Evaluating the efficacy of biologics with and without methotrexate in the treatment of psoriatic arthritis: a network meta-analysis.

INTRODUCTION: An important consideration in the treatment of patients with psoriatic arthritis (PsA) is whether the addition of methotrexate (MTX) to biologics has greater efficacy than biologic monotherapy with respect to efficacy outcomes in these patients. OBJECTIVES: To conduct a network meta-analysis (NMA) comparing biologics by treatment class with and without MTX for treatment of adults with active PsA. METHODS: A systematic literature review (SLR) identified randomised, double-blinded, controlled trials, and a Bayesian NMA compared biologics with and without MTX by treatment class (tumour necrosis factor inhibitors (TNFi), interleukin-23 inhibitors (IL-23i) and IL-17i). Efficacy outcomes included American College of Rheumatology 20%, 50% and 70% (ACR20, ACR50 and ACR70) improvement response. RESULTS: The SLR initially identified 31 studies, of which 17 met feasibility criteria for the NMA by containing the 'without MTX' subgroup. For ACR20 efficacy (the most robust assessment examined), all active treatments were significantly better than placebo. No statistically significant differences were demonstrated between biologic monotherapy (for all classes examined) and biologics in combination with MTX for ACR20/50. IL-17i were comparable to IL-23i, and IL-17i were significantly better than TNFi for ACR20. Although limited by fewer trials, TNFi, IL-23i and IL-17i were not statistically different for ACR50/70. CONCLUSIONS: Concomitant use of MTX and biologics did not improve ACR efficacy outcomes versus biologic monotherapy. MTX does not appear to be necessary as a background therapy when biologics are used for the achievement of ACR20/50 responses in patients with PsA.

Patient-reported disease impact of systemic lupus erythematosus with active joint symptoms: Results from the systemic lupus erythematosus-update survey.

BACKGROUND: Many people with systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) experience joint pain, swelling, and stiffness. These joint symptoms are associated with problems in physical functioning and work disability. We used survey data from adults with SLE to explore the burden and impact of joint symptoms. METHODS: SLE-UPDATE was a 2019 cross-sectional US survey of adults with SLE. We compared respondents with "currently active" joint symptoms' and those "without currently active" joint symptoms. The active joint cohort comprised survey respondents who self-reported current "stiffness in joints" or "pain/swelling in joints" and who had moderate to severe joint pain (Worst Joint Pain Numeric Rating Scale [NRS] score ≥ 4). Respondents not fulfilling these criteria were included in the non-active joint cohort. Outcomes included frequency and severity of pain, patient-reported outcomes (LupusPRO™ and Work Productivity and Activity Impairment: Lupus [WPAI-Lupus]), satisfaction with current treatments, and importance of different treatment goals. RESULTS: More respondents in the active joint cohort (N = 285) than in the non-active joint cohort (N = 215) reported pain most or all the time over the preceding 7 days (77.5% vs. 32.1%, p < .0001), fibromyalgia (45% vs. 12%, p < .0001), and higher (worse) mean scores on the Worst Pain NRS (6.5 vs. 4.8, p < .0001) and Worst Joint Pain NRS (6.7 vs. 4.5, p < .0001). Mean Lupus PRO health-related quality of life (HRQoL) total score was lower (worse) in the active joint cohort (48.9 vs. 64.1, p < .0001). WPAI-Lupus scores indicated greater work productivity losses and activity impairment in the active joint cohort. More respondents in the active joint cohort than in the non-active joint cohort were neutral or not satisfied with current treatments and rated reducing pain as a "very important" treatment goal (26.7% vs. 18.1%). CONCLUSIONS: Respondents with SLE and active joint manifestations in addition to having more pain report lower HRQoL and were less satisfied with their current treatments. Comorbid fibromyalgia may play a role in joint symptoms in patient with SLE joint manifestations. There is an unmet need for new therapeutic options to reduce joint symptom burden among patients with SLE.

Identifying inadequate response among patients with ankylosing spondylitis and psoriatic arthritis prescribed advanced therapy in a real-world, commercially insured adult population in the USA.

OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to assess treatment patterns and frequency of inadequate response associated with advanced therapy initiation among patients with ankylosing spondylitis (AS) and psoriatic arthritis (PsA) in the USA. METHODS: Adult patients with AS or PsA who initiated advanced therapy were identified from the HealthCore Integrated Research Database®. Inadequate response to advanced therapies (tumour necrosis factor inhibitors [TNFi] and non-TNFi biologics) was identified using a claims-based algorithm. Factors influencing inadequate response were assessed using multivariable logistic regression. RESULTS: In total, 646 patients with AS, and 1433 patients with PsA were evaluated. Among patients with AS (mean age, 43 years; male, 58%), 93% patients initiated TNFi, and 69% of patients had inadequate response. In patients with PsA (mean age, 49 years; male, 47%), 67% initiated TNFi, and 77% had inadequate response. Low adherence was the main predictor of inadequate response in patients with AS (56%) and PsA (63%). Inadequate responders were more likely to be female (odds ratio [OR] 2.05 for AS and 1.37 for PsA). Prior exposure to TNFi was associated with 3.89- and 2.14-fold greater odds of inadequate response in both AS and PsA patients, respectively, while patients using methotrexate were less likely to have inadequate response (OR 0.48 for AS and 0.72 for PsA; all p < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Over 69% of patients with AS and 77% of patients with PsA had inadequate response to their index advanced therapy during 1 year after initiation. Health plan claims data appear useful to classify inadequate responders in AS and PsA. Key Points • Estimating inadequate response to advanced therapies and identifying factors associated with this outcome using claims data could improve treatment outcomes in AS and PsA. • In a sample of commercially insured US patients, over 69% of patients with AS and 77% of patients with PsA had inadequate response to their index advanced therapy during 1 year after initiation. Patient characteristics such as sex and prior therapy use were predictive of inadequate response to advanced therapies. • Health plan claims data appear useful to classify inadequate responders in AS and PsA and identify factors associated with this outcome.

Maintenance of Patient-Reported Outcomes in Baricitinib-Treated Patients with Moderate-to-Severe Active Rheumatoid Arthritis: Post Hoc Analyses from Two Phase 3 Trials.

INTRODUCTION: Baricitinib has been shown to improve patient-reported outcomes (PROs) in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) who are inadequate responders (IR) to conventional synthetic and biologic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (csDMARDs and bDMARDs, respectively). We assessed the ability of baricitinib 2-mg to maintain minimal clinically important differences (MCIDs) in PROs until week 24 among week 4 and 12 responders. METHODS: Data were from two phase 3 trials, RA-BUILD (NCT01721057; csDMARD-IR patients) and RA-BEACON (NCT01721044; bDMARD-IR patients). PROs included Pain Visual Analogue Scale, Health Assessment Questionnaire-Disability Index, Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy-Fatigue, Short-Form 36 Physical Component Score, and Patient's Global Assessment of Disease Activity. Outcomes were evaluated by proportions of patients achieving MCID improvements, number needed to treat (NNT) at weeks 4, 12, and 24, proportions of patients maintaining MCID responses at week 24 among week 4 or 12 responders, and median time to achieve substantial response with baricitinib 2-mg versus placebo. RESULTS: A higher proportion of baricitinib-treated patients achieved MCID improvements, with NNTs ranging from 5 to 8 for baricitinib 2-mg versus placebo at week 24. Generally, early MCID responses in PROs at weeks 4 or 12 were better maintained through week 24 in RA patients treated with baricitinib 2-mg versus placebo. Patients treated with baricitinib 2-mg also achieved substantial PRO responses or normative values more quickly than placebo. CONCLUSIONS: These results suggest baricitinib-treated patients with RA achieving MCID improvement in PROs at weeks 4 and 12 maintained those improvements over time and that substantial PRO responses were achieved quickly.

Patient Experiences, Satisfaction, and Expectations with Current Systemic Lupus Erythematosus Treatment: Results of the SLE-UPDATE Survey.

