Dataset Information

Biologics Prescribing for Rheumatoid Arthritis in Older Patients: A Single-Center Retrospective Cross-Sectional Study.

ABSTRACT:

Introduction

Appropriate medical treatment can reduce the morbidity and mortality associated with rheumatoid arthritis (RA). Studies have shown that older patients with RA may be treated less aggressively than their younger counterparts, despite evidence suggesting that biologic treatments may be safe and efficacious in older age groups. The aim of this study was to assess whether patient age was associated with biologic treatment for RA in a single center in the United Kingdom.

Methods

This was a retrospective cross-sectional analysis of clinic records for all patients with RA reviewed over 1 year in our center. Data were also collected on healthcare use in patients aged 65 years and older as a surrogate marker of comorbidity.

Results

In total, 856 patients with RA were identified, of which 22.8% were on biologic treatment. Patients on biologics were younger (mean age 58.9 years) compared to the mean age of all patients (61.4 years). Of patients aged less than 65 years, 27.2% were receiving biologic treatment, while only 15.2% of patients aged 65 years or older were on biologics. Increasing age was significantly associated with a lower likelihood of receiving biologic treatment. However, in patients 65 years or older, there was no significant difference in overall healthcare use between those on biologic treatment and those not. Patients treated with prednisolone were found to have a greater number of admissions.

Conclusion

In our center, older patients are less likely to receive biologic treatment than younger patients. Among older patients we found no difference in healthcare use between those treated with biologics and those not, suggesting similar levels of comorbidity. Potential contributors are discussed, but further assessment is required to determine the reasons for this observation.

SUBMITTER: Morsley K

PROVIDER: S-EPMC4883268 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:IntroductionLimited data are available to explain nonadherence to methotrexate (MTX) therapy in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA). Better understanding of patterns of MTX use and reasons for nonadherence may help identify patients who would benefit from alternative RA treatments and potentially aid in developing strategies to increase overall adherence. The purpose of this study was to assess patients' self-reported adherence to MTX and to identify reasons for nonadherence.MethodsPatient panel members in the US self-reporting a diagnosis of RA of ?3 months' and current MTX use of ?4 weeks' duration, with or without concomitant use of another RA prescription medication, participated in this cross-sectional, web-based survey.ResultsThe sample population (251 MTX monotherapy, 250 MTX combination therapy) was predominantly female, white, non-Hispanic, and educated; 48% were 18-44 years-old, 47% had medical comorbidities, 66% were first diagnosed with RA ?5 years earlier, 51% reported MTX use of <1 year, and 83% reported oral MTX use. Forty-two percent reported not taking MTX exactly as prescribed. Reasons for nonadherence included forgetting to take it (33%), not needing it when feeling well (24%), and concern about long-term safety (24%). Among nonadherent patients, 53% took smaller doses, 52% skipped doses, and 6% reported other nonprescribed ways of taking MTX. Younger age, male sex, and shorter duration of MTX use were associated with poorer self-reported adherence. Compared with monotherapy patients, combination therapy patients, particularly those taking ?2 other RA prescriptions, were less likely to report high adherence.ConclusionNearly half the sample reported poor MTX adherence because they forgot to take it, thought it was not needed when they felt well, or had long-term safety concerns. Patients taking ?2 other RA prescription medications were less likely to report good adherence. Reducing treatment burden without sacrificing efficacy may be a strategy worth evaluating.

Project description:BackgroundThis multi-center, retrospective study aimed to clarify retention rates and reasons for discontinuation of 7 biological disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (bDMARDs) and tofacitinib (TOF), one of the janus kinase inhibitors, in bDMARDs-naïve and bDMARDs-switched patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA).MethodsThis study assessed 3897 patients and 4415 treatment courses with bDMARDs and TOF from 2001 to 2019 (2737 bDMARDs-naïve courses and 1678 bDMARDs-switched courses [59.5% of switched courses were their second agent], female 82.3%, baseline age 57.4 years, disease duration 8.5 years; rheumatoid factor positivity 78.4%; Disease Activity Score in 28 joints using erythrocyte sedimentation rate 4.3; concomitant prednisolone [PSL] dose 6.1 mg/day [usage 42.4%], and methotrexate [MTX] dose 8.5 mg/week [usage 60.9%]). Treatment courses included abatacept (ABT; n = 663), adalimumab (ADA; n = 536), certolizumab pegol (CZP; n = 226), etanercept (ETN; n = 856), golimumab (GLM; n = 458), infliximab (IFX; n = 724), tocilizumab (TCZ; n = 851), and TOF (n = 101/only bDMARDs-switched cases). Drug discontinuation reasons (categorized into lack of effectiveness, toxic adverse events, non-toxic reasons, or remission) and rates were estimated at 36 months using Gray's test and statistically evaluated after adjusted by potential clinical confounders (age, sex, disease duration, concomitant PSL and MTX usage, starting date, and number of switched bDMARDs) using the Fine-Gray model.ResultsCumulative incidence of drug discontinuation for each reason was as follows: lack of effectiveness in the bDMARDs-naïve group (from 13.7% [ABT] to 26.9% [CZP]; P < 0.001 between agents) and the bDMARDs-switched group (from 18.9% [TCZ] to 46.1% [CZP]; P < 0.001 between agents); toxic adverse events in the bDMARDs-naïve group (from 4.6% [ABT] to 11.2% [ETN]; P < 0.001 between agents) and the bDMARDs-switched group (from 5.0% [ETN] to 15.7% [TOF]; P = 0.004 between agents); and remission in the bDMARDs-naïve group (from 2.9% [ETN] to 10.0% [IFX]; P < 0.001 between agents) and the bDMARDs-switched group (from 1.1% [CZP] to 3.3% [GLM]; P = 0.9 between agents).ConclusionsRemarkable differences were observed in drug retention of 7 bDMARDs and TOF between bDMARDs-naïve and bDMARDs-switched cases.

