Abstract:Objectives: This report reviews the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of adalimumab, etanercept and infliximab, agents that inhibit tumour necrosis factor-alpha (TNF-alpha), when used in the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis (RA) in adults. Data sources: Electronic databases were searched up to February 2005. Review methods: Systematic reviews of the literature on effectiveness and cost-effectiveness were undertaken and industry submissions to the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE) were reviewed. Meta-analyses of effectiveness data were also undertaken for each agent. The Birmingham Rheumatoid Arthritis Model (BRAM), a simulation model, was further developed and used to produce an incremental cost-effectiveness analysis. Results: Twenty-nine randomised controlled trials (RCTs), most of high quality, were included. The only head-to-head comparisons were against methotrexate. For patients with short disease duration (<or=3 years) who were naïve to methotrexate, adalimumab was marginally less and etanercept was marginally more effective than methotrexate in reducing symptoms of RA. Etanercept was better tolerated than methotrexate. Both adalimumab and etanercept were more effective than methotrexate in slowing radiographic joint damage. Etanercept was also marginally more effective and better tolerated than methotrexate in patients with longer disease durations who had not failed methotrexate treatment. Infliximab is only licensed for use with methotrexate. All three agents, either alone (where so licensed) or in combination with ongoing disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs), were effective in reducing the symptoms and signs of RA in patients with established disease. At the licensed dose, the numbers needed to treat (NNTs) (95% CI) required to produce an American College for Rheumatology (ACR) response compared with placebo were: ACR20: adalimumab 3.6 (3.1 to 4.2), etanercept 2.1 (1.9 to 2.4), infliximab 3.2 (2.7 to 4.0); ACR50: adalimumab 4.2 (3.7 to 5.0), etanercept 3.1 (2.7 to 3.6), infliximab 5.0 (3.8 to 6.7); and ACR70: adalimumab 7.7 (5.9 to 11.1), etanercept 7.7 (6.3 to 10.0), infliximab 11.1 (7.7 to 20.0). In patients who were naïve to methotrexate, or who had not previously failed methotrexate treatment, a TNF inhibitor combined with methotrexate was significantly more effective than methotrexate alone. Infliximab combined with methotrexate had an increased risk of serious infections. All ten published economic evaluations met standard criteria for quality, but the incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) ranged from being within established thresholds to being very high because of varying assumptions and parameters. All three sponsors who submitted economic models made assumptions favourable to their product. BRAM incorporates improvements in quality of life and mortality, but assumes no effect of TNF inhibitors on joint replacement. For use in accordance with current NICE guidance as the third DMARD in a sequence of DMARDs, the base-case ICER was around pound30,000 per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) in early RA and pound50,000 per QALY in late RA. Sensitivity analyses showed that the results were sensitive to the estimates of Health Assessment Questionnaire (HAQ) progression while on TNF inhibitors and the effectiveness of DMARDs, but not to changes in mortality ratios per unit HAQ. TNF inhibitors are most cost-effective when used last. The ICER for etanercept used last is pound24,000 per QALY, substantially lower than for adalimumab ( pound30,000 per QALY) or infliximab ( pound38,000 per QALY). First line use as monotherapy generates ICERs around pound50,000 per QALY for adalimumab and etanercept. Using the combination of methotrexate and a TNF inhibitor as first line treatment generates much higher ICERs, as it precludes subsequent use of methotrexate, which is cheap. The ICERs for sequential use are of the same order as using the TNF inhibitor alone. Conclusions: Adalimumab, etanercept and infliximab are effective treatments compared with placebo for RA patients who are not well controlled by conventional DMARDs, improving control of symptoms, improving physical function, and slowing radiographic changes in joints. The combination of a TNF inhibitor with methotrexate was more effective than methotrexate alone in early RA, although the clinical relevance of this additional benefit is yet to be established, particularly in view of the well-established effectiveness of MTX alone. An increased risk of serious infection cannot be ruled out for the combination of methotrexate with adalimumab or infliximab. The results of the economic evaluation based on BRAM are consistent with the observations from the review of clinical effectiveness, including the ranking of treatments. TNF inhibitors are most cost-effective when used as last active therapy. In this analysis, other things being equal, etanercept may be the TNF inhibitor of choice, although this may also depend on patient preference as to route of administration. The next most cost-effective use of TNF inhibitors is third line, as recommended in the 2002 NICE guidance. Direct comparative RCTs of TNF inhibitors against each other and against other DMARDs, and sequential use in patients who have failed a previous TNF inhibitor, are needed. Longer term studies of the quality of life in patients with RA and the impact of DMARDs on this are needed, as are longer studies that directly assess effects on joint replacement, other morbidity and mortality.

Efficacy, safety and cost per responder of biologics in the treatment of non-radiographic axial spondyloarthritis

Efficacy and safety of TNF-α inhibitors for active ankylosing spondylitis patients: Multiple treatment comparisons in a network meta-analysis

Efficacy and safety of non-pharmacological and non-biological pharmacological treatment: a systematic literature review informing the 2016 update of the ASAS/EULAR recommendations for the management of axial spondyloarthritis

Number Needed to Treat and Costs Per Responder among Biologic Treatments for Moderate-to-severe Psoriasis: a Network Meta-Analysis

A systematic review of the effectiveness of adalimumab, etanercept and infliximab for the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis in adults and an economic evaluation of their cost-effectiveness

Different drug survival of first line tumour necrosis factor inhibitors in radiographic and non-radiographic axial spondyloarthritis: a multicentre retrospective survey

Comparative Efficacy of Advanced Therapies in the Treatment of Radiographic Axial Spondyloarthritis or Ankylosing Spondylitis as Evaluated by the ASDAS Low Disease Activity Criteria

Certolizumab pegol in the treatment of axial spondyloarthritis

Optimal Biologic Drugs for the Treatment of Ankylosing Spondylitis: Results from a Network Meta-Analysis and Network Metaregression

The Cost-effective Analysis of TNF-αInhibitors in the Treatment of Rheumatoid Arthritis

Ankylosing Spondylitis versus Nonradiographic Axial Spondyloarthritis: Comparison of Tumor Necrosis Factor Inhibitor Effectiveness and Effect of HLA-B27 Status. An Observational Cohort Study from the Nationwide DANBIO Registry

Rotation or change of biotherapy after TNF blocker treatment failure for axial spondyloarthritis: the ROC-SpA study, a randomised controlled study protocol

Comparative effectiveness of first-line tumour necrosis factor inhibitor versus non-tumour necrosis factor inhibitor biologics and targeted synthetic agents in patients with rheumatoid arthritis: results from a large US registry study

Effectiveness and safety of biological and target synthetic drugs treatment for psoriatic arthritis: a systematic review with network meta-analysis

The Long-Term Effects of Short-Period Adalimumab Biosimilar Usage in Ankylosing Spondylitis

Efficacy of anti-IL-23 and anti-IL-17 after adalimumab failure in psoriatic patients

Efficacy and safety of biologics in psoriatic arthritis: a systematic literature review and network meta-analysis

Should axial spondyloarthritis without radiographic changes be treated with anti-TNF agents?

Cost-Utility Analysis of TNF-α Inhibitors, B Cell Inhibitors, and JAK Inhibitors Versus csDMARDs for Rheumatoid Arthritis Treatment

Past, Present and (Foreseeable) Future of Biological Anti-TNF Alpha Therapy

Comparative effectiveness of biologics and targeted therapies for psoriatic arthritis