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 .).

Infections in baricitinib clinical trials for patients with active rheumatoid arthritis.

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the incidence of infection in patients with active rheumatoid arthritis (RA) treated with baricitinib, an oral selective Janus kinase (JAK)1 and JAK2 inhibitor. METHODS: Infections are summarised from an integrated database (8 phase 3/2/1b clinical trials and 1 long-term extension (LTE)) with data to 1 April 2017. The 'all-bari-RA' analysis set included patients who received any baricitinib dose. Placebo comparison was based on six studies with 4 mg and placebo to week 24, including four trials with 2 mg (placebo-controlled set). Dose-response assessment was based on four studies with 2 mg and 4 mg, including LTE data (2-4 mg extended set). RESULTS: There were 3492 patients who received baricitinib for 7860 patient-years (PY) of exposure (median 2.6 years, maximum 6.1 years). Treatment-emergent infections were higher for baricitinib versus placebo (exposure-adjusted incidence rate (IR)/100 PY: placebo 75.9, 2 mg 84.0 (p not significant), 4 mg 88.4 (p≤0.001)). The IR of serious infection was similar for baricitinib versus placebo and stable over time (all-bari-RA IR 3.0/100 PY). There were 11 cases of tuberculosis (all-bari-RA IR 0.1/100 PY); all occurred with 4 mg in endemic regions. Herpes zoster (HZ) IR/100 PY was higher for baricitinib versus placebo (placebo 1.0, 2 mg 3.1 (p not significant), 4 mg 4.3 (p≤0.01)); rates remained elevated and stable over time (all-bari-RA 3.3). Opportunistic infections, including multidermatomal HZ, were infrequent in the baricitinib programme (all-bari-RA IR 0.5/100 PY). CONCLUSIONS: Increased rates of treatment-emergent infections including HZ were observed in patients with RA treated with baricitinib, consistent with baricitinib's immunomodulatory mode of action.

Baricitinib in patients with rheumatoid arthritis with inadequate response to methotrexate: results from a phase 3 study.

OBJECTIVES: This study evaluated the efficacy and safety of baricitinib, an oral Janus kinase (JAK)1/JAK2 inhibitor, in patients with moderately to severely active rheumatoid arthritis (RA) and inadequate response to methotrexate (MTX) therapy. METHODS: In this phase 3, double-blind, 52-week, placebo-controlled study, 290 patients with moderately to severely active RA and inadequate response to MTX were randomly assigned 1:1 to placebo or baricitinib 4-mg once daily, stratified by country (China, Brazil, Argentina) and presence of joint erosions. Primary endpoint measures included American College of Rheumatology 20% response (ACR20) at week 12. Secondary endpoints included changes in Health Assessment Questionnaire-Disability Index (HAQ-DI) and Disease Activity Score for 28-joint counts (DAS28)-high-sensitivity C-reactive protein (hsCRP), Simplified Disease Activity Index (SDAI) score ≤3.3, mean duration of morning joint stiffness, severity of morning joint stiffness numeric rating scale (NRS 0-10), worst tiredness NRS, and worst joint pain NRS at week 12. RESULTS: Most patients (approximately 80%) were from China. More patients achieved ACR20 response at week 12 with baricitinib than with placebo (58.6% vs. 28.3%; p<0.001). Statistically significant improvements were also seen in HAQ-DI, DAS28-hsCRP, morning joint stiffness, worst tiredness, and worst joint pain in the baricitinib group compared to placebo at week 12. Through week 24, rates of treatment-emergent adverse events, including infections, were higher for baricitinib compared to placebo, while serious adverse event rates were similar between baricitinib and placebo. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with RA who had an inadequate response to MTX, baricitinib was associated with significant clinical improvements as compared with placebo.

Safety profile of baricitinib in Japanese patients with active rheumatoid arthritis with over 1.6 years median time in treatment: An integrated analysis of Phases 2 and 3 trials.

