Factors associated with long-term retention of treatment with golimumab in a real-world setting: an analysis of the Spanish BIOBADASER registry
The retention rate of a biological drug (percentage of patients remaining on treatment over time) provides an index of a drug’s overall effectiveness. The golimumab retention rate as first-line biological therapy was high in clinical trial extensions lasting 5 years. Real-world studies also indicate...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Rheumatology international 2019-03, Vol.39 (3), p.509-515 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , , , , , , , , , , , , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
Zusammenfassung: | The retention rate of a biological drug (percentage of patients remaining on treatment over time) provides an index of a drug’s overall effectiveness. The golimumab retention rate as first-line biological therapy was high in clinical trial extensions lasting 5 years. Real-world studies also indicate good retention rates but have been of shorter duration. The probability of retention with golimumab treatment was assessed, as any line of anti-tumor necrosis factor-alpha therapy, for up to 5 years in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA), axial spondyloarthritis (SpA) or psoriatic arthritis (PsA), associated factors were analyzed. A retrospective database analysis of the Spanish registry of patients with rheumatic disorders receiving biological drugs (BIOBADASER) was performed. Among 353 patients, 29.8% had RA, 41.6% SpA and 28.6% PsA. Golimumab was the first biological drug in 40.1% of patients, second in 30.1% and third/later in 29.8%. The overall probability of retention of golimumab at years 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 was 85.9% (95% confidence interval 81.4–89.5%), 73.7% (67.1–79.1%), 68.5% (60.5–75.1%), 60.6% (50.2–69.5%) and 57.1% (44.9–67.5%), respectively. Retention was similar across indications (
p
= 0.070) but was greater when golimumab was used as the first biological agent compared with later therapy lines (
p
|
---|---|
ISSN: | 0172-8172 1437-160X |
DOI: | 10.1007/s00296-018-4177-z |