Objective: Achieving therapeutic goals in multiple sclerosis (MS) requires strict adherence to treatment schedules. This retrospective study analyzed persistence with, and adherence to, fingolimod compared with injectable/ infusible disease-modifying therapies (DMTs) in patients with MS. Methods:Patients in the PharMetrics Plus TM US administrative claims database with at least one prescription for, or administration of, fingolimod, glatiramer acetate (GA), interferon (IFN), or natalizumab (index DMT) between October 1, 2010 and September 30, 2011 were included. Patients were naïve to index DMT (no claim in the previous 360 days) and had an MS diagnosis code within 360 days of the first index DMT prescription. Outcomes were persistence, risk of discontinuing index DMT (evaluated by a Cox proportional hazards model), adherence (measured using the medication possession ratio [MPR] and proportion of days covered [PDC] in patients with at least two index DMT prescriptions), and the risk of being non-adherent (MPR580% and PDC 580%, assessed using a logistic regression model). Results:The study included 3750 patients (fingolimod, n ¼ 889; GA, n ¼ 1233; any IFN, n ¼ 1341; natalizumab, n ¼ 287). Discontinuation rates (fingolimod, 27.9%; GA, 39.5%; IFN, 43.7%; natalizumab, 39.5%; all p50.001) and risk of discontinuation were significantly higher (hazard ratios vs fingolimod [95% confidence interval]: GA, 1.75 [1.49-2.07]; IFN, 2.01 [1.71-2.37]; natalizumab, 1.53 [1.22-1.91]) for patients receiving other DMTs compared with fingolimod. The risk of being non-adherent was also lower for patients in the fingolimod cohort than the other treatment cohorts, irrespective of whether nonadherence was defined as MPR580% (p50.05 for all) or PDC580% (p50.05 for GA and IFN). Limitations:As with all studies assessing real-world treatment patterns it is unclear if medications were used as prescribed. Conclusions:In a real-world setting, persistence with, and adherence to, oral fingolimod was higher than for injectable and infusible DMTs.
BackgroundApproximately one-third of patients with multiple sclerosis (MS) are unresponsive to, or intolerant of, interferon (IFN) therapy, prompting a switch to other disease-modifying therapies. Clinical outcomes of switching therapy are unknown. This retrospective study assessed differences in relapse rates among patients with MS switching from IFN to fingolimod or glatiramer acetate (GA) in a real-world setting.MethodsUS administrative claims data from the PharMetrics Plus™ database were used to identify patients with MS who switched from IFN to fingolimod or GA between October 1, 2010 and March 31, 2012. Patients were matched 1∶1 using propensity scores within strata (number of pre-index relapses) on demographic (e.g. age and gender) and disease (e.g. timing of pre-index relapse, comorbidities and symptoms) characteristics. A claims-based algorithm was used to identify relapses while patients were persistent with therapy over 360 days post-switch. Differences in both the probability of experiencing a relapse and the annualized relapse rate (ARR) while persistent with therapy were assessed.ResultsThe matched sample population contained 264 patients (n = 132 in each cohort). Before switching, 33.3% of patients in both cohorts had experienced at least one relapse. During the post-index persistence period, the proportion of patients with at least one relapse was lower in the fingolimod cohort (12.9%) than in the GA cohort (25.0%), and ARRs were lower with fingolimod (0.19) than with GA (0.51). Patients treated with fingolimod had a 59% lower probability of relapse (odds ratio, 0.41; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.21–0.80; p = 0.0091) and 62% fewer relapses per year (rate ratio, 0.38; 95% CI, 0.21–0.68; p = 0.0013) compared with those treated with GA.ConclusionsIn a real-world setting, patients with MS who switched from IFNs to fingolimod were significantly less likely to experience relapses than those who switched to GA.
PurposeTo compare treatment patterns of intravitreal ranibizumab and aflibercept for the management of neovascular age-related macular degeneration (nAMD) in a real-world setting over the first 12 months of treatment.MethodsA proprietary clinical database was used to identify treatment-naïve patients with nAMD in the USA with claims for ranibizumab or aflibercept between November 1, 2011 and November 30, 2013 and with follow-up of at least 12 months. Patients were considered treatment-naïve if they had no anti-VEGF treatment code for 6 months before the index date. Mean numbers of injections and of non-injection visits to a treating physician were compared between the two treatment cohorts (ranibizumab or aflibercept). In addition, the mean interval between doses was also investigated.ResultsPatient characteristics were similar for those receiving either ranibizumab (n = 5421) or aflibercept (n = 3506) at the index date. The mean (± standard deviation) numbers of injections received by patients treated with ranibizumab (4.9 ± 3.3) or aflibercept (5.2 ± 2.9) were not clinically different. The mean number of non-injection visits was 2.8 ± 2.8 and 2.1 ± 2.5 for ranibizumab and aflibercept, respectively. Mean dosing interval was 51.0 days (± 41.8 days) in patients receiving ranibizumab and 54.1 days (± 36.0 days) in those receiving aflibercept. Results were robust to sensitivity analyses for definition of treatment-naïve, length of follow-up and treatment in the index eye only.ConclusionsLimited data exist regarding real-world treatment patterns of aflibercept for the management of nAMD. Our results suggest that, in routine clinical practice, patients receive a comparable number of injections in the first year of treatment with ranibizumab or aflibercept.
Patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA), ankylosing spondylitis (AS), and psoriatic arthritis (PsA) are frequently treated with subcutaneous biologic therapies when disease progresses or when response to synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs) is inadequate. This study analyzed treatment persistence and treatment patterns for RA, AS, and PsA patients in Germany initiating subcutaneous biologic therapies with and without prior DMARDs use. A retrospective cohort study was conducted using the Electronic Medical Record database of IMS Disease Analyzer, Germany. Patients who were ≥18 years old; had at least one ICD-10 diagnosis code of RA, AS, or PsA during the study period; and had exposure to a subcutaneous biologic agent between January 1, 2009 and June 30, 2012 were selected. Patients were required to have continuous observation ≥12 months prior to and after index medication date. Persistence was defined as consecutive days from treatment initiation until treatment discontinuation (≥60-day lapse in medication coverage). Patients were stratified by pre-index use of DMARDs. Kaplan-Meier analysis was conducted to assess time to discontinuation, and logistic regression was conducted to identify characteristics associated with persistence. A total of 576 RA, 108 AS, and 197 PsA patients without biologic experience during the pre-index period were selected. The percentages of RA, AS, and PsA patients persistent ≥12 months were 51.9, 48.1, and 57.9 %, respectively. Median persistent time over 12 months was 365.0 days for RA (mean 245.9 days), 281.0 for AS (mean 228.5), and 365.0 for PsA (mean 264.1). In the RA cohort, a significantly higher proportion of those with pre-index DMARD use were persistent compared to those without pre-index DMARD (56.1 vs. 33.3 %, p = 0.0001). No significant differences were observed for the AS and PsA cohorts. Multivariate analyses confirmed that DMARD-experienced patients were 2.45 times more likely to be persistent with subcutaneous biologic therapy in the RA cohort. Switching between subcutaneous biologics occurred in <10 % of patients in all three cohorts. In the subpopulations with at least two prescriptions for the index subcutaneous biologic and who remained persistent on the index subcutaneous biologic, dose escalation of ≥50 % occurred in 50, 60, and 49 % in the RA, AS, and PsA cohorts, respectively. Among RA, AS, and PsA patients newly initiating subcutaneous biologic agents in Germany, persistence at 12 months is relatively low (48-58 %). For the RA cohort, patients with pre-index DMARD use are more persistent than patients without. The majority of patients do not switch between subcutaneous biologics. A notable proportion of patients who remained persistent on their index subcutaneous biologic had a dose escalation. There are opportunities to improve outcomes of patient with rheumatoid disease through improved medication persistence.
Objective. To compare the efficacy and tolerability of tofacitinib, an oral Janus kinase inhibitor for the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis (RA), as monotherapy and combined with disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs) versus biological DMARDs (bDMARDs) and other novel DMARDs for second-line moderate-to-severe rheumatoid arthritis (RA) patients by means of a systematic literature review (SLR) and network meta-analysis (NMA). Methods. MEDLINE®, EMBASE®, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were searched to identify randomized clinical trials (RCTs) published between 1990 and March 2015. Efficacy data based on American College of Rheumatology (ACR) response criteria, improvements in the Health Assessment Questionnaire Disability Index (HAQ-DI) at 6 months, and discontinuation rates due to adverse events were analyzed by means of Bayesian NMAs. Results. 45 RCTs were identified, the majority of which demonstrated a low risk of bias. Tofacitinib 5 mg twice daily (BID) and 10 mg BID monotherapy exhibited comparable efficacy and discontinuation rates due to adverse events versus other monotherapies. Tofacitinib 5 mg BID and 10 mg BID + DMARDs or methotrexate (MTX) were mostly comparable to other combination therapies in terms of efficacy and discontinuation due to adverse events. Conclusion. In most cases, tofacitinib had similar efficacy and discontinuation rates due to adverse events compared to biologic DMARDs.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.