Downloads: 187

Files in This Item:
File Description SizeFormat 
journal.pone.0194130.pdf1.14 MBAdobe PDFView/Open
Title: Drug retention and discontinuation reasons between seven biologics in patients with rheumatoid arthritis -The ANSWER cohort study-
Authors: Ebina, Kosuke
Hashimoto, Motomu  kyouindb  KAKEN_id
Yamamoto, Wataru
Ohnishi, Akira  kyouindb  KAKEN_id
Kabata, Daijiro
Hirano, Toru
Hara, Ryota
Katayama, Masaki
Yoshida, Shuzo
Nagai, Koji
Son, Yonsu
Amuro, Hideki
Akashi, Kengo
Fujimura, Takanori
Hirao, Makoto
Yamamoto, Keiichi
Shintani, Ayumi
Kumanogoh, Atsushi
Yoshikawa, Hideki
Author's alias: 橋本, 求
Issue Date: 15-Mar-2018
Publisher: Public Library of Science (PLoS)
Journal title: PLOS ONE
Volume: 13
Issue: 3
Thesis number: e0194130
Abstract: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the retention and discontinuation reasons of seven biological disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (bDMARDs) in a real-world setting of patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA). 1, 037 treatment courses with bDMARDs from 2009 to 2016 [female, 81.8%; baseline age, 59.6 y; disease duration 7.8 y; rheumatoid factor positivity 81.5%; Disease Activity Score in 28 joints using erythrocyte sedimentation rate (DAS28-ESR), 4.4; concomitant prednisolone 43.5% and methotrexate 68.6%; Bio-naïve, 57.1%; abatacept (ABT), 21.3%; tocilizumab (TCZ), 20.7%; golimumab (GLM), 16.9%; etanercept (ETN), 13.6%; adalimumab (ADA), 11.1%; infliximab (IFX), 8.5%; certolizumab pegol (CZP), 7.9%] were included in this multi-center, retrospective study. Drug retention and discontinuation reasons at 36 months were estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method and adjusted by potent confounders using Cox proportional hazards modeling. As a result, 455 treatment courses (43.9%) were stopped, with 217 (20.9%) stopping due to inefficacy, 113 (10.9%) due to non-toxic reasons, 86 (8.3%) due to toxic adverse events, and 39 (3.8%) due to remission. Drug retention rates in the adjusted model were as follows: total retention (ABT, 60.7%; ADA, 32.7%; CZP, 43.3%; ETN, 51.9%; GLM, 45.4%; IFX, 31.1%; and TCZ, 59.2%; P < 0.001); inefficacy (ABT, 81.4%; ADA, 65.7%; CZP, 60.7%; ETN, 71.3%; GLM, 68.5%; IFX, 65.0%; and TCZ, 81.4%; P = 0.015), toxic adverse events (ABT, 89.8%; ADA, 80.5%; CZP, 83.9%; ETN, 89.2%; GLM, 85.5%; IFX, 75.6%; and TCZ, 77.2%; P = 0.50), and remission (ABT, 95.5%; ADA, 88.1%; CZP, 91.1%; ETN, 97.5%; GLM, 94.7%; IFX, 86.4%; and TCZ, 98.4%; P < 0.001). In the treatment of RA, ABT and TCZ showed higher overall retention, and TCZ showed lower inefficacy compared to IFX, while IFX showed higher discontinuation due to remission compared to ABT, ETN, GLM, and TCZ in adjusted modeling.
Rights: © 2018 Ebina et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.
DOI(Published Version): 10.1371/journal.pone.0194130
PubMed ID: 29543846
Appears in Collections:Journal Articles

Show full item record

Export to RefWorks

Export Format: 

Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.