Cost-effective analysis of disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs in rheumatoid arthritis

The main objective of the study was to perform the pharmacoeconomic analysis of synthetic disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs in rheumatoid arthritis patients. A prospective, observational study was conducted in 98 rheumatoid arthritis (RA) patients meeting 2010 Rheumatoid Arthritis Classification Criteria. Treatment-naive RA patients were initiated on synthetic disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs (DMARD/s) and followed up for 3 months. Average cost-effectiveness analysis was done by taking Health Assessment Questionnaire Disability Index (HAQ-DI) score as a measure of effectiveness. Out of the 98 RA patients, 15.30% were males and 84.69% females. 80.61% RA patients are seropositive. Majority of the study population patients (55%) were on combination of three synthetic DMARDs and almost a quarter (24.48%) were on combination of two synthetic DMARDs. The mean value of DAS 28 at baseline was 6.07 ± 1.33 and after 3 months treatment, the mean was 3.84 ± 1.11. The mean disability index measured by HAQ-DI was significantly reduced from 1.43 ± 0.71 to 0.81 ± 0.61, p < 0.001, after 3 months treatment. The direct medical cost of treatment of RA per month is 997.05 rupees. The average cost-effectiveness ratio of combination of synthetic DMARDs was 1533.92 rupees. Treatment of RA with synthetic DMARDs controls disease activity and improves disability with reasonable cost of treatment. The majority of the direct medical cost is attributable to cost of medicine and laboratory investigation. Use of quality generic drugs and an early diagnosis would minimize the economic burden on the patient.     

Assessment of adherence to disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs in rheumatoid arthritis

Clinical Rheumatology - This work aimed to assess treatment adherence in rheumatoid arthritis patients with several tools and to identify factors associated with poor adherence. Between February...     

Pharmacotherapeutic combination strategies with disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs in established rheumatoid arthritis

Pharmacotherapy is still the cornerstone in the management of rheumatoid arthritis (RA). Due to several reasons the pharmacotherapeutic strategy has changed dramatically in the past decades. It has become clear that in most cases single treatment with disease modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs) is insufficient to control the disease on the long term. This is the main reason why combinations of second-line agents are increasingly being used in the treatment of established RA. Many different ways of prescribing combination treatment and a large number of different combinations have been published. However definite conclusions which drugs to combine or what strategy to apply are difficult to make as solid studies which enable these conclusions are sparse. Several studies have shown that the best opportunity to achieve a good response is to use a set-up approach, in addition different studies have shown that corticosteroids do have a profound effect on disease activity variables.     

Utilization of biologic disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs in patients with rheumatoid arthritis and cancer

Clinical Rheumatology - Biologic disease–modifying anti-rheumatic drugs (bDMARDs) interfere with the immune system and could theoretically increase risk of malignancies. However, recent...     

Meta-analysis of treatment termination rates among rheumatoid arthritis patients receiving disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs

OBJECTIVE: To summarize the evidence on treatment withdrawal rates reported in observational studies and randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of methotrexate (MTX), parenteral gold (GST), sulphasalazine (SSZ) and hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) among patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA). METHODS: Two independent Medline searches were used to retrieve relevant studies published between 1966 and 1997. Those which disclosed information on the number of patients withdrawing from the drug were retained. Cumulative probabilities of survival on treatment were then computed using actuarial survival estimates, and differences were tested using log-rank, Wilcoxon and Cox proportional hazards tests. RESULTS: A total of 159 studies provided withdrawal information, and the numbers of patients who withdrew, in general or because of inefficacy or toxicity, could be abstracted from 110 studies contributing 142 treatment arms (MTX, 48; GST, 56; SSZ, 22; HCQ, 16). Data for HCQ were available only up to 24 months, but combined percentages of patients estimated to have continued MTX, GST or SSZ, respectively, for 60 months were 36, 23 and 22% when all failures were considered, 75, 73 and 53% when withdrawals due to lack of efficacy alone were considered, and 65, 36 and 48% when only withdrawals due to toxicity were taken into account. The Cox proportional hazards test performed on all withdrawals, after adjusting for year of publication and type of study, revealed that patients remained on MTX significantly longer than they did on the other three agents; however, the patients stayed significantly longer on GST than MTX when withdrawals for inefficacy were analysed separately. No significant differences in withdrawal rates were noted between observational studies and RCTs. CONCLUSION: Patients with RA stay significantly longer on MTX than on other disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs. Higher withdrawal rates among those given GST are mainly due to high toxicity, whereas the majority of withdrawals from SSZ and HCQ result from lack of efficacy. Withdrawal rates in observational studies are similar to those reported in RCTs.     

