Cardiovascular Events, Malignancies, and Efficacy Outcomes in Latin American Patients With Rheumatoid Arthritis Receiving Tofacitinib or Tumor Necrosis Factor Inhibitors: A Post Hoc Analysis of the ORAL Surveillance Study.

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVE: To assess safety/efficacy of tofacitinib and tumor necrosis factor inhibitors (TNFi) in patients from Latin America (LATAM) in ORAL Surveillance. METHODS: In ORAL Surveillance, 4362 patients with rheumatoid arthritis aged ≥50 years with ≥1 additional cardiovascular risk factor received tofacitinib 5 or 10 mg twice daily or TNFi. This post hoc analysis stratified patients by geographical location (LATAM, n = 1202; non-LATAM, n = 3160). Incidence rates (IRs; patients with first event/100 patient-years) and hazard ratios for adverse events of special interest were reported. Efficacy outcomes included Clinical Disease Activity Index and American College of Rheumatology 20/50/70 responses. RESULTS: Risk factors associated with cardiovascular disease and malignancies were less prevalent in the LATAM cohort compared with the non-LATAM cohort. IRs for patients receiving tofacitinib (combined doses) versus TNFi were 0.54 versus 0.28 (LATAM) and 1.14 versus 0.92 (non-LATAM) for major adverse cardiovascular events; 0.58 versus 0.27 (LATAM) and 1.33 versus 0.95 (non-LATAM) for malignancies excluding nonmelanoma skin cancer; and 0.69 versus 0.35 (LATAM) and 0.63 versus 0.33 (non-LATAM) for all-cause death. IRs for nonmelanoma skin cancer and venous thromboembolism were also numerically higher with tofacitinib versus TNFi and in the non-LATAM cohort versus LATAM. Efficacy was similar across treatment groups within each cohort. CONCLUSIONS: Adverse events of special interest were generally less frequent in LATAM versus non-LATAM patients, reflecting differences in baseline characteristics, and higher with tofacitinib versus TNFi in both cohorts, consistent with the overall findings of ORAL Surveillance. Our findings emphasize the importance of assessing individual risk factors to guide benefit/risk assessment and treatment decisions. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT02092467.

Opportunities and challenges of lupus care in Latin America, the Middle East, and Asia-Pacific: A call to action.

Lupus remains a disease with a low prioritisation in the national agendas of many countries in Latin America, the Middle East, and Asia-Pacific, where there is a dearth of rheumatologists and limited access to new or even standard lupus treatments. There is thus an important need for education, advocacy, and outreach to prioritise lupus in these regions to ensure that patients receive the care they need. This article reviews some of the specific challenges facing the care and management of people with lupus in these regions and suggests strategies for improving patient outcomes. Specifically, we review and discuss (with a focus on the aforementioned regions) the epidemiology of lupus; economic costs, disease burden, and effects on quality of life; barriers to care related to disease assessment; barriers to effective treatment, including limitations of standard treatments, high glucocorticoid use, inadequate access to new treatments, and low adherence to medications; and strategies to improve lupus management and patient outcomes. We hope that this represents a call to action to come together and act now for the lupus community, policymakers, health authorities, and healthcare professionals to improve lupus management and patient outcomes in Latin America, the Middle East, and Asia-Pacific.

Safety profile of upadacitinib in patients at risk of cardiovascular disease: integrated post hoc analysis of the SELECT phase III rheumatoid arthritis clinical programme.

OBJECTIVE: Increased risk of serious adverse events (AEs) was reported for tofacitinib relative to tumour necrosis factor inhibitor therapy in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) aged ≥50 years enriched for cardiovascular (CV) risk (ORAL Surveillance). We assessed post hoc the potential risk of upadacitinib in a similar RA population. METHODS: Pooled safety data from six phase III trials were evaluated post hoc for AEs in patients receiving upadacitinib 15 mg once a day (with or without conventional synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs), adalimumab 40 mg every other week with concomitant methotrexate (MTX), or MTX monotherapy in the overall trial population and in a subset of patients with higher CV risk (aged ≥50 years, ≥1 CV risk factor). Higher-risk patients from a head-to-head study of upadacitinib 15 mg versus adalimumab (SELECT-COMPARE) were assessed in parallel. Exposure-adjusted incidence rates for treatment-emergent AEs were summarised based on exposure to upadacitinib or comparators. RESULTS: A total of 3209 patients received upadacitinib 15 mg, 579 received adalimumab and 314 received MTX monotherapy; ~54% of the patients were included in the overall and SELECT-COMPARE higher-risk populations. Major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE), malignancy (excluding non-melanoma skin cancer (NMSC)) and venous thromboembolism (VTE) were more frequent in the higher-risk cohorts versus the overall population but were generally similar across treatment groups. Rates of serious infections in higher-risk populations and herpes zoster (HZ) and NMSC in all populations were higher with upadacitinib 15 mg than comparators. CONCLUSIONS: An increased risk of MACE, malignancy (excluding NMSC) and VTE was observed in higher-risk populations with RA, yet risk was comparable between upadacitinib-treated and adalimumab-treated patients. Higher rates of NMSC and HZ were observed with upadacitinib versus comparators across all populations, and increased rates of serious infections were detected in upadacitinib-treated patients at higher CV risk. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBERS: NCT02706873, NCT02675426, NCT02629159, NCT02706951, NCT02706847 and NCT03086343.

