Sarilumab monotherapy vs sarilumab and methotrexate combination therapy in patients with rheumatoid arthritis.

OBJECTIVE: Sarilumab, as monotherapy or in combination with conventional synthetic DMARDs, such as MTX, has demonstrated improvement in clinical outcomes in patients with RA. The primary objective of this post hoc analysis was to compare the efficacy of sarilumab (200 mg every 2 weeks) monotherapy (MONARCH study) with that of sarilumab and MTX combination therapy (MOBILITY study) at week 24. METHODS: The endpoints assessed were mean change from baseline in the Clinical Disease Activity Index (CDAI), 28-joint Disease Activity using CRP (DAS28-CRP), CRP, haemoglobin (Hb), pain visual analogue scale (VAS) and Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy (FACIT)-Fatigue. Least square (LS) mean change from baseline (95% CI) at week 24 for all endpoints was compared between the treatment arms for adjusted comparisons. RESULTS: This analysis included 184 patients on sarilumab monotherapy and 399 patients on sarilumab plus MTX. Differences (P < 0.05) were observed in ethnicity, region, body mass index group, rheumatoid factor, anti-cyclic citrullinated peptide antibodies, swollen joint count, CRP, CDAI and oral glucocorticoid use between these treatment groups. After adjusting for these differences in a mixed-effect model repeated measure, LS mean change from baseline for all assessments was similar between the treatment groups with overlapping CIs: CDAI, -28.79 vs -26.21; DAS28-CRP, -2.95 vs -2.81; CRP, -18.31 vs -16.46; Hb, 6.59 vs 8.09; Pain VAS, -33.62 vs -31.66; FACIT-Fatigue, 9.90 vs 10.24. CONCLUSION: This analysis demonstrated that the efficacy of sarilumab monotherapy was similar to that of sarilumab and MTX combination therapy.

Immunogenicity of sarilumab and impact on safety and efficacy in Japanese patients with rheumatoid arthritis: analysis of two Phase 3 randomised clinical trials.

OBJECTIVES: To describe the immunogenicity profile of sarilumab in Japanese patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA). METHODS: Patients enrolled in the KAKEHASI and HARUKA studies were included in our analysis. In these studies, patients received sarilumab 150 mg or 200 mg every 2 weeks for 52 or 28 weeks in combination with methotrexate (MTX) (KAKEHASI), or for 52 weeks as monotherapy or in combination with non-MTX conventional synthetic disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs (HARUKA). Anti-drug antibodies (ADAs) and neutralising antibodies (NAbs) were assessed in the pooled population. RESULTS: Positive ADA assay responses occurred in 10/149 (7.1%) patients treated with sarilumab 150 mg and 13/185 (7.0%) patients treated with sarilumab 200 mg, with persistent responses in 2 (1.4%) and 4 (2.2%) patients, respectively. Peak ADA titre was 30. No patients treated with the 150 mg dose and one patient (0.5%) treated with the 200 mg dose exhibited NAbs. There was no evidence of an association between ADA formation and hypersensitivity reactions or reduced efficacy. CONCLUSIONS: ADAs, which occurred at a low frequency and titre, did not affect the safety or efficacy of sarilumab 150 or 200 mg administered as monotherapy or combination therapy in Japanese patients with RA in the KAKEHASI or HARUKA studies.

Addition of another disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drug to methotrexate reduces the flare rate within 2 years after infliximab discontinuation in patients with rheumatoid arthritis: an open, randomized, controlled trial.

