AB0245 Unmet Needs and Burden of Illness in Patients Currently Receiving Biologic Treatments for Rheumatoid Arthritis: A Comparison of Physician Perception of Remission and DAS28-Measured Remission in A Real World Study: Table 1.

2016 ◽  
Vol 75 (Suppl 2) ◽  
pp. 982.1-982
Author(s):  
S. Peterson ◽  
E. Sullivan ◽  
D. Kielar ◽  
N. Li
2021 ◽  
Vol 80 (Suppl 1) ◽  
pp. 378-379
Author(s):  
B. Fautrel ◽  
R. Caporali ◽  
E. Holdsworth ◽  
B. Donaghy ◽  
M. Khalid ◽  
...  

Background:The principles of treat to target (T2T) include defining an appropriate treatment target, assessed at pre-defined intervals, with a commitment to changing therapeutic approach if the target is not met (1). T2T is recommended as a key strategy for the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis (RA).Objectives:To explore attitudes towards T2T, its implementation and stated treatment goals among physicians and their patients with RA.Methods:The Adelphi RA Disease Specific Programme™ was a large, quantitative, point-in-time survey conducted amongst rheumatologists (n=296) and their consulting patients with RA (n=3042) in Europe (France, Germany, Italy, Spain, UK) between Q4 2019–Q3 2020. Physicians were recruited via publicly available lists, completing an online survey and medical record extraction for their next 10–12 consecutive patients. The same patients were invited to voluntarily complete a self-report questionnaire (n=1098, 36% response), collecting data on attitudes towards T2T and treatment goals.Results:Physicians reported that 76% of patients were in remission (DAS28: <2.6) or had low disease activity (DAS28: 2.6 – 3.2), and 24% had moderate-high disease activity (DAS28: >3.2). Patient mean age was 53.0 years (SD 14.0), mean time since diagnosis was 7.2 years (SD 7.2). The proportion of patients currently receiving an advanced therapy (AT; defined as biologic or targeted synthetic DMARD) was 68%, of whom 70% were on a first line AT. No difference was observed between disease activity groups.In the physician survey, 86% of physicians stated they followed T2T principals in at least some of their RA patients, and would utilize a T2T approach in RA patients with moderate-high disease activity (61%), the most uncontrolled patients (37%) and those who do not respond well to initial therapy (34%). In this sample of real-world RA patients, 66% were reported by physicians to be on a T2T plan at the time of data collection. The most common physician-reported targets were remission (DAS28: <2.6) (75%), improvement of quality of life (QoL) (41%) and reduction of pain (31%), with 85% of physicians perceiving these treatment goals were fully or partially met. The most stated reasons for not implementing T2T was physician preference not to adjust current treatment (34%), patient preference not to adjust current treatment (23%), and there are no achievable goals for this patient (16%).Overall, 29% of patients reported they were involved in setting their T2T goals, while 34% stated their T2T goals were set by their physicians only, and 29% perceived no T2T goal had been set (n=620). The most common overall T2T goals from the patient perspective were remission (61%), controlling symptoms (41%), and reducing impact on QoL (34%). Of those patients who acknowledged a T2T goal had been set (n=407), 77% reported their T2T goal was fully or partially achieved.Of 719 patients who had moderate-high disease activity, 57% were on a T2T plan, with 46% of physicians perceiving these treatment goals were fully or partially met. The most common physician-stated reason for not implementing T2T was a lack of achievable targets (29%).Conclusion:Rheumatologists in this study reported a strong belief in T2T. The most common physician-set T2T goals were remission, improvement of QoL and reduction of pain, corresponding with T2T goals as reported by patients. However, a third of patients in this cohort were not aware of a defined T2T objective in their management, which may be a result of a perceived lack of achievable goals by physicians. It may be desirable to promote more patient involvement in defining achievable targets amongst those with moderate-high disease activity who despite best efforts may not reach a clinical state of remission. Further research is needed to identify and understand goals important to RA patients.References:[1]van Vollenhoven R. Treat-to-target in rheumatoid arthritis - are we there yet? Nat Rev Rheumatol. 2019;15(3):180-6.Acknowledgements:This study was funded by Galapagos NV, Belgium.Medical writing support was provided by Gary Sidgwick, PhD (Adelphi Real World, Bollington, UK) and editorial support was provided by Debbie Sherwood, BSc, CMPP (Aspire Scientific, Bollington, UK), both funded by Galapagos NV.Disclosure of Interests:Bruno Fautrel Consultant of: AbbVie, Amgen, Biogen, BMS, Celgene, Celltrion, Fresenius Kabi, Gilead, Janssen, Lilly, Medac, MSD, Mylan, NORDIC Pharma, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, Sandoz, Sanofi-Genzyme, SOBI, UCB, Grant/research support from: AbbVie, Lilly, MSD, Pfizer, Roberto Caporali Speakers bureau: AbbVie, Amgen, Bristol Myers Squibb, Celltrion, Galapagos, Gilead, Lilly, Pfizer, Roche, UCB, Sanofi, Fresenius Kabi, Samsung Bioepis, MSD, Consultant of: Galapagos, Gilead, Lilly, Janssen, MSD, Elizabeth Holdsworth Employee of: Adelphi Real World, Bethany Donaghy Employee of: Adelphi Real World, Mona Khalid Shareholder of: Galapagos, Employee of: Galapagos, Mark Moore Shareholder of: Gilead Sciences, Speakers bureau: Gilead Sciences (only as employee), Paid instructor for: Gilead Sciences (only as employee), Consultant of: Gilead Sciences (only as employee), Grant/research support from: Gilead Sciences (only as employee), Employee of: Gilead Sciences, and previously Sanofi and AstraZeneca, Katrien Van Beneden Shareholder of: Galapagos, Employee of: Galapagos, Yves Piette Consultant of: AbbVie, Amgen, Galapagos, Grünenthal and Sandoz, Grant/research support from: Amgen, Mylan and UCB, Susana Romero-Yuste Speakers bureau: AbbVie, Amgen, Bristol Myers Squibb, Grunenthal, Kern Pharma, Lilly, Roche, Sandoz, Sanofi, UCB, Janssen, Consultant of: AbbVie, Biogen, Fresenius, Galapagos, Gebro, Janssen, Lilly, Grant/research support from: Bristol Myers Squibb, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, Jasper Broen Shareholder of: Pharming Group, Consultant of: Galapagos, Gilead, Novartis, Peter C. Taylor Consultant of: AbbVie, Biogen, Galapagos, Gilead, GlaxoSmithKline, Janssen, Lilly, Pfizer, Roche, Sanofi, Nordic Pharma, Fresenius, UCB, Grant/research support from: Celgene, Galapagos, Gilead, Lilly


