University of Chicago Medicine Inflammatory Bowel Disease Center, Chicago, IL.
Takeda Pharmaceuticals U.S.A., Inc., Lexington, MA.
J Manag Care Spec Pharm. 2024 Nov;30(11):1276-1287. doi: 10.18553/jmcp.2024.30.11.1276.
Dose escalation of biologics may restore response in patients with Crohn's disease (CD) who experience inadequate response or loss of response, but the rates of dose escalation and subsequent adverse clinical outcomes have not been well characterized.
To evaluate the rate of dose escalation of biologics and associated adverse clinical outcomes and economic outcomes in biologic-naive patients with CD.
ODESSA-CD (real wOrld Dose EScalation and outcomeS with biologics in IBD pAtients with Crohn's Disease) was a retrospective cohort study conducted using claims data from IBM MarketScan databases. Adults with CD with at least 1 claim for an index drug (adalimumab, infliximab, ustekinumab, or vedolizumab) between January 1, 2017, and December 31, 2018, and no claims for biologics in the 6 months prior (ie, biologic naive) were included. Follow-up ended on June 30, 2020. Cox proportional hazards models and logistic regression models were used to compare the rate of dose escalation and the likelihood of adverse clinical outcomes and costs after dose escalation, respectively.
Of the 2,664 eligible patients, most (71.4%) were younger than 50 years and 50.5% were male. The rate of dose escalation was higher with the anti-tumor necrosis factor α (TNFα) treatments adalimumab (hazard ratio [HR] = 1.703; < 0.0001) and infliximab (HR = 1.690; < 0.0001) compared with vedolizumab, but there was no significant difference between ustekinumab and vedolizumab (HR = 0.842; = 0.730). After dose escalation, the likelihood of infection, sepsis, and inflammatory bowel disease-related hospitalization did not differ among biologics (anti-TNFα vs vedolizumab: odds ratio [OR] = 1.141, = 0.599; ustekinumab vs vedolizumab: OR = 0.891; = 0.836); however, corticosteroid use was more likely with anti-TNFα treatment than with vedolizumab (OR = 1.740, = 0.002). Among patients whose dose was escalated, index drug costs were likely to be higher with anti-TNFα treatment and ustekinumab than with vedolizumab (anti-TNFα vs vedolizumab: ratio of expected cost = 1.429, = 0.002; ustekinumab vs vedolizumab: ratio of expected cost = 3.115, < 0.0001).
Patients who were biologic naive and received ustekinumab or vedolizumab were less likely to undergo dose escalation than those who received anti-TNFα treatment. Adverse clinical outcomes after dose escalation were similar among these biologics but with different costs. These analyses may inform providers and payers of the clinical and economic implications of dose escalation.
在生物制剂应答不足或应答丧失的克罗恩病(CD)患者中,增加生物制剂剂量可能会恢复应答,但剂量升级的比率以及随后的不良临床结局尚未得到很好的描述。
评估生物制剂初治 CD 患者增加生物制剂剂量的比率以及相关的不良临床结局和经济结局。
ODESSA-CD(真实世界中生物制剂剂量升级和结局研究)是一项回顾性队列研究,使用 IBM MarketScan 数据库中的索赔数据进行。纳入了 2017 年 1 月 1 日至 2018 年 12 月 31 日期间至少有一次索引药物(阿达木单抗、英夫利昔单抗、乌司奴单抗或维得利珠单抗)索赔,且在之前 6 个月内没有生物制剂索赔的(即生物制剂初治)的 CD 成年患者。随访于 2020 年 6 月 30 日结束。使用 Cox 比例风险模型和逻辑回归模型分别比较了剂量升级率和剂量升级后不良临床结局的可能性以及成本。
在 2664 名符合条件的患者中,大多数(71.4%)年龄小于 50 岁,50.5%为男性。与维得利珠单抗相比,抗肿瘤坏死因子-α(TNFα)治疗阿达木单抗(风险比[HR] = 1.703;<0.0001)和英夫利昔单抗(HR = 1.690;<0.0001)的剂量升级率更高,但乌司奴单抗与维得利珠单抗之间无显著差异(HR = 0.842;= 0.730)。剂量升级后,生物制剂之间感染、败血症和炎症性肠病相关住院的可能性并无差异(抗-TNFα 与维得利珠单抗:比值比[OR] = 1.141,= 0.599;乌司奴单抗与维得利珠单抗:OR = 0.891;= 0.836);然而,与维得利珠单抗相比,抗-TNFα 治疗更可能使用皮质类固醇(OR = 1.740,= 0.002)。在剂量升级的患者中,索引药物的费用可能高于抗-TNFα 治疗和乌司奴单抗与维得利珠单抗(抗-TNFα 与维得利珠单抗:预期费用比 = 1.429,= 0.002;乌司奴单抗与维得利珠单抗:预期费用比 = 3.115,<0.0001)。
与接受抗-TNFα 治疗的患者相比,接受乌司奴单抗或维得利珠单抗治疗的生物制剂初治患者更不可能进行剂量升级。剂量升级后这些生物制剂的不良临床结局相似,但成本不同。这些分析可以为提供者和支付者提供剂量升级的临床和经济影响的信息。