Biologics Used for Psoriasis: A Drug Utilization Study Based on Two Nationwide Danish Data Sources.

IF 2.4 4区 医学 Q3 PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY Pharmacoepidemiology and Drug Safety Pub Date : 2024-11-01 DOI:10.1002/pds.70050
Nanna Philbert Engel-Andreasen, Jesper Hallas, Peter Jensen, Alexander Egeberg, Mette Reilev
{"title":"Biologics Used for Psoriasis: A Drug Utilization Study Based on Two Nationwide Danish Data Sources.","authors":"Nanna Philbert Engel-Andreasen, Jesper Hallas, Peter Jensen, Alexander Egeberg, Mette Reilev","doi":"10.1002/pds.70050","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>Biological treatment has been a game changer in the management of moderate-to-severe psoriasis. In Denmark, biological treatment for psoriasis is registered in two data sources. We aimed to describe the utilization of biologics for psoriasis in Denmark using data from both data sources separately.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We used data from two different nationwide Danish data sources: The healthcare registries and the clinical quality database, Dermbio. Utilization patterns were described by three different parameters: (1) distribution of drugs used in the first treatment episodes, (2) treatment cascade on a population level, and (3) drug survival using Kaplan Meier (KM) analysis and the proportion of patients covered (PPC) method.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>From January 1, 2011, to December 31, 2018, we found 1878 users of biologics in the healthcare registries and 2264 in Dermbio. Adalimumab, ustekinumab, and secukinumab were the most common first-choice treatments throughout the study period. According to the healthcare registries, it was most common to have more than one treatment episode with the same drug. In Dermbio, most were registered to have only one observable treatment episode overall in the study period. Ustekinumab showed the longest drug survival in both databases. Drug survival was longer for all biologics in Dermbio than in the healthcare registries.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Adalimumab, ustekinumab, and secukinumab were the most common first-choice treatments in Denmark. Overall, ustekinumab showed the longest drug survival. We observed important differences in treatment cascades and drug survival between Dermbio and the healthcare registries, which should be considered when using these data sources to perform drug utilization studies on biologics.</p>","PeriodicalId":19782,"journal":{"name":"Pharmacoepidemiology and Drug Safety","volume":"33 11","pages":"e70050"},"PeriodicalIF":2.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Pharmacoepidemiology and Drug Safety","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1002/pds.70050","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose: Biological treatment has been a game changer in the management of moderate-to-severe psoriasis. In Denmark, biological treatment for psoriasis is registered in two data sources. We aimed to describe the utilization of biologics for psoriasis in Denmark using data from both data sources separately.

Methods: We used data from two different nationwide Danish data sources: The healthcare registries and the clinical quality database, Dermbio. Utilization patterns were described by three different parameters: (1) distribution of drugs used in the first treatment episodes, (2) treatment cascade on a population level, and (3) drug survival using Kaplan Meier (KM) analysis and the proportion of patients covered (PPC) method.

Results: From January 1, 2011, to December 31, 2018, we found 1878 users of biologics in the healthcare registries and 2264 in Dermbio. Adalimumab, ustekinumab, and secukinumab were the most common first-choice treatments throughout the study period. According to the healthcare registries, it was most common to have more than one treatment episode with the same drug. In Dermbio, most were registered to have only one observable treatment episode overall in the study period. Ustekinumab showed the longest drug survival in both databases. Drug survival was longer for all biologics in Dermbio than in the healthcare registries.

Conclusion: Adalimumab, ustekinumab, and secukinumab were the most common first-choice treatments in Denmark. Overall, ustekinumab showed the longest drug survival. We observed important differences in treatment cascades and drug survival between Dermbio and the healthcare registries, which should be considered when using these data sources to perform drug utilization studies on biologics.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
治疗银屑病的生物制剂:基于丹麦两个全国性数据源的药物使用研究。
目的:生物治疗改变了中重度银屑病的治疗方法。在丹麦,银屑病的生物治疗有两个数据来源。我们旨在利用这两个数据源的数据分别描述丹麦银屑病生物制剂的使用情况:我们使用了来自丹麦两个不同全国性数据源的数据:方法:我们使用了两个不同的丹麦全国性数据源的数据:医疗保健登记和临床质量数据库 Dermbio。使用模式由三个不同的参数来描述:(1)首次治疗中使用药物的分布;(2)人群层面的治疗级联;(3)使用卡普兰-梅尔(KM)分析法和覆盖患者比例(PPC)法分析的药物存活率:从2011年1月1日至2018年12月31日,我们在医疗登记中发现了1878名生物制剂使用者,在Dermbio中发现了2264名使用者。在整个研究期间,阿达木单抗、乌斯特库单抗和赛库单抗是最常见的首选治疗药物。根据医疗登记信息,使用同一种药物进行一次以上治疗的情况最为常见。在 Dermbio,大多数登记的患者在整个研究期间只有一次可观察到的治疗。在这两个数据库中,Ustekinumab 的药物存活期最长。Dermbio数据库中所有生物制剂的药物存活期均长于医疗登记数据库:结论:阿达木单抗、乌斯特库单抗和secukinumab是丹麦最常见的首选治疗药物。总体而言,乌司他单抗的药物存活期最长。我们观察到 Dermbio 和医疗登记之间在治疗级联和药物存活率方面存在重大差异,在使用这些数据源对生物制剂进行药物利用率研究时应考虑到这一点。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.80
自引率
7.70%
发文量
173
审稿时长
3 months
期刊介绍: The aim of Pharmacoepidemiology and Drug Safety is to provide an international forum for the communication and evaluation of data, methods and opinion in the discipline of pharmacoepidemiology. The Journal publishes peer-reviewed reports of original research, invited reviews and a variety of guest editorials and commentaries embracing scientific, medical, statistical, legal and economic aspects of pharmacoepidemiology and post-marketing surveillance of drug safety. Appropriate material in these categories may also be considered for publication as a Brief Report. Particular areas of interest include: design, analysis, results, and interpretation of studies looking at the benefit or safety of specific pharmaceuticals, biologics, or medical devices, including studies in pharmacovigilance, postmarketing surveillance, pharmacoeconomics, patient safety, molecular pharmacoepidemiology, or any other study within the broad field of pharmacoepidemiology; comparative effectiveness research relating to pharmaceuticals, biologics, and medical devices. Comparative effectiveness research is the generation and synthesis of evidence that compares the benefits and harms of alternative methods to prevent, diagnose, treat, and monitor a clinical condition, as these methods are truly used in the real world; methodologic contributions of relevance to pharmacoepidemiology, whether original contributions, reviews of existing methods, or tutorials for how to apply the methods of pharmacoepidemiology; assessments of harm versus benefit in drug therapy; patterns of drug utilization; relationships between pharmacoepidemiology and the formulation and interpretation of regulatory guidelines; evaluations of risk management plans and programmes relating to pharmaceuticals, biologics and medical devices.
期刊最新文献
Core Concepts in Pharmacoepidemiology: New-User Designs. Determining Line of Therapy from Real-World Data in Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer. Handling With Vaccine Type Missing Data in a Dynamic Cohort to Assess the Link Between Time-Varying Vaccination and an Autoimmune Disease. Impact of Regulatory Risk Communication on Thrombosis With Thrombocytopenia Syndrome for COVID-19 Adenovirus Vector Vaccines on European Healthcare Professionals. Validity of Pharmaceutical Claims Data for Determining Medication Exposure in Long-Term Care Facilities.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1