Objectives: Baricitinib is a selective oral inhibitor of JAK1/JAK2 for patients with moderately-to-severely active rheumatoid arthritis (RA). Baricitinib's safety profile in Japanese patients was evaluated using six studies (five Ph2/Ph3 trials, one long-term extension study through 01 September 2016) from an integrated database (nine RA studies).Methods: Incidence rates (IRs) or exposure-adjusted IRs (EAIRs) of adverse events (AEs) per 100 patient-years (PY) were calculated using data which included RA patients exposed to any baricitinib dose.Results: Five hundred and fourteen Japanese patients received baricitinib for 851.5 total PY of exposure (median 1.7 years, maximum 3.2). The EAIR of treatment-emergent AEs was 57.4/100PY. There were no deaths; 31 patients had serious infections (IR: 3.6/100PY), 55 herpes zoster (6.5), 0 tuberculosis, 10 malignancies (1.1) including two lymphomas, two major cardiovascular AEs (0.3), one gastrointestinal perforation (0.1), and four deep vein thrombosis (0.5). In Japanese patients, herpes zoster was more frequent than that of patients overall in the integrated database, but the events were considered manageable.Conclusion: In this analysis, baricitinib had acceptable safety profile in Japanese RA patients in the context of demonstrated efficacy. Aside from herpes zoster, baricitinib safety was not notably different between Japanese RA patients and those RA patients in the integrated database.Trial registration: NCT01185353, NCT00902486, NCT01469013, NCT01710358, NCT01721044, NCT01721057, NCT01711359, and NCT01885078 at https://clinicaltrials.gov/.

Baricitinib in Patients with Refractory Rheumatoid Arthritis.

BACKGROUND: In phase 2 studies, baricitinib, an oral Janus kinase 1 and 2 inhibitor, reduced disease activity in patients with rheumatoid arthritis who had not previously received treatment with biologic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs). METHODS: In this phase 3 study involving 527 patients with an inadequate response to or unacceptable side effects associated with one or more tumor necrosis factor inhibitors, other biologic DMARDs, or both, we randomly assigned the patients in a 1:1:1 ratio to baricitinib at a dose of 2 or 4 mg daily or placebo for 24 weeks. End points, tested hierarchically at week 12 to control type 1 error, were the American College of Rheumatology 20% (ACR20) response (primary end point), the Health Assessment Questionnaire-Disability Index (HAQ-DI) score, the 28-joint Disease Activity Score based on C-reactive protein level (DAS28-CRP), and a Simplified Disease Activity Index (SDAI) score of 3.3 or less (on a scale of 0.1 to 86.0, with a score of 3.3 or less indicating remission). Comparisons with placebo were made first with the 4-mg dose of baricitinib and then with the 2-mg dose. RESULTS: Significantly more patients receiving baricitinib at the 4-mg dose than those receiving placebo had an ACR20 response at week 12 (55% vs. 27%, P<0.001). Differences between the higher-dose baricitinib group and the placebo group were also significant for the HAQ-DI score and the DAS28-CRP but not for an SDAI score of 3.3 or less. Adverse-event rates through 24 weeks were higher for patients receiving the 2-mg dose of baricitinib and those receiving the 4-mg dose than for patients receiving placebo (71% and 77%, respectively, vs. 64%), including infections (44% and 40%, vs. 31%). The rates of serious adverse events were 4%, 10%, and 7% in the three groups, respectively. Two nonmelanoma skin cancers and two major adverse cardiovascular events, including a fatal stroke, occurred in the higher-dose group. Baricitinib was associated with a small reduction in neutrophil levels and increases in serum creatinine and low-density lipoprotein cholesterol levels. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with rheumatoid arthritis and an inadequate response to biologic DMARDs, baricitinib at a daily dose of 4 mg was associated with clinical improvement at 12 weeks. (Funded by Eli Lilly and Incyte; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01721044.).

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.

Dose reduction of baricitinib in patients with rheumatoid arthritis achieving sustained disease control: results of a prospective study.

