Cargando…

Comparative effectiveness of subcutaneous tocilizumab versus intravenous tocilizumab in a pan-European collaboration of registries

OBJECTIVE: To compare the real-word effectiveness of subcutaneous tocilizumab (TCZ-SC) and intravenous tocilizumab (TCZ-IV) in rheumatoid arthritis (RA). METHODS: Patients with RA with TCZ from eight European registries were included. Drug retention was compared using unadjusted Kaplan-Meier and Cox...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Lauper, Kim, Mongin, Denis, Iannone, Florenzo, Klami Kristianslund, Eirik, Kvien, Tore K, Nordström, Dan, Pavelka, Karel, Pombo-Suarez, Manuel, Rotar, Ziga, Santos, Maria Jose, Codreanu, Catalin, Lukina, Galina, Courvoisier, Delphine S, Gabay, Cem
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BMJ Publishing Group 2018
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6241977/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30488002
http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/rmdopen-2018-000809
_version_ 1783371802006781952
author Lauper, Kim
Mongin, Denis
Iannone, Florenzo
Klami Kristianslund, Eirik
Kvien, Tore K
Nordström, Dan
Pavelka, Karel
Pombo-Suarez, Manuel
Rotar, Ziga
Santos, Maria Jose
Codreanu, Catalin
Lukina, Galina
Courvoisier, Delphine S
Gabay, Cem
author_facet Lauper, Kim
Mongin, Denis
Iannone, Florenzo
Klami Kristianslund, Eirik
Kvien, Tore K
Nordström, Dan
Pavelka, Karel
Pombo-Suarez, Manuel
Rotar, Ziga
Santos, Maria Jose
Codreanu, Catalin
Lukina, Galina
Courvoisier, Delphine S
Gabay, Cem
author_sort Lauper, Kim
collection PubMed
description OBJECTIVE: To compare the real-word effectiveness of subcutaneous tocilizumab (TCZ-SC) and intravenous tocilizumab (TCZ-IV) in rheumatoid arthritis (RA). METHODS: Patients with RA with TCZ from eight European registries were included. Drug retention was compared using unadjusted Kaplan-Meier and Cox models adjusted for baseline patient, disease and treatment characteristics, using a strata term for year of treatment initiation and country of registry. The proportions of patients achieving Clinical Disease Activity Index (CDAI) remission and low disease activity (LDA) at 1 year were compared using samples matched on the same covariates and corrected for attrition using LUNDEX. RESULTS: 3448 patients were retrieved, 2414 with TCZ-IV and 1034 with TCZ-SC. Crude median retention was 3.52 years (95% CI 3.22 to 3.85) for TCZ-IV and 2.12 years for TCZ-SC (95% CI 1.88 to 2.38). In a country-stratified and year of treatment initiation–stratified, covariate-adjusted analysis, hazards of discontinuation were similar between TCZ-SC and TCZ-IV treated patients (HR 0.93, 95% CI 0.80 to 1.09). The average adjusted CDAI change at 1 year was similar in both groups (−6.08). After matching, with 560 patients in each group, CDAI remission corrected for attrition at 1 year was also similar between TCZ-SC and TCZ-IV (10.4% in TCZ-IV vs 12.8% in TCZ-SC (difference: 2.4%, bootstrap 95% CI −2.1% to 7.6%)), but CDAI LDA was lower in TCZ-IV patients: 41.0% in TCZ-IV versus 49.1% in TCZ-SC (difference: 8.0 %; bootstrap 95% CI 2.4% to 12.4%). CONCLUSION: With similar retention and effectiveness, TCZ-SC is an adequate alternative to TCZ-IV for RA. When possible, considering the costs of the TCZ-IV route, TCZ-SC should be the preferred mode of administration.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6241977
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2018
publisher BMJ Publishing Group
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-62419772018-11-28 Comparative effectiveness of subcutaneous tocilizumab versus intravenous tocilizumab in a pan-European collaboration of registries Lauper, Kim Mongin, Denis Iannone, Florenzo Klami Kristianslund, Eirik Kvien, Tore K Nordström, Dan Pavelka, Karel Pombo-Suarez, Manuel Rotar, Ziga Santos, Maria Jose Codreanu, Catalin Lukina, Galina Courvoisier, Delphine S Gabay, Cem RMD Open Rheumatoid Arthritis OBJECTIVE: To compare the real-word effectiveness of subcutaneous tocilizumab (TCZ-SC) and intravenous tocilizumab (TCZ-IV) in rheumatoid arthritis (RA). METHODS: Patients with RA with TCZ from eight European registries were included. Drug retention was compared using unadjusted Kaplan-Meier and Cox models adjusted for baseline patient, disease and treatment characteristics, using a strata term for year of treatment initiation and country of registry. The proportions of patients achieving Clinical Disease Activity Index (CDAI) remission and low disease activity (LDA) at 1 year were compared using samples matched on the same covariates and corrected for attrition using LUNDEX. RESULTS: 3448 patients were retrieved, 2414 with TCZ-IV and 1034 with TCZ-SC. Crude median retention was 3.52 years (95% CI 3.22 to 3.85) for TCZ-IV and 2.12 years for TCZ-SC (95% CI 