Improvements in Patient-Reported Outcomes After Treatment With Deucravacitinib in Patients With Psoriatic Arthritis: Results From a Randomized Phase 2 Trial.

OBJECTIVE: Deucravacitinib, a tyrosine kinase 2 inhibitor, was assessed in a phase 2 trial in patients with active psoriatic arthritis (PsA). Here, we report effects of deucravacitinib from the patient perspective. METHODS: This phase 2, double-blind trial (NCT03881059) randomized patients with active PsA 1:1:1 to deucravacitinib 6 mg once daily (QD), 12 mg QD, or placebo, for 16 weeks. Key secondary end points were changes from baseline (CFBs) at week 16 in Health Assessment Questionnaire-Disability Index (HAQ-DI) and 36-item Short-Form Health Survey (SF-36) physical component summary (PCS) scores. Additional patient-reported outcomes (PROs) assessed disease impact, including fatigue, pain, and mental health. The mean CFBs in PROs and percentages of patients reporting improvements with minimum clinically important differences (MCIDs) or scores of greater than normal values were also assessed. RESULTS: This study comprised 203 patients (51.2% female; mean ± SD age, 49.8 ± 13.5 years). At week 16, the adjusted mean difference (95% confidence interval) versus placebo in HAQ-DI and SF-36 PCS CFB was significant for each deucravacitinib group (HAQ-DI 6 mg, -0.26 [-0.42 to -0.10], P = 0.0020; HAQ-DI 12 mg, -0.28 [-0.45 to -0.12], P = 0.0008; SF-36 PCS 6 mg, 3.3 [0.9 to 5.7], P = 0.0062; SF-36 PCS 12 mg, 3.5 [1.1 to 5.9], P = 0.0042). MCID at week 16 were reported for all PROs with either dose of deucravacitinib. Improvements of MCID or to normative values were reported by more patients receiving deucravacitinib than placebo. CONCLUSION: Deucravacitinib groups demonstrate significant and clinically meaningful improvements in PROs versus placebo in patients with active PsA, which warrants further study.

Increasing uptake through collaboration in the development of core outcome sets: Lessons learned at OMERACT 2023.

OBJECTIVE: This manuscript highlights the importance of enhancing the uptake of Core Outcome Sets (COS) by building partnerships with Collaborators and addressing their needs in COS development. METHODS AND SETTING: This session was structured as a simulation, resembling a format akin to a classic television game show. The moderator posed a series of questions to eight different Collaborator groups who briefly described the importance of COS within their areas of interest. Previous studies examining the uptake of individual core outcomes revealed disparities in uptake rates. The Identified barriers to the uptake of COS include the lack of recommendations for validated instruments for each domain, insufficient involvement of patients and key Collaborator groups in COS development, and a lack of awareness regarding the existence of COS. CONCLUSIONS: This analysis underscores the need for COS development approaches that prioritize the inclusion of patients and diverse Collaborator groups at every stage. While current studies on COS uptake are limited, future research should explore the broader implementation of COS across diverse disease categories and delve into the factors that hinder or facilitate their uptake such as, the importance of COS developers extending their work to recommending domains with well validated instruments. Embracing patient leadership and multifaceted engagement is essential for advancing the relevance and impact of COS in clinical research.

The Sjögren's Working Group: The 2023 OMERACT meeting and provisional domain generation.

Sjögren's disease (SjD) is a systemic autoimmune exocrinopathy with key features of dryness, pain, and fatigue. SjD can affect any organ system with a variety of presentations across individuals. This heterogeneity is one of the major barriers for developing effective disease modifying treatments. Defining core disease domains comprising both specific clinical features and incorporating the patient experience is a critical first step to define this complex disease. The OMERACT SjD Working Group held its first international collaborative hybrid meeting in 2023, applying the OMERACT 2.2 filter toward identification of core domains. We accomplished our first goal, a scoping literature review that was presented at the Special Interest Group held in May 2023. Building on the domains identified in the scoping review, we uniquely deployed multidisciplinary experts as part of our collaborative team to generate a provisional domain list that captures SjD heterogeneity.

Patient-Reported Outcome Measures for Health-Related Quality of Life in Patients With Psoriasis: A Systematic Review.

