The Proportion of Patients With Rheumatoid Arthritis Achieving ACR20/50/70; Consistent Patterns of a 60/40/20 as Demonstrated by a Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVES: We aimed to demonstrate that the proportion of rheumatoid arthritis patients achieving 20%/50%/70% improvement in American College of Rheumatology (ACR20/50/70) responses to Food and Drug Administration-approved biologic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (bDMARDs) after an inadequate response to methotrexate (MTX) and after failure of the first bDMARDs followed a consistent pattern. METHODS: This systematic review and meta-analysis was performed in accordance with MECIR (Methodological Expectations for Cochrane Intervention Reviews) standards. Two separate groups of randomized controlled trials were included: the first group included studies with biologic-naive patients who added bDMARD to MTX as intervention arm compared with the placebo plus MTX group. The second group included biologic-irresponsive (IR) patients who used a second bDMARD plus MTX after the first bDMARD failure compared with placebo plus MTX group. Primary outcome was defined as the proportion of rheumatoid arthritis patients achieving ACR20/50/70 responses at 24 ± 6 weeks. RESULTS: Twenty-one studies initiated between 1999 and 2017 were included: 15 studies for the biologic-naive group and 6 studies for the biologic-IR group. For the biologic-naive group, the proportions of patients achieving ACR20/50/70 were 61.4% (95% confidence interval [CI], 58.7%-64.1%), 37.8% (95% CI, 34.8%-40.8%), and 18.8% (95% CI, 16.1%-21.4%), respectively. For the biologic-IR group, proportions of patients achieving ACR20/50/70 were 48.5% (95% CI, 42.2%-54.8%), 27.3% (95% CI, 21.6%-33.0%), and 12.9% (95% CI, 11.3%-14.8%), respectively. CONCLUSION: We were able to systematically demonstrate that ACR20/50/70 responses to biologic-naive follow a consistent pattern of 60%, 40%, and 20%, respectively. We also demonstrated that the ACR20/50/70 responses to a biologic IR follow a certain pattern of 50%, 25%, and 12.5%, respectively.

Safety and efficacy of filgotinib for Japanese patients with RA and inadequate response to MTX: FINCH 1 52-week results and FINCH 4 48-week results.

OBJECTIVES: To present safety and efficacy of the JAK1 preferential inhibitor filgotinib in Japanese patients with prior inadequate response (IR) to methotrexate (MTX) from a 52-week randomised controlled parent study (PS) and long-term extension (LTE) through June 2020. METHODS: The PS (NCT02889796) randomised MTX-IR patients to filgotinib 200 (FIL200) or 100 mg (FIL100), adalimumab (ADA) 40 mg, or placebo; all took stable background MTX. At week (W) 24, placebo patients were rerandomised to FIL200 or FIL100. The primary endpoint was W12 American College of Rheumatology 20% improvement; safety was assessed by adverse event (AE) reporting. For the LTE (NCT03025308), eligible filgotinib patients continued FIL200/FIL100; ADA patients were rerandomised (blinded) to FIL200 or FIL100; all continued MTX. RESULTS: In all, 114/147 Japanese patients completed the PS, 115 enrolled in LTE, and 103 remained on study in June 2020. In the PS, AEs were consistent with the overall population, and W24 efficacy was maintained or improved through W52, comparable with the overall population. LTE AE incidences were similar between doses; filgotinib efficacy was consistent from baseline to W48 and similar between PS ADA and filgotinib patients. CONCLUSIONS: Among MTX-IR Japanese patients, filgotinib maintained efficacy over 1 year; LTE safety was consistent with the PS.

Efficacy and safety of filgotinib in combination with methotrexate in Japanese patients with active rheumatoid arthritis who have an inadequate response to methotrexate: Subpopulation analyses of 24-week data of a global phase 3 study (FINCH 1).

