Cardiovascular and Cancer Risk with Tofacitinib in Rheumatoid Arthritis.

BACKGROUND: Increases in lipid levels and cancers with tofacitinib prompted a trial of major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) and cancers in patients with rheumatoid arthritis receiving tofacitinib as compared with a tumor necrosis factor (TNF) inhibitor. METHODS: We conducted a randomized, open-label, noninferiority, postauthorization, safety end-point trial involving patients with active rheumatoid arthritis despite methotrexate treatment who were 50 years of age or older and had at least one additional cardiovascular risk factor. Patients were randomly assigned in a 1:1:1 ratio to receive tofacitinib at a dose of 5 mg or 10 mg twice daily or a TNF inhibitor. The coprimary end points were adjudicated MACE and cancers, excluding nonmelanoma skin cancer. The noninferiority of tofacitinib would be shown if the upper boundary of the two-sided 95% confidence interval for the hazard ratio was less than 1.8 for the combined tofacitinib doses as compared with a TNF inhibitor. RESULTS: A total of 1455 patients received tofacitinib at a dose of 5 mg twice daily, 1456 received tofacitinib at a dose of 10 mg twice daily, and 1451 received a TNF inhibitor. During a median follow-up of 4.0 years, the incidences of MACE and cancer were higher with the combined tofacitinib doses (3.4% [98 patients] and 4.2% [122 patients], respectively) than with a TNF inhibitor (2.5% [37 patients] and 2.9% [42 patients]). The hazard ratios were 1.33 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.91 to 1.94) for MACE and 1.48 (95% CI, 1.04 to 2.09) for cancers; the noninferiority of tofacitinib was not shown. The incidences of adjudicated opportunistic infections (including herpes zoster and tuberculosis), all herpes zoster (nonserious and serious), and adjudicated nonmelanoma skin cancer were higher with tofacitinib than with a TNF inhibitor. Efficacy was similar in all three groups, with improvements from month 2 that were sustained through trial completion. CONCLUSIONS: In this trial comparing the combined tofacitinib doses with a TNF inhibitor in a cardiovascular risk-enriched population, risks of MACE and cancers were higher with tofacitinib and did not meet noninferiority criteria. Several adverse events were more common with tofacitinib. (Funded by Pfizer; ORAL Surveillance ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02092467.).

Identification of two tofacitinib subpopulations with different relative risk versus TNF inhibitors: an analysis of the open label, randomised controlled study ORAL Surveillance.

OBJECTIVES: Based on primary results from ORAL Surveillance, an event-driven clinical trial of risk-enriched patients, identify subpopulations with different relative risk (ie, 'high-risk' and 'low-risk') with tofacitinib versus tumour necrosis factor inhibitors (TNFi). METHODS: Patients with rheumatoid arthritis aged ≥50 years with ≥1 additional cardiovascular risk factor received tofacitinib 5 or 10 mg two times a day or TNFi. Prior analyses had identified age and smoking as risk factors of particular interest across safety outcomes. Hazard ratios (HRs) and incidence rates were evaluated by age and smoking individually and in combination. Results were validated across tofacitinib development programmes. RESULTS: 'Age ≥65 years or ever smoker' defined a group ('high-risk') with increased risk of malignancies (excluding non-melanoma skin cancer), major adverse cardiovascular events, myocardial infarction, venous thromboembolism and all-cause death with tofacitinib (combined doses) versus TNFi (HRs 1.41-5.19). In patients 'aged <65 years and never smokers' ('low-risk'), there was no detectable risk increase with tofacitinib versus TNFi (HRs ≈1.0) up to 6 years of follow-up, and absolute risk remained low and was corroborated across tofacitinib rheumatoid arthritis, psoriatic arthritis and ulcerative colitis programmes with up to 10 years of observation. CONCLUSIONS: This posthoc analysis of ORAL Surveillance identified two tofacitinib subpopulations with different relative risk versus TNFi. High risk was confined to patients defined by distinct risk factors age ≥65 years or smoking, and these differentiating risk factors accounted for the excess risk observed with tofacitinib versus TNFi. These findings can guide individualised benefit/risk assessment and clinical decision-making on treatment with tofacitinib. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBERS: NCT02092467, NCT01262118, NCT01484561, NCT00147498, NCT00413660, NCT00550446, NCT00603512, NCT00687193, NCT01164579, NCT00976599, NCT01059864, NCT01359150, NCT02147587, NCT00960440, NCT00847613, NCT00814307, NCT00856544, NCT00853385, NCT01039688, NCT02281552, NCT02187055, NCT02831855, NCT00413699, NCT00661661, NCT00787202, NCT01465763, NCT01458951, NCT01458574, NCT01470612, NCT01877668, NCT01882439, NCT01976364.

Malignancy risk with tofacitinib versus TNF inhibitors in rheumatoid arthritis: results from the open-label, randomised controlled ORAL Surveillance trial.