OBJECTIVES: To provide information on systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) patients' experiences, satisfaction, and expectations with treatments and examine the association between treatment satisfaction and patient-reported outcomes (PRO). METHODS: A cross-sectional, non-interventional, online survey of US adult patients with SLE was conducted in 2019. The survey consisted of 104 questions about SLE and the following PRO instruments: LupusPRO™, Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy (FACIT) Fatigue, Work Productivity and Activity Impairment (WPAI), an 11-point Worst Pain Numerical Rating scale (NRS), and an 11-point Worst Joint Pain NRS. RESULTS: Five hundred participants (75% female, 76% White/Caucasian, mean age 42.6 ± 12.7 years, 63% with an associate degree or higher) completed the survey. Most participants were "completely" or "somewhat satisfied" with their treatments, although satisfaction rates were lower for corticosteroids (65%), immunosuppressants (71%), and anti-malarials (55%) than for belimumab (intravenous or subcutaneous) (86%) and rituximab (94%). Treatments were more often considered "burdensome" or "very burdensome" for belimumab (67%) and rituximab (63%) than for corticosteroids (48%), immunosuppressants (49%), and anti-malarials (30%). Pain and productivity assessments supported substantial impairment for the majority of participants, even those who indicated that they were completely satisfied with treatments. The treatment goals most commonly reported as "very important" were reducing fatigue, pain, and the frequency or severity of flares. Three-quarters of participants (76.6%) indicated that their physician's goals for their therapy matched their own goals "very" or "somewhat closely." Despite high levels of satisfaction, most participants (63.0%) indicated that their physicians had not asked about their treatment goals during the past 3 months. CONCLUSION: SLE patients reported high rates of satisfaction with current therapies despite identifying substantial treatment burdens, residual pain, and fatigue. Reduced fatigue, pain, and flares were the most important treatment goals for these patients.

Efficacy of Long-Term Treatment with Once-Daily Baricitinib 2 mg in Patients with Active Rheumatoid Arthritis: Post Hoc Analysis of Two 24-Week, Phase III, Randomized, Controlled Studies and One Long-Term Extension Study.

INTRODUCTION: To evaluate long-term efficacy of once-daily baricitinib 2 mg in patients with active rheumatoid arthritis who had an inadequate response (IR) to conventional synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (csDMARD) or biologic DMARDs (bDMARD). METHODS: Data from patients treated with baricitinib 2 mg daily in two 24-week, phase III studies, RA-BUILD (csDMARD-IR; NCT01721057) and RA-BEACON (bDMARD-IR; NCT01721044), and one long-term extension study (RA-BEYOND; NCT01885078), were analyzed (120 weeks). The main outcomes were achievement of low-disease activity (LDA; Simple Disease Activity Index [SDAI] ≤ 11), clinical remission (SDAI ≤ 3.3), Health Assessment Questionnaire Disability Index (HAQ-DI) ≤ 0.5 and improvement from baseline of ≥ 0.22, and safety. Analysis populations included (1) all patients and (2) never-rescued patients. Completer and non-responder imputation (NRI) analyses were conducted on each population. RESULTS: In RA-BUILD, 684 were randomized (229 to baricitinib 2 mg, 180 of whom completed RA-BUILD and entered RA-BEYOND). In RA-BEACON, 527 were randomized (174 to baricitinib 2 mg, 117 of whom completed RA-BEACON and entered RA-BEYOND). In RA-BUILD-BEYOND, 85.1% (63/74, completer) and 27.5% (63/229, NRI) of csDMARD-IR patients treated with baricitinib 2 mg achieved SDAI LDA; 40.5% (30/74, completer) and 13.1% (30/229, NRI) were in SDAI remission; 62.2% (46/74, completer) and 20.1% (46/229, NRI) had HAQ-DI ≤ 0.5 and 81.1% (60/74, completer); and 26.2% (60/229, NRI) achieved ≥ 0.22 change from baseline at week 120. In RA-BEACON-BEYOND, 86.5% (32/37, completer) and 18.4% (32/174, NRI) of bDMARD-IR patients treated with baricitinib 2 mg achieved SDAI LDA; 24.3% (9/37, completer) and 5.2% (9/174, NRI) were in SDAI remission; 50.0% (19/38, completer) and 10.9% (19/174, NRI) had HAQ-DI ≤ 0.5; and 73.7% (28/38, completer) and 16.1% (28/174, NRI) achieved ≥ 0.22 change from baseline at week 120. Rates of adverse events of special interest were consistent with previous reports. CONCLUSIONS: Long-term treatment with baricitinib 2 mg demonstrated efficacy for up to 120 weeks and was well tolerated. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier, NCT01721057, NCT01721044, and NCT01885078.

