The need for comparative data in spondyloarthritis

Ernest Choy; Xenofon Baraliakos; Frank Behrens; Salvatore D'Angelo; Kurt De Vlam; Bruce W. Kirkham; Mikkel Østergaard; Georg A. Schett; Michael Rissler; Kamel Chaouche-Teyara; Chiara Perella

doi:10.1186/s13075-019-1812-3

The need for comparative data in spondyloarthritis

Ernest Choy, Xenofon Baraliakos, Frank Behrens, Salvatore D'Angelo, Kurt De Vlam, Bruce W. Kirkham, Mikkel Østergaard, Georg A. Schett, Michael Rissler, Kamel Chaouche-Teyara, Chiara Perella

Department of Clinical Medicine

1 Citation (Scopus)

12 Downloads (Pure)

Abstract

Spondyloarthritis comprises a group of inflammatory diseases, characterised by inflammation within axial joints and/or peripheral arthritis, enthesitis and dactylitis. An increasing number of biologic treatments, including biosimilars, are available for the treatment of spondyloarthritis. Although there are a growing number of randomised controlled trials assessing treatments in spondyloarthritis, there is a paucity of data from head-to-head studies. Comparative data are required so that clinicians and payers have the level of evidence required to inform clinical decision-making and health economic assessments. In the absence of head-to-head studies, statistical methods such as network meta-analyses and matching-adjusted indirect comparisons (MAICs) are used for assessing comparative effectiveness. Network meta-analysis can be used to compare treatments for trials using a common comparator (e.g. placebo); however, for those without a common comparator or where considerable heterogeneity exists between the study populations, a MAIC that controls for differences in study design and baseline patient characteristics may be used. MAICs, unlike network meta-analyses, are of value for longer-term comparisons beyond the placebo-controlled phase of clinical trials, which is important for chronic diseases requiring long-term treatment, like spondyloarthritis. At present, there are a number of limitations that restrict the effectiveness of MAIC, such as the poor availability of individual patient-level data from trials, which results in patient-level data from one trial being compared with published whole-population data from another. Despite these limitations, drug reimbursement agencies are increasingly accepting MAIC as a means of comparative effectiveness and greater methodological guidance is needed. This report highlights a number of challenges that are specific to conducting comparative studies like MAIC in spondyloarthritis, including disease heterogeneity, the paucity of biomarkers and the duration of studies required for radiographic endpoints in this slow-progressing disease.

Original language	English
Article number	32
Journal	Arthritis Research and Therapy
Volume	21
Number of pages	6
ISSN	1478-6354
DOIs	https://doi.org/10.1186/s13075-019-1812-3
Publication status	Published - 2019

Keywords

Biological therapy
Clinical trials
Psoriatic arthritis
Radiography
Spondyloarthropathy

Access to Document

10.1186/s13075-019-1812-3Licence: CC BY

s13075-019-1812-3Final published version, 534 KBLicence: CC BY

Cite this

@article{7d17cbf31fbd45a69857c4f843a787ef,

title = "The need for comparative data in spondyloarthritis",

abstract = "Spondyloarthritis comprises a group of inflammatory diseases, characterised by inflammation within axial joints and/or peripheral arthritis, enthesitis and dactylitis. An increasing number of biologic treatments, including biosimilars, are available for the treatment of spondyloarthritis. Although there are a growing number of randomised controlled trials assessing treatments in spondyloarthritis, there is a paucity of data from head-to-head studies. Comparative data are required so that clinicians and payers have the level of evidence required to inform clinical decision-making and health economic assessments. In the absence of head-to-head studies, statistical methods such as network meta-analyses and matching-adjusted indirect comparisons (MAICs) are used for assessing comparative effectiveness. Network meta-analysis can be used to compare treatments for trials using a common comparator (e.g. placebo); however, for those without a common comparator or where considerable heterogeneity exists between the study populations, a MAIC that controls for differences in study design and baseline patient characteristics may be used. MAICs, unlike network meta-analyses, are of value for longer-term comparisons beyond the placebo-controlled phase of clinical trials, which is important for chronic diseases requiring long-term treatment, like spondyloarthritis. At present, there are a number of limitations that restrict the effectiveness of MAIC, such as the poor availability of individual patient-level data from trials, which results in patient-level data from one trial being compared with published whole-population data from another. Despite these limitations, drug reimbursement agencies are increasingly accepting MAIC as a means of comparative effectiveness and greater methodological guidance is needed. This report highlights a number of challenges that are specific to conducting comparative studies like MAIC in spondyloarthritis, including disease heterogeneity, the paucity of biomarkers and the duration of studies required for radiographic endpoints in this slow-progressing disease.",

keywords = "Biological therapy, Clinical trials, Psoriatic arthritis, Radiography, Spondyloarthropathy",

author = "Ernest Choy and Xenofon Baraliakos and Frank Behrens and Salvatore D'Angelo and {De Vlam}, Kurt and Kirkham, {Bruce W.} and Mikkel {\O}stergaard and Schett, {Georg A.} and Michael Rissler and Kamel Chaouche-Teyara and Chiara Perella",

year = "2019",

doi = "10.1186/s13075-019-1812-3",

language = "English",

volume = "21",

journal = "Arthritis Research & Therapy",

issn = "1478-6354",

publisher = "BioMed Central",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - The need for comparative data in spondyloarthritis