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate malignancies and their associations with baseline risk factors and cardiovascular risk scores with tofacitinib versus tumour necrosis factor inhibitors (TNFi) in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA). METHODS: In an open-label, randomised controlled trial (ORAL Surveillance; NCT02092467), 4362 patients with RA aged ≥50 years with ≥1 additional cardiovascular risk factor received tofacitinib 5 (N=1455) or 10 mg two times per day (N=1456) or TNFi (N=1451). Incidence rates (IRs; patients with first events/100 patient-years) and HRs were calculated for adjudicated malignancies excluding non-melanoma skin cancer (NMSC), NMSC and subtypes. Post hoc analyses for malignancies excluding NMSC, lung cancer and NMSC included risk factors identified via simple/multivariable Cox models and IRs/HRs categorised by baseline risk factors, history of atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (HxASCVD) and cardiovascular risk scores. RESULTS: IRs for malignancies excluding NMSC and NMSC were higher with tofacitinib (combined and individual doses) versus TNFi. Risk of lung cancer (most common subtype with tofacitinib) was higher with tofacitinib 10 mg two times per day versus TNFi. In the overall study population, the risk of malignancies excluding NMSC was similar between both tofacitinib doses and TNFi until month 18 and diverged from month 18 onwards (HR (95% CIs) for combined tofacitinib doses: 0.93 (0.53 to 1.62) from baseline to month 18 vs 1.93 (1.22 to 3.06) from month 18 onwards, interaction p=0.0469). Cox analyses identified baseline risk factors across treatment groups for malignancies excluding NMSC, lung cancer and NMSC; interaction analyses generally did not show statistical evidence of interaction between treatment groups and risk factors. HxASCVD or increasing cardiovascular risk scores were associated with higher malignancy IRs across treatments. CONCLUSIONS: Risk of malignancies was increased with tofacitinib versus TNFi, and incidence was highest in patients with HxASCVD or increasing cardiovascular risk. This may be due to shared risk factors for cardiovascular risk and cancer. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBERS: NCT02092467, NCT01262118, NCT01484561, NCT00147498, NCT00413660, NCT00550446, NCT00603512, NCT00687193, NCT01164579, NCT00976599, NCT01059864, NCT01359150, NCT02147587, NCT00960440, NCT00847613, NCT00814307, NCT00856544, NCT00853385, NCT01039688, NCT02281552, NCT02187055, NCT02831855, NCT00413699, NCT00661661.

Risk of major adverse cardiovascular events with tofacitinib versus tumour necrosis factor inhibitors in patients with rheumatoid arthritis with or without a history of atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease: a post hoc analysis from ORAL Surveillance.

OBJECTIVES: Evaluate risk of major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) with tofacitinib versus tumour necrosis factor inhibitors (TNFi) in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) with or without a history of atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) in ORAL Surveillance. METHODS: Patients with RA aged ≥50 years with ≥1 additional CV risk factor received tofacitinib 5 mg or 10 mg two times per day or TNFi. Hazard rations (HRs) were evaluated for the overall population and by history of ASCVD (exploratory analysis). RESULTS: Risk of MACE, myocardial infarction and sudden cardiac death were increased with tofacitinib versus TNFi in ORAL Surveillance. In patients with history of ASCVD (14.7%; 640/4362), MACE incidence was higher with tofacitinib 5 mg two times per day (8.3%; 17/204) and 10 mg two times per day (7.7%; 17/222) versus TNFi (4.2%; 9/214). HR (combined tofacitinib doses vs TNFi) was 1.98 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.95 to 4.14; interaction p values: 0.196 (for HR)/0.059 (for incidence rate difference)). In patients without history of ASCVD, MACE HRs for tofacitinib 5 mg two times per day (2.4%; 30/1251) and 10 mg two times per day (2.8%; 34/1234) versus TNFi (2.3%; 28/1237) were, respectively, 1.03 (0.62 to 1.73) and 1.25 (0.76 to 2.07). CONCLUSIONS: This post hoc analysis observed higher MACE risk with tofacitinib versus TNFi in patients with RA and history of ASCVD. Among patients without history of ASCVD, all with prevalent CV risk factors, MACE risk did not appear different with tofacitinib 5 mg two times per day versus TNFi. Due to the exploratory nature of this analysis and low statistical power, we cannot exclude differential MACE risk for tofacitinib 5 mg two times per day versus TNFi among patients without history of ASCVD, but any absolute risk excess is likely low. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT02092467.

Tofacitinib for the treatment of ankylosing spondylitis: a phase III, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled study.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the efficacy/safety of tofacitinib in adult patients with active ankylosing spondylitis (AS). METHODS: This phase III, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled study enrolled patients aged ≥18 years diagnosed with active AS, meeting the modified New York criteria, with centrally read radiographs, and an inadequate response or intolerance to ≥2 non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs. Patients were randomised 1:1 to receive tofacitinib 5 mg two times per day or placebo for 16 weeks. After week 16, all patients received open-label tofacitinib until week 48. The primary and key secondary endpoints were Assessment of SpondyloArthritis international Society ≥20% improvement (ASAS20) and ≥40% improvement (ASAS40) responses, respectively, at week 16. Safety was assessed throughout. RESULTS: 269 patients were randomised and treated: tofacitinib, n=133; placebo, n=136. At week 16, the ASAS20 response rate was significantly (p<0.0001) greater with tofacitinib (56.4%, 75 of 133) versus placebo (29.4%, 40 of 136), and the ASAS40 response rate was significantly (p<0.0001) greater with tofacitinib (40.6%, 54 of 133) versus placebo (12.5%, 17 of 136). Up to week 16, with tofacitinib and placebo, respectively, 73 of 133 (54.9%) and 70 of 136 (51.5%) patients had adverse events; 2 of 133 (1.5%) and 1 of 136 (0.7%) had serious adverse events. Up to week 48, with tofacitinib, 3 of 133 (2.3%) patients had adjudicated hepatic events, 3 of 133 (2.3%) had non-serious herpes zoster, and 1 of 133 (0.8%) had a serious infection; with placebo→tofacitinib, 2 (1.5%) patients had non-serious herpes zoster. There were no deaths, malignancies, major adverse cardiovascular events, thromboembolic events or opportunistic infections. CONCLUSIONS: In adults with active AS, tofacitinib demonstrated significantly greater efficacy versus placebo. No new potential safety risks were identified. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT03502616.

