ACR Meeting Abstracts

ACR Meeting Abstracts

  • Meetings
    • ACR Convergence 2024
    • ACR Convergence 2023
    • 2023 ACR/ARP PRSYM
    • ACR Convergence 2022
    • ACR Convergence 2021
    • ACR Convergence 2020
    • 2020 ACR/ARP PRSYM
    • 2019 ACR/ARP Annual Meeting
    • 2018-2009 Meetings
    • Download Abstracts
  • Keyword Index
  • Advanced Search
  • Your Favorites
    • Favorites
    • Login
    • View and print all favorites
    • Clear all your favorites
  • ACR Meetings

Abstract Number: 1845

Inequalities Across 46 European Countries in Clinical Eligibility Criteria for the Start of A First (Reimbursed) Biologic in Patients with Rheumatoid Arthritis

Polina Putrik1, Sofia Ramiro2, Tore K. Kvien3, Tuulikki Sokka4, Till Uhlig3, Annelies Boonen5 and Equity in Clinical Eligibility Criteria for RA treatment6, 1Department of Internal Medicine, Division of Rheumatology, Maastricht University Medical Center, Maastricht, Netherlands, 2Clinical Immunology & Rheumatology, Academic Medical Center, University of Amsterdam, The Netherlands and Hospital Garcia de Orta, Almada, Portugal, 3Dept. of Rheumatology, Diakonhjemmet Hospital, Oslo, Norway, 4Rheumatology, Jyvaskyla Central Hospital, Jyvaskyla, Finland, 5Department of Internal Medicine, Division of Rheumatology, Maastricht University Medical Center, Maastricht, Netherlands, 6European Region

Meeting: 2012 ACR/ARHP Annual Meeting

Keywords: Clinical practice guidelines, Disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs, rheumatoid arthritis, treatment and socioeconomic factors

  • Tweet
  • Click to email a link to a friend (Opens in new window) Email
  • Click to print (Opens in new window) Print
Session Information

Title: Epidemiology and Health Services Research: Rheumatic Disease Pharmacoepidemiology

Session Type: Abstract Submissions (ACR)

Background/Purpose:

In the treatment of patients with RA, strategies that include biologics have resulted in a better outcome for patients with regard to disease activity, need for surgery and work participation. Across the countries, reimbursement criteria and/or recommendations/guidelines have been formulated to regulate access to these costly treatments. The objective of this study was to explore clinical eligibility criteria for the start of a first reimbursed biologic in patients with RA and compare them across different European countries.

Methods:

A questionnaire was sent via email to one representative rheumatologist in 49 countries of the European Region to collect data on the eligibility criteria for a first biologic in patients with RA, as of May 2011. First, rheumatologists were asked whether either reimbursement or clinical recommendations or both were mainly regulating prescription in clinical practice. Further information was collected on (a) minimal disease duration required, (b) number of previous DMARDs needed to be failed and (c) requirements for disease activity or severity, mandatory before the start of a biological. A simple score was developed to evaluate the level of restrictions in access to reimbursed biologics across the countries (table). This score varied between 0 and 5, the higher the score, the easier the access. Study results are presented using descriptive statistics.

Results:

Forty-six countries (response rate 96%) provided data. In 10 countries (22%) no biologic was reimbursed. Among the remaining 36, Luxemburg had no regulation of access to reimbursed biologics, in 13 (36%) the reimbursement criteria were the major source of eligibility criteria, while in 7 (19%) the clinical recommendations predominated, and in 15 (42%) both reimbursement criteria and clinical recommendations were used (usually because they were similar).

Among those with at least 1 biologic reimbursed, 21 countries (58%) had no requirement for disease duration in order to initiate a biologic, and for the remaining countries a duration of 3 to 12 months was mandatory. The majority of the countries (47%) required a failure of 2 synthetic DMARDs to qualify for therapy with biologics. Thirty-one out of 36 countries specified a minimum level of disease activity that had to be fulfilled before treatment with biologics (table). Three countries (8%) had the maximum (5) eligibility score (most liberal), 19.5% had a score of 4, 19.5% a score of 3, 22% a score of 2, 28% of 1 and 3% (1 country) a score of 0 (more restrictive). Countries from Eastern Europe and former Soviet Union were more likely to be classified in the more restricted scores.

Criterion

Cut-off

Score for eligibility for biologics

Number of countries (%)

Disease duration

No limitation

1

21(58%)

Yes

0

15(42%)

Disease activity

No requirement

2

5(14%)

DAS28≥3.2 or equivalent as

major criteria

1

12(33%)

Stricter requirement than

DAS28≥3.2

0

19(53%)

Number of synthetic

DMARDs to be failed

≤1

2

15(42%)

2

1

17(47%)

>2

0

4(11%)

Conclusion:

Clinical criteria for biologic therapy differ significantly across the countries, suggesting inequalities in access to treatment in RA. These findings should alert stakeholders to further strive for optimal standards of rheumatologic care and implement them across all European countries.


Disclosure:

P. Putrik,
None;

S. Ramiro,
None;

T. K. Kvien,
None;

T. Sokka,

Grants from Academy of Finland and Abbott, the QUEST-RA invesigators,

2;

T. Uhlig,
None;

A. Boonen,
None;

  • Tweet
  • Click to email a link to a friend (Opens in new window) Email
  • Click to print (Opens in new window) Print

« Back to 2012 ACR/ARHP Annual Meeting

ACR Meeting Abstracts - https://acrabstracts.org/abstract/inequalities-across-46-european-countries-in-clinical-eligibility-criteria-for-the-start-of-a-first-reimbursed-biologic-in-patients-with-rheumatoid-arthritis/

Advanced Search

Your Favorites

You can save and print a list of your favorite abstracts during your browser session by clicking the “Favorite” button at the bottom of any abstract. View your favorites »

All abstracts accepted to ACR Convergence are under media embargo once the ACR has notified presenters of their abstract’s acceptance. They may be presented at other meetings or published as manuscripts after this time but should not be discussed in non-scholarly venues or outlets. The following embargo policies are strictly enforced by the ACR.

Accepted abstracts are made available to the public online in advance of the meeting and are published in a special online supplement of our scientific journal, Arthritis & Rheumatology. Information contained in those abstracts may not be released until the abstracts appear online. In an exception to the media embargo, academic institutions, private organizations, and companies with products whose value may be influenced by information contained in an abstract may issue a press release to coincide with the availability of an ACR abstract on the ACR website. However, the ACR continues to require that information that goes beyond that contained in the abstract (e.g., discussion of the abstract done as part of editorial news coverage) is under media embargo until 10:00 AM ET on November 14, 2024. Journalists with access to embargoed information cannot release articles or editorial news coverage before this time. Editorial news coverage is considered original articles/videos developed by employed journalists to report facts, commentary, and subject matter expert quotes in a narrative form using a variety of sources (e.g., research, announcements, press releases, events, etc.).

Violation of this policy may result in the abstract being withdrawn from the meeting and other measures deemed appropriate. Authors are responsible for notifying colleagues, institutions, communications firms, and all other stakeholders related to the development or promotion of the abstract about this policy. If you have questions about the ACR abstract embargo policy, please contact ACR abstracts staff at [email protected].

Wiley

  • Online Journal
  • Privacy Policy
  • Permissions Policies
  • Cookie Preferences

© Copyright 2025 American College of Rheumatology