OBJECTIVES: Evaluate the efficacy and safety of the Janus kinase-1 inhibitor filgotinib in Japanese patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) and inadequate response to methotrexate (MTX). METHODS: Data from 147 Japanese patients in FINCH 1, a 52-week global Phase 3 study, were analysed up to 24 weeks. Patients received once-daily filgotinib 200 or 100 mg, biweekly adalimumab, or placebo, all with stable background MTX. RESULTS: In the Japanese population, American College of Rheumatology 20% response rates at Week 12 (primary endpoint) were 77.5%, 65.9%, 53.6%, and 36.8% for filgotinib 200 mg, filgotinib 100 mg, adalimumab, and placebo. Proportions of patients achieving Disease Activity Score with 28 joints <2.6 at Week 24: filgotinib 200 mg, 65.0%; filgotinib 100 mg, 51.2%; adalimumab, 42.9%; and placebo, 5.3%. Incidence rates of serious infections: filgotinib 200 mg, 2.5%; filgotinib 100 mg, 0%; adalimumab, 10.7%; and placebo, 5.3%. Treatment-emergent laboratory abnormalities Grade ≥3 occurred in five (12.5%) filgotinib 200 mg, three (7.3%) filgotinib 100 mg, one (3.6%) adalimumab, and no placebo patients. No deaths were reported among Japanese patients. CONCLUSIONS: Filgotinib once daily combined with MTX was effective and generally safe and well tolerated up to Week 24 in Japanese patients with RA and inadequate response to MTX.

Filgotinib versus placebo or adalimumab in patients with rheumatoid arthritis and inadequate response to methotrexate: a phase III randomised clinical trial.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of the Janus kinase-1-preferential inhibitor filgotinib versus placebo or tumour necrosis factor-α inhibitor therapy in patients with active rheumatoid arthritis (RA) despite ongoing treatment with methotrexate (MTX). METHODS: This 52-week, multicentre, double-blind, placebo-controlled and active-controlled phase III trial evaluated once-daily oral filgotinib in patients with RA randomised 3:3:2:3 to filgotinib 200 mg (FIL200) or filgotinib 100 mg (FIL100), subcutaneous adalimumab 40 mg biweekly, or placebo (through week 24), all with stable weekly background MTX. The primary endpoint was the proportion of patients achieving 20% improvement in American College of Rheumatology criteria (ACR20) at week 12. Additional efficacy outcomes were assessed sequentially. Safety was assessed from adverse events and laboratory abnormalities. RESULTS: The proportion of patients (n=1755 randomised and treated) achieving ACR20 at week 12 was significantly higher for FIL200 (76.6%) and FIL100 (69.8%) versus placebo (49.9%; treatment difference (95% CI), 26.7% (20.6% to 32.8%) and 19.9% (13.6% to 26.2%), respectively; both p<0.001). Filgotinib was superior to placebo in key secondary endpoints assessing RA signs and symptoms, physical function and structural damage. FIL200 was non-inferior to adalimumab in terms of Disease Activity Score in 28 joints with C reactive protein ≤3.2 at week 12 (p<0.001); FIL100 did not achieve non-inferiority. Adverse events and laboratory abnormalities were comparable among active treatment arms. CONCLUSIONS: Filgotinib improved RA signs and symptoms, improved physical function, inhibited radiographic progression and was well tolerated in patients with RA with inadequate response to MTX. FIL200 was non-inferior to adalimumab. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT02889796.

Baricitinib versus Placebo or Adalimumab in Rheumatoid Arthritis.

BACKGROUND: Baricitinib is an oral, reversible inhibitor of the Janus kinases JAK1 and JAK2 that may have therapeutic value in patients with rheumatoid arthritis. METHODS: We conducted a 52-week, phase 3, double-blind, placebo- and active-controlled trial in which 1307 patients with active rheumatoid arthritis who were receiving background therapy with methotrexate were randomly assigned to one of three regimens in a 3:3:2 ratio: placebo (switched to baricitinib after 24 weeks), 4 mg of baricitinib once daily, or 40 mg of adalimumab (an anti-tumor necrosis factor α monoclonal antibody) every other week. End-point measures evaluated after adjustment for multiplicity included 20% improvement according to the criteria of the American College of Rheumatology (ACR20 response) (the primary end point), the Disease Activity Score for 28 joints (DAS28), the Health Assessment Questionnaire-Disability Index, and the Simplified Disease Activity Index at week 12, as well as radiographic progression of joint damage as measured by the van der Heijde modification of the total Sharp score (mTSS) (range, 0 to 448, with higher scores indicating greater structural joint damage) at week 24. RESULTS: More patients had an ACR20 response at week 12 with baricitinib than with placebo (primary end point, 70% vs. 40%, P<0.001). All major secondary objectives were met, including inhibition of radiographic progression of joint damage, according to the mTSS at week 24 with baricitinib versus placebo (mean change from baseline, 0.41 vs. 0.90; P<0.001) and an increased ACR20 response rate at week 12 with baricitinib versus adalimumab (70% vs. 61%, P=0.014). Adverse events, including infections, were more frequent through week 24 with baricitinib and adalimumab than with placebo. Cancers were reported in five patients (two who received baricitinib and three who received placebo). Baricitinib was associated with reductions in neutrophil counts and increases in levels of creatinine and low-density lipoprotein cholesterol. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with rheumatoid arthritis who had had an inadequate response to methotrexate, baricitinib was associated with significant clinical improvements as compared with placebo and adalimumab. (Funded by Eli Lilly and Incyte; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01710358 .).