Tofacitinib for Psoriatic Arthritis in Patients with an Inadequate Response to TNF Inhibitors.

BACKGROUND: Tofacitinib is an oral Janus kinase inhibitor that is under investigation for the treatment of psoriatic arthritis. We evaluated tofacitinib in patients with active psoriatic arthritis who had previously had an inadequate response to tumor necrosis factor (TNF) inhibitors. METHODS: In this 6-month randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind, phase 3 trial, we randomly assigned 395 patients, in a 2:2:1:1 ratio, to four regimens: 5 mg of tofacitinib administered orally twice daily (132 patients); 10 mg of tofacitinib twice daily (132 patients); placebo, with a switch to 5 mg of tofacitinib twice daily at 3 months (66 patients); or placebo, with a switch to 10 mg of tofacitinib twice daily at 3 months (65 patients). Data from the patients who received placebo during the first 3 months of the trial were pooled. The primary end points were the percentage of patients who had at least 20% improvement according to the criteria of the American College of Rheumatology (ACR20 response) and the change from baseline score on the Health Assessment Questionnaire-Disability Index (HAQ-DI; scores range from 0 to 3, with higher scores indicating greater disability) at the month 3 analysis. RESULTS: At 3 months, the rates of ACR20 response were 50% with the 5-mg dose of tofacitinib and 47% with the 10-mg dose, as compared with 24% with placebo (P<0.001 for both comparisons); the corresponding mean changes from baseline in HAQ-DI score were -0.39 and -0.35, as compared with -0.14 (P<0.001 for both comparisons). Serious adverse events occurred in 4% of the patients who received the 5-mg dose of tofacitinib continuously and in 6% who received the 10-mg dose continuously. Over the course of 6 months, there were four serious infections, three herpes zoster infections, one myocardial infarction, and one ischemic stroke among the patients who received tofacitinib continuously. Elevations of aspartate and alanine aminotransferase concentrations of three or more times the upper limit of the normal range occurred in more patients who received tofacitinib continuously than in patients who received placebo followed by tofacitinib. CONCLUSIONS: In this trial involving patients with active psoriatic arthritis who had had an inadequate response to TNF inhibitors, tofacitinib was more effective than placebo over 3 months in reducing disease activity. Adverse events were more frequent with tofacitinib than with placebo. (Funded by Pfizer; OPAL Beyond ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01882439 .).

Tofacitinib or Adalimumab versus Placebo for Psoriatic Arthritis.

BACKGROUND: Tofacitinib is an oral Janus kinase inhibitor that is under investigation for the treatment of psoriatic arthritis. We evaluated tofacitinib in patients with active psoriatic arthritis who previously had an inadequate response to conventional synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs). METHODS: In this 12-month, double-blind, active-controlled and placebo-controlled, phase 3 trial, we randomly assigned patients in a 2:2:2:1:1 ratio to receive one of the following regimens: tofacitinib at a 5-mg dose taken orally twice daily (107 patients), tofacitinib at a 10-mg dose taken orally twice daily (104), adalimumab at a 40-mg dose administered subcutaneously once every 2 weeks (106), placebo with a blinded switch to the 5-mg tofacitinib dose at 3 months (52), or placebo with a blinded switch to the 10-mg tofacitinib dose at 3 months (53). Placebo groups were pooled for analyses up to month 3. Primary end points were the proportion of patients who had an American College of Rheumatology 20 (ACR20) response (≥20% improvement from baseline in the number of tender and swollen joints and at least three of five other important domains) at month 3 and the change from baseline in the Health Assessment Questionnaire-Disability Index (HAQ-DI) score (scores range from 0 to 3, with higher scores indicating greater disability) at month 3. RESULTS: ACR20 response rates at month 3 were 50% in the 5-mg tofacitinib group and 61% in the 10-mg tofacitinib group, as compared with 33% in the placebo group (P=0.01 for the comparison of the 5-mg dose with placebo; P<0.001 for the comparison of the 10-mg dose with placebo); the rate was 52% in the adalimumab group. The mean change in the HAQ-DI score was -0.35 in the 5-mg tofacitinib group and -0.40 in the 10-mg tofacitinib group, as compared with -0.18 in the placebo group (P=0.006 for the comparison of the 5-mg dose with placebo; P<0.001 for the comparison of the 10-mg dose with placebo); the score change was -0.38 in the adalimumab group. The rate of adverse events through month 12 was 66% in the 5-mg tofacitinib group, 71% in the 10-mg tofacitinib group, 72% in the adalimumab group, 69% in the placebo group that switched to the 5-mg tofacitinib dose, and 64% in the placebo group that switched to the 10-mg tofacitinib dose. There were four cases of cancer, three serious infections, and four cases of herpes zoster in patients who received tofacitinib during the trial. CONCLUSIONS: The efficacy of tofacitinib was superior to that of placebo at month 3 in patients with psoriatic arthritis who had previously had an inadequate response to conventional synthetic DMARDs. Adverse events were more frequent with tofacitinib than with placebo. (Funded by Pfizer; OPAL Broaden ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01877668 .).