OBJECTIVES: We examined whether the addition of another conventional disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs (DMARDs) to methotrexate (MTX) upon infliximab (IFX) discontinuation in well-controlled rheumatoid arthritis (RA) patients could suppress subsequent disease flare. METHODS: RA patients maintaining DAS28-CRP (Disease Activity Score of 28 joints with C-reactive protein) scores < 2.6 for ≥ 6 months with IFX were randomized either to receive addition of bucillamine (BUC) to MTX (BUC + MTX group; n = 24) or not (MTX group; n = 31) upon discontinuing IFX. The primary endpoint was the flare rate within 2 years of IFX discontinuation. RESULTS: Six patients discontinuing MTX during the study were excluded from analyses. Seventeen patients (63.0%) experienced flares in the MTX group, which was significantly reduced in the BUC + MTX group (31.8%; p = 0.045). Further, the flare rates differed significantly between remission and non-remission by a Boolean definition upon IFX discontinuation in the MTX group (40.0% vs. 91.7%, respectively; p = 0.014), but they were comparable in the BUC + MTX group. BUC treatment was interrupted in seven patients due to rash, proteinuria and incompliance. CONCLUSIONS: DMARDs combination therapy may be a better treatment strategy than MTX monotherapy for maintaining RA control after successful discontinuation of biological agents.

Improvement of Signs and Symptoms of Nonradiographic Axial Spondyloarthritis in Patients Treated With Secukinumab: Primary Results of a Randomized, Placebo-Controlled Phase III Study.

OBJECTIVE: To report the primary (1-year) results from PREVENT, the first phase III study evaluating secukinumab in patients with active nonradiographic axial spondyloarthritis (SpA). METHODS: A total of 555 patients were randomized (1:1:1) to receive subcutaneous secukinumab 150 mg with a loading dose (loading dose [LD] group), secukinumab 150 mg without a loading dose (non-loading dose [NL] group), or placebo weekly and then every 4 weeks starting at week 4. The NL group received placebo at weeks 1, 2, and 3 to maintain blinding. Switch to open-label secukinumab or standard of care was permitted after week 20. The study had 2 independent analysis plans, per European Union and non-US (plan A; week 16) and US (plan B; week 52) regulatory requirements. The primary end point was 40% improvement in disease activity according to the Assessment of SpondyloArthritis international Society (ASAS40) criteria at week 16 (in the LD group) and at week 52 (in the NL group) in tumor necrosis factor inhibitor (TNFi)-naive patients. Safety analyses included all patients who received ≥1 dose of study treatment. RESULTS: Overall, 481 patients completed 52 weeks of treatment, including 84.3% (156 of 185) in the LD group, 89.7% (165 of 184) in the NL group, and 86.0% (160 of 186) in the placebo group. The proportion of patients who switched to open-label or standard of care between weeks 20 and 48 was 50.8% in the LD group, 47.3% in the NL group, and 64.0% in the placebo group. Both primary and all secondary end points were met at week 16. The proportion of TNFi-naive patients who met ASAS40 was significantly higher for LD at week 16 (41.5%) and NL at week 52 (39.8%) versus placebo (29.2% at week 16 and 19.9% at week 52; both P < 0.05). No new safety findings were reported. CONCLUSION: Our findings indicate that secukinumab 150 mg provides significant and sustained improvement in signs and symptoms of nonradiographic axial SpA through 52 weeks. Safety was consistent with previous reports.

Secukinumab in non-radiographic axial spondyloarthritis: subgroup analysis based on key baseline characteristics from a randomized phase III study, PREVENT.

BACKGROUND: To investigate the efficacy of secukinumab in patients with active non-radiographic axial spondyloarthritis (nr-axSpA) grouped by disease activity as assessed by C-reactive protein (CRP) levels and/or magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) scores, human leukocyte antigen (HLA)-B27 status, and sex. METHODS: The phase III PREVENT study randomized (1:1:1) 555 patients to receive subcutaneous secukinumab 150 mg with (LD) or without (NL) loading dose or placebo weekly, followed by every 4 weeks starting at week 4. Here, we report the results of a post hoc analysis reporting the efficacy outcomes (pooled secukinumab) to 16 weeks by CRP, MRI, HLA-B27, and sex. RESULTS: Efficacy differences between the secukinumab and the placebo groups were highest in the CRP+, MRI+, HLA-B27+, and male subgroups, particularly for Ankylosing Spondylitis Disease Activity Score-CRP inactive disease and Assessment of SpondyloArthritis international Society (ASAS) partial remission outcomes. ASAS40 response rates in the CRP+/MRI+ subgroup was 52.3% (secukinumab) versus 21.8% (placebo; P < 0.0001) at week 16. ASAS40 response rates (secukinumab versus placebo) were 43.9% versus 32.6% in HLA-B27+, 32.7% versus 16.4% in HLA-B27- subgroups, 51.2% versus 30.8% in male, and 31.7% versus 25.3% in female patients, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Secukinumab improved the signs and symptoms of nr-axSpA across patients grouped by CRP (+/-) and/or MRI (+/-) status, HLA-B27 (+/-) status, and sex. The highest treatment differences between secukinumab and placebo were observed in patients with both elevated CRP and evidence of sacroiliitis on MRI. Treatment difference was minimal between HLA-B27 (+) and (-) subgroups. Male patients had higher relative responses than female patients. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov , NCT02696031 . Registered on 02 March 2016.

