Cost-effectiveness analysis of treatment sequences containing tofacitinib for the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis in Spain.
ABSTRACT: OBJECTIVE:To assess the cost-effectiveness of tofacitinib-containing treatment sequences versus sequences containing only standard biological therapies in patients with moderate-to-severe rheumatoid arthritis (RA) after the failure of conventional synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (csDMARD-IR population) and in patients previously treated with methotrexate (MTX) who show an inadequate response to second-line therapy with any tumour necrosis factor inhibitor (TNFi-IR population). METHODS:A patient-level microsimulation model estimated, from the perspective of the Spanish Public NHS, lifetime costs and quality-adjusted life years (QALY) for treatment sequences starting with tofacitinib (5 mg twice daily) followed by biological therapies versus sequences of biological treatments only. Concomitant treatment with MTX was considered. Model's parameters comprised demographic and clinical inputs (initial Health Assessment Questionnaire [HAQ] score and clinical response to short- and long-term treatment). Efficacy was measured by means of HAQ score changes using mixed treatment comparisons and data from long-term extension (LTE) trials. Serious adverse events (SAEs) data were derived from the literature. Total cost estimation (€, 2018) included drug acquisition, parenteral administration, disease progression and SAE management. RESULTS:In the csDMARD-IR population, sequences starting with tofacitinib proved dominant options (more QALYs and lower costs) versus the corresponding sequences without tofacitinib. In the TNFi-IR population, first-line treatment with tofacitinib+MTX followed by scAbatacept+MTX?rituximab+MTX?certolizumab+MTX proved dominant versus scTocilizumab+MTX?scAbatacept+MTX?rituximab+MTX?certolizumab+MTX; and tofacitinib+MTX?scTocilizumab+MTX?scAbatacept+MTX?rituximab+MTX versus scTocilizumab+MTX?scAbatacept+MTX?rituximab+MTX?certolizumab+MTX was less effective but remained a cost-saving option. CONCLUSIONS:Inclusion of tofacitinib seems a dominant strategy in moderate-to-severe RA patients after csDMARDs failure. Tofacitinib, as initial third-line therapy, proved a cost-saving strategy (€-?337,489/QALY foregone) in moderate-to-severe TNFi-IR RA patients. Key points • Therapeutical approach in rheumatoid arthritis (RA) consisted in sequences of several therapies during patient lifetime. • Treatment sequences initiating with tofacitinib followed by biological drugs provided higher health effects in csDMARDs-IR population, compared with sequences containing only biological drugs. • In both csDMARD-IR and TNFi-IR RA populations, initiating treatment with tofacitinib was associated to lower treatment costs for the Spanish National Health System.
Project description:INTRODUCTION:No published studies exist comparing the effectiveness of tofacitinib with other advanced therapies for the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis (RA) in real-world clinical practice. Here, we report differences in effectiveness of tofacitinib compared with standard of care, tumor necrosis factor inhibitors (TNFi), with or without concomitant methotrexate (MTX), using US Corrona registry data. METHODS:This observational cohort study included RA patients receiving tofacitinib (from 6 November 2012; N?=?558) or TNFi (from 1 November 2001; N?=?8014) with or without MTX until 31 July 2016. Efficacy outcomes at 6 months included modified American College of Rheumatology 20% responses, Clinical Disease Activity Index (CDAI) and Pain. Outcomes were compared between patients receiving TNFi and tofacitinib with or without MTX and by line of therapy. Outcomes within therapy lines were compared using propensity-score matching; between-group differences were estimated using mixed-effects regression models. RESULTS:Patients receiving tofacitinib had longer RA duration and a greater proportion had previously received biologics than those receiving TNFi; other baseline characteristics were comparable. In patients receiving second- and third-line TNFi therapy, CDAI low disease activity/remission response rates were significantly better with concomitant MTX. Too few patients received tofacitinib as second line for meaningful assessment. No significant differences were observed in outcomes between tofacitinib as monotherapy and tofacitinib with concomitant MTX. CONCLUSIONS:In clinical practice, TNFi efficacy is improved with concomitant MTX in the second and third line. In the third/fourth line, patients are likely to achieve similar efficacy with tofacitinib monotherapy, or TNFi or tofacitinib in combination with MTX. FUNDING:Pfizer Inc.
