Tofacitinib in combination with methotrexate in patients with rheumatoid arthritis: patient-reported outcomes from the 24-month Phase 3 ORAL Scan study.

OBJECTIVES: Tofacitinib is an oral Janus kinase inhibitor for the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis (RA). Here we present data from the completed Phase 3 randomised controlled trial (RCT) ORAL Scan (NCT00847613), which evaluated the impact of tofacitinib on patient-reported outcomes (PROs) through 24 months in patients with active RA and inadequate responses to methotrexate (MTX-IR). METHODS: Patients were randomised 4:4:1:1 to receive tofacitinib 5 or 10 mg twice daily (BID), or placebo advanced to tofacitinib 5 or 10 mg, plus background MTX. Patients receiving placebo advanced to tofacitinib at month 3 (non-responders) or month 6 (remaining patients). Mean changes from baseline in PROs, assessed at months 1-24, included Health Assessment Questionnaire-Disability Index, Patient Global Assessment of disease activity (visual analogue scale [VAS]), Patient Assessment of Arthritis Pain (VAS), health-related quality of life (Short Form-36 version 2), Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy-Fatigue and Medical Outcomes Study-Sleep. RESULTS: Overall, 539/797 (67.6%) patients completed 24 months' treatment. At month 3, tofacitinib-treated patients reported signi cant (p<0.05) mean changes from baseline versus placebo across all PROs, and significantly more patients reported improvements ≥ minimum clinically important differences versus placebo. Improvements in PROs with tofacitinib were sustained to month 24. Following advancement to tofacitinib, placebo-treated patients generally reported changes of similar magnitude to tofacitinib-treated patients. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with RA and MTX-IR receiving tofacitinib 5 or 10 mg BID plus MTX reported significant and clinically meaningful improvements in PROs versus placebo at month 3, which were sustained through 24 months.

Assessments of the unmet need in the management of patients with rheumatoid arthritis: analyses from the NOR-DMARD registry.

OBJECTIVE: To describe the outcomes of MTX and biologic DMARD (bDMARD) treatment in patients with RA and assess unmet needs in patients who fail treatment, using real-world data from the Norwegian DMARD (NOR-DMARD) registry. METHODS: Data included RA treatment courses from January 2007 until July 2016. Patients received MTX monotherapy (in MTX-naïve patients), bDMARD monotherapy, bDMARDs + MTX, or bDMARDs + other conventional synthetic DMARDs (csDMARDs). DAS28-4(ESR) was used to measure remission (<2.6) and inadequate response (>3.2) across all groups at Months 6 and 12. Estimated ACR20/50/70 and EULAR good and good/moderate response rates (based on DAS28-4[ESR] score) for bDMARDs were modelled at Months 6 and 12 using logistic mixed regression. DAS28-4(ESR) scores and changes from baseline, and rates and reasons for discontinuation, were evaluated for all groups over 24 months. RESULTS: The 2778 treatment courses in this analysis included 714 MTX monotherapy, 396 bDMARD monotherapy, 1460 bDMARDs + MTX and 208 bDMARDs + other csDMARDs. Of patients with DAS28-4(ESR) data at Months 6 and 12 (25.0-34.1%), 33.9-47.2% did not switch treatment and were inadequate-responders at Month 12. There were no significant differences in efficacy between bDMARD groups (bDMARD monotherapy, or bDMARDs + MTX or other csDMARDs). Lack of efficacy was the most common reason for stopping treatment across all groups (13.7-22.1% over 24 months). CONCLUSION: An unmet treatment need exists for patients still experiencing inadequate response to MTX monotherapy and bDMARDs as monotherapy or in combination with MTX/other csDMARDs after 12 months. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov, https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT01581294.

Tofacitinib versus methotrexate in rheumatoid arthritis.

BACKGROUND: Methotrexate is the most frequently used first-line antirheumatic drug. We report the findings of a phase 3 study of monotherapy with tofacitinib, an oral Janus kinase inhibitor, as compared with methotrexate monotherapy in patients with rheumatoid arthritis who had not previously received methotrexate or therapeutic doses of methotrexate. METHODS: We randomly assigned 958 patients to receive 5 mg or 10 mg of tofacitinib twice daily or methotrexate at a dose that was incrementally increased to 20 mg per week over 8 weeks; 956 patients received a study drug. The coprimary end points at month 6 were the mean change from baseline in the van der Heijde modified total Sharp score (which ranges from 0 to 448, with higher scores indicating greater structural joint damage) and the proportion of patients with an American College of Rheumatology (ACR) 70 response (≥70% reduction in the number of both tender and swollen joints and ≥70% improvement in three of five other criteria: the patient's assessment of pain, level of disability, C-reactive protein level or erythrocyte sedimentation rate, global assessment of disease by the patient, and global assessment of disease by the physician). RESULTS: Mean changes in the modified total Sharp score from baseline to month 6 were significantly smaller in the tofacitinib groups than in the methotrexate group, but changes were modest in all three groups (0.2 points in the 5-mg tofacitinib group and <0.1 point in the 10-mg tofacitinib group, as compared with 0.8 points in the methotrexate group [P<0.001 for both comparisons]). Among the patients receiving tofacitinib, 25.5% in the 5-mg group and 37.7% in the 10-mg group had an ACR 70 response at month 6, as compared with 12.0% of patients in the methotrexate group (P<0.001 for both comparisons). Herpes zoster developed in 31 of 770 patients who received tofacitinib (4.0%) and in 2 of 186 patients who received methotrexate (1.1%). Confirmed cases of cancer (including three cases of lymphoma) developed in 5 patients who received tofacitinib and in 1 patient who received methotrexate. Tofacitinib was associated with increases in creatinine levels and in low-density and high-density lipoprotein cholesterol levels. CONCLUSIONS: In patients who had not previously received methotrexate or therapeutic doses of methotrexate, tofacitinib monotherapy was superior to methotrexate in reducing signs and symptoms of rheumatoid arthritis and inhibiting the progression of structural joint damage. The benefits of tofacitinib need to be considered in the context of the risks of adverse events. (Funded by Pfizer; ORAL Start ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01039688.).

