The occurrence of multiple treatment switches in axial spondyloarthritis. Results from five Nordic rheumatology registries.

OBJECTIVES: In axial spondyloarthritis (axSpA), switching between multiple biologic or targeted synthetic (b/ts-) DMARDs might indicate difficult-to-treat disease. We aimed to explore the occurrence of multiple switching in routine care axSpA patients using various definitions, and to identify associated clinical characteristics upon start of first b/tsDMARD (baseline). METHODS: Observational cohort study including patients with axSpA starting a first-ever b/tsDMARD 2009-2018 based on data from five biologic registries (Denmark/Sweden/Finland/Norway/Iceland). Comorbidities and extra-articular manifestations were identified through linkage to national registries. Multi-switching was defined in overlapping categories according to b/tsDMARD treatment history: treatment with ≥3, ≥4 or ≥5 b/tsDMARDs during follow-up. We explored the cumulative incidence of patients becoming multi-switchers with ≥3 b/tsDMARDs stratified by calendar-period (2009-2011, 2012-2013, 2014-2015, 2016-2018). In the subgroup of patients starting a first b/tsDMARD 2009-2015, baseline characteristics associated with multi-switching (within 3 years' follow-up) were explored using multiple logistic regression analyses. RESULTS: Among 8398 patients included, 6056 patients (63% male, median age 42 years) started a first b/tsDMARD in 2009-2015, whereof proportions treated with ≥3, ≥4 or ≥5 b/tsDMARDs within 3 years' follow-up were 8%, 3% and 1%, respectively. Calendar-period did not affect the cumulative incidence of multi-switching. Baseline characteristics associated with multi-switching (≥3 b/tsDMARDs) were female gender, shorter disease duration, higher patient global score, comorbidities and having psoriasis but not uveitis. CONCLUSION: In this large Nordic observational cohort of axSpA patients, multiple switching was frequent with no apparent time-trend. Clinical associated factors included gender, but also previous comorbidities and extra-articular manifestations illustrating the ongoing challenge of treating this patient group.

Risk of solid cancers overall and by subtypes in patients with psoriatic arthritis treated with TNF inhibitors - a Nordic cohort study.

OBJECTIVES: To investigate whether TNF inhibitors (TNFi) are associated with increased risk of solid cancer in patients with psoriatic arthritis (PsA). METHODS: From the Nordic clinical rheumatology registers (CRR) here: SRQ/ARTIS (Sweden), DANBIO (Denmark), NOR-DMARD (Norway), ROB-FIN (Finland) and ICEBIO (Iceland) we identified PsA patients who started a first TNFi 2001-2017 (n = 9655). We identified patients with PsA not treated with biologics from (i) the CRR (n = 14 809) and (ii) the national patient registers (PR, n = 31 350). By linkage to the national cancer registers, we collected information on incident solid cancer overall and for eight cancer types. We used Cox regression to estimate hazard ratio (HR) with 95% CI of cancer (per country and pooled) in TNFi-exposed vs biologics-naïve, adjusting for age, sex, calendar period, comorbidities and disease activity. We also assessed standardized incidence ratios (SIR) in TNFi-exposed PsA vs the general population (GP). RESULTS: We identified 296 solid cancers among the TNFi-exposed PsA patients (55 850 person-years); the pooled adjusted HR for solid cancer overall was 1.0 (0.9-1.2) for TNFi-exposed vs biologics-naïve PsA from the CRR, and 0.8 (0.7-1.0) vs biologics-naïve PsA from the PRs. There were no significantly increased risks for any of the cancer types under study. The pooled SIR of solid cancer overall in TNFi treated PsA vs GP was 1.0 (0.9-1.1). CONCLUSION: In this large cohort study from five Nordic countries, we found no increased risk of solid cancer in TNFi-treated PsA patients, neither for solid cancer overall nor for eight common cancer types.

Inflammatory hallmarks of lesser prominence in psoriatic arthritis patients starting biologics: a Nordic population-based cohort study.

