Comparative Effectiveness of Bimekizumab and Ustekinumab in Patients with Psoriatic Arthritis at 52 Weeks Assessed Using a Matching-Adjusted Indirect Comparison.

INTRODUCTION: A matching-adjusted indirect comparison (MAIC) was conducted to assess the relative efficacy at 52 weeks (Wk52) of bimekizumab 160 mg every 4 weeks (Q4W) and ustekinumab 45 or 90 mg every 12 weeks (Q12W) in patients with psoriatic arthritis (PsA) who were biologic disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drug naïve (bDMARD naïve) or who had a previous inadequate response or an intolerance to tumor necrosis factor inhibitors (TNFi-IR). METHODS: Relevant trials were systematically identified. Individual patient data from the bimekizumab trials BE OPTIMAL (NCT03895203; N = 431) and BE COMPLETE (NCT03896581; N = 267) were matched with summary data on patients receiving ustekinumab in the PSUMMIT 1 trial (NCT01009086; 45 mg, N = 205; 90 mg; N = 204) and a subgroup of TNFi-IR patients receiving ustekinumab in the PSUMMIT 2 trial (NCT01077362; 45 mg, N = 60; 90 mg, N = 58), respectively. Patients from the bimekizumab trials were re-weighted using propensity scores to match the baseline characteristics of the ustekinumab trial patients. Adjustment variables were selected based on expert consensus (n = 5) and adherence to established MAIC guidelines. Non-placebo-adjusted comparisons of recalculated bimekizumab and ustekinumab outcomes for the American College of Rheumatology (ACR) 20/50/70 response criteria (non-responder imputation) were analyzed. RESULTS: In patients who were bDMARD naïve, bimekizumab had a greater likelihood of response than ustekinumab at Wk52 for ACR20 (odds ratio [95% confidence interval] 45 mg: 2.14 [1.35, 3.40]; 90 mg: 1.98 [1.24, 3.16]), ACR50 (45 mg: 2.74 [1.75, 4.29]; 90 mg: 2.29 [1.48, 3.55]), and ACR70 (45 mg: 3.33 [2.04, 5.46]; 90 mg: 3.05 [1.89, 4.91]). In patients who were TNFi-IR, bimekizumab had a greater likelihood of response than ustekinumab at Wk52 for ACR20 (45 mg: 4.17 [2.13, 8.16]; 90 mg: 4.19 [2.07, 8.49]), ACR50 (45 mg: 5.00 [2.26, 11.05]; 90 mg: 3.86 [1.70, 8.79]), and ACR70 (45 mg: 9.85 [2.79, 34.79]; 90 mg: 6.29 [1.98, 20.04]). CONCLUSIONS: Using MAIC, bimekizumab showed greater efficacy than ustekinumab in achieving all ACR responses in patients with PsA who were bDMARD naïve and TNFi-IR at Wk52. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT03895203, NCT03896581, NCT01009086, NCT01077362.

Comparative Effectiveness of Bimekizumab and Risankizumab in Patients with Psoriatic Arthritis at 52 Weeks Assessed Using a Matching-Adjusted Indirect Comparison.

INTRODUCTION: The relative efficacy of bimekizumab and risankizumab in patients with PsA who were biologic disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drug naïve (bDMARD naïve) or with previous inadequate response or intolerance to tumor necrosis factor inhibitors (TNFi-IR) was assessed at 52 weeks (Wk52) using matching-adjusted indirect comparisons (MAIC). METHODS: Relevant trials were systematically identified. For patients who were bDMARD naïve, individual patient data (IPD) from BE OPTIMAL (NCT03895203; N = 431) were matched with summary data from KEEPsAKE-1 (NCT03675308; N = 483). For patients who were TNFi-IR, IPD from BE COMPLETE (NCT03896581; N = 267) were matched with summary data from the TNFi-IR patient subgroup in KEEPsAKE-2 (NCT03671148; N = 106). To adjust for cross-trial differences, patients from the bimekizumab trials were re-weighted to match the baseline characteristics of patients in the risankizumab trials. Adjustment variables were selected based on expert consensus (n = 5) and adherence to established MAIC guidelines. Recalculated bimekizumab Wk52 outcomes for American College of Rheumatology (ACR) 20/50/70 response criteria and minimal disease activity (MDA) index (non-responder imputation) were compared with risankizumab outcomes via non-placebo-adjusted comparisons. RESULTS: In patients who were bDMARD naïve, bimekizumab had a significantly greater likelihood of response than risankizumab at Wk52 for ACR50 (odds ratio [95% confidence interval]: 1.52 [1.11, 2.09]) and ACR70 (1.80 [1.29, 2.51]). In patients who were TNFi-IR, bimekizumab had a significantly greater likelihood of response than risankizumab at Wk52 for ACR20 (1.78 [1.08, 2.96]), ACR50 (3.05 [1.74, 5.32]), ACR70 (3.69 [1.82, 7.46]), and MDA (2.43 [1.37, 4.32]). CONCLUSIONS: Using MAIC, bimekizumab demonstrated a greater likelihood of efficacy in most ACR and MDA outcomes than risankizumab in patients with PsA who were bDMARD naïve and TNFi-IR at Wk52. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT03895203, NCT03896581, NCT03675308, NCT03671148.