Disease activity measures at baseline predict structural damage progression: data from the randomized, controlled AMPLE and AVERT trials.

OBJECTIVE: Data from two double-blind, randomized, Phase III studies were analysed to investigate the ability of Routine Assessment of Patient Index Data 3, DAS28 (CRP), modified (M)-DAS28 (CRP) and Simplified or Clinical Disease Activity Indices to predict structural damage progression in RA. METHODS: This post hoc analysis included data from the 2-year Abatacept vs adaliMumab comParison in bioLogic-naïvE RA subjects with background MTX (AMPLE) trial in biologic-naïve patients with active RA (<5 years) and an inadequate response to MTX, and the 12-month treatment period of the Assessing Very Early Rheumatoid arthritis Treatment (AVERT) trial in MTX-naïve patients with early RA (⩽2 years) and poor prognostic indicators. Adjusted logistic regression analysis assessed the relationship between baseline disease activity and structural damage progression (defined as change from baseline greater than the smallest detectable change) at 12 and 24 months in AMPLE and 6 and 12 months in AVERT. Areas under the receiver operating characteristic curves for the impact of baseline disease activity on structural damage progression were calculated. RESULTS: Adjusted logistic regression analyses included all randomized and treated patients in AMPLE (N = 646) and those who received abatacept plus MTX or MTX monotherapy in AVERT (N = 235). Baseline Routine Assessment of Patient Index Data 3, DAS28 (CRP) and M-DAS28 (CRP) scores significantly predicted structural progression at months 12 and 24 in AMPLE (P < 0.05) and months 6 and 12 in AVERT (P < 0.01), and were stronger predictors than Simplified or Clinical Disease Activity Indices. CONCLUSION: In this post hoc analysis of two patient populations with RA, Routine Assessment of Patient Index Data 3, DAS28 (CRP) and M-DAS28 (CRP) were good at predicting structural damage. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov, http://clinicaltrials.gov: NCT00929864 (AMPLE); NCT01142726 (AVERT).

Clinical outcomes in patients switched from adalimumab to baricitinib due to non-response and/or study design: phase III data in patients with rheumatoid arthritis.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate clinical outcomes in patients who changed treatment from adalimumab to baricitinib, an oral Janus kinase (JAK)1/JAK2 inhibitor, during a phase III programme. METHODS: In phase III RA-BEAM, patients were randomised 3:3:2 to placebo, baricitinib 4 mg once daily, or adalimumab 40 mg biweekly. At week 16 or subsequent visits, non-responders were rescued to open-label baricitinib 4 mg. At week 52, patients could enter a long-term extension (LTE) and continue on baricitinib or switch from adalimumab to baricitinib 4 mg with no adalimumab washout period. Percentage of patients achieving low disease activity and remission were assessed, along with physical function, patient's assessment of pain, and safety. RESULTS: Thirty-five (7%) baricitinib-treated and 40 (12%) adalimumab-treated patients were rescued to baricitinib in RA-BEAM; 78% (381/487) of baricitinib-treated and 72% (238/330) of adalimumab-treated patients who were not rescued in RA-BEAM, entered the LTE and continued/were switched to baricitinib. In both baricitinib-rescued and adalimumab-rescued patients, there were significant improvements in all measures up to 12 weeks after rescue compared with the time of rescue. Patients who switched from adalimumab to baricitinib showed improvements in disease control through 12 weeks in the LTE. Exposure-adjusted incidence rates for treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) and infections, including serious events, were similar for patients who switched from adalimumab to baricitinib and those who continued on baricitinib. CONCLUSIONS: Switching from adalimumab to baricitinib (without adalimumab washout) was associated with improvements in disease control, physical function and pain during the initial 12 weeks postswitch, without an increase in TEAEs, serious adverse events or infections. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBERS: NCT01710358, NCT01885078.