EULAR recommendations for the management of rheumatoid arthritis with synthetic and biological disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs: 2022 update.

OBJECTIVES: To provide an update of the EULAR rheumatoid arthritis (RA) management recommendations addressing the most recent developments in the field. METHODS: An international task force was formed and solicited three systematic literature research activities on safety and efficacy of disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs) and glucocorticoids (GCs). The new evidence was discussed in light of the last update from 2019. A predefined voting process was applied to each overarching principle and recommendation. Levels of evidence and strengths of recommendation were assigned to and participants finally voted on the level of agreement with each item. RESULTS: The task force agreed on 5 overarching principles and 11 recommendations concerning use of conventional synthetic (cs) DMARDs (methotrexate (MTX), leflunomide, sulfasalazine); GCs; biological (b) DMARDs (tumour necrosis factor inhibitors (adalimumab, certolizumab pegol, etanercept, golimumab, infliximab including biosimilars), abatacept, rituximab, tocilizumab, sarilumab and targeted synthetic (ts) DMARDs, namely the Janus kinase inhibitors tofacitinib, baricitinib, filgotinib, upadacitinib. Guidance on monotherapy, combination therapy, treatment strategies (treat-to-target) and tapering in sustained clinical remission is provided. Safety aspects, including risk of major cardiovascular events (MACEs) and malignancies, costs and sequencing of b/tsDMARDs were all considered. Initially, MTX plus GCs is recommended and on insufficient response to this therapy within 3-6 months, treatment should be based on stratification according to risk factors; With poor prognostic factors (presence of autoantibodies, high disease activity, early erosions or failure of two csDMARDs), any bDMARD should be added to the csDMARD; after careful consideration of risks of MACEs, malignancies and/or thromboembolic events tsDMARDs may also be considered in this phase. If the first bDMARD (or tsDMARD) fails, any other bDMARD (from another or the same class) or tsDMARD (considering risks) is recommended. With sustained remission, DMARDs may be tapered but should not be stopped. Levels of evidence and levels of agreement were high for most recommendations. CONCLUSIONS: These updated EULAR recommendations provide consensus on RA management including safety, effectiveness and cost.

Consensus statement on blocking interleukin-6 receptor and interleukin-6 in inflammatory conditions: an update.

BACKGROUND: Targeting interleukin (IL)-6 has become a major therapeutic strategy in the treatment of immune-mediated inflammatory disease. Interference with the IL-6 pathway can be directed at the specific receptor using anti-IL-6Rα antibodies or by directly inhibiting the IL-6 cytokine. This paper is an update of a previous consensus document, based on most recent evidence and expert opinion, that aims to inform on the medical use of interfering with the IL-6 pathway. METHODS: A systematic literature research was performed that focused on IL-6-pathway inhibitors in inflammatory diseases. Evidence was put in context by a large group of international experts and patients in a subsequent consensus process. All were involved in formulating the consensus statements, and in the preparation of this document. RESULTS: The consensus process covered relevant aspects of dosing and populations for different indications of IL-6 pathway inhibitors that are approved across the world, including rheumatoid arthritis, polyarticular-course and systemic juvenile idiopathic arthritis, giant cell arteritis, Takayasu arteritis, adult-onset Still's disease, Castleman's disease, chimeric antigen receptor-T-cell-induced cytokine release syndrome, neuromyelitis optica spectrum disorder and severe COVID-19. Also addressed were other clinical aspects of the use of IL-6 pathway inhibitors, including pretreatment screening, safety, contraindications and monitoring. CONCLUSIONS: The document provides a comprehensive consensus on the use of IL-6 inhibition to treat inflammatory disorders to inform healthcare professionals (including researchers), patients, administrators and payers.

