Economic Burden of Switching to a Non-Tumor Necrosis Factor Inhibitor Versus a Tumor Necrosis Factor Inhibitor Biologic Therapy among Patients with Rheumatoid Arthritis.

INTRODUCTION: The objective of this study was to examine healthcare resource utilization (HRU) and costs associated with switching to another tumor necrosis factor alpha inhibitor (TNFi) therapy versus a non-TNFi therapy among patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) discontinuing use of an initial TNFi biologic therapy. METHODS: Patients with ≥2 RA diagnoses who used ≥1 TNFi on or after their initial RA diagnosis were identified in a US employer-based insurance claims database. Patients were selected based on ≥1 claim of another TNFi or a non-TNFi biologic therapy (occurring after 2010, and within 30 days before to 60 days after discontinuation of the initial TNFi), and continuous insurance ≥6 months before (baseline period) and ≥12 months after the switch date (study period). Patient demographic and clinical characteristics were measured during the baseline period. All-cause and RA-related HRU and costs were analyzed during the 12-month study period using multivariable regression analysis controlling for baseline characteristics and selected comorbidities. RESULTS: Of the 1577 patients with RA that switched therapies, 1169 patients used another TNFi and 408 patients used a non-TNFi biologic. The most commonly used initial TNFi treatments were etanercept (50%) and adalimumab (34%) among the TNFi cohort, and infliximab (39%) and etanercept (28%) among the non-TNFi cohort. The TNFi cohort had significantly fewer outpatient visits [all-cause: 23.01 vs. 29.77 visits/patient/year; adjusted incidence rate ratio (IRR) = 0.78, P < 0.001; RA-related: 7.42 vs. 13.58; adjusted IRR = 0.58, P < 0.001] and rheumatologist visits (all-cause: 4.01 vs. 6.81; adjusted IRR = 0.66, P < 0.001; RA-related: 3.23 vs. 6.40; adjusted IRR = 0.58, P < 0.001) than the non-TNFi cohort. All-cause total costs were significantly lower for patients who switched to another TNFi instead of a non-TNFi therapy ($36,932 vs. $44,566; adjusted difference = $7045, P < 0.01), as were total RA-related costs ($26,973 vs. $31,735; adjusted difference = $4904, P < 0.01). CONCLUSION: Adult patients with RA discontinuing TNFi therapy who switched to an alternative TNFi incurred lower healthcare costs than patients who switched to a non-TNFi biologic. FUNDING: AbbVie, Inc.

Economic Burden and Treatment Patterns of Cycling between Conventional Synthetic Disease-modifying Antirheumatic Drugs Among Biologic-treated Patients with Rheumatoid Arthritis.

PURPOSE: To assess the economic outcomes and treatment patterns among patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) who used 1, 2, or 3 or more conventional synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs) before receiving a biologic therapy. METHODS: Adult patients with ≥2 RA diagnoses (International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision, Clinical Modification [ICD-9-CM] codes 714.xx) on different dates, ≥1 claim for a conventional synthetic DMARD, and ≥1 claim for a biologic DMARD were identified from a large commercial claims database. The initiation date of the first biologic DMARD was defined as the index date. Based on the number of distinct conventional synthetic DMARDs initiated between the first RA diagnosis and the index date, patients were classified into 3 cohorts: those who used 1, 2, or 3 or more conventional synthetic DMARDs. Baseline characteristics were measured 6 months preindex date and compared between the 3 cohorts. All-cause health care costs (in 2014 US$) were compared during the follow-up period (12 months postbiologic initiation) using multivariable gamma models adjusting for baseline characteristics. Time to discontinuation of the index biologic DMARD and time to switching to a new DMARD were compared using multivariable Cox proportional hazards models. FINDINGS: The 1, 2, and 3 or more conventional synthetic DMARD cohorts included 6215; 3227; and 976 patients, respectively. At baseline, patients in the 3 or more conventional synthetic DMARD cohort had the least severe RA, as indicated by the lowest claims-based index for RA severity score (1 vs 2 vs 3 or more = 6.1 vs 5.9 vs 5.8). During the study period, there was a significant association between number of conventional synthetic DMARDs and higher all-cause total health care costs (adjusted mean difference, 1 vs 2: $772; P < 0.001; 2 vs 3 or more: $2390; P < 0.001). The all-cause medical and pharmacy costs were also significantly higher with the increasing number of conventional synthetic DMARDs. Patients who cycled more conventional synthetic DMARDs were also more likely to switch treatment after biologic initiation (1 vs 2: adjusted hazard ratio = 0.89; P = 0.005; 2 vs 3 or more: adjusted hazard ratio = 0.89; P = 0.087). There were no differences in index biologic discontinuation between the 3 cohorts. IMPLICATIONS: Patients with RA who cycled more conventional synthetic DMARDs had increased economic burden in the 12 months following biologic initiation and were more likely to switch therapy. These results highlight the importance of timely switching to biologic DMARDs for the treatment of RA.