OBJECTIVES: This study investigated the effects of dose step-down in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) who achieved sustained disease control with baricitinib 4 mg once a day. METHODS: Patients who completed a baricitinib phase 3 study could enter a long-term extension (LTE). In the LTE, patients who received baricitinib 4 mg for ≥15 months and maintained CDAI low disease activity (LDA) or remission (REM) were blindly randomised to continue 4 mg or taper to 2 mg. Patients could rescue (to 4 mg) if needed. Efficacy and safety were assessed through 48 weeks. RESULTS: Patients in both groups maintained LDA (80% 4 mg; 67% 2 mg) or REM (40% 4 mg; 33% 2 mg) over 48 weeks. However, dose reduction resulted in small, statistically significant increases in disease activity at 12, 24 and 48 weeks. Dose reduction also produced earlier and more frequent relapse (loss of step-down criteria) over 48 weeks compared with 4 mg maintenance (23% 4 mg vs 37% 2 mg, p=0.001). Rescue rates were 10% for baricitinib 4 mg and 18% for baricitinib 2 mg. Dose reduction was associated with a numerically lower rate of non-serious infections (30.6 for baricitinib 4 mg vs 24.9 for 2 mg). Rates of serious adverse events and adverse events leading to discontinuation were similar across groups. CONCLUSIONS: In a large randomised, blinded phase 3 study, maintenance of RA control following induction of sustained LDA/REM with baricitinib 4 mg was greater with continued 4 mg than after taper to 2 mg. Nonetheless, most patients tapered to 2 mg could maintain LDA/REM or recapture with return to 4 mg if needed.

Lipid profile and effect of statin treatment in pooled phase II and phase III baricitinib studies.

OBJECTIVES: Lipid profiles are altered by active disease in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) and may be further modified by treatment with Janus kinase inhibitors and other disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs. METHODS: Lipid data were analysed from phase II and III studies of 4 mg (n=997) and 2 mg (n=479) oral baricitinib administered once daily in patients with moderate-to-severe active RA. Lipoprotein particle size and number and GlycA were evaluated with nuclear magnetic resonance in one phase III study. The effect of statin therapy on lipid levels was evaluated in patients on statins at baseline and in patients who initiated statins during the study. RESULTS: Treatment with baricitinib was associated with increased levels of total cholesterol, low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C), high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-C) and triglycerides, but no significant change in LDL-C:HDL-C ratio. Lipid levels plateaued after 12 weeks of treatment. Baricitinib treatment increased large LDL and decreased small, dense LDL particle numbers and GlycA. Lipid changes from baseline were not significantly different between baseline statin users and non-users. In patients who initiated statin therapy during the study, LDL-C, triglycerides (baricitinib 4 mg only) and apolipoprotein B decreased to pre-baricitinib levels; HDL-C and apolipoprotein A-I levels remained elevated. CONCLUSIONS: Baricitinib was associated with increased LDL-C, HDL-C and triglyceride levels, but did not alter the LDL-C:HDL-C ratio. Evaluation of cardiovascular event rates during long-term treatment is warranted to further characterise these findings and their possible clinical implications. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT00902486, NCT01469013, NCT01185353, NCT01721044, NCT01721057, NCT01711359, NCT01710358, NCT01885078.

Response to baricitinib based on prior biologic use in patients with refractory rheumatoid arthritis.

Objective: RA patients who have failed biologic DMARDs (bDMARDs) represent an unmet medical need. We evaluated the effects of baseline characteristics, including prior bDMARD exposure, on baricitinib efficacy and safety. Methods: RA-BEACON patients (previously reported) had moderate to severe RA with insufficient response to one or more TNF inhibitor and were randomized 1:1:1 to once-daily placebo or 2 or 4 mg baricitinib. Prior bDMARD use was allowed. The primary endpoint was a 20% improvement in ACR criteria (ACR20) at week 12 for 4 mg vs placebo. An exploratory, primarily post hoc, subgroup analysis evaluated efficacy at weeks 12 and 24 by ACR20 and Clinical Disease Activity Index (CDAI) ⩽10. An interaction P-value ⩽0.10 was considered significant, with significance at both weeks 12 and 24 given more weight. Results: The odds ratios predominantly favored baricitinib over placebo and were generally similar to those in the overall study (3.4, 2.4 for ACR20 weeks 12 and 24, respectively). Significant quantitative interactions were observed for baricitinib 4 mg vs placebo at weeks 12 and 24: ACR20 by region (larger effect Europe) and CDAI ⩽10 by disease duration (larger effect ⩾10 years). No significant interactions were consistently observed for ACR20 by age; weight; disease duration; seropositivity; corticosteroid use; number of prior bDMARDs, TNF inhibitors or non-TNF inhibitors; or a specific prior TNF inhibitor. Treatment-emergent adverse event rates, including infections, appeared somewhat higher across groups with greater prior bDMARD use. Conclusion: Baricitinib demonstrated a consistent, beneficial treatment effect in bDMARD-refractory patients across subgroups based on baseline characteristics and prior bDMