Consensus statement on the use of biosimilar drugs in immune-mediated diseases in Spain.

OBJECTIVE: To improve knowledge about biosimilar medicines and to generate a consensus framework on their use. METHODS: Qualitative study. A multidisciplinary group of experts in biosimilar medicines was established (1dermatologist, 1hospital pharmacist, 1rheumatologist, and 1gastroenterologist) who defined the sections and topics of the document. A narrative literature review was performed in Medline to identify articles on biosimilar medicines. Systematic reviews, controlled, pre-clinical, clinical, and real-life studies were selected. Based on the results of the review, several general principles and recommendations were generated. The level of agreement was tested in a Delphi that was extended to 66 health professionals who voted from 1 (totally disagree) to 10 (totally agree). Agreement was defined if at least 70% of the participants voted ≥7. RESULTS: The literature review included 555 articles. A total of 10 general principles and recommendations were voted upon. All reached the level of agreement established. The document includes data on the main characteristics of biosimilar medicines (definition, development, approval, indication extrapolation, interchangeability, financing, and traceability); published evidence (biosimilarity, efficacy, effectiveness, safety, immunogenicity, efficiency, switch); barriers and facilitators to its use; and data on information for patients. CONCLUSIONS: Authorized biosimilar medicines meet all the characteristics of quality, efficacy, and safety. They also significantly help improve patient access to biological therapies and contribute to health system sustainability.

Documento de consenso sobre los medicamentos biosimilares en enfermedades inmunomediadas en España / Consensus statement on the use of biosimilar drugs in immune-mediated diseases in Spain

Objetivo: Mejorar el nivel de conocimiento sobre los medicamentos biosimilares y generar un marco consensuado sobre su uso. Métodos: Estudio cualitativo. Se seleccionó un grupo multidisciplinar de expertos en medicamentos biosimilares (una dermatóloga, un farmacéutico de hospital, un reumatólogo y un gastroenterólogo) que definieron los apartados y los temas del documento. Se realizó una revisión narrativa de la literatura en Medline para identificar artículos sobre los medicamentos biosimilares. Se seleccionaron revisiones sistemáticas de la literatura, estudios controlados pre-clínicos, clínicos y en vida real. Con esta información se generaron varios principios generales y recomendaciones. El grado de acuerdo con los mismos se estableció mediante un Delphi que se extendió a 66 profesionales de la salud que votaron de 1 (totalmente en desacuerdo) a 10 (totalmente de acuerdo). Se definió acuerdo si al menos el 70% de los participantes votaron ≥7. Resultados: La revisión de la literatura incluyó 555 artículos. Se votaron un total de 10 principios generales y recomendaciones. Todos alcanzaron el nivel de acuerdo establecido en el Delphi. El documento incluye datos sobre las características principales de los medicamentos biosimilares (definición, desarrollo, aprobación, extrapolación de indicaciones, intercambiabilidad, financiación y trazabilidad); sobre la evidencia publicada (biosimilitud, eficacia, efectividad, seguridad, inmunogenicidad, eficiencia, switch); sobre barreras y facilitadores a su uso, y datos sobre la información para pacientes. Conclusiones: Los medicamentos biosimilares autorizados reúnen todas las características de calidad, eficacia y seguridad. Además, ayudan significativamente a mejorar el acceso de los pacientes a las terapias biológicas y contribuyen a la sostenibilidad de los sistemas sanitarios. (AU)

Objective: To improve knowledge about biosimilar medicines and to generate a consensus framework on their use. Methods: Qualitative study. A multidisciplinary group of experts in biosimilar medicines was established (1dermatologist, 1hospital pharmacist, 1rheumatologist, and 1gastroenterologist) who defined the sections and topics of the document. A narrative literature review was performed in Medline to identify articles on biosimilar medicines. Systematic reviews, controlled, pre-clinical, clinical, and real-life studies were selected. Based on the results of the review, several general principles and recommendations were generated. The level of agreement was tested in a Delphi that was extended to 66 health professionals who voted from 1 (totally disagree) to 10 (totally agree). Agreement was defined if at least 70% of the participants voted ≥7. Results: The literature review included 555 articles. A total of 10 general principles and recommendations were voted upon. All reached the level of agreement established. The document includes data on the main characteristics of biosimilar medicines (definition, development, approval, indication extrapolation, interchangeability, financing, and traceability); published evidence (biosimilarity, efficacy, effectiveness, safety, immunogenicity, efficiency, switch); barriers and facilitators to its use; and data on information for patients. Conclusions: Authorized biosimilar medicines meet all the characteristics of quality, efficacy, and safety. They also significantly help improve patient access to biological therapies and contribute to health system sustainability. (AU)

Management of particular clinical situations in psoriatic arthritis: an expert's recommendation document based on systematic literature review and extended Delphi process.

