Abstract
Introduction
To compare all-cause and rheumatoid arthritis (RA)-related healthcare costs and resource use in patients with RA who do not achieve remission versus those who achieve remission, using clinical practice data.
Methods
Data were derived from Optum electronic health records linked to claims from commercial and Medicare Advantage health plans. Two cohorts were created: remission and non-remission. Remission was defined as Disease Activity Score 28-joint count with the C-reactive protein level or erythrocyte sedimentation rate (DAS28-CRP/ESR) < 2.6 or Routine Assessment of Patient Index Data 3 (RAPID3 ≤ 3.0). Outcomes were all-cause and RA-related costs and resource use during a 1-year follow-up period. A weighted generalized linear regression and negative binomial regression were used to estimate adjusted annual costs and resource use, respectively, controlling for confounding factors, including patient and socio-demographic characteristics.
Results
Data from 335 patients (remission: 125; non-remission: 210) were analyzed. Annual all-cause total costs were significantly less in the remission versus non-remission cohort ($30,427 vs. $38,645, respectively; cost ratio [CR] = 0.79; 95% CI 0.63, 0.99). All-cause resource use (mean number of visits) was less in the remission versus non-remission cohort: inpatient (0.23 vs. 0.63; visit ratio [VR] = 0.36; 95% CI 0.19, 0.70), emergency department (0.36 vs. 0.77; VR = 0.47; 95% CI 0.30, 0.74), and outpatient visits (20.7 vs. 28.5; VR = 0.73; 95% CI 0.62, 0.86). Annual RA-related total costs were similar in both cohorts; however, RA-related medical costs were numerically lower in the remission versus non-remission cohort ($8,594 vs. $10,002, respectively; CR = 0.86; 95% CI 0.59, 1.25). RA-related resource use was less in the remission versus non-remission cohort.
Conclusions
Significant economic burden was associated with patients who did not achieve remission compared with those who did achieve remission.
Similar content being viewed by others
Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.
Why carry out this study? |
Rheumatoid arthritis (RA) is a chronic disease with substantial economic burden to patients and society |
Guidelines recommend sustained remission of disease activity as a treatment goal for patients with RA |
The economic benefit of achieving remission in a commercially insured RA population on healthcare services remains to be defined |
What was learned from the study? |
Significant economic burden was associated with patients who did not achieve remission compared with those who achieved remission |
Higher costs in the non-remission cohort were driven mostly by non-RA-related outpatient visits, suggesting that tighter disease control may have beneficial effects beyond those related to RA |
These findings may assist physicians and payers in making decisions regarding the management of patients with RA |
Digital Features
This article is published with digital features, including a summary slide, to facilitate understanding of the article. To view digital features for this article go to https://doi.org/10.6084/m9.figshare.14292272.
Introduction
Rheumatoid arthritis (RA) is a chronic, systemic, autoimmune disease characterized by inflammation of multiple joints [1] affecting an estimated 1.3–1.4 million adults in the USA [2]. Without treatment, RA can lead to progressive joint damage resulting in disability and poor health-related quality of life [3,4,5,6]. The economic burden of RA to patients and society is substantial with annual costs related to hospital care, drug use, and work loss estimated to be 2–3 times higher in patients with RA compared with those without RA [7, 8].
Early therapy with disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs) can slow or prevent disease progression and limit disability [9,10,11]. Guidelines recommend sustained remission of disease activity as a treatment goal for patients with RA [12, 13]. Five different measures of disease activity are recognized by the American College of Rheumatology as preferred options to guide clinical practice decisions toward a target of clinical remission [14]. These include the Clinical Disease Activity Index (CDAI), Disease Activity Score in 28 Joints with C-reactive protein level or erythrocyte sedimentation rate (DAS28-CRP/ESR), Routine Assessment of Patient Index Data 3 (RAPID3), Patient Activity Scale-II, and Simplified Disease Activity Index [14]. Each has its own strengths and limitations, while all are scientifically reliable for their intended use in routine clinical practice [14]. The goal of the treat-to-target approach is to stop disease progression, reduce joint damage, prevent functional disability, lower risk of cardiovascular disease, normalize participation in social and professional life, and maximize health-related quality of life using a tight control strategy [15,16,17,18,19,20]. Studies have shown that there is significantly greater improvement in clinical, functional, and patient-reported outcomes in patients with RA who achieve clinical remission compared with those who do not [20,21,22,23,24].