Project description:INTRODUCTION:Tofacitinib is an oral Janus kinase inhibitor for the treatment of psoriatic arthritis (PsA). This post hoc analysis assessed the efficacy of tofacitinib using pooled data from two phase 3 studies of patients with active PsA. METHODS:Data were pooled from OPAL Broaden (NCT01877668) and OPAL Beyond (NCT01882439). Patients had active PsA and either an inadequate response (IR) to ≥ 1 conventional synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drug (csDMARD) and were tumor necrosis factor inhibitor (TNFi)-naïve (OPAL Broaden), or had IR to ≥ 1 TNFi (OPAL Beyond). Pooled data included tofacitinib 5 or 10 mg twice daily (BID; to month 6) and placebo (to month 3; patients then switched to tofacitinib 5 or 10 mg BID). Patients also received one background csDMARD. Endpoints included American College of Rheumatology (ACR)20 response and change from baseline in Health Assessment Questionnaire-Disability Index (HAQ-DI) at month 3 (primary endpoints), ACR50/70 response, HAQ-DI response (decrease from baseline ≥ 0.35) and improvements in painful and swollen joint counts, psoriasis, enthesitis and dactylitis to month 6. RESULTS:A total of 710 patients were included (tofacitinib 5 mg BID: 238; tofacitinib 10 mg BID: 236; placebo: 236). Primary endpoints showed significant improvements at month 3 in patients receiving tofacitinib 5 or 10 mg BID vs. placebo. Significant improvements in HAQ-DI response, painful and swollen joints, psoriasis, enthesitis and dactylitis vs. placebo were observed for both tofacitinib doses at month 3. Efficacy was maintained to month 6 (final pooled time point). CONCLUSIONS:In a pooled analysis of csDMARD-IR/TNFi-naïve and TNFi-IR patients, tofacitinib was superior to placebo at month 3 across four PsA domains: peripheral arthritis, psoriasis, enthesitis and dactylitis. TRIAL REGISTRATION:OPAL Broaden (NCT01877668); OPAL Beyond (NCT01882439). FUNDING:Pfizer Inc.
Project description:Objectives:Given that RA treatment might affect the severity of diabetes mellitus (DM), we compared the risk of DM treatment intensification in patients with both RA and DM newly initiating a biologic DMARD or tofacitinib. Methods:Using claims data from the IBM MarketScan database (2005-2016), we identified patients aged ?18?years with RA who initiated abatacept, a TNF inhibitor (TNFi), rituximab, tocilizumab or tofacitinib. Patients were required to have type 1 or type 2 DM and to use at least one antidiabetic drug at baseline. We assessed DM treatment intensification (i.e. addition of a new insulin or non-insulin antidiabetic medication). We also assessed non-insulin antidiabetic medication switching events. Results:We included 10 019 patients with RA and DM initiating a biologic DMARD or tofacitinib. Baseline insulin use was the highest in rituximab initiators (44%) and lowest in tofacitinib initiators (35%). The incidence rate per 1000 person-years for DM treatment intensification ranged from 148.2 (tofacitinib) to 198.0 (rituximab). The risk of DM treatment intensification was similar between abatacept and TNFi [hazard ratio (HR) 0.97, 95% CI: 0.82, 1.15], rituximab (HR 0.99, 95% CI: 0.79, 1.23) and tocilizumab (HR 0.94, 95% CI: 0.74, 1.19), but lower for tofacitinib compared with abatacept (HR 0.67, 95% CI: 0.50, 0.90). The risk of non-insulin DM treatment switching was not different between abatacept and other biologic DMARDs. Conclusion:In patients with both RA and DM, we found no difference in the risk of DM treatment switching or intensification after initiating abatacept vs TNFi, rituximab and tocilizumab, whereas the risk appeared to be lower for tofacitinib.
