RESUMEN
Background: Loss of response to anti-tumor necrosis factor drugs in patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) is frequent and, in case of low drug levels, treatment intensification is recommended. In addition, in cases in which clinical response without attainment of remission (clinical, endoscopic, or radiological), intensification could be justified since higher drug levels are associated with better outcomes. For adalimumab (ADA), the standard intensification regimen is 40 mg every week (ew). Availability of ADA 80 mg prefilled pens has enabled every other week (eow) intensification. We assessed the clinical efficacy of intensification with ADA 80 mg eow. Methods: This retrospective study was conducted at a tertiary hospital in Spain. Patients with IBD receiving maintenance ADA 80 mg eow with clinical, biomarker, and drug-level assessments were included. Demographics and clinical, biological, and endoscopic evaluation of the disease before and after ADA intensification, and pharmacokinetic assessments, were collected. Results: Eighty-seven patients (72 Crohn's disease, 15 ulcerative colitis; average age 50 years) were included. Reasons for ADA intensification were: low ADA levels-<5 µg mL-1-(17%), low ADA levels-<5 µg mL-1-without clinical response (63%), clinical response without clinical remission (15%) and active disease on objective evaluation (including colonoscopy, magnetic resonance imaging, capsule endoscopy, and/or intestinal ultrasound; 5%). Following treatment intensification to ADA 80 mg eow, 75 patients (86%) were in clinical remission and 69 (79.3%) were in biologic remission (clinical remission and normalization of biomarkers). After a median follow-up of 19 months (interquartile range 13-25), 63 patients (72%) remained on treatment and in clinical remission. There were no serious infections, hospitalizations, or deaths. Drug costs did not increase with the 80 mg eow regimen versus a standard intensification regimen. Conclusions: ADA intensification to 80 mg eow was safe, effective, and did not increase drug costs versus standard intensification to 40 mg ew in our experience.
RESUMEN
Rheumatoid arthritis (AR), psoriatic arthritis (PSA) and ankylosing spondylitis (AS) are autoimmune systemic diseases characterized by inflammation, pain and joint degeneration. The objective of this study is to evaluate, under the actual conditions of use, dosing patterns of adalimumab, etanercept, golimumab and infliximab in these pathologies, and compare them with the label regimens recommended, as well as evaluating the financial implications of these regimen modifications. The study population included all adult patients diagnosed with RA, PSA or AS who had been treated with adalimumab, etanercept, golimumab and infliximab for at least 6 months between 1 January 2011 and 31 December 2013. The main variable of this study was to assess the dose dispensed for drugs administered subcutaneously and the dose prepared/administered for drugs administered intravenously, and the annual costs of the treatment. A total of 5,428 episodes were included. The mean weekly dose was lower than the standard dose in the three pathologies studied in the patients treated with adalimumab and etanercept (84.3% vs 81.2% for RA, 85.0% vs 78.0% for PSA and 87.8% vs 81.6% for AS). The drugs with highest dose optimization in RA are etanercept (46.3%) followed by adalimumab (46%); however, the highest percentage of patients with major dose optimization corresponds to etanercept (11.6%). Both in the PA and the AS group, we also observed that etanercept is the drug more optimized, corresponding to 53.9 and 43% of patients, respectively. By contrast, 48.5% of patients with RA treated with infliximab required dose intensification; however, infliximab dose intensification in PSA and AS is not so pronounced. The practice of optimization of dose regimens in patients with rheumatic diseases under treatment with anti-TNFα is spreading among professionals, resulting in annual cost reduction in the treatment of rheumatic arthropathies. However, long term follow-up will be necessary to assess the influence of this optimization on health outcomes.