Association Between Achievement of Clinical Disease Control and Improvement in Patient-Reported Outcomes and Quality of Life in Patients With Psoriatic Arthritis in the Phase 3 SELECT-PsA 1 and 2 Randomized Controlled Trials.

OBJECTIVE: We explored the relationship between achievement of clinical disease control and improvements in and normative values for patient-reported outcomes (PROs), including quality of life (QoL) measures, in patients with psoriatic arthritis (PsA). METHODS: This was a post hoc analysis of 104-week data from the SELECT-PsA 1 and 2 trials in adults with PsA and inadequate response to one or more conventional synthetic (SELECT-PsA 1) or biologic (SELECT-PsA 2) disease-modifying antirheumatic drug. Patients were initially randomized to upadacitinib 15 mg once daily (QD) to placebo switched to upadacitinib 15 mg QD at week 24 or to adalimumab 40 mg every other week (SELECT-PsA 1 only), and data were pooled across treatments and analyzed. We evaluated several clinical disease control measures (minimal disease activity [MDA]; very low disease activity [VLDA]; and low disease activity [LDA] and/or remission by Disease Activity in Psoriatic Arthritis [DAPSA], Psoriatic Arthritis Disease Activity Score [PASDAS], and Routine Assessment of Patient Index Data 3 [RAPID3]) and examined their associations with improvements and normative values for various PROs. RESULTS: A total of 1,069 and 317 patients were analyzed for SELECT-PsA 1 and 2, respectively. In both studies, responders (patients who achieved MDA or VLDA, and DAPSA, PASDAS, and RAPID3 LDA or remission) at week 104 achieved more marked changes from baseline, and more responders achieved normative values in PROs compared with nonresponders (most nominal P < 0.0001). Furthermore, numerically larger proportions of responders achieved minimal clinically important differences across PROs compared with nonresponders in both studies. In addition, patients who achieved MDA or VLDA were more likely to achieve DAPSA, PASDAS, and RAPID3 LDA or remission (all nominal P < 0.0001) for upadacitinib 15 mg QD and when treatment arms were pooled. CONCLUSION: Patients with PsA who achieve clinical disease control are more likely to achieve improvements and normative values in PROs and QoL measures, which reinforces disease control as a treatment target.

Efficacy and Safety of Tofacitinib in Ankylosing Spondylitis by Baseline C-Reactive Protein Level: Post Hoc Analysis of Phase II and Phase III Clinical Trials.

OBJECTIVE: This post hoc analysis assessed the effect of baseline C-reactive protein (CRP) on the efficacy and safety of tofacitinib (TOF) use in ankylosing spondylitis (AS), as well as patient-reported outcomes (PROs). METHODS: Phase II (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT01786668) and phase III (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT03502616) data from patients with active AS were used. Endpoints (weeks 12, 16, and 48), including 20% and 40% improvement in Assessment of SpondyloArthritis international Society (ASAS), AS Disease Activity Score with CRP low disease activity, 50% improvement in Bath AS Disease Activity Index (BASDAI50), and PROs (pain and fatigue), were stratified by baseline CRP (mg/L) as follows: < 5 (normal), ≥ 5 (elevated), < 10, and ≥ 10. Safety outcomes were evaluated between < 5 and ≥ 5 mg/L subgroups. RESULTS: Overall, 372 patients were included (69.6% ≥ 5mg/L; 50.8% ≥ 10 mg/L). At baseline in the < 5mg/L group, more placebo-treated than TOF-treated patients received concomitant nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) or sulfasalazine (SSZ). Week 12 efficacy and PRO responses were generally higher for TOF vs placebo, regardless of baseline CRP. The treatment effect (placebo-adjusted response) at week 12 was generally numerically higher in ≥ 5 mg/L and ≥ 10 mg/L vs < 5 mg/L and < 10 mg/L groups. Incidence rates for treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) and "all infections" were numerically higher for TOF vs placebo in patients in the < 5 mg/L group, but similar for TOF vs placebo in patients in the ≥ 5 mg/L group. CONCLUSION: Regardless of baseline CRP, TOF was more efficacious vs placebo at week 12. The placebo-adjusted efficacy and PRO responses were generally numerically higher in patients with CRP ≥ 5 mg/L and ≥ 10 mg/L vs < 5 mg/L and < 10 mg/L. The higher concomitant NSAID/SSZ exposure may have improved efficacy responses in the baseline < 5 mg/L placebo group, and ultimately affected the TOF treatment effect. Safety was consistent with previous studies of TOF use in AS, with numerically higher incidence rates for TEAEs and "all infections" for TOF vs placebo in patients with CRP < 5 mg/L.