Impact of initial therapy with upadacitinib or adalimumab on achievement of 48-week treatment goals in patients with rheumatoid arthritis: post hoc analysis of SELECT-COMPARE.

OBJECTIVES: Evaluate the importance of treatment sequencing in SELECT-COMPARE, assessing potential differences between starting upadacitinib or adalimumab therapy following inadequate MTX response. METHODS: Patients from SELECT-COMPARE were randomized to upadacitinib 15 mg once daily, placebo or adalimumab 40 mg. Per protocol, patients with <20% improvement in tender or swollen joint counts (weeks 14, 18, 22) or failure to achieve Clinical Disease Activity Index (CDAI) low disease activity (LDA) at week 26 were blindly switched from upadacitinib to adalimumab or vice versa. Treatment outcomes, including clinical remission/LDA, physical function, pain and a novel combined endpoint for deep response, were evaluated through 48 weeks and corresponding time-averaged response rates determined. Data were analysed by initial randomized group regardless of any subsequent switch in therapy. RESULTS: This post hoc analysis included 651 patients initially randomized to upadacitinib (of whom 252 switched to adalimumab) and 327 patients initially randomized to adalimumab (of whom 159 switched to upadacitinib). At week 48, patients randomized to either therapy demonstrated similar achievement of most treatment endpoints. Greater improvements in the total time spent in a lower disease state were observed for initial upadacitinib vs initial adalimumab therapy across most clinical and patient-reported outcomes through 48 weeks, and the median time to DAS28(CRP) <2.6/≤3.2 occurred 6-8 weeks earlier among those randomized to upadacitinib. CONCLUSION: Following a modified treat-to-target strategy, rates of CDAI remission/LDA and DAS28(CRP) <2.6/≤3.2 at 48 weeks were similar, regardless of starting therapy. However, patients initially receiving upadacitinib reached treatment targets more quickly and spent more time in clinical targets over the initial 48 weeks of treatment. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov, https://clinicaltrials.gov, NCT02629159.

Incidence and risk factors for herpes zoster in patients with rheumatoid arthritis receiving upadacitinib: a pooled analysis of six phase III clinical trials.

BACKGROUND: Upadacitinib (UPA) is an oral Janus kinase (JAK) inhibitor approved for the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis (RA). JAK inhibitors have been associated with an increased risk of herpes zoster (HZ) in patients with RA. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the incidence and risk factors for HZ in UPA-treated patients with RA from the UPA phase III clinical trial programme. METHODS: Exposure-adjusted incidence/event rates for HZ were determined in patients receiving UPA (monotherapy or combination therapy) in six randomised phase III trials (data cut-off on 30 June 2020). HZ incidence and event rates were also determined in patients receiving methotrexate (MTX) monotherapy or adalimumab (ADA) + MTX. Multivariable Cox regression analysis was used to identify HZ risk factors in UPA-treated patients. RESULTS: A total of 5306 patients were included in this analysis. The incidence rate of HZ/100 patient-years (95% CI) was 0.8 (0.3 to 1.9), 1.1 (0.5 to 1.9), 3.0 (2.6 to 3.5) and 5.3 (4.5 to 6.2), in the MTX monotherapy, ADA + MTX, UPA 15 mg and UPA 30 mg groups, respectively. The majority of HZ cases with UPA (71%) involved a single dermatome. Prior history of HZ and Asian region were HZ risk factors in UPA-treated patients. CONCLUSION: In the UPA phase III RA clinical programme, HZ incidence and event rates were higher with UPA versus ADA + MTX or MTX monotherapy, and higher with the 30 mg versus 15 mg dose. Patients from Asia and those with a history of HZ may be at increased risk of HZ while receiving UPA.

