Use of Disease-Modifying Antirheumatic Drugs in Rheumatoid Arthritis: Supporting Shared Decision-Making Between Patients With Cancer and Clinicians.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Singh N
PROVIDER: S-EPMC10267802 | biostudies-literature | 2023 Jun
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Publications
Use of Disease-Modifying Antirheumatic Drugs in Rheumatoid Arthritis: Supporting Shared Decision-Making Between Patients With Cancer and Clinicians.
Singh Namrata N Grivas Petros P Makris Una E UE Suarez-Almazor Maria E ME O'Hare Ann M AM Barton Jennifer L JL
ACR open rheumatology 20230511 6
Similar Datasets
Project description:ObjectiveDisease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs) are the standard of care for rheumatoid arthritis (RA); however, studies have found that many patients do not receive them. We examined predictors of starting and stopping DMARDs among a longitudinal cohort of patients with RA.MethodsStudy participants came from a cohort of RA patients recruited from a random sample of rheumatologists' practices in Northern California. We examined patterns and predictors of stopping and starting nonbiologic and biologic DMARDs during 1982-2009 based on annual questionnaires. Stopping was defined as stopping all DMARDs and starting was defined as transitioning from no DMARDs to any DMARDs across 2 consecutive years.ResultsThe analysis of starting DMARDs included 471 subjects with 1,974 pairs of years with no DMARD use in the first of 2 consecutive years. From this population, subjects started DMARD use by year 2 in 313 (15.9%) of the pairs. The analysis of stopping DMARDs included 1,026 subjects with 7,595 pairs of years with DMARD use in the first of 2 consecutive years; in 423 pairs (5.6%), subjects stopped DMARD use by year 2. In models that adjusted for RA-related factors, sociodemographics, and comorbidities, significant predictors of starting DMARDs included younger age, Hispanic ethnicity, shorter disease duration, and the use of oral glucocorticoids. In separate adjusted models, predictors of stopping DMARDs included Hispanic ethnicity and low income, while younger age was associated with a reduced risk of stopping.ConclusionEfforts to improve DMARD use should focus on patient age, ethnicity, and income and RA-related factors.
| S-EPMC4112169 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectivesRecent research suggests that rheumatoid arthritis increases the risk of venous thromboembolism. This study compared the risk of venous thromboembolism in patients with newly diagnosed rheumatoid arthritis initiating a biologic disease-modifying antirheumatic drug (DMARD) with those initiating methotrexate or a nonbiologic DMARD.MethodsWe conducted a population-based cohort study using US insurance claims data (2001-2012). Three mutually exclusive, hierarchical DMARD groups were used: (1) a biologic DMARD with and without nonbiologic DMARDs; (2) methotrexate without a biologic DMARD; or (3) nonbiologic DMARDs without a biologic DMARD or methotrexate. We calculated the incidence rates of venous thromboembolism. Cox proportional hazard models stratified by propensity score (PS) deciles after asymmetric PS trimming were used for 3 pairwise comparisons, controlling for potential confounders at baseline.ResultsWe identified 29,481 patients with rheumatoid arthritis with 39,647 treatment episodes. From the pairwise comparison after asymmetric PS trimming, the incidence rate of hospitalization for venous thromboembolism per 1000 person-years was 5.5 in biologic DMARD initiators versus 4.4 in nonbiologic DMARD initiators and 4.8 in biologic DMARD initiators versus 3.5 in methotrexate initiators. The PS decile-stratified hazard ratio of venous thromboembolism associated with biologic DMARDs was 1.83 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.91-3.66) versus nonbiologic DMARDs and 1.39 (95% CI, 0.73-2.63) versus methotrexate. The hazard ratio of venous thromboembolism in biologic DMARD initiators was the highest in the first 180 days versus nonbiologic DMARD initiators (2.48; 95% CI, 1.14-5.39) or methotrexate initiators (1.80; 95% CI, 0.90-3.62).ConclusionsThe absolute risk for venous thromboembolism was low in patients with newly diagnosed rheumatoid arthritis. Initiation of a biologic DMARD seems to be associated with an increased short-term risk of hospitalization for venous thromboembolism compared with initiation of a nonbiologic DMARD or methotrexate.
| S-EPMC4414700 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectiveImplementing treat-to-target (TTT) strategies requires that patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) and their rheumatologists decide on how best to escalate care when indicated. The objective of this study was to develop preference phenotypes to facilitate shared decision-making at the point of care for patients failing methotrexate monotherapy.MethodsWe developed a conjoint analysis survey to measure the preferences of patient with RA for triple therapy, biologics and Janus kinase (JAK) inhibitors. The survey included seven attributes: administration, onset, bothersome side effects, serious infection, very rare side effects, amount of information and cost. Each choice set (n=12) included three hypothetical profiles. Preference phenotypes were identified by applying latent class analysis to the conjoint data.Results1273 participants completed the survey. A five-group solution was chosen based on progressively lower values of the Akaike and Bayesian information criteria. Members of the largest group (group 3: 38.4%) were most strongly impacted by the cost of the medication. The next largest group (group 1: 25.8%) was most strongly influenced by the risk of bothersome side effects. Members of group 2 (11.2%) were also risk averse, but were most concerned with the risk of very rare side effects. Group 4 (6.6%) strongly preferred oral over parenteral medications. Members of group 5 (18.0%) were most strongly and equally influenced by onset of action and the risk of serious infections.ConclusionsTreatment preferences of patients with RA can be measured and represented by distinct phenotypes. Our results underscore the variability in patients' values and the importance of using a shared decision-making approach to implement TTT.