2020 ◽  
Vol 79 (Suppl 1) ◽  
pp. 1872.1-1873
Author(s):  
S. H. Park ◽  
X. Han ◽  
F. Lobo ◽  
S. Nanji ◽  
D. Patel

Background:The shared epitope (SE) is a significant genetic risk factor for rheumatoid arthritis (RA), and it has been proposed to be associated with T-cell activation and the production of anti-citrullinated protein antibody (ACPA).1-3The results from the Early AMPLE trial, a head-to-head trial comparing the efficacy of abatacept versus adalimumab among early moderate-to-severe RA patients with positive ACPA (ACPA+) and rheumatoid factor (RF), showed that at week 24, patients with SE positivity (SE+) responded better to abatacept compared to adalimumab across all efficacy measures evaluated (ACR20 [American College of Rheumatology], ACR50, ACR70, DAS[disease activity score]28-CRP[C-reactive protein]).4Objectives:To compare the cost per responder (CPR) between abatacept and adalimumab among RA patients with SE+ at week 24 using the Early AMPLE trial data from a United States (US) payer perspective.Methods:A CPR analysis was conducted for RA patients with SE+, ACPA+, and RF. Responders were defined as patients achieving ACR20, ACR50, ACR70, or DAS28-CRP ≤2.6 and efficacy data was sourced from the trial (Figure 1).4Approved product labels were referenced for treatment dosing regimen and wholesale acquisition cost was used to calculate pharmacy cost.5A real-world rebate scenario was considered for adalimumab (30%) to reflect the real-world pricing in the US market. The CPR was calculated as the total pharmacy cost divided by the proportion of responders.Results:The total pharmacy cost at week 24 was $26,273 per patient for abatacept and $21,731 per patient for adalimumab. With achieving ACR70 as the definition of responder, the CPR at 24-week was $46,337 for abatacept and $74,935 for adalimumab, a difference of $28,598 (Table 1). The CPR was consistently lower for abatacept compared to adalimumab across all clinical measures, with difference ranging from $7,099 to $43,609.Table 1.Overall cost per responder resultsAbataceptAdalimumabDifferenceACR20$30,303.74$37,403.06-$7,099.32ACR50$34,254.68$48,077.83-$13,823.15ACR70$46,337.46$74,935.10-$28,597.64DAS28-CRP ≤2.6$52,546.68$96,155.65-$43,608.97Conclusion:While the pharmacy cost was higher for abatacept compared to adalimumab driven by the rebate, due to its higher clinical efficacy, the CPR was consistently lower for SE+ RA patients treated with abatacept. The results may be useful for US healthcare decision makers in understanding how to optimize treatment for SE+ RA patient while minimizing costs in today’s budget constrained environment.References:[1]Gregersen PK, Silver J, Winchester RJ. The shared epitope hypothesis. An approach to understanding the molecular genetics of susceptibility to rheumatoid arthritis.Arthritis and rheumatism. 1987;30(11):1205-13.[2]Holoshitz J. The rheumatoid arthritis HLA-DRB1 shared epitope.Curr Opin Rheumatol. 2010;22(3):293-8.[3]Sakkas LI, Bogdanos DP, Katsiari C, et al. Anti-citrullinated peptides as autoantigens in rheumatoid arthritis-relevance to treatment.Autoimmun Rev. 2014;13(11):1114-20.[4]Fleischmann R, Weinblatt M, Ahmad H, et al. Efficacy of abatacept and adalimumab in patientsn with early rheumatoid arthritis with multiple poor prognostic factors: post hoc analysis of a randomized controlled clinical trial (AMPLE).Rheumatol Ther. 2019;6(4): 559-571.[5]Truven Health Analytics. Redbook online. Accessed October 11, 2019.Disclosure of Interests:Sang Hee Park Consultant of: Pharmerit International, which received consultancy fees from Bristol-Myers Squibb (US), Inc. for this study, Xue Han Employee of: BMS, Francis Lobo Shareholder of: Bristol-Myers Squibb (US), Employee of: Bristol-Myers Squibb (US), Sakina Nanji Consultant of: Pharmerit International, which received consultancy fees from Bristol-Myers Squibb (US), Inc. for this study, Dipen Patel Consultant of: Pharmerit International, which received consultancy fees from Bristol-Myers Squibb (US), Inc. for this study


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document