Comparative effectiveness of subcutaneous tocilizumab versus intravenous tocilizumab in a pan-European collaboration of registries

Objective To compare the real-word effectiveness of subcutaneous tocilizumab (TCZ-SC) and intravenous tocilizumab (TCZ-IV) in rheumatoid arthritis (RA). Methods Patients with RA with TCZ from eight European registries were included. Drug retention was compared using unadjusted Kaplan-Meier and Cox models adjusted for baseline patient, disease and treatment characteristics, using a strata term for year of treatment initiation and country of registry. The proportions of patients achieving Clinical Disease Activity Index (CDAI) remission and low disease activity (LDA) at 1 year were compared using samples matched on the same covariates and corrected for attrition using LUNDEX. Results 3448 patients were retrieved, 2414 with TCZ-IV and 1034 with TCZ-SC. Crude median retention was 3.52 years (95% CI 3.22 to 3.85) for TCZ-IV and 2.12 years for TCZ-SC (95% CI 1.88 to 2.38). In a country-stratified and year of treatment initiation–stratified, covariate-adjusted analysis, hazards of discontinuation were similar between TCZ-SC and TCZ-IV treated patients (HR 0.93, 95% CI 0.80 to 1.09). The average adjusted CDAI change at 1 year was similar in both groups (−6.08). After matching, with 560 patients in each group, CDAI remission corrected for attrition at 1 year was also similar between TCZ-SC and TCZ-IV (10.4% in TCZ-IV vs 12.8% in TCZ-SC (difference: 2.4%, bootstrap 95% CI −2.1% to 7.6%)), but CDAI LDA was lower in TCZ-IV patients: 41.0% in TCZ-IV versus 49.1% in TCZ-SC (difference: 8.0 %; bootstrap 95% CI 2.4% to 12.4%). Conclusion With similar retention and effectiveness, TCZ-SC is an adequate alternative to TCZ-IV for RA. When possible, considering the costs of the TCZ-IV route, TCZ-SC should be the preferred mode of administration.

[1]  J. Kremer,et al.  Tocilizumab treatment leads to improvement in disease activity regardless of CCP status in rheumatoid arthritis. , 2017, Seminars in arthritis and rheumatism.

[2]  M. Rojas-Giménez,et al.  Adherence of rheumatoid arthritis patients to biologic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs: a cross-sectional study , 2017, Rheumatology International.

[3]  L. Carmona,et al.  Non-adherence to subcutaneous biological medication in patients with rheumatoid arthritis: a multicentre, non-interventional study. , 2017, Clinical and experimental rheumatology.

[4]  K. Eguchi,et al.  Evaluation of switching from intravenous to subcutaneous formulation of tocilizumab in patients with rheumatoid arthritis , 2016, Modern rheumatology.

[5]  P. Dieudé,et al.  Body mass index and response to tocilizumab in rheumatoid arthritis: a real life study , 2016, Clinical Rheumatology.

[6]  H. Yamanaka,et al.  Sustainable Efficacy of Switching From Intravenous to Subcutaneous Tocilizumab Monotherapy in Patients With Rheumatoid Arthritis , 2015, Arthritis care & research.

[7]  P. V. van Riel,et al.  Effectiveness of tocilizumab with and without synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs in rheumatoid arthritis: results from a European collaborative study , 2015, Annals of the rheumatic diseases.

[8]  C. Gabay,et al.  Effectiveness of biologic DMARDs in monotherapy versus in combination with synthetic DMARDs in rheumatoid arthritis: data from the Swiss Clinical Quality Management Registry. , 2015, Rheumatology.

[9]  L. Jacobsson,et al.  Drug adherence, response and predictors thereof for tocilizumab in patients with rheumatoid arthritis: results from the Swedish biologics register. , 2015, Rheumatology.

[10]  D. Wendling,et al.  Response to Tocilizumab in Rheumatoid Arthritis Is Not Influenced by the Body Mass Index of the Patient , 2015, The Journal of Rheumatology.

[11]  J. Pope,et al.  Subcutaneous Tocilizumab Versus Placebo in Combination With Disease-Modifying Antirheumatic Drugs in Patients With Rheumatoid Arthritis , 2014, Arthritis care & research.