A number of drugs with different mechanisms of action are available to treat RA, including conventional synthetic DMARDs (e.g, methotrexate, sulfasalazine, and leflunomide), biologic DMARDs (e.g., tumor necrosis factor alpha inhibitors; interleukin [IL] 1, IL 6, and IL 6 receptor inhibitors, T-cell co-stimulation modulators, and agents that deplete B-cells), and targeted synthetic DMARDs (e.g., Janus kinase inhibitors) [25]. Despite the availability of these treatments, only one-third of patients are known to achieve sustained remission [26, 27].
The benefit of achieving remission on healthcare services (e.g., hospitalizations, emergency department [ED] visits, and outpatient physician visits) remains to be defined. A few studies have evaluated the impact of remission on healthcare use and costs [24, 28, 29]. One study found significant economic benefits for the Canadian healthcare system in patients who required biological therapy with the greatest savings seen in those who achieved good disease control [29]. A retrospective study conducted in The Netherlands assessed clinical, functional, and cost outcomes in patients with early RA and found that achieving early remission was associated with lower disease activity and lower costs over a 5-year follow-up period [24]. Another study analyzed data from an elderly patient population in the US and found lower rates of hospitalizations, ED visits, and medical costs associated with remission [28].
It is important to examine the impact of RA on healthcare use and associated costs and determine cost drivers in a commercially insured patient population with RA. We hypothesized that achieving remission would be associated with lower healthcare costs compared with not achieving remission in a commercially insured population of patients with RA in the US. The objective of this study was to compare all-cause and RA-specific annual healthcare costs and health resource use in patients with RA who achieved remission with those who did not achieve remission.
Methods
Study Design and Data Source
This was a retrospective cohort study evaluating the economic burden of not achieving remission in RA using data from Optum’s de-identified Integrated Claims Clinical dataset in which electronic health records (EHR) were linked to healthcare claims from commercial and Medicare Advantage health plans in the US. The Optum EHR data (January 2007–March 2019) were derived from multiple large health provider organizations in the US, representing > 140,000 providers, 7000 clinics, and 760 hospitals in all 50 states yielding study results that are generalizable to the RA population in the US.
This was a retrospective study using anonymous data; therefore, Ethics Committee approval was not required. However, the data were certified as de-identified by an independent statistical expert following the statistical de-identification rules of the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPPA) and managed according to customer data use agreements.
Study Population
Patients with RA in the integrated Optum EHR and claims database were identified using International Classification of Diseases, Ninth/Tenth Revision, Clinical Modification (ICD-9-CM/ICD-10-CM) codes (714.0, 714.1, 714.2, 714.81, M05.x, M06.x). Inclusion criteria required that patients had at least two separate claims with an RA diagnosis on different days and at least one disease activity score (either DAS28-CRP/ESR or RAPID3) during the study period. Patients also had to have continuous insurance coverage for 6 months before and 1 year after the index date. Two cohorts were created: remission and non-remission (Fig. 1). In this study, achieving remission was defined as DAS28 < 2.6 or RAPID3 ≤ 3.0. In the remission cohort, the index date was defined as the first date remission was achieved. In the non-remission cohort (patients who never achieved remission during the whole study period), the index date was defined as the first date of DAS28 or RAPID3 measurement.
Outcomes
Outcomes were all-cause and RA-related total costs (medical and prescription), healthcare resource use (number of annual inpatient, ED, outpatient, and other visits), and number of prescriptions within 1 year of index date. Medical costs included inpatient, ED, outpatient, and other costs. Specifically, inpatient costs were costs associated with inpatient hospital, inpatient hospice, skilled nursing facility, inpatient psychiatry, and inpatient rehabilitation. Outpatient costs were costs associated with office/clinic visits, retail health clinics, urgent care, outpatient hospital, ambulatory surgical center, independent clinic, federally qualitied health center, community mental health center, non-residential substance abuse treatment facility, mass immunization center, outpatient rehabilitation facility, state or local public health office/clinic, and psychiatric facility-partial hospitalization. Other costs included costs associated with services at pharmacy, school, homeless shelter, home, assisted living facility, group home, mobile unit, temporary lodging, nursing facility, custodial care facility, ambulance-land, ambulance-air or water, intermediate care facility for mentally retarded, end-stage renal disease treatment facility, independent laboratory, other unlisted facility, and unknown place of service. RA-related costs were defined as healthcare cost claims that had an ICD-9-CM/ICD-10-CM code for RA. RA-related prescriptions included conventional synthetic DMARDs, biologic DMARDs, targeted synthetic DMARDs, nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, and corticosteroids for the treatment of RA (Table S1).