Incidence of venous and arterial thromboembolic events reported in the tofacitinib rheumatoid arthritis, psoriasis and psoriatic arthritis development programmes and from real-world data.

OBJECTIVES: Tofacitinib is a Janus kinase inhibitor for the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis (RA), psoriatic arthritis (PsA) and ulcerative colitis, and has been investigated in psoriasis (PsO). Routine pharmacovigilance of an ongoing, open-label, blinded-endpoint, tofacitinib RA trial (Study A3921133; NCT02092467) in patients aged ≥50 years and with ≥1 cardiovascular risk factor identified a higher frequency of pulmonary embolism (PE) and all-cause mortality for patients receiving tofacitinib 10 mg twice daily versus those receiving tumour necrosis factor inhibitors and resulted in identification of a safety signal for tofacitinib. Here, we report the incidence of deep vein thrombosis (DVT), PE, venous thromboembolism (VTE; DVT or PE) and arterial thromboembolism (ATE) from the tofacitinib RA (excluding Study A3921133), PsA and PsO development programmes and observational studies. Data from an ad hoc safety analysis of Study A3921133 are reported separately within. METHODS: This post-hoc analysis used data from separate tofacitinib RA, PsO and PsA programmes. Incidence rates (IRs; patients with events per 100 patient-years' exposure) were calculated for DVT, PE, VTE and ATE, including for populations stratified by defined baseline cardiovascular or VTE risk factors. Observational data from the US Corrona registries (including cardiovascular risk factor stratification), IBM MarketScan research database and the US FDA Adverse Event Reporting System (FAERS) database were analysed. RESULTS: 12 410 tofacitinib-treated patients from the development programmes (RA: n=7964; PsO: n=3663; PsA: n=783) were included. IRs (95% CI) of thromboembolic events among the all tofacitinib cohorts' average tofacitinib 5 mg and 10 mg twice daily treated patients for RA, respectively, were: DVT (0.17 (0.09-0.27) and 0.15 (0.09-0.22)); PE (0.12 (0.06-0.22) and 0.13 (0.08-0.21)); ATE (0.32 (0.22-0.46) and 0.38 (0.28-0.49)). Among PsO patients, IRs were: DVT (0.06 (0.00-0.36) and 0.06 (0.02-0.15)); PE (0.13 (0.02-0.47) and 0.09 (0.04-0.19)); ATE (0.52 (0.22-1.02) and 0.22 (0.13-0.35)). Among PsA patients, IRs were: DVT (0.00 (0.00-0.28) and 0.13 (0.00-0.70)); PE (0.08 (0.00-0.43) and 0.00 (0.00-0.46)); ATE (0.31 (0.08-0.79) and 0.38 (0.08-1.11)). IRs were similar between tofacitinib doses and generally higher in patients with baseline cardiovascular or VTE risk factors. IRs from the overall Corrona populations and in Corrona RA patients (including tofacitinib-naïve/biologic disease-modifying antirheumatic drug-treated and tofacitinib-treated) with baseline cardiovascular risk factors were similar to IRs observed among the corresponding patients in the tofacitinib development programme. No signals of disproportionate reporting of DVT, PE or ATE with tofacitinib were identified in the FAERS database. CONCLUSIONS: DVT, PE and ATE IRs in the tofacitinib RA, PsO and PsA programmes were similar across tofacitinib doses, and generally consistent with observational data and published IRs of other treatments. As expected, IRs of thromboembolic events were elevated in patients with versus without baseline cardiovascular or VTE risk factors, and were broadly consistent with those observed in the Study A3921133 ad hoc safety analysis data, although the IR (95% CI) for PE was greater in patients treated with tofacitinib 10 mg twice daily in Study A3921133 (0.54 (0.32-0.87)), versus patients with baseline cardiovascular risk factors treated with tofacitinib 10 mg twice daily in the RA programme (0.24 (0.13-0.41)).

Treatment of plaque psoriasis with an ointment formulation of the Janus kinase inhibitor, tofacitinib: a Phase 2b randomized clinical trial.

