Advertisement

International Journal of Clinical Pharmacy

, Volume 37, Issue 5, pp 808–814 | Cite as

Efficiency of adalimumab, etanercept and infliximab in ankylosing spondylitis in clinical practice

  • Vicente Escudero-VilaplanaEmail author
  • Esther Ramírez-Herráiz
  • Estefanía Alañón-Plaza
  • Nicolás Trovato-López
  • Rosario García-Vicuña
  • Luis Carreño-Pérez
  • Alberto Morell-Baladrón
  • María Sanjurjo-Sáez
Research Article

Abstract

Background Information on the use of ankylosing spondylitis (AS) therapies in clinical practice is a key factor in decision making, as more efficient treatments may involve substantial savings while maintaining the clinical benefits for the patient. Objective To assess the mean annual doses and associated costs of the three main anti-tumour necrosis factor agents used in Spanish daily clinical practice in ankylosing spondylitis patients and to correlate these costs with disease activity. Setting This retrospective, observational study included adult ankylosing spondylitis patients over a 4-year period that had been treated for at least 6 months with adalimumab, etanercept or infliximab at two University Hospitals in Spain. Methods Disease activity was estimated with Bath Ankylosing Spondylitis Disease Activity Index (BASDAI) scores at the start of anti-tumour necrosis factor (anti-TNF) therapy and in the last visit or whenever the drug was switched. Mean costs were estimated for a 52-week horizon from the delivered doses registered by pharmacy records. Outcomes were the doses and costs of anti TNFs administered to each patient, and the BASDAI score. Results A total of 119 patients (137 cases) were included (28 cases treated with adalimumab, 48 cases with etanercept and 61 with infliximab). Mean doses of adalimumab and etanercept were 92.8 and 88.8 % of the initially prescribed doses, respectively, while the mean dose of infliximab administered was 102 %. There were no statistical differences among treatments in terms of clinical effectiveness. Associated mean patient-year costs were significantly higher in the infliximab group (€14,235), compared to the other treatments [adalimumab €11,934; etanercept €10,516; (P < 0.05)]. Conclusion In certain ankylosing spondylitis patients, doses and associated costs of biological therapies can be reduced while controlling disease activity. Mean doses used in our clinical practice vary from the recommended doses and are significantly lower for adalimumab and etanercept than for infliximab. These differences impact directly on associated patient-year costs, and, thus, on treatment efficiency.

Keywords

Adalimumab Ankylosing spondylitis Clinical practice Cost Cost-effectiveness Efficiency Etanercept Infliximab Spain 

Notes

Acknowledgments

The authors wish to thank the patients, as well as the participating investigators, support staff and the Rheumatology Departments of Gregorio Marañón University General Hospital and La Princesa University Hospital. The authors also thank Jose María Bellón Cano, from the Institute for Health Research Gregorio Marañón, for his support in statistical analysis.

Funding

This study evolved as part of an educational grant funded by Pfizer, which had no involvement either in the study design, in the collection, analysis and interpretation of data, in the writing of the manuscript or in the decision to submit the manuscript for publication. Editorial assistance was provided by Content Ed Net and Medical Statistics Consulting S. L. and funded by Pfizer.

Conflicts of interest

The authors have no conflicts of interests related to the content of the present manuscript.