Project description:OBJECTIVES: To update a previous systematic review assessing the efficacy of conventional synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (csDMARDs) in rheumatoid arthritis (RA). METHODS: Two systematic reviews of the literature using PubMed, Embase and the Cochrane library were performed from 2009 until January 2013 to assess the efficacy of csDMARDs (as monotherapy or combination therapy) in adults with RA, and the efficacy of glucocorticoids in early RA. A third systematic review was performed until March 2013 to assess the efficacy of tofacitinib by meta-analysis. RESULTS: For glucocorticoids, of 222 hits, five publications relating to four new trials were analysed for efficacy, confirming that initial treatment of RA with low-dose prednisone plus methotrexate (MTX) results in better clinical and structural outcomes at 1 and 2 years than treatment with MTX alone. For csDMARDs, of 498 studies, only two new studies were randomised controlled trials comparing MTX monotherapy with MTX in combination with another csDMARD without differences in glucocorticoid usage. Using tight control principles, clinical outcomes were no better with immediate triple therapy than with 'step-up' therapy. For tofacitinib, the pooled analysis of 10 trials showed that tofacitinib was more efficacious on signs and symptoms, disability and appeared to be more efficacious on structural damage than control treatment with placebo (OR (95% CI)--American College of Rheumatology 20% (ACR20) response: 2.44 (1.97 to 3.02)) or treatment with MTX (ACR20 response: 2.38 (1.66 to 3.43)). CONCLUSIONS: Addition of low-dose glucocorticoids to csDMARD therapy produces benefits in early RA. Under tight control conditions, combination therapy with csDMARDs is no better than MTX monotherapy. Tofacitinib is a new DMARD with proven efficacy.
Project description:Importance:Considering the widespread and increasing use of biological immunomodulators (biological disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs [bDMARDs]) to treat chronic inflammatory conditions, and the concern that immunomodulation may alter cancer risk and progression, the limited available data on use of these therapies as used in clinical practice and cancer risks are a concern. Objective:To assess the risk of incident malignant neoplasms in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) treated with bDMARDs. Design, Setting, and Participants:This was a national register-based prospective cohort study of the public health care system in Sweden from 2006 to 2015. Cohorts of patients with RA initiating treatment with tocilizumab (n?=?1798), abatacept (n?=?2021), and rituximab (n?=?3586), a tumor necrosis factor inhibitor (TNFi) as first-ever (n?=?10?782) or second-ever (n?=?4347) bDMARD, a biologics-naive cohort treated with conventional synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (csDMARDs) (n?=?46?610), and a general population comparator cohort (n?=?107?491). Exposures:Treatment with tocilizumab, abatacept, rituximab, or TNFi. Main Outcomes and Measures:Outcomes included a first invasive solid or hematologic malignant neoplasm, or skin cancer. Hazard ratios were calculated using Cox-regression, adjusted for age, sex, disease and treatment characteristics, and educational level. Results:We identified a total of 15?129 initiations of TNFi as the first or second bDMARD, 7405 initiations of other bDMARDs, and 46?610 csDMARD users. The mean age varied from 58 to 64 years, and the proportion of female patients varied from 71% to 80%, across the 7 cohorts under study. The observed numbers of events (crude incidence per 100?000 person-years) for a first invasive solid or hematologic malignant neoplasm were 50 (959) for tocilizumab, 61 (1026) for abatacept, 141 (1074) for rituximab, 478 (978) for initiators of TNFi as first bDMARD, and 169 (917) for TNFi as second bDMARD. There were no statistically significant differences between initiators of a first or second TNFi, or other bDMARDs, and bDMARD-naive RA for any of a total of 25 drug- and outcome-specific comparisons, with 1 exception (abatacept and increased risk of squamous cell skin cancer). Conclusions and Relevance:The overall risk of cancer among patients with RA initiating TNFi as first or second bDMARD, tocilizumab, abatacept, or rituximab does not differ substantially from that of biologic drug-naive, csDMARD-treated patients with RA, although altered risks for specific cancer types, or those with longer latency, cannot be excluded.
