Rheumatology and Therapy最新文献

Introduction: The safety and efficacy of upadacitinib 15 mg (UPA15) through week 216 was evaluated in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) from the long-term extension (LTE) of the phase 3 SELECT-CHOICE study.

Methods: Patients with RA refractory to biologic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (bDMARDs) were randomized to UPA15 or abatacept (ABA) for 24 weeks. During the open-label LTE, patients on ABA switched to UPA15 at week 24, and those on UPA15 continued treatment. The safety and efficacy of continuous UPA15, and ABA to UPA15, are summarized through week 216.

Results: The LTE was comprised of 91.4% (n = 277/303) of patients that initially received UPA15, and 89.6% (n = 277/309) that initially received ABA. Of patients on UPA15 in the LTE (n = 547), 28.3% (n = 155/547) discontinued the study drug by week 216. Relative to other adverse events of special interest, and largely consistent with previous findings at week 24, higher rates of serious infection, COVID-19, herpes zoster, and elevated creatine phosphokinase were reported, while rates of malignancy excluding nonmelanoma skin cancer (NMSC), NMSC, major adverse cardiovascular event (MACE), and venous thromboembolism (VTE) were low. Long-term safety data with UPA through week 216 aligned with previous observations and no new safety risks were identified, including in patients who switched from ABA to UPA15. Proportions of patients achieving 28-joint disease activity score based on C-reactive protein (DAS28[CRP]) < 2.6/ ≤ 3.2, clinical disease activity index (CDAI) and simple disease activity index (SDAI) low disease activity/remission, ≥ 20%/50%/70% improvement in the American College of Rheumatology (ACR20/50/70) response criteria, and Boolean remission were maintained or improved with UPA15 through week 216. Improvements in the Health Assessment Questionnaire-Disability Index (HAQ-DI), patient's assessment of pain, and Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy-Fatigue (FACIT-F) were also maintained or improved with UPA15 through week 216. Across all efficacy endpoints, similar results were observed in patients who switched from ABA to UPA15 versus continuous UPA15. Patients with an inadequate response to ≥ 1 prior tumor necrosis factor (TNF) inhibitor (UPA15: n = 263/303, 86.8%; ABA to UPA15: n = 273/309, 88.3%) showed similar responses to the total population.

Conclusions: The long-term safety profile of UPA was consistent with previous findings and the broader RA clinical program. Compared to the primary analyses at week 24, efficacy responses were maintained or further improved with UPA15 through week 216 in patients with RA. Trial registration, ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT03086343.

Introduction: Patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) may have an increased malignancy risk versus the general population, potentially elevated by biological disease-modifying antirheumatic drug (bDMARD) use. Using patient registry data, we determined malignancy risk, stratified by bDMARD use, among Japanese patients with RA versus the Japanese general population and investigated whether bDMARD use is a time-dependent risk factor for the development of malignancy.

Methods: Patients aged ≥ 18 years with ≥ 2 data entries of RA in the IORRA (Institute of Rheumatology, Rheumatoid Arthritis) patient registry, enrolled from January 2013-December 2018, were identified ('All RA' cohort). Patients were stratified into bDMARD (≥ 1 bDMARD received) or non-bDMARD (no history of bDMARDs) sub-cohorts. Malignancy incidence rates and standardized incidence ratios (SIRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) versus the Japanese general population were calculated. Risk of RA medication use was analyzed using a time-dependent Cox proportional hazards model, after adjusting for covariates.

Results: A total of 8020 patients were identified for the All RA cohort; 2187 and 5833 for the bDMARD and non-bDMARD sub-cohorts, respectively. For all three cohorts, incidence of overall malignancies was similar versus the Japanese general population. Incidence of specific malignancies was also similar, but incidence of lymphoma was higher for all three cohorts (SIRs [95% CIs] 3.72 [2.71-4.93], 5.97 [3.34-9.59], and 2.79 [1.82-4.02], respectively). In the bDMARD sub-cohort, no increase in SIRs was observed for other site-specific malignancies. In the All RA cohort, use of methotrexate, tacrolimus, glucocorticoids, non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, and bDMARDs were not associated with the risk of overall malignancy; the hazard ratio (95% CI) was 1.36 (0.96-1.93) for bDMARD use. Increased disease activity was a time-dependent risk factor of overall malignancy with a hazard ratio (95% CI) of 1.35 (1.15-1.59).