BACKGROUND: Most psoriasis patients have mild to moderate disease, commonly treated topically. Current topical agents have limited efficacy and undesirable side effects associated with long-term use. Tofacitinib is a small molecule Janus kinase inhibitor investigated for the topical treatment of psoriasis. METHODS: This was a 12-week, randomized, double-blind, parallel-group, vehicle-controlled Phase 2b study of tofacitinib ointment (2 % and 1 %) applied once (QD) or twice (BID) daily in adults with mild to moderate plaque psoriasis. Primary endpoint: proportion of patients with Calculated Physician's Global Assessment (PGA-C) clear or almost clear and ≥2 grade improvement from baseline at Weeks 8 and 12. Secondary endpoints: proportion of patients with PGA-C clear or almost clear; proportion achieving Psoriasis Area and Severity Index 75 (PASI75) response; percent change from baseline in PASI and body surface area; change from baseline in Itch Severity Item (ISI). Adverse events (AEs) were monitored and clinical laboratory parameters measured. RESULTS: Overall, 435 patients were randomized and 430 patients received treatment. The proportion of patients with PGA-C clear or almost clear and ≥2 grade improvement from baseline at Week 8 was 18.6 % for 2 % tofacitinib QD (80 % confidence interval [CI] for difference from vehicle: 3.8, 18.2 %) and 22.5 % for 2 % tofacitinib BID (80 % CI: 3.1, 18.5 %); this was significantly higher vs vehicle for both dosage regimens. No significant difference vs vehicle was seen at Week 12. Significantly more patients achieved PGA-C clear or almost clear with 2 % tofacitinib QD and BID and 1 % tofacitinib QD (not BID) at Week 8, and with 2 % tofacitinib BID at Week 12. Pruritus was significantly reduced vs vehicle with 2 % and 1 % tofacitinib BID (starting Day 2), and 2 % tofacitinib QD (starting Day 3). Overall, 44.2 % of patients experienced AEs, 8.1 % experienced application site AEs, and 2.3 % experienced serious AEs. The highest incidence of AEs (including application site AEs) was in the vehicle QD group. CONCLUSIONS: In adults with mild to moderate plaque psoriasis, 2 % tofacitinib ointment QD and BID showed greater efficacy than vehicle at Week 8, but not Week 12, with an acceptable safety and local tolerability profile. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT01831466 registered March 28, 2013.

Missing CD4+ cell response in randomized clinical trials of maraviroc and dolutegravir.

BACKGROUND: Missing data can compromise inferences from clinical trials, yet the topic has received little attention in the clinical trial community. Shortcomings in commonly used methods used to analyze studies with missing data (complete case, last- or baseline-observation carried forward) have been highlighted in a recent Food and Drug Administration-sponsored report. This report recommends how to mitigate the issues associated with missing data. We present an example of the proposed concepts using data from recent clinical trials. METHODS: CD4+ cell count data from the previously reported SINGLE and MOTIVATE studies of dolutegravir and maraviroc were analyzed using a variety of statistical methods to explore the impact of missing data. Four methodologies were used: complete case analysis, simple imputation, mixed models for repeated measures, and multiple imputation. We compared the sensitivity of conclusions to the volume of missing data and to the assumptions underpinning each method. RESULTS: Rates of missing data were greater in the MOTIVATE studies (35%-68% premature withdrawal) than in SINGLE (12%-20%). The sensitivity of results to assumptions about missing data was related to volume of missing data. Estimates of treatment differences by various analysis methods ranged across a 61 cells/mm3 window in MOTIVATE and a 22 cells/mm3 window in SINGLE. CONCLUSIONS: Where missing data are anticipated, analyses require robust statistical and clinical debate of the necessary but unverifiable underlying statistical assumptions. Multiple imputation makes these assumptions transparent, can accommodate a broad range of scenarios, and is a natural analysis for clinical trials in HIV with missing data.

Efficacy and safety of lersivirine versus etravirine for the treatment of HIV-1 infection in patients with prior non-nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor (NNRTI) use and evidence of NNRTI resistance: a randomized phase 2B trial.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the efficacy and safety of lersivirine versus etravirine in patients with HIV-1 and prior non-nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor (NNRTI) use and evidence of NNRTI resistance. METHODS: In this 96-week, phase 2b study, 97 patients were randomized and treated with lersivirine 750 mg qd (n = 31), lersivirine 1,000 mg qd (n = 32), and etravirine 200 mg bid (n = 34), plus one optimized nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor and darunavir/ritonavir 600/100 mg bid. The primary endpoint was the percentage of patients with HIV-1 RNA <50 copies/mL at week 24. RESULTS: At week 24, HIV-1 RNA <50 copies/mL was achieved by fewer patients receiving lersivirine 750 mg (48.4%) and 1,000 mg (43.8%) qd compared with etravirine 200 mg qd (67.7%) (intention to treat [ITT], missing/switch/discontinuation equals failure [MSDF]). At week 48, HIV-1 RNA <50 copies/mL and <400 copies/mL were also achieved by fewer patients receiving lersivirine 750 mg (41.9% and 41.9%, respectively) and 1,000 mg (31.3% and 34.4%, respectively) qd compared with etravirine 200 mg bid (61.8% and 70.6%, respectively) (ITT, MSDF). Least squares means (SE) change from baseline in log transformed HIV-1 RNA at week 48 was -1.42 (0.27) and -0.95 (0.28) copies/mL for lersivirine 750 mg and 1,000 mg qd, respectively, versus -2.02 (0.26) copies/mL for etravirine 200 mg bid (ITT). Lersivirine and etravirine were generally safe and well-tolerated. CONCLUSIONS: Lersivirine 750 mg and 1,000 mg qd was associated with lower rates of viral suppression at week 24 and week 48 versus etravirine in patients with prior NNRTI use and evidence of NNRTI resistance. No new safety signals were detected.

A phase 2 study of filibuvir in combination with pegylated IFN alfa and ribavirin for chronic HCV.