Phase II randomised trial of type I interferon inhibitor anifrolumab in patients with active lupus nephritis.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the efficacy and safety of the type I interferon receptor antibody, anifrolumab, in patients with active, biopsy-proven, Class III/IV lupus nephritis. METHODS: This phase II double-blinded study randomised 147 patients (1:1:1) to receive monthly intravenous anifrolumab basic regimen (BR, 300 mg), intensified regimen (IR, 900 mg ×3, 300 mg thereafter) or placebo, alongside standard therapy (oral glucocorticoids, mycophenolate mofetil). The primary endpoint was change in baseline 24-hour urine protein-creatinine ratio (UPCR) at week (W) 52 for combined anifrolumab versus placebo groups. The secondary endpoint was complete renal response (CRR) at W52. Exploratory endpoints included more stringent CRR definitions and sustained glucocorticoid reductions (≤7.5 mg/day, W24-52). Safety was analysed descriptively. RESULTS: Patients received anifrolumab BR (n=45), IR (n=51), or placebo (n=49). At W52, 24-hour UPCR improved by 69% and 70% for combined anifrolumab and placebo groups, respectively (geometric mean ratio=1.03; 95% CI 0.62 to 1.71; p=0.905). Serum concentrations were higher with anifrolumab IR versus anifrolumab BR, which provided suboptimal exposure. Numerically more patients treated with anifrolumab IR vs placebo attained CRR (45.5% vs 31.1%), CRR with UPCR ≤0.5 mg/mg (40.9% vs 26.7%), CRR with inactive urinary sediment (40.9% vs 13.3%) and sustained glucocorticoid reductions (55.6% vs 33.3%). Incidence of herpes zoster was higher with combined anifrolumab vs placebo (16.7% vs 8.2%). Incidence of serious adverse events was similar across groups. CONCLUSION: Although the primary endpoint was not met, anifrolumab IR was associated with numerical improvements over placebo across endpoints, including CRR, in patients with active lupus nephritis. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT02547922.

Inhibition of structural joint damage progression with upadacitinib in rheumatoid arthritis: 1-year outcomes from the SELECT phase 3 program.

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the inhibition of progression of structural joint damage through week 48 in patients with moderately to severely active RA receiving upadacitinib as monotherapy or in combination with MTX. METHODS: Radiographic progression was assessed in two phase 3 randomized controlled trials. MTX-naïve patients were randomized to upadacitinib 15 or 30 mg once daily or MTX monotherapy (SELECT-EARLY, n = 945), while MTX inadequate responders (IRs) were randomized to upadacitinib 15 mg once daily or adalimumab 40 mg every other week or placebo added to background MTX (SELECT-COMPARE, n = 1629). The mean changes from baseline in modified total Sharp score (mTSS), joint space narrowing and erosion scores were determined. Data were analysed both by linear extrapolation for missing data imputation and treatment switching and as observed. RESULTS: In patients naïve or with limited exposure to MTX (SELECT-EARLY), mean changes from baseline to week 48 in mTSS were 0.03 for upadacitinib 15 mg, 0.14 for upadacitinib 30 mg and 1.00 for MTX based on linear extrapolation (P < 0.001 for both upadacitinib doses vs MTX). Among patients with an inadequate response to MTX (SELECT-COMPARE), the mean change from baseline in mTSS was significantly reduced in the upadacitinib 15 mg plus MTX group vs placebo plus MTX (0.28 vs 1.73; P < 0.001). The mean change from baseline in the adalimumab plus MTX group was 0.39. CONCLUSION: Upadacitinib monotherapy or in combination with background MTX was effective in inhibiting the progression of structural joint damage through week 48 in MTX-naïve and MTX-IR patients with RA. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov (https://clinicaltrials.gov), NCT02706873 and NCT02629159.

Phase III trials of JAK1 selective inhibitors in rheumatoid arthritis.

Upadacitinib and filgotinib, two JAK1 selective drugs have undergone extensive phase III clinical trials in RA and have demonstrated rapid improvements in disease activity, function and patient reported outcomes. Six global phase III randomized controlled clinical trials (SELECT phase III program) evaluated the efficacy and safety of upadacitinib and four clinical phase III trials (the FINCH program) evaluated the efficacy and safety of filgotinib. This article is a critical review of all these studies with focus on the therapeutic efficacy in RA. The aim is to display the data that could allow the approval of these new drugs for the treatment of RA (upadacitinib has been already approved in most of the markets around the world).

Efficacy, Safety, and Immunogenicity of Biosimilar Etanercept (Enerceptan) Versus Its Original Form in Combination With Methotrexate in Patients With Rheumatoid Arthritis: A Randomized, Multicenter, Evaluator-Blinded, Noninferiority Study.

