Search

Abstract Background Biologics have revolutionized the management of psoriasis, but response to treatment varies. Loss of treatment efficacy may occur over time, requiring treatment switching or escalation. Claims data on persistence may be informative of real-world treatment outcome. This analysis described persistence and rates of remission of patients with psoriasis initiated on current biologics. Methods Adults with psoriasis initiated (index date) on guselkumab, adalimumab, secukinumab, or ixekizumab between 07/13/2017 and 07/31/2020 were identified in the IBM MarketScan Databases. Discontinuation (or end of persistence) was defined as gaps in index biologic supply of more than twice the labelled dosing interval or mode days of supply (> 120 days for guselkumab and > 60 days for adalimumab, secukinumab, and ixekizumab). The proportion of patients reinitiating index therapy post-discontinuation and the proportion achieving remission (proxy definition: no claims for psoriasis-related treatment post-discontinuation among patients with ≥ 6 months of follow-up post-discontinuation) were assessed. Results There were 3408 patients in the guselkumab (mean age: 47.9 years old; female: 47.1%), 8017 in the adalimumab (47.4 years old; 54.1%), 6123 in the secukinumab (49.4 years old; 54.2%), and 3728 in the ixekizumab cohorts (49.1 years old; 50.3%). The median time to discontinuation was 26.2 months in the guselkumab cohort and 9.9, 12.4, and 12.5 months in adalimumab, secukinumab, and ixekizumab cohorts, respectively. Among those who discontinued index therapy, 22.9% in the guselkumab cohort and 21.1%, 31.9%, and 32.0% in the adalimumab, secukinumab, and ixekizumab cohorts reinitiated it. Remission rates were 17.2% in the guselkumab cohort and 12.4%, 10.5%, and 9.0% in adalimumab, secukinumab, and ixekizumab cohorts, respectively. Conclusions Patients on guselkumab showed trends toward better persistence and higher remission rates relative to other biologics. Finding patients who may be in remission suggests potential disease modification with current agents.

This study assessed the total costs of testing, including the estimated costs of delaying care, associated with next-generation sequencing (NGS) versus single-gene testing strategies among patients with newly diagnosed metastatic non-small cell lung cancer (mNSCLC) from a Canadian public payer perspective. A decision tree model considered testing for genomic alterations using tissue biopsy NGS or single-gene strategies following Canadian guideline recommendations. Inputs included prevalence of mNSCLC, the proportion that tested positive for each genomic alteration, rebiopsy rates, time to test results, testing/medical costs, and costs of delaying care based on literature, public data, and expert opinion. Among 1,000,000 hypothetical publicly insured adult Canadians (382 with mNSCLC), the proportion of patients that tested positive for a genomic alteration with an approved targeted therapy was 38.0% for NGS and 26.1% for single-gene strategies. The estimated mean time to appropriate targeted therapy initiation was 5.1 weeks for NGS and 9.2 weeks for single-gene strategies. Based on literature, each week of delayed care cost CAD 406, translating to total mean per-patient costs of CAD 3480 for NGS and CAD 5632 for single-gene strategies. NGS testing with mNSCLC in current Canadian practice resulted in more patients with an identified mutation, shorter time to appropriate targeted therapy initiation, and lower total testing costs compared to single-gene strategies.