OBJECTIVES: Filibuvir is a non-nucleoside inhibitor of hepatitis C virus (HCV) polymerase. This study evaluated the safety and efficacy of filibuvir plus pegylated interferon alfa-2a (pegIFN)/ribavirin. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Treatment-naïve, HCV genotype-1 patients were randomized to receive filibuvir 300 or 600 mg twice daily (BID) or placebo plus pegIFN (180 µg/wk) and ribavirin (1,000/1,200 mg BID) for 24 weeks. Filibuvir patients who achieved defined response through week 24 discontinued therapy at week 24. All other patients continued on open-label pegIFN/ribavirin through week 48. The primary endpoint was the proportion of patients who achieved sustained virologic response (SVR) defined as HCV RNA < 15 IU/mL at end of treatment (weeks 24 or 48) and week 72. RESULTS: Overall, 288 patients were randomized and treated. SVR was achieved by 41.7, 39.6, and 45.8% of patients in the filibuvir 300 mg, 600 mg, and placebo arms, respectively. While the addition of filibuvir to pegIFN/ribavirin improved on-treatment virologic response parameters, this did not translate into improved SVR rates due to a high rate of virologic relapse following completion of therapy (300 mg: 35.9%; 600 mg: 42.9%; placebo: 25.4%). The most commonly reported adverse events were nausea, fatigue, headache, and insomnia, and were reported at similar rates across arms. CONCLUSIONS: Filibuvir plus pegIFN/ribavirin did not improve the percentage of patients achieving SVR compared with administration of pegIFN/ribavirin alone. However, the agent was well tolerated and was associated with higher on-treatment virologic response parameters. Further evaluation of filibuvir in combination with other direct-acting antiviral agents may be considered.

Risk of Venous Thromboembolism With Tofacitinib Versus Tumor Necrosis Factor Inhibitors in Cardiovascular Risk-Enriched Rheumatoid Arthritis Patients.

OBJECTIVE: The ORAL Surveillance trial found a dose-dependent increase in venous thromboembolism (VTE) and pulmonary embolism (PE) events with tofacitinib versus tumor necrosis factor inhibitors (TNFi). We aimed to assess VTE incidence over time and explore risk factors of VTE, including disease activity, in ORAL Surveillance. METHODS: Patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) aged 50 years or older with at least one additional cardiovascular risk factor received tofacitinib 5 or 10 mg twice daily (BID) or TNFi. Post hoc, cumulative probabilities and incidence rates (patients with first events/100 patient-years) by 6-month intervals were estimated for adjudicated VTE, deep vein thrombosis, and PE. Cox regression models identified risk factors. Clinical Disease Activity Index leading up to the event was explored in patients with VTE. RESULTS: Cumulative probabilities for VTE and PE were higher with tofacitinib 10 mg BID, but not 5 mg BID, versus TNFi. Incidence rates were consistent across 6-month intervals within treatments. Across treatments, risk factors for VTE included prior VTE, body mass index greater than or equal to 35 kg/m2, older age, and history of chronic lung disease. At the time of the event, most patients with VTE had active disease as defined by Clinical Disease Activity Index. CONCLUSION: Incidences of VTE and PE were higher with tofacitinib (10 > 5 mg BID) versus TNFi and were generally consistent over time. Across treatments, VTE risk factors were aligned with previous studies in the general RA population. These data highlight the importance of assessing VTE risk factors, including age, body mass index, and VTE history, when considering initiation of tofacitinib or TNFi in patients with active RA.

Microstructure and Properties of Ti-Zr-Mo Alloys Fabricated by Laser Directed Energy Deposition.

The binary Ti-Zr congruent alloys have been a potential candidate for laser-directed energy deposition owing to an excellent combination of high structural stability and good formability. To solve its insufficient strength, a new series of Ti-Zr-Mo alloys with different Mo contents were designed based on a cluster model and then made by laser-directed energy deposition on a high-purity titanium substrate. The effect of Mo content on the microstructure and properties of the L-DEDed alloys was investigated. The consequences exhibit that the microstructure of all designed alloys is featured with near-equiaxed ß grains without obvious texture. However, increasing Mo content induces a gradual refinement of the grain and a steady decrease in the lattice constant, which effectively improves the hardness, strength, wear and corrosion resistance of the designed alloys, but slightly weakens ductility and formability. From the viewpoint of both properties and forming quality, the Ti60.94Zr36.72Mo2.34 (at.%) alloy owns a proper match in mechanical, tribological, chemical, and forming properties, which is widely used in aeroengine components.

Tofacitinib Reduces Spinal Inflammation in Vertebral Bodies and Posterolateral Elements in Ankylosing Spondylitis: Results from a Phase 2 Trial.

INTRODUCTION: This post hoc analysis of phase 2 trial data assessed the efficacy of tofacitinib on magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) outcomes with the detailed anatomy-based Canada-Denmark (CANDEN) MRI scoring system and evaluated tofacitinib suppression of spinal inflammation in patients with active ankylosing spondylitis (AS). METHODS: Patients with active AS (per modified New York criteria) were randomized 1:1:1:1 to receive tofacitinib 2, 5, or 10 mg twice daily (BID), or placebo, in a 16-week, phase 2, double-blind clinical trial. Spine MRI assessments were performed at baseline and week 12. For post hoc analysis, MRI images from patients receiving tofacitinib 5 or 10 mg BID, or placebo, were re-evaluated by two readers blinded to time point/treatment and assessed by the CANDEN MRI scoring system. Least squares mean changes from baseline to week 12 were reported for CANDEN-specific MRI outcomes, with analysis of covariance used for comparisons of pooled tofacitinib and tofacitinib 5 or 10 mg BID versus placebo. p values without multiplicity adjustment were reported. RESULTS: MRI data from 137 patients were analyzed. At week 12, CANDEN spine inflammation score and vertebral body, posterior elements, corner, non-corner, facet joint, and posterolateral inflammation subscores were significantly reduced with pooled tofacitinib versus placebo (p < 0.0001; except non-corner subscore, p < 0.05). Total spine fat score was numerically increased with pooled tofacitinib versus placebo. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with AS, tofacitinib treatment was associated with significant reductions in MRI scores of spinal inflammation versus placebo, as assessed by the CANDEN MRI scoring system. Tofacitinib reduced inflammation in posterolateral elements of the spine and facet joints, which has not been described previously. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov registry (NCT01786668).

