Literature DB >> 31952883

Drug Retention Rate and Causes of Discontinuation of Adalimumab in Uveitis: Real-World Data from the Biotherapies in Uveitis (BioÚvea) Study Group.

Victor Llorenç1, Miguel Cordero-Coma2, Ana Blanco-Esteban3, Henar Heras-Mulero4, María-José Losada-Castillo5, Vega Jovani-Casano6, Elia Valls-Pascual7, Margarita Jodar-Marquez8, Ángel García-Aparicio9, Alejandro Fonollosa10, Juan Jacobo González-Guijarro11, Luís Rodriguez-Melian12, Manuel Fernández-Prada13, María Jerez-Fidalgo14, Marisa Hernandez-Garfella15, Cristina Esquinas16, Maite Sainz-de-la-Maza17, Alfredo Adán17.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: To study the drug retention rate (DRR), causes, and predictors of discontinuation of adalimumab (ADA) in a real-world uveitis setting.
DESIGN: Multicentric, nationwide, registry-based, ambispective, observational study. PARTICIPANTS: Patients treated with ADA for noninfectious uveitis (NIU) in the Biotherapies for Uveitis (BioÚvea) Spanish registry from November 2016 to November 2017.
METHODS: Demographics, clinical data, timing, and reasons for discontinuation, if occurred, were recorded. The DRR and drug retention time (DRT) were estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method. Median follow-up was analyzed by reverse Kaplan-Meier. Log-rank test was used for comparisons. Cox proportional-hazards model (PHM) and propensity score matching were used to identify predictors for discontinuation due to inefficacy and adverse events. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Drug retention rate and DRT.
RESULTS: A total of 392 patients were analyzed, including 218 women. Median age was 39 (interquartile range, 25) years. Nonanterior uveitis was recorded in 242 patients. Median follow-up was 49.07 (0.97-131.67) months, median DRT (survival) was 69.3 months, and 14 patients were lost to follow-up. The DRR at 6, 12, 24, and 60 months was 92.97%, 87.68%, 76.31%, and 54.28%, respectively. Adalimumab was discontinued in 151 patients. Discontinuation was due to lack or loss of efficacy in 74 patients, adverse event in 34 patients, and sustained quiescence in 25 patients. Recorded adverse events included infections in 10 patients and malignant neoplasms in 3 patients. Concurrent classic immunomodulatory therapy (IMT) was given to 251 patients. We did not find DRT differences regarding the use of concurrent IMT. Adalimumab was prescribed as a second or greater biotherapy line in 76 patients who showed shorter DRT (P = 0.038). Starting ADA in nonbiotherapy-naive patients was a predictor for "discontinuation due to inefficacy," whereas undifferentiated uveitis was a predictor for "discontinuation due to adverse event." Drug retention time was significantly shorter when spared or intensified, mainly due to discontinuation after sustained quiescence.
CONCLUSIONS: Drug retention rate of ADA in uveitis at 60 months was 54.28%, with a good safety profile. The use of concurrent IMT did not show a significant influence on DRT. The use of ADA as a second or further biotherapy could be predictive for discontinuation due to inefficacy. Undifferentiated uveitis may be prone to premature discontinuation of ADA due to adverse events.
Copyright © 2019 American Academy of Ophthalmology. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2019        PMID: 31952883     DOI: 10.1016/j.ophtha.2019.11.024

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Ophthalmology        ISSN: 0161-6420            Impact factor:   12.079


  5 in total

Review 1.  TNF-α in Uveitis: From Bench to Clinic.

Authors:  Qi Jiang; Zhaohuai Li; Tianyu Tao; Runping Duan; Xianggui Wang; Wenru Su
Journal:  Front Pharmacol       Date:  2021-11-02       Impact factor: 5.810

2.  Efficacy, safety and cost-effectiveness of methotrexate, adalimumab or their combination in non-infectious non-anterior uveitis: a protocol for a multicentre, randomised, parallel three arms, active-controlled, phase III open label with blinded outcome assessment study.

Authors:  Ana Belen Rivas; Amanda Lopez-Picado; Valentina Calamia; Ester Carreño; Lidia Cocho; Miguel Cordero-Coma; Alex Fonollosa; Felix M Francisco Hernandez; Angel Garcia-Aparicio; Javier Garcia-Gonzalez; Jose Juan Mondejar; Leticia Lojo-Oliveira; Llucí Martínez-Costa; Santiago Munoz; Diana Peiteado; Jose Antonio Pinto; Beatriz Rodriguez-Lozano; Esperanza Pato; David Diaz-Valle; Elena Molina; Luis Alberto Tebar; Luis Rodriguez-Rodriguez
Journal:  BMJ Open       Date:  2022-03-22       Impact factor: 2.692

Review 3.  Biotherapies in Uveitis.

Authors:  Mathilde Leclercq; Anne-Claire Desbois; Fanny Domont; Georgina Maalouf; Sara Touhami; Patrice Cacoub; Bahram Bodaghi; David Saadoun
Journal:  J Clin Med       Date:  2020-11-08       Impact factor: 4.241

4.  Efficacy and Safety of Immunosuppressant Therapy for Noninfectious Uveitis: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Authors:  Haihong Zuo; Wei Zhang; Yuqing Yan
Journal:  Comput Math Methods Med       Date:  2021-09-04       Impact factor: 2.238

5.  Case Report: A Promising Treatment Strategy for Noninfectious Uveitis.

Authors:  Xiao-Bao Liu; Lu-Shi Tang; Jing-Wen Chen; Chang-Song Lin; Qiu-Hong Liu; Qiang Xu
Journal:  Front Pharmacol       Date:  2022-01-18       Impact factor: 5.810

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.