Guselkumab provides durable improvement across psoriatic arthritis disease domains: post hoc analysis of a phase 3, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled study.

OBJECTIVE: Evaluate long-term guselkumab effectiveness across Group for Research and Assessment of Psoriasis and Psoriatic Arthritis (GRAPPA)-recognised domains/related conditions of psoriatic arthritis (PsA). METHODS: Post hoc analyses used data from DISCOVER-2 (NCT03158285) biologic/Janus-kinase inhibitor-naïve participants with active PsA (≥5 swollen/≥5 tender joints, C-reactive protein ≥0.6 mg/dL), randomised (1:1:1) to guselkumab every 4 or 8 weeks (Q4W/Q8W) or placebo with crossover to guselkumab. Outcomes aligned with key GRAPPA-recognised domains of overall disease activity, peripheral arthritis, axial disease, enthesitis/dactylitis and skin psoriasis (nail psoriasis was not evaluated). PsA-related conditions (inflammatory bowel disease (IBD)/uveitis) were assessed via adverse events through W112. Least squares mean changes from baseline through W100 in continuous outcomes employed repeated measures mixed-effects models adjusting for baseline scores. Binary measure response rates were determined with non-responder imputation for missing data. RESULTS: 442/493 (90%) of guselkumab-randomised patients completed treatment through W100. Following early reductions in disease activity with guselkumab, durable improvements were observed across key PsA domains (swollen/tender joints, psoriasis, spinal pain, enthesitis/dactylitis) through W100. Response rates of therapeutically relevant targets generally increased through W100 with guselkumab Q4W/Q8W: Disease Activity Index for PsA low disease activity (LDA) 62%/59%, enthesitis resolution 61%/70%, dactylitis resolution 72%/83%, 100% improvement in Psoriasis Area and Severity Index 59%/53%, Psoriatic Arthritis Disease Activity Score LDA 51%/49% and minimal disease activity 38%/40%. Through W112, no cases of IBD developed among guselkumab-randomised patients and one case of uveitis was reported. CONCLUSION: In biologic-naïve patients with active PsA, guselkumab provided early and durable improvements in key GRAPPA-recognised domains through 2 years, with substantial proportions achieving important treatment targets.

Impact of filgotinib on pain control in the phase 3 FINCH studies.

OBJECTIVE: This post hoc analysis of the FINCH 1-3 (NCT02889796, NCT02873936 and NCT02886728) studies assessed specific effects of filgotinib on pain control and their relationship with other aspects of efficacy in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA). METHODS: Assessments included: residual pain responses of ≤10 and ≤20 mm on a 100 mm visual analogue scale (VAS); the proportion of patients who achieved VAS pain responses in addition to remission or low disease activity by Disease Activity Score-28 with C-reactive protein (DAS28-CRP) or Clinical Disease Activity Index (CDAI) criteria. RESULTS: Across studies, filgotinib reduced pain from week 2, with responses sustained throughout the studies. In FINCH 1, at week 24, 35.8%, 25.0%, 24.6% and 11.6% of patients in the filgotinib 200 mg, filgotinib 100 mg, adalimumab and placebo arms (each plus methotrexate) achieved VAS pain ≤20 mm in addition to DAS28-CRP remission; 26.3%, 17.9%, 17.2% and 7.6% achieved VAS pain ≤10 mm in addition to DAS28-CRP remission. A similar pattern was seen for CDAI remission. Time during which VAS pain was ≤10 or ≤20 mm was longest with filgotinib 200 mg and comparable between adalimumab and filgotinib 100 mg. Similar findings were reported for filgotinib in FINCH 2 and 3. CONCLUSION: In all RA populations studied, pain improvements occurred from week 2 and were sustained over time. In FINCH 1, filgotinib 100 mg provided similar pain amelioration to adalimumab, whereas filgotinib 200 mg resulted in greater pain improvement and higher proportion of patients with residual pain ≤10 or ≤20 mm and meeting DAS28-CRP remission criteria.

Comparative Effectiveness of Bimekizumab and Secukinumab in Patients with Psoriatic Arthritis at 52 Weeks Using a Matching-Adjusted Indirect Comparison.