Tofacitinib Efficacy and Safety in Patients With Ankylosing Spondylitis by Prior Biologic Disease-Modifying Antirheumatic Drug Use: A Post Hoc Analysis.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of tofacitinib in patients with ankylosing spondylitis (AS) by prior biologic disease-modifying antirheumatic drug (bDMARD) use. METHODS: Data from a placebo-controlled, double-blind study of patients with active AS were analyzed. Patients received tofacitinib 5 mg twice daily (BID) or placebo to week 16; all received open-label tofacitinib 5 mg BID to week 48 and were stratified by prior treatment (bDMARD-naive or tumor necrosis factor inhibitor [TNFi]-inadequate responder [IR], including bDMARD-experienced [non-IR]). Disease activity/safety were assessed throughout. RESULTS: Of 269 patients, 207 (77%) were bDMARD-naive; 62 (23%) were in the TNFi-IR subgroup. TNFi-IR patients had higher baseline BMI (28.0 vs. 26.1 kg/m2 ), longer symptom duration (14.4 vs. 13.2 years), and lower concomitant conventional synthetic DMARD use (14.5% vs. 30.9%) than bDMARD-naive patients. At week 16, for most outcomes, tofacitinib efficacy exceeded placebo for both subgroups and was sustained to week 48. At week 16, tofacitinib versus placebo differences were similar between bDMARD-naive and TNFi-IR patients (Assessment in Spondyloarthritis international Society 40 treatment difference [95% confidence interval]: 30.8% [19.1%-42.6%] vs. 19.4% [1.7%-37.0%]). Adverse event (AE) proportions were similar between tofacitinib-treated bDMARD-naive/TNFi-IR patients (77.5%/77.4%) at week 48 with no deaths. A numerically higher proportion of tofacitinib-treated TNFi-IR versus bDMARD-naive patients discontinued study drug (12.9% vs. 3.9%) or dose reduced/temporarily discontinued due to AEs (19.4% vs. 11.8%). CONCLUSION: Tofacitinib efficacy exceeded placebo at week 16 for bDMARD-naive/TNFi-IR patients and was sustained to week 48. The absolute magnitude of responses was generally greater in bDMARD-naive patients versus TNFi-IR patients. More TNFi-IR versus bDMARD-naive patients discontinued or dose reduced/temporarily discontinued tofacitinib due to AEs. Small sample size and sample size differences between subgroups limited the interpretation.

Rheumatoid arthritis disease activity and adverse events in patients receiving tofacitinib or tumor necrosis factor inhibitors: a post hoc analysis of ORAL Surveillance.

Background: In patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA), persistent inflammation and increasing disease activity are associated with increased risk of adverse events (AEs). Objectives: To assess relationships between RA disease activity and AEs of interest in patients treated with tofacitinib or tumor necrosis factor inhibitors (TNFi). Design: This was a post hoc analysis of a long-term, postauthorization safety endpoint trial of tofacitinib versus TNFi. Methods: In ORAL Surveillance, 4362 patients aged ⩾50 years with active RA despite methotrexate, and ⩾1 additional cardiovascular (CV) risk factor, were randomized 1:1:1 to tofacitinib 5 or 10 mg twice daily or TNFi for up to 72 months. Post hoc time-dependent multivariable Cox analysis evaluated the relationships between disease activity [Clinical Disease Activity Index (CDAI)], inflammation [C-reactive protein (CRP)], and AEs of interest. The AEs included major adverse CV events (MACE), malignancies excluding nonmelanoma skin cancer (NMSC), venous thromboembolism (VTE), serious infections, herpes zoster (HZ), nonserious infections excluding HZ (NSI), and death. Results: Across treatments, risk for NSI was higher when patients had CDAI-defined active disease versus remission; MACE and VTE risks trended higher, but did not reach significance. Hazard ratios for MACE, malignancies excluding NMSC, VTE, infections, and death rose by 2-9% for each 5-mg/L increment in serum CRP. The interaction terms evaluating the impact of treatment assignment on the relationship between disease activity and AEs were all p > 0.05. Conclusion: In ORAL Surveillance, higher NSI risk was observed in the presence of active RA versus remission. The risk of MACE and VTE directionally increased in active disease versus remission, although statistical power was limited due to small event numbers in these categories. The relationship between active disease and AEs was not impacted by treatment with tofacitinib versus TNFi. Registration: NCT02092467.

