383.55 € (1,747.20 €/patient-years) for the hospital. CONCLUSION: The biosimilar Benepali is as effective and safe as the original and much more cost-effective.

A safety review of biologic therapies for the management of hidradenitis suppurativa and unmet needs.

INTRODUCTION: Hidradenitis suppurativa (HS) is a chronic, debilitating inflammatory skin disorder characterized by nodules, abscesses, fistulae, and significant scarring in intertriginous areas rich in apocrine glands. Immunomodulator drugs, including biologics, are a mainstay of treatment for this disease. AREAS COVERED: This review details the safety profiles of various biologic therapies currently available commercially that have been tried for HS as assessed in clinical trials and observational studies. As the only Food and Drug Administration (FDA)-approved medication for the treatment of moderate-to-severe HS, adalimumab is discussed in the most detail. Additional biologic medications, including tumor necrosis factor α (TNFα) inhibitors, interleukin 1 (IL-1) inhibitors, IL-12 and IL-23 inhibitors, IL-17 inhibitors, and IL-23 inhibitors, are discussed as well. Safety concerns in special populations, including pregnant women and children, are outlined. EXPERT OPINION: Existing data support excellent short-term and long-term safety profiles for adalimumab, although caution must be taken with use in high-risk patient populations, including those with chronic infections or increased risk of malignancy. Based on their safety data for other indications, additional biologic agents appear safe in HS as well. However, further research is needed to fully understand the safety profiles of these medications in the HS population.

Persistence With Biologic Therapy and Associated Costs of Patients With Inflammatory Bowel Disease: A German Retrospective Claims Data Analysis.

Background: In recent years, biologic agents became a relevant and promising treatment option for inflammatory bowel diseases (IBDs). However, high treatment costs and moderate remission rates lead to a high interest in treatment persistence and corresponding economic consequences. Methods: A retrospective health claims data analysis was conducted including biologic naive patients diagnosed with IBD between 2013 and 2018. Observation points were at 12 and 18 months of follow-up, starting from the first biologic prescription. Nonpersistence was defined as either no further prescription or prescription of another biologic agent within the days of supply per original prescription. Biologic agents included were Adalimumab, Golimumab, Infliximab, Ustekinumab, and Vedolizumab. Results: In total, 1444 patients with IBD were included in this analysis, mostly treated with Adalimumab (46.9%) and Infliximab (39.9%) as their first biologic treatment. After 12 months, 72.2% of patients were still persistent with their initial biologic treatment with the highest shares for Infliximab (74%) and Vedolizumab (72.4%). 27.8% of patients were nonpersistent, mostly due to a switch of biologic agent (75.8%). Cox regression identified female, hospitalizations, and simultaneous prescriptions of corticosteroids and immunomodulators as risk factors for nonpersistence. Treatment costs per year were approximately 3000€ higher for nonpersistent patients (27,146€) than for persistent patients (23,839€), mostly due to inpatient treatment costs. Conclusions: The persistence of biologic therapy in this study was rather high at 72% after 12 months, while nonpersistence was mostly due to switches to other biologic agents. Lack of persistence is associated with increased cost, mostly due to nonbiologic medication and inpatient treatment.

Does Etanercept Biosimilar Prescription in a Rheumatology Center Bend the Medication Cost Curve?

OBJECTIVE: The market entry of biosimilars is expected to bring budgetary relief. Our objective was to determine how the introduction of biosimilars influences medication costs in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) and which patients gain access to biologics due to the availability of biosimilars. METHODS: Using hospital data of patients with RA between 2014 and 2018, an interrupted time series was performed. The interruption in the time series was placed at June 2016 (i.e., the introduction of the etanercept biosimilar). The changes in trends for rheumatic medication costs before and after the interruption were measured. Secondary analyses focused on explaining these trends. RESULTS: In the first quarter after the interruption, there was a decrease in total costs for biologic users of -€63,020 (95% CI -€96,487 to -€29,553, P = 0.001). The postinterruption trend did not differ from the preinterruption trend (95% CI -€6695 to €6715, P = 0.998) and after 3 quarters, the medication costs were back at the interruption level. After the interruption, the average cost per biologic user decreased by -€370 (95% CI -€602 to -€138, P = 0.005), followed by a quarterly decrease (relative to the preinterruption trend; 95% CI -€86 to -€14, P = 0.010), bending the average cost curve. The percentage of patients being treated with biologics increased in postinterruption by 0.50 percentage points quarterly (95% CI 0.38-0.62, P < 0.001). Also, the average age at the start of the first biologic increased after the interruption (P = 0.057). CONCLUSION: The average cost per patient treated with biologics decreased after the introduction of biosimilars with a persistent trend. However, the budgetary relief due to market entry of biosimilars vanished quickly due to an increase in patients treated with biologics.