Project description:Tofacitinib is an oral Janus kinase inhibitor for the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis (RA). This post hoc analysis investigated the effect of methotrexate (MTX) dose on the efficacy of tofacitinib in patients with RA. ORAL Scan (NCT00847613) was a 2-year, randomized, Phase 3 trial evaluating tofacitinib in MTX-inadequate responder (IR) patients with RA. Patients received tofacitinib 5 or 10 mg twice daily (BID), or placebo, with low (?12.5 mg/week), moderate (>12.5 to <17.5 mg/week), or high (?17.5 mg/week) stable background MTX. Efficacy endpoints (at months 3 and 6) included American College of Rheumatology (ACR) 20/50/70 response rates, and mean change from baseline in Clinical Disease Activity Index (CDAI), Disease Activity Score in 28 joints (DAS28)-4(erythrocyte sedimentation rate [ESR]), Health Assessment Questionnaire-Disability Index (HAQ-DI), and modified Total Sharp score. 797 patients were treated with tofacitinib 5 mg BID (N = 321), tofacitinib 10 mg BID (N = 316), or placebo (N = 160); 242, 333, and 222 patients received low, moderate, and high MTX doses, respectively. At months 3 and 6, ACR20/50/70 response rates were greater for both tofacitinib doses vs placebo across all MTX doses. At month 3, mean changes from baseline in CDAI and HAQ-DI were significantly greater for both tofacitinib doses vs placebo, irrespective of MTX category; improvements were maintained at month 6. Both tofacitinib doses demonstrated improvements in DAS28-4(ESR), and less structural progression vs placebo, across MTX doses at month 6. Tofacitinib plus MTX showed greater clinical and radiographic efficacy than placebo in MTX-IR patients with RA, regardless of MTX dose.
Project description:Objectives:Tofacitinib is an oral Janus kinase inhibitor for treatment of psoriatic arthritis (PsA). Patient-reported outcomes (PROs) were evaluated in patients with PsA with inadequate responses to tumour necrosis factor inhibitors (TNFi-IR) in a 6-month, phase III randomised controlled trial (OPAL Beyond [NCT01882439]). Methods:Patients (N=394) received tofacitinib 5 or 10?mg twice daily or placebo (advancing to tofacitinib 5 or 10?mg twice daily at month 3). Least squares mean changes from baseline and percentages of patients reporting improvements ?minimum clinically important differences and scores ?normative values were determined in Patient Global Assessment of disease activity (PtGA), Pain, Patient Global Joint and Skin Assessment (PGJS), Short Form-36 Health Survey version 2 (SF-36v2), Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy-Fatigue (FACIT-Fatigue), EuroQol 5-Dimensions-3-level (EQ-5D-3L), EQ-VAS and Ankylosing Spondylitis Quality of Life (ASQoL). Nominal p values are without multiple comparison adjustments. Results:At month 3, PtGA, Pain, PGJS, SF-36v2 Physical Component Summary (PCS), physical functioning (PF), bodily pain (BP), vitality and social functioning (SF) domains, FACIT-Fatigue Total score, EQ-5D-3L pain/discomfort, EQ-VAS and ASQoL scores exceeded placebo with both tofacitinib doses (role physical [RP] with 10?mg twice daily only; p?0.05). Patients reporting improvements ?MCID (%) in PtGA, PGJS, Pain, ASQoL and SF-36v2 PCS, PF, RP, BP, SF (both tofacitinib doses) exceeded placebo (p?0.05). Conclusion:TNFi-IR patients with PsA receiving tofacitinib reported statistically and clinically meaningful improvements in PROs versus placebo over 3 months, which were maintained to month 6. Despite lower baseline scores, these improvements were similar to the csDMARD-IR TNFi-naive OPAL Broaden trial.
Project description:Patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) are at increased risk of herpes zoster (HZ), and the risk appears to be increased in patients treated with tofacitinib. The aim of this study was to evaluate whether concomitant treatment with conventional synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (csDMARDs) or glucocorticoids (GCs) contributes to the increased risk of HZ in RA patients treated with tofacitinib.HZ cases were identified from the databases of 2 phase I, 9 phase II, 6 phase III, and 2 long-term extension studies of tofacitinib in RA patients. Crude incidence rates (IRs) of all HZ events (serious and nonserious) per 100 patient-years (with 95% confidence intervals [95% CIs]) were calculated for unique patients. Within phase III studies, we described HZ rates according to concomitant csDMARD treatment and baseline GC use. A multivariable Cox proportional hazards regression model was used to evaluate HZ risk factors across studies.Across all studies (6,192 patients; 16,839 patient-years), HZ was reported in 636 tofacitinib-treated patients (IR 4.0, 95% CI 3.7-4.4). In most cases (93%), HZ was classified as nonserious, and the majority of patients (94%) had involvement of only 1 dermatome. HZ IRs varied across regions, from 2.4 (95% CI 2.0-2.9) in Eastern Europe to 8.0 (95% CI 6.6-9.6) in Japan and 8.4 (95% CI 6.4-10.9) in Korea. Within phase III studies, HZ IRs varied according to tofacitinib dose, background csDMARD treatment, and baseline use of GCs. The IRs were numerically lowest for monotherapy with tofacitinib 5 mg twice daily without GCs (IR 0.56 [95% CI 0.07-2.01]) and highest for tofacitinib 10 mg twice daily with csDMARDs and GCs (IR 5.44 [95% CI 3.72-7.68]). Age, GC use, tofacitinib dose, and enrollment within Asia were independent risk factors for HZ.Patients receiving treatment with tofacitinib and GCs appear to have a greater risk of developing HZ compared with patients receiving tofacitinib monotherapy without GCs.