Statistical Analyses
Baseline characteristics were described using mean and standard deviation for continuous variables and frequency and percentage for categorical variables. Given that the remission cohort was likely to be different from the non-remission cohort in terms of demographics and health status factors that may affect healthcare costs and resource utilization, an inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) approach was used to minimize confounding by patient characteristics and disease complexities between remission and non-remission cohorts. The weights were estimated from a multivariate logistic regression, adjusting for age, sex, race (Caucasian, African American vs. others), and comorbidities using the Elixhauser index [30] (ranging 0–28). Standardized mean differences for age, sex, race, and Elixhauser index before and after weighting were calculated. The standardized mean difference for each variable was small (≤ 0.2) after weighting [31] (Table S2). An IPTW weighted generalized linear regression and negative binomial regression were used to estimate adjusted annual direct costs and healthcare resource use, respectively. All costs were adjusted to 2019 US dollars based on Optum all payer data cost factors. Cost ratios (CR; mean expenditures in remission cohort divided by mean expenditures in the non-remission cohort) and inpatient, ED, and outpatient visit ratios (VR; mean number of visits in the remission cohort divided by mean number of visits in the non-remission cohort) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) were reported. All analyses were performed using SAS version 9.4 (SAS, Inc., Cary, NC, US).
Sensitivity Analysis
Some patients in the remission cohort may have DAS28/RAPID3 measurements within the year following the index date that change to non-remission status, which could result in a potential misclassification for the remission cohort. To minimize the influence of misclassification, a sensitivity analysis was performed, which excluded individuals from the remission cohort who had a non-remission record within 1 year following the index date, and healthcare costs in the remission and non-remission cohorts were recalculated.
Results
Study Population
A total of 335 patients with RA (remission cohort: 125; non-remission cohort: 210) met the study inclusion criteria (Fig. 2). Age, sex, and race were similar in the remission and non-remission cohorts (Table 1). Patients in the remission cohort had a significantly lower Elixhauser comorbidity index score than those in the non-remission cohort (1.7 vs. 2.5; P = 0.002).
All-Cause Healthcare Resource Use
Compared with the non-remission cohort, a lower percentage of patients in the remission cohort had at least one inpatient visit (13.6% vs. 26.2%) or ED visit (22.4% vs. 39.5%) for any reason. The mean number of all-cause inpatient visits was 64% lower in the remission cohort than in the non-remission cohort (0.23 vs. 0.63, respectively; VR = 0.36; 95% CI 0.19, 0.70). Mean ED visits were 53% lower in the remission cohort compared with the non-remission cohort (0.36 vs. 0.77, respectively; VR = 0.47; 95% CI 0.30, 0.74). Most patients (> 99%) in both cohorts had an outpatient visit for any reason. The mean number of all-cause outpatient visits was 27% lower in the remission cohort than in the non-remission cohort (20.7 vs. 28.5, respectively; VR = 0.73; 95% CI 0.62, 0.86). Other medical visits and the number of prescriptions were also lower in the remission cohort compared with the non-remission cohort (Table 2).
RA-Related Healthcare Resource Use
A lower percentage of patients in the remission cohort than in the non-remission cohort had an RA-related inpatient visit (10.4% vs. 16.7%) or RA-related ED visit (4.0% vs. 8.6%). Mean inpatient visits were 33% lower in the remission cohort than in the non-remission cohort (0.15 vs. 0.22; VR = 0.67; 95% CI 0.35, 1.30). Mean ED visits were 69% lower in the remission cohort compared with the non-remission cohort (0.04 vs. 0.13, respectively; VR = 0.31; 95% CI 0.10, 0.95). Compared with the non-remission cohort, the mean number of RA prescriptions (Table 2) in the remission cohort was 12% greater (8.25 vs. 7.36; VR = 1.12; 95% CI 0.90, 1.40).
All-Cause Healthcare Costs
Annual all-cause total costs in the remission cohort were significantly less than in the non-remission cohort ($30,427 vs. $38,645, respectively; CR = 0.79; 95% CI 0.63, 0.99). All-cause medical costs were 32% lower in the remission cohort than in the non-remission cohort ($17,846 vs. $26,391; CR = 0.68; 95% CI 0.52, 0.88; Table 3, Fig. 3). Furthermore, among all-cause medical costs, outpatient visit costs were 39% lower in the remission than in the non-remission cohort ($10,498 vs. $17,235; CR = 0.61; 95% CI 0.47, 0.79).
Annual RA-related total costs were similar in both cohorts (Table 3, Fig. 4); however, RA-related medical costs were numerically lower in the remission versus non-remission cohort ($8594 vs. $10,002, respectively; CR = 0.86; 95% CI 0.59, 1.25). RA-related costs were driven primarily by outpatient visits in both cohorts.
Results of a sensitivity analysis examining annual all-cause and RA-related healthcare costs excluding patients in the remission group with a non-remission status within 1 year following the index date are provided in Table S3. Generally, the results of the sensitivity analysis were similar to the main analysis. Regarding all-cause total costs, the CR in the main analysis of 0.79 (95% CI 0.63, 0.99) was comparable to that of the sensitivity analysis (0.80 [95% CI 0.62, 1.04]). Similar results were observed for RA-related total costs with a CR of 1.00 (95% CI 0.72, 1.39) in the main analysis compared with 1.06 (95% CI 0.73, 1.54) in the sensitivity analysis.
Discussion
To our knowledge, this is the first study to examine the direct cost impact of achieving remission in a commercially insured patient population in the US. We estimated all-cause and RA-specific annual healthcare costs in patients with RA who achieved remission compared with patients who did not achieve remission. We found that annual all-cause total costs were significantly lower in the remission cohort compared with the non-remission cohort, which further underscores the importance of targeting remission as the treatment goal in RA and treating patients to achieve that goal. Furthermore, evidence from the present study suggests that treating patients to remission reduces not only outpatient visit costs, which are common among patients with RA, but also overall annual all-cause and RA-related total costs.
Although current guidelines recommend treating patients with RA to target with the ultimate goal of achieving clinical remission [12, 13], there is a lack of clarity around a single universal definition of remission. Several measures are recommended for assessing disease activity in routine clinical care [14], which may result in variable response rates of remission depending on the measure used to assess the outcome and the data source examined. To be comprehensive, we used RAPID3 and DAS28 to define remission in this study. The most recorded disease measure in the EHR system was RAPID3; however, the overall percentage of patients reporting RAPID3 was low (0.25%). Implementation of RAPID3 assessment in clinical practice and recording the results in EHR systems may help to track treatment goals. Since, RAPID3 is completely patient reported, measures that include physician assessments such as CDAI and CDAI-based remission definitions may also be considered. To achieve clinical remission, disease activity and use of appropriate therapies need to be monitored on a regular basis during routine clinical care. Because RA is a life-long disease, multiple successive therapies may be needed to achieve and maintain remission. Although the best clinical outcome for patients with RA is clinical remission, current guidelines indicate that low disease activity, which implies the presence of a low level of inflammation, is an acceptable alternative as it is recognized that remission may not be achievable in all patients with RA [12, 13]. However, it should be noted that patients who are able to achieve remission have better physical function, greater work productivity, and higher health-related quality of life compared with those with low disease activity [20, 32, 33]. If patients with low, moderate, or high disease activity do not begin treatment early, are not regularly monitored, and therapy is not adjusted based on disease assessments, then patients will not be able to achieve remission. As shown in our study, a state of non-remission can have a substantial economic burden.