AU - Choy, Ernest

AU - Baraliakos, Xenofon

AU - Behrens, Frank

AU - D'Angelo, Salvatore

AU - De Vlam, Kurt

AU - Kirkham, Bruce W.

AU - Østergaard, Mikkel

AU - Schett, Georg A.

AU - Rissler, Michael

AU - Chaouche-Teyara, Kamel

AU - Perella, Chiara

PY - 2019

Y1 - 2019

N2 - Spondyloarthritis comprises a group of inflammatory diseases, characterised by inflammation within axial joints and/or peripheral arthritis, enthesitis and dactylitis. An increasing number of biologic treatments, including biosimilars, are available for the treatment of spondyloarthritis. Although there are a growing number of randomised controlled trials assessing treatments in spondyloarthritis, there is a paucity of data from head-to-head studies. Comparative data are required so that clinicians and payers have the level of evidence required to inform clinical decision-making and health economic assessments. In the absence of head-to-head studies, statistical methods such as network meta-analyses and matching-adjusted indirect comparisons (MAICs) are used for assessing comparative effectiveness. Network meta-analysis can be used to compare treatments for trials using a common comparator (e.g. placebo); however, for those without a common comparator or where considerable heterogeneity exists between the study populations, a MAIC that controls for differences in study design and baseline patient characteristics may be used. MAICs, unlike network meta-analyses, are of value for longer-term comparisons beyond the placebo-controlled phase of clinical trials, which is important for chronic diseases requiring long-term treatment, like spondyloarthritis. At present, there are a number of limitations that restrict the effectiveness of MAIC, such as the poor availability of individual patient-level data from trials, which results in patient-level data from one trial being compared with published whole-population data from another. Despite these limitations, drug reimbursement agencies are increasingly accepting MAIC as a means of comparative effectiveness and greater methodological guidance is needed. This report highlights a number of challenges that are specific to conducting comparative studies like MAIC in spondyloarthritis, including disease heterogeneity, the paucity of biomarkers and the duration of studies required for radiographic endpoints in this slow-progressing disease.

AB - Spondyloarthritis comprises a group of inflammatory diseases, characterised by inflammation within axial joints and/or peripheral arthritis, enthesitis and dactylitis. An increasing number of biologic treatments, including biosimilars, are available for the treatment of spondyloarthritis. Although there are a growing number of randomised controlled trials assessing treatments in spondyloarthritis, there is a paucity of data from head-to-head studies. Comparative data are required so that clinicians and payers have the level of evidence required to inform clinical decision-making and health economic assessments. In the absence of head-to-head studies, statistical methods such as network meta-analyses and matching-adjusted indirect comparisons (MAICs) are used for assessing comparative effectiveness. Network meta-analysis can be used to compare treatments for trials using a common comparator (e.g. placebo); however, for those without a common comparator or where considerable heterogeneity exists between the study populations, a MAIC that controls for differences in study design and baseline patient characteristics may be used. MAICs, unlike network meta-analyses, are of value for longer-term comparisons beyond the placebo-controlled phase of clinical trials, which is important for chronic diseases requiring long-term treatment, like spondyloarthritis. At present, there are a number of limitations that restrict the effectiveness of MAIC, such as the poor availability of individual patient-level data from trials, which results in patient-level data from one trial being compared with published whole-population data from another. Despite these limitations, drug reimbursement agencies are increasingly accepting MAIC as a means of comparative effectiveness and greater methodological guidance is needed. This report highlights a number of challenges that are specific to conducting comparative studies like MAIC in spondyloarthritis, including disease heterogeneity, the paucity of biomarkers and the duration of studies required for radiographic endpoints in this slow-progressing disease.

KW - Biological therapy

KW - Clinical trials

KW - Psoriatic arthritis

KW - Radiography

KW - Spondyloarthropathy

U2 - 10.1186/s13075-019-1812-3

DO - 10.1186/s13075-019-1812-3

M3 - Journal article

C2 - 30670074

AN - SCOPUS:85060368613

SN - 1478-6354

VL - 21

JO - Arthritis Research & Therapy

JF - Arthritis Research & Therapy

M1 - 32

ER -

The need for comparative data in spondyloarthritis

Abstract

Keywords

Access to Document

Fingerprint

Cite this