OBJECTIVES: To assess secular trends in baseline characteristics of PsA patients initiating their first or subsequent biologic DMARD (bDMARD) therapy and to explore prescription patterns and treatment rates of bDMARDs from 2006 to 2017 in the Nordic countries. METHODS: PsA patients registered in the Nordic rheumatology registries initiating any treatment with bDMARDs were identified. The bDMARDs were grouped as original TNF inhibitor [TNFi; adalimumab (ADA), etanercept (ETN) and infliximab (IFX)]; certolizumab pegol (CZP) and golimumab (GOL); biosimilars and ustekinumab, based on the date of release. Baseline characteristics were compared for the five countries, supplemented by secular trends with R2 calculations and point prevalence of bDMARD treatment. RESULTS: A total of 18 089 patients were identified (Denmark, 4361; Iceland, 449; Norway, 1948; Finland, 1069; Sweden, 10 262). A total of 54% of the patients were female, 34.3% of patients initiated an original TNFi, 8% CZP and GOL, 7.5% biosimilars and 0.3% ustekinumab as a first-line bDMARD. Subsequent bDMARDs were 25.2% original TNFi, 9% CZP and GOL, 12% biosimilars and 2.1% ustekinumab. From 2015 through 2017 there was a rapid uptake of biosimilars. The total of first-line bDMARD initiators with lower disease activity increased from 2006 to 2017, where an R2 close to 1 showed a strong association. CONCLUSION: Across the Nordic countries, the number of prescribed bDMARDs increased from 2006 to 2017, indicating a previously unmet need for bDMARDs in the PsA population. In recent years, PsA patients have initiated bDMARDs with lower disease activity compared with previous years, suggesting that bDMARDs are initiated in patients with a less active inflammatory phenotype.

Efficacy and effectiveness of tumour necrosis factor inhibitors in the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis in randomized controlled trials and routine clinical practice.

Objective: Efficacy of TNF inhibitors in the treatment of RA assessed in randomized controlled trials (RCTs) may not be fully comparable to routine care owing to the stringent inclusion criteria. The objective of this study was to observe the effectiveness of TNF inhibitors in real-world patients and assess the patients' potential eligibility for the RCTs. Methods: RA patients starting a TNF-inhibitor treatment between 2004 and 2014 were identified from the National Register for Biologic Treatment in Finland, which is a longitudinal observational cohort study. Effectiveness was measured using the ACR and EULAR response criteria and by studying the proportion of patients reaching DAS28 remission. The patients' baseline characteristics were compared against the inclusion criteria of 27 RCTs. Results: EULAR moderate and good treatment responses at 6 months were achieved by 69 and 40% of the users of the first TNF inhibitor, respectively. ACR20, ACR50 and ACR70 responses were reached by 48, 27 and 13%, respectively. DAS28 remission was reached by 47%. Only 7.6-44% of the patients would have been potentially eligible for the RCTs. The eligible patients had better treatment responses compared with the non-eligible patients. Different TNF inhibitors were mostly equipotent, but the usage of MTX co-therapy had a major influence on treatment response. Conclusion: Only a small proportion of patients would have been eligible for RCTs, and the efficacy of TNF inhibitors assessed in them cannot be generalized directly into Finnish routine health care.

