AB0253 Tips on selection of biologics for patients with rheumatoid arthritis based on treatment patterns
Authors: M Kamiya, S Soen, H Kikuchi, N Okada
Journal: Annals of the Rheumatic Diseases (2017)

<h3>Background</h3> The emergence of biologics has led to innovation in the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis (RA). In the clinical setting, biologics are administered with careful consideration of complications and medical history in accordance with the treat-to-target recommendations. However, the progression of joint damage, the costs incurred before finding an effective biologic are serious concerns. It is therefore desirable to use biologics with long-term efficacy and less financial burden from the early stage. <h3>Objectives</h3> Participants were RA patients treated with one of three biologics having different mechanisms of action who achieved therapy targets with long-term treatment efficacy and consequently achieved either reduction or withdrawal of therapy. Patients9 background characteristics and long-term treatment patterns were evaluated. <h3>Methods</h3> Between November 2004 and October 2016, 196, 57, and 85 RA patients were treated with etanercept (ETN), tocilizumab (TCZ), and abatacept (ABT), respectively, in first- or second-line therapy. These patients were divided into the continuation group, who underwent therapy with the same agent for ≥3 years without disease flare (DAS28-ESR &gt;3.2) persisting 3 months, and the discontinuation group, who experienced primary failure resulting in discontinuation of the therapy within 3 months. Student9s t test or Mann-Whitney9s U test were used to compare patients9 background characteristics between the two groups for each biologic. Further, log-rank test and Steel-Dwass test, respectively, were used to compare therapy continuation rates and reasons for discontinuation among the three biologics. Finally, relative dose intensity (RDI) was calculated to evaluate the treatment patterns of the individual biologics. <h3>Results</h3> The Kaplan-Meier method showed that the 3-year continuation rates of therapy with ETN, TCZ, and ABT were 54.2%, 23.8%, and 35.8%, respectively: the continuation rate of ETN was significantly higher than that of the other two agents. The numbers of patients treated with ETN, TCZ, and ABT were respectively 46, 9, and 14 in the continuation group and 16, 12, and 11 in the discontinuation group. The proportion of patients treated with ETN plus concomitant MTX was significantly higher in the continuation group than in the discontinuation group (P=0.0057). No significant differences were found in patients9 background characteristics (disease duration, rheumatoid or anti-cyclic citrullinated peptide positivity, number of biologics previously used, and DAS28-ESR). Mean RDI values (median value, 95% confidence interval) over a 3-year period were as follows: 0.95 (0.92, 0.83–1.06) for 25 mg/week ETN therapy; 0.78 (0.90, 0.66–0.89) for 50 mg/week ETN therapy; 0.84 (0.84, 0.76–0.89) for TCZ therapy; and 0.87 (0.94, 0.79–0.95) for ABT therapy. The cumulative costs for 3 years of the respective treatments were 19,700, 32,200, 27,300, and 39,000 euros (1 euro =115 Japanese yen). After targets were reached, the dose of ETN was maintained at 25 mg/week or reduced from 50 mg/week, while the TCZ and ABT therapies were continued over the long term with a longer dosing interval. <h3>Conclusions</h3> Treatment with ETN plus concomitant MTX showed high continuation rates, and long-term achievement of therapy targets was maintained at a lower dosage (and thus, lower costs). It is beneficial to choose this method over non-TNF inhibitors. <h3>Disclosure of Interest</h3> None declared