Estimated medical expenditure and risk of job loss among rheumatoid arthritis patients undergoing tofacitinib treatment: post hoc analyses of two randomized clinical trials.

Objectives: RA causes high disability levels and reduces health-related quality of life, triggering increased costs and risk of unemployment. Tofacitinib is an oral Janus kinase inhibitor for the treatment of RA. These post hoc analyses of phase 3 data aimed to assess monthly medical expenditure (MME) and risk of job loss for tofacitinib treatment vs placebo. Methods: Data analysed were from two randomized phase 3 studies of RA patients (n = 1115) with inadequate response to MTX or TNF inhibitors (TNFi) receiving tofacitinib 5 or 10 mg twice daily, adalimumab (one study only) or placebo, in combination with MTX. Short Form 36 version 2 Health Survey physical and mental component summary scores were translated into predicted MME via an algorithm and concurrent inability to work and job loss risks at 6, 12 and 24 months, using Medical Outcomes Study data. Results: MME reduction by month 3 was $100 greater for tofacitinib- than placebo-treated TNFi inadequate responders (P < 0.001); >20 and 6% reductions from baseline, respectively. By month 3 of tofacitinib treatment, the odds of inability to work decreased ⩾16%, and risk of future job loss decreased ∼20% (P < 0.001 vs placebo). MME reduction by month 3 was $70 greater for tofacitinib- than placebo-treated MTX inadequate responders (P < 0.001); ⩾23 and 13% reductions from baseline, respectively. By month 3 of tofacitinib treatment, the odds of inability to work decreased ⩾31% and risk of future job loss decreased ⩾25% (P < 0.001 vs placebo). Conclusion: Tofacitinib treatment had a positive impact on estimated medical expenditure and risk of job loss for RA patients with inadequate response to MTX or TNFi.

Analysis of haematological changes in tofacitinib-treated patients with rheumatoid arthritis across phase 3 and long-term extension studies.

OBJECTIVES: Tofacitinib is an oral Janus kinase inhibitor for the treatment of RA. The aim of this analysis was to characterize changes in haematological parameters following tofacitinib treatment, and to compare changes in haemoglobin with markers of disease activity, fatigue and vitality. METHODS: Changes in neutrophil counts, lymphocyte counts and haemoglobin levels were analysed in patients with RA from six phase 3 randomized controlled trials (n = 4271) of tofacitinib 5 or 10 mg bd, placebo or active comparators of up to 24 months' duration, and two long-term extension (LTE) studies (n = 4858) of tofacitinib of up to 84 months' duration. Disease activity markers included CRP and ESR. Fatigue and vitality were assessed using the Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy-Fatigue (FACIT-F) and Short Form Health Survey-36 vitality domain scores. RESULTS: In phase 3 studies, mean neutrophil and lymphocyte counts decreased and mean haemoglobin levels increased in all tofacitinib treatment groups. Haemoglobin levels and neutrophil counts stabilized in the LTE studies, while lymphocyte count decreases stabilized at approximately month 48. Increased haemoglobin was associated with decreased ESR and CRP levels. Clinically meaningful reductions in haemoglobin levels (⩾3 g/dl from baseline or haemoglobin ⩽7 g/dl) occurred in <1.0% of patients in all treatment groups. FACIT-F and Short Form Health Survey-36 vitality scores were weakly correlated with haemoglobin levels. CONCLUSION: Small changes in haematological parameters were seen with tofacitinib treatment, which stabilized over time in the LTE studies. Changes in haemoglobin levels, although associated with changes in ESR and CRP, were not associated with fatigue or vitality.

Tofacitinib or adalimumab versus placebo: patient-reported outcomes from a phase 3 study of active rheumatoid arthritis.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate effects of tofacitinib or adalimumab on patient-reported outcomes (PROs) in patients with moderate to severe RA and inadequate responses to MTX. METHODS: In this 12-month, phase 3, randomized controlled trial (ORAL Standard), patients (n = 717) receiving background MTX were randomized to tofacitinib 5 or 10 mg twice daily (BID), adalimumab 40 mg once every 2 weeks or placebo. PROs included HAQ-Disability Index, Patient Global Assessment of Arthritis, Patient Assessment of Arthritis Pain, health-related quality of life (Short Form-36 [SF-36]), fatigue (Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy-Fatigue) and sleep (Medical Outcomes Study-Sleep). RESULTS: At month 3, tofacitinib 10 mg BID treatment resulted in significant changes from baseline vs placebo across all PROs, sustained to month 12, with the highest number of patients reporting improvements ⩾minimum clinically important differences vs placebo (P < 0.05). Changes from baseline at month 3 with tofacitinib 5 mg BID and adalimumab were similar and statistically significant vs placebo across most PROs, excluding SF-36 Mental Component Score and Social Functioning, Role Emotional, and Mental Health domains, with significantly more patients reporting improvements ⩾minimum clinically important differences. Numbers Needed to Treat were lowest for tofacitinib 10 mg BID and similar between tofacitinib 5 mg BID and adalimumab. CONCLUSION: Patients with moderate to severe RA and inadequate responses to MTX reported improvements across a broad range of PROs with tofacitinib 5 and 10 mg BID and adalimumab that were significantly superior to placebo.