Importance: Multiple patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) for health-related quality of life (HRQL) exist for patients with psoriasis. Evidence for the content validity and other measurement properties of these PROMs is critical to determine which HRQL PROMs could be recommended for use. Objective: To systematically review the validity of HRQL-focused PROMs used in patients with psoriasis. Evidence Review: Using PubMed and Embase, full-text articles published in English or Spanish on development or validation studies for psoriasis-specific, dermatology-specific, or generic HRQL PROMs were included. Development studies included original development studies, even if not studied in psoriasis patients per Consensus-Based Standards for the Selection of Health Measurement Instruments (COSMIN) recommendations. If a study included multiple diagnoses, more than 50% of patients had to have psoriasis or psoriasis-specific subgroup analyses available. Data extraction and analysis followed the COSMIN guidelines. Two independent reviewers extracted and analyzed the data, including PROM characteristics, quality of measurement properties (structural validity, internal consistency, cross-cultural validity, reliability, measurement error, criterion validity, construct validity, and responsiveness), and level of evidence. PROMs were classified into 3 levels of recommendations: (1) PROM recommended for use; (2) PROM requires further validation; and (3) PROM not recommended for use. Findings: Overall, 97 articles were identified for extraction. This included 19 psoriasis-specific, 8 skin-specific, and 6 generic PROMs. According to COSMIN standards, most measures identified received a B recommendation for use, indicating their potential but requiring further validation. Only the Rasch reduced version of the Impact of Psoriasis Questionnaire (IPSO-11 Rasch) received an A recommendation for use given that it had sufficient content validity, structural validity, and internal consistency. Conclusions and Relevance: This study identified a significant lack of information concerning the quality of HRQL measures in psoriasis. This gap in knowledge can be attributed to the fact that traditional measures were developed using validation criteria that differ from the current standards in use. Consequently, additional validation studies in accordance with contemporary standards will be useful in aiding researchers and clinicians in determining the most suitable measure for assessing HRQL in patients with psoriasis.

OMERACT Core outcome measurement set for shared decision making in rheumatic and musculoskeletal conditions: a scoping review to identify candidate instruments.

OBJECTIVES: Shared decision making (SDM) is a central tenet in rheumatic and musculoskeletal care. The lack of standardization regarding SDM instruments and outcomes in clinical trials threatens the comparative effectiveness of interventions. The Outcome Measures in Rheumatology (OMERACT) SDM Working Group is developing a Core Outcome Set for trials of SDM interventions in rheumatology and musculoskeletal health. The working group reached consensus on a Core Outcome Domain Set in 2020. The next step is to develop a Core Outcome Measurement Set through the OMERACT Filter 2.2. METHODS: We conducted a scoping review (PRISMA-ScR) to identify candidate instruments for the OMERACT Filter 2.2 We systematically reviewed five databases (Ovid MEDLINE®, Embase, Cochrane Library, CINAHL and Web of Science). An information specialist designed search strategies to identify all measurement instruments used in SDM studies in adults or children living with rheumatic or musculoskeletal diseases or their important others. Paired reviewers independently screened titles, abstracts, and full text articles. We extracted characteristics of all candidate instruments (e.g., measured construct, measurement properties). We classified candidate instruments and summarized evidence gaps with an adapted version of the Summary of Measurement Properties (SOMP) table. RESULTS: We found 14,464 citations, read 239 full text articles, and included 99 eligible studies. We identified 220 potential candidate instruments. The five most used measurement instruments were the Decisional Conflict Scale (traditional and low literacy versions) (n=38), the Hip/Knee-Decision Quality Instrument (n=20), the Decision Regret Scale (n=9), the Preparation for Decision Making Scale (n=8), and the CollaboRATE (n=8). Only 44 candidate instruments (20%) had any measurement properties reported by the included studies. Of these instruments, only 57% matched with at least one of the 7-criteria adapted SOMP table. CONCLUSION: We identified 220 candidate instruments used in the SDM literature amongst people with rheumatic and musculoskeletal diseases. Our classification of instruments showed evidence gaps and inconsistent reporting of measurement properties. The next steps for the OMERACT SDM Working Group are to match candidate instruments with Core Domains, assess feasibility and review validation studies of measurement instruments in rheumatic diseases or other conditions. Development and validation of new instruments may be required for some Core Domains.

OMERACT 2023 Systemic Lupus Erythematosus Special Interest Group: Winnowing and Binning Preliminary Candidate Domains for the Core Outcome Set.