References

  1. 1.
    Khan MA. An overview of clinical spectrum and heterogeneity of spondyloarthropathies. Rheum Dis Clin North Am. 1992;18(1):1–10.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    van der Horst-Bruinsma IE, Nurmohamed MT. Management and evaluation of extra-articular manifestations in spondyloarthritis. Ther Adv Musculoskelet Dis. 2012;4(6):413–22.PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Reveille JD. The genetic basis of ankylosing spondylitis. Curr Opin Rheumatol. 2006;18(4):332–41.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Thomas GP, Brown MA. Genomics of ankylosing spondylitis. Discov Med. 2010;10(52):263–71.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Chorus AM, Miedema HS, Boonen A, Van Der Linden S. Quality of life and work in patients with rheumatoid arthritis and ankylosing spondylitis of working age. Ann Rheum Dis. 2003;62(12):1178–84.PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Kiltz U, van der Heijde D. Health-related quality of life in patients with rheumatoid arthritis and in patients with ankylosing spondylitis. Clin Exp Rheumatol. 2009;27(4 Suppl 55):S108–11.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Boonen A, van der Linden SM. The burden of ankylosing spondylitis. J Rheumatol Suppl. 2006;78:4–11.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Barlow JH, Wright CC, Williams B, Keat A. Work disability among people with ankylosing spondylitis. Arthritis Rheum. 2001;45(5):424–9.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Boonen A, van der Heijde D, Landewe R, Spoorenberg A, Schouten H, Rutten-van Mölken M, et al. Work status and productivity costs due to ankylosing spondylitis: comparison of three European countries. Ann Rheum Dis. 2002;61(5):429–37.PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Braun J, van den Berg R, Baraliakos X, Boehm H, Burgos-Vargas R, Collantes-Estevez E, et al. 2010 update of the ASAS/EULAR recommendations for the management of ankylosing spondylitis. Ann Rheum Dis. 2011;70(6):896–904.PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Sieper J, Braun J, Rudwaleit M, Boonen A, Zink A. Ankylosing spondylitis: an overview. Ann Rheum Dis. 2002;61(Suppl 3):iii8–18.PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Garrett S, Jenkinson T, Kennedy LG, Whitelock H, Gaisford P, Calin A. A new approach to defining disease status in ankylosing spondylitis: the Bath Ankylosing Spondylitis Disease Activity Index. J Rheumatol. 1994;21(12):2286–91.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Braun J, Davis J, Dougados M, Sieper J, van der Linden S, van der Heijde D. First update of the international ASAS consensus statement for the use of anti-TNF agents in patients with ankylosing spondylitis. Ann Rheum Dis. 2006;65(3):316–20.PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Chatzidionysiou K, Askling J, Eriksson J, Kristensen LE, van Vollenhoven R. Effectiveness of TNF inhibitor switch in RA: results from the national Swedish register. Ann Rheum Dis. 2014. doi: 10.1136/annrheumdis-2013-204714.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Rémy A, Avouac J, Gossec L, Combe B. Clinical relevance of switching to a second tumour necrosis factor-alpha inhibitor after discontinuation of a first tumour necrosis factor-alpha inhibitor in rheumatoid arthritis: a systematic literature review and meta-analysis. Clin Exp Rheumatol. 2011;29(1):96–103.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Fitzcharles MA, Clayton D, Menard HA. The use of infliximab in academic rheumatology practice: an audit of early clinical experience. J Rheumatol. 2002;29(12):2525–30.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Lee J, Noh JW, Hwang JW, Oh JM, Kim H, Ahn JK, et al. Extended dosing of etanercept 25 mg can be effective in patients with ankylosing spondylitis: a retrospective analysis. Clin Rheumatol. 2010;29(10):1149–54.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Moghimi J, Sheikhvatan M, Semnani V. The use of low-dose etanercept as an alternative therapy for treatment of ankylosing spondylitis: a case series. Rheumatol Int. 2012;32(8):2271–4.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Tenga G, Goeb V, Lequerre T, Bacquet-Deschryver H, Daragon A, Pouplin S, et al. A 3 mg/kg starting dose of infliximab in active spondyloarthritis resistant to conventional treatments is efficient, safe and lowers costs. Joint Bone Spine. 2011;78(1):50–5.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    van der Linden S, Valkenburg HA, Cats A. Evaluation of diagnostic criteria for ankylosing spondylitis. A proposal for modification of the New York criteria. Arthritis Rheum. 