INTRODUCTION: Matching-adjusted indirect comparisons (MAICs) were used to compare the efficacy of bimekizumab and secukinumab 150 mg and 300 mg at 52 weeks for the treatment of psoriatic arthritis (PsA) in patients who were biologic disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drug-naïve (bDMARD-naïve) or with previous inadequate response or intolerance to tumor necrosis factor inhibitors (TNFi-IR). METHODS: Relevant trials were systematically identified. Individual patient data from bimekizumab randomized controlled trials, BE OPTIMAL (N = 431) and BE COMPLETE (N = 267), were matched to aggregate data from bDMARD-naïve and TNFi-IR patient subgroups from FUTURE 2 using secukinumab 150 mg and 300 mg doses (bDMARD-naïve: N = 63/37; TNFi-IR: N = 67/33). To adjust for cross-trial differences, patients from the bimekizumab trials were re-weighted using propensity scores to match the baseline characteristics of patients in the secukinumab trials. Unanchored comparisons of recalculated bimekizumab and secukinumab 52-week non-responder imputation outcomes for 20/50/70% improvement in American College of Rheumatology score (ACR20/50/70) and minimal disease activity (MDA) index were analyzed. RESULTS: In patients who were bDMARD-naïve, bimekizumab had a greater likelihood of ACR70 response than secukinumab 150 mg (odds ratio [95% confidence interval] 2.39 [1.26, 4.53]; p = 0.008) and secukinumab 300 mg (2.03 [1.11, 3.72]; p = 0.021) at 52 weeks. In patients who were TNFi-IR, bimekizumab had a greater likelihood of response compared to secukinumab 150 mg for ACR20 (3.50 [1.64-7.49]; p = 0.001), ACR50 (3.32 [1.41, 7.80]; p = 0.006), ACR70 (2.95 [1.08, 8.07]; p = 0.035) and MDA (3.52 [1.38, 8.99]; p = 0.009), and a greater likelihood of response compared to secukinumab 300 mg for ACR50 (2.44 [1.06, 5.65]; p = 0.037) and MDA (2.92 [1.20, 7.09]; p = 0.018) at 52 weeks. CONCLUSION: In this MAIC analysis, the efficacy of bimekizumab, as demonstrated by the likelihood of ACR20/50/70 and MDA response at 52 weeks, was greater or comparable to secukinumab 150 mg and 300 mg for patients with PsA who were bDMARD-naïve and TNFi-IR. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBERS: NCT03895203, NCT03896581, NCT04009499, NCT01752634, NCT01989468, NCT02294227, NCT02404350.

Comparative Effectiveness of Bimekizumab and Guselkumab in Patients with Psoriatic Arthritis at 52 Weeks Assessed Using a Matching-Adjusted Indirect Comparison.

INTRODUCTION: Matching-adjusted indirect comparisons (MAIC) were used to assess the relative efficacy of bimekizumab 160 mg every 4 weeks (Q4W) compared to guselkumab 100 mg Q4W or every 8 weeks (Q8W) at 48/52 weeks in patients with psoriatic arthritis (PsA) who were biologic disease-modifying antirheumatic drug-naïve (bDMARD-naïve) or with previous inadequate response or intolerance to tumor necrosis factor inhibitors (TNFi-IR). METHODS: Relevant trials were identified as part of a systematic literature review. For patients who were bDMARD-naïve, individual patient data (IPD) from BE OPTIMAL (N = 431) was matched to summary data from DISCOVER-2 (Q4W, n = 245; Q8W, n = 248). For patients who were TNFi-IR, IPD from BE COMPLETE (n = 267) and summary data from COSMOS (Q8W, N = 189). Trial populations were re-weighted using propensity scores. Unanchored comparisons of recalculated bimekizumab and guselkumab 48- or 52-week non-responder imputation outcomes for 20/50/70% improvement in American College of Rheumatology score (ACR20/50/70) and minimal disease activity (MDA) index were analyzed. RESULTS: In patients who were bDMARD-naïve, bimekizumab was associated with a greater likelihood of ACR50 (odds ratio [95% confidence interval] 1.62 [1.07, 2.44]; p = 0.021), ACR70 (2.20 [1.43, 3.38]; p < 0.001), and MDA (1.82 [1.20, 2.76]; p = 0.005) compared to guselkumab Q4W at week 52. Bimekizumab also had a greater likelihood of ACR70 response (2.08 [1.34, 3.22]; p = 0.001) and MDA (2.07 [1.35, 3.17]; p < 0.001) compared to guselkumab Q8W at week 52. In patients who were TNFi-IR, bimekizumab had a greater likelihood in achieving all evaluated outcomes compared to guselkumab Q8W at week 48/52 (ACR20, 1.77 [1.15, 2.72]; p = 0.010; ACR50, 1.56 [1.03, 2.36]; p = 0.037; ACR70, 1.66 [1.05, 2.61]; p = 0.028; and MDA, 1.95 [1.27, 3.02]; p = 0.003). CONCLUSIONS: According to MAICs, bimekizumab demonstrated greater or comparable efficacy on ACR50/70 and MDA outcomes than guselkumab in patients with PsA who were bDMARD-naïve and TNFi-IR at week 48/52. Bimekizumab had a more favorable likelihood than guselkumab in achieving more stringent treatment outcomes. TRIAL REGISTRATIONS: NCT03895203, NCT03896581, NCT04009499, NCT03158285, NCT03796858.