| S-EPMC5898982 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectiveThe objective of this study was to compare the clinical effectiveness of biologic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (bDMARDs) or Janus kinase inhibitors (JAKi) among seropositive versus seronegative patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) in a real-world setting.MethodsWe used Optum's deidentified Clinformatics Data Mart Database (January 1, 2004, to March 31, 2021) linked with outpatient laboratory test results. The study population was adult patients with RA who initiated a bDMARD or JAKi. The index date was the dispensing of the first-ever study drug. At least 1-year continuous enrollment before and after the index date was required. Disenrollment due to death after the index date was allowed. Serostatus was defined using laboratory test results or the International Classification of Diseases, 10th Revision code M05x or M06.0x any time prior to the index date. Treatment effectiveness was measured based on a claims-based composite endpoint at 1-year post index, including nonoccurrence of any of the following: addition of conventional synthetic DMARDs, addition of or switching to new bDMARDs/JAKi, initiation of glucocorticoids, increased glucocorticoid dose, or death. Log-binomial regression models were constructed to estimate the risk ratio (RR) with 95% confidence interval (CI) comparing seropositive patients with seronegative patients, adjusting for more than 60 baseline covariates.ResultsWe identified a total of 7813 seropositive patients and 4202 seronegative patients. The mean (±SD) age was 56.7 (±14.0) years; 77.9% were female. The risk of 1-year treatment effectiveness was 70.2% among seropositive patients and 69.8% among seronegative patients. The adjusted RR (95% CI) was 1.00 (0.98-1.02).ConclusionIn this real-world cohort study, seropositive and seronegative patients with RA had similar 1-year treatment effectiveness after initiating a bDMARD/JAKi.
| S-EPMC10642251 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Background/aimsWe aimed to compare the effectiveness and safety of Janus kinase inhibitors (JAKi) vs. biologic disease- modifying antirheumatic drugs (bDMARD) in Korean patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) who had an inadequate response to conventional synthetic DMARDs.MethodsA quasi-experimental, multi-center, prospective, non-randomized study was conducted to compare response rates between JAKi and bDMARDs in patients with RA naïve to targeted therapy. An interim analysis was performed to estimate the proportion of patients achieving low disease activity (LDA) based on disease activity score (DAS)-28- erythroid sedimentation rate (ESR) (DAS28-ESR) at 24 weeks after treatment initiation and to evaluate the development of adverse events (AEs).ResultsAmong 506 patients enrolled from 17 institutions between April 2020 and August 2022, 346 (196 JAKi group and 150 bDMARD group) were included in the analysis. After 24 weeks of treatment, 49.0% of JAKi users and 48.7% of bDMARD users achieved LDA (p = 0.954). DAS28-ESR remission rates were also comparable between JAKi and bDMARD users (30.1% and 31.3%, respectively; p = 0.806). The frequency of AEs reported in the JAKi group was numerically higher than that in the bDMARDs group, but the frequencies of serious and severe AEs were comparable between the groups.ConclusionOur interim findings reveal JAKi have comparable effectiveness and safety to bDMARDs at 24 weeks after treatment initiation.
| S-EPMC10338257 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectiveThe efficacy and safety of subcutaneous tocilizumab (TCZ-SC) versus subcutaneous placebo (PBO-SC) was evaluated in patients with rheumatoid arthritis who had an inadequate response to disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs in the BREVACTA study.MethodsPatients (n = 656) were randomized 2:1 to receive TCZ-SC 162 mg every other week or PBO-SC every other week for 24 weeks; 20% previously received anti-tumor necrosis factor treatment. Escape therapy with TCZ-SC 162 mg weekly was offered from week 12 for inadequate response. The primary end point was the American College of Rheumatology 20% improvement (ACR20) response at week 24. The key secondary outcomes were radiographic progression and safety.ResultsTCZ-SC was superior to PBO-SC for ACR20 response at week 24 (60.9% versus 31.5%; P < 0.0001). All secondary end points showed TCZ-SC to be superior to PBO-SC, including ACR50 and ACR70 response (40% and 20% for TCZ-SC, respectively, and 12% and 5% for PBO-SC, respectively; P < 0.0001 for both) and Disease Activity Score in 28 joints (DAS28) remission (DAS28 <2.6; 32% versus 4% [P < 0.0001]). The mean change in modified Sharp/van der Heijde score was significantly lower in the TCZ-SC group than the PBO-SC group (0.62 versus 1.23; P = 0.0149). Adverse events (AEs) and serious AEs (SAEs) were comparable between the TCZ-SC and PBO-SC groups; 4.6% and 3.7% of patients had at least 1 SAE, respectively, and infection was the most common SAE in 2.1% and 1.8% of patients, respectively. More injection site reactions occurred with TCZ-SC than PBO-SC (7.1% versus 4.1%). No anaphylaxis or serious hypersensitivity reactions occurred. There were 3 deaths in the TCZ-SC group and 0 in the PBO-SC group.ConclusionTCZ-SC every other week had significantly greater efficacy, including ACR end points and inhibition of joint damage, compared with PBO-SC. TCZ-SC was well tolerated and its safety profile was comparable with that of previous intravenous TCZ studies.