BACKGROUND: The Outcome Measures in Rheumatology (OMERACT) Systemic Lupus Erythematosus (SLE) Working Group held a Special Interest Group (SIG) at the OMERACT 2023 conference in Colorado Springs where SLE collaborators reviewed domain sub-themes generated through qualitative research and literature review. OBJECTIVE: The objective of the SIG and the subsequent meetings of the SLE Working Group was to begin the winnowing and binning of candidate domain sub-themes into a preliminary list of candidate domains that will proceed to the consensus Delphi exercise for the SLE COS. METHODS: Four breakout groups at the SLE SIG in Colorado Springs winnowed and binned 132 domain sub-themes into candidate domains, which was continued with a series of virtual meetings by an advisory group of SLE patient research partners (PRPs), members of the OMERACT SLE Working Group Steering Committee, and other collaborators. RESULTS: The 132 domain sub-themes were reduced to a preliminary list of 20 candidate domains based on their clinical and research relevance for clinical trials and research studies. CONCLUSION: A meaningful and substantial winnowing and binning of candidate domains for the SLE COS was achieved resulting in a preliminary list of 20 candidate domains.

Decision Impact Analysis to Measure the Influence of Molecular Signature Response Classifier Testing on Treatment Selection in Rheumatoid Arthritis.

INTRODUCTION: Clinical guidelines offer little guidance for treatment selection following inadequate response to conventional synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drug (csDMARD) in rheumatoid arthritis (RA). A molecular signature response classifier (MSRC) was validated to predict tumor necrosis factor inhibitor (TNFi) inadequate response. The decision impact of MSRC results on biologic and targeted synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drug (b/tsDMARD) selection was evaluated. METHODS: This is an analysis of AIMS, a longitudinal, prospective database of patients with RA tested using the MSRC. This study assessed selection of b/tsDMARDs class after MSRC testing by surveying physicians, the rate of b/tsDMARD prescriptions aligning with MSRC results, and the percentage of physicians utilizing MSRC results for decision-making. RESULTS: Of 1018 participants, 70.7% (720/1018) had treatment selected after receiving MSRC results. In this MSRC-informed cohort, 75.6% (544/720) of patients received a b/tsDMARD aligned with MSRC results, and 84.6% (609/720) of providers reported using MSRC results to guide treatment selection. The most prevalent reason reported (8.2%, 59/720) for not aligning treatment selection with MSRC results from the total cohort was health insurance coverage issues. CONCLUSION: This study showed that rheumatologists reported using the MSRC test to guide b/tsDMARD selection for patients with RA. In most cases, MSRC test results appeared to influence clinical decision-making according to physician self-report. Wider adoption of precision medicine tools like the MSRC could support rheumatologists and patients in working together to achieve optimal outcomes for RA.

The COMPARE head-to-head, randomized controlled trial of SEL-212 (pegadricase plus rapamycin-containing nanoparticle, ImmTOR™) versus pegloticase for refractory gout.

OBJECTIVES: Serum urate (SU) lowering with PEGylated uricases in gout can reduce flares and tophi. However, treatment-emergent anti-drug antibodies adversely affect safety and efficacy and the currently approved PEGylated uricase pegloticase requires twice-monthly infusions. Investigational SEL-212 therapy aims to promote uricase-specific tolerance via monthly sequential infusions of a proprietary rapamycin-containing nanoparticle (ImmTOR) and pegadricase. METHODS: COMPARE was a randomized, phase 2, open-label trial of SEL-212 vs pegloticase in adults with refractory gout. SEL-212 [ImmTOR (0.15 mg/kg) and pegadricase (0.2 mg/kg)] was infused monthly or pegloticase (8 mg) twice monthly for 6 months. The primary endpoint was the proportion of participants with SU <6 mg/dl for ≥80% of the time during 3 and 6 months. Secondary outcomes were mean SU, gout flares, number of tender and/or swollen joints and safety. RESULTS: During months 3 and 6 combined, numerically more participants achieved and maintained a SU <6 mg/dl for ≥80% of the time with SEL-212 vs pegloticase (53.0% vs 46.0%, P = 0.181). The percentage reductions in SU levels were statistically greater during months 3 and 6 with SEL-212 vs pegloticase (-73.79% and -47.96%, P = 0.0161). Reductions in gout flare incidence and number of tender and/or swollen joints were comparable between treatments. There were numerical differences between the most common treatment-related adverse events of interest with SEL-212 and pegloticase: gout flares (60.2% vs 50.6%), infections (25.3% vs 18.4%) and infusion-related reactions (15.7% vs 11.5%), respectively. Stomatitis (and related terms) was experienced by eight participants (9.6%) with SEL-212 and none with pegloticase. Stomatitis, a known event for rapamycin, was associated with ImmTOR only. CONCLUSIONS: SEL-212 efficacy and tolerability were comparable to pegloticase in refractory gout. This was associated with a substantial reduction in treatment burden with SEL-212 due to decreased infusion frequency vs pegloticase. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT03905512.

