Treatment Persistence and Clinical Outcomes of Tumor Necrosis Factor Inhibitor Cycling or Switching to a New Mechanism of Action Therapy: Real-world Observational Study of Rheumatoid Arthritis Patients in the United States with Prior Tumor Necrosis Factor Inhibitor Therapy

Wenhui Wei, Keith Knapp, Li Wang, Chieh I. Chen, Gary L. Craig, Karen Ferguson, Sergio Schwartzman

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

47 Scopus citations

Abstract

Introduction: To examine treatment persistence and clinical outcomes associated with switching from a tumor necrosis factor inhibitor (TNFi) to a medication with a new mechanism of action (MOA) (abatacept, anakinra, rituximab, tocilizumab, or tofacitinib) versus cycling to another TNFi (adalimumab, certolizumab pegol, etanercept, golimumab, or infliximab) among patients with rheumatoid arthritis. Methods: This retrospective, longitudinal study included patients with rheumatoid arthritis in the JointMan® US clinical database who received a TNFi in April 2010 or later and either cycled to a TNFi or switched to a new MOA therapy by March 2015. Cox proportional hazards models were used for time to non-persistence (switching or discontinuing). An ordinary least squares regression model compared 1-year reduction from baseline for the Clinical Disease Activity Index (CDAI). Results: There were 332 (54.2%) TNFi cyclers and 281 (45.8%) new MOA switchers. During a median follow-up of 29.9 months, treatment persistence was 36.7% overall. Compared with new MOA switchers, TNFi cyclers were 51% more likely to be non-persistent (adjusted hazard ratio, 1.511; 95% CI 1.196, 1.908), driven by a higher likelihood of switching again (adjusted hazard ratio, 2.016; 95% CI 1.428, 2.847). Clinical outcomes were evaluable for 239 (53.3%) TNFi cyclers and 209 (46.7%) new MOA switchers. One-year mean reduction in CDAI from baseline to end of follow-up was significantly higher for new MOA switchers than TNFi cyclers (−7.54 vs. −4.81; P = 0.037), but the difference was not statistically significant after adjustment for baseline CDAI (−6.39 vs. −5.83; P = 0.607). Conclusion: In this study, TNFi cycling was common in clinical practice, but switching to a new MOA DMARD was associated with significantly better treatment persistence and a trend toward greater CDAI reduction that was not significant after adjustment for baseline disease activity. Funding: Sanofi and Regeneron Pharmaceuticals.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)1936-1952
Number of pages17
JournalAdvances in Therapy
Volume34
Issue number8
DOIs
StatePublished - Aug 1 2017
Externally publishedYes

Keywords

  • Biologic disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs
  • Persistence
  • Rheumatoid arthritis
  • Rheumatology
  • TNFi
  • Treatment outcome
  • Treatment selection
  • Tumor necrosis factor inhibitor
  • bDMARDs

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Pharmacology (medical)

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Treatment Persistence and Clinical Outcomes of Tumor Necrosis Factor Inhibitor Cycling or Switching to a New Mechanism of Action Therapy: Real-world Observational Study of Rheumatoid Arthritis Patients in the United States with Prior Tumor Necrosis Factor Inhibitor Therapy'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this