Cost-effectiveness of biologic compared with conventional synthetic disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs in patients with rheumatoid arthritis: a Register study.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to explore the cost-effectiveness of biological DMARDs (bDMARDs) compared with conventional synthetic DMARDs (csDMARDs) for RA using real-world data from Finnish registers. METHODS: RA patients starting their first bDMARD and comparator patients using csDMARDs during 2007-11 were obtained from the National register of biologic treatments in Finland and the Jyväskylä Central Hospital patient records. Propensity score matching was applied to adjust for differences between bDMARD and csDMARD users. Effectiveness was measured in quality-adjusted life years (QALY) and based on the register of biologic treatments in Finland and Jyväskylä Central Hospital patient records, whereas the direct costs were obtained from relevant Finnish national registers. Patients were followed up for 2 years, and both costs and effectiveness for the second year were discounted at 3%. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) with 95% CI was calculated based on bootstrapped mean costs and effectiveness. RESULTS: Of 1581 RA patients meeting study inclusion criteria, 552 bDMARD and 220 csDMARD users were included in analyses after matching. Mean costs for bDMARDs and csDMARDs were €55 371 and €24 879, while mean effectiveness was 1.23 and 1.20 QALYs, respectively. Consequent ICER was €902 210/QALY. Results were confirmed in sensitivity analyses. CONCLUSION: The high incremental cost and the small, non-significant difference in effectiveness resulted in high ICER, suggesting that bDMARDs are not cost-effective. Regardless of matching, latent confounders may introduce bias to the results.

A survey on the medication adherence to methotrexate among rheumatoid arthritis patients treated with self-administered biologic drugs.

OBJECTIVES: Methotrexate (MTX) is the most widely used co-therapy among rheumatoid arthritis (RA) patients using biological disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs (bDMARDs). However, adherence to MTX treatment remains a concern with estimates of adherence ranging from 59 to 63%. The objective of this study was to assess the self-reported use and adherence to MTX among RA patients treated with self-administered bDMARDs. METHODS: An electronic questionnaire survey was conducted in 68 community pharmacies in Finland. To be included in the present study patients had to be at least 18 years old, be currently using a self-administered bDMARD and be diagnosed with RA. The results are presented as medians with their respective interquartile ranges (IQR) or percentages. RESULTS: Of the 158 pharmacy customers asked to participate, 135 (85%) consented to complete the questionnaire. The included respondents were predominantly female (72%) with a median age of 55 (IQR 44-65) and rheumatic activity of 3 out of 10 (IQR 2-6.5). The majority (91%) of the included respondents were using TNF-inhibitors and 27% of all patients were on biologic monotherapy. MTX was currently used by 45% of the respondents while 50% were past users. Of the current MTX users, 6.8% identified themselves moderately non-adherent to the treatment. MTX-related adverse events were important factors associated with nonadherence and discontinuation of the treatment. CONCLUSIONS: Only 45% of the respondents were currently using MTX co-therapy, but the ones who did were adherent to their treatment. Self-reported adherence may however be subject to social desirability bias and recall bias.

The EULAR Study Group for Registers and Observational Drug Studies: comparability of the patient case mix in the European biologic disease modifying anti-rheumatic drug registers.

OBJECTIVE: Under the auspices of the European League Against Rheumatism (EULAR), a study group of investigators representing European biologic DMARD (bDMARD) registers was convened. The purpose of this initial assessment was to collect and compare a cross section of patient characteristics and collate information on the availability of potential confounders within these registers. METHODS: Baseline characteristics of patients starting their first bDMARD in an arbitrary year (2008) for the treatment of RA, including demographic and disease characteristics, bDMARD drug details and co-morbidities, were collected and compared across 14 European bDMARD registers. RESULTS: A total of 5320 patients were included. Half the registers had restricted recruitment to certain bDMARDs during the study year. All registers` collected data on age, gender, disease duration, seropositivity for IgM-RF and 28-joint DAS (DAS28). The mean DAS28 ranged from 4.2 to 6.6 and the mean HAQ from 0.8 to 1.9. Current smoking ranged from 9% to 34%. Nine registers reported co-morbidities with varying prevalence. CONCLUSION: In addition to demonstrating European-wide collaboration across rheumatology bDMARD registers, this assessment identified differences in prescribing patterns, recruitment strategies and data items collected. These differences need to be considered when applying strategies for combined analysis. The lack of a common data model across Europe calls for further work to harmonize data collection across registers.

Impact of TNF inhibitor medication on working ability in axial spondyloarthritis: an observational national registry-based cohort study.

