The German fibromyalgia consumer reports - a cross-sectional survey.

BACKGROUND: Consumer surveys provide information on effectiveness and side effects of medical interventions in routine clinical care. A report of fibromyalgia syndrome (FMS) consumers has not been carried out in Europe. METHODS: The study was carried out from November 2010 to April 2011. Participants diagnosed with FMS rated the effectiveness and side effects of pharmacological and non-pharmacological FMS interventions on a 0 to 10 scale, with 10 being most efficacious (harmful). The questionnaire was distributed by the German League for people with Arthritis and Rheumatism and the German Fibromyalgia Association to their members and to all consecutive FMS patients of nine clinical centers of different levels of care. RESULTS: 1661 questionnaires (95% women, mean age 54 years, mean duration since FMS diagnosis 6.8 years) were analysed. The most frequently used therapies were self-management strategies, prescription pain medication and aerobic exercise. The highest average effectiveness was attributed to whole body and local warmth therapies, thermal bathes, FMS education and resting. The highest average side effects were attributed to strong opioids, local cold therapy, gamma-amino-butyric acid analogues (pregabalin and gabapentin), tramadol and opioid transdermal systems. CONCLUSION: The German fibromyalgia consumer reports highlight the importance of non-pharmcological therapies in the long-term management of FMS, and challenges the strong recommendations for drug therapies given by FMS-guidelines.

Rheumatoid arthritis.

Rheumatoid arthritis is characterised by persistent synovitis, systemic inflammation, and autoantibodies (particularly to rheumatoid factor and citrullinated peptide). 50% of the risk for development of rheumatoid arthritis is attributable to genetic factors. Smoking is the main environmental risk. In industrialised countries, rheumatoid arthritis affects 0·5-1·0% of adults, with 5-50 per 100 000 new cases annually. The disorder is most typical in women and elderly people. Uncontrolled active rheumatoid arthritis causes joint damage, disability, decreased quality of life, and cardiovascular and other comorbidities. Disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs), the key therapeutic agents, reduce synovitis and systemic inflammation and improve function. The leading DMARD is methotrexate, which can be combined with other drugs of this type. Biological agents are used when arthritis is uncontrolled or toxic effects arise with DMARDs. Tumour necrosis factor inhibitors were the first biological agents, followed by abatacept, rituximab, and tocilizumab. Infections and high costs restrict prescription of biological agents. Long-term remission induced by intensive, short-term treatment selected by biomarker profiles is the ultimate goal.

Cost-effectiveness of abatacept in patients with moderately to severely active rheumatoid arthritis and inadequate response to tumor necrosis factor-alpha antagonists.

OBJECTIVE: To assess cost-effectiveness of abatacept in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) with inadequate response to tumor necrosis factor-alpha antagonists (anti-TNF). METHODS: We developed a simulation model to depict progression of disability [in terms of Health Assessment Questionnaire Disability Index (HAQ-DI)] in women aged 55-64 years with moderately to severely active RA and inadequate response to anti-TNF. At model entry, patients were assumed to receive either oral disease modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARD) only or oral DMARD plus abatacept. Patients were then tracked from model entry until death. Future health-state utilities and medical-care costs (except study therapy) were estimated based on predicted values of the HAQ-DI. The model was estimated using data from a Phase III clinical trial of abatacept plus secondary sources. Cost-effectiveness was expressed in terms of incremental cost (2006 US$) per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) gained alternatively over 10 years and a lifetime. Future costs and health effects were discounted at 3% annually. RESULTS: Over 10 years, abatacept would yield 1.0 additional QALY (undiscounted) per patient (4.0 vs 3.0 for oral DMARD) at an incremental (discounted) cost of $45,497 (100,648 vs $55,151) respectively; over a lifetime, corresponding figures were 1.6 QALY (5.8 vs 4.2) and $64,978 ($140,714 vs $82,489). Cost-effectiveness was [mean (95% CI)] $50,576 ($47,056, $54,944) per QALY gained over 10 years, and $45,979 ($42,678, $49,932) per QALY gained over a lifetime. Findings were robust in sensitivity analyses. CONCLUSION: Abatacept is cost-effective by current standards of medical practice in patients with moderately to severely active RA and inadequate response to an anti-TNF.

Biologic treatment of rheumatoid arthritis and the risk of malignancy: analyses from a large US observational study.

OBJECTIVE: Induction of malignancy is a major concern when rheumatoid arthritis (RA) is treated with biologic therapy. A meta-analysis of RA biologic clinical trials found a general increased risk of malignancy, but this risk was not found in a large observational study. We undertook this study to assess the risk of malignancy among biologic-treated patients in a large US observational database. METHODS: We studied incident cases of cancer among 13,001 patients during approximately 49,000 patient-years of observation in the years 1998-2005. Cancer rates were compared with population rates using the US National Cancer Institute SEER (Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End-Results) database. Assessment of the risk of biologic therapy utilized conditional logistic regression to calculate odds ratios (ORs) as estimates of the relative risk, further adjusted for 6 confounders: age, sex, education level, smoking history, RA severity, and prednisone use. RESULTS: Biologic exposure was 49%. There were 623 incident cases of nonmelanotic skin cancer and 537 other cancers. The standardized incidence ratios and 95% confidence intervals (95% CIs) compared with SEER data were as follows: all cancers 1.0 (1.0-1.1), breast 0.8 (0.6-0.9), colon 0.5 (0.4-0.6), lung 1.2 (1.0-1.4), lymphoma 1.7 (1.3-2.2). Biologics were associated with an increased risk of nonmelanotic skin cancer (OR 1.5, 95% CI 1.2-1.8) and melanoma (OR 2.3, 95% CI 0.9-5.4). No other malignancy was associated with biologic use; the OR (overall risk) of any cancer was 1.0 (95% CI 0.8-1.2). CONCLUSION: Biologic therapy is associated with increased risk for skin cancers, but not for solid tumors or lymphoproliferative malignancies. These associations were consistent across different biologic therapies.