Effects of the oral Janus kinase inhibitor tofacitinib on patient-reported outcomes in patients with active rheumatoid arthritis: results of two Phase 2 randomised controlled trials.

OBJECTIVES: Tofacitinib is an oral Janus kinase inhibitor for the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis (RA). Here we investigated the effects of tofacitinib on patient-reported outcomes (PRO) in patients with active RA. METHODS: Two, 6-month, double-blind, placebo-controlled Phase 2b studies were performed. The combination study evaluated patients with inadequate response to methotrexate who received tofacitinib 1-15 mg twice daily (BID), 20 mg once daily or placebo, on background methotrexate. In the monotherapy study, patients with inadequate response to disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs received tofacitinib 1-15 mg BID, adalimumab 40 mg once every other week or placebo. PROs measured were: Patient's Assessment of Arthritis Pain (PAAP), Patient's Assessment of Disease Activity, HAQ-DI, FACIT-F and SF-36. RESULTS: In the combination study (n=507), significant improvements (p<0.05) versus placebo were observed at Week 12 in PAAP (visual analogue scale) and HAQ-DI for all tofacitinib groups. In the monotherapy study (n=384), significant improvements in PAAP were observed at Week 12 for tofacitinib 5, 10 and 15 mg BID, and in HAQ-DI for tofacitinib 3, 5, 10 and 15 mg BID. Significant improvements versus placebo were seen at Week 2 in PAAP (both studies) and HAQ­DI (monotherapy study) with tofacitinib, and were maintained throughout each study. In both studies, improvements in several domains of the SF-36 in the tofacitinib groups were observed at Weeks 12 and 24. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with active RA, tofacitinib, either in combination with methotrexate or as monotherapy, demonstrated rapid and sustained improvement in pain, physical functioning and health-related quality of life.

Meta-analysis of long-term joint structural deterioration in minimally treated patients with rheumatoid arthritis.

BACKGROUND: Rheumatoid arthritis (RA) is a chronic autoimmune disease characterized by inflammation and joint structural deterioration. Driven by recent expectations that patients in clinical trials randomized to placebo should be 'rescued' with active therapy within 6 months of starting treatment, the relative benefit of arresting joint damage with biologic agents beyond this period is unclear. With longer-term evidence of the rate of joint deterioration with minimal treatment, the efficacy of biologic agents and novel treatments might be projected beyond the placebo-controlled phase observed in clinical trials. The aim of this study was to estimate radiographic structural deterioration over time in patients with moderate-to-severe RA minimally treated with DMARDs. METHODS: A literature review identified evidence of joint structural deterioration in patients with (DMARD-IR population) and without (non-DMARD-IR population) a history of inadequate response to DMARDs. Patients were minimally treated with one non-biologic DMARD or palliative care (non-DMARD-IR population only). Outcomes of interest were the (modified) Total Sharp Score (TSS) and subscales (Erosion Subscore [ES] and Joint Space Narrowing [JSN] Subscore), and Larsen score. Pooled joint-deterioration curves over time were obtained with meta-analysis models. RESULTS: Mean change from baseline in TSS increased in the DMARD-IR population from 1.14 (95 % credible interval [CrI] 0.66, 1.67) to 9.84 (5.68, 14.46) at Weeks 12 and 104, respectively, and a non-linear increase of 1.56 (0.79, 2.34) and 5.13 (-1.35, 11.67) in the non-DMARD-IR population. At the same time points, mean changes (95 % CrI) were 0.51 (0.27, 0.83) and 4.43 (2.38, 7.21) for ES and 0.36 (0.09, 0.67) and 3.14 (0.80, 5.78) for JSN in the DMARD-IR population, whereas corresponding changes in the non-DMARD-IR population were 0.69 (0.31, 1.12) and 2.93 (0.92, 5.02), and 0.29 (0.17, 0.44) and 2.55 (1.45, 3.80), respectively. Larsen scores were only available for the non-DMARD-IR population, with mean changes (95 % CrI) of 0.08 (0.04, 0.11) and 0.65 (0.36, 0.96) at Weeks 12 and 104, respectively. CONCLUSION: Minimal treatment of RA with one non-biologic DMARD results in deterioration of joint structure in patients with or without a history of inadequate response to non-biologic DMARDs.

Placebo-controlled trial of tofacitinib monotherapy in rheumatoid arthritis.