Objective: The aim was to investigate the effect of TNF inhibitor (TNFi) initiation on working ability and health-care resource utilization among axial SpA patients in a real-life setting. Methods: Patients with a clinical diagnosis of non-radiographic (nr-axSpA) or radiographic axial SpA initiating their first TNFi were identified from the National Register for Antirheumatic and Biologic Treatment in Finland. Sickness absences, including sick leave and disability pension, in- and outpatient days and rehabilitation rates, 1 year before and after initiating the medication were retrieved from national registries. Factors affecting result variables were studied using multivariate regression analysis. Results: Overall, 787 patients were identified. Rates of work disability days per year were 55.6 the year before treatment onset and 55.2 the year after, with significant differences between patient subgroups. The rate of sick leave decreased after starting TNFi treatment. However, the rate of disability pension continued to rise. Patients with a diagnosis of nr-axSpA experienced a decrease in overall work disability and, especially, fewer sick leaves. No sex differences were detected. Conclusion: TNFi interrupts the increase in work disabled days evident during the year before its initiation. However, the overall work disability remains high. Treating patients earlier in the nr-axSpA phase, regardless of sex, appears important in maintaining the ability to work.

Exposure to specific tumour necrosis factor inhibitors and risk of demyelinating and inflammatory neuropathy in cohorts of patients with inflammatory arthritis: a collaborative observational study across five Nordic rheumatology registers.

OBJECTIVE: To compare incidences of neuroinflammatory events, including demyelinating disease (DML), inflammatory polyneuropathies (IPN) and multiple sclerosis (MS), in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) or spondyloarthritis (SpA; including psoriatic arthritis) starting a tumour necrosis factor inhibitor (TNFi), investigating whether monoclonal TNFi antibodies (other TNFis (oTNFis)) confer higher risk than etanercept. METHODS: This is an observational cohort study including patients from the five Nordic countries starting a TNFi in 2001-2020. Time to first neuroinflammatory event was identified through register linkages. We calculated crude incidence rates (cIR) per 1000 person-years and used multivariable-adjusted Cox regression to compare incidences of neuroinflammatory events overall and for DML, IPN and MS with oTNFi versus etanercept. We further examined individual TNFis and indications. RESULTS: 33 883 patients with RA and 28 772 patients with SpA were included, initiating 52 704 and 46 572 treatment courses, respectively. In RA, we observed 135 neuroinflammatory events (65% DML) with cIR of 0.38 with oTNFi and 0.34 with etanercept. The HR of oTNFi versus etanercept was 1.07 (95% CI 0.74 to 1.54) for any neuroinflammatory event, 0.79 (95% CI 0.51 to 1.22) for DML, 2.20 (95% CI 1.05 to 4.63) for IPN and 0.73 (95% CI 0.34 to 1.56) for MS. In SpA, we observed 179 events (78% DML) with cIR of 0.68 with oTNFi and 0.65 with etanercept. The HR for any neuroinflammatory event, DML, IPN and MS was 1.06 (95% CI 0.75 to 1.50), 1.01 (95% CI 0.68 to 1.50), 1.28 (95% CI 0.61 to 2.69) and 0.94 (95% CI0.53 to 1.69), respectively. CONCLUSION: The cIRs of neuroinflammatory events are higher in SpA than in RA, but the choice of specific TNFi does not seem to play an important role in the risk of neuroinflammatory events.

Haematological malignancies in patients with psoriatic arthritis overall and treated with TNF inhibitors: a Nordic cohort study.