Elucidating the endogenous synovial fluid proteome and peptidome of inflammatory arthritis using label-free mass spectrometry.

BACKGROUND: Inflammatory arthritis (IA) is an immunological disorder in which loss of immune tolerance to endogenous self-antigens perpetuates synovitis and eventual destruction of the underlying cartilage and bone. Pathological changes in the joint are expected to be represented by synovial fluid (SF) proteins and peptides. In the present study, a mass spectrometry-based approach was utilized for the identification of key protein and peptide mediators of IA. METHODS: Age-matched SF samples from 10 rheumatoid arthritis patients, 10 psoriatic arthritis patients and 10 cadaveric controls were subjected to an integrated proteomic and peptidomic protocol using liquid chromatography tandem mass spectrometry. Significant differentially abundant proteins and peptides were identified between cohorts according to the results of a Mann-Whitney U test coupled to the Benjamini-Hochberg correction for multiple hypothesis testing. Fold change ratios were computed for each protein and peptide according to their log-transformed extracted ion current. Pathway analysis and antimicrobial peptide (AMP) prediction were conducted to clarify the pathophysiological relevance of identified proteins and peptides to IA. RESULTS: We determined that 144 proteins showed significant differential abundance between the IA and control SF proteomes, of which 11 protein candidates were selected for future follow-up studies. Similar analyses applied to our peptidomic data identified 15 peptide sequences, originating from 4 protein precursors, to have significant differential abundance in IA compared to the control SF peptidome. Pathway enrichment analysis of the IA SF peptidome along with AMP prediction suggests a possible mechanistic role of microbes in eliciting an immune response which drives the development of IA. CONCLUSIONS: The discovery-phase data generated herein has provided a basis for the identification of candidates with the greatest potential to serve as novel serum biomarkers specific to inflammatory arthritides. Moreover, these findings facilitate the understanding of possible disease mechanisms specific to each subtype.

Triple Therapy Versus Biologic Therapy for Active Rheumatoid Arthritis: A Cost-Effectiveness Analysis.

Background: The RACAT (Rheumatoid Arthritis Comparison of Active Therapies) trial found triple therapy to be noninferior to etanercept-methotrexate in patients with active rheumatoid arthritis (RA). Objective: To determine the cost-effectiveness of etanercept-methotrexate versus triple therapy as a first-line strategy. Design: A within-trial analysis based on the 353 participants in the RACAT trial and a lifetime analysis that extrapolated costs and outcomes by using a decision analytic cohort model. Data Sources: The RACAT trial and sources from the literature. Target Population: Patients with active RA despite at least 12 weeks of methotrexate therapy. Time Horizon: 24 weeks and lifetime. Perspective: Societal and Medicare. Intervention: Etanercept-methotrexate first versus triple therapy first. Outcome Measures: Incremental costs, quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs). Results of Base-Case Analysis: The within-trial analysis found that etanercept-methotrexate as first-line therapy provided marginally more QALYs but accumulated substantially higher drug costs. Differences in other costs between strategies were negligible. The ICERs for first-line etanercept-methotrexate and triple therapy were $2.7 million per QALY and $0.98 million per QALY over 24 and 48 weeks, respectively. The lifetime analysis suggested that first-line etanercept-methotrexate would result in 0.15 additional lifetime QALY, but this gain would cost an incremental $77 290, leading to an ICER of $521 520 per QALY per patient. Results of Sensitivity Analysis: Considering a long-term perspective, an initial strategy of etanercept-methotrexate and biologics with similar cost and efficacy is unlikely to be cost-effective compared with using triple therapy first, even under optimistic assumptions. Limitation: Data on the long-term benefit of triple therapy are uncertain. Conclusion: Initiating biologic therapy without trying triple therapy first increases costs while providing minimal incremental benefit. Primary Funding Source: The Cooperative Studies Program, Department of Veterans Affairs Office of Research and Development, Canadian Institutes for Health Research, and an interagency agreement with the National Institutes of Health-American Recovery and Reinvestment Act.

Patient-reported outcomes from a phase 3 study of baricitinib versus placebo or adalimumab in rheumatoid arthritis: secondary analyses from the RA-BEAM study.