Crohn's Disease in which the Patient Developed Aortitis during Treatment with Adalimumab.

A 23-year-old woman developed aortitis during treatment with adalimumab (ADA) for ileocolic Crohn's disease (CD). The patient complained of a high fever, abdominal pain, diarrhea, hematochezia and arthralgia. Although the ADA therapy resulted in immediate symptom improvement, after six weeks, she again complained of a low-grade fever and abdominal pain, whereas the CD-related symptoms did not worsen. Contrast-enhanced computed tomography revealed thoracoabdominal aortitis, and we therefore started treatment with prednisolone, which immediately improved the fever and abdominal pain. We subsequently tapered the dose of prednisolone and resumed the administration of ADA in order to maintain the CD remission. No further episodes of aortitis relapse were noted after restarting ADA, and the CD currently remains in remission. This is the first report of the onset of aortitis during ADA therapy for CD.

Successful treatment of adult-onset Still's disease with tocilizumab monotherapy: two case reports and literature review.

Adult-onset Still's disease (AOSD) is a systemic inflammatory disease of unknown etiology. Recently, it has been reported that quite a few cases of refractory AOSD were successfully treated with tocilizumab (TCZ) and corticosteroids were withdrawn in some of these patients. We report two AOSD patients who were treated successfully with TCZ monotherapy; thus, avoiding corticosteroid treatment. Because both of the patients refused to take corticosteroids, we planned to treat them with 8 mg/kg of TCZ monotherapy at weeks 0, 2, 6 and subsequently every 4 weeks. The efficacy of TCZ was assessed by patients' clinical symptoms such as fever, arthralgia, skin eruptions, and laboratory markers such as serum levels of CRP, ferritin, and IL-6. We also reviewed 14 previous case reports including 30 cases who had been treated with TCZ for AOSD. Our patients responded rapidly and have been maintained in clinical remission without corticosteroid treatment. In the literature review, concomitant corticosteroid treatment described in 13 cases was successfully tapered in 7 and discontinued in 6 cases. TCZ monotherapy can be a candidate for the first-line therapy for some AOSD patients.

The Japanese experience with biologic therapies for rheumatoid arthritis.

The unique genetic, environmental and medical backgrounds of people in Japan might influence the effectiveness and safety of biologic agents in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA). Indeed, clinical trials revealed higher response rates to some biologic agents (including infliximab, etanercept and tocilizumab) in patients with RA in Japan than patients treated with the same agents in Western countries, although response rates to adalimumab were comparable in both populations. The reasons why response rates to some biologic agents differ in Japanese individuals is currently under investigation. Post-marketing surveillance data have been collected for all patients with RA who were treated with biologic agents in Japan to monitor drug safety. These data clearly demonstrated that only ∼5% of these patients experienced adverse drug reactions to biologic agents, which were well tolerated. Pneumonia, tuberculosis, Pneumocystis jirovecii pneumonia and interstitial pneumonitis are considered important severe adverse reactions and risk factors for these adverse effects have been identified. Adverse drug reactions could exaggerate the risks associated with biologic therapy in Japanese patients with RA. Attempts have, therefore, been made to predict clinical response and adverse effects to enable personalized therapy with biologic agents and to optimize the outcomes of these patients.