Project description:Cutaneous manifestations are fairly common in rheumatoid arthritis (RA) and they can help in early diagnosis, prompt treatment, and hence reduced morbidity from the disease.The objective of the present study was to find out the different patterns of dermatoses in a group of patients with RA from Eastern India.Consecutive patients fulfilling the American Rheumatism Association 1987 revised criteria for the classification of RA and who had different dermatoses were included in this cross-sectional study done over a period of 8 years in a tertiary care hospital in Eastern India. Thorough clinical examination and appropriate laboratory investigations were performed as needed. Data were recorded in a predesigned schedule, and appropriate statistical analysis was done.We studied 111 evaluable patients with an age range of 19-71 years and a female to male ratio of 7:1. The mean disease duration of RA was 6.5 years. Cutaneous infections as a group was the most common mucocutaneous manifestation (34.2%) followed by xerosis including ichthyotic skin changes (27%), pigmented purpuric dermatoses (14.4%), leg ulcer (9.9%), periungual telangiectasia (9.9%), rheumatoid nodules (RNs) (8.1%), purpura and ecchymoses (7.2%), small vessel vasculitis in (7.2%), corn and callosities (6.3%), palmar erythema (4.5%), and neutrophilic dermatosis (4.5%). Raynaud's phenomenon was found in 3.6% patients and panniculitis in (3.6%) patients. Rheumatoid factor (RF) and anti-cyclic citrullinated peptides antibody were positive in 74.8% and 88.3% patients, respectively. No statistically significant difference of incidence of leg ulcer, small vessel vasculitis, RN, or Raynaud's phenomenon could be noted between RF positive and negative groups.Being an institution-based study, the study findings may not reflect the true situation in the community which remained a limitation of this study.While some of the features of this study were analogous to Western data, other features showed discordance which may be due to ethnic variations among the patients with RA.

Project description:BackgroundThe use of eHealth tools (eg, the internet, mobile apps, and connected devices) in the management of chronic diseases and for rheumatoid arthritis is growing. eHealth may improve the overall quality of care provided to patients with chronic diseases.ObjectiveThe primary objective of this study was to describe eHealth use by patients with rheumatoid arthritis in France. The secondary objectives were to identify associations between patient demographics and disease characteristics and the use of eHealth tools, and assess their expectations of eHealth.MethodsIn this cross-sectional, multicenter study, patients with rheumatoid arthritis, according to the 2010 ACR/EULAR classification criteria, were recruited from 5 university hospitals (Bordeaux, Clermont-Ferrand, Limoges, Montpellier, and Toulouse). Patients completed an anonymous self-questionnaire, including demographic data, evaluating their eHealth use (ie, access, support, frequency of use, type of use, and reason for use). The rheumatologist in charge of each patient completed an independent medical questionnaire on disease characteristics, activity of rheumatoid arthritis, and treatments. Data were collected between December 2018 and July 2019.ResultsQuestionnaires were completed by 575 participants, with a mean age of 62 (SD 13) years, 447 (77.7%) of whom were female. Overall, 82.2% (473/575) of the participants had access to eHealth through a computer (402/467, 86.1%), tablet (188/467, 40.2%), or smartphone (221/467, 47.3%). Of these, 36.4% (170/467) of the participants used the internet for health in general, and 28.7% (134/467) used it specifically for rheumatoid arthritis-related reasons. All these 134 patients used eHealth to learn about disease pathology, and 66.4% (89/134) of them used it as a tool to help monitor rheumatoid arthritis. Most patients (87/125, 69.6%) had a paper file, 19.2% (24/125) used a digital tool (spreadsheets, 10/125, 8%; mobile app, 9/125, 7.2%; or website, 5/125, 4%), and 24.8% (31/125) did not use any tools for monitoring. Few patients (16/125, 12.8%) used tools for treatment reminders. About 21.6% (27/125) of the patients using eHealth used a specific app for rheumatoid arthritis. Univariate analysis showed that age, education level, employment status, treatment, comorbidities, membership of a patient association, and patient education program were associated with eHealth use for rheumatoid arthritis. Multivariate analysis showed that membership of a patient association (odds ratio [OR] 5.8, 95% CI 3.0-11.2), use of biologic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (OR 0.6, 95% CI 0.4-1.0), and comorbidities (OR 0.7, 95% CI 0.6-0.8) remained associated with eHealth use for rheumatoid arthritis. Recommendation by a doctor (225/330, 68.2%), ease of use (105/330, 31.8%), and data security (69/330, 20.9%) were factors favoring the use of eHealth.ConclusionsTo date, few patients have used eHealth for disease management. The use of a reliable and validated eHealth tool for rheumatoid arthritis could therefore be promoted by rheumatologists and could optimize therapeutic adherence.

