Validity of psoriatic arthritis and capture of disease modifying antirheumatic drugs in the health improvement network.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Ogdie A
PROVIDER: S-EPMC4149813 | biostudies-literature | 2014 Sep
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Publications
Validity of psoriatic arthritis and capture of disease modifying antirheumatic drugs in the health improvement network.
Ogdie Alexis A Alehashemi Sara S Love Thorvardur Jon TJ Jiang Yihui Y Haynes Kevin K Hennessy Sean S Choi Hyon H Gelfand Joel M JM
Pharmacoepidemiology and drug safety 20140705 9
<h4>Purpose</h4>The aims of this study are to examine the validity of diagnostic codes for psoriatic arthritis in The Health Improvement Network (THIN) and to examine the agreement between General Practitioner (GP) report and prescription records for disease modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs).<h4>Methods</h4>Questionnaires were sent to the GPs of 100 randomly selected patients with at least one medical record code for psoriatic arthritis. The positive predictive value (PPV) for a GP confirme ...[more]
Similar Datasets
Project description:Background:Tofacitinib and other new treatments approved for use in psoriatic arthritis have only recently been included in psoriatic arthritis treatment guidelines, and studies evaluating the relative efficacy of available therapies are important to inform treatment decisions by healthcare professionals. Objective:To perform a network meta-analysis to evaluate the efficacy and safety profiles of tofacitinib, biologic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (bDMARDs), and apremilast in patients with psoriatic arthritis naïve to tumor necrosis factor inhibitor therapy (TNFi-naïve) or with an inadequate response (TNFi-IR). Methods:A systematic literature review used searches of MEDLINE, Embase, and The Cochrane Library on October 9, 2017. Randomized controlled trials including adult patients with psoriatic arthritis receiving treatment administered as monotherapy or with conventional synthetic DMARDs were selected. Efficacy outcomes included American College of Rheumatology 20 response, change from baseline in Health Assessment Questionnaire-Disability Index, ?75% improvement in Psoriasis Area and Severity Index, and change from baseline in Dactylitis Severity Score and Leeds Enthesitis Index. Treatment effects were evaluated during placebo-controlled phases, using a binomial logit model for binary outcomes and a normal identify link model for other outcomes. Discontinuations due to adverse events and serious infection events were assessed as safety outcomes. Results:The network meta-analysis included 24 published randomized controlled trials, of which 13 enrolled TNFi-naïve patients only, 3 enrolled TNFi-IR patients only, and 8 enrolled both TNFi-naïve and TNFi-IR patients. Placebo-controlled treatment durations ranged from 12 to 24 weeks. Indirect comparisons showed tofacitinib 5 and 10 mg BID to have similar efficacy compared with most bDMARDs and apremilast in improving joint symptoms (based on American College of Rheumatology 20 response), and with some bDMARDs in improving skin symptoms (based on Psoriasis Area and Severity Index) (tofacitinib 10 mg BID only in TNFi-IR) in patients with psoriatic arthritis who were TNFi-naïve or TNFi-IR. Results also showed that, compared with placebo, the improvement in physical functioning (based on Health Assessment Questionnaire-Disability Index) with tofacitinib 5 and 10 mg BID was similar to that observed with most bDMARDs and apremilast in TNFi-naïve patients, and similar to that observed with all bDMARDs with available data in the TNFi-IR population. Improvements in Dactylitis Severity Score and Leeds Enthesitis Index scores were comparable between treatments. Tofacitinib 5 and 10 mg BID were median-ranked 8 and 15, respectively, for discontinuation due to any adverse events, and 5 and 16, respectively, for a serious infection event out of a total of 20 treatments in the network (lower numbers are more favorable). Conclusions:Tofacitinib provides an additional treatment option for patients with psoriatic arthritis, both in patients naïve to TNFi and in those with TNFi-IR. (Curr Ther Res Clin Exp. 2020; 81:XXX-XXX).