1.88 to 2.38). In a country-stratified and year of treatment initiation–stratified, covariate-adjusted analysis, hazards of discontinuation were similar between TCZ-SC and TCZ-IV treated patients (HR 0.93, 95% CI 0.80 to 1.09). The average adjusted CDAI change at 1 year was similar in both groups (−6.08). After matching, with 560 patients in each group, CDAI remission corrected for attrition at 1 year was also similar between TCZ-SC and TCZ-IV (10.4% in TCZ-IV vs 12.8% in TCZ-SC (difference: 2.4%, bootstrap 95% CI −2.1% to 7.6%)), but CDAI LDA was lower in TCZ-IV patients: 41.0% in TCZ-IV versus 49.1% in TCZ-SC (difference: 8.0 %; bootstrap 95% CI 2.4% to 12.4%). CONCLUSION: With similar retention and effectiveness, TCZ-SC is an adequate alternative to TCZ-IV for RA. When possible, considering the costs of the TCZ-IV route, TCZ-SC should be the preferred mode of administration. BMJ Publishing Group 2018-11-05 /pmc/articles/PMC6241977/ /pubmed/30488002 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/rmdopen-2018-000809 Text en © Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2018. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ. This is an open access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial (CC BY-NC 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited, appropriate credit is given, any changes made indicated, and the use is non-commercial. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/
spellingShingle Rheumatoid Arthritis
Lauper, Kim
Mongin, Denis
Iannone, Florenzo
Klami Kristianslund, Eirik
Kvien, Tore K
Nordström, Dan
Pavelka, Karel
Pombo-Suarez, Manuel
Rotar, Ziga
Santos, Maria Jose
Codreanu, Catalin
Lukina, Galina
Courvoisier, Delphine S
Gabay, Cem
Comparative effectiveness of subcutaneous tocilizumab versus intravenous tocilizumab in a pan-European collaboration of registries
title Comparative effectiveness of subcutaneous tocilizumab versus intravenous tocilizumab in a pan-European collaboration of registries
title_full Comparative effectiveness of subcutaneous tocilizumab versus intravenous tocilizumab in a pan-European collaboration of registries
title_fullStr Comparative effectiveness of subcutaneous tocilizumab versus intravenous tocilizumab in a pan-European collaboration of registries
title_full_unstemmed Comparative effectiveness of subcutaneous tocilizumab versus intravenous tocilizumab in a pan-European collaboration of registries
title_short Comparative effectiveness of subcutaneous tocilizumab versus intravenous tocilizumab in a pan-European collaboration of registries
title_sort comparative effectiveness of subcutaneous tocilizumab versus intravenous tocilizumab in a pan-european collaboration of registries
topic Rheumatoid Arthritis
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6241977/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30488002
http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/rmdopen-2018-000809
work_keys_str_mv AT lauperkim comparativeeffectivenessofsubcutaneoustocilizumabversusintravenoustocilizumabinapaneuropeancollaborationofregistries
AT mongindenis comparativeeffectivenessofsubcutaneoustocilizumabversusintravenoustocilizumabinapaneuropeancollaborationofregistries
AT iannoneflorenzo comparativeeffectivenessofsubcutaneoustocilizumabversusintravenoustocilizumabinapaneuropeancollaborationofregistries
AT klamikristianslundeirik comparativeeffectivenessofsubcutaneoustocilizumabversusintravenoustocilizumabinapaneuropeancollaborationofregistries
AT kvientorek comparativeeffectivenessofsubcutaneoustocilizumabversusintravenoustocilizumabinapaneuropeancollaborationofregistries
AT nordstromdan comparativeeffectivenessofsubcutaneoustocilizumabversusintravenoustocilizumabinapaneuropeancollaborationofregistries
AT pavelkakarel comparativeeffectivenessofsubcutaneoustocilizumabversusintravenoustocilizumabinapaneuropeancollaborationofregistries
AT pombosuarezmanuel comparativeeffectivenessofsubcutaneoustocilizumabversusintravenoustocilizumabinapaneuropeancollaborationofregistries
AT rotarziga comparativeeffectivenessofsubcutaneoustocilizumabversusintravenoustocilizumabinapaneuropeancollaborationofregistries
AT santosmariajose comparativeeffectivenessofsubcutaneoustocilizumabversusintravenoustocilizumabinapaneuropeancollaborationofregistries
AT codreanucatalin comparativeeffectivenessofsubcutaneoustocilizumabversusintravenoustocilizumabinapaneuropeancollaborationofregistries
AT lukinagalina comparativeeffectivenessofsubcutaneoustocilizumabversusintravenoustocilizumabinapaneuropeancollaborationofregistries
AT courvoisierdelphines comparativeeffectivenessofsubcutaneoustocilizumabversusintravenoustocilizumabinapaneuropeancollaborationofregistries
AT gabaycem comparativeeffectivenessofsubcutaneoustocilizumabversusintravenoustocilizumabinapaneuropeancollaborationofregistries