RESUMEN
AIM: to evaluate the effects of adalimumab, etanercept and infliximab on disease activity, functional ability and quality of life and the medication costs in a naturalistic design. METHODS: All patients from the Dutch Rheumatoid Arthritis Monitoring (DREAM) register starting on tumour necrosis factor (TNF)alpha-blocking agents for the first time were monitored and assessed by trained research nurses every 3 months. The primary outcome was the Disease Activity Score (DAS28) course over the 12 months follow-up, analysed by linear mixed models. Secondary outcomes were the Health Assessment Questionnaire (HAQ), EuroQol five dimensions (EQ-5D) and the Short-Form 36 items (SF36) scores, and medication-related total costs. RESULTS: The DAS28 and SF-36 physical component scale decreased in all three medication groups over 12 months, but the decrease was larger for adalimumab and etanercept in comparison to infliximab (p<0.001). The analyses of the HAQ and the EQ-5D scores showed the same (non-significant) trend, namely that at 12 months, the functionality and quality of life was better for adalimumab and etanercept patients. With regard to the medication costs, infliximab treatment resulted in significantly higher costs over the follow-up period than treatments with either adalimumab or etanercept. The comparison between adalimumab and etanercept showed a significant difference in the 12-month DAS28 course (p = 0.031). There were no additional indications for differences in effectiveness or costs between adalimumab and etanercept. CONCLUSION: The evaluation of the effectiveness and costs showed that adalimumab and etanercept are more or less equal and favourable compared to infliximab in the first year of treatment.
Asunto(s)
Antirreumáticos/economía , Antirreumáticos/uso terapéutico , Artritis Reumatoide/tratamiento farmacológico , Costos de los Medicamentos/estadística & datos numéricos , Factor de Necrosis Tumoral alfa/antagonistas & inhibidores , Adalimumab , Adulto , Anciano , Anticuerpos Monoclonales/economía , Anticuerpos Monoclonales/uso terapéutico , Anticuerpos Monoclonales Humanizados , Artritis Reumatoide/economía , Quimioterapia Combinada , Métodos Epidemiológicos , Etanercept , Femenino , Glucocorticoides/economía , Glucocorticoides/uso terapéutico , Humanos , Inmunoglobulina G/economía , Inmunoglobulina G/uso terapéutico , Infliximab , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Países Bajos , Calidad de Vida , Receptores del Factor de Necrosis Tumoral/uso terapéutico , Índice de Severidad de la EnfermedadRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating the efficacy of antagonists to tumour necrosis factor alpha (TNFalpha) showed high response percentages in the groups treated with active drugs. OBJECTIVE: To compare the efficacy of anti-TNF treatments for rheumatoid arthritis (RA) patients in RCTs and in daily clinical practice, with an emphasis on the efficacy for patients eligible and not eligible for RCTs of anti-TNF treatments. METHODS: First, randomised placebo-controlled trials written in English for etanercept, infliximab and adalimumab for patients with RA were selected by a systematic review. Second, the DREAM (Dutch Rheumatoid Arthritis Monitoring) register with patients starting for the first time on one of the TNF-blocking agents was used. Patient characteristics, doses of medication and co-medication as well as the ACR20 response percentages were compared between RCTs and DREAM data, stratified for trial eligibility. RESULTS: In 10 of 11 comparisons, the ACR20 response percentages were lower in daily clinical practice than in the RCT active drug group, which was significant in five of 11 comparisons. Only 34-79% of DREAM patients fulfilled the selection criteria for disease activity in the several RCTs examined. DREAM patients eligible for RCTs had higher response percentages than ineligible DREAM patients. ACR20 response percentages of eligible DREAM patients were comparable with the ACR20 response percentages of the RCT active drug group in 10 of 11 comparisons. CONCLUSION: The efficacy of TNF-blocking agents in RCTs exceeded the efficacy of these drugs in clinical practice. However, in clinical practice more patients with lower disease activity were treated with TNF-blocking agents compared with those treated in RCTs. For daily practice patients who were eligible for RCTs, responses were more similar to responses reached in RCTs.