| S-EPMC4276289 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectiveNonadherence to disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDS) in rheumatoid arthritis (RA) and spondyloarthritis (SpA) results in increased disease activity and symptoms and poorer quality of life. We aimed to describe patients' attitudes and experiences of DMARDs in RA and SpA to inform strategies to improve medication adherence.MethodsDatabases (MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, and CINAHL) were searched to January 2016. Thematic synthesis was used to analyze the findings.ResultsFrom 56 studies involving 1,383 adult patients (RA [n = 1,149], SpA [n = 191], not specified [n = 43]), we identified 6 themes (with subthemes): intensifying disease identity (severity of sudden pharmacotherapy, signifying deteriorating health, daunting lifelong therapy), distressing uncertainties and consequences (poisoning the body, doubting efficacy, conflicting and confusing advice, prognostic uncertainty with changing treatment regimens), powerful social influences (swayed by others' experiences, partnering with physicians, maintaining roles, confidence in comprehensive and ongoing care, valuing peer support), privilege and right of access to biologic agents (expensive medications must be better, right to receive a biologic agent, fearing dispossession), maintaining control (complete ownership of decision, taking extreme risks, minimizing lifestyle intrusion), and negotiating treatment expectations (miraculous recovery, mediocre benefit, reaching the end of the line).ConclusionPatients perceive DMARDs as strong medications with alarming side effects that intensify their disease identity. Trust and confidence in medical care, positive experiences with DMARDS among other patients, and an expectation that medications will help maintain participation in life can motivate patients to use DMARDs. Creating a supportive environment for patients to voice their concerns may improve treatment satisfaction, adherence, and health outcomes.
| S-EPMC5901029 | biostudies-literature
Project description: Not available
| S-EPMC10051094 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectiveLittle is known about the preferences of people with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) regarding tapering of biologic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (bDMARDs). The aim of this study was to assess the preferences of people with RA in relation to potential treatment-related benefits and risks of bDMARD tapering and the health care service-related attributes that affect tapering.MethodsParticipants with RA who had experience taking a bDMARD completed an online discrete choice experiment. Participants were asked their preferences when given three hypothetical treatment scenarios in which varying the frequency of treatment might alter their chance of adverse effects, of regaining disease control, and of other health care service-related effects. Preference weights were estimated using a multinomial logit model.ResultsThere were 142 complete responses. Reduced dosing frequency of bDMARD treatment had the largest impact on preference (mean 1.0, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.8-1.2), followed by chance of disease flare (mean 0.7, 95% CI 0.6-0.9). Participants were willing to accept an increased risk of flare between 10.6% (95% CI 3.2-17.9) and 60.6% (95% CI 48.1-72.9) in exchange for benefits associated with tapering bDMARDs. Participants with better quality of life were more likely to choose to remain on current treatment. The predicted uptake of bDMARD tapering was high among people with RA, suggesting bDMARD tapering was a favored option.ConclusionFor individuals with RA, making decisions about tapering bDMARDs involves considering several factors, with the most important determinants identified as dosing frequency and the risk of disease flare. Understanding patient perspectives of bDMARD tapering may enable physicians to make patient-focused shared health care decisions.
| S-EPMC11848995 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Clinical evidence demonstrates coadministration of tumour necrosis factor inhibitor (TNFi) agents and methotrexate (MTX) is more efficacious than administration of TNFi agents alone in patients with rheumatoid arthritis, leading to the perception that coadministration of MTX with all biologic agents or oral disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs is necessary for maximum efficacy. Real-life registry data reveal approximately one-third of patients taking biologic agents use them as monotherapy. Additionally, an analysis of healthcare claims data showed that when MTX was prescribed in conjunction with a biologic agent, as many as 58% of patients did not collect the MTX prescription. Given this discrepancy between perception and real life, we conducted a review of the peer-reviewed literature and rheumatology medical congress abstracts to determine whether data support biologic monotherapy as a treatment option for patients with rheumatoid arthritis. Our analysis suggests only for tocilizumab is there evidence that the efficacy of biologic monotherapy is comparable with combination therapy with MTX.
| S-EPMC3841743 | biostudies-literature