BACKGROUND: To assess the effect of baricitinib on patient-reported outcomes (PROs) in patients with active rheumatoid arthritis and an inadequate response to methotrexate (MTX). METHODS: In this double-blind phase 3 study, patients were randomised 3:3:2 to placebo (n=488), baricitinib 4 mg once daily (n=487), or adalimumab 40 mg biweekly (n=330) with background MTX. PROs included the SF-36, EuroQol 5-D (EQ-5D) index scores and visual analogue scale, Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy-Fatigue (FACIT-F), Health Assessment Questionnaire-Disability Index (HAQ-DI), Patient's Global Assessment of Disease Activity (PtGA), patient's assessment of pain and Work Productivity and Activity Impairment Questionnaire-Rheumatoid Arthritis (WPAI-RA), and measures collected in electronic patient daily diaries: duration and severity of morning joint stiffness (MJS), Worst Ttiredness and Worst Joint Pain. The primary study endpoint was at week 12. Treatment comparisons were assessed with logistic regression for categorical measures or analysis of covariance for continuous variables. RESULTS: Compared with placebo and adalimumab, baricitinib showed statistically significant improvements (p≤0.05) in HAQ-DI, PtGA, pain, FACIT-F, SF-36 physical component score, EQ-5D index scores and WPAI-RA daily activity at week 12. Improvements were maintained for measures assessed to week 52. Statistically significant improvement in patient diary measures (MJS duration and severity), worst tiredness and worst joint pain were observed for baricitinib versus placebo and adalimumab at week 12 (p≤0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Baricitinib provided significantly greater improvement in most PROs compared with placebo and adalimumab, including physical function MJS, pain, fatigue and quality of life. Improvement was maintained to the end of the study (week 52). TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT01710358.

The effect of rheumatoid arthritis-associated autoantibodies on the incidence of cardiovascular events in a large inception cohort of early inflammatory arthritis.

Objective: . RA is associated with an increased risk of cardiovascular events (CVEs). The objective was to estimate independent effects of RA autoantibodies on the incident CVEs in patients with early RA. Methods: Patients were enrolled in the Canadian Early Inflammatory Arthritis Cohort, a prospective multicentre inception cohort. Incident CVEs, including acute coronary syndromes and cerebrovascular events, were self-reported by the patient and partially validated by medical chart review. Seropositive status was defined as either RF or ACPA positive. Multivariable Cox proportional hazards survival analysis was used to estimate the effects of seropositive status on incident CVEs, controlling for RA clinical variables and traditional cardiovascular risk factors. Results: . A total of 2626 patients were included: the mean symptom duration at diagnosis was 6.3 months ( s . d . 4.6), the mean age was 53 years ( s . d . 15), 72% were female and 86% met classification criteria for RA. Forty-six incident CVEs occurred over 6483 person-years [incidence rate 7.1/1000 person-years (95% confidence interval 5.3, 9.4)]. The CVE rate did not differ in seropositive vs seronegative subjects and seropositivity was not associated with incident CVEs in multivariable Cox regression models. Baseline covariates independently associated with incident CVEs were older age, a history of hypertension and a longer duration of RA symptoms prior to diagnosis. Conclusion: The rate of CVEs early in the course of inflammatory arthritis was low; however, delays in the diagnosis of arthritis increased the rate of CVEs. Hypertension was the strongest independent risk factor for CVEs. Results support early aggressive management of RA disease activity and co-morbidities to prevent severe complications.

Klinefelter's syndrome (47,XXY) is in excess among men with Sjögren's syndrome.

Primary Sjögren's syndrome (pSS) has a strong female bias. We evaluated an X chromosome dose effect by analyzing 47,XXY (Klinefelter's syndrome, 1 in 500 live male births) among subjects with pSS. 47,XXY was determined by examination of fluorescence intensity of single nucleotide polymorphisms from the X and Y chromosomes. Among 136 pSS men there were 4 with 47,XXY. This was significantly different from healthy controls (1 of 1254 had 47,XXY, p=0.0012 by Fisher's exact test) as well men with rheumatoid arthritis (0 of 363 with 47,XXY), but not different compared to men with systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) (4 of 136 versus 8 of 306, Fisher's exact test p=NS). These results are consistent with the hypothesis that the number of X chromosomes is critical for the female bias of pSS, a property that may be shared with SLE but not RA.

