Article Text

PDF
FRI0490 Real-life effectiveness of tnf inhibitors in psoriatic arthritis: are changing national policies on choice of tnf inhibitor reflected in response to treatment?
  1. EK Kristianslund1,
  2. KM Fagerli1,
  3. E Lie1,
  4. A Wierød2,
  5. S Kalstad3,
  6. E Rødevand4,
  7. F Krøll5,
  8. P Mielnik6,
  9. TK Kvien1,
  10. IC Olsen1
  1. 1Department of Rheumatology, Diakonhjemmet Hospital, Oslo
  2. 2Department of Rheumatology, Drammen Hospital, Drammen
  3. 3Department of Rheumatology, University Hospital of North Norway, Tromsø
  4. 4Department of Rheumatology, St. Olavs Hospital, Trondheim
  5. 5Revmatismesykehuset, Lillehammer
  6. 6Department of Rheumatology, Førde Central Hospital, Førde, Norway

Abstract

Background Tumour necrosis factor inhibitors (TNFi) are essential in the treatment of psoriatic arthritis (PsA). Whether the effectiveness of the five different TNFi differs is not known, as they have not been directly compared. In Norway the national authorities consider the TNFi to be equivalent, and since 2009 the least expensive drug in an annual national tender has been preferred in the publicly funded healthcare system. This has led to substantial year-to-year differences in chioce of first TNFi, the system has acted as an unbiased factor distributing patients between different agents across years.

Objectives Comparing response to TNFi during the first year of treatment of PsA over years with highly varying uptake of different TNFi.

Methods From the NOR-DMARD register we included the 715 biologics-naïve patients with PsA who started their first TNFi from 2009 through 2015. The preferred TNFi in national recommendations were: 2009 adalimumab, 2010 golimumab, 2011 and 2012 etanercept, 2013 golimumab, 2014 certolizumab, 2015 certolizumab/biosimilar infliximab (CT-P13). The estimated Disease Activity Score 28 joints (DAS28) at 3, 6 and 12 months after treatment start was compared between treatment years using a mixed-model, adjusted for baseline disease activity, age, sex and treatment centre.

Results Demographics, choice of TNFi and baseline characteristics are listed for each year 2009–2015 in Table 1. The preferred drug was started in 56–91% of patients. There was a trend towards lower disease activity at baseline over time. There were no significant differences in DAS28 at 3 and 6 months between treatment years, but a difference was found at 1 year (figure).

Table 1

Conclusions The results from this innovative analytic approach indicate similar effectiveness of different TNFi in PsA, and consequently supports the practice of selecting agent based on cost and feasibility of use. However, there are potential differences after 1 year. The interpretation of this is challenging, especially as there is a marked difference in outcomes between the years 2011 and 2012, where the distribution of type of TNFi was similar.

Disclosure of Interest E. K. Kristianslund: None declared, K. M. Fagerli: None declared, E. Lie Consultant for: AbbVie, Celgene, Hospira, Pfizer, UCB., A. Wierød: None declared, S. Kalstad: None declared, E. Rødevand: None declared, F. Krøll: None declared, P. Mielnik: None declared, T. K. Kvien Consultant for: AbbVie, Biogen, BMS, Boehringer Ingelheim, Celltrion, Eli Lilly, Epirus, Janssen, Merck-Serono, MSD, Mundipharma, Novartis, Oktal, Orion Pharma, Hospira/Pfizer, Roche, Sandoz, UCB, I. C. Olsen: None declared

Statistics from Altmetric.com

Request permissions

If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.