BACKGROUND: Tofacitinib (CP-690,550) is a novel oral Janus kinase inhibitor that is being investigated as a targeted immunomodulator and disease-modifying therapy for rheumatoid arthritis. METHODS: In this phase 3, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group, 6-month study, 611 patients were randomly assigned, in a 4:4:1:1 ratio, to 5 mg of tofacitinib twice daily, 10 mg of tofacitinib twice daily, placebo for 3 months followed by 5 mg of tofacitinib twice daily, or placebo for 3 months followed by 10 mg of tofacitinib twice daily. The primary end points, assessed at month 3, were the percentage of patients with at least a 20% improvement in the American College of Rheumatology scale (ACR 20), the change from baseline in Health Assessment Questionnaire-Disability Index (HAQ-DI) scores (which range from 0 to 3, with higher scores indicating greater disability), and the percentage of patients with a Disease Activity Score for 28-joint counts based on the erythrocyte sedimentation rate (DAS28-4[ESR]) of less than 2.6 (with scores ranging from 0 to 9.4 and higher scores indicating more disease activity). RESULTS: At month 3, a higher percentage of patients in the tofacitinib groups than in the placebo groups met the criteria for an ACR 20 response (59.8% in the 5-mg tofacitinib group and 65.7% in the 10-mg tofacitinib group vs. 26.7% in the combined placebo groups, P<0.001 for both comparisons). The reductions from baseline in HAQ-DI scores were greater in the 5-mg and 10-mg tofacitinib groups than in the placebo groups (-0.50 and -0.57 points, respectively, vs. -0.19 points; P<0.001). The percentage of patients with a DAS28-4(ESR) of less than 2.6 was not significantly higher with tofacitinib than with placebo (5.6% and 8.7% in the 5-mg and 10-mg tofacitinib groups, respectively, and 4.4% with placebo; P=0.62 and P=0.10 for the two comparisons). Serious infections developed in six patients who were receiving tofacitinib. Common adverse events were headache and upper respiratory tract infection. Tofacitinib treatment was associated with elevations in low-density lipoprotein cholesterol levels and reductions in neutrophil counts. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with active rheumatoid arthritis, tofacitinib monotherapy was associated with reductions in signs and symptoms of rheumatoid arthritis and improvement in physical function. (Funded by Pfizer; ORAL Solo ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00814307.).

Tofacitinib or adalimumab versus placebo in rheumatoid arthritis.

BACKGROUND: Tofacitinib (CP-690,550) is a novel oral Janus kinase inhibitor that is being investigated for the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis. METHODS: In this 12-month, phase 3 trial, 717 patients who were receiving stable doses of methotrexate were randomly assigned to 5 mg of tofacitinib twice daily, 10 mg of tofacitinib twice daily, 40 mg of adalimumab once every 2 weeks, or placebo. At month 3, patients in the placebo group who did not have a 20% reduction from baseline in the number of swollen and tender joints were switched in a blinded fashion to either 5 mg or 10 mg of tofacitinib twice daily; at month 6, all patients still receiving placebo were switched to tofacitinib in a blinded fashion. The three primary outcome measures were a 20% improvement at month 6 in the American College of Rheumatology scale (ACR 20); the change from baseline to month 3 in the score on the Health Assessment Questionnaire-Disability Index (HAQ-DI) (which ranges from 0 to 3, with higher scores indicating greater disability); and the percentage of patients at month 6 who had a Disease Activity Score for 28-joint counts based on the erythrocyte sedimentation rate (DAS28-4[ESR]) of less than 2.6 (with scores ranging from 0 to 9.4 and higher scores indicating greater disease activity). RESULTS: At month 6, ACR 20 response rates were higher among patients receiving 5 mg or 10 mg of tofacitinib (51.5% and 52.6%, respectively) and among those receiving adalimumab (47.2%) than among those receiving placebo (28.3%) (P<0.001 for all comparisons). There were also greater reductions in the HAQ-DI score at month 3 and higher percentages of patients with a DAS28-4(ESR) below 2.6 at month 6 in the active-treatment groups than in the placebo group. Adverse events occurred more frequently with tofacitinib than with placebo, and pulmonary tuberculosis developed in two patients in the 10-mg tofacitinib group. Tofacitinib was associated with an increase in both low-density and high-density lipoprotein cholesterol levels and with reductions in neutrophil counts. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with rheumatoid arthritis receiving background methotrexate, tofacitinib was significantly superior to placebo and was numerically similar to adalimumab in efficacy. (Funded by Pfizer; ORAL Standard ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00853385.).

Tofacitinib (CP-690,550) in combination with methotrexate in patients with active rheumatoid arthritis with an inadequate response to tumour necrosis factor inhibitors: a randomised phase 3 trial.

