Treatment strategies involving anti-tumor necrosis factor dose tapering or withdrawal among rheumatoid arthritis patients who are achieving disease control are gaining popularity. Such strategies seek to optimize benefits versus risks with respect to both patient preferences and the high costs of biologic treatments.
Treatment strategies involving anti-tumor necrosis factor (anti-TNF) dose tapering or withdrawal among rheumatoid arthritis (RA) patients who are achieving disease control are gaining popularity. Such strategies seek to optimize benefits versus risks with respect to both patient preferences and the high costs of biologic treatments. A 2015 consensus statement from the Spanish Rheumatology Society and Hospital Pharmacy Society advised that, while patients with RA usually relapse after a complete withdrawal of anti-TNF medication, a careful dose tapering of anti-TNF medications can be undertaken in most patients with RA.
A recent study examined the clinical and cost impacts of withdrawal, tapering, or maintenance of anti-TNFs among RA patients in remission, defined as those patients who have a 28-joint Disease Activity Score (DAS28) under 2.6, or patients who have achieved low disease activity (LDA), defined as those who have a DAS28 of less than 3.2.
Researchers, led by Daniel Aletaha, MD, MSc, concluded that tapering or withdrawing anti-TNF medications in RA patients results in reduced healthcare costs, but also results in less time in sustained disease control compared to maintaining anti-TNF therapy. Their analysis is published in the July 2017 issue of ClinicoEconomics and Outcomes Research.
The study focused on the anti-TNFs adalimumab, etanercept, and infliximab, and used a 5-year Markov model with 1-month cycle length that assessed the time to loss of disease control, time to regaining control after treatment reinitiation, and associated medical and anti-TNF costs. It analyzed 14 studies, involving over 2300 patients, using 1 of the 3 anti-TNF agents and adjusted for treatment strategy, anti-TNF, patient type (ie, early or established RA), and model entry criterion (ie, remission or LDA). Total costs for the months spent in each health state were calculated for 4 combinations of scenarios: early or established RA and patients entering the model with remission or LDA. The costs of disease for patients in remission and flare were obtained from a 2011 Spanish study.
Patients whose anti-TNF treatments were withdrawn incurred the lowest overall 5-year healthcare costs, followed by patients whose doses were tapered or maintained; however, withdrawal costs were only marginally lower than tapering costs. Established RA patients had higher total costs than did early RA patients across all treatment strategies. Adalimumab was associated with the lowest costs in the withdrawal and tapering strategies, but the highest costs in the maintenance strategy. The proportion of total costs due to anti-TNFs was similar across the 3 drugs, but was lowest for withdrawal and highest for maintenance.
The adjusted risk of losing disease control upon dose tapering or with maintenance of anti-TNFs was less than half the risk presented by treatment withdrawal, and patients with established RA had a significantly higher risk of losing disease control than did patients with early RA. “Further, risk of losing disease control with [etanercept] was found to be significantly higher than [adalimumab], irrespective of treatment strategy,” the authors state. Thus, the withdrawal strategy was associated with the fewest number of months until loss of disease control, followed by the tapering and maintenance strategies, respectively. Established RA patients had fewer months until loss of disease control than early RA patients, and patients taking adalimumab had a longer time to loss of disease control than those taking etanercept or infliximab.
The researchers conclude that patients whose anti-TNF treatments were withdrawn or tapered incurred lower 5-year healthcare costs, but had worse clinical outcomes than patients who maintained their treatment. The marginally lower costs incurred by withdrawal compared to tapering were offset by substantially less time to loss of disease control.
The researchers note that their model represents the perspective of the healthcare payer, and includes only direct costs, not indirect productivity costs; thus, the true cost of loss of disease control may be greater than shown in the study’s results. The findings also suggest a higher feasibility of withdrawing or tapering anti-TNFs in early RA patients compared to established RA patients. Nevertheless, the researchers conclude that the risk—benefit of anti-TNF dose tapering or withdrawal over maintenance should be carefully examined in both early and established RA patients.
AMCP Posters Tackle Interchangeability and Medicaid, Factors Driving Biosimilar Access
April 24th 2024Two posters from the Academy of Managed Care Pharmacy (AMCP) annual meeting explore how an interchangeable insulin glargine biosimilar plays into Medicaid budgets and the top factors driving access to biosimilars.
Decoding the Patent Puzzle: Navigating the Legal Landscape of Biosimilars
March 17th 2024On this episode of Not So Different, Ha Kung Wong, JD, an intellectual patent attorney and partner at Venable LLP, details the confusing landscape that is the US patent system and how it can be improved to help companies overcome barriers to biosimilar competition.
Julie Reed: Why 2024 Is Important for Biosimilars
April 17th 2024Julie Reed, executive director of the Biosimilars Forum, showcases how the biosimilar industry is expected to develop throughout 2024, including major policy changes and hope for continued improvement in market share for adalimumab biosimilars.
Biosimilars Rheumatology Roundup for February 2024—Podcast Edition
March 3rd 2024On this episode of Not So Different, The Center for Biosimilars® revisited all the major rheumatology biosimilar news from February 2024, including the FDA approval of the 10th adalimumab biosimilar, the promise for an oral delivery system for ustekinumab, and the impact of adalimumab products on COVID-19 antibodies.
Alvotech’s Stelara Biosimilar, Selarsdi, Receives FDA Approval
April 16th 2024Alvotech’s Selarsdi (ustekinumab-aekn), a biosimilar referencing Stelara (ustekinumab), gained FDA approval, making it the second ustekinumab biosimilar and second for the company to be given the green light for the American market.
What Clinicians Need to Know About Using Biosimilars to Treat IBD
April 13th 2024A review article, intended to act as a guide for clinicians, summarizes the available infliximab and adalimumab biosimilars for treating inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) as well as others that are coming down the pipeline.