BACKGROUND: Enerceptan (EtaBS) has been developed as a proposed biosimilar of etanercept. METHODS: This randomized, multicenter, evaluator-blinded, noninferiority study conducted in Argentina included adults with active, moderate, and severe rheumatoid arthritis with inadequate response to methotrexate. Subjects were randomly assigned to 32 weeks treatment with EtaBS (n = 99) or etanercept (n = 51) at a weekly 50-mg dose administered subcutaneously. Patients were categorized according to prior use of biologic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs and concomitant use of steroids. The primary efficacy endpoint was ACR20 response rate at week 32. Safety, immunogenicity, and steady-state concentration of both drugs were evaluated. The noninferiority margin for ACR20 was estimated at 12%. RESULTS: In the per-protocol population, 85 subjects (92.4%) treated with EtaBS and 44 subjects (93.6%) treated with etanercept achieved ACR20 (difference, -1.2%; 95% confidence interval, -10.1% to 7.6%). Frequent adverse drug reactions occurred in 34.3% and 38% of subjects treated with EtaBS and etanercept, respectively. The most common reaction was upper respiratory tract infection. Six and 3 serious adverse events occurred in 4 and 3 subjects treated with EtaBS and etanercept, respectively. Injection site reactions occurred in 67.7% and 66.0% of subjects treated with EtaBS and etanercept, respectively. Two subjects treated with EtaBS and 1 subject treated with etanercept developed antibodies by week 32. CONCLUSIONS: Efficacy outcomes for EtaBS were noninferior to original etanercept in patients with moderate-to-severe rheumatoid arthritis with inadequate response to methotrexate. Safety and immunogenicity results were comparable between the two. This study is a major step toward improving access to biologics in Latin America.

Incidence Rates of Interstitial Lung Disease Events in Tofacitinib-Treated Rheumatoid Arthritis Patients: Post Hoc Analysis From 21 Clinical Trials.

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVE: Tofacitinib is an oral Janus kinase inhibitor for the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis (RA). Interstitial lung disease (ILD) is an extra-articular manifestation of RA. We investigated incidence rates of ILD in patients with RA, receiving tofacitinib 5 or 10 mg twice daily, and identified potential risk factors for ILD. METHODS: This post hoc analysis comprised a pooled analysis of patients receiving tofacitinib 5 or 10 mg twice daily or placebo from 2 phase (P)1, 10 P2, 6 P3, 1 P3b/4, and 2 long-term extension studies. Interstitial lung disease events were adjudicated as "probable" (supportive clinical evidence) or "possible" (no supportive clinical evidence) compatible adverse events. Incidence rates (patients with events per 100 patient-years) were calculated for ILD events. RESULTS: Of 7061 patients (patient-years of exposure = 23,393.7), 42 (0.6%) had an ILD event; median time to ILD event was 1144 days. Incidence rates for ILD with both tofacitinib doses were 0.18 per 100 patient-years. Incidence rates generally remained stable over time. There were 17 of 42 serious adverse events (40.5%) of ILD; for all ILD events (serious and nonserious), 35 of 42 events (83.3%) were mild to moderate in severity. A multivariable Cox regression analysis identified age 65 years or older (hazard ratio 2.43 [95% confidence interval, 1.13-5.21]), current smokers (2.89 [1.33-6.26]), and Disease Activity Score in 28 joints-erythrocyte sedimentation rate score (1.30 [1.04-1.61]) as significant risk factors for ILD events. CONCLUSIONS: Across P1/2/3/4/long-term extension studies, incidence rates for ILD events were 0.18 following tofacitinib treatment, and ILD events were associated with known risk factors for ILD in RA.

EULAR recommendations for the management of rheumatoid arthritis with synthetic and biological disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs: 2019 update.

OBJECTIVES: To provide an update of the European League Against Rheumatism (EULAR) rheumatoid arthritis (RA) management recommendations to account for the most recent developments in the field. METHODS: An international task force considered new evidence supporting or contradicting previous recommendations and novel therapies and strategic insights based on two systematic literature searches on efficacy and safety of disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs) since the last update (2016) until 2019. A predefined voting process was applied, current levels of evidence and strengths of recommendation were assigned and participants ultimately voted independently on their level of agreement with each of the items. RESULTS: The task force agreed on 5 overarching principles and 12 recommendations concerning use of conventional synthetic (cs) DMARDs (methotrexate (MTX), leflunomide, sulfasalazine); glucocorticoids (GCs); biological (b) DMARDs (tumour necrosis factor inhibitors (adalimumab, certolizumab pegol, etanercept, golimumab, infliximab), abatacept, rituximab, tocilizumab, sarilumab and biosimilar (bs) DMARDs) and targeted synthetic (ts) DMARDs (the Janus kinase (JAK) inhibitors tofacitinib, baricitinib, filgotinib, upadacitinib). Guidance on monotherapy, combination therapy, treatment strategies (treat-to-target) and tapering on sustained clinical remission is provided. Cost and sequencing of b/tsDMARDs are addressed. Initially, MTX plus GCs and upon insufficient response to this therapy within 3 to 6 months, stratification according to risk factors is recommended. With poor prognostic factors (presence of autoantibodies, high disease activity, early erosions or failure of two csDMARDs), any bDMARD or JAK inhibitor should be added to the csDMARD. If this fails, any other bDMARD (from another or the same class) or tsDMARD is recommended. On sustained remission, DMARDs may be tapered, but not be stopped. Levels of evidence and levels of agreement were mostly high. CONCLUSIONS: These updated EULAR recommendations provide consensus on the management of RA with respect to benefit, safety, preferences and cost.