| S-EPMC7494680 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectiveTo assess the efficacy and safety of upadacitinib (UPA), an oral Janus kinase inhibitor, as monotherapy or in combination with non-biologic DMARDs (nbDMARDs) in patients with PsA.MethodsPooled data were analysed from patients with prior inadequate response or intolerance to one or more nbDMARD (SELECT-PsA 1) or one or more biologic DMARD (SELECT-PsA 2) who received placebo, UPA 15 mg once daily (QD) or UPA 30 mg QD as monotherapy or in combination with two or fewer nbDMARDs for 24 weeks. Efficacy outcomes included achievement of ACR responses, Psoriasis Area and Severity Index responses, minimal disease activity and change from baseline and clinically meaningful improvement in the HAQ Disability Index. Adverse events (AEs) were summarized.ResultsA total of 1916 patients were included; 574 (30%) received monotherapy and 1342 (70%) received combination therapy. Placebo-subtracted treatment effects for a 20% improvement in ACR criteria at week 12 were 33.7% (95% CI 24.4, 43.1) and 34.0% (95% CI 27.9, 40.1) for UPA 15 mg QD monotherapy and combination therapy, respectively, and 45.7% (95% CI 36.9, 54.5) and 39.6% (95% CI 33.7, 45.5) for UPA 30 mg QD monotherapy and combination therapy, respectively. Treatment effects for other outcomes were consistent between monotherapy and combination therapy. AE frequency was generally similar for UPA monotherapy and combination therapy, although hepatic disorders and creatine phosphokinase elevation were more common with combination therapy vs monotherapy.ConclusionThe efficacy and safety of UPA were generally consistent when administered as monotherapy or in combination with nbDMARDs through 24 weeks, supporting the use of UPA with or without nbDMARDs in PsA.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov (https://clinicaltrials.gov): SELECT-PsA 1 (NCT03104400), SELECT-PsA 2 (NCT03104374).
| S-EPMC9348611 | biostudies-literature
Project description:IntroductionTo investigate drug survival for biologic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (bDMARDs) in a real-world cohort of German adult biologic-naïve patients with psoriatic arthritis (PsA).MethodsClaims data for patients with a diagnosis of PsA, a bDMARD claims record (index date) between 1 January 2014 and 31 December 2017, and no bDMARD prescription for 365 days before the index date were retrospectively analyzed. The primary outcomes were the overall and individual bDMARD persistence rates over 12 months. Nonpersistence was defined as a treatment gap exceeding the days of supply plus 60 days or switching to a bDMARD other than the index therapy. Sensitivity analysis was performed, wherein the treatment gap was found to vary depending on the bDMARD regimen. Kaplan-Meier curves were plotted to determine persistence; the log-rank test was used to evaluate differences in the persistence rate. Factors associated with treatment discontinuation were evaluated using Cox regression analysis.ResultsAmong 10,954 patients with a PsA diagnosis, 348 were eligible. The overall bDMARD persistence rate was 57.5%; individual bDMARD persistence rates were 81.3% for ustekinumab, 66.7% for infliximab, and 60.0% for golimumab. The mean (SD) overall persistence with bDMARDs was 289 (103) days; the mean persistence was 334 (72) days for ustekinumab, 309 (82) days for golimumab, and 305 (92) days for infliximab. The main reasons for nonpersistence were switching to another bDMARD (15.8%) and treatment discontinuation (26.7%). Male gender was significantly associated with a lower risk of treatment discontinuation (hazard ratio 0.54, 95% confidence interval 0.39-0.77; P < 0.001). The sensitivity analysis yielded similar results.ConclusionThe one-year persistence rate for bDMARDs in German PsA patients is modest, although the persistence rate depends on the bDMARD considered.
| S-EPMC7991063 | biostudies-literature
Project description:IntroductionPsoriatic arthritis (PsA) has a major impact on health-related quality of life (HRQOL) and other patient-reported outcomes (PROs), important components in the assessment of therapeutic efficacy. We evaluated the impact of upadacitinib on PROs in PsA patients with inadequate responses or intolerance to biologic disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs (bDMARD-IR).MethodsPatients enrolled in the phase 3 SELECT-PsA 2 randomized controlled trial (RCT) received 56 weeks of oral upadacitinib 15 mg QD, upadacitinib 30 mg QD, or placebo switched to either dose of upadacitinib at week 24. PROs included patient global assessment of disease activity (PtGA), pain, physical function (HAQ-DI), health-related quality of life (SF-36 physical (PCS) and mental (MCS) component summary and domain scores), fatigue (FACIT-F), psoriasis symptom severity (SAPS), and work productivity (WPAI). Mean changes from baseline in PROs, improvements ≥ minimum clinically important differences (MCID) and scores ≥ normative values, and maintenance of improvements were assessed.ResultsAt weeks 12 and 24, patients treated with either upadacitinib dose reported statistically and nominally significant improvements from baseline across all PROs versus placebo (p ≤ 0.05), except the WPAI absenteeism domain, which were maintained or further improved to week 56. A significantly greater proportion of patients receiving either upadacitinib dose reported improvements ≥ MCID and scores ≥ normative values versus placebo (nominal p ≤ 0.01) in most PROs at weeks 12 and 24, with clinically meaningful improvements continuing to week 56. Improvements ≥ MCID were reported as early as week 2 in PtGA, pain, and HAQ-DI.ConclusionsUpadacitinib provides rapid, clinically meaningful, and sustained improvements in PROs reported by bDMARD-IR PsA patients. SELECT-PsA 2 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03104374.
