Assessment of adherence to, and persistence with, an electromechanical autoinjector for subcutaneous interferon beta-1a injections for multiple sclerosis treatment over 3 years.

BACKGROUND: Self-administration of subcutaneous interferon beta-1a (sc IFN ß-1a) can be achieved with the RebiSmart® electromechanical autoinjector. This study investigated adherence to, and duration of persistence with, the newest version of the device (v1.6) among 2644 people receiving sc IFN ß-1a for multiple sclerosis (MS). RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: This retrospective, observational study utilized data from RebiSmart® devices, recorded on the MSdialog database, between January 2014 and November 2019. Adherence and persistence were evaluated over a 3-year period and assessed in relation to age, sex, injection type, and injection depth. RESULTS: The population of RebiSmart® users (N = 2644) comprised of 1826 (69.1%) females and mean age was 39 (range 16-83) years. Adherence to RebiSmart® use and data transfer to the MSdialog database was consistently high (mean 91.7%; range 86.8-92.6%), including across all variables (81.6-100%). Mean (±SD) persistence during the study period was 1.35 ± 1.06 years, with a maximum recorded persistence of 5.1 years. In multivariate analysis, the longest durations of persistence were observed among older individuals and males (p < 0.0001 and p = 0.0078, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: People living with MS were highly adherent to use of the RebiSmart® device, with higher persistence generally observed for older and/or male individuals.

It is important for people living with multiple sclerosis (MS) to take their medication regularly ­ and to keep doing so ­ in order to control their symptoms. Some people with MS receive a medication called interferon beta-1a (Rebif®) as a subcutaneous injection (given just under the skin), and the RebiSmart® electromechanical autoinjector was designed to help them to self-inject such medication. This study aimed to find out whether people were using the RebiSmart® device as often as they should be, and how long they continued to use it for. Information was taken from the MSdialog database, which recorded peoples' use of the RebiSmart® device between January 2014 and November 2019. Records for 2644 people using the device were analyzed. Results showed that the RebiSmart® device was used most of the time (around 91.7%). On average, people kept using the device for around a year and 4 months before stopping. This duration was generally longer for men compared with women, and longer for older people than younger people. These results increase our understanding of how people are using the RebiSmart® device to treat their MS symptoms.

A parametric model fitting time to first event for overdispersed data: application to time to relapse in multiple sclerosis.

In this article, we propose a parametric model for the distribution of time to first event when events are overdispersed and can be properly fitted by a Negative Binomial distribution. This is a very common situation in medical statistics, when the occurrence of events is summarized as a count for each patient and the simple Poisson model is not adequate to account for overdispersion of data. In this situation, studying the time of occurrence of the first event can be of interest. From the Negative Binomial distribution of counts, we derive a new parametric model for time to first event and apply it to fit the distribution of time to first relapse in multiple sclerosis (MS). We develop the regression model with methods for covariate estimation. We show that, as the Negative Binomial model properly fits relapse counts data, this new model matches quite perfectly the distribution of time to first relapse, as tested in two large datasets of MS patients. Finally we compare its performance, when fitting time to first relapse in MS, with other models widely used in survival analysis (the semiparametric Cox model and the parametric exponential, Weibull, log-logistic and log-normal models).

Lack of effect of TNFalpha blockade therapy on circulating adiponectin levels in patients with autoimmune disease: results from two independent prospective studies.

BACKGROUND: Adiponectin is an anti-inflammatory and potentially antiatherogenic molecule. Some recent reports suggest that tumour necrosis factor alpha (TNFalpha) blockade therapy increases circulating adiponectin levels, but data are sparse and inconsistent. METHODS: Data from a double-blind placebo controlled study of onercept in 126 patients with psoriatic arthritis (PsA) and from pre- and post-adalimumab treatment in 171 patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) were used to examine the effect of TNFalpha blockade therapy on adiponectin. RESULTS: Despite expected associations of adiponectin with gender and baseline high-density lipoprotein cholesterol and triglyceride, adiponectin levels did not change over time with TNFalpha blockade therapy in either group. The mean+/-SD absolute change in adiponectin levels was -0.23+/-4.6 microg/ml in patients with PsA treated with combined onercept 50 mg and onercept 100 mg (vs placebo, p=0.60) and 0.28+/-3.23 microg/ml in patients with RA treated with adalimumab (vs baseline, p=0.66). CONCLUSION: These results do not support a significant effect of TNFalpha blockade therapy on circulating adiponectin levels in patients with autoimmune disease.

The incidence of arthropathy adverse events in efalizumab-treated patients is low and similar to placebo and does not increase with long-term treatment: pooled analysis of data from Phase III clinical trials of efalizumab.

