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: 3094

Factors Associated with Initial or Subsequent Choice of Biologic Disease Modifying Antirheumatic Drugs for the Treatment of Rheumatoid Arthritis

Yinzhu Jin1, Rishi J. Desai1, Jun Liu1, Nam-Kyong Choi1 and Seoyoung Kim2,3, 1Division of Pharmacoepidemiology and Pharmacoeconomics, Brigham and Women’s Hospital, Boston, MA, 2Division of Pharmacoepidemiology and Pharmocoeconomics, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, MA, 3Brigham and Women’s Hospita and, Harvard Medical School,, Boston, MA

Meeting: 2016 ACR/ARHP Annual Meeting

Date of first publication: September 28, 2016

Keywords: Biologic agents, rheumatoid arthritis (RA) and treatment

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

Date: Tuesday, November 15, 2016

Title: Rheumatoid Arthritis – Small Molecules, Biologics and Gene Therapy IV: Biomarkers

Session Type: ACR Concurrent Abstract Session

Session Time: 4:30PM-6:00PM

Background/Purpose:  Treatment with disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs) is considered the standard of care for rheumatoid arthritis (RA). Over the past two decades, major advances have occurred in the treatment of RA with development of biologic DMARDS including tumor necrosis factor (TNF) inhibitors. It is not well-studied in what sequence these biologic DMARDs are being offered in RA patients in recent years. We aimed to describe patterns of biologic DMARD treatment for RA and identify factors associated with initial and subsequent choice of biologic DMARDs.

Methods: We conducted a prospective cohort study using claims data from a US commercial health plan (2004-2013) and Medicaid (2000-2010). We identified patients who aged ≥18 years with two diagnoses of RA (ICD-9 diagnosis code 714.xx) that are 7-365 days apart, first of which was defined as the index diagnosis. We then identified three separate groups of patients based on their DMARD use in the 365 day period pre-index: 1) incident RA patients who were naïve to any DMARDs, 2) prevalent RA patients with or without non-biologic DMARDs but naïve to biologic DMARDs and 3) prevalent RA patients with prior use of a biologic DMARD. Multivariable logistic regression models examined the effect of patient demographics, clinical characteristics and health care utilization factors on the initial and subsequent choice of biologic DMARDs for RA.

Results: We identified a total of 195,433 RA patients including 78,667 DMARD-naïve incident RA patients and 93,534 biologic-naïve prevalent RA patients and 23,232 biologic-experienced patients (Table 1). Patients in the commercial health plan were 87% more likely to initiate a biologic DMARD than those in Medicaid. African Americans were 30-40% less likely to initiate or switch biologics in all three RA groups when compared to White, non-Hispanic population. Prior use of steroid and non-biologic DMARD had positive association with biologic initiation as well as subsequent switching to another biologic drug. Etanercept (51%), adalimumab (22%), and infliximab (22%) were most commonly used first- and second-line biologics; anakinra and golimumab were most likely to be switched by other biologics (Table 2).

Conclusion:  Younger age, private insurance type, and White race were significantly associated with higher odds of getting initial and subsequent treatment with biologics. There may be a need for future research examining the impact of selective prescribing of biologics on RA-related clinical outcomes.

Table1. Factors associated with initiation or switching of biologics and corresponding adjusted* odds ratio (95% CI)

Incident RA patients

Prevalent RA patients

Biologics users

Total N

78,667

93,534

23,232

Biologic initiation/switch

3,873 (4.9%)

10,361 (11.1%)

2,761 (11.9%)

Data source Commercial vs. Medicaid

1.87 (1.70, 2.05)

1.13 (1.06, 1.2)

0.92 (0.81, 1.05)

Age (by 10 year increase)

0.87 (0.84, 0.89)

0.81 (0.79, 0.83)

0.87 (0.84, 0.91)

Gender
Male vs. Female

0.90 (0.83, 0.98)

0.95 (0.89, 1.00)

0.87 (0.79, 0.97)

Race
White, non-Hispanic

Reference

Reference

Reference

Black, non-Hispanic

0.59 (0.51, 0.68)

0.71 (0.61, 0.74)

0.71 (0.55 0.90)

Other non-Hispanic

0.88 (0.72, 1.06)

0.89 (0.81,0.99)

1.08 (0.85, 1.41)

Hispanic

1.24 (1.08, 1.42)

1.08 (0.99, 1.17)

0.92 (0.76, 1.12)

History of medication use in prior year
Aspirin

0.99 (0.82, 1.19)

0.83 (0.73, 0.94)

0.75 (0.55, 1.01)

Cox-II inhibitors

1.46 (1.32, 1.61)

1.30 (1.23, 1.38)

1.11 (1.00, 1.23)