Project description:BackgroundThe link between body mass index (BMI) and disease characteristics in rheumatoid arthritis (RA) remains controversial. Body composition (BC) has been more frequently recommended to be used instead of BMI for more accurate assessment. Our study aimed to investigate the characteristics of BC in RA patients and their associations with disease characteristics.MethodsBody composition was assessed in consecutive Chinese RA patients and control subjects by bioelectric impedance analysis. Overfat was defined by body fat percentage (BF%) as ≥25% for men and ≥35% for women. Myopenia was defined by appendicular skeletal muscle mass index (ASMI) ≤7.0 kg/m2 in men and ≤5.7 kg/m2 in women. BMI and clinical data including disease activity, function, and radiographic assessment were collected. Active disease was defined by disease activity score in 28 joints with four variables including C-reactive protein (DAS28-CRP) ≥2.6. Functional limitation was defined as Stanford health assessment questionnaire disability index (HAQ-DI) >1. Radiographic joint damage (RJD) was defined as the Sharp/van der Heijde modified sharp score (mTSS) >10.ResultsThere were 457 RA patients (mean age 49.5 ± 13.1 years old with 82.7% women) and 1860 control subjects (mean age 34.3 ± 9.9 years old with 51.2% women) recruited. Comparisons of BMI and BC between RA patients and control subjects in age and gender stratification showed that lower BMI with 17.7% underweight and lower ASMI with 45.1% myopenia are the main characteristics in RA patients. Compared with those without myopenia, RA patients with myopenia had significantly higher DAS28-CRP (median 3.5 vs. 3.0), higher HAQ-DI (median 0.38 vs. 0.13) with higher rate of functional limitation (24.8% vs. 7.6%), and higher mTSS (median 22.3 vs. 9.0) with more RJD (71.8% vs. 45.8%) (all P < 0.001). Multivariate logistic regression analysis showed myopenia were positively associated with functional limitation (OR = 2.546, 95% CI: 1.043-6.217) and RJD (OR = 2.660, 95% CI: 1.443-4.904). All RA patients were divided into four BC subgroups according to overfat and myopenia. Those with both overfat and myopenia had the worst disease characteristics. After adjustment for confounding factors, significant additive interactions were observed between overfat and myopenia in active disease (AP = 0.528, 95% CI: 0.086-0.971), functional limitation (AP = 0.647, 95% CI: 0.356-0.937), and RJD (AP = 0.514, 95% CI: 0.139-0.890).ConclusionsMyopenia is very common in RA patients that is associated with functional limitation and joint damage in RA. Further research on the underlying mechanism and the effect of skeletal muscle mass improvement in RA management are worth exploring in the future.

Project description:BackgroundMany medications pose greater health risks when prescribed for older adults, compared with available pharmacologic and nonpharmacologic alternatives. We sought to quantify the frequency and cost of potentially inappropriate prescribing for older women and men in Canada.MethodsUsing data for 2013 from the National Prescription Drug Utilization Information System database, which contains prescription claims from publicly financed drug plans in all provinces except for Quebec, we identified the frequency of prescribing and cost of potentially inappropriate medications dispensed to provincial drug plan enrollees aged 65 years or more. Potentially inappropriate prescriptions were defined with the use of the American Geriatrics Society's 2012 version of the Beers Criteria for potentially inappropriate medication use in older adults.ResultsFor the 6 provinces with relatively complete data coverage (British Columbia, Alberta, Saskatchewan, Manitoba, Ontario and Prince Edward Island), 37% of older people filled 1 or more prescription meeting the Beers Criteria. A higher proportion of women (42%) than men (31%) filled potentially inappropriate prescriptions. The highest rates of prescribing of potentially inappropriate medications were among women aged 85 or more (47%). Benzodiazepines and other hypnotics were the leading contributors to the overall frequency of and sex differences in prescribing of potentially inappropriate drugs among older adults. We estimated that $75 per older Canadian, or $419 million in total, was spent on potentially inappropriate medications outside of hospital settings in 2013.InterpretationPrescribing of potentially inappropriate medications for older adults is common and costly in Canada, especially for women. Multipronged and well-coordinated strategies to reduce the use and cost of potentially inappropriate drugs would likely generate significant health system savings while simultaneously generating major benefits to patient health.