Project description:The effect of five approved tumour necrosis factor inhibitors (TNFi: infliximab, etanercept, adalimumab, certolizumab, and golimumab) on joint destruction in rheumatoid arthritis (RA) have been compared versus methotrexate (MTX) in randomized controlled trials (RCTs) but have not been compared directly to each other or to an otherwise untreated placebo control. The present analysis compares effects of standard doses, high doses, and low doses of TNFis on radiographic joint destruction in RA and relate these effects to MTX and placebo by means of a Bayesian network meta-analysis. We identified 31 RCTs of the effect of TNFis on joint destruction and 5 RCTs with controls, which indirectly could link otherwise untreated placebo controls to the TNFi treatments in the network. The previously untested comparison with placebo was performed to estimate not only the effect relative to another drug, but also the absolute attainable effect. Compared to placebo there was a highly significant inhibitory effect on joint destruction of infliximab, etanercept, adalimumab, certolizumab, and golimumab, which was about 0.9% per year as monotherapy and about 1.2% per year when combined with MTX. Although significantly better than MTX and placebo, golimumab seemed inferior to the remaining TNFis. There was no difference between original reference drugs (Remicade, Enbrel) and the almost identical copy drugs (biosimilars).
Project description:INTRODUCTION:Janus kinase (JAK) inhibitors are a class of targeted therapies for rheumatoid arthritis (RA) with established clinical efficacy. However, little is known about their efficacy compared with each other. This network meta-analysis (NMA) estimated the comparative efficacy of JAK inhibitors currently approved for RA. METHODS:A targeted literature review was conducted for phase III randomized controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating the efficacy of three approved JAK inhibitors (tofacitinib, baricitinib, and upadacitinib) as monotherapy or combination therapy among patients with moderate-to-severe RA who had inadequate response to conventional synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (csDMARD-IR). Using Bayesian NMA, American College of Rheumatology (ACR) 20/50/70 responses and clinical remission (defined as DAS28-CRP?<?2.6) were evaluated separately at 12 and 24 weeks. RESULTS:Eleven RCTs were identified and included in the NMA. All JAK inhibitors demonstrated significantly better efficacy than csDMARD. Among combination therapies, upadacitinib 15 mg had the highest 12-week ACR50 responses (median [95% credible interval]: 43.4% [33.4%, 54.5%]), followed by tofacitinib 5 mg (38.7% [28.6%, 49.8%]), baricitinib 2 mg (37.1% [25.0%, 50.6%]), and baricitinib 4 mg (36.7%, [27.2%, 47.0%]). Similar results were observed for ACR20/70 and at week 24. Upadacitinib 15 mg?+?csDMARD was also found to have the highest clinical remission rates at week 12 (29.8% [16.9%, 47.0%]), followed by tofacitinib 5 mg (24.3%, [12.7%, 40.2%]), baricitinib 4 mg (22.8%, [11.8%, 37.5%]), and baricitinib 2 mg (20.1%, [8.6%, 37.4%]). Similar results were seen at week 24. Among monotherapies, upadacitinib had a higher ACR50 response (38.5% [25.3%, 53.2%]) than tofacitinib (30.4% [18.3%, 45.5%]). The differences in efficacy measures were not statistically significant between the JAK inhibitors. CONCLUSIONS:The NMA found that upadacitinib 15 mg once daily had numerically higher efficacy in terms of ACR response and clinical remission among approved JAK combination therapies and monotherapies for csDMARD-IR patients with RA.