Related Experiment Video
Updated: May 15, 2026

Preliminary Study on Acupuncture Combined with Grain-sized Moxibustion for Treating Rheumatoid Arthritis with Finger Joint Pain
Published on: May 16, 2025
Economic consequences of sequencing biologics in rheumatoid arthritis: a systematic review
Sean D Sullivan1, Rafael Alfonso-Cristancho, Josh Carlson
1Pharmaceutical Outcomes Research and Policy Program, School of Pharmacy, University of Washington, Seattle, WA 98195-7630, USA. sdsull@u.washington.edu
Background/Objective:
Tumor necrosis factor-alpha (anti-TNF) blocking agents are effective for the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis (RA), with mean response rates of 60-70%. Patients with incomplete response to initial anti-TNF treatment often are switched to other biologic treatments with some success. However, little is known about whether or not switching to anti-TNF or other non-TNF biologic treatments is cost-effective. This study sought to review the economic evidence of sequencing various biologic treatments in RA.
Methods:
A systematic review was conducted of published and unpublished literature (January 2000 to October 2012) on the cost-effectiveness of sequencing biologic treatments in RA after failure of an initial biologic treatment. It included modeling and other economic studies that assessed cost-effectiveness of one or more sequences of biologics. Studies were excluded that evaluated non-biologic sequencing.
Results:
This review of the available evidence suggests that there is limited evidentiary support favoring the cost-effectiveness of switching from one anti-TNF agent to another within the anti-TNF category of biologics. This is due, in large part, to the limited clinical evidence base supporting the incremental efficacy of second- and third-line anti-TNF treatments and to variation on how and when to assess non-response to the first-line biologic. When compared to anti-TNF agents, biologic treatments with a different mechanism of action are more cost-effective as second-line agents.
Limitations:
Not all sequences and patterns of switching, either within or outside of therapeutic class, have been evaluated for clinical benefit and cost-effectiveness, limiting the interpretation of these findings.
Conclusions:
Switching from one anti-TNF agent to another after first-line treatment failure may not be a cost-effective treatment strategy. However, when non-TNF biologics are included in the sequence they are likely to be more cost-effective than anti-TNF specific cycling sequences.
Related Concept Videos
Drugs for Treatment of Crohn's Disease in IBD Using Biologic Agents: Anti-TNF
Genome-wide Association Studies-GWAS
GWAS does not require the identification of the target gene involved in...
Drug Products: Biologics, Biosimilars and Interchangeables
Inflammatory Bowel Disease IV: Pharmacological Management
Pharmacologic...
Types of Biopharmaceutical Studies: Controlled and Non-Controlled Approaches
Non-controlled studies, commonly employed for initial exploration, lack a control group, rendering them susceptible to biases and external influences. In contrast, controlled...
Rheumatic Heart Disease III: Medical Management