Non-selective NSAIDs

1.30 (1.20, 1.39)

1.07 (1.02, 1.12)

1.12 (1.03, 1.22)

Opioids

1.18 (1.09, 1.27)

1.19 (1.13, 1.25)

1.21 (1.10, 1.34)

Steroid dosage, prednisone equivalent mgs
None

Reference

Reference

Reference

Low (< 5 mg/day)

2.42 (2.25, 2.60)

1.65 (1.57, 1.73)

1.52 (1.38, 1.68)

Medium (5-10mg/day)

3.12 (2.56, 3.80)

1.89 (1.76, 2.04)

1.53 (1.34, 1.75)

High (≥10mg/day)

2.61 (1.91, 3.57)

1.72 (1.55, 1.89)

1.81 (1.51, 2.15)

Number of non-biologics
 None

–

Reference

Reference

 One

–

1.54 (1.42, 1.66)

1.44 (1.27, 1.64)

 More than one

–

2.40 (2.17, 2.67)

1.98 (1.65, 2.36)

Prior methotrexate

–

1.79 (1.69, 1.90)

0.78 (0.70, 0.87)

Prior hydrochloroquine

–

0.57 (0.54, 0.61)

0.75 (0.65, 0.86)

c-statistic of logistic model

0.733

0.712

0.656

*Adjusted for demographics, data source, calendar year, comorbidities, history of medication use, and healthcare utilization in baseline period
Table 2. Switching between TNF inhibitors and non-TNF biologic DMARDs in 23,232 biologic-experienced patients

 

 

Prior biologic

N

(% of all prior biologics)

N of switch

(% of each prior biologic)

Adjusted* OR of any switch (95% CI)

Switch to TNF or to non-TNF inhibitors†

N of switch to TNF inhibitors (%)

N switch to non-TNF inhibitors (%)

TNF inhibitors

Etanercept

11,753 (50.6)

1223 (10.4)

Reference

989 (80.9)

234 (19.1)

Adalimumab

5,119 (22.0)

732 (14.3)

1.22 (1.10, 1.35)

573 (78.3)

159 (21.7)

Certolizumab

104 (0.4)

20 (19.2)

1.44 (0.86, 2.39)

8 (40.0)

12 (60.0)

Golimumab

130 (0.6)

35 (26.9)

2.24 (1.48, 3.37)

22 (62.9)

13 (37.1)

Infliximab

5,102 (22.0)

567 (11.1)

1.06 (0.95, 1.19)

377 (66.5)

190 (33.5)

Non-TNF biologics

Abatacept

407 (1.8)

70 (17.2)

1.31 (0.99, 1.72)

40 (57.1)

30 (42.9)

Anakinra

260 (1.1)

85 (32.7)

3.20 (2.41, 4.25)

79 (92.9)

6 (7.1)

Rituximab

334 (1.4)

27 (8.1)

0.57 (0.38, 0.85)

16 (59.3)

11 (40.7)

Tocilizumab

22 (0.1)

2 (9.1)

0.59 (0.14, 2.60)

0 (0.0)

2 (100.0)

Total

23231 (100)

2761 (11.9)

—

743 (76.2)

657 (23.8)

*Adjusted for demographics, data source, calendar year, comorbidities, history of medication use, and healthcare utilization in baseline period † TNF inhibitors include adalimumab, certolizumab, etanercept, golimumab, and infliximab; non-TNF inhibitors include abatacept, anakinra, rituximab, tocilizumab, and tofacitinib.

Disclosure: Y. Jin, None; R. J. Desai, None; J. Liu, None; N. K. Choi, National Research Foundation of Korea (NRF-2014R1A1A2058601 and NRF-2015K2A1A2070210), 2; S. Kim, Paizer, Lilly, Genentech, Astra Zeneca, Bristol-Myers Squibb, 2.

To cite this abstract in AMA style:

Jin Y, Desai RJ, Liu J, Choi NK, Kim S. Factors Associated with Initial or Subsequent Choice of Biologic Disease Modifying Antirheumatic Drugs for the Treatment of Rheumatoid Arthritis [abstract]. Arthritis Rheumatol. 2016; 68 (suppl 10). https://acrabstracts.org/abstract/factors-associated-with-initial-or-subsequent-choice-of-biologic-disease-modifying-antirheumatic-drugs-for-the-treatment-of-rheumatoid-arthritis/. Accessed .
  • Tweet
  • Click to email a link to a friend (Opens in new window) Email
  • Click to print (Opens in new window) Print

« Back to 2016 ACR/ARHP Annual Meeting

ACR Meeting Abstracts - https://acrabstracts.org/abstract/factors-associated-with-initial-or-subsequent-choice-of-biologic-disease-modifying-antirheumatic-drugs-for-the-treatment-of-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