Back to Journals » ClinicoEconomics and Outcomes Research » Volume 6

Group-based trajectory modeling to assess adherence to biologics among patients with psoriasis

Authors Li Y, Zhou H, Cai B, Kahler KH, Tian H, Gabriel S, Arcona S

Received 17 December 2013

Accepted for publication 29 January 2014

Published 10 April 2014 Volume 2014:6 Pages 197—208


Checked for plagiarism Yes

Review by Single-blind

Peer reviewer comments 4

Yunfeng Li,1 Huanxue Zhou,2 Beilei Cai,1 Kristijan H Kahler,1 Haijun Tian,1 Susan Gabriel,1 Steve Arcona1

1Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation, East Hanover, NJ, USA; 2KMK Consulting Inc., Florham Park, NJ, USA

Background: Proportion of days covered (PDC), a commonly used adherence metric, does not provide information about the longitudinal course of adherence to treatment over time. Group-based trajectory model (GBTM) is an alternative method that overcomes this limitation.
Methods: The statistical principles of GBTM and PDC were applied to assess adherence during a 12-month follow-up in psoriasis patients starting treatment with a biologic. The optimal GBTM model was determined on the basis of the balance between each model's Bayesian information criterion and the percentage of patients in the smallest group in each model. Variables potentially predictive of adherence were evaluated.
Results: In all, 3,249 patients were included in the analysis. Four GBTM adherence groups were suggested by the optimal model, and patients were categorized as demonstrating continuously high adherence, high-then-low adherence, moderate-then-low adherence, or consistently moderate adherence during follow-up. For comparison, four PDC groups were constructed: PDC Group 4 (PDC ≥75%), PDC Group 3 (25%≤ PDC <50%), PDC Group 2 (PDC <25%), and PDC Group 1 (50%≤ PDC <75%). Our findings suggest that the majority of patients (97.9%) from PDC Group 2 demonstrated moderate-then-low adherence, whereas 96.4% of patients from PDC Group 4 showed continuously high adherence. The remaining PDC-based categorizations did not capture patients with uniform adherence behavior based on GBTM. In PDC Group 3, 25.3%, 17.2%, and 57.5% of patients exhibited GBTM-defined consistently moderate adherence, moderate-then-low adherence, or high-then-low adherence, respectively. In PDC Group 1, 70.8%, 23.6%, and 5.7% of patients had consistently moderate adherence, high-then-low adherence, and continuously high adherence, respectively. Additional analyses suggested GBTM-based categorization was best predicted by patient age, sex, certain comorbidities, and particular drug use.
Conclusion: GBTM is a more appropriate way to model dynamic behaviors and offers researchers an alternative to more traditional drug adherence measurements.

Keywords: classification, proportion days of covered (PDC), patterns, dynamic, behavior, grouping

Creative Commons License This work is published and licensed by Dove Medical Press Limited. The full terms of this license are available at and incorporate the Creative Commons Attribution - Non Commercial (unported, v3.0) License. By accessing the work you hereby accept the Terms. Non-commercial uses of the work are permitted without any further permission from Dove Medical Press Limited, provided the work is properly attributed. For permission for commercial use of this work, please see paragraphs 4.2 and 5 of our Terms.

Download Article [PDF]  View Full Text [HTML][Machine readable]