scholarly journals Biologic Disease-Modifying Antirheumatic Drugs and Risk of Multiple Myeloma

Blood ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 132 (Supplement 1) ◽  
pp. 1888-1888
Author(s):  
Gregory Sampang Calip ◽  
Karen Sweiss ◽  
Sruthi Adimadhyam ◽  
Alemseged Ayele Asfaw ◽  
Jifang Zhou ◽  
...  

Abstract INTRODUCTION: Biologic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs) are used more frequently and earlier in the course of rheumatologic conditions in a treat-to-target approach. These medications act on proteins and cytokines with potential pro- and anti-malignancy roles, including tumor necrosis factor-alpha (TNF), human interleukin (IL) receptors and B- and T-cell functions. There is concern for hematologic malignancy with some but not all biologic DMARDs. Little is known about possible associations between these medications and development of multiple myeloma (MM). Our purpose was to determine risk of MM in relation to biologic DMARD treatment, duration of use and by biologic target in a large cohort of patients with rheumatologic conditions. METHODS: We conducted a nested case-control study within a cohort of adults undergoing active treatment for rheumatoid arthritis, psoriatic arthritis and ankylosing spondylitis. Patients were sampled from a population of commercially-insured U.S. health plan enrollees in the Truven Health MarketScan Research Database between 2009 and 2015. MM cases were ascertained using validated algorithms for administrative data. Up to ten controls from the overall cohort were matched to each MM case on age, sex and rheumatologic indication using incidence density sampling with replacement. Index date was defined as the date of MM diagnosis for a case and corresponding time at-risk for matched controls. Exposure was defined as both treatment and duration of biologic DMARD use including TNF inhibitor (etanercept, infliximab, adalimumab, golimumab, certolizumab pegol), IL-6 receptor antagonist (tocilizumab), T-cell targeted (abatacept) and B-cell depleting (rituximab) agents and were determined from health claims and pharmacy dispensing data. Data on rheumatologic indication, comorbid conditions and treatment with prescription nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), corticosteroids and conventional synthetic DMARDs (hydroxychloroquine, sulfasalazine, methotrexate, leflunomide) were documented in the 12 month baseline period and during follow up as potential confounders. An exposure lag time of 365 days was used to minimize protopathic bias. Multivariable conditional logistic regression models were used to calculate adjusted odds ratios (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) for risk of MM associated with biologic DMARDs. RESULTS: From a retrospective cohort of 56866 adult patients with rheumatologic conditions, 287 MM cases and 2760 matched controls were identified. Compared to controls, a higher proportion of cases had Charlson comorbidity scores of 2 or greater (24% vs 18%) and used oral corticosteroids during follow up (67% vs 61%). Cases and controls were similar with respect to use of prescription NSAIDs (56% vs 59%) and use of conventional DMARDs (63% vs 67%). Use of biologic DMARDs overall was similar between cases and controls (14% vs 15%), although cases had a slightly lower proportion of etanercept users (5% vs 7%) and a slightly higher proportion of tocilizumab users (1.4% vs 0.4%). Biologic DMARD users were younger, more likely to have psoriatic arthritis or ankylosing spondylitis, lower comorbidity and greater use of concomitant NSAIDs and oral corticosteroids. Risk of MM was neither associated with biologic DMARD use overall (OR 0.84; 95% CI 0.57, 1.26; P=0.40) nor with longer duration of biologic DMARD use (>2.5 years: OR 0.72; 95% CI 0.34, 1.52; P=0.39). However, compared to patients treated with only conventional DMARDs, those receiving concomitant conventional plus biologic DMARDs had a 48% lower risk of developing MM (OR 0.52; 95% CI 0.30, 0.88; P=0.02). Associations with MM appeared to differ by specific biologic DMARD agent with estimates suggesting a lowered risk of MM with use of etanercept (OR 0.55; 95% CI 0.30, 1.02; P=0.06) and greater risk with use of tocilizumab (OR 4.33; 95% CI 1.33, 14.19; P=0.02) that was statistically significant, although confidence intervals were wide. CONCLUSIONS: The potential influence of biologic DMARDs on multiple myeloma is complex. We found that immune suppression with conventional plus biologic DMARDs is inversely associated with MM risk in patients with rheumatologic conditions, but this association differed by biologic drug target. Further research is needed to understand the roles of DMARDs targeting TNF and IL-6 in relation to subsequent myeloma pathogenesis. Disclosures Patel: Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria; Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria; Janssen: Honoraria.