EULAR recommendations for the management of psoriatic arthritis with pharmacological therapies: 2023 update.

OBJECTIVE: New modes of action and more data on the efficacy and safety of existing drugs in psoriatic arthritis (PsA) required an update of the EULAR 2019 recommendations for the pharmacological treatment of PsA. METHODS: Following EULAR standardised operating procedures, the process included a systematic literature review and a consensus meeting of 36 international experts in April 2023. Levels of evidence and grades of recommendations were determined. RESULTS: The updated recommendations comprise 7 overarching principles and 11 recommendations, and provide a treatment strategy for pharmacological therapies. Non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs should be used in monotherapy only for mild PsA and in the short term; oral glucocorticoids are not recommended. In patients with peripheral arthritis, rapid initiation of conventional synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs is recommended and methotrexate preferred. If the treatment target is not achieved with this strategy, a biological disease-modifying antirheumatic drug (bDMARD) should be initiated, without preference among modes of action. Relevant skin psoriasis should orient towards bDMARDs targeting interleukin (IL)-23p40, IL-23p19, IL-17A and IL-17A/F inhibitors. In case of predominant axial or entheseal disease, an algorithm is also proposed. Use of Janus kinase inhibitors is proposed primarily after bDMARD failure, taking relevant risk factors into account, or in case bDMARDs are not an appropriate choice. Inflammatory bowel disease and uveitis, if present, should influence drug choices, with monoclonal tumour necrosis factor inhibitors proposed. Drug switches and tapering in sustained remission are also addressed. CONCLUSION: These updated recommendations integrate all currently available drugs in a practical and progressive approach, which will be helpful in the pharmacological management of PsA.

Comparative efficacy and safety of bimekizumab in psoriatic arthritis: a systematic literature review and network meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVES: To understand the relative efficacy and safety of bimekizumab, a selective inhibitor of IL-17F in addition to IL-17A, vs other biologic and targeted synthetic DMARDs (b/tsDMARDs) for PsA using network meta-analysis (NMA). METHODS: A systematic literature review (most recent update conducted on 1 January 2023) identified randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of b/tsDMARDs in PsA. Bayesian NMAs were conducted for efficacy outcomes at Weeks 12-24 for b/tsDMARD-naïve and TNF inhibitor (TNFi)-experienced patients. Safety at Weeks 12-24 was analysed in a mixed population. Odds ratios (ORs) and differences of mean change with the associated 95% credible interval (CrI) were calculated for the best-fitting models, and the surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA) values were calculated to determine relative rank. RESULTS: The NMA included 41 RCTs for 22 b/tsDMARDs. For minimal disease activity (MDA), bimekizumab ranked 1st in b/tsDMARD-naïve patients and 2nd in TNFi-experienced patients. In b/tsDMARD-naïve patients, bimekizumab ranked 6th, 5th and 3rd for ACR response ACR20/50/70, respectively. In TNFi-experienced patients, bimekizumab ranked 1st, 2nd and 1st for ACR20/50/70, respectively. For Psoriasis Area and Severity Index 90/100, bimekizumab ranked 2nd and 1st in b/tsDMARD-naïve patients, respectively, and 1st and 2nd in TNFi-experienced patients, respectively. Bimekizumab was comparable to b/tsDMARDs for serious adverse events. CONCLUSION: Bimekizumab ranked favourably among b/tsDMARDs for efficacy on joint, skin and MDA outcomes, and showed comparable safety, suggesting it may be a beneficial treatment option for patients with PsA.

Systematic literature review and network meta-analysis of therapies for psoriatic arthritis on patient-reported outcomes.