BACKGROUND: Rheumatoid arthritis is a heterogeneous chronic disease, and no therapeutic agent has been identified which is universally and persistently effective in all patients. We investigated the effectiveness of tofacitinib (CP-690,550), a novel oral Janus kinase inhibitor, as a targeted immunomodulator and disease-modifying therapy for rheumatoid arthritis. METHODS: We did a 6-month, double-blind, parallel-group phase 3 study at 82 centres in 13 countries, including North America, Europe, and Latin America. 399 patients aged 18 years or older with moderate-to-severe rheumatoid arthritis and inadequate response to tumour necrosis factor inhibitors (TNFi) were randomly assigned in a 2:2:1:1 ratio with an automated internet or telephone system to receive twice a day treatment with: tofacitinib 5 mg (n=133); tofacitinib 10 mg (n=134); or placebo (n=132), all with methotrexate. At month 3, patients given placebo advanced to either tofacitinib 5 mg twice a day (n=66) or 10 mg twice a day (n=66). Primary endpoints included American College of Rheumatology (ACR)20 response rate, mean change from baseline in Health Assessment Questionnaire-Disability Index (HAQ-DI), and rates of disease activity score (DAS)28-4(ESR) less than 2·6 (referred to as DAS28<2·6), all at month 3. The full analysis set for the primary analysis included all randomised patients who received at least one dose of study medication and had at least one post-baseline assessment. This trial is registered with www.ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00960440. FINDINGS: At month 3, ACR20 response rates were 41·7% (55 of 132 [95% CI vs placebo 6·06-28·41]; p=0·0024) for tofacitinib 5 mg twice a day and 48·1% (64 of 133; [12·45-34·92]; p<0·0001) for tofacitinib 10 mg twice a day versus 24·4% (32 of 131) for placebo. Improvements from baseline in HAQ-DI were -0·43 ([-0·36 to -0·15]; p<0·0001) for 5 mg twice a day and -0·46 ([-0·38 to -0·17]; p<0·0001) for 10 mg twice a day tofacitinib versus -0·18 for placebo; DAS28<2·6 rates were 6·7% (eight of 119; [0-10·10]; p=0·0496) for 5 mg twice a day tofacitinib and 8·8% (11 of 125 [1·66-12·60]; p=0·0105) for 10 mg twice a day tofacitinib versus 1·7% (two of 120) for placebo. Safety was consistent with phase 2 and 3 studies. The most common adverse events in months 0-3 were diarrhoea (13 of 267; 4·9%), nasopharyngitis (11 of 267; 4·1%), headache (11 of 267; 4·1%), and urinary tract infection (eight of 267; 3·0%) across tofacitinib groups, and nausea (nine of 132; 6·8%) in the placebo group. INTERPRETATION: In this treatment-refractory population, tofacitinib with methotrexate had rapid and clinically meaningful improvements in signs and symptoms of rheumatoid arthritis and physical function over 6 months with manageable safety. Tofacitinib could provide an effective treatment option in patients with an inadequate response to TNFi. FUNDING: Pfizer.

Tofacitinib (CP-690,550) in patients with rheumatoid arthritis receiving methotrexate: twelve-month data from a twenty-four-month phase III randomized radiographic study.

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this 24-month phase III study was to examine structural preservation with tofacitinib in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) with an inadequate response to methotrexate (MTX). Data from a planned 12-month interim analysis are reported. METHODS: In this double-blind, parallel-group, placebo-controlled study, patients receiving background MTX were randomized 4:4:1:1 to tofacitinib at 5 mg twice daily, tofacitinib at 10 mg twice daily, placebo to tofacitinib at 5 mg twice daily, and placebo to tofacitinib at 10 mg twice daily. At month 3, nonresponder placebo-treated patients were advanced in a blinded manner to receive tofacitinib as indicated above; remaining placebo-treated patients were advanced at 6 months. Four primary efficacy end points were all analyzed in a step-down procedure. RESULTS: At month 6, response rates according to the American College of Rheumatology 20% improvement criteria for tofacitinib at 5 mg and 10 mg twice daily were higher than those for placebo (51.5% and 61.8%, respectively, versus 25.3%; both P < 0.0001). At month 6, least squares mean (LSM) changes in total modified Sharp/van der Heijde score for tofacitinib at 5 mg and 10 mg twice daily were 0.12 and 0.06, respectively, versus 0.47 for placebo (P = 0.0792 and P ≤ 0.05, respectively). At month 3, LSM changes in the Health Assessment Questionnaire disability index score for tofacitinib at 5 mg and 10 mg twice daily were -0.40 (significance not declared due to step-down procedure) and -0.54 (P < 0.0001), respectively, versus -0.15 for placebo. At month 6, rates of remission (defined as a value <2.6 for the 4-variable Disease Activity Score in 28 joints using the erythrocyte sedimentation rate) for tofacitinib at 5 mg and 10 mg twice daily were 7.2% (significance not declared due to step-down procedure) and 16.0% (P < 0.0001), respectively, versus 1.6% for placebo. The safety profile was consistent with findings in previous studies. CONCLUSION: Data from this 12-month interim analysis demonstrate that tofacitinib inhibits progression of structural damage and improves disease activity in patients with RA who are receiving MTX.

Tofacitinib in combination with nonbiologic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs in patients with active rheumatoid arthritis: a randomized trial.

