Differences in patients’ population and efficacy/effectiveness of biologic disease–modifying antirheumatic drugs between randomized controlled trials and real-world settings in patients with rheumatoid arthritis – using the IORRA cohort

Author:

Sugano Eri1,Tanaka Eiichi2,Inoue Eisuke23,Sakai Ryoko24,Abe Mai21,Saka Kumiko21,Sugitani Naohiro21,Ochiai Moeko21,Yamaguchi Rei21,Higuchi Yoko21,Sugimoto Naoki21,Ikari Katsunori45,Nakajima Ayako26,Yamanaka Hisashi278,Harigai Masayoshi21

Affiliation:

1. Department of Rheumatology, Institute of Rheumatology, Tokyo Women’s Medical University Hospital, Tokyo, Japan

2. Division of Rheumatology, Department of Internal Medicine, Tokyo Women’s Medical University School of Medicine, Shinjuku-ku, Tokyo, Japan

3. Research Administration Center, Showa University, Tokyo, Japan

4. Division of Multidisciplinary Management of Rheumatic Diseases, Tokyo Women’s Medical University School of Medicine, Tokyo, Japan

5. Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Institute of Rheumatology, Tokyo Women’s Medical University Hospital, Tokyo, Japan

6. Center for Rheumatic Diseases, Mie University Hospital, Mie, Japan

7. Department of Rheumatology, Sanno Medical Center, Tokyo, Japan

8. Department of Rheumatology, International University of Health and Welfare, Chiba, Japan

Abstract

ABSTRACT Objectives To evaluate the differences in patients’ population and efficacy/effectiveness of biological disease–modifying antirheumatic drugs (bDMARDs) between randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and clinical practice in patients with rheumatoid arthritis. Methods We reviewed inclusion criteria in Phase II or III RCTs of bDMARDs conducted in Japan. The Institute of Rheumatology, Rheumatoid Arthritis study participants during the period when each RCT was conducted (Cohort A) and new bDMARD users at our institute in 2016 (Cohort B) were assessed for the fulfilment of the inclusion criteria. The effectiveness of bDMARDs in our cohort and their efficacy in RCTs were compared using the inverse-variance method. Results Nineteen RCTs were selected. The mean proportions of patients fulfilling all inclusion criteria of each RCT in Cohorts A and B were 2.3% and 7.6%, respectively. The pooled proportion ratios (95% confidence interval) for achieving the American College of Rheumatology 20 (ACR20), ACR50, ACR70, and disease activity score 28 remission in non-eligible cases for eight RCTs versus all corresponding RCTs were 0.38 (0.30–0.51), 0.41 (0.30–0.57), 0.54 (0.35–0.82), and 1.28 (1.10–1.56), respectively. Conclusions Few rheumatoid arthritis patients fulfilled the inclusion criteria of the RCTs in clinical settings. There was a difference in the efficacy/effectiveness of bDMARDs between RCTs and clinical practice.

Funder

Ministry of Health, Labour, and Welfare of Japan

UCB Japan Co., Ltd

Publisher

Oxford University Press (OUP)

Subject

Rheumatology

Reference28 articles.

1. Rheumatoid arthritis;Scott;Lancet,2010

2. Efficacy and effectiveness of tumour necrosis factor inhibitors in the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis in randomized controlled trials and routine clinical practice;Aaltonen;Rheumatology (Oxford),2017

3. Generalizability of patients with rheumatoid arthritis in biologic agent clinical trials;Vashisht;Arthritis Care Res (Hoboken),2016

4. Effectiveness of tumor necrosis factor inhibitors in rheumatoid arthritis in an observational cohort study: comparison of patients according to their eligibility for major randomized clinical trials;Zink;Arthritis Rheum,2006

5. The efficacy of anti-TNF in rheumatoid arthritis, a comparison between randomised controlled trials and clinical practice;Kievit;Ann Rheum Dis,2007

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3