In the present study, annual all-cause medical costs were 32% lower in the remission cohort than in the non-remission cohort. Our results are consistent with those reported in a Medicare population in the US [28]. In the Medicare population, a decrease in annual medical costs of 45% was observed in patients in remission compared with those with high disease activity, and a decrease of 37% was shown for patients in remission compared with those with moderate disease activity [28]. An analysis of Canadian healthcare service costs [29] associated with achieving remission reported reductions in annual overall total costs in patients who achieved remission compared with those not able to achieve remission, which agrees with our finding in a commercially insured population in the US. Thus, our finding that non-remission in RA is associated with higher medical costs in a commercial market-based healthcare system in the US is reinforced by a similar finding in a single-payer healthcare system in Canada. These results may assist physicians and payers in making decisions regarding the treatment and management of patients with RA.
An important strength of this study is that the EHR data used in the analysis was derived from all 50 states in the US representing > 140,000 providers, 7000 clinics, and 760 hospitals. Although the overall sample size in this study was small (350 patients), there was representation from patients across the US. Another strength of this study is that the EHRs were linked to claims data, which provided a means to estimate costs associated with clinical outcomes. Furthermore, this study evaluated healthcare costs of not achieving remission using commercial insurance data, which represents an important portion of the RA population. This study also describes the individual components (e.g., inpatient costs, outpatient costs, prescription costs) that drive the cost differences between patients with RA who achieved remission and those who were not able to achieve remission. Despite these strengths, some limitations should be noted. The sample size was relatively small; hence, there may be uncertainty about the findings from the EHR and claims-linked data. Given the limited data available in the EHR data, we only included DAS28 and RAPID3 to define remission in this study. Another commonly used remission measurement, CDAI, was not included because of lack of data. Future studies may include CDAI or other remission measures. DAS28 and RAPID3 (the remission definition) may not be measured routinely in clinical practice, in which case a misclassification of remission status may occur in this study. To address this limitation, we conducted a sensitivity analysis excluding those individuals with non-remission records within 1 year following the index date for the remission cohort. The results of this sensitivity analysis were generally similar to those obtained in the main analysis. Some comorbidities (e.g., obesity, dyslipidemia, diabetes, and cardiovascular diseases) may influence achievement of remission in RA and may have an impact on costs [34, 35]. To minimize confounding by disease complexities related to comorbidity between the remission and non-remission cohorts, an IPTW approach was used in the analysis. Weights were estimated from multivariate logistic regression, and differences in comorbidities between cohorts as determined by the Elixhauser index [30] were controlled using IPTW. Unmeasured confounding, an inherent limitation of any observational study, cannot be ruled out. Future studies with larger sample sizes are needed to replicate these findings. In addition, studies comparing work productivity among remission and non-remission RA populations are needed to understand the complete economic burden of not achieving remission in patients with RA.
Conclusions
In conclusion, significant economic burden was associated with patients who did not achieve remission compared with those who achieved remission. Although outpatient visits were the driver of medical costs in both groups studied in this analysis, the contribution of outpatient visits was greater among those who did not achieve remission. Higher costs in the non-remission cohort were driven mostly by non-RA related visits suggesting that tighter disease control may have effects beyond those related to RA.
References
Aletaha D, Smolen JS. Diagnosis and management of rheumatoid arthritis: a review. JAMA. 2018;320:1360–72.
Hunter TM, Boytsov NN, Zhang X, Schroeder K, Michaud K, Araujo AB. Prevalence of rheumatoid arthritis in the United States adult population in healthcare claims databases, 2004–2014. Rheumatol Int. 2017;37:1551–7.
Matcham F, Scott IC, Rayner L, et al. The impact of rheumatoid arthritis on quality-of-life assessed using the SF-36: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Semin Arthritis Rheum. 2014;44:123–30.
Strand V, Khanna D. The impact of rheumatoid arthritis and treatment on patients’ lives. Clin Exp Rheumatol. 2010;28:S32-40.
Strand V, Singh JA. Newer biological agents in rheumatoid arthritis: impact on health-related quality of life and productivity. Drugs. 2010;70:121–45.
Salaffi F, Carotti M, Gasparini S, Intorcia M, Grassi W. The health-related quality of life in rheumatoid arthritis, ankylosing spondylitis, and psoriatic arthritis: a comparison with a selected sample of healthy people. Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2009;7:25.