BACKGROUND: Many patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) do not achieve adequate and safe responses with disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs). Tofacitinib is a novel, oral, Janus kinase inhibitor that treats RA. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of tofacitinib in combination with nonbiologic DMARDs. DESIGN: 1-year, double-blind, randomized trial (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT00856544). SETTING: 114 centers in 19 countries. PATIENTS: 792 patients with active RA despite nonbiologic DMARD therapy. INTERVENTION: Patients were randomly assigned 4:4:1:1 to oral tofacitinib, 5 mg or 10 mg twice daily, or placebo advanced to tofacitinib, 5 mg or 10 mg twice daily. MEASUREMENTS: Primary end points were 20% improvement in American College of Rheumatology (ACR20) criteria; Disease Activity Score for 28-joint counts based on the erythrocyte sedimentation rate (DAS28-4[ESR]) of less than 2.6; DAS28-4(ESR)-defined remission, change in Health Assessment Questionnaire Disability Index (HAQ-DI) score, and safety assessments. RESULTS: Mean treatment differences for ACR20 response rates (month 6) for the 5-mg and 10-mg tofacitinib groups compared with the combined placebo groups were 21.2% (95% CI, 12.2% to 30.3%; P < 0.001) and 25.8% (CI, 16.8% to 34.8%; P < 0.001), respectively. The HAQ-DI scores (month 3) and DAS28-4(ESR) less than 2.6 response rates (month 6) were also superior in the tofacitinib groups versus placebo. The incidence rates of serious adverse events for patients receiving 5-mg tofacitinib, 10-mg tofacitinib, or placebo were 6.9, 7.3, or 10.9 events per 100 patient-years of exposure, respectively. In the tofacitinib groups, 2 cases of tuberculosis, 2 cases of other opportunistic infections, 3 cardiovascular events, and 4 deaths occurred. Neutrophil counts decreased, hemoglobin and low- and high-density lipoprotein cholesterol levels increased, and serum creatinine levels had small increases in the tofacitinib groups. LIMITATIONS: Placebo groups were smaller and of shorter duration. Patients received primarily methotrexate. The ability to assess drug combinations other than tofacitinib plus methotrexate was limited. CONCLUSION: Tofacitinib improved disease control in patients with active RA despite treatment with nonbiologic DMARDs, primarily methotrexate. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE: Pfizer.

A phase IIb dose-ranging study of the oral JAK inhibitor tofacitinib (CP-690,550) versus placebo in combination with background methotrexate in patients with active rheumatoid arthritis and an inadequate response to methotrexate alone.

OBJECTIVE: To compare the efficacy, safety, and tolerability of 6 dosages of oral tofacitinib (CP-690,550) with placebo for the treatment of active rheumatoid arthritis (RA) in patients receiving a stable background regimen of methotrexate (MTX) who have an inadequate response to MTX monotherapy. METHODS: In this 24-week, double-blind, phase IIb study, patients with active RA (n = 507) were randomized to receive placebo or tofacitinib (20 mg/day, 1 mg twice daily, 3 mg twice daily, 5 mg twice daily, 10 mg twice daily, or 15 mg twice daily). All patients continued to receive a stable dosage of MTX. The primary end point was the American College of Rheumatology 20% improvement criteria (ACR20) response rate at week 12. RESULTS: At week 12, ACR20 response rates for patients receiving all tofacitinib dosages ≥3 mg twice daily (52.9% for 3 mg twice daily, 50.7% for 5 mg twice daily, 58.1% for 10 mg twice daily, 56.0% for 15 mg twice daily, and 53.8% for 20 mg/day) were significantly (P ≤ 0.05) greater than those for placebo (33.3%). Improvements were sustained at week 24 for the ACR20, ACR50, and ACR70 responses, scores for the Health Assessment Questionnaire disability index, the 3-variable Disease Activity Score in 28 joints using the C-reactive protein level (DAS28-CRP), and a 3-variable DAS28-CRP of <2.6. The most common treatment-emergent adverse events occurring in >10% of patients in any tofacitinib group were diarrhea, upper respiratory tract infection, and headache; 21 patients (4.1%) experienced serious adverse events. Sporadic increases in transaminase levels, increases in cholesterol and serum creatinine levels, and decreases in neutrophil and hemoglobin levels were observed. CONCLUSION: In patients with active RA in whom the response to MTX has been inadequate, the addition of tofacitinib at a dosage ≥3 mg twice daily showed sustained efficacy and a manageable safety profile over 24 weeks.

Phase IIb dose-ranging study of the oral JAK inhibitor tofacitinib (CP-690,550) or adalimumab monotherapy versus placebo in patients with active rheumatoid arthritis with an inadequate response to disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs.

OBJECTIVE: To compare the efficacy, safety, and tolerability of 5 doses of oral tofacitinib (CP-690,550) or adalimumab monotherapy with placebo for the treatment of active rheumatoid arthritis (RA) in patients with an inadequate response to disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs. METHODS: In this 24-week, double-blind, phase IIb study, patients with RA (n = 384) were randomized to receive placebo, tofacitinib at 1, 3, 5, 10, or 15 mg administered orally twice a day, or adalimumab at 40 mg injected subcutaneously every 2 weeks (total of 6 injections) followed by oral tofacitinib at 5 mg twice a day for 12 weeks. The primary end point was the responder rate according to the American College of Rheumatology 20% improvement criteria (ACR20) at week 12. RESULTS: Treatment with tofacitinib at a dose of ≥3 mg twice a day resulted in a rapid response with significant efficacy when compared to placebo, as indicated by the primary end point (ACR20 response at week 12), achieved in 39.2% (3 mg; P ≤ 0.05), 59.2% (5 mg; P < 0.0001), 70.5% (10 mg; P < 0.0001), and 71.9% (15 mg; P < 0.0001) in the tofacitinib group and 35.9% of patients in the adalimumab group (P = 0.105), compared with 22.0% of patients receiving placebo. Improvements were sustained at week 24, according to the ACR20, ACR50, and ACR70 response rates as well as classifications of remission according to the 3-variable Disease Activity Score in 28 joints (DAS28) using C-reactive protein and the 4-variable DAS28 using the erythrocyte sedimentation rate. The most common treatment-emergent adverse events (AEs) in patients across all tofacitinib treatment arms (n = 272) were urinary tract infection (7.7%), diarrhea (4.8%), headache (4.8%), and bronchitis (4.8%). CONCLUSION: Tofacitinib monotherapy at ≥3 mg twice a day was efficacious in the treatment of patients with active RA over 24 weeks and demonstrated a manageable safety profile.