Safety of ixekizumab in adult patients with plaque psoriasis, psoriatic arthritis and axial spondyloarthritis: data from 21 clinical trials.

OBJECTIVES: The aim of this integrated analysis is to evaluate the long-term safety and tolerability of ixekizumab in adults with psoriasis, PsA and axial SpA. METHODS: Integrated safety data from 21 clinical trials are presented by indication in patients who received at least one dose of ixekizumab. Adverse events (AEs) and treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) adjusted incidence rates (IRs) per 100 patient-years (PY) up to 5 years' exposure are reported. RESULTS: A total of 8228 patients with an ixekizumab exposure of 20 895.9 PY were included in this analysis. The most common TEAEs were nasopharyngitis, upper respiratory tract infection and injection-site reactions. Across populations, IRs were low for AEs leading to discontinuation (IRs ≤5.1 per 100 PY), serious AEs (IRs ≤6.0 per 100 PY) and death (IRs ≤0.3 per 100 PY). The most reported TEAEs of special interest were infections (IRs ≤35.8 per 100 PY). Patients rarely reported malignancies (IR ≤0.8), IBD including ulcerative colitis and Crohn's disease (IR ≤0.8) and major adverse cardiovascular events (IR ≤0.5). TEAEs were most commonly reported the first 2 years of exposure with ixekizumab and IR decreased over the years (infections, injection-site reactions and depression) or remained constant over the entire treatment period (serious infections, major adverse cardiovascular events, malignancies and IBD). CONCLUSION: This long-term analysis on the safety of ixekizumab was consistent with previously published reports and did not show any new safety signals. The safety profile and tolerability reported in this integrated analysis remained consistent with the known safety profile for ixekizumab.

Subcutaneous Tocilizumab in Monotherapy or in Combination With Nonbiologic Disease-Modifying Antirheumatic Drugs in Latin American Patients With Moderate to Severe Active Rheumatoid Arthritis: A Multicenter, Phase IIIb Study.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the efficacy and safety of subcutaneous tocilizumab (TCZ) in combination with conventional synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (csDMARDs) in Latin American patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) and inadequate response to previous csDMARDs. METHODS: ML28700 was a multicenter, open-label, single-arm trial. Previously treated RA patients who had not received treatment with TCZ or any biological agent (n = 284) and with a baseline Disease Activity Score in 28 joints based on erythrocyte sedimentation rate (DAS28-ESR) of 3.2 or greater were assigned to receive subcutaneous TCZ (162 mg/wk) in association with csDMARD for 24 weeks. Patients who achieved remission (DAS28-ESR <2.6) at week 24 continued with TCZ as monotherapy until week 52; otherwise, they continued with their assigned treatment. The primary efficacy end point was remission rate (DAS28-ESR <2.6) at weeks 24 and 52. Secondary objectives included disease activity scores, safety, and quality of life. RESULTS: At week 24, a total of 169 patients (59.5%; 95% confidence interval, 53.5%-65.3%) achieved remission, 91 patients (32.0%) had low disease activity, and 46 patients (8.4%) were not responders. Sustained remission at week 52 was achieved by 80.8% (n = 126) of patients who continued with TCZ monotherapy versus 44.6% (n = 37) of those on combination therapy. A total of 241 patients (84.9%; 95% confidence interval, 80.2%-88.8%) had at least 1 adverse event during follow-up. Adverse events led to drug modification in 32 patients (11.3%) or discontinuation in 21 patients (7.4%). CONCLUSIONS: Subcutaneous TCZ is an efficacious therapy with long-lasting results and tolerable adverse events in Latin American patients with RA.Trial registration no.: NCT02011334 Tozura Study Program.