[12]  M. Brookhart,et al.  Comparative Persistence of the TNF Antagonists in Rheumatoid Arthritis – A Population-Based Cohort Study , 2014, PloS one.

[13]  G. Burmester,et al.  Efficacy and safety of subcutaneous tocilizumab versus intravenous tocilizumab in combination with traditional DMARDs in patients with RA at week 97 (SUMMACTA) , 2014, Annals of the rheumatic diseases.

[14]  Y. Saeki,et al.  Phase III Study of the Efficacy and Safety of Subcutaneous Versus Intravenous Tocilizumab Monotherapy in Patients With Rheumatoid Arthritis , 2014, Arthritis care & research.

[15]  H. Olsson,et al.  Drug survival on TNF inhibitors in patients with rheumatoid arthritis comparison of adalimumab, etanercept and infliximab , 2013, Annals of the rheumatic diseases.

[16]  C. Barbui,et al.  What is the European Medicines Agency? , 2012, Epidemiology and Psychiatric Sciences.

[17]  S. Yamasaki,et al.  In rheumatoid arthritis patients treated with tocilizumab, the rate of clinical disease activity index (CDAI) remission at 24 weeks is superior in those with higher titers of IgM-rheumatoid factor at baseline , 2011 .

[18]  Ricardo Blanco,et al.  Tocilizumab inhibits structural joint damage in rheumatoid arthritis patients with inadequate responses to methotrexate: results from the double-blind treatment phase of a randomized placebo-controlled trial of tocilizumab safety and prevention of structural joint damage at one year. , 2011, Arthritis and rheumatism.

[19]  S. Yamasaki,et al.  In rheumatoid arthritis patients treated with tocilizumab, the rate of clinical disease activity index (CDAI) remission at 24 weeks is superior in those with higher titers of IgM-rheumatoid factor at baseline , 2011, Modern rheumatology.

[20]  Tsutomu Takeuchi,et al.  EULAR recommendations for the management of rheumatoid arthritis with synthetic and biological disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs: 2016 update , 2010, Annals of the rheumatic diseases.

[21]  John Wong,et al.  EULAR recommendations for the management of rheumatoid arthritis with synthetic and biological disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs , 2010, Annals of the rheumatic diseases.

[22]  C. Gabay,et al.  Comparison of drug retention rates and causes of drug discontinuation between anti-tumor necrosis factor agents in rheumatoid arthritis. , 2009, Arthritis and rheumatism.

[23]  P. Emery,et al.  Double-blind randomized controlled clinical trial of the interleukin-6 receptor antagonist, tocilizumab, in European patients with rheumatoid arthritis who had an incomplete response to methotrexate. , 2006, Arthritis and rheumatism.

[24]  P. Geborek,et al.  The LUNDEX, a new index of drug efficacy in clinical practice: results of a five-year observational study of treatment with infliximab and etanercept among rheumatoid arthritis patients in southern Sweden. , 2006, Arthritis and rheumatism.

[25]  Tanja Stamm,et al.  Remission and active disease in rheumatoid arthritis: defining criteria for disease activity states. , 2005, Arthritis and rheumatism.

[26]  J. Smolen,et al.  The Simplified Disease Activity Index (SDAI) and the Clinical Disease Activity Index (CDAI): a review of their usefulness and validity in rheumatoid arthritis. , 2005, Clinical and experimental rheumatology.

[27]  M. Uffmann,et al.  Acute phase reactants add little to composite disease activity indices for rheumatoid arthritis: validation of a clinical activity score , 2005, Arthritis research & therapy.

[28]  A. McMahon,et al.  Effect of a treatment strategy of tight control for rheumatoid arthritis (the TICORA study): a single-blind randomised controlled trial , 2004, The Lancet.

[29]  T. Pincus,et al.  Longterm drug therapy for rheumatoid arthritis in seven rheumatology private practices: II. Second line drugs and prednisone. , 1992, The Journal of rheumatology.

[30]  M. Prevoo,et al.  Modified disease activity scores that include twenty-eight-joint counts. Development and validation in a prospective longitudinal study of patients with rheumatoid arthritis. , 1995, Arthritis and rheumatism.