Corticosteroid dosing and opioid use are high in patients with SLE and remain elevated after belimumab initiation: a retrospective claims database analysis.

OBJECTIVES: To investigate corticosteroid and opioid use among patients with SLE and to examine the impact of belimumab initiation on the use of other SLE therapies. METHODS: We identified adult patients with SLE (International Classification of Diseases, 9th Revision/10th Revision 710.0 and M32) between 1 January 2012 and 31 May 2018 (earliest SLE diagnosis=index date) within MarketScan administrative claims data. Patients were followed from index date for a minimum of 12 months and until the earlier of disenrolment in their health plan or study end (31 May 2018). Corticosteroid utilisation, corticosteroid dose (in prednisone equivalents) and opioid utilisation (overall, by strength (weak, strong) and by duration (chronic use defined as >90 days of cumulative drug supply)) were measured during follow-up. Oral corticosteroid and opioid use were compared in the 6 months before and after initiation of belimumab. RESULTS: There were 49 413 patients with SLE eligible for analysis (mean (SD) age: 50.1 (14.0) years, 90.2% female). Of these, 68.5% received corticosteroids, and the average number of prescriptions was 4.59 (4.11) over the first 12 months of follow-up. Among patients with oral corticosteroids, average daily dose was 19.4 (14.2) mg and 59.6% had an average daily dose of ≥15 mg. Half (52.6%) had at least one opioid prescription and of these, 34.6% had chronic use over the first 12 months of follow-up. Among patients initiating belimumab during follow-up (n=1710), oral corticosteroid use decreased by 9.1% (p=0.001), and average daily dose decreased from 14.5 (18.4) mg to 11.9 (18.0) mg (p<0.001) in the 6 months after initiation compared with the 6 months prior. Initiation of belimumab had no impact on prevalence of opioid use. CONCLUSIONS: A high proportion of patients with SLE are treated with corticosteroids to control SLE and opioid therapy to manage chronic pain. While there was no change in opioid use, oral corticosteroid use and dose intensity decreased following initiation of belimumab.

The economic burden of systemic lupus erythematosus in commercially- and medicaid-insured populations in the United States.

OBJECTIVE: To estimate the economic burden of systematic lupus erythematous (SLE), stratified by disease severity, in commercially- and Medicaid-insured US populations. METHODS: Adults (≥18 years) with SLE treated with antimalarials, selected biologics, immunosuppressants, and systemic glucocorticoids (2010-2014) were identified within the commercial and Medicaid insurance IBM MarketScan® databases (index date = first SLE medication claim). Both cohorts were stratified into mild (receiving antimalarial or glucocorticoid monotherapy ≤5 mg/day) versus moderate/severe SLE (receiving glucocorticoids >5 mg/day, biologic, immunosuppressant, or combination therapy) during a 6-month exposure period. All-cause healthcare utilization and costs were evaluated during the 12 months following the exposure period. RESULTS: Among 8231 commercially-insured patients, 32.6% had mild and 67.4% had moderate/severe SLE by our definition. Among 802 Medicaid-insured patients, 25.2% had mild and 74.8% had moderate/severe SLE. Adjusted mean total healthcare costs, excluding pharmacy, for moderate/severe SLE patients were higher than for mild SLE patients in the commercially-insured ($39,021 versus $23,519; p < 0.0001) and Medicaid-insured populations ($56,050 versus $44,932; p = 0.06). In both SLE severity populations total unadjusted costs were significantly higher among Medicaid-insured than commercially-insured patients. CONCLUSION: Commercially-insured patients with treatment suggesting moderate/severe SLE incurred significantly higher adjusted mean healthcare costs, excluding pharmacy, compared with mild SLE patients. While not reaching statistical significance, moderate/severe Medicaid-insured patients had higher costs then mild SLE patients. Total unadjusted healthcare costs were significantly higher among Medicaid-insured than commercially-insured patients. These differential costs are important to consider and monitor when implementing interventions to improve health and reduce healthcare spending for SLE.