OBJECTIVES: Head-to-head clinical trials are common in psoriasis, but scarce in psoriatic arthritis (PsA), making treatment comparisons between therapeutic classes difficult. This study describes the relative effectiveness of targeted synthetic (ts) and biologic (b) disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs) on patient-reported outcomes (PROs) through network meta-analysis (NMA). DESIGN: A systematic literature review (SLR) was conducted in January 2020. Bayesian NMAs were conducted to compare treatments on Health Assessment Questionnaire Disability Index (HAQ-DI) and 36-item Short Form (SF-36) Health Survey including Mental Component Summary (MCS) and Physical Component Summary (PCS) scores. DATA SOURCES: Ovid MEDLINE (including Epub Ahead of Print, In-Process & Other Non-Indexed Citations and Daily),Embase and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA: Phase III randomised controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating patients with PsA receiving tsDMARDS, bDMARDs or placebo were included in the SLR; there was no restriction on outcomes. DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS: Two independent researchers reviewed all citations. Data for studies meeting all inclusion criteria were extracted into a standardised Excel-based form by one reviewer and validated by a second reviewer. A third reviewer was consulted to resolve any discrepancies, as necessary. Risk of bias was assessed using the The National Institute for Health and Care Excellence clinical effectiveness quality assessment checklist. RESULTS: In total, 26 RCTs were included. For HAQ-DI, SF-36 PCS and SF-36 MCS scores, intravenous tumour necrosis factor (TNF) alpha inhibitors generally ranked higher than most other classes of therapies available to treat patients with PsA. For almost all outcomes, several interleukin (IL)-23, IL-17A, subcutaneous TNF and IL-12/23 agents offered comparable improvement, while cytotoxic T-lymphocyte-associated antigen 4, phosphodiesterase-4 and Janus kinase inhibitors often had the lowest efficacy. CONCLUSIONS: While intravenous TNFs may provide some improvements in PROs relative to several other tsDMARDs and bDMARDs for the treatment of patients with PsA, differences between classes of therapies across outcomes were small.

MACE and VTE across upadacitinib clinical trial programmes in rheumatoid arthritis, psoriatic arthritis and ankylosing spondylitis.

OBJECTIVES: To provide an integrated analysis of major adverse cardiovascular events (MACEs) and events of venous thromboembolism (VTE) and associated risk factors across rheumatoid arthritis (RA), psoriatic arthritis (PsA), and ankylosing spondylitis (AS) phase 2b/3 upadacitinib clinical programmes. METHODS: Data were analysed and summarised from clinical trials of RA, PsA and AS treated with upadacitinib 15 mg once daily (QD) and 30 mg QD (as of 30 June 2021). Data from adalimumab (RA and PsA) and methotrexate (RA) arms were included as comparators. Adjudicated MACEs and VTE events were presented as exposure-adjusted rates per 100 patient-years (E/100 PY). Univariable Cox proportional hazard regression analyses assessed potential associations of risk factors for MACE and VTE. RESULTS: In total, 4298 patients received upadacitinib 15 mg (RA n=3209, PsA n=907 and AS n=182) and 2125 patients received upadacitinib 30 mg (RA n=1204 and PsA n=921). In patients with RA and PsA, rates of MACE (0.3-0.6 E/100 PY) and VTE (0.2-0.4 E/100 PY) were similar across upadacitinib doses; in patients with AS, no MACEs and one VTE event occurred. Most patients experiencing MACEs or VTE events had two or more baseline cardiovascular risk factors. Across RA and PsA groups, rates of MACEs and VTE events were similar. CONCLUSIONS: Rates of MACEs and VTE events with upadacitinib were consistent with previously reported data for patients receiving conventional synthetic and biologic disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs and comparable with active comparators adalimumab and methotrexate. Associated patient characteristics are known risk factors for MACEs and VTE events. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBERS: RA (SELECT-NEXT: NCT02675426; SELECT-MONOTHERAPY: NCT02706951; SELECT-BEYOND: NCT02706847; SELECT-COMPARE: NCT02629159; SELECT-EARLY: NCT02706873, SELECT-CHOICE: NCT03086343), PsA (SELECT-PsA 2: NCT03104374; SELECT-PsA 1: NCT03104400), and AS (SELECT-AXIS 1: NCT03178487).

Proceedings of the GRAPPA 2022 Executive Retreat.

The Group for Research and Assessment of Psoriasis and Psoriatic Arthritis (GRAPPA) leadership congregated for a strategic planning meeting before the 2022 GRAPPA annual meeting in New York, USA. Meeting aims were to review GRAPPA's performance in relation to its 2016 goals and identify successes and areas for further improvement, identify key GRAPPA priorities and activities for the next 5 years, and explore committee structures to best support these aims.

Impact of COVID-19 on Patients With Psoriasis or Psoriatic Arthritis.