Author(s):  
Jorge Enrique Machado-Alba ◽  
Manuel E. Machado-Duque ◽  
Andres Gaviria-Mendoza ◽  
Juan Manuel Reyes ◽  
Natalia Castaño Gamboa

Abstract Introduction/objectives The objective of this study is to describe the treatment patterns and use of healthcare resources in a cohort of Colombian patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) treated with biological disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (bDMARDs) or tofacitinib. Method This is a descriptive study from a retrospective cohort of patients diagnosed with RA who were treated with bDMARDs or tofacitinib after failure of conventional DMARDs (cDMARDs) or first bDMARD. Patients who were receiving pharmacological treatment between 01 January 2014 and 30 June 2018 were included. The analysis is through the revision of claim database and electronical medical records. Demographic and clinical data were collected. The costs of healthcare resources were estimated from the billing expense of healthcare service provider. Results We evaluated 588 RA patients on treatment with bDMARDs (n = 505) or tofacitinib (n = 83), most of them were in combination with cDMARDs (85.4%). The 88.1% were females and mean age was 57.3 ± 12.5 years. The median evolution of RA since diagnosis was 9 years (IQR:4–17.2). The mean duration of use during follow-up of the bDMARDs or tofacitinib was similar, with a mean of 9.8 ± 1.9 months. It was identified that 394 (67.0%) discontinued therapy. The average annual direct cost of care per patient was USD 8997 ± 2172, where 97.2% was due to drug costs. The average annual cost of treatment per patient with bDMARDs was USD 8604 and tofacitinib was USD 6377. Conclusions In the face of a first failure of cDMARD, bDMARDs are frequently added. A high frequency of patients do not persist treatment during the first year of follow-up. The pharmacological treatment is the most representative cause of healthcare costs. Key Points• Rheumatoid arthritis is a disease with a high burden of comorbidities, complications, and worse health-related quality of life and is associated with elevated healthcare costs.• The biological disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs or tofacitinib medications are indicated for those with significant progression of the disease and when there is a need for alternatives to achieve low levels of activity and remission.• Patients with rheumatoid arthritis treated with biological disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs or tofacitinib represent a significant economic burden to the health system, especially in the costs derived from pharmacological treatment.


2017 ◽  
Vol 45 (3) ◽  
pp. 430-436 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jessica A. Walsh ◽  
Shaobo Pei ◽  
Zachary Burningham ◽  
Gopi Penmetsa ◽  
Grant W. Cannon ◽  
...  

Objective.To evaluate the effect of access to and distance from rheumatology care on the use of disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARD) in US veterans with inflammatory arthritis (IA).Methods.Provider encounters and DMARD dispensations for IA (rheumatoid arthritis, psoriatic arthritis, and ankylosing spondylitis) were evaluated in national Veterans Affairs (VA) datasets between January 1, 2015, and December 31, 2015.Results.Among 12,589 veterans with IA, 23.5% saw a rheumatology provider. In the general IA population, 25.3% and 13.6% of veterans were exposed to a synthetic DMARD (sDMARD) and biologic DMARD (bDMARD), respectively. DMARD exposure was 2.6- to 3.4-fold higher in the subpopulation using rheumatology providers, compared to the general IA population. The distance between veterans’ homes and the closest VA rheumatology site was < 40 miles (Near) for 55.9%, 40–99 miles (Intermediate) for 31.7%, and ≥ 100 miles (Far) for 12.4%. Veterans in the Intermediate and Far groups were less likely to see a rheumatology provider than veterans in the Near group (RR = 0.72 and RR = 0.49, respectively). Exposure to bDMARD was 34% less frequent in the Far group than the Near group. In the subpopulation who used rheumatology care, the bDMARD exposure discrepancy did not persist between distance groups.Conclusion.Use of rheumatology care and DMARD was low for veterans with IA. DMARD exposure was strongly associated with rheumatology care use. Veterans in the general IA population living far from rheumatology sites accessed rheumatology care and bDMARD less frequently than veterans living close to rheumatology sites.


2020 ◽  
Vol 79 (6) ◽  
pp. 700-712 ◽  
Author(s):  
Laure Gossec ◽  
Xenofon Baraliakos ◽  
Andreas Kerschbaumer ◽  
Maarten de Wit ◽  
Iain McInnes ◽  
...  

ObjectiveTo update the European League Against Rheumatism (EULAR) recommendations for the pharmacological treatment of psoriatic arthritis (PsA).MethodsAccording to the EULAR standardised operating procedures, a systematic literature review was followed by a consensus meeting to develop this update involving 28 international taskforce members in May 2019. Levels of evidence and strengths of recommendations were determined.ResultsThe updated recommendations comprise 6 overarching principles and 12 recommendations. The overarching principles address the nature of PsA and diversity of both musculoskeletal and non-musculoskeletal manifestations; the need for collaborative management and shared decision-making is highlighted. The recommendations provide a treatment strategy for pharmacological therapies. Non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs and local glucocorticoid injections are proposed as initial therapy; for patients with arthritis and poor prognostic factors, such as polyarthritis or monoarthritis/oligoarthritis accompanied by factors such as dactylitis or joint damage, rapid initiation of conventional synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs is recommended. If the treatment target is not achieved with this strategy, a biological disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (bDMARDs) targeting tumour necrosis factor (TNF), interleukin (IL)-17A or IL-12/23 should be initiated, taking into account skin involvement if relevant. If axial disease predominates, a TNF inhibitor or IL-17A inhibitor should be started as first-line disease-modifying antirheumatic drug. Use of Janus kinase inhibitors is addressed primarily after bDMARD failure. Phosphodiesterase-4 inhibition is proposed for patients in whom these other drugs are inappropriate, generally in the context of mild disease. Drug switches and tapering in sustained remission are addressed.ConclusionThese recommendations provide stakeholders with an updated consensus on the pharmacological management of PsA, based on a combination of evidence and expert opinion.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document