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the risk of haematological malignancies in patients with psoriatic arthritis (PsA) overall, and in relation to treatment with tumour necrosis factor inhibitors (TNFi). METHODS: We identified that patients with PsA starting a first TNFi from the clinical rheumatology registers (CRR) in the five Nordic countries (n=10 621) and biologics-naïve PsA patients from (1) the CRR (n=18 705) and (2) the national patient registers (NPR, n=27 286, Sweden and Denmark) from 2006 through 2019. For Sweden and Denmark, general population comparators were matched 5:1 to PsA patients on birth year, year at start of follow-up and sex. By linkage to the national cancer registers in all countries, we collected information on haematological malignancies overall, and categorised into lymphoid or myeloid types. We estimated incidence rate ratios (IRRs) with 95% CIs using modified Poisson regression for TNFi-treated versus biologics-naïve PsA patients and versus the general population adjusted for age, sex, calendar period and country. RESULTS: During 59 827 person-years, 40 haematological malignancies occurred among TNFi-treated patients with PsA resulting in a pooled IRR of 0.96 (0.68-1.35) versus biologics-naïve PsA from CRR and an IRR of 0.84 (0.64-1.10) versus biologics-naïve PsA from NPR. The IRR of haematological malignancies in PsA overall versus general population comparators was 1.35 (1.17-1.55). The estimates were largely similar for lymphoid and myeloid malignancies. CONCLUSIONS: Treatment with TNFi in patients with PsA was not associated with an increased incidence of haematological malignancies. Conversely, a moderately increased underlying risk was seen in patients with PsA compared with the general population.

One-Year Treatment Outcomes of Secukinumab Versus Tumor Necrosis Factor Inhibitors in Spondyloarthritis: Results From Five Nordic Biologic Registries Including More Than 10,000 Treatment Courses.

OBJECTIVE: To describe baseline characteristics and to compare treatment effectiveness of secukinumab versus tumor necrosis factor inhibitors (TNFi) in patients with spondyloarthritis (SpA) using adalimumab as the main comparator. METHODS: This was an observational, prospective cohort study. Patients with SpA (clinical ankylosing spondylitis, nonradiographic axial SpA, or undifferentiated SpA) starting secukinumab or a TNFi during 2015-2018 were identified from 5 Nordic clinical rheumatology registries. Data on comorbidities and extraarticular manifestations (psoriasis, uveitis, and inflammatory bowel disease) were captured from national registries (data available in 94% of patients) and included in multivariable analyses. We assessed 1-year treatment retention (crude survival curves, adjusted hazard ratios [HRadj ] for treatment discontinuation) and 6-month response rates (Ankylosing Spondylitis Disease Activity Score [ASDAS] score <2.1, Bath Ankylosing Spondylitis Disease Activity Index [BASDAI] <40 mm, crude/LUNDEX-adjusted, adjusted logistic regression analyses with odds ratios [ORs]) stratified by line of biologic treatment (first, second, and third plus). RESULTS: In total, 10,853 treatment courses (842 secukinumab and 10,011 TNFi, of which 1,977 were adalimumab) were included. The proportions of patients treated with secukinumab during the first, second, and third-plus lines of treatment were 1%, 6%, and 22%, respectively). Extraarticular manifestations varied across treatments, while other baseline characteristics were largely similar. Secukinumab had a 1-year retention comparable to adalimumab as a first or second line of treatment but poorer as a third-plus line of therapy (secukinumab 56% [95% confidence interval (95% CI) 51-61%] versus adalimumab 70% [95% CI 64-75%]; HRadj 1.43 [95% CI 1.12-1.81]). Across treatment lines, secukinumab had poorer estimates for 6-month response rates than adalimumab, statistically significantly only for the third-plus line (adjusted analyses: ASDAS score <2.1 OR 0.56 [95% CI 0.35-0.90]; BASDAI <40 mm OR 0.62 [95% CI 0.41-0.95]). Treatment outcomes varied across the 5 TNFi. CONCLUSION: Secukinumab was mainly used in biologics-experienced patients with SpA. Secukinumab and adalimumab performed similarly in patients who had failed a first biologic, although with increasing prior biologic exposure, adalimumab was superior.

Effectiveness of a Second Biologic After Failure of a Non-tumor Necrosis Factor Inhibitor As First Biologic in Rheumatoid Arthritis.