Given the impact of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) on patients with psoriatic disease (PsD), a session was devoted at the Group for Research and Assessment of Psoriasis and Psoriatic Arthritis (GRAPPA) 2022 annual meeting to discussing the current understanding of the risk of severe COVID-19 in patients with PsD. The effects of PsD and its treatment on prevention and treatment of COVID-19 with vaccinations, antiviral drugs, and monoclonal antibodies were discussed. The session concluded with a presentation on the perspectives of patient research partners about their experiences with COVID-19.

The effect of ixekizumab on axial manifestations in patients with psoriatic arthritis from two phase III clinical trials: SPIRIT-P1 and SPIRIT-P2.

Background: Psoriatic arthritis (PsA) is a chronic inflammatory condition predominantly affecting the peripheral joints. However, some patients with PsA can experience axial involvement which is manifested with back pain and associated with increased burden of illness. Objectives: The aim of this post hoc analysis was to determine the efficacy of ixekizumab (IXE) up to 52 weeks in reducing axial symptoms in PsA patients, presenting with axial manifestations. Design: This was a post hoc analysis of two pooled phase III clinical trials. Methods: Patients with axial manifestations, from two placebo-controlled, randomized, double-blind, phase III trials (SPIRIT-P1 and SPIRIT-P2), were defined as Bath Ankylosing Spondylitis Disease Activity Index (BASDAI) Question 2 (Q2; back pain)] total score ⩾4 and average of BASDAI Q5 + Q6 (morning stiffness) ⩾4 at baseline. For this post hoc analysis, the efficacy of IXE was evaluated at weeks 16, 24, and 52 using separate BASDAI questions (including back pain and morning stiffness), total BASDAI and modified BASDAI (mBASDAI; without Q3), Ankylosing Spondylitis Disease Activity Score (ASDAS), and 50% improvement in BASDAI (BASDAI50) response. Treatment comparisons were performed using logistic regression and analysis of covariance model for categorical and continuous end points, respectively. Results: In the post hoc analysis among PsA patients with axial manifestations at baseline (N = 313), improvements in back pain and morning stiffness at weeks 16 and 24 were significantly greater in patients receiving IXE versus placebo (both p < 0.001). Improvements in BASDAI individual scores and total scores, mBASDAI, and ASDAS were significantly greater in patients receiving IXE compared with placebo. Similarly, significantly more IXE-treated patients achieved BASDAI50 at weeks 16 and 24 versus placebo. The effect of IXE was sustained at week 52. Similar effects were observed in sensitivity analyses subgroups. Conclusion: IXE is effective in improving axial symptoms in patients with active PsA presenting with axial manifestations.

Ixekizumab improves symptoms of back pain and morning stiffness in patients with psoriatic arthritis Background: Psoriatic arthritis is a chronic, immune-mediated condition with heterogeneous manifestations including peripheral arthritis, axial arthritis, enthesitis, dactylitis, and skin and nail psoriasis. Some patients with psoriatic arthritis also experience symptoms relating to the spine and sacroiliac joint. These symptoms are referred to as axial manifestations of the psoriatic arthritis. Ixekizumab is a monoclonal antibody that targets IL-17A with high affinity. IL-17A has been implicated in the pathogenesis of PsA. Aim: The aim is to investigate the effects of ixekizumab in controlling symptoms suggestive of axial involvement in patients with active psoriatic arthritis. Methods: This post hoc analysis included patients with psoriatic arthritis from two phase III clinical trials. Only patients with psoriatic arthritis who had back pain and morning stiffness at baseline were included. In the second analysis, we assessed the effect of ixekizumab in a subset of patients with psoriatic arthritis with back pain who were aged less than 45 years. A third analysis included a subset of patients with increased CRP. Results: Our results show that patients with psoriatic arthritis and back pain suggestive of axial involvement experience a greater disease burden than patients without back pain. This post hoc analysis showed that ixekizumab was significantly better compared with placebo in improving inflammatory back pain, morning stiffness, and disease activity at weeks 16 and 24. Disease activity was also significantly improved in ixekizumab-treated patients compared with placebo. Conclusion: Axial manifestations in patients with psoriatic arthritis were significantly improved following ixekizumab treatment. These improvements were noted regardless of whether the patients were less than 45 years and regardless of the level of inflammation.

Australian consensus: Treatment goals for moderate to severe psoriasis in the era of targeted therapies - Adult patients.

