Efficacy, safety, and cost-effectiveness of therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM) for TNF inhibitor therapy in rheumatic disease: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Objective: The benefits of TDM-guided TNFi therapy in patients with rheumatic disease was still controversial. This systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted to explore if the TDM-guided TNFi therapy is superior to empirical-guided therapy.Methods: We systematically searched PubMed, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, and EMBASE databases for articles published between database inception and October 05, 2023. Studies reporting endpoints in TDM-guided TNFi therapy and empirical therapy were included. Results would be presented in risk ratio (RR) and mean difference, with 95 % confidence interval (CI) reported. This study is registered with PROSPERO (CRD42022353956).Results: A total of 14 studies (eight RCTs and six cohort studies) involving 2427 patients were included in this meta-analysis. In the scenario of response prediction, compared with empirical-guided therapy, TDM-guided TNFi therapy had association with higher treat-to-target rates (RR 1.30, 95 % CI 1.02-1.65, P=0.03, I2=79 %), more specifically, higher low disease activity rates (RR 2.11, 95 % CI 1.22-3.66, P=0.007, I2=61 %), but no difference in clinical remission rates (RR 0.98,95 % CI 0.87-1.11, P=0.75, I2=0 %). In the scenario of dose reduction prediction, lower relapse rates (RR 0.73, 95 % CI 0.65-0.82, P <0.00001, I-2=0 %) were observed compared with empirical-guided dose reduction strategy, but no difference (RR 1.24, 95 % CI 0.85-1.80, P=0.27, I-2=57 %) between TDM-guided dose reduction and standard-dosing therapy. No significant difference was observed in change of disease activity score, mean disease activity score, radiographic progression, and safety. And TDM-guided therapy was associated with reduced cost per patient per year calculated as the total accumulated sum of therapy cost.Conclusion: TDM-guided TNFi therapy was associated with increased rates of low disease activity and decreased risks of relapse, and may save cost compared with empirical-guided therapy in patients with rheumatic disease. But this does not mean that the use of TDM-guided TNFi therapy can be advocated, because there is no difference in clinical remission rates and many other outcomes. More researches, especially randomized clinical trials are needed to verify this conclusion in the future.

Automated summary

The findings of this systematic review and meta-analysis indicate that TDM-guided TNFi therapy is associated with higher rates of low disease activity and lower risks of relapse compared to empirical-guided therapy in patients with rheumatic disease. Additionally, TDM-guided therapy may lead to cost savings. However, further research, especially randomized clinical trials, are needed to confirm these results and determine the potential limitations of TDM-guided TNFi therapy.