OBJECTIVE: In rheumatoid arthritis (RA), evidence regarding the effectiveness of a second biologic disease-modifying antirheumatic drug (bDMARD) in patients whose first-ever bDMARD was a non-tumor necrosis factor inhibitor (TNFi) bDMARD is limited. The objective of this study was therefore to assess the outcome of a second bDMARD (non-TNFi: rituximab [RTX], abatacept [ABA], or tocilizumab [TCZ], separately; and TNFi) after failure of a non-TNFi bDMARD as first bDMARD. METHODS: We identified patients with RA from the 5 Nordic biologics registers who started treatment with a non-TNFi as first-ever bDMARD but switched to a second bDMARD. For the second bDMARD, we assessed drug survival (at 6 and 12 months) and primary response (at 6 months). RESULTS: We included 620 patients starting a second bDMARD (ABA 86, RTX 40, TCZ 67, and TNFi 427) following failure of a first non-TNFi bDMARD. At 6 and 12 months after start of their second bDMARD, approximately 70% and 60%, respectively, remained on treatment, and at 6 months, less than one-third of patients were still on their second bDMARD and had reached low disease activity or remission according to the Disease Activity Score in 28 joints. For those patients whose second bMDARD was a TNFi, the corresponding proportion was slightly higher (40%). CONCLUSION: The drug survival and primary response of a second bDMARD in patients with RA switching due to failure of a non-TNFi bDMARD as first bDMARD is modest. Some patients may benefit from TNFi when used after failure of a non-TNFi as first bDMARD.

[Biological therapy in rheumatoid arthritis based on ten years of registry surveillance in Finland]. / Biologiset reumalääkkeet--käytännön kokemukset rekisteritulosten valossa.

Biological drugs are used in the treatment of active inflammatory athritides refractory to conventional treatment. Data from the Finnish registry of biological treatment (ROB-FIN) indicates that the effectiveness of the biologicals in clinical practice corresponds to or even excels that of randomized controlled clinical trials, and seems to endure in patients continuing treatment. About one-fifth of rheumatoid arthritis patients discontinue treatment due to lack of effectiveness, and one-tenth due to adverse events. Serious adverse events were seen in 2.5% of all patients. In the future electronic follow-up, pharmacogenetics, and biomarker research may help to better optimize treatment individually.

Cost-effectiveness of abatacept, tocilizumab and TNF-inhibitors compared with rituximab as second-line biologic drug in rheumatoid arthritis.

OBJECTIVES: The objective of this study was to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of abatacept, tocilizumab, and tumor necrosis factor (TNF) inhibitors as compared with rituximab in Finnish rheumatoid arthritis patients, who have previously been treated with TNF inhibitors. METHODS: A patient-level simulation model was developed to predict costs and outcomes associated with four biological drugs (abatacept, tocilizumab, rituximab and TNF inhibitors) in the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis. Following lack of efficacy or adverse events, the patients were switched to another biological drug until all four options were exhausted. After that, the patients were assumed to receive a 6th line treatment until death. The patients' baseline characteristics and regression models used in the simulation were based on observational data from the National Register for Biological Treatments in Finland. Direct costs comprised drug costs, administration costs, costs of switching, and outpatient and inpatient care, while indirect costs included disability pension and sick leaves due to rheumatoid arthritis. Several subgroup and deterministic sensitivity analyses were conducted. RESULTS: Drug costs were the lowest for rituximab, but when administration costs and costs of switching were included, drug costs were the lowest for TNF inhibitors. Abatacept was associated with the highest drug costs, whereas rituximab was associated with the highest healthcare costs. In total, TNF inhibitors had the lowest direct costs, while rituximab had the highest direct costs. The amount of quality-adjusted life years (QALY) gained ranged from 9.405 for rituximab to 9.661 for TNF inhibitors. TNF inhibitors, abatacept, and tocilizumab were dominant in comparison to RTX. CONCLUSIONS: TNF inhibitors, abatacept, and tocilizumab had lower costs and higher QALYs than rituximab, and therefore, they were dominant in comparison to rituximab. As TNF inhibitors had the lowest costs and highest QALYs, they were the most cost-effective treatment option.

