Syed Nauroz, Tolaymat Mazen, Brown Sara A, Sivasailam Barathi, Cross Raymond K
Department of Medicine, Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Penn State Hershey College of Medicine, Hershey, Pennsylvania, USA.
Department of Medicine, Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, University of Maryland School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland, USA.
Crohns Colitis 360. 2020 Jul;2(3):otaa050. doi: 10.1093/crocol/otaa050. Epub 2020 Jun 5.
Serum drug-level assays for infliximab (IFX) and adalimumab (ADA) are widely available and are most often obtained reactively, to determine the next steps in patients with loss of response. Studies done thus far on the use of these assays proactively, or during symptom remission, have had mixed results. Here we investigate persistence on therapy and healthcare utilization in patients on 3 drug-level monitoring strategies.
We conducted a retrospective chart review of 235 patients treated for both Crohn disease and ulcerative colitis on either IFX or ADA. Monitoring strategy was defined as proactive if patients underwent testing at predefined time points regardless of symptoms or signs of disease, reactive if done during relapse, or control if no drug levels were obtained. Groups were compared on persistence on original therapeutic at 1 and 2 years as well as on various measures of healthcare utilization during the 2-year follow-up period.
Proactive drug monitoring was associated with a higher likelihood of persistence on therapy at 1 year when compared with the control (odds ratio [OR] = 4.76, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.65, 13.67) and reactive groups (OR = 6.10, CI = 2.19, 17.02). Similarly, at 2 years, proactive monitoring was superior to the control (OR = 5.41, CI = 2.26, 12.94) and reactive groups (OR = 4.51, CI = 1.88, 10.80). Proactive monitoring was also associated with lower healthcare utilization across almost all measures related to inflammatory bowel disease.
Proactive drug monitoring increases persistence on IFX and ADA in patients with ulcerative colitis or Crohn disease and decreases overall healthcare utilization in these patients.
英夫利昔单抗(IFX)和阿达木单抗(ADA)的血清药物水平检测方法已广泛应用,大多是在患者出现反应丧失时进行检测,以确定后续治疗方案。目前关于在症状缓解期或主动使用这些检测方法的研究结果不一。在此,我们研究了采用三种药物水平监测策略的患者的治疗持续性和医疗资源利用情况。
我们对235例接受IFX或ADA治疗的克罗恩病和溃疡性结肠炎患者进行了回顾性病历审查。如果患者在预定时间点进行检测,无论有无疾病症状或体征,则监测策略定义为主动监测;如果在复发期间进行检测,则为反应性监测;如果未进行药物水平检测,则为对照监测。比较各组在1年和2年时原治疗方案的持续性,以及在2年随访期内各种医疗资源利用指标。
与对照组(优势比[OR]=4.76,95%置信区间[CI]=1.65,13.67)和反应性监测组(OR=6.10,CI=2.19,17.02)相比,主动药物监测与1年时持续治疗的可能性更高相关。同样,在2年时,主动监测优于对照组(OR=5.41,CI=2.26,12.94)和反应性监测组(OR=4.51,CI=1.88,10.80)。主动监测还与几乎所有与炎症性肠病相关指标的较低医疗资源利用相关。
主动药物监测可提高溃疡性结肠炎或克罗恩病患者对IFX和ADA的治疗持续性,并降低这些患者的总体医疗资源利用。