The comparative effectiveness of oral versus subcutaneous methotrexate for the treatment of early rheumatoid arthritis.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the comparative effectiveness of oral versus subcutaneous methotrexate (MTX) as initial therapy for patients with early rheumatoid arthritis (ERA). METHODS: Patients with ERA (symptoms ≤1 year) initiating MTX therapy were included from a multicentre, prospective cohort study. We compared the effectiveness between starting with oral versus subcutaneous MTX over the first year. Longitudinal multivariable models, adjusted for potential baseline and time-varying confounders, were used to compare treatment changes due to inefficacy or toxicity and treatment efficacy (Disease Activity Score-28 (DAS-28), DAS-28 remission and Health Assessment Questionnaire-Disability Index (HAQ-DI)). RESULTS: 666 patients were included (417 oral MTX, 249 subcutaneous MTX). Patients prescribed subcutaneous MTX were prescribed a higher dose of MTX (mean dose over first three months 22.3 mg vs 17.2 mg/week). At 1 year, 49% of patients initially treated with subcutaneous MTX had changed treatment compared with 77% treated with oral MTX. After adjusting for potential confounders, subcutaneous MTX was associated with a lower rate of treatment failure ((HR (95% CI) 0.55 (0.39 to 0.79)). Most treatment failures were due to inefficacy with no difference in failure due to toxicity. In multivariable models, subcutaneous MTX was also associated with lower average DAS-28 scores (mean difference (-0.38 (95% CI -0.64 to -0.10)) and a small difference in DAS-28 remission (OR 1.2 (95% CI 1.1 to 1.3)). There was no significant difference in sustained remission or HAQ-DI (p values 0.43 and 0.75). CONCLUSIONS: Initial treatment with subcutaneous MTX was associated with lower rates of treatment changes, no difference in toxicity and some improvements in disease control versus oral MTX over the first year in patients with ERA.

Fibrocyte and T cell interactions promote disease pathogenesis in rheumatoid arthritis.

Rheumatoid arthritis (RA) is a systemic autoimmune disease. We previously identified a circulating cell population, fibrocytes, which is activated early in disease. As RA is characterized by the formation of autoantibodies and autoreactive T cells, which often precede symptom onset, the objective of these studies was to characterize fibrocyte activation in the context of T cell activation. Multidimensional flow cytometry was used to characterize the activation status of peripheral blood (PB) fibrocytes and T cells derived from RA patients with different levels of disease activity. Compared to healthy controls, fibrocytes from RA patients exhibited increased activation, denoted as elevated levels of phosphorylation of STAT3 and NF-κB. RA patients had higher numbers of circulating activated Th17 cells and Tregs compared with healthy controls, Th17 cell numbers being higher in patients with moderate to high disease activity. Additionally, increased numbers of FOXP3+ RORγt+ double positive CD4+ T cells were observed in RA patients with more severe disease. Our data confirm that circulating fibrocytes are expanded in RA and that there is a direct correlation between the increase in number of activated fibrocytes and increased number of CD4+ T cells. Moreover, our data suggest that interactions between circulating fibrocytes and activated T cells may promote disease activity. Specifically, we provide in vitro evidence that mouse-derived CD4+ T cells produce GM-CSF which induces fibrocyte proliferation. In turn, activated fibrocytes produce IL-6, promoting Th17 polarization.

Two-year radiographic and clinical outcomes from the Canadian Methotrexate and Etanercept Outcome study in patients with rheumatoid arthritis.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate radiographic and clinical outcomes up to 24 months in patients with RA enrolled in the Canadian Methotrexate and Etanercept Outcome study. METHODS: In this open-label non-inferiority trial, patients with inadequate response to MTX received etanercept plus MTX for 6 months and then were randomized to either etanercept monotherapy or continued etanercept plus MTX until 24 months. Radiographic data were analysed using the modified total Sharp score (mTSS), joint space narrowing and erosion scores. Secondary outcomes included the 28-joint DAS with ESR (DAS28-ESR), Simplified Disease Activity Index, Clinical Disease Activity Index, HAQ Disability Index (HAQ-DI) and safety. RESULTS: Two hundred five of 258 patients enrolled were randomized (98 etanercept, 107 etanercept plus MTX). At month 24, the mean increase from baseline to month 24 for the etanercept and etanercept plus MTX arms, respectively, for the mTSS were 0.4 (s.d. 1.9) and 0.0 (s.d. 1.4); for joint space narrowing, 0.1 (s.d. 0.6) and 0.0 (s.d. 0.7) and for erosion, 0.3 (s.d. 1.5) and 0.0 (s.d. 1.0). At month 24, the mean increase from month 6 mean scores/count increases for DAS28-ESR were 0.56 (s.d. 1.26) and 0.08 (s.d. 1.50); for Simplified Disease Activity Index, 4.7 (s.d. 13.1) and 0.9 (s.d. 12.5); for Clinical Disease Activity Index, 4.1 (s.d. 12.3) and 1.0 (s.d. 12.3) and for HAQ-DI, 0.20 (s.d. 0.45) and 0.02 (s.d. 0.54). Patients with DAS28-ESR low disease activity (LDA)/remission at month 6 had numerically better outcomes at month 24 than patients with moderate to high disease activity at month 6. In patients with LDA/remission at month 6, outcomes were similar at month 24 between etanercept monotherapy and etanercept plus MTX, whereas patients with moderate to high disease activity at month 6 had numerically better outcomes with etanercept plus MTX than etanercept at month 24. There were no new safety signals and serious adverse events were not different between groups. CONCLUSION: These results support the possibility of discontinuing MTX in patients who have tolerability issues with MTX if they achieve LDA/remission. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov (https://clinicaltrials.gov/; NCT00654368).