Eriksson JK, Johansson K, Askling J, Neovius M. Costs for hospital care, drugs and lost work days in incident and prevalent rheumatoid arthritis: how large, and how are they distributed? Ann Rheum Dis. 2015;74:648–54.
Chen CI, Wang L, Wei W, Yuce H, Phillips K. Burden of rheumatoid arthritis among US Medicare population: co-morbidities, health-care resource utilization and costs. Rheumatol Adv Pract. 2018;2:5.
Verstappen SM, Jacobs JW, van der Veen MJ, et al. Intensive treatment with methotrexate in early rheumatoid arthritis: aiming for remission. Computer Assisted Management in Early Rheumatoid Arthritis (CAMERA, an open-label strategy trial). Ann Rheum Dis. 2007;66:1443–9.
Aletaha D, Funovits J, Keystone EC, Smolen JS. Disease activity early in the course of treatment predicts response to therapy after one year in rheumatoid arthritis patients. Arthritis Rheum. 2007;56:3226–35.
Verschueren P, Esselens G, Westhovens R. Predictors of remission, normalized physical function, and changes in the working situation during follow-up of patients with early rheumatoid arthritis: an observational study. Scand J Rheumatol. 2009;38:166–72.
Singh JA, Saag KG, Bridges SL Jr, et al. 2015 American college of rheumatology guideline for the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis. Arthritis Rheumatol. 2016;68:1–26.
Smolen JS, Landewé RBM, Bijlsma JWJ, et al. EULAR recommendations for the management of rheumatoid arthritis with synthetic and biological disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs: 2019 update. Ann Rheum Dis. 2020;79:685–99.
England BR, Tiong BK, Bergman MJ, et al. 2019 update of the American college of rheumatology recommended rheumatoid arthritis disease activity measures. Arthritis Care Res (Hoboken). 2019;71:1540–55.
Smolen JS. Treat-to-target as an approach in inflammatory arthritis. Curr Opin Rheumatol. 2016;28:297–302.
Stoffer MA, Schoels MM, Smolen JS, et al. Evidence for treating rheumatoid arthritis to target: results of a systematic literature search update. Ann Rheum Dis. 2016;75:16–22.
Solomon DH, Reed GW, Kremer JM, et al. Disease activity in rheumatoid arthritis and the risk of cardiovascular events. Arthritis Rheumatol. 2015;67:1449–55.
Smolen JS, Breedveld FC, Burmester GR, et al. Treating rheumatoid arthritis to target: 2014 update of the recommendations of an international task force. Ann Rheum Dis. 2016;75:3–15.
Schipper LG, van Hulst LT, Grol R, van Riel PL, Hulscher ME, Fransen J. Meta-analysis of tight control strategies in rheumatoid arthritis: protocolized treatment has additional value with respect to the clinical outcome. Rheumatology (Oxford). 2010;49:2154–64.
Radner H, Smolen JS, Aletaha D. Remission in rheumatoid arthritis: benefit over low disease activity in patient-reported outcomes and costs. Arthritis Res Ther. 2014;16:R56.
Kavanaugh A, Fleischmann RM, Emery P, et al. Clinical, functional and radiographic consequences of achieving stable low disease activity and remission with adalimumab plus methotrexate or methotrexate alone in early rheumatoid arthritis: 26-week results from the randomised, controlled OPTIMA study. Ann Rheum Dis. 2013;72:64–71.
Sakellariou G, Scirè CA, Verstappen SM, Montecucco C, Caporali R. In patients with early rheumatoid arthritis, the new ACR/EULAR definition of remission identifies patients with persistent absence of functional disability and suppression of ultrasonographic synovitis. Ann Rheum Dis. 2013;72:245–9.
Thiele K, Huscher D, Bischoff S, et al. Performance of the 2011 ACR/EULAR preliminary remission criteria compared with DAS28 remission in unselected patients with rheumatoid arthritis. Ann Rheum Dis. 2013;72:1194–9.
ten Klooster PM, Oude Voshaar MAH, Fakhouri W, de la Torre I, Nicolay C, van de Laar M. Long-term clinical, functional, and cost outcomes for early rheumatoid arthritis patients who did or did not achieve early remission in a real-world treat-to-target strategy. Clin Rheumatol. 2019;38:2727–36.