The link between disease activity and adverse medical events in people with rheumatoid arthritis taking tofacitinib or tumor necrosis factor inhibitors. Why was the study done? • People with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) who have uncontrolled symptoms (high disease activity) have a higher chance of having adverse medical events (medical problems that occur during treatment with a medication) than people who have mild symptoms (low disease activity). • We looked at the link between levels of disease activity and the risk of having adverse medical events in people with RA who took tofacitinib or a tumor necrosis factor inhibitor (TNFi) medication. What did the researchers do? • We used the results of ORAL Surveillance, a long-term safety trial in people with RA. ○ In this study, people with RA were 50 years or older and at high risk of a major cardiovascular event such as heart attack or stroke. • For up to 6 years, people took tofacitinib 5 or 10mg tablets two times a day or TNFi injections. • We used statistical tests to examine the link between different levels of RA disease activity or inflammation and different adverse medical events, such as: ○ major cardiovascular events (such as heart attack, stroke, or death due to heart failure) ○ cancers ○ blood clots ○ infections ○ deaths. What did the researchers find? • In people who took tofacitinib or TNFi: ○ People with active disease (those with RA symptoms) had a higher risk of infections that did not lead to hospitalization (nonserious infections) than people in remission (those with very mild symptoms or no symptoms at all). ○ People with active disease also had a slightly higher risk of major cardiovascular events and blood clots than those in remission. ○ Higher levels of inflammation led to increased risk of major cardiovascular events, cancers, blood clots, infections, and deaths. What do the findings mean? • Active RA disease leads to higher risk of adverse medical events. • The medication used (tofacitinib or TNFi) did not affect the link between levels of RA disease activity and adverse medical events. • This study was limited by the low number of adverse medical events recorded.

Efficacy and safety of tofacitinib in Chinese patients with active psoriatic arthritis: a phase 3, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled study.

OBJECTIVES: Efficacy and safety of tofacitinib, an oral Janus kinase inhibitor, were evaluated in a 6-month, double-blind, phase 3 study in Chinese patients with active (polyarthritic) psoriatic arthritis (PsA) and inadequate response to ≥1 conventional synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drug. METHODS: Patients were randomised (2:1) to tofacitinib 5 mg twice daily (N=136) or placebo (N=68); switched to tofacitinib 5 mg twice daily after month (M)3 (blinded). PRIMARY ENDPOINT: American College of Rheumatology (ACR50) response at M3. Secondary endpoints (through M6) included: ACR20/50/70 response; change from baseline in Health Assessment Questionnaire-Disability Index (HAQ-DI); ≥75% improvement in Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI75) response, and enthesitis and dactylitis resolution. Safety was assessed throughout. RESULTS: The primary endpoint was met (tofacitinib 5 mg twice daily, 38.2%; placebo, 5.9%; p<0.0001). M3 ACR20/ACR70/PASI75 responses, and enthesitis and dactylitis resolution rates, were higher and HAQ-DI reduction was greater for tofacitinib 5 mg twice daily versus placebo. Incidence of adverse events (AEs)/serious AEs (M0-3): 68.4%/0%, tofacitinib 5 mg twice daily; 75.0%/4.4%, placebo. One death was reported with placebo→tofacitinib 5 mg twice daily (due to accident). One serious infection, non-serious herpes zoster, and lung cancer case each were reported with tofacitinib 5 mg twice daily; four serious infections and one non-serious herpes zoster case were reported with placebo→tofacitinib 5 mg twice daily (M0-6). No non-melanoma skin cancer, major adverse cardiovascular or thromboembolism events were reported. CONCLUSION: In Chinese patients with PsA, tofacitinib efficacy was greater than placebo (primary and secondary endpoints). Tofacitinib was well tolerated; safety outcomes were consistent with the established safety profile in PsA and other indications. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT03486457.

Laser-sintering fabrication of integrated Al/Ni anodes for lithium-ion batteries.

Integrated Al/Ni electrodes of lithium-ion batteries (LIBs) with variant atomic ratios were successfully fabricated by a one-step laser-sintering process. The microstructure, phase composition, and pore structure were controlled by the raw material composition and laser parameters. The electrodes showed working merits without any conductive agent and binder, or even the collector used in a traditional battery. It was shown that the electrode consisted of multi-phases, i.e., Al, Al3Ni2, Al3Ni, and Ni, when the Al/Ni atomic ratio was higher than 5 : 5. A lower Al/Ni atomic ratio less than 5 : 5 favored the formation of a dual-phase electrode consisting of Al3Ni2 and Ni. As the Al content increased, the specific surface area of the as-sintered electrodes increased in the initial stage and then decreased. The formation of pores was closely related to the content of the residual Al phase after the laser sintering. The residual Al phase filled the pores when the Al content was high, leading to a lower pore size. In contrast, the liquid Al phase completely reacted with the Ni component, leaving a large number of pores at its original sites. The linked pores can serve as transport channels for Li+ ions, provide mass sites for electrochemical reactions, and also buffer huge volume changes of the active material. Among the electrodes, the one with an Al/Ni ratio of 3 : 7 showed the best cycling/rate performance, i.e., a capacity of 522.8 mA h g-1 by a current of 0.1 A g-1 after 200 cycles, even holding to 338.4 mA h g-1 by a big current impact at 2 A g-1. It formed a metallurgical combination between the conductive network and the active material with multiple porous structures, which is helpful for the electrodes to provide high capacity and maintain structural stability during cycling. In addition, the average laser-sintering time of a single electrode was within 10 s, which is suitable for industrial mass production.