Safety and efficacy of baricitinib at 24†weeks in patients with rheumatoid arthritis who have had an inadequate response to methotrexate.

OBJECTIVES: To investigate baricitinib (LY3009104, formerly INCB028050), a novel, oral inhibitor of JAK1/JAK2 in patients with moderate to severe rheumatoid arthritis (RA) despite treatment with methotrexate. METHODS: In this phase IIb study, 301 patients were randomised 2:1:1:1:1 to receive once daily doses of placebo or 1, 2, 4 or 8 mg baricitinib for 12 weeks. Patients assigned to 2, 4 and 8 mg baricitinib continued blinded treatment for an additional 12 weeks. Patients assigned to placebo or 1 mg baricitinib were reassigned to 2 mg twice daily or 4 mg once daily baricitinib between weeks 12-24. The primary endpoint was the proportion of patients in the combined 4 and 8 mg groups achieving an American College of Rheumatology 20% (ACR20) response versus placebo at week 12. RESULTS: Significantly more patients in the combined baricitinib 4 and 8 mg groups compared with placebo achieved an ACR20 response at week 12 (76% vs 41%, p<0.001). At week 12, significant differences versus placebo were also observed in patients achieving ACR50, ACR70 and remission as measured by Disease Activity Score for 28-joint counts, Clinical Disease Activity Index and Simplified Disease Activity Index. Patients receiving 2, 4, or 8 mg baricitinib maintained or improved in all measures through 24 weeks. Similar proportions of patients experienced at least one adverse event in the placebo and baricitinib groups. Serious infections developed in three patients receiving baricitinib. No cases of tuberculosis, herpes zoster, opportunistic infections or deaths were reported. Dose-dependent decreases in haemoglobin were observed with baricitinib. CONCLUSIONS: Baricitinib improved the signs and symptoms of RA in methotrexate inadequate responders with active disease. Baricitinib was well tolerated with no unexpected safety findings through week 24. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT01185353.

The Canadian methotrexate and etanercept outcome study: a randomised trial of discontinuing versus continuing methotrexate after 6 months of etanercept and methotrexate therapy in rheumatoid arthritis.

OBJECTIVE: To determine if withdrawing methotrexate (MTX) after 6 months of combination etanercept (ETN)+MTX, in MTX-inadequate responders with active rheumatoid arthritis (RA), is non-inferior to continuing ETN+MTX. METHODS: Tumour necrosis factor-inhibitor naïve RA patients with disease activity score 28 (DAS28)≥3.2, swollen joint count≥3, despite stable MTX, were treated with ETN+MTX for 6 months, followed by randomisation to either continue ETN+MTX or switch to ETN monotherapy for an additional 18 months. The primary endpoint was change in DAS28 from 6-month randomisation to 12 months. The non-inferiority margin of change in DAS28 was 0.6, with prespecified analyses (DAS28<3.2 vs DAS28≥3.2). RESULTS: 205 patients were randomised. DAS28 was stable in patients on ETN+MTX and increased slightly in patients on ETN monotherapy from 6 to 12 months. Non-inferiority was not achieved, with an adjusted difference of 0.4 (0.1 to 0.7) between the ETN and the ETN+MTX groups, for the month 6-12 change in DAS28. However, patients who achieved low disease activity (LDA; DAS28<3.2) at 6 months had a similar disease activity at 12 months, whether on monotherapy or combination therapy (DAS28 change 0.7 ETN vs 0.57 ETN+MTX, p=0.8148). Conversely, for patients who did not reach LDA at 6 months, those on ETN monotherapy had increased disease activity at 12 months, while disease activity continued to decrease for patients on combination therapy, at 12 months (DAS28 change 0.4 ETN vs -0.4 ETN+MTX, p=0.0023). CONCLUSIONS: Non-inferiority was not achieved. Withdrawing MTX after 6 months of continuation ETN+MTX in MTX inadequate responders did not yield the same degree of improvement between 6 and 12 months compared with continuing ETN+MTX. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov-NCT00654368.

