Department of Pharmacy, La Princesa University Hospital, Madrid, Spain.
Clin Exp Rheumatol. 2013 Jul-Aug;31(4):559-65. Epub 2013 May 27.
This retrospective, multicentre, observational study aimed to assess the mean annual doses and associated costs of three anti-tumour necrosis factor agents in daily clinical practice in rheumatoid arthritis patients, correlating these costs with disease activity.
Adult rheumatoid arthritis patients were treated and followed at the Rheumatology departments of two Spanish hospitals for at least 6 months, with adalimumab, etanercept or infliximab over a 4-year period. ANOVA and multivariate statistical analyses of dosing patterns, disease activity and annualised costs were carried out.
A total of 198 patients, comprising 215 cases, met the inclusion criteria (73 on adalimumab, 81 etanercept and 61 infliximab). Compared to recommended doses, mean doses of adalimumab and etanercept decreased by 7% and 19%, respectively, while the mean dose of infliximab increased by 36%. There were no statistical differences between treatments in terms of clinical effectiveness. The hazard of dose escalation was significantly higher for either adalimumab (4.4-fold) or infliximab (11.8-fold) compared to etanercept (p<0.05). Clinical control was achieved and maintained in more than half of the patients treated with reduced doses of etanercept. Associated mean patient-year costs were significantly higher in adalimumab patients (€11.962.58) (etanercept €9.594.73; infliximab €10.094.53; [p<0.05]).
In rheumatoid arthritis patients, it is possible to reduce doses and associated costs of biological therapies while controlling disease activity. Mean doses used in our clinical practice were significantly lower with etanercept than with the anti-TNF monoclonal antibodies, adalimumab and infliximab. Dose differences impact directly on associated patient-year costs, and thus on treatment efficiency.
本回顾性、多中心、观察性研究旨在评估三种抗肿瘤坏死因子药物在类风湿关节炎患者中的年平均剂量及其在日常临床实践中的相关费用,并将这些费用与疾病活动度相关联。
在西班牙两家医院的风湿病科,至少对 198 名成年类风湿关节炎患者进行了为期 4 年的治疗和随访,他们接受阿达木单抗、依那西普或英夫利昔单抗治疗,至少 6 个月。对剂量模式、疾病活动度和年度成本进行了方差分析和多变量统计分析。
共纳入了 198 名患者(215 例),符合纳入标准(阿达木单抗 73 例,依那西普 81 例,英夫利昔单抗 61 例)。与推荐剂量相比,阿达木单抗和依那西普的平均剂量分别降低了 7%和 19%,而英夫利昔单抗的平均剂量增加了 36%。在临床疗效方面,三种治疗方法之间无统计学差异。与依那西普相比,阿达木单抗(4.4 倍)和英夫利昔单抗(11.8 倍)剂量升级的风险显著更高(p<0.05)。对于接受依那西普低剂量治疗的患者,超过一半的患者达到并维持了临床控制。阿达木单抗患者的平均患者年费用显著更高(€11962.58)(依那西普 €9594.73;英夫利昔单抗 €10094.53;[p<0.05])。
在类风湿关节炎患者中,在控制疾病活动度的同时,可以减少生物治疗的剂量和相关费用。在我们的临床实践中,依那西普的平均剂量明显低于抗 TNF 单克隆抗体阿达木单抗和英夫利昔单抗。剂量差异直接影响相关的患者年费用,从而影响治疗效率。