LAUSR

Objective The optimal choice of a second biological disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drug (bDMARD) after failure with first line tumour necrosis factor inhibitor (TNFi) represents a critical therapeutic challenge. This study aims to evaluate the persistence with treatment using second line bDMARDs with different mechanisms of action in rheumatoid arthritis (RA) patients with inadequate response to first line TNFi. Method A retrospective cohort study on administrative healthcare databases was conducted. We analysed the relationship between different bDMARDs and persistence with treatment in RA patients who started second line bDMARD therapy according to two different strategies: cycling (second TNFi) or switching [change in mechanism of action: abatacept (ABA), tocilizumab (TCZ), and rituximab (RTX)] with or without concomitant conventional synthetic (cs) DMARDs. Results The cohort comprised 1434 patients. The mean age was 53.8 years and 1142 (79.6%) were women. Among second line bDMARDs, 969 patients (67.6%) started TNFi, 204 (14.2%) ABA, 145 (10.1%) RTX, and 116 (8.1%) TCZ. A bDMARD was prescribed as monotherapy in 359 patients (25.0%). The switching strategy showed a lower overall discontinuation rate [hazard ratio (HR) 0.72], while switching compared to cycling showed significantly better survival for ABA (HR 0.61) and RTX (HR 0.76), but no significant difference for TCZ (HR 0.82). A lower impact of better drug survival in the switching strategy occurred in patients with concurrent methotrexate. Conclusions Among RA patients failing a first TNFi, switching is associated with marginally better persistence, in particular for ABA and RTX, with only marginal differences in patients on concurrent csDMARDs.