Patient Preference and Treatment Satisfaction With a Port Delivery System for Ranibizumab vs Intravitreal Injections in Patients With Neovascular Age-Related Macular Degeneration: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: The port delivery system (PDS) with ranibizumab has demonstrated noninferior and equivalent efficacy compared with monthly intravitreal injections of ranibizumab, an anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) agent, in patients with neovascular age-related macular degeneration (nAMD), but evaluating patient preference is important to help inform clinical decision-making. Objective: Evaluate treatment satisfaction for ranibizumab delivered via PDS vs intravitreal injections as well as patient preference among those assigned to PDS. Design, Setting, and Participants: Archway was a phase 3 randomized active-comparator open-label clinical trial conducted at 78 sites in the US. Patients 50 years and older with nAMD diagnosed within 9 months of screening with a documented response to anti-VEGF therapy were included. Of 619 patients screened, 418 were enrolled; 415 were included in the primary analysis and 234 were included in the secondary exploratory analysis. The Archway study ran from September 12, 2019, through primary readout on May 22, 2020. Interventions: Patients were randomized 3:2 to PDS with ranibizumab, 100 mg/mL, with fixed refill exchanges every 24 weeks or intravitreal ranibizumab injections, 0.5 mg, every 4 weeks. Main Outcomes and Measures: Treatment satisfaction was measured using the Macular Disease Treatment Satisfaction Questionnaire in the PDS and intravitreal injection arms at week 40. Patient preference was assessed using the content-validated PDS Patient Preference Questionnaire (PPPQ), which measured the proportion of patients in the PDS arm with monthly monitoring who preferred treatment with the PDS at week 40 over previous intravitreal injections or concurrent fellow-eye injections. Both outcomes were exploratory end points. Results: The mean (SD) age of participants at baseline was 75.0 (7.9) years; 234 participants (59%) were women and 162 (41%) were men. At week 40, differences in overall treatment satisfaction scores were minimal for the PDS and intravitreal injection arms (mean, 68.0; 95% CI, 67.4-68.6; n = 237 and mean, 66.1; 95% CI, 64.9-67.3; n = 159, respectively; difference, 1.9; 95% CI, 0.7-3.1). A total of 234 of 248 patients (94.4%) in the PDS arm were included in the PPPQ analysis. At week 40, almost all patients in the PDS arm preferred treatment via PDS (218 of 234 [93.2%]) vs previous intravitreal injections (3 of 234 [1.3%]), including 172 of 234 (73.5%) with a very strong preference for the PDS. In patients who received concurrent fellow-eye injections (n = 78), 72 (92.3%) preferred the PDS. Conclusions and Relevance: Although PDS treatment was preferred by almost all patients assigned to PDS over previous intravitreal injections, both delivery methods have high treatment satisfaction. These findings provide further evidence for the PDS as a meaningful alternative treatment option for patients with nAMD. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03677934.

Quantifying the relationship between disability progression and quality of life in patients treated for NMOSD: Insights from the SAkura studies.

BACKGROUND: To date, no specific scales have been developed to explore the impact of neuromyelitis optica spectrum disorder (NMOSD)-related disability on quality of life (QoL). The Expanded Disability Status Scale (EDSS) and the EuroQol 5-dimensions (EQ-5D) have been used to assess disability and QoL, respectively, in patients with NMOSD. However, there is limited evidence surrounding their use in this condition. We compared EDSS and EQ-5D data across two clinical trials to quantify the relationship between disability and QoL in patients with NMOSD. METHODS: SAkuraSky (NCT02028884) and SAkuraStar (NCT02073279) were Phase 3, multicenter, randomized, international, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-assignment studies of satralizumab, administered in combination with baseline immunosuppressants (SAkuraSky) or as monotherapy (SAkuraStar). EDSS and EQ-5D were assessed at baseline and at 24-week intervals thereafter. The relationship between disability and QoL was assessed by estimating EQ-5D utilities (UK tariff) for each incremental EDSS category. A repeated-measures linear model was used to regress health utilities on EDSS score-derived health states. RESULTS: Overall, 176 patients underwent at least one EDSS assessment and completed an EQ-5D survey and were included in this analysis. There was a clear association between mean EQ-5D score and EDSS score, with decreases in QoL being observed at each incremental increase in disability. The relationship between EDSS and EQ-5D score remained consistent across the different treatment groups. CONCLUSIONS: These results, generated from high-quality clinical trial data, demonstrated a strong and consistent relationship between disability and QoL in patients with NMOSD.

A novel approach to estimate the minimally important difference for the Fatigue Impact Scale in multiple sclerosis patients.