1984;27(4):361–8.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Ariza-Ariza R, Hernandez-Cruz B, Navarro-Sarabia F. The Spanish version of the BASDAI is reliable and correlates with disease activity in patients with ankylosing spondylitis. Rev Esp Reumatol. 2004;31(6):372–8.Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Braun J, Baraliakos X, Listing J, Fritz C, Alten R, Burmester G, et al. Persistent clinical efficacy and safety of anti-tumour necrosis factor alpha therapy with infliximab in patients with ankylosing spondylitis over 5 years: evidence for different types of response. Ann Rheum Dis. 2008;67(3):340–5.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Davis JC Jr, Van Der Heijde D, Braun J, Dougados M, Cush J, Clegg DO, et al. Recombinant human tumor necrosis factor receptor (etanercept) for treating ankylosing spondylitis: a randomized, controlled trial. Arthritis Rheum. 2003;48(11):3230–6.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Davis JC Jr, van der Heijde DM, Braun J, Dougados M, Clegg DO, Kivitz AJ, et al. Efficacy and safety of up to 192 weeks of etanercept therapy in patients with ankylosing spondylitis. Ann Rheum Dis. 2008;67(3):346–52.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    van der Heijde D, Dijkmans B, Geusens P, Sieper J, DeWoody K, Williamson P, et al. Efficacy and safety of infliximab in patients with ankylosing spondylitis: results of a randomized, placebo-controlled trial (ASSERT). Arthritis Rheum. 2005;52(2):582–91.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    van der Heijde D, Kivitz A, Schiff MH, Sieper J, Dijkmans BA, Braun J, et al. Efficacy and safety of adalimumab in patients with ankylosing spondylitis: results of a multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial. Arthritis Rheum. 2006;54(7):2136–46.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    The Association of British Pharmaceutical Industry. The vision for real world data—harnessing the opportunities in the UK. Demonstrating value with real world data. White paper: September 2011. http://www.abpi.org.uk/our-work/library/industry/Documents/Vision-for-Real-World-Data.pdf.
  28. 28.
    Lee SH, Lee YA, Hong SJ, Yang HI. Etanercept 25 mg/week is effective enough to maintain remission for ankylosing spondylitis among Korean patients. Clin Rheumatol. 2008;27(2):179–81.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Navarro-Compan V, Moreira V, Ariza-Ariza R, Hernandez-Cruz B, Vargas-Lebron C, Navarro-Sarabia F. Low doses of etanercept can be effective in ankylosing spondylitis patients who achieve remission of the disease. Clin Rheumatol. 2011;30(7):993–6.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Paccou J, Bacle-Boutry MA, Solau-Gervais E, Bele-Philippe P, Flipo RM. Dosage adjustment of anti-tumor necrosis factor-alpha inhibitor in ankylosing spondylitis is effective in maintaining remission in clinical practice. J Rheumatol. 2012;39(7):1418–23.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Botteman MF, Hay JW, Luo MP, Curry AS, Wong RL, van Hout BA. Cost effectiveness of adalimumab for the treatment of ankylosing spondylitis in the United Kingdom. Rheumatology (Oxford). 2007;46(8):1320–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Ara RM, Reynolds AV, Conway P. The cost-effectiveness of etanercept in patients with severe ankylosing spondylitis in the UK. Rheumatology (Oxford). 2007;46(8):1338–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Neilson AR, Sieper J, Deeg M. Cost-effectiveness of etanercept in patients with severe ankylosing spondylitis in Germany. Rheumatology (Oxford). 2010;49(11):2122–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Kobelt G, Sobocki P, Mulero J, Gratacos J, Pocovi A, Collantes-Estevez E. The burden of ankylosing spondylitis in Spain. Value Health. 2008;11(3):408–15.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Koninklijke Nederlandse Maatschappij ter bevordering der Pharmacie 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  • Vicente Escudero-Vilaplana
    • 1
    Email author
  • Esther Ramírez-Herráiz
    • 2
  • Estefanía Alañón-Plaza
    • 2
  • Nicolás Trovato-López
    • 1
  • Rosario García-Vicuña
    • 3
  • Luis Carreño-Pérez
    • 4
  • Alberto Morell-Baladrón
    • 2
  • María Sanjurjo-Sáez
    • 1
  1. 1.Pharmacy DepartmentGregorio Marañón University General HospitalMadridSpain
  2. 2.Pharmacy DepartmentLa Princesa University HospitalMadridSpain
  3. 3.Rheumatology DepartmentLa Princesa University HospitalMadridSpain
  4. 4.Rheumatology DepartmentGregorio Marañón University General HospitalMadridSpain

Personalised recommendations