ArticleClinical rheumatology2017
Economic impact of biologic utilization patterns in patients with psoriatic arthritis.
Article in Clinical rheumatology, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
8 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 16 citations in OpenAlex.
- Cost and Cost Effectiveness of Treatments for Psoriatic Arthritis: A Systematic Literature Review.PharmacoEconomics · 2018Pooled it
- Psoriatic arthritis: the role of self-reported non-adherence, non-trough drug levels, immunogenicity and conventional synthetic DMARD co-therapy in adalimumab and etanercept response.Rheumatology advances in practice · 2024Article
- Non-trough serum drug levels of adalimumab and etanercept are associated with response in patients with psoriatic arthritis.Rheumatology (Oxford, England) · 2023Article
- Do genetics contribute to TNF inhibitor response prediction in Psoriatic Arthritis?The pharmacogenomics journal · 2023Review
- Real-World Treatment Patterns and Healthcare Costs in Patients with Psoriatic Arthritis Treated with Ixekizumab: A Retrospective Study.ACR open rheumatology · 2021Article
- Persistence of tumor necrosis factor inhibitor or conventional synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drug monotherapy or combination therapy in psoriatic arthritis in a real-world setting.Rheumatology international · 2019Article
- Efficacy of Tofacitinib for the Treatment of Psoriatic Arthritis: Pooled Analysis of Two Phase 3 Studies.Rheumatology and therapy · 2018Article
- Treatment Patterns Among Patients with Psoriatic Arthritis Treated with a Biologic in the United States: Descriptive Analyses from an Administrative Claims Database.Journal of managed care & specialty pharmacy · 2018Observational
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The aim of the study is to examine the frequency and costs associated with above-label dosing of biologics in patients with psoriatic arthritis (PsA). MarketScan identified adults with ≥1 International Classification of Diseases, Clinical Modification diagnosis for PsA and ≥1 pharmacy claim for biologics of interest between January 1, 2011 and December 31, 2013. The first biologic claim was the index date with a 1-year follow-up period and three additional months to confirm continuous biologic use. Exclusion criteria included switching to a different biologic or diagnosis with another autoimmune disease. During the follow-up period, duration was stratified into three groups: <30, 30-179, and ≥180 days of above-label dosing (>10% of the labeled dose). One-tailed t test was conducted to examine the impact of above-label duration on healthcare costs. We identified 4245 PsA patients receiving etanercept (n = 2342), adalimumab (n = 1788), and golimumab (n = 115). Above-label dosing of <30 days (85% adalimumab, 90.4% etanercept, and 95.7% golimumab) and ≥180 days (9.6% adalimumab, 4.1% etanercept, and 2.6% golimumab) was observed. All-cause total healthcare costs for <30 days of above-label use (etanercept $30,625, adalimumab $31,620, and golimumab $37,224), 30-179 days (etanercept $35,602, adalimumab $38,915, and golimumab $64,349), and ≥180 days (etanercept $55,349, adalimumab $54,176, and golimumab $47,993) were reported. Longer above-label duration (30-179 versus <30 days, ≥180 versus 30-179 and ≥180 days) with etanercept or adalimumab was significantly associated with higher mean increased total all-cause healthcare, PsA-specific healthcare, and biologic costs (p < 0.05). Above-label use of anti-TNF biologics does occur and is associated with significantly increased healthcare costs.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.