Safety and effectiveness of upadacitinib or adalimumab plus methotrexate in patients with rheumatoid arthritis over 48 weeks with switch to alternate therapy in patients with insufficient response.

BACKGROUND: In SELECT-COMPARE, a randomised double-blind study, upadacitinib 15 mg once daily was superior to placebo or adalimumab on background methotrexate (MTX) for treating rheumatoid arthritis signs and symptoms and inhibited radiographical progression versus placebo at 26 weeks. Here we report 48-week safety and efficacy in patients who continued their original medication or were rescued to the alternative medication for insufficient response. METHODS: Patients on MTX received upadacitinib 15 mg, placebo or adalimumab for 48 weeks. Rescue without washout, from placebo or adalimumab to upadacitinib or upadacitinib to adalimumab occurred if patients had <20% improvement in tender joint count (TJC) or swollen joint count (SJC) (weeks 14/18/22) or Clinical Disease Activity Index (CDAI) >10 (week 26); remaining placebo patients were switched to upadacitinib at week 26. Efficacy was analysed by randomised group (non-responder imputation), as well as separately for rescued patients (as observed). Treatment-emergent adverse events per 100 patient-years were summarised. RESULTS: Consistent with responses through week 26, from weeks 26 to 48, responses by randomised group including low disease activity, clinical remission and improvements in pain and function remained superior for upadacitinib versus adalimumab; radiographical progression remained lower for upadacitinib versus placebo (linear extrapolation). Although both switch groups responded, a higher proportion of patients rescued to upadacitinib from adalimumab achieved CDAI ≤10 at 6 months postswitch versus patients rescued from upadacitinib to adalimumab. Safety at week 48 was comparable to week 26. CONCLUSION: Upadacitinib+MTX demonstrated superior clinical and functional responses versus adalimumab+MTX and maintained inhibition of structural damage versus placebo+MTX through week 48. Patients with an insufficient response to adalimumab or upadacitinib safely achieved clinically meaningful responses after switching to the alternative medication without washout.

Efficacy and safety of tofacitinib monotherapy, tofacitinib with methotrexate, and adalimumab with methotrexate in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (ORAL Strategy): a phase 3b/4, double-blind, head-to-head, randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Tofacitinib is an oral Janus kinase inhibitor for the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis. The Oral Rheumatoid Arthritis triaL (ORAL) Strategy aimed to assess the comparative efficacy of tofacitinib monotherapy, tofacitinib plus methotrexate, and adalimumab plus methotrexate for the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis in patients with a previous inadequate response to methotrexate. METHODS: ORAL Strategy was a 1 year, double-blind, phase 3b/4, head-to-head, non-inferiority, randomised controlled trial in patients aged 18 years or older with active rheumatoid arthritis despite methotrexate therapy. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1:1) to receive oral tofacitinib (5 mg twice daily) monotherapy, oral tofacitinib (5 mg twice daily) plus methotrexate, or subcutaneous adalimumab (40 mg every other week) plus methotrexate at 194 centres in 25 countries. Eligible patients received live zoster vaccine at investigators' discretion. The primary endpoint was the proportion of patients who attained an American College of Rheumatology response of at least 50% (ACR50) at month 6 in the full analysis set (patients who were randomly assigned to a group and received at least one dose of the study treatment). Non-inferiority between groups was shown if the lower bound of the 98·34% CI of the difference between comparators was larger than -13·0%. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT02187055. FINDINGS: 1146 patients received treatment (384 had tofacitinib monotherapy; 376 had tofacitinib and methotrexate; and 386 had adalimumab and methotrexate). At 6 months, ACR50 response was attained in 147 (38%) of 384 patients with tofacitinib monotherapy, 173 (46%) of 376 patients with tofacitinib and methotrexate, and 169 (44%) of 386 patients with adalimumab and methotrexate. Non-inferiority was declared for tofacitinib and methotrexate versus adalimumab and methotrexate (difference 2% [98·34% CI -6 to 11]) but not for tofacitinib monotherapy versus either adalimumab and methotrexate (-6 [-14 to 3]) or tofacitinib and methotrexate (-8 [-16 to 1]). In total, 23 (6%) of 384 patients receiving tofacitinib monotherapy, 26 (7%) of 376 patients receiving tofacitinib plus methotrexate, and 36 (9%) of 386 patients receiving adalimumab plus methotrexate discontinued due to adverse events. Two (1%) of the 384 patients receiving tofacitinib monotherapy died. No new or unexpected safety issues were reported for either treatment in this study for up to 1 year. INTERPRETATION: Tofacitinib and methotrexate combination therapy was non-inferior to adalimumab and methotrexate combination therapy in the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis in patients with an inadequate response to methotrexate in this trial. Tofacitinib monotherapy was not shown to be non-inferior to either combination. FUNDING: Pfizer Inc.

