Objective: To assess the process related to each infusible biologic used in rheumatoid arthritis (RA) with regard to patient and physician engagement in the infusion process, ancillary services required, and participant preferences. Methods: This was a cross-sectional survey of patients with RA and their physicians. Biologic-naïve patients with RA starting abatacept, infliximab, or rituximab were included. Both patients and physicians completed detailed questionnaires related to the infusion and satisfaction with the process. Results: A total of 205 patients were enrolled: abatacept (n=102), infliximab (n=74), rituximab (n=29). Patients were primarily female (75%), Caucasian (85%), with a mean age of 58 years. Patients had a mean disease duration of approximately 8 years and had typically failed multiple DMARDs. Rituximab required the most pre-infusion preparation and the longest infusion time. Abatacept was associated with a shorter mean infusion time (42 minutes) than infliximab (131 minutes; p<0.0001) or rituximab (274 minutes; p<0.0001) and required less time away from work/home (p=0.01 and p<0.0001, respectively). Abatacept patients reported significantly less discomfort than rituximab patients (p=0.03), while discomfort was similar between abatacept and infliximab. From the physicians' perspective, compared to infliximab and rituximab abatacept was very easy to administer (57% vs. 27% and 5%, respectively), caused no pain/discomfort (52% vs. 42% and 31%), and had very infrequent infusion reactions (75% vs. 30% and 44%). Conclusion: The process involved in infusion administration, as perceived by both the patient and physician, seems to differ across the three infusible biologic agents and may have an impact on the decision-making process regarding which infusible biologic to use.
|Original language||English (US)|
|Number of pages||7|
|Journal||Clinical and Experimental Rheumatology|
|State||Published - 2009|
- Infusible biologics
- Infusion administration