Treatment retention of infliximab and etanercept originators versus their corresponding biosimilars: Nordic collaborative observational study of 2334 biologics naïve patients with spondyloarthritis.

Objective: Although clinical trials support equivalence of originator products and biosimilars for etanercept and infliximab, real-world studies among biologics-naïve patients with spondyloarthritis (SpA) are lacking. The objectives were to compare treatment retention in biologics-naïve patients with SpA starting either the originator product or a biosimilar of infliximab and etanercept, and to explore the baseline characteristics of these patients. Methods: Patients with SpA (ankylosing spondylitis/non-radiographical axial SpA/undifferentiated SpA), starting infliximab or etanercept as their first-ever biological disease-modifying antirheumatic drug during January 2014-June 2017 were identified in five Nordic biologics-rheumatology registers. Baseline characteristics were retrieved from each registry; comorbidity data were identified through linkage to national health registers. Country-specific data were pooled, and data on infliximab and etanercept were analysed separately. Comparisons of treatment retention between originators and biosimilars were assessed through survival probability curves, retention rates (2 years for infliximab/1 year for etanercept) and Hazard Ratios (HR). Results: We included 1319 patients starting infliximab (24% originator/76% biosimilar), and 1015 patients starting etanercept (49% originator/51% biosimilar). Baseline characteristics were largely similar for the patients treated with the originators compared with the corresponding biosimilars. Survival probability curves were highly similar for the originator and its biosimilar, as were retention rates: infliximab 2-year retention originator, 44% (95% CI 38% to 50%)/biosimilar, 46% (95% CI: 42% to 51%); and etanercept 1-year retention originator, 66% (95% CI 61% to 70%)/biosimilar, 73% (95% CI 68% to 78%). HRs were not statistically significant. Conclusion: This observational study of biologics-naïve patients with SpA from five Nordic countries showed similar baseline characteristics and very similar retention rates in patients treated with originators versus biosimilars, for both infliximab and etanercept, indicating comparable effectiveness in clinical practice.

Opportunities and challenges for real-world studies on chronic inflammatory joint diseases through data enrichment and collaboration between national registers: the Nordic example.

There are increasing needs for detailed real-world data on rheumatic diseases and their treatments. Clinical register data are essential sources of information that can be enriched through linkage to additional data sources such as national health data registers. Detailed analyses call for international collaborative observational research to increase the number of patients and the statistical power. Such linkages and collaborations come with legal, logistic and methodological challenges. In collaboration between registers of inflammatory arthritides in Sweden, Denmark, Norway, Finland and Iceland, we plan to enrich, harmonise and standardise individual data repositories to investigate analytical approaches to multisource data, to assess the viability of different logistical approaches to data protection and sharing and to perform collaborative studies on treatment effectiveness, safety and health-economic outcomes. This narrative review summarises the needs and potentials and the challenges that remain to be overcome in order to enable large-scale international collaborative research based on clinical and other types of data.

Effectiveness and drug survival of TNF-inhibitors in the treatment of psoriatic arthritis: A prospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Tumor necrosis factor (TNF)-inhibitors are used to treat psoriatic arthritis (PsA), but only a limited number of observational studies on this subject have been published thus far. The aim of this research was to analyze the effectiveness and drug survival of TNF-inhibitors in the treatment of PsA. METHODS: PsA patients identified from the National Register for Biologic Treatment in Finland (ROB-FIN) starting their first, second, or third TNF-inhibitor treatment between 2004 and 2014 were included. Effectiveness was measured using ACR and EULAR response criteria and modeled using ordinal logistic regression. Treatment persistence was analyzed using Kaplan-Meier survival analysis and Cox proportional hazards model. RESULTS: The study comprised 765 patients and 990 TNF-inhibitor treatment courses. EULAR moderate treatment responses at 6 months were achieved by 68% and 37% of the users of the first and the second or the third biologic, respectively. The probabilities of discontinuing the treatment within 12 and 24 months were 20% and 28%, respectively. Adjusted treatment responses to all TNF-inhibitors were similar; however, co-therapy with conventional synthetic disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs (csDMARDs) was not associated with better effectiveness. Adalimumab [hazard ratio (HR) = 0.62; 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.44-0.88] was superior to infliximab in drug survival while etanercept (HR = 0.77, 95% CI: 0.55-1.1) and golimumab (HR = 0.75, 95% CI: 0.46-1.2) did not differ from it. Co-medication with csDMARDs did not statistically improve drug survival. CONCLUSION: All available TNF-inhibitors showed similar treatment responses with or without csDMARDs. Adalimumab was associated with better drug survival when compared to infliximab.