To establish practical recommendations for the management of patients with psoriatic arthritis (PsA) with particular clinical situations that might lead to doubts in the pharmacological decision-making. A group of six expert rheumatologists on PsA identified particular clinical situations in PsA. Then, a systematic literature review (SLR) was performed to analyse the efficacy and safety of csDMARDs, b/tsDMARDs in PsA. In a nominal group meeting, the results of the SLR were discussed and a set of recommendations were proposed for a Delphi process. A total of 65 rheumatologists were invited to participate in the Delphi. Agreement was defined if ≥ 70% of the participants voted ≥ 7 (from 1, totally disagree to 10, totally agree). For each recommendation, the level of evidence and grade of recommendation was established based on the Oxford Evidence-Based Medicine categorisation. Particular clinical situations included monoarthritis, axial disease, or non-musculoskeletal manifestations. The SLR finally comprised 131 articles. A total of 16 recommendations were generated, all but 1 reached consensus. According to them, it is crucial to carefully analyse the impact of individual manifestations on patients (disability, quality of life, etc.), but also to recognise the impact of each drug singularities on selected clinical phenotypes to adopt the most appropriate treatment strategy. Early diagnosis and treatment to target approach, along with a close risk management, is also necessary. These recommendations are intended to complement gaps in national and international guidelines by helping health professionals address and manage particular clinical situations in PsA.

Persistence and adverse events of biological treatment in adult patients with juvenile idiopathic arthritis: results from BIOBADASER.

BACKGROUND: Biologic therapy has changed the prognosis of patients with juvenile idiopathic arthritis (JIA). The aim of this study was to examine the pattern of use, drug survival, and adverse events of biologics in patients with JIA during the period from diagnosis to adulthood. METHODS: All patients included in BIOBADASER (Spanish Registry for Adverse Events of Biological Therapy in Rheumatic Diseases), a multicenter prospective registry, diagnosed with JIA between 2000 and 2015 were analyzed. Proportions, means, and SDs were used to describe the population. Incidence rates and 95% CIs were calculated to assess adverse events. Kaplan-Meier analysis was used to compare the drug survival rates. RESULTS: A total of 469 patients (46.1% women) were included. Their mean age at diagnosis was 9.4 ± 5.3 years. Their mean age at biologic treatment initiation was 23.9 ± 13.9 years. The pattern of use of biologics during their pediatric years showed a linear increase from 24% in 2000 to 65% in 2014. Biologic withdrawal for disease remission was higher in patients who initiated use biologics prior to 16 years of age than in those who were older (25.7% vs 7.9%, p < 0.0001). Serious adverse events had a total incidence rate of 41.4 (35.2-48.7) of 1000 patient-years. Patients younger than 16 years old showed significantly increased infections (p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Survival and suspension by remission of biologics were higher when these compounds were initiated in patients with JIA who had not yet reached 16 years of age. The incidence rate of serious adverse events in pediatric vs adult patients with JIA treated with biologics was similar; however, a significant increase of infection was observed in patients under 16 years old.

Desarrollo de un cuadro de actuación para la evaluación de pacientes con espondiloartritis axial y artritis psoriásica en la práctica diaria: proyecto ONLY TOOLS / Development of a checklist for patients with axial spondyloarthritis and psoriatic arthritis in daily practice: ONLY TOOLS project

Objetivo. Estandarizar la evaluación clínica de pacientes con espondiloartritis (EspA) axial y artritis psoriásica (APs). Métodos. Estudio cualitativo que incluyó: 1) grupo nominal (18 expertos); 2) revisión de la literatura sobre variables empleadas en la evaluación de los pacientes con EspA axial o APs, y 3) grupo focal con reumatólogos y otro con pacientes con EspA axial o APs para analizar la evaluación de las EspA en las consultas de reumatología. Los expertos seleccionaron las variables a incluir en el cuadro de actuación con base en su relevancia, factibilidad en consulta y método/s de medición. Resultados. El cuadro de actuación incluye las variables para valorar antecedentes personales, exploración física, actividad y función, pruebas complementarias y tratamientos. Detalla factores de riesgo de progresión radiográfica, factores predictores de respuesta a terapia biológica, e incluye variables de excelencia. Conclusiones. Este cuadro de actuación para pacientes con EspA axial y APs podrá ayudar a homogeneizar la práctica clínica diaria y a mejorar el manejo y el pronóstico de estos pacientes

Objective. To standardize clinical evaluation of patients with axial spondyloarthritis (SpA) and psoriatic arthritis (PsA) using a checklist. Methods. Qualitative study that included: 1) nominal group (18 experts); 2) literature reviews of measures used in the assessment of patients with axial SpA or PsA; and 3) focus groups, one with rheumatologists and another with patients, organized to become familiar with their opinion on medical assistance. Taking this into account, the experts selected the measures to be included in the checklist based on their relevance, feasibility, and the outcome type. Results. The checklist includes measures for the evaluation of personal history, physical examination, activity and function, laboratory tests, imaging studies and treatments. It also defines risk factors of radiographic progression, predictors of the response to biological therapies, and comprises measures of excellence. Conclusions. This checklist for patients with axial SpA and PsA could help standardize daily clinical practice and improve clinical management and patient prognosis

Development of a checklist for patients with axial spondyloarthritis and psoriatic arthritis in daily practice: ONLY TOOLS project. / Desarrollo de un cuadro de actuación para la evaluación de pacientes con espondiloartritis axial y artritis psoriásica en la práctica diaria: proyecto ONLY TOOLS.