Physician global assessment at 3 months is strongly predictive of remission at 12 months in early rheumatoid arthritis: results from the CATCH cohort.

OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to determine predictors of 1-year remission in early RA (ERA) using baseline and 3-month data. METHODS: The Canadian Early Arthritis Cohort (CATCH) patients were included if baseline, 3- and 12-month data were available. Regression analyses for four different definitions of remission at 12 months were done to determine baseline and 3-month predictors of remission. RESULTS: Five hundred and sixty-two patients had complete data at 12 months (mean age 53.4 years, disease duration 6.2 years, 73% female). The factors at baseline associated with all four remission outcomes at 12 months were age, gender, income, education, tender joint count (TJC), patient global assessment (PtGA), HAQ and pain. Baseline ESR was associated with the 28-joint DAS (DAS28) remission only. At 3 months, all four remission definitions were associated with TJC, swollen joint count, physician global assessment (PGA), PtGA, HAQ, pain, ESR and CRP in univariate analyses. In the regression model, variables associated with Simple Disease Activity Index remission were PGA [odds ratio (OR) 0.77, P < 0.001), pain (OR 0.85, P = 0.004), age (OR 0.98, P = 0.006) and HAQ (OR 0.49, P = 0.011); Clinical Disease Activity Index remission was associated with PGA (OR 0.77, P < 0.001), pain (OR 0.85, P = 0.003), age (OR 0.98, P = 0.015) and CRP (OR 0.80, P = 0.031). DAS28 remission was predicted by ESR (OR 0.95, P < 0.001), PGA (OR 0.76, P < 0.001), age (OR 0.98, P = 0.001), HAQ (OR 0.57, P = 0.006) and male gender (OR 2.01, P = 0.005), whereas Boolean remission was associated with pain (OR 0.79, P = 0.009), age (OR 0.98, P = 0.016), PtGA (OR 0.83, P = 0.025) and PGA (OR 0.86, P = 0.038). CONCLUSION: A low PGA at 3 months was consistently associated with 1-year remission in ERA.

Are there differences between young- and older-onset early inflammatory arthritis and do these impact outcomes? An analysis from the CATCH cohort.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to determine the impact of age on disease and remission in suspected early RA (ERA). METHODS: Data from the Canadian Early Arthritis Cohort (CATCH) were examined at baseline, 6 and 12 months. Patients were divided into three groups based on age. Analysis of variance (ANOVA) and regression models were performed to determine the impact of age on the 28-joint DAS (DAS28) and remission at 12 months. RESULTS: A total of 1809 patients were initially assessed: 442 (24.4%) young (<42 years), 899 (49.7%) middleaged (542<64 years) and 468 (25.9%) old (564 years); 72.9% female; 63.8% met 2010 ACR/European League Against Rheumatism (EULAR) classification criteria for RA; symptom duration at first visit 186.0 days; DAS28 4.9; HAQ 1.0; 25.3% had baseline erosions. A significant correlation existed between older age and a lower percentage of females, less positive RF and CCP, fewer meeting RA criteria, shorter symptom duration, more erosions at first visit, higher DAS28 and HAQ at baseline and 12 months and fewer DAS28 remission at 12 months (all P<0.003). The age group did not affect the change in DAS28 and HAQ from 0 to 12 months. Co-morbidities increased with age; more DMARDs, including MTX and steroids, and fewer biologics were used in older age. Age and female had a lesser chance of remission in the regression model. CONCLUSION: In suspected ERA, older-onset patients start and end their first year worse in terms of DAS28 and HAQ, with fewer meeting RA criteria, less remission, more DMARDs and steroids use but less biologics use. However, there were no differences between age groups in the change in DAS28.