Review of Biosimilar Trials and Data on Etanercept in Rheumatoid Arthritis.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Etanercept was the first tumour necrosis factor inhibitor approved to treat rheumatoid arthritis (RA) in the United States (US) and Europe. The recent patent expiration of the etanercept originator ENBREL in Europe has facilitated the development of biosimilar products, creating the prospect of reduced treatment costs. In this article, we review the original trials for etanercept in RA to facilitate critical appraisal of biosimilar trial data. RECENT FINDINGS: Two etanercept biosimilars are currently approved in Europe and/or the US, SB4 (Benepali) and GP2015 (Erelzi), having met the pre-specified equivalence criteria for biosimilarity. Trial data demonstrates subtle differences in clinical outcomes and adverse events between the biosimilars and the reference product (RP). The development of etanercept biosimilars may reduce the financial burden of treating RA, but real-world data regarding efficacy and safety in comparison to the RP will be vital to assess for meaningful differences.

Review of Biosimilar Trials and Data on Adalimumab in Rheumatoid Arthritis.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Adalimumab is one of the top-selling drugs worldwide. Its imminent patent expiration has seen the emergence of numerous biosimilar agents. In this article, we recap the evidence from bio-originator trials in rheumatoid arthritis (RA) to provide context for a critical review of biosimilar trial data. RECENT FINDINGS: Currently, three adalimumab biosimilars are approved in Europe and/or the USA: Amgen's ABP 501 (AMJEVITA/Solymbic), Boehringer Ingelheim's BI 695501 (Cyltezo) and Samsung Bioepis's SB5 (Imraldi). All three agents met their pre-specified equivalence criteria. Subtle differences in adverse events and clinical responses between the reference and biosimilar products were noted. The introduction of adalimumab biosimilars will offer exciting opportunities in improving treatment access and increasing treatment options for RA and other licensed indications. Real-world data will further provide assurances on efficacy as well as safety.

A randomised phase IIb study of mavrilimumab, a novel GM-CSF receptor alpha monoclonal antibody, in the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis.

OBJECTIVES: Despite the therapeutic value of current rheumatoid arthritis (RA) treatments, agents with alternative modes of action are required. Mavrilimumab, a fully human monoclonal antibody targeting the granulocyte-macrophage colony-stimulating factor receptor-α, was evaluated in patients with moderate-to-severe RA. METHODS: In a phase IIb study (NCT01706926), patients with inadequate response to ≥1 synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drug(s), Disease Activity Score 28 (DAS28)-C reactive protein (CRP)/erythrocyte sedimentation rate ≥3.2, ≥4 swollen joints despite methotrexate (MTX) were randomised 1:1:1:1 to subcutaneous mavrilimumab (150, 100, 30 mg), or placebo every other week (eow), plus MTX for 24 weeks. Coprimary outcomes were DAS28-CRP change from baseline to week 12 and American College of Rheumatology (ACR) 20 response rate (week 24). RESULTS: 326 patients were randomised (150 mg, n=79; 100 mg, n=85; 30 mg, n=81; placebo, n=81); 305 completed the study (September 2012-June 2013). Mavrilimumab treatment significantly reduced DAS28-CRP scores from baseline compared with placebo (change from baseline (SE); 150 mg: -1.90 (0.14), 100 mg: -1.64 (0.13), 30 mg: -1.37 (0.14), placebo: -0.68 (0.14); p<0.001; all dosages compared with placebo).Significantly more mavrilimumab-treated patients achieved ACR20 compared with placebo (week 24: 73.4%, 61.2%, 50.6% vs 24.7%, respectively (p<0.001)). Adverse events were reported in 43 (54.4%), 36 (42.4%), 41 (50.6%) and 38 (46.9%) patients in the mavrilimumab 150, 100, 30 mg eow and placebo groups, respectively. No treatment-related safety signals were identified. CONCLUSIONS: Mavrilimumab significantly decreased RA disease activity, with clinically meaningful responses observed 1 week after treatment initiation, representing a novel mechanism of action with persuasive therapeutic potential. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT01706926; results.