OBJECTIVE: To standardize clinical evaluation of patients with axial spondyloarthritis (SpA) and psoriatic arthritis (PsA) using a checklist. METHODS: Qualitative study that included: 1) nominal group (18 experts); 2) literature reviews of measures used in the assessment of patients with axial SpA or PsA; and 3) focus groups, one with rheumatologists and another with patients, organized to become familiar with their opinion on medical assistance. Taking this into account, the experts selected the measures to be included in the checklist based on their relevance, feasibility, and the outcome type. RESULTS: The checklist includes measures for the evaluation of personal history, physical examination, activity and function, laboratory tests, imaging studies and treatments. It also defines risk factors of radiographic progression, predictors of the response to biological therapies, and comprises measures of excellence. CONCLUSIONS: This checklist for patients with axial SpA and PsA could help standardize daily clinical practice and improve clinical management and patient prognosis.

Scoring with the Berlin MRI method for assessment of spinal inflammatory activity in patients with ankylosing spondylitis: a calibration exercise among rheumatologists.

OBJECTIVES: To test the reliability of the Berlin MRI scoring method and the effect of a calibration exercise on the score's reliability among untrained readers in MRI examinations of patients with established ankylosing spondylitis (AS). METHODS: Eleven rheumatologists read blinded images of 20 AS patients before and after a two-day workshop on the Berlin MRI scoring method. Reliability (intra- and inter-reader) and concordance with the expert (all measured by intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC)) were compared before and after 2 weeks of the training. Feasibility in terms of time and difficulty was also measured. RESULTS: The mean Berlin score increased from (mean ± standard deviation) 5.04 ± 6.41 before to 6.40±7.08 after the calibration exercise (p<0.01). Inter-reader ICC decreased from 0.83 (95% CI: 0.75-0.93) to 0.78 (95% CI: 0.66-0.90), and intra-reader ICC from 0.89 (95% CI: 0.84-0.94) to 0.87 (95% CI: 0.82-0.92). Agreement with an experienced reader improved after the calibration exercise, with ICC = 0.59 (95% CI 0.45-0.76) before vs. ICC = 0.65 (95% CI 0.50-0.80) after training. CONCLUSIONS: The Berlin method is a reliable scoring method for assessment of spinal inflammatory activity by using MRI in patients with AS, even in the hands of inexperienced readers. A calibration exercise can improve feasibility and sensitivity of the scoring method.

Cancer in patients with rheumatic diseases exposed to TNF antagonists.

OBJECTIVE: To describe the risk of cancer in patients exposed to tumor necrosis factor (TNF) antagonists. METHODS: The following 2 clinical cohorts were studied: (1) BIOBADASER 2.0: a registry of patients suffering from rheumatic diseases exposed to TNF antagonists (2531 rheumatoid arthritis (RA), 1488 spondyloarthropathies, and 675 other rheumatic conditions); and (2) EMECAR: a cohort of 789 RA patients not exposed to TNF antagonists. Cancer incidence rates (IR) per 1000 patient-years and incidence rate ratios (IRR) were calculated for BIOBADASER 2.0 and EMECAR patients. The IR over time in BIOBADASER 2.0 patients was analyzed by joinpoint regression. The IRR was estimated to compare cancer rates in exposed versus nonexposed RA patients. Standardized incidence and mortality ratios (SIR, SMR) were also estimated. Risk factors for cancer in patients exposed to TNF antagonists were investigated by generalized linear models. RESULTS: The SMR for cancer in BIODASER 2.0 was 0.67 (95% CI: 0.51-0.86), and the SIR was 0.1 (95% CI 0.03-0.23). The IR in RA patients exposed to TNF antagonists was 5.8 (95% CI: 4.4-7.6), and the adjusted IRR was 0.48 (95% CI: 0.09-2.45). The IR in patients with previous cancer was 26.4 (95% CI: 4.1-171.5). Age, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, and steroids were associated with a higher risk of developing cancer. The IR decreased after the first 4 months of exposure, without statistical significance. CONCLUSION: Overall cancer and mortality rates in patients with rheumatic diseases exposed to TNF antagonists are no higher than in the background Spanish population. However special attention should be paid to elderly patients, those with previous cancers, and patients treated with steroids.