Comparative cost-effectiveness of tildrakizumab and other commonly used treatments for moderate-to-severe psoriasis.

OBJECTIVES: To compare the cost-effectiveness of tildrakizumab with other commonly used biologics and apremilast as the first-line treatment for moderate-to-severe plaque psoriasis from a US health plan's perspective. METHODS: A 10-year cost-effectiveness model was developed to compare the incremental cost per extra month with a Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI) 75 response. Patients were assumed to receive one of the treatments evaluated as their first-line treatment at the outset of the analysis. Nonresponders (PASI <75) discontinued their current treatment; 25% went on to receive a mix of topical therapies, phototherapies, and other systemic therapies, while 75% received a second-line therapy before receiving a mix of topical therapies, phototherapies, and other systemic therapies. Direct medical costs were calculated based on drug acquisition, administration, and monitoring costs. RESULTS: The incremental cost per extra month a patient had a PASI 75 response was lowest for brodalumab ($3,685), infliximab ($4,102), apremilast ($4,770), and tildrakizumab ($5,150), followed by risankizumab ($5,319), secukinumab ($5,675), guselkumab ($5,784), ixekizumab ($5,900), adalimumab ($5,943), ustekinumab ($6,131), etanercept ($6,618), and certolizumab pegol ($13,476). CONCLUSION: Tildrakizumab was among the most cost-effective first-line treatments for moderate-to-severe psoriasis and was more cost-effective than risankizumab, secukinumab, guselkumab, ixekizumab, adalimumab, ustekinumab, etanercept, and certolizumab pegol.

Assessing the Quality and Coherence of Network Meta-Analyses of Biologics in Plaque Psoriasis: What Does All This Evidence Synthesis Tell Us?

INTRODUCTION: A range of treatments are available for moderate-to-severe psoriasis; however, there remains a paucity of direct comparisons of these in head-to-head trials. Network meta-analyses (NMA) allow comparisons of these to support clinical decision making. This systematic literature review assesses the methodological quality of NMAs available for moderate-to-severe psoriasis and compares their methods and results. Their validity and applicability for current practice is also assessed. METHODS: A systematic review of published NMAs of at least two biologics for moderate-to-severe psoriasis was undertaken. Embase, MEDLINE, MEDLINE In-Process, and the Cochrane Library were last searched on 19 February 2020. The quality of NMAs was assessed using the International Society of Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research (ISPOR) criteria. NMA methodology, funding, and results were compared and differences in results explored. RESULTS: Twenty-five analyses evaluating up to 19 different treatments at 8-24 weeks, and two analyses at 1 year, were included. Psoriasis Area Severity Index (PASI) response was assessed in 23, facilitating comparisons between NMAs. All NMAs met at least half of the ISPOR criteria. The major limitations were explaining the rationale for methodology, exploring effect modifiers, and consistency between direct and indirect estimates. The analyses differed in model type (Bayesian or frequentist), analysis of PASI response (binomial or multinomial), and analysis of different treatment doses (separate or pooled). PASI results were broadly similar, except for the Cochrane Collaboration NMA which provided lower estimates of treatment efficacy versus placebo. This analysis differed methodologically from others, including pooling data for different doses. CONCLUSIONS: Based on PASI 90 at induction, the majority of recent NMAs came to similar conclusions: interleukin (IL) 17 inhibitors (brodalumab, ixekizumab, secukinumab), IL-23 inhibitors (guselkumab and risankizumab) and infliximab were most efficacious, supporting the validity of NMAs in this clinical area. Decisions should be made using high-quality, up-to-date NMAs with assumptions relevant to clinical practice.

Real-world treatment patterns and healthcare costs of biologics and apremilast among patients with moderate-to-severe plaque psoriasis by metabolic condition status.