BACKGROUND: Over the last decade, the treatment landscape for moderate-severe psoriasis has rapidly evolved. The Australasian College of Dermatologists sought to review and update previously published treatment goals for moderate-severe psoriasis. METHODS: A modified Delphi approach was used. Comprehensive literature review and guideline evaluation resulted in the development of statements and other questions to establish current clinical practices. Two rounds of anonymous voting were undertaken, with a collaborative meeting held in between to discuss areas of discordance. Overall, consensus was defined as achievement of ≥75% agreement in the range 7-9 on a 9-point scale (1 strongly disagree; 9 strongly agree). RESULTS: Consensus was achieved on 26/29 statements in round 1 and a further 20 statements in round 2. There was strong agreement to expanding the classification/definition of psoriasis severity by including a choice of metrics, incorporating quality of life measures, and widening the scope of high-impact sites. Consensus was also reached on revised treatment response criteria, which were then incorporated into a new treatment algorithm. There was discordance with the current requirement to undertake a trial with established systemic agents before accessing targeted therapy. CONCLUSION: The ability of new targeted treatment options to change the narrative in psoriasis patient care can only be properly realised if challenges to timely and equitable access are addressed. The proposed framework for the assessment, classification and management of moderate-severe psoriasis aligns with international recommendations. Its adoption into Australian clinical practice is hoped to improve treatment outcomes and patients' satisfaction with their care.

A Comprehensive Review of Ixekizumab Efficacy in Nail Psoriasis from Clinical Trials for Moderate-to-Severe Psoriasis and Psoriatic Arthritis.

Nail psoriasis is a difficult-to-treat manifestation of psoriatic disease affecting up to 80% of patients with psoriatic arthritis (PsA) and 40-60% of patients with plaque psoriasis (PsO). Ixekizumab (IXE), a high-affinity monoclonal antibody that selectively targets interleukin-17A, is approved for the treatment of patients with PsA and patients with moderate-to-severe PsO. This narrative review aims to summarize nail psoriasis data generated from IXE clinical trials in patients with PsA (SPIRIT-P1, SPIRIT-P2, and SPIRIT-H2H) and/or moderate-to-severe PsO (UNCOVER-1, -2, -3, IXORA-R, IXORA-S, and IXORA-PEDS) with an emphasis on head-to-head clinical trial data. Across numerous trials explored, IXE treatment was associated with greater improvement in resolution of nail disease versus comparators at week 24, results which were maintained up to and beyond week 52. Additionally, patients experienced higher rates of resolution of nail disease versus comparators at week 24 and maintained high levels of resolution up to week 52 and beyond. In both PsA and PsO, IXE demonstrated efficacy in treating nail psoriasis, and therefore may be an effective therapy option. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier UNCOVER-1 (NCT01474512), UNCOVER-2 (NCT01597245), UNCOVER-3 (NCT01646177), IXORA-PEDS (NCT03073200), IXORA-S (NCT02561806), IXORA-R (NCT03573323), SPIRIT-P1 (NCT01695239), SPIRIT-P2 (NCT02349295), SPIRIT-H2H (NCT03151551).

Long-Term Durability of Certolizumab Pegol in Patients with Rheumatoid Arthritis Over 5 Years: An Analysis of Pooled Clinical Trial Data.

INTRODUCTION: There is a paucity of data on how patient characteristics may affect the long-term durability of certolizumab pegol (CZP) in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA). This study therefore aimed to investigate CZP durability and reasons for discontinuation over 5 years between different subgroups of patients with RA. METHODS: Data were pooled from 27 clinical trials in RA patients. Durability was defined as the percentage of patients randomized to CZP at baseline who were still on CZP treatment at a given timepoint. Post hoc analyses of clinical trial data on CZP durability and reasons for discontinuation among different patient subgroups were conducted using Kaplan-Meier curves and Cox proportional hazards modeling. Patient subgroups included: age (18- < 45/45- < 65/ ≥ 65 years), gender (male/female), prior tumor necrosis factor inhibitor (TNFi) use (yes/no), and disease duration (< 1/1- < 5/5- < 10/ ≥ 10 years). RESULTS: Among 6927 patients, the durability of CZP was 39.7% at 5 years. Patients aged ≥ 65 years had a 33% greater risk of CZP discontinuation than patients 18- < 45 years (hazard ratio [95% confidence interval]: 1.33 [1.19-1.49]) and patients with prior TNFi use had a 24% greater risk of discontinuing CZP than patients without (1.24 [1.12-1.37]). Conversely, greater durability was observed among patients who had a baseline disease duration of ≥ 1 year. Durability did not differ in the gender subgroup. Of the 6927 patients, the most common reason for discontinuation was inadequate levels of efficacy (13.5%); followed by adverse events (11.9%); consent withdrawn (6.7%); lost to follow-up (1.8%); protocol violation (1.7%); other reasons (9.3%). CONCLUSIONS: CZP durability was comparable with durability data on other bDMARDs in RA patients. Patient characteristics that were associated with greater durability included younger age, TNFi-naïvety, and disease duration ≥ 1 year. Findings may be helpful in informing clinicians on a patient's likelihood of discontinuing CZP, based on their baseline characteristics.