• 한국임상약학회지
• /
• 제26권1호
• /
• pp.59-69
• /
• 2016

Background: The subcutaneous formulation of biologic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs) was preferred due to favored self-administration and would be an economical treatment option for patients with rheumatoid arthritis. This study was to compare the economic impact of biologic DMARDs administered by subcutaneous injection in patients with rheumatoid arthritis who had inadequate response to conventional DMARDs. Methods: The cost-minimization analysis was conducted to estimate the lifetime health care costs of treatment sequences with subcutaneous biologic DMARDs as first-line therapy from a health care system perspective. The Markov model was developed to represent the transitions through treatment sequences based on American College of Rheumatology response rate and discontinuation rate. The health care costs comprised the cost of medications, administration, dispensing, outpatient visits, test/diagnostic examination, palliative therapy and treatment of serious infection. All costs were expressed in 2016 Korean Won (KRW) and discounted at 5%. Results: The mean lifetime health care cost per patient was lowest in the etanercept sequence, which was estimated at KRW 63,441,679. The incremental costs of the treatment sequence started with adalimumab, golimumab, abatacept, and tocilizumab were KRW 7,985,730, KRW 4,064,669, KRW 2,869,947, and KRW 4,282,833, respectively, relative to etanercept sequence. These differences in costs mainly were attributable to medication costs. One-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses confirmed that etanercept represented the option with the lowest cost compared with comparators. Conclusion: This study found that etanercept is likely a cost-saving treatment option among subcutaneous biologic DMARDs in patients with rheumatoid arthritis.

• 한국임상약학회지
• /
• 제25권1호
• /
• pp.9-17
• /
• 2015

Background: Biologic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (bDMARDs) extend the treatment choices for rheumatoid arthritis patients with insufficient response or intolerance to conventional DMARDs (cDMARDs). These agents have considerable efficacy compared with conventional DMARDs, but only a few head-to-head comparisons among these agents have been performed. The objective of this systematic review and network meta-analysis (NMA) was to compare the relative efficacy of Certolizumab with conventional DMARD to licensed bDMARD with cDMARD therapy for patients who failed to prior cDMARD treatment under the condition of the reimbursement coverage criteria in Korea. Methods: A systematic review was conducted using MEDLINE and Cochrane library. Key endpoints were the American College of Rheumatology (ACR) responses of 20/50/70 at six months. Bayesian outcomes were calculated as median of treatment effect, probability of the best, Odds Ratio (OR) and probability that OR was greater than one. Results: Compared with other bDMARDs, Certolizumab were associated with higher or comparable ACR response rates; in ACR20, the OR (probability of OR>1) was 2.08 (92.6%) for Adalimumab, 1.86 (85.7%) for Etanercept, 1.89 (79.5%) for Golimumab, 2.36 (92.1%) for Infliximab, 1.79 (87.0%) for Abatacept, 1.74 (80.8%) for Rituximab and 1.82 (86.8%) for Tocilizaumab. In ACR50 and ACR70, the ORs did not present significant differences. Conclusion: Certolizaumab with cDMARD was more effective or comparable than other bDMARDs in patients who failed prior cDMARD treatment.

• Journal of Periodontal and Implant Science
• /
• 제51권2호
• /
• pp.124-134
• /
• 2021

Purpose: The aim of this study was to assess the association between the clinical status of rheumatoid arthritis (RA) and periodontitis (PD) in patients diagnosed with PD and to evaluate the impact of RA treatment on the severity of PD. Methods: The study included 148 participants with PD, of whom 64 were also diagnosed with RA (PD+RA group), while 84 age-matched participants were rheumatologically healthy (PD-only group). PD severity was assessed by the following periodontal parameters: clinical attachment loss, probing pocket depth (PPD), bleeding on probing (BOP), alveolar bone loss, and number of missing teeth. RA disease characteristics and impact of disease were evaluated by the Disease Activity Score 28 using C-reactive protein, disease duration, RA treatment, the RA Impact of Disease tool, and the Health Assessment Questionnaire. Outcome variables were compared using parametric and non-parametric tests and associations were evaluated using regression analysis with the calculation of odds ratios (ORs). Results: Participants in the PD+RA group had higher mean PPD values (2.81 ± 0.59 mm vs. 2.58 ± 0.49 mm, P=0.009) and number of missing teeth (6.27±4.79 vs. 3.93±4.08, P=0.001) than those in the PD-only group. A significant association was found between mean PPD and RA (OR, 2.22; 95% CI, 1.16-4.31; P=0.016). Within the PD+RA group, moderate to severe periodontal disease was significantly more prevalent among participants with higher RA disease activity (P=0.042). The use of biologic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (bDMARDs) was associated with a lower BOP percentage (P=0.016). Conclusions: In patients with PD, RA was associated with a higher mean PPD and number of missing teeth. The severity of PD was affected by the RA disease clinical activity and by treatment with bDMARDs, which were associated with a significantly lower mean BOP percentage.