Conventional disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs in early arthritis

This article reviews the use of conventional disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs) in the treatment of early rheumatoid arthritis (RA). The Finnish early RA cohorts are used as examples of how early and active treatment strategies have improved over time with increasing variety of available DMARDs. Therapy goals of early RA include remission to prevent severe long-term outcomes of RA. Remission can be achieved in a third of patients with early RA using a combination of conventional DMARDs, including methotrexate, sulfasalazine, hydroxychloroquine, and prednisolone. Of patients with early RA, 20% to 30% do not improve enough with conventional treatments and should be identified at early phases to consider institution of biologic agents.     

Combination therapy with multiple disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs in rheumatoid arthritis: a preventive strategy

The traditional "pyramid" or sequential approach to treatment of patients with rheumatoid arthritis involved use of a nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug for months to years while seeking to avoid use of second-line antirheumatic drugs until evidence of joint damage was seen. This approach led to short-term reduction of inflammation and a few remissions. However, long-term remissions were rare, and most patients experienced poor long-term outcomes, including joint destruction, severe functional declines, considerable economic losses, work disability, and premature mortality. At this time, a "preventive" strategy is evolving in which early aggressive treatment with disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs is used, seeking to minimize long-term joint damage. When residual inflammation remains after maximum doses of single agents, as is usually the case, combinations of disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs appear to be a reasonable consideration for many patients. Methotrexate is the most commonly used "anchor drug" in combination therapy. Evidence from randomized, controlled clinical trials and observational studies have indicated increased efficacy and acceptable (and often lower) toxicity for combinations of methotrexate plus cyclosporine, hydroxychloroquine, sulfasalazine, leflunomide, etanercept, and infliximab. Further studies lasting 5 years or more are needed to determine the long-term effectiveness, toxicities, and optimal clinical use of disease-modifying antirheumatic drug combinations. At this time, such combinations are taken by at least some patients under care of almost all rheumatologists, and it appears likely that they will be used increasingly in the coming decades.     

Response to traditional disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs in indigent South Africans with early rheumatoid arthritis

The clinical response to traditional disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs (DMARDs) in indigent South Africans with early rheumatoid arthritis was investigated. A cohort of patients with early (≤2 years) RA who were DMARD-naïve at inception were prospectively assessed for response to DMARDs using the Simplified Disease Activity Index (SDAI) over a 12-month period. Patients with low disease activity (LDA) at 12 months were compared to those with moderate and high disease activity with respect to demographic, clinical, autoantibody and radiographic features. The 171 patients (140 females) had a mean (SD) age of 47.1 (12.4) years, symptom duration of 11.7 (7.1) months and baseline SDAI of 39.4 (16.2). There was a significant overall improvement in the SDAI and its components in the 134 (78.4%) patients who completed the 12 months visit, but only 28.4% of them achieved LDA. The majority of patients (91%) were treated with methotrexate as monotherapy or in combination with chloroquine and/or sulphasalazine. Baseline features that independently predicted a LDA state at 12 months were lower Health Assessment Questionnaire Disability Index (p?=?0.023) and a higher haemoglobin level (p?=?0.048). Receiver operating characteristic curve analysis showed that the 6-month SDAI was better than the baseline SDAI in predicting the 12-month SDAI (area under the curve of 0.69 vs. 0.52, respectively, p?=?0.008). In conclusion, less than a third of the patients achieved a low disease activity at 12 months on traditional DMARDs. Patients who have an inadequate response to traditional DMARDs at 6 months are unlikely to show further improvement on traditional DMARDs at 12 months. These findings underscore the need for better disease control by an aggressive tight control strategy, including intense patient education and biologic therapy.     

Use of nonbiologic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs and risk of infection in patients with rheumatoid arthritis

OBJECTIVE: Rheumatoid arthritis (RA) is associated with increased frequency of and mortality from infections, which may be related to host factors, RA itself, inflammation, or medication side effects. This study was undertaken to determine the effect of nonbiologic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs) on infection risk in RA. METHODS: We performed a retrospective, longitudinal study of a population-based RA cohort in British Columbia, Canada, followed from January 1996 to March 2003 using administrative data. We evaluated mild infections (requiring a physician visit or antibiotics) and serious infections (requiring or complicating hospitalization). Adjusted risk of mild and serious infections associated with DMARD exposure was estimated using generalized estimating equation extension of multivariate Poisson regression models, after adjusting for baseline covariates (age, sex, RA duration, socioeconomic status) and time-dependent covariates (corticosteroids, comorbidity, prior infections). RESULTS: A total of 27,710 individuals with RA provided 162,710 person-years of followup. Of these, 25,608 (92%) had at least 1 mild infection and 4,941 (18%) had at least 1 serious infection. Use of DMARDs without corticosteroids was associated with a small decrease in mild infection risk of statistical significance but unclear clinical significance (adjusted rate ratio [RR] 0.90, 95% confidence interval [95% CI] 0.88-0.93 relative to no corticosteroid or DMARD use). Use of DMARDs without corticosteroids was not associated with increased serious infection risk (adjusted RR 0.92, 95% CI 0.85-1.0). Use of corticosteroids increased the risk of mild and serious infections. CONCLUSION: Our results indicate that use of nonbiologic DMARDs, including methotrexate, does not increase the risk of infection in RA, whereas use of corticosteroids does. This has important implications for counseling individuals with RA concerning risks and benefits of DMARDs.     

Renal toxicity associated with disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs used for the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis

OBJECTIVE: To provide a review of the renal toxicity of disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs) currently used for the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis. METHODS: Papers in American and European medical journals related to renal toxicity of DMARDs used for the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis were reviewed. Specific DMARDs reviewed were cyclosporine, gold, D-penicillamine, methotrexate, azathioprine, antimalarials, sulfasalazine, leflunomide, etanercept, infliximab, and DMARD combination therapy. RESULTS: The renal toxicity of DMARDs varies widely. Cyclosporine, gold, and D-penicillamine all have a serious potential for renal side effects, particularly in the elderly or in patients with compromised renal function. Concomitant use of nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) increases the potential for renal damage. In contrast, methotrexate, azathioprine, antimalarials, sulfasalazine, leflunomide, etanercept, and infliximab have relatively little renal toxicity. CONCLUSIONS: The potential for renal toxicity should always be considered when determining which DMARD to use for RA therapy. DMARDs that combine efficacy with negligible renal adverse effects should be used for the treatment of patients susceptible to DMARD-associated renal damage.     

Termination of disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs in rheumatoid arthritis and in psoriatic arthritis. A comparative study of 270 cases

102 rheumatoid arthritis (RA) and 104 psoriatic arthritis (PsA) patients' records were analysed according to a standardised protocol. Using Cox regression, life-table analysis and log rank test, the effectiveness and toxicity of, and duration of disease modifying antirheumatic drug (DMARD) treatment were compared in RA and PsA. RA patients were treated with gold sodium thiomalate (GST), methotrexate (MTX) and sulphasalazine (SSZ) for a median duration of 35, 72 and 12 months respectively, whereas PsA patients were treated for 12, 12 and 17 months. The differences for GST and MTX were statistically significant (p=0.0043 and 0.0447). Drug toxicity was more frequently seen among patients with PsA (p=0.0023). No difference in efficacy could be proved. Results suggest that there is a significant difference between RA and PsA patients in terms of toxicity of these agents. Therefore, separate treatment strategies are needed, and earlier results with RA may not be directly applicable to PsA.     

Factors predicting addition of disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs after initial methotrexate monotherapy in patients with rheumatoid arthritis

Clinical Rheumatology - We investigated factors predicting the addition of disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs) after an initial methotrexate (MTX) monotherapy in rheumatoid arthritis...     

Biologic disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs and kinase inhibitors: differences in efficacy and safety in rheumatoid arthritis

Clinical Rheumatology -     

Prospective study of HBV reactivation risk in rheumatoid arthritis patients who received conventional disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs

Studies that reported hepatitis B virus (HBV) reactivation in rheumatoid arthritis (RA) patients have caused attention of disease-modifying antirheumatic drug (DMARD)-related HBV reactivation. Most of the studies were focused on HBV reactivation risk of biologic DMARDs; insufficient data are available to identify the exact risk of conventional DMARD (c-DMARD)-related HBV reactivation. This prospective study aimed to investigate the risk of HBV reactivation in HBV-infected RA patients who received c-DMARDs. A total of 476 RA patients were screened in this prospective non-randomized, non-controlled study. HBV-infected patients characterized by hepatitis B surface antigen (HBsAg) positive or HBsAg negative/anti-hepatitis B core antigen (anti-HBc) positive were analyzed for HBV DNA, followed with HBV DNA monitoring scheduled every 3 months, serum alanine aminotransferase test at 2-month intervals, or more frequently. Prevalence of HBsAg positive and HBsAg negative/anti-HBc positive was 6.51 and 51.1 %, respectively, among the 476 RA patients. Among 211 patients (23 patients were HBsAg positive and 188 patients were HBsAg negative/anti-HBc positive) who received c-DMARDs without antiviral prophylactic treatment, 4 patients developed HBV reactivation. Both HBsAg positive and HBsAg negative/anti-HBc positive patients have the possibility of developing HBV reactivation. There was no correlation between HBV reactivation and any specific c-DMARD. Glucocorticoid coadministration and negative anti-hepatitis B surface antigen (anti-HBs) at baseline showed correlation with reactivation. In conclusion, it would be rational to initiate antiviral prophylaxis according to risk stratification rather than universal prophylaxis for HBV-infected RA patients. Conventional DMARDs are relatively safe to HBV-infected patients with low reactivation risk (low HBV DNA level, no GCs administration, and anti-HB positive).