Conclusions: The use of bDMARDs was not a time-dependent risk factor for malignancy.

Introduction: The Patient Acceptable Symptoms State (PASS) is a validated instrument that is used to assess whether a patient with psoriatic arthritis (PsA) accepts her/his disease status by asking them a simple question: "Think about all the ways your PsA has affected you during the last 48 h. If you were to remain in the next few months as you were during the last 48 h, would this be acceptable to you?" The aim of the present study was to explore any PASS differences in patients with PsA based on sex by looking at the corresponding thresholds of Disease Activity for Psoriatic Arthritis (DAPSA), Psoriatic Arthritis Impact of the Disease-12 (PsAID-12) and the Health Assessment Questionnaire-Disability Index (HAQ-DI) in female and male patients.

Methods: This was a cross-sectional study that included two PsA cohorts. To identify the DAPSA, PsAID and HAQ-DI thresholds that differentiated patients who reported "yes" in response to the PASS question from those who reported "no," we used the receiver operating characteristic curves both for the female and male sexes. Moreover, Cohen's kappa test was used to determine the agreement of a PASS "yes" with DAPSA ≤ 14, PsAID ≤ 4 and HAQ-DI ≤ 0.5.

Results: Three-hundred ten patients were considered for the study. The DAPSA, PsAID-12 and HAQ-DI thresholds that differentiated PASS "yes" patients from PASS "no" patients were 11.7, 1.85 and 0.625 in male patients and 13.3, 3.85 and 0.750 in female patients, respectively. A PASS "yes" and DAPSA ≤ 14 showed moderate agreement in males (kappa = 0.56) and good agreement in females (kappa = 0.80); the agreement between a PASS "yes" and PsAID ≤ 4 and between a PASS "yes" and HAQ-DI ≤ 0.5 was higher in female patients (moderate).

Conclusion: Female patients accept their disease at higher DAPSA, PsAID and HAQ-DI values than male patients do. The clinical meaning of this could be that a female patient generally has a greater global disease acceptance inclination. Therefore, this study further supports the concept that sex differences are present in patients with PsA.

Introduction: High baseline neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR) in rheumatoid arthritis (RA) has been associated with positive responses to biologic tumor necrosis factor inhibition and negative responses to conventional synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drug (csDMARD) triple therapy. Datasets from three randomized clinical trials in patients with RA were used to test the hypothesis that baseline NLR is associated with improved clinical response to filgotinib in methotrexate (MTX)-naïve or MTX-experienced RA populations.

Methods: Patients from FINCH 1 (inadequate response to MTX, MTX-IR; NCT02889796), FINCH 2 (inadequate response to biologic DMARDs; NCT02873936), and FINCH 3 (MTX-naïve; NCT02886728) were classified as baseline NLR-High or baseline NLR-Low based on a previously published cut point of 2.7. In total, 3365 patients were included across the three studies. Differences in clinical outcomes and patient-reported outcomes (PROs) were determined using linear-regression models.

Results: Control-arm patients (placebo + MTX/placebo + csDMARD) classified as NLR-High exhibited worse continuous clinical and PRO responses at week 12 across clinical trials compared to NLR-Low patients. In contrast, NLR-High patients who received FIL 200 mg + MTX/csDMARD exhibited consistently better responses after 12 weeks compared to NLR-Low patients across clinical trials, clinical endpoints, and PROs. These trends were most prominent among the MTX-IR population.

Conclusion: The 2.7 baseline NLR cut point could be used to enrich for patients most likely to benefit from the addition of filgotinib to background MTX/csDMARD. Use of baseline NLR as part of therapeutic decision-making would not require additional diagnostics and could contribute to improved outcomes for patients with RA.

Trial registration: Clinicaltrials.gov: NCT02889796; NCT02873936; NCT02886728.

