Table 2.
Rheumatologists' reasons for choosing a specific biologic therapy
| Reasons for choice, n (%) | n = 299 |
|---|---|
| Strong overall efficacy | 277 (92.6%) |
| Familiarity/experience with drug | 201 (67.2%) |
| Fast onset of action | 166 (55.5%) |
| Inhibits disease progression | 161 (53.8%) |
| Sustained pain relief | 155 (51.8%) |
| Good overall safety profile | 152 (50.8%) |
| Achieves low disease activity | 144 (48.2%) |
| Efficacious in treating joint symptoms | 139 (46.5%) |
| Convincing efficacy data in clinical trials | 133 (44.5%) |
| Maintains patients' ability to perform daily tasks/activities | 129 (43.1%) |
| Achieves clinical remission | 128 (42.8%) |
| Control of acute episode/flares | 123 (41.1%) |
| Included in local/national formulary | 122 (40.8%) |
| Strong efficacy as monotherapy | 112 (37.5%) |
| Achieves consistent efficacy over time | 106 (35.5%) |
| Reduces fatigue | 97 (32.4%) |
| Has a reasonable cost-effectiveness ratio | 76 (25.4%) |
| Method of delivery is acceptable to the patient | 76 (25.4%) |
| Allows reduction in steroid use | 75 (25.1%) |
| Improves patients' mood/outlook | 72 (24.1%) |
| Low out of pocket cost/affordability for patients | 71 (23.7%) |
| Specifically to address enthesitis | 58 (19.4%) |
| Delays onset of SI joint involvement | 58 (19.4%) |
| Delays or prevents the progression of the condition to AS/radiographic disease | 53 (17.7%) |
| Suitability for patients with CV risk | 29 (9.7%) |
| No black box warning concerns | 10 (3.3%) |