A recently published systematic literature review sought to compare the effects of down-titration of biologics compared with standard dosing on clinical efficacy and health-related quality of life, and to evaluate the impact of decreased doses on the cost of RA treatment.
Biologic therapies have resulted in better treatment of rheumatoid arthritis (RA), and have allowed many patients to achieve remission. The efficacy of these therapies has allowed clinicians to consider down-titration (also referred to as dose reduction or dose tapering) for patients who have achieved remission or low disease activity (LDA), though rheumatology guidelines in the United States, Asia, and Europe all acknowledge the fact that the level of evidence guiding down-titration is moderate to very low.
A recently published systematic literature review sought to compare the effects of down-titration of biologics compared with standard dosing on clinical efficacy and health-related quality of life (HRQL), and to evaluate the impact of decreased doses on the cost of RA treatment.
The investigators, led by Chak Sing Lau, MD, conducted an electronic literature search of English-language references published from January 2000 to February 2015. Randomized controlled trials, non-randomized controlled trials, observational studies, and pharmacogenomics studies were eligible for inclusion and screened for risk of bias. The studies that qualified for inclusion evaluated adalimumab, certolizumab, etanercept, infliximab, and rituximab:
In terms of economic outcomes, most studies reported a decrease in cost with down-titration. One retrospective US cost analysis found, however, that patients with a decreased dose had a significantly higher number of inpatient admissions, physician visits, laboratory and diagnostic tests, and prescriptions.
Based on these findings, the authors concluded that down-titration can be successful in some patients with RA, and that down-titration generally decreases costs. However, because some patients are unable to retain remission or LDA after having changed their treatment dosage, care must be exercised so that these patients do not experience joint damage.
Breaking Down Biosimilar Barriers: Payer and PBM Policies
November 13th 2024Part 2 of this series for Global Biosimilars Week dives into the complexities of payer and pharmacy benefit manager (PBM) policies, how they impact biosimilar accessibility, and how addressing these issues may look under a second Trump term.
Biosimilars in America: Overcoming Barriers and Maximizing Impact
July 21st 2024Join us as we explore the complexities of the US biosimilars market, discussing legislative influences, payer and provider adoption factors, and strategies to overcome industry challenges with expert insights from Kyle Noonan, PharmD, MS, value & access strategy manager at Cencora.
Panelists Stress Stakeholder Education to Build Confidence in Biosimilars
October 31st 2024By expanding educational initiatives to clarify biosimilar safety, efficacy, and interchangeability, stakeholders can foster trust, improve access, and ensure that biosimilars are widely accepted as high-quality, cost-effective alternatives to originator biologics.
What AmerisourceBergen's Report Reveals About Payers, Biosimilar Pricing Trends
May 28th 2023On this episode of Not So Different, Tasmina Hydery and Brian Biehn from AmerisourceBergen discussed results from a recent survey, that were also presented at Asembia 2023, diving into the payer perspective on biosimilars and current pricing trends across the US biosimilar industry.
Sandoz Report: A Unified Approach to Overcoming Drug Shortages
October 10th 2024A report from Sandoz emphasizes the need for collaboration among stakeholders to eliminate drug shortages impacting over 90% of hospital systems in the US, recommending policy changes and actions to address the ongoing issue, which has caused treatment delays and increased costs.