Patient outcomes in longitudinal observational studies (POLOS) of rheumatoid arthritis: Determining the OMERACT core domain set.

OBJECTIVE: To define and select rheumatoid arthritis (RA)-specific core domain set for Longitudinal Observational Studies (LOS) within the Outcome Measures in Rheumatology (OMERACT) framework. METHODS: A three-round online Delphi exercise, including patient research partners (PRPs) and other community partners in healthcare, was conducted. Domains scored 7-9 (i.e., critically important to include) by ≥ 70 % of participants in both groups were included. Items were consolidated in a subsequent dedicated meeting. RESULTS: Nineteen domains scored ≥ 70 % consensus in both groups. The focus group refined these into a list of twelve domains. CONCLUSION: The achieved consensus will inform the next steps of developing the core domain set for LOS in RA.

Exploring the complexities of pain phenotypes: OMERACT 2023 chronic pain working group workshop.

OBJECTIVE: To educate and discuss pain mechanisms (nociceptive, neuropathic, nociplastic) illuminating its possible impact when measuring different outcomes, which may modify, confound and potentially bias the outcome measures applied across various aspects of Rheumatic Musculoskeletal Diseases (RMDs) clinical trials. METHODS: In the plenary presentations, PM lectured on different pain mechanisms and impact on disease activity assessment. Data from two data sets of RMDs patients, which assessed the prevalence and impact of nociplastic pain were presented and reviewed. Audience breakout group sessions and polling were conducted. RESULTS: Mixed pain etiologies may differentially influence disease activity assessment and therapeutic decision-making. Polling demonstrated a consensus on the need to assess different types of pain as a phenotype, as it constitutes an important contextual factor (a variable that is not an outcome of the trial, but needs to be recognized [and measured] to understand the study results), and to standardize across RMDs. CONCLUSION: There is need for a standardized pain measure that can differentiate underlying pain mechanisms.

International Dermatology Outcome Measures (IDEOM) - Report from the 2022 Annual Meeting.

BACKGROUND: The International Dermatology Outcome Measures (IDEOM) is a non-profit organization dedicated to the advancement of evidence-based, consensus-driven outcome measures in dermatological diseases. Researchers and stakeholders from various backgrounds collaborate to develop these objective benchmark metrics to further advance treatment and management of dermatological conditions. SUMMARY: The 2022 IDEOM Annual Meeting was held on June 17-18, 2022. Leaders and stakeholders from the hidradenitis suppurativa, acne, vitiligo, actinic keratosis, alopecia areata, itch, cutaneous lymphoma, and psoriatic disease workgroups discussed the progress of their respective outcome-measures research. This report summarizes each workgroup's updates from 2022 and their next steps as established during the 2022 IDEOM Annual Meeting. J Drugs Dermatol. 2023;22(12):1153-1159 doi:10.36849/JDD.7615.

More Evidence on the Validity of the Measurement Properties of PROMIS Computerized Adaptive Tests in Systemic Lupus Erythematosus.

Systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) significantly affects different aspects of patients' health-related quality of life (HRQOL).1 In 1998, Outcome Measures in Rheumatology (OMERACT) proposed the first Core Domain Set (CDS) for SLE, which included disease activity, organ damage, adverse events, HRQOL, and economic costs.2.

Stakeholder endorsement advancing the implementation of a patient-reported domain for harms in rheumatology clinical trials: Outcome of the OMERACT Safety Working Group.

OBJECTIVES: To develop an understanding of the concept of safety/harms experienced by patients involved in clinical trials for their rheumatic and musculoskeletal diseases (RMDs) and to seek input from the OMERACT community before moving forward to developing or selecting an outcome measurement instrument. METHODS: OMERACT 2023 presented and discussed interview results from 34 patients indicating that up to 171 items might be important for patients' harm-reporting. RESULTS: Domain was defined in detail and supported by qualitative work. Participants in the Special-Interest-Group endorsed (96 %) that enough qualitative data are available to start Delphi survey(s). CONCLUSION: We present a definition of safety/harms that represents the patient voice (i.e., patients' perception of safety) evaluating the symptomatic treatment-related adverse events for people with RMDs enrolled in clinical trials.