OBJECTIVES: To compare treatment patterns and costs among psoriasis patients with and without metabolic conditions newly initiating a biologic or apremilast. METHODS: Adult patients included had ≥1 prescription for secukinumab, adalimumab, ustekinumab, etanercept, or apremilast between 01/01/2015 and 08/31/2018 (date of first prescription was index date) and no index drug use in the 12-months pre-index, and continuous enrollment in the 12-month pre-index and 24-month post-index periods. Patients were divided into mutually exclusive treatment cohorts and stratified by their pre-index metabolic condition status. Treatment patterns (adherence, non-persistence, switching, discontinuation, use of combination therapy, and re-initiation) and healthcare costs were compared. RESULTS: Overall, 7773 patients were included; 47.5-56.7% had a metabolic condition. Except for the apremilast group, patients with metabolic conditions had higher discontinuation (secukinumab: 50.6% vs. 43.7%; adalimumab*: 53.9% vs. 48.7%; ustekinumab*: 41.9% vs. 35.1%; etanercept: 42.8% vs. 41.2%; apremilast: 43.1% vs. 46.1%) and switching (secukinumab: 48.1% vs. 41.2%; adalimumab*: 47.8% vs. 41.9%; ustekinumab*: 34.5% vs. 25.3%; etanercept*: 53.6% vs. 51.5%; apremilast: 45.8% vs. 44.6%) than patients without (*p < .05). Patients with metabolic conditions incurred significantly higher costs. CONCLUSION: Many psoriasis patients initiating biologics or apremilast had metabolic conditions. These patients had higher discontinuation and switching, and significantly higher healthcare costs.

How Frequently Is Asthma Objectively Demonstrated before Starting a Biologic? Quality Assessment of a Group Practice of Allergists and Immunologists.

Worldwide, asthma-related healthcare cost remains a major burden. Individuals with severe asthma account for 50% of that cost. Although they are expensive, biologics such as anti-IL5 and anti-IgE agents promise cost-effectiveness when judiciously used to decrease asthma-related hospitalization and the debilitating side effects of systemic corticosteroids. Before considering biologics to treat patients with asthma, current guidelines recommend confirmation of asthma and control of comorbid diseases. Diagnostic confirmation of asthma can be challenging among individuals with severe asthma. In this quality assessment study, we determined the frequency of objective asthma confirmation and addressing of comorbidities prior to starting biologics at a group practice of allergists and immunologists. We surveyed our specialty providers to understand habit(s) leading to the observed results. We identified 40 adult patients who started on biologic modifiers for asthma over the past 5 years. Only 58% of these patients had a proper diagnosis of asthma. Providers underutilized several diagnostic methods that may prove useful in confirming asthma diagnosis in this patient population. The factors contributing to poor asthma control were rarely addressed. A sense of urgency to initiate biologics was the primary reason for the observed results. Further interventions are needed to improve asthma diagnosis and management prior to the initiation of biologic therapeutics.

Adjunctive Use of Calcipotriene/Betamethasone Dipropionate Foam in a Real-World Setting Curtails the Cost of Biologics Without Reducing Efficacy in Psoriasis.

INTRODUCTION: Although the efficacy of monotherapy with biologics for psoriasis is well established, many patients fail to achieve complete plaque clearance from their initial biologic treatment alone. Adjunctive treatment with topical calcipotriene plus betamethasone dipropionate (Cal/BD) foam may offer substantial clinical benefit and potential cost savings. METHODS: We conducted a 16-week, open-label, single-arm study of adjunctive therapy with Cal/BD foam in subjects who had been treated with etanercept or adalimumab for ≥ 24 weeks but had not obtained a satisfactory treatment response. Assessments included affected body surface area (BSA), Physician's Global Assessment (PGA) of disease severity, BSA × PGA, National Psoriasis Foundation (NPF) Treat to Target status, and likelihood of the physician to switch biologics. In parallel, a cost analysis was performed to compare the cost of switching to a different biologic versus adding Cal/BD foam to the original biologic. RESULTS: Four weeks of daily adjunctive treatment with Cal/BD foam led to notable reductions in BSA, PGA, and BSA × PGA relative to baseline. Additionally, by week 4, > 75% of subjects achieved NPF Treat to Target status, and the likelihood of the investigator to switch biologics decreased from 90.0% at baseline to 7.1%. The improved efficacy was maintained throughout the additional 12 weeks of maintenance Cal/BD foam application. The pharmacoeconomic evaluation demonstrated that adjuvant use of Cal/BD foam led to cost savings compared with switching biologic treatments. LIMITATIONS: Due to the nature of the open-label study lacking a vehicle-treated control, no statistical comparison can be made. CONCLUSIONS: The results of this study demonstrate that the addition of Cal/BD foam to plaque psoriasis patients who still have significant disease activity despite being on stable biologic therapy improves treatment outcomes to the point where switching to a more expensive biologic therapy is a less suitable treatment option.