Köhler BM, Günther J, Kaudewitz D, Lorenz HM. Current therapeutic options in the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis. J Clin Med. 2019;8:2.
Hamann PDH, Pauling JD, McHugh N, Shaddick G, Hyrich K. Predictors, demographics and frequency of sustained remission and low disease activity in anti-tumour necrosis factor-treated rheumatoid arthritis patients. Rheumatology (Oxford). 2019;58:2162–9.
de Punder YM, Fransen J, Kievit W, et al. The prevalence of clinical remission in RA patients treated with anti-TNF: results from the Dutch Rheumatoid Arthritis Monitoring (DREAM) registry. Rheumatology (Oxford). 2012;51:1610–7.
Curtis JR, Chen L, Greenberg JD, et al. The clinical status and economic savings associated with remission among patients with rheumatoid arthritis: leveraging linked registry and claims data for synergistic insights. Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf. 2017;26:310–9.
Barnabe C, Thanh NX, Ohinmaa A, et al. Healthcare service utilisation costs are reduced when rheumatoid arthritis patients achieve sustained remission. Ann Rheum Dis. 2013;72:1664–8.
Elixhauser A, Steiner C, Harris DR, Coffey RM. Comorbidity measures for use with administrative data. Med Care. 1998;36:8–27.
Faraone SV. Interpreting estimates of treatment effects: implications for managed care. P T. 2008;33:700–11.
Nikiphorou E, Norton SJ, Carpenter L, et al. Remission vs low disease activity: function, quality of life and structural outcomes in the Early Rheumatoid Arthritis Study and Network. Rheumatology (Oxford). 2020;59:1272–80.
Scott IC, Ibrahim F, Panayi G, et al. The frequency of remission and low disease activity in patients with rheumatoid arthritis, and their ability to identify people with low disability and normal quality of life. Semin Arthritis Rheum. 2019;49:20–6.
Iannazzo S, Furneri G, Demma F, et al. The burden of rheumatic diseases: an analysis of an Italian administrative database. Rheumatol Ther. 2016;3:167–77.
Han GM, Han XF. Comorbid conditions are associated with healthcare utilization, medical charges and mortality of patients with rheumatoid arthritis. Clin Rheumatol. 2016;35:1483–92.
Acknowledgements
Funding
Financial support for the study and the journal’s Rapid Service fee and Open Access charge were provided by AbbVie. AbbVie participated in the interpretation of data, review, and approval of the manuscript. All authors contributed to the development of the manuscript and maintained control over the final content. No honoraria or payments were made for authorship.
Authorship
All named authors meet the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors criteria for authorship for this article, take responsibility for the integrity of the work as a whole, and have given their approval for this version to be published.
Medical Writing and/or Editorial Assistance
Medical writing assistance was provided by Joann Hettasch, PhD (Fishawack Facilitate Ltd., part of Fishawack Health, Conshohocken, PA), and was funded by AbbVie Inc., North Chicago, IL.
Disclosures
Martin Bergman is a consultant/speaker for AbbVie, Amgen, BMS, Genentech, Gilead, Janssen, Merck, Novartis, Pfizer, Regeneron, Sanofi, and Sandoz and is a shareholder of JNJ (parent of Janssen). Lili Zhou, Pankaj Patel, Ruta Sawant, Jerry Clewell, and Namita Tundia are employees and stockholders of AbbVie.
Compliance with Ethics Guidelines
This was a retrospective study using anonymous data; therefore, Ethics Committee approval was not required. However, the data were certified as de-identified by an independent statistical expert following the statistical de-identification rules of the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPPA) and managed according to customer data use agreements.
Data Availability
All data generated or analyzed during this study are included in this published article or as supplementary files.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Supplementary Information
Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.
Rights and permissions
Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License, which permits any non-commercial use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/.
About this article
Cite this article
Bergman, M., Zhou, L., Patel, P. et al. Healthcare Costs of Not Achieving Remission in Patients with Rheumatoid Arthritis in the United States: A Retrospective Cohort Study. Adv Ther 38, 2558–2570 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12325-021-01730-w
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12325-021-01730-w