Anti-GM-CSF otilimab versus tofacitinib or placebo in patients with active rheumatoid arthritis and an inadequate response to conventional or biologic DMARDs: two phase 3 randomised trials (contRAst 1 and contRAst 2).

OBJECTIVES: To investigate the efficacy and safety of otilimab, an antigranulocyte-macrophage colony-stimulating factor antibody, in patients with active rheumatoid arthritis. METHODS: Two phase 3, double-blind randomised controlled trials including patients with inadequate responses to methotrexate (contRAst 1) or conventional synthetic/biologic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (cs/bDMARDs; contRAst 2). Patients received background csDMARDs. Through a testing hierarchy, subcutaneous otilimab (90/150 mg once weekly) was compared with placebo for week 12 endpoints (after which, patients receiving placebo switched to active interventions) or oral tofacitinib (5 mg two times per day) for week 24 endpoints. PRIMARY ENDPOINT: proportion of patients achieving an American College of Rheumatology response ≥20% (ACR20) at week 12. RESULTS: The intention-to-treat populations comprised 1537 (contRAst 1) and 1625 (contRAst 2) patients. PRIMARY ENDPOINT: proportions of ACR20 responders were statistically significantly greater with otilimab 90 mg and 150 mg vs placebo in contRAst 1 (54.7% (p=0.0023) and 50.9% (p=0.0362) vs 41.7%) and contRAst 2 (54.9% (p<0.0001) and 54.5% (p<0.0001) vs 32.5%). Secondary endpoints: in both trials, compared with placebo, otilimab increased the proportion of Clinical Disease Activity Index (CDAI) low disease activity (LDA) responders (not significant for otilimab 150 mg in contRAst 1), and reduced Health Assessment Questionnaire-Disability Index (HAQ-DI) scores. Benefits with tofacitinib were consistently greater than with otilimab across multiple endpoints. Safety outcomes were similar across treatment groups. CONCLUSIONS: Although otilimab demonstrated superiority to placebo in ACR20, CDAI LDA and HAQ-DI, improved symptoms, and had an acceptable safety profile, it was inferior to tofacitinib. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBERS: NCT03980483, NCT03970837.

Anti-GM-CSF otilimab versus sarilumab or placebo in patients with rheumatoid arthritis and inadequate response to targeted therapies: a phase III randomised trial (contRAst 3).

OBJECTIVES: To investigate the efficacy and safety of otilimab, an anti-granulocyte-macrophage colony-stimulating factor antibody, in patients with active rheumatoid arthritis and an inadequate response to conventional synthetic (cs) and biologic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs) and/or Janus kinase inhibitors. METHODS: ContRAst 3 was a 24-week, phase III, multicentre, randomised controlled trial. Patients received subcutaneous otilimab (90/150 mg once weekly), subcutaneous sarilumab (200 mg every 2 weeks) or placebo for 12 weeks, in addition to csDMARDs. Patients receiving placebo were switched to active interventions at week 12 and treatment continued to week 24. The primary end point was the proportion of patients achieving an American College of Rheumatology ≥20% response (ACR20) at week 12. RESULTS: Overall, 549 patients received treatment. At week 12, there was no significant difference in the proportion of ACR20 responders with otilimab 90 mg and 150 mg versus placebo (45% (p=0.2868) and 51% (p=0.0596) vs 38%, respectively). There were no significant differences in Clinical Disease Activity Index, Health Assessment Questionnaire-Disability Index, pain Visual Analogue Scale or Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy-Fatigue scores with otilimab versus placebo at week 12. Sarilumab demonstrated superiority to otilimab in ACR20 response and secondary end points. The incidence of adverse or serious adverse events was similar across treatment groups. CONCLUSIONS: Otilimab demonstrated an acceptable safety profile but failed to achieve the primary end point of ACR20 and improve secondary end points versus placebo or demonstrate non-inferiority to sarilumab in this patient population. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT04134728.

Report of the Skin Research Workgroups From the IDEOM Breakout at the GRAPPA 2022 Annual Meeting.

