Michael J Stewart1, Talat Bessissow2, James Gregor3, Maureen Hazel4, Tracy S H In4, Kinda Karra4,5, Dorota Dajnowiec4,6, Martin Williamson4, Bernie Sattin7. 1. Division of Digestive Care and Endoscopy, Department of Medicine, Dalhousie University, Halifax, NS, Canada. 2. Division of Gastroenterology, Montreal General Hospital, McGill University Health Centre, Montreal, QC, Canada. 3. Division of Gastroenterology, Department of Medicine, Western University, London, ON, Canada. 4. Janssen Inc., 19 Green Belt Dr, Toronto, ON, M3C 1L9, Canada. 5. Merck Canada Inc., Kirkland, QC, Canada. 6. Edwards Lifesciences Corp., Irvine, CA, USA. 7. Janssen Inc., 19 Green Belt Dr, Toronto, ON, M3C 1L9, Canada. bsattin@its.jnj.com.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Adalimumab and golimumab are subcutaneously administered anti-tumor necrosis factor α (TNFα) biologics used in the treatment of ulcerative colitis (UC). To date, no studies have directly compared treatment patterns and healthcare resource utilization (HRU) among patients with UC receiving these therapies in a real-world setting. The objective of this study was to compare these outcomes among patients with UC treated with either adalimumab or golimumab using a US claims database. METHODS: Patients with UC treated with golimumab or adalimumab were identified using the US Optum Clinformatics® Data Mart database. Outcomes of interest included treatment patterns (discontinuations, dose optimizations, persistence, and concomitant medication use) and HRU (outpatient office visits, emergency room [ER] visits, and inpatient stays). Propensity score matching (PSM) was used to account for differences in confounding variables between groups. RESULTS: Overall, 990 patients were identified (golimumab: n = 277; adalimumab: n = 713). After PSM, 246 patients were included in each group. There were no significant differences between the adalimumab and golimumab groups over the full follow-up period in terms of treatment discontinuations (53.7% vs. 51.2%; P = 0.5881), dose optimizations (35.4% vs. 39.4%; P = 0.3515), or persistence (338.2 vs. 361.2 days; P = 0.4194). During the year after initiating therapy, there were no significant differences in concomitant immunosuppressant (21.9% vs. 21.7%; P = 0.9686) or corticosteroid use (74.7% vs. 78.8%; P = 0.3573) or in HRU outcomes including outpatient office visits (93.3% vs. 94.0%; P = 0.7660), ER visits (15.2% vs. 10.9%; P = 0.2238), and inpatient stays (15.2% vs. 13.6%; P = 0.6680). CONCLUSIONS: In this nationwide PSM cohort study of patients with UC receiving golimumab or adalimumab, no significant differences were observed between groups for treatment patterns or HRU outcomes. High rates of concomitant corticosteroid use, treatment discontinuations, and HRU while on therapy highlight key unmet needs in the treatment of UC.
INTRODUCTION:Adalimumab and golimumab are subcutaneously administered anti-tumor necrosis factor α (TNFα) biologics used in the treatment of ulcerative colitis (UC). To date, no studies have directly compared treatment patterns and healthcare resource utilization (HRU) among patients with UC receiving these therapies in a real-world setting. The objective of this study was to compare these outcomes among patients with UC treated with either adalimumab or golimumab using a US claims database. METHODS:Patients with UC treated with golimumab or adalimumab were identified using the US Optum Clinformatics® Data Mart database. Outcomes of interest included treatment patterns (discontinuations, dose optimizations, persistence, and concomitant medication use) and HRU (outpatient office visits, emergency room [ER] visits, and inpatient stays). Propensity score matching (PSM) was used to account for differences in confounding variables between groups. RESULTS: Overall, 990 patients were identified (golimumab: n = 277; adalimumab: n = 713). After PSM, 246 patients were included in each group. There were no significant differences between the adalimumab and golimumab groups over the full follow-up period in terms of treatment discontinuations (53.7% vs. 51.2%; P = 0.5881), dose optimizations (35.4% vs. 39.4%; P = 0.3515), or persistence (338.2 vs. 361.2 days; P = 0.4194). During the year after initiating therapy, there were no significant differences in concomitant immunosuppressant (21.9% vs. 21.7%; P = 0.9686) or corticosteroid use (74.7% vs. 78.8%; P = 0.3573) or in HRU outcomes including outpatient office visits (93.3% vs. 94.0%; P = 0.7660), ER visits (15.2% vs. 10.9%; P = 0.2238), and inpatient stays (15.2% vs. 13.6%; P = 0.6680). CONCLUSIONS: In this nationwide PSM cohort study of patients with UC receiving golimumab or adalimumab, no significant differences were observed between groups for treatment patterns or HRU outcomes. High rates of concomitant corticosteroid use, treatment discontinuations, and HRU while on therapy highlight key unmet needs in the treatment of UC.