| S-EPMC8572272 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Disease-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.Study 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.The 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.Efforts to improve DMARD use should focus on patient age, ethnicity, and income and RA-related factors.
| S-EPMC4112169 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Recent 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.We 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.We 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).The 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: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:ObjectiveTo evaluate the comparative efficacy and safety of Janus kinase (JAK) inhibitors and biological disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (bDMARDs) in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) and an inadequate response to at least one disease-modifying antirheumatic drug (DMARD).MethodsPubMed, Embase, Cochrane library and ClinicalTrials.gov were searched for relevant randomized controlled trials (RCTs) from inception to April 2020. The active drugs included three JAK inhibitors and eight bDMARDs while the control drugs included placebo or conventional synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (csDMARDs). Outcomes include American College of Rheumatology 20% response (ACR20), Disease Activity Score in 28 joints (DAS28), Health Assessment Questionnaire-Disability Index (HAQ-DI) and discontinuations for adverse events (AEs). We estimated summary odds ratios (ORs) and weighted mean differences (WMDs) using network meta-analysis with random effects.ResultsEighty-eight RCTs with 31,566 patients were included. All JAK inhibitors and bDMARDs were more effective than placebo in ACR20 (ORs ranging between 3.05 and 5.61), DAS28 (WMDs ranging between -1.91 and -0.80) and HAQ-DI (WMDs ranging between -0.34 and -0.21). Tocilizumab, certolizumab pegol and upadacitinib showed relatively good efficacy in these three outcomes according to their relative ranking. Notably, tocilizumab was more effective than other active drugs in DAS28 (WMDs ranging between -1.11 and -0.49). Compared with the lower recommended doses, increasing the doses of JAK inhibitors (baricitinib 4 mg versus 2 mg, tofacitinib 10 mg versus 5 mg and upadacitinib 30 mg versus 15 mg) cannot provide significant additional benefits. In terms of discontinuations for AEs, all active drugs showed no significant difference compared with placebo except certolizumab pegol [OR 1.65, 95% credible interval (CrI) 1.06-2.61] and rituximab (3.17, 1.11-10.80).ConclusionsTocilizumab, certolizumab pegol and upadacitinib may have relatively good efficacy in patients with RA after treatment failure with csDMARDs. RA patients taking a JAK inhibitor may have a preference for a lower recommended dose.
| S-EPMC7989112 | biostudies-literature
Project description:IntroductionThe The BIOlogical Dose OPTimisation (BIODOPT) trial is a pragmatic, multicentre, randomised controlled, open-label, parallel-group, equivalence study designed to evaluate tapering of biological disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (bDMARDs) in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA), psoriatic arthritis (PsA) and axial spondyloarthritis (axSpA) in sustained clinical remission or low disease activity (LDA). Traditionally, these patients maintain standard dosage of bDMARD lifelong; however, recent studies indicate that a significant proportion of patients in sustained remission or LDA can taper their bDMARD and maintain stable disease activity. Thus, this trial aims to evaluate whether a disease activity-guided tapering strategy for bDMARDs will enable a significant dosage reduction while maintaining disease activity compared with usual care. From the individual patient's standpoint as well as from a societal perspective, it would be advantageous if bDMARDs could be reduced or even discontinued while maintaining disease activity.Methods and analysisA total of 180 patients with RA, PsA or axSpA treated with bDMARDs and in clinical remission/LDA during the past 12 months will be enrolled from four centres in Denmark. Patients will be randomised in a ratio of 2:1 to either disease activity-guided tapering of bDMARDs (intervention group) or continuation of bDMARDs as usual care (control group).The primary objective is the difference between the two groups in the proportion of patients who have reduced their inclusion dosage of bDMARDs to 50% or less while maintaining stable disease activity at 18 months follow-up.Ethics and disseminationThe study is approved by the ethics committee of Northern Jutland, Denmark (N-20170073) and by the Danish Medicine Agency. Patient research partner KHH contributed to refinement of the protocol and approved the final manuscript. Results will be disseminated through publication in international peer-reviewed journals.Trial registration number2017-001970-41; Pre-results.
| S-EPMC6624054 | biostudies-literature