The International Dermatology Outcome Measures (IDEOM) organization presented an update on its progress related to patient-centered outcome measures for psoriasis (PsO) and psoriatic arthritis (PsA) at the 2022 annual meeting of the Group for Research and Assessment of Psoriasis and Psoriatic Arthritis (GRAPPA). The Musculoskeletal (MSK) Symptoms working group presented an update on the development of the IDEOM Musculoskeletal Questionnaire (IDEOM MSK-Q). The IDEOM MSK-Q is a patient-reported outcome measure intended to capture MSK symptoms and describe their intensity and impact on health-related quality of life in patients with psoriatic disease. IDEOM also presented the progress of the integration of the Psoriasis Epidemiology Screening Tool (PEST) and Psoriatic Arthritis Impact of Disease (PsAID) questionnaires into the Epic electronic health record system. This will allow for automated PsA screening and symptom measurement in the hopes of improving disease detection and treat-to-target strategies. The Treatment Satisfaction working group discussed the development of the DermSat-7, a 7-item treatment satisfaction questionnaire specific for dermatological conditions. The DermSat-7 is currently being validated in a multicenter study of patients with PsO.

Initiating Evaluation of Composite Outcome Measures for Psoriatic Arthritis: 2022 Updates From the GRAPPA-OMERACT Working Group.

The Group for Research and Assessment of Psoriasis and Psoriatic Arthritis (GRAPPA)-Outcome Measures in Rheumatology (OMERACT) Psoriatic Arthritis (PsA) working group-comprising rheumatologists, dermatologists, methodologists, and patient research partners-provided updates at the GRAPPA 2022 annual meeting on its work to evaluate composite outcome measures for PsA. Ten composite outcome measures were considered. Initial steps were to define the population, the purpose of use, and the proposed pros and cons of the 10 candidate composite instruments for PsA. Preliminary Delphi exercises within the working group and GRAPPA stakeholders confirmed high priority for evaluating minimal disease activity (MDA); moderate priority for Disease Activity in PsA (DAPSA), American College of Rheumatology (ACR) response criteria, Psoriatic Arthritis Disease Activity Score (PASDAS), Composite Psoriatic Disease Activity Index (CPDAI), 3 visual analog scale (VAS), and 4VAS; and low priority for Disease Activity Score in 28 joints (DAS28), Psoriatic Arthritis Responder Criteria (PsARC), and Routine Assessment of Patient Index Data 3 (RAPID3). Further appraisal of candidate composite instruments is ongoing.

Sex differences in the efficacy, safety and persistence of patients with psoriatic arthritis treated with tofacitinib: a post-hoc analysis of phase 3 trials and long-term extension.

BACKGROUND: Evaluate the impact of sex on tofacitinib efficacy, safety and persistence (time to discontinuation) in patients with psoriatic arthritis (PsA). METHODS: Data were pooled from two phase 3 randomised controlled trials. Patients were randomised to tofacitinib 5 mg or 10 mg two times per day, adalimumab 40 mg every 2 weeks or placebo. Efficacy outcomes to month 12 included American College of Rheumatology (ACR)20/50/70, minimal disease activity (MDA), Psoriasis Area Severity Index (PASI)75, change from baseline (∆) in Health Assessment Questionnaire-Disability Index (HAQ-DI) and ∆Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy-Fatigue (FACIT-F). Safety was assessed to month 12 and persistence was assessed to month 42 of a long-term extension study. RESULTS: Overall, 816 patients were included (54.3% females). At baseline, higher tender joint counts, enthesitis scores and worse HAQ-DI and FACIT-F were reported in females versus males; presence of dactylitis and PASI were greater in males versus females. At month 3, tofacitinib efficacy generally exceeded placebo in both sexes. Overall, similar ACR20/50/70, PASI75, ∆HAQ-DI and ∆FACIT-F were observed for tofacitinib between sexes; females were less likely to achieve MDA. Similar proportions of males/females receiving tofacitinib (both doses) experienced treatment-emergent adverse events (AEs). Serious AEs occurred in 3.4%/6.6% and 4.0%/5.9% males/females with tofacitinib 5 mg and 10 mg two times per day. Persistence was generally similar between sexes. CONCLUSION: Tofacitinib efficacy exceeded placebo in both sexes and was comparable between sexes. Consistent with previous studies of PsA treatments, females were less likely to achieve MDA, likely due to baseline differences. Safety and time to discontinuation were generally similar between sexes. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT01877668; NCT01882439; NCT01976364.