The cost-effectiveness of biologics for the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis: a systematic review.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Economic evaluations provide information to aid the optimal utilization of limited healthcare resources. Costs of biologics for Rheumatoid arthritis (RA) are remarkably high, which makes these agents an important target for economic evaluations. This systematic review aims to identify existing studies examining the cost-effectiveness of biologics for RA, assess their quality and report their results systematically. METHODS: A literature search covering Medline, Scopus, Cochrane library, ACP Journal club and Web of Science was performed in March 2013. The cost-utility analyses (CUAs) of one or more available biological drugs for the treatment of RA in adults were included. Two independent investigators systematically collected information and assessed the quality of the studies. To enable the comparison of the results, all costs were converted to 2013 euro. RESULTS: Of the 4890 references found in the literature search, 41 CUAs were included in the current systematic review. While considering only direct costs, the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of the tumor necrosis factor inhibitors (TNFi) ranged from 39,000 to 1,273,000 €/quality adjusted life year (QALY) gained in comparison to conventional disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (cDMARDs) in cDMARD naïve patients. Among patients with an insufficient response to cDMARDs, biologics were associated with ICERs ranging from 12,000 to 708,000 €/QALY. Rituximab was found to be the most cost-effective alternative compared to other biologics among the patients with an insufficient response to TNFi. CONCLUSIONS: When 35,000 €/QALY is considered as a threshold for the ICER, TNFis do not seem to be cost-effective among cDMARD naïve patients and patients with an insufficient response to cDMARDs. With thresholds of 50,000 to 100,000 €/QALY biologics might be cost-effective among patients with an inadequate response to cDMARDs. Standardization of multiattribute utility instruments and a validated standard conversion method for missing utility measures would enable better comparison between CUAs.

Effectiveness and Drug Survival of TNF Inhibitors in the Treatment of Ankylosing Spondylitis: A Prospective Cohort Study.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this research was to describe the effectiveness and drug survival of tumor necrosis factor (TNF) inhibitors in the treatment of ankylosing spondylitis (AS) and to analyze the effect of concomitant treatment with conventional disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs. METHODS: Patients with AS identified from the National Register for Biologic Treatment in Finland starting their first TNF inhibitor treatment between July 2004 and December 2011 were included. Treatment response was measured as an improvement of 50% (or 20 mm) after 6 months of treatment onset compared to the baseline Bath AS Disease Activity Index (BASDAI) score. Treatment response and 2-year drug survival were modeled with logistic regression and time-dependent Cox proportional hazard models, respectively. RESULTS: The study comprised 543 patients, of whom 123 also commenced a second TNF inhibitor during the followup. Treatment was discontinued within 24 months by 25% and 28% of the users of the first and the second TNF inhibitors, respectively. BASDAI response at 6 months was achieved by 52% and 25% of the users of the first and the second TNF inhibitors, respectively. Etanercept (ETN; HR 0.42, 95% CI 0.29-0.62) and adalimumab (ADA; HR 0.48, 95% CI 0.30-0.77) were associated with better drug survival in comparison to infliximab (IFX). Also, concurrent use of sulfasalazine (SSZ; HR 0.70, 95% CI 0.49-0.99) decreased the hazard for treatment discontinuation. CONCLUSION: TNF inhibitors are equipotent in the treatment of AS; however, ETN and ADA were found superior to IFX in drug survival. The use of SSZ improves treatment continuation.