A large-scale, pooled analysis of safety data from five Phase III clinical trials (including open-label extensions of two of these studies) and two Phase III open-label clinical trials of efalizumab was conducted to explore whether arthropathy adverse events (AEs) were associated with efalizumab treatment in patients with moderate-to-severe chronic plaque psoriasis. Data from patients who received subcutaneous injections of efalizumab or placebo were stratified for analysis into phases according to the nature and duration of treatment. These included: the 'first treatment' phase (0-12-week data from patients who received either efalizumab, 1 mg/kg once weekly, or placebo in the five placebo-controlled studies); the 'extended treatment' phase (13-24-week data from seven trials for all efalizumab-treated patients); and the 'long-term treatment' phase (data from efalizumab-treated patients who received treatment for up to 36 months in two long-term trials). Descriptive statistics were performed and the incidence of arthropathy AEs per patient-year was calculated using 95% confidence intervals (CIs). During the first treatment phase, a similar proportion of patients had an arthropathy AE in the efalizumab group (3.3%; 58/1740 patients) compared with the placebo group (3.5%; 34/979 patients); the incidence of arthropathy AEs per patient-year was 0.15 in the efalizumab group (95% CI 0.11-0.19) and 0.16 in the placebo group (95% CI 0.11-0.22). Analysis of first treatment phase data from one study (n = 793) showed that the incidence of psoriatic arthropathy per patient-year was lower in efalizumab-treated patients (0.10; 95% CI 0.05-0.18) than in those given placebo (0.17; 95% CI 0.08-0.30). During the extended treatment phase, the incidence of arthropathy remained low (0.17; 95% CI 0.14-0.22). Data from two long-term studies showed that there was no increase in the incidence of arthropathy AEs over time in patients treated with efalizumab for up to 36 months. Patients who had an arthropathy AE during treatment with efalizumab appeared to be more likely to have a history of arthropathy prior to treatment. Efalizumab does not appear to increase the risk of arthropathy AEs compared with placebo.

Evaluation of efalizumab using safe psoriasis control.

BACKGROUND: Safe Psoriasis Control (SPC) is an important comprehensive measure that is validated for the assessment of benefit:risk of psoriasis treatments, combining efficacy, quality of life, and safety measures. The objective of this analysis was to assess the benefit:risk of efalizumab, a novel biologic agent indicated for the treatment of moderate-to-severe plaque psoriasis, by applying the SPC to data from randomized, placebo-controlled clinical studies of efalizumab. METHODS: SPC was applied to week 12 data from four placebo-controlled, Phase III studies: three retrospective and one prospective, the latter including a cohort of "high-need" patients for whom existing therapies were inadequate or unsuitable. RESULTS: In the retrospective analysis, 39.4% of patients achieved SPC after 12 weeks of treatment with efalizumab, compared with 10.4% for placebo. In the prospective analysis, 34.3% of patients achieved SPC after 12 weeks of treatment with efalizumab, compared with 7.3% on placebo. Among high-need patients, 33.0% achieved SPC, compared with 3.4% on placebo. CONCLUSION: Efalizumab has a favorable benefit:risk profile using the comprehensive outcome measure SPC.

Impact of efalizumab on patient-reported outcomes in high-need psoriasis patients: results of the international, randomized, placebo-controlled Phase III Clinical Experience Acquired with Raptiva (CLEAR) trial [NCT00256139].

BACKGROUND: Chronic psoriasis can negatively affect patients' lives. Assessing the impact of treatment on different aspects of a patient's health-related quality of life (HRQOL) is therefore important and relevant in trials of anti-psoriasis agents. The recombinant humanized IgG1 monoclonal antibody efalizumab targets multiple T-cell-dependent steps in the immunopathogenesis of psoriasis. Efalizumab has demonstrated safety and efficacy in several clinical trials, and improves patients' quality of life. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the impact of efalizumab on HRQOL and other patient-reported outcomes in patients with moderate to severe plaque psoriasis, including a large cohort of High-Need patients for whom at least 2 other systemic therapies were unsuitable because of lack of efficacy, intolerance, or contraindication. METHODS: A total of 793 patients were randomized in a 2:1 ratio to receive efalizumab 1 mg/kg/wk (n = 529) or placebo (n = 264) for 12 weeks. The study population included 526 High-Need patients (342 efalizumab, 184 placebo). The treatment was evaluated by patients using the HRQOL assessment tools Short Form-36 (SF-36) and Dermatology Life Quality Index (DLQI). Other patient-reported assessments included the Psoriasis Symptom Assessment (PSA), a visual analog scale (VAS) for itching, and the Patient's Global Psoriasis Assessment (PGPA). RESULTS: Efalizumab was associated with improvements at Week 12 from baseline in patient-reported outcomes, both in the total study population and in the High-Need cohort. Among all efalizumab-treated patients, the DLQI improved by 5.7 points from baseline to Week 12, relative to an improvement of 2.3 points for placebo patients (P < .001). Corresponding improvements in DLQI in the High-Need cohort were 5.4 points for efalizumab compared to 2.3 for placebo (P < .001). Improvements from baseline on the SF-36, PSA, PGPA, and itching VAS at Week 12 were also significantly greater in efalizumab-treated patients than for placebo. CONCLUSION: A 12-week course of efalizumab improved HRQOL and other patient-reported outcomes in patients with moderate to severe plaque psoriasis. The benefits of efalizumab therapy in High-Need patients were similar to those observed in the total study population, indicating that the beneficial impact of efalizumab on QOL is consistent regardless of disease severity, prior therapy, or contraindications to previous therapies.

Safe psoriasis control: a new outcome measure for the composite assessment of the efficacy and safety of psoriasis treatment.

BACKGROUND: PASI is an inadequate outcome measure for the assessment of psoriasis treatments. No currently used endpoints provide a benefit: risk assessment of treatment taking into consideration all available efficacy and safety data. OBJECTIVE: To propose a new outcome measure called "safe psoriasis control" (SPC), which assesses multiple dimensions of the disease in a clinically meaningful way through the combined use of appropriate efficacy, quality of life, and safety data. METHODS: Data from 3,500 subjects were used for the purpose of derivation and validation of the SPC endpoint. Advanced statistical methodology was used to evaluate and validate important components in the assessment of therapeutic benefit. RESULTS: SPC was shown to be a simple but meaningful combined endpoint showing the proportion of patients who had treatment benefit without major side effects. CONCLUSION: The SPC endpoint may be a step-forward in providing a composite tool for the evaluation of treatments for psoriasis.