Introduction: Rheumatoid arthritis (RA) guidelines recommend methotrexate (MTX)-anchored therapy with biologic or targeted synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (b/tsDMARDs); however, tolerability issues often lead to non-adherence. Canadian data on MTX tapering and/or withdrawal following b/tsDMARD initiation are minimal. This chart review assessed frequency of MTX tapering or withdrawal following b/tsDMARD initiation and the impact on disease status in Canadian adults with RA.

Methods: Eligible patients had received MTX for ≥ 3 months before b/tsDMARD initiation. The b/tsDMARD was prescribed continuously for ≥ 18 months. Patients taking > 10 mg/day oral prednisone or equivalent were excluded.

Results: Eight hundred eighty-nine patients (mean baseline MTX dose 19.0 mg/week) prescribed b/tsDMARDs (tumor necrosis factor inhibitor 52.1%, Janus kinase inhibitor 18.3%, interleukin-6 inhibitor [IL-6i] 11.9%, other 17.7%) were evaluated at 22 Canadian centers. Within 2 years of b/tsDMARD initiation, MTX was tapered in 123 (13.8%) patients and discontinued in 147 (16.5%), most commonly due to planned tapering (36.6%) and patient decision (27.2%), respectively, and most commonly with IL-6i use (34.9%). The MTX dose was unchanged for 582 (65.5%) patients and increased for 37 (4.2%). Missing data limit interpretations of MTX dose effects on some secondary endpoints and challenge the assertion that a disease activity measure-based treat-to-target approach is routinely used in Canadian rheumatology practice.

Conclusions: Methotrexate tapering or withdrawal occurred in 30.4% of Canadians with RA within 2 years following b/tsDMARD initiation. Baseline disease activity measures were missing from many medical records. However, for patients with baseline assessments, MTX tapering or discontinuation did not worsen disease activity.

Introduction: We evaluated the impact of gender on disease severity, health-related quality of life (HRQoL), treatment management, and patient-healthcare professional (HCP) interactions from the perspectives of patients with psoriatic arthritis (PsA).

Methods: Data were collected from a global online patient survey conducted by The Harris Poll (November 2, 2017 to March 12, 2018). Eligible patients were aged ≥ 18 years, with a self-reported diagnosis of PsA for > 1 year, had visited a rheumatologist/dermatologist in the past 12 months, and had reported previously using ≥ 1 conventional synthetic or biologic disease-modifying antirheumatic drug. Data were stratified by gender and analyzed descriptively, inferentially by binomial (chi-square) tests, and by multivariate logistic regression models.

Results: Data from 1286 patients who participated were included: 52% were female, 48% were male. Varying perceptions of disease severity between males and females were indicated by differences in symptoms leading to a diagnosis of PsA, and in symptoms reported despite treatment; more females than males reported joint tenderness, skin patches/plaques, and enthesitis. More females than males reported a major/moderate impact of PsA on their physical activity and emotional/mental well-being. Reasons for switching medication differed between genders, with more females switching because they perceived their medication to not be effective enough related to their joint symptoms. More females than males were very satisfied with their communication with their rheumatologist and were more likely to discuss the impact of PsA on their daily lives, their treatment satisfaction, and treatment goals with their rheumatologist.

Conclusions: Patients' perceptions of the impact of PsA on HRQoL, treatment management, and interactions with HCPs varied between males and females. More females than males reported major/moderate physical and emotional impacts of PsA. When treating patients, it is important for HCPs to consider the potential impact of gender on patients' experience of PsA and its symptoms. Graphical plain language summary available for this article.

Introduction: Racial disparities in disease activity, clinical outcomes, and treatment survival persist despite advancements in rheumatoid arthritis (RA) therapies and clinical management. In this post hoc analysis of pooled data from the tofacitinib global clinical program, we evaluated the impact of race on the efficacy and safety of tofacitinib in patients with RA.

Methods: Data were pooled from 15 phase 2-3b/4 studies of patients with RA treated with tofacitinib 5 or 10 mg twice daily, adalimumab, or placebo. Outcomes were stratified by self-reported patient race (White/Black/Asian/Other). Efficacy outcomes to month 12 included: American College of Rheumatology (ACR)20/50/70 responses, Clinical Disease Activity Index (CDAI)/Disease Activity Score in 28 joints, erythrocyte sedimentation rate [DAS28-4(ESR)] low disease activity (LDA) rates, least squares (LS) mean change from baseline (∆) in CDAI, DAS28-4 (ESR), Health Assessment Questionnaire-Disability Index (HAQ-DI), and Pain [Visual Analog Scale (VAS)]. Odds ratios (ORs; 95% CI) versus placebo, and placebo-adjusted ∆LS means were calculated for active treatments using logistic regression model and mixed-effect model of repeated measurements, respectively. Safety outcomes were assessed throughout.

Results: A total of 6355 patients were included (White, 4145; Black, 213; Asian, 1348; Other, 649). For tofacitinib-treated patients, ORs for ACR20/50/70 responses and CDAI/DAS28-4(ESR) LDA rates through month 3 were generally numerically higher for White/Asian/Other versus Black patients. Across active treatments, trends toward higher placebo-adjusted improvements from baseline in CDAI, DAS28-4 (ESR), HAQ-DI, and Pain (VAS) were observed in Asian/Other versus White/Black patients. Numerically higher placebo responses in Black versus White/Asian/Other patients were generally observed across outcomes through month 12. Safety outcomes were mostly similar across treatment/racial groups.

Conclusions: In patients with RA, tofacitinib was efficacious across racial groups with similar safety outcomes; observed racial differences potentially reflect patient demographics or regional practice disparities.

Trial registration numbers: ClinicalTrials.gov identifiers: NCT00147498; NCT00413660; NCT00550446; NCT00603512; NCT00687193; NCT01164579; NCT00976599; NCT01359150; NCT00960440; NCT00847613; NCT00814307; NCT00856544; NCT00853385; NCT01039688; NCT02187055.

Introduction: Some retrospective data sources, such as electronic health records in the USA, report composite outcome measures not fully validated in psoriatic arthritis (PsA). However, they often contain global assessments, such as a Physician Global Assessment (PhGA) and Patient Global Assessment (PatGA), along with patient-reported pain scores, which individually are considered validated in PsA. This research described the performance characteristics of a 3-item global assessment and pain (GAP) composite endpoint using data from the ixekizumab phase 3 PsA clinical trial program.

Methods: Discrimination of GAP was assessed by comparing placebo to active treatment arms. The magnitude of treatment effect and responsiveness were compared to Disease Activity Index for PsA (DAPSA), clinical DAPSA, DAPSA28, and Psoriatic Arthritis Disease Activity Score (PASDAS) using effect size (ES) and standardized response mean (SRM), respectively. Construct validity was evaluated through correlation among the composite endpoints, and with other physician- and patient-reported outcomes. Change in GAP was compared in patients who reached low disease activity (LDA) levels based on DAPSA, cDAPSA, and PASDAS vs those who did not.

Results: GAP discriminated between active treatment and placebo with statistically significant separation as early as week 1. The largest ES/SRM was seen with GAP (2.29/1.74) and PASDAS (2.47/1.68). GAP had the strongest correlation with PASDAS (0.81-0.92) and showed moderate correlations with patient-assessed physical function, low correlations with physician-assessed skin and nail psoriasis, and low to moderate correlation with physician-assessed enthesitis. A significantly greater improvement in GAP was seen in the groups achieving LDA states compared to those not (p < 0.001).

Conclusion: The GAP composite, an abbreviated endpoint comprising measures common in electronic health records, has promising performance characteristics and could be used to address important clinical questions regarding outcomes and impact of PsA in existing datasets. CLINTRIALS.

Gov identifier: NCT01695239; NCT02349295.

Introduction: ABP 501 was an adalimumab (ADA) biosimilar approved for treating immune-mediated inflammatory diseases (IMIDs) including rheumatoid arthritis (RA), psoriatic arthritis (PsA), and ankylosing spondylitis (AS). In this retrospective study, we aimed to examine the treatment patterns of ABP 501 among patients with these IMIDs using German and French pharmacy claims databases.

Methods: Patients with RA, PsA, or AS who initiated ABP 501 between October 2018 and March 2020 and were observed continuously for ≥ 365 days both before and after ABP 501 initiation were included. Descriptive analyses of persistence and switch after ABP 501 discontinuation were conducted and reported for each disease cohort by prior use of ADA products (patients naïve to ADA or patients experienced with ADA).

Results: Median (95% confidence interval) persistence on ABP 501 was 9.4 (8.6-10.3), 10.2 (9.0-11.7), and 12.1 (11.0-13.1) months in German patients, and 11.7 (9.9-13.3), 7.1 (5.8-8.4), and 10.8 (9.6-11.9) months in French patients for RA, PsA, and AS, respectively. For patients who switched from ABP 501 to another targeted therapy during the first 12 months of follow-up, switching patterns varied between patients naïve to ADA and patients experienced with ADA in both Germany and France, with patients naïve to ADA switching most frequently to other targeted therapies including non-ADA tumor necrosis factor inhibitor (TNFi), non-TNFi biologic, or Janus Kinase inhibitor (JAKi) and patients experienced with ADA switching most frequently back to ADA reference product (RP).

Conclusions: Across three rheumatologic diseases, about half of patients persisted on ABP 501 at the end of 12 months after treatment initiation in both Germany and France. Patients experienced with ADA were more likely to switch back to ADA RP, regardless of indication and country, suggesting a possible nocebo effect. Future studies are warranted to understand reasons of discontinuation and switching.

Introduction: Matching-adjusted indirect comparisons (MAIC) were used to assess the relative efficacy of bimekizumab 160 mg every 4 weeks (Q4W) compared to guselkumab 100 mg Q4W or every 8 weeks (Q8W) at 48/52 weeks in patients with psoriatic arthritis (PsA) who were biologic disease-modifying antirheumatic drug-naïve (bDMARD-naïve) or with previous inadequate response or intolerance to tumor necrosis factor inhibitors (TNFi-IR).

Methods: Relevant trials were identified as part of a systematic literature review. For patients who were bDMARD-naïve, individual patient data (IPD) from BE OPTIMAL (N = 431) was matched to summary data from DISCOVER-2 (Q4W, n = 245; Q8W, n = 248). For patients who were TNFi-IR, IPD from BE COMPLETE (n = 267) and summary data from COSMOS (Q8W, N = 189). Trial populations were re-weighted using propensity scores. Unanchored comparisons of recalculated bimekizumab and guselkumab 48- or 52-week non-responder imputation outcomes for 20/50/70% improvement in American College of Rheumatology score (ACR20/50/70) and minimal disease activity (MDA) index were analyzed.

Results: In patients who were bDMARD-naïve, bimekizumab was associated with a greater likelihood of ACR50 (odds ratio [95% confidence interval] 1.62 [1.07, 2.44]; p = 0.021), ACR70 (2.20 [1.43, 3.38]; p < 0.001), and MDA (1.82 [1.20, 2.76]; p = 0.005) compared to guselkumab Q4W at week 52. Bimekizumab also had a greater likelihood of ACR70 response (2.08 [1.34, 3.22]; p = 0.001) and MDA (2.07 [1.35, 3.17]; p < 0.001) compared to guselkumab Q8W at week 52. In patients who were TNFi-IR, bimekizumab had a greater likelihood in achieving all evaluated outcomes compared to guselkumab Q8W at week 48/52 (ACR20, 1.77 [1.15, 2.72]; p = 0.010; ACR50, 1.56 [1.03, 2.36]; p = 0.037; ACR70, 1.66 [1.05, 2.61]; p = 0.028; and MDA, 1.95 [1.27, 3.02]; p = 0.003).

Conclusions: According to MAICs, bimekizumab demonstrated greater or comparable efficacy on ACR50/70 and MDA outcomes than guselkumab in patients with PsA who were bDMARD-naïve and TNFi-IR at week 48/52. Bimekizumab had a more favorable likelihood than guselkumab in achieving more stringent treatment outcomes.

Trial registrations: NCT03895203, NCT03896581, NCT04009499, NCT03158285, NCT03796858.