PURPOSE: The Fatigue Impact Scale (FIS) has been used extensively to assess the impact of fatigue on health-related quality of life (HRQOL) in multiple sclerosis (MS). The objective of this study was to estimate the minimally important difference (MID) of the FIS to facilitate the interpretation of the scale in patients with MS. METHODS: Data came from a cross-sectional study of 184 patients with MS. Anchor-based estimates of the MID were evaluated using patients' ratings of their own health and a clinical rating of MS severity. Using the proportional odds model, estimates of the MID were evaluated by finding FIS score differences that corresponded to a 50% increase in the odds of poorer health. Convergence between distribution- and anchor-based estimates was assessed. RESULTS: Nineteen items met the selection criteria for anchors. Triangulation of the anchor- and distribution-based approaches indicated that the MID of the FIS ranged between 10 and 20 points, approximately. CONCLUSION: A common metric of meaningful difference of FIS was defined across anchors measuring a broad range of HRQOL domains. The MID estimates in the current study can be used for sample size calculation in the planning of future studies and to aid researchers and clinicians in interpreting FIS score differences in patients with MS.

Interpreting Premenstrual Symptoms Impact Survey scores using outcomes in health-related quality of life and sexual drive impact.

OBJECTIVE: To link the Premenstrual Symptoms Impact Survey (PMSIS) scores to health-related quality of life (HRQOL) and sexual drive impact associated with premenstrual syndrome (PMS) and premenstrual dysphoric disorder (PMDD). STUDY DESIGN: Secondary data analysis was performed using the online survey study for PMSIS development. Women were sorted into 10 mutually exclusive score levels (N = 949). Their responses to the SF-12v2 Health Survey and the sexual drive question were dichotomized to indicate the presence of limitations/impairment. Chi-square analysis was conducted to compare the differences in percentages of women with limitations across 3 representative PMSIS score levels containing (1) women with no indication of PMS, (2) women at risk for PMS but not PMDD, and (3) women at risk for PMDD. RESULTS: The higher the PMSIS score level (more severe impact), the greater the percentage of women reported functional limitations. Women either at risk for PMS or PMDD were significantly more likely to report limitations than women with no indication of PMS in all HRQOL areas except for 2 Physical Functioning items and 1 Mental Health item and the General Health item. Significantly more women with PMS (67.5%) and with PMDD (73.3%) reported sexual drive impact than in women with no PMS (45.7%). CONCLUSION: The associations between PMSIS score levels and the premenstrual symptoms' impact on HRQOL and sexual functioning assist the interpretation of PMSIS scores and use of the tool in reproductive-age women.

Associations between Patient Global Assessment scores and pain, physical function, and fatigue in rheumatoid arthritis: a post hoc analysis of data from phase 3 trials of tofacitinib.

BACKGROUND: Tofacitinib is an oral Janus kinase inhibitor for the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis (RA). We examined the degree to which Patient Global Assessment of Disease Activity (PtGA) was driven by patient-reported assessments of pain (Pain), physical function, and fatigue in patients receiving tofacitinib 5 mg twice daily or placebo, each with conventional synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (csDMARDs). METHODS: This post hoc analysis used data pooled from three randomized controlled trials in csDMARD-inadequate responder (csDMARD-IR) patients (ORAL Scan: NCT00847613; ORAL Standard: NCT00853385; ORAL Sync: NCT00856544). Using subgroup analysis from 2 × 2 tables, associations between PtGA and Pain, Health Assessment Questionnaire-Disability Index (HAQ-DI), and Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy-Fatigue (FACIT-F) at month 3 were evaluated using Pearson's Phi correlation coefficients. To support the main analysis, associations between select patient-reported outcomes (PROs) were also evaluated in csDMARD-naïve (ORAL Start; NCT01039688) and biologic (b)DMARD-IR (ORAL Step; NCT00960440) patients. RESULTS: Across csDMARD-IR treatment groups, low disease activity (defined as PtGA ≤ 20 mm), and moderate (≥ 30%) and substantial (≥ 50%) improvements from baseline in PtGA were associated with mild Pain (Visual Analog Scale score ≤ 20 mm), and moderate (≥ 30%) and substantial (≥ 50%) improvements from baseline in Pain; lack of Pain improvement was associated with little/no improvement in PtGA. In contrast, large proportions of csDMARD-IR patients who reported PtGA improvements did not report HAQ-DI or FACIT-F scores ≥ normative values (≤ 0.25 and ≥ 43.5, respectively) or changes in HAQ-DI or FACIT-F scores ≥ minimum clinically important difference (≥ 0.22 and ≥ 4.0, respectively). Generally, PtGA and Pain outcomes were moderately-to-strongly correlated at month 3 in csDMARD-IR patients, with weaker correlations evident between PtGA and HAQ-DI/FACIT-F outcomes. Similar findings were generally evident in csDMARD-naïve and bDMARD-IR patients. CONCLUSIONS: This analysis supports the role of Pain as a key driver of PtGA in RA; physical function and fatigue play lesser roles in patients' perceptions of disease activity. These findings corroborate the importance of improved PROs and attainment of low symptom states for optimizing patient care. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinicaltrials.gov: NCT00847613 (registered: February 19, 2009); NCT00853385 (registered: March 2, 2009); NCT00856544 (registered: March 5, 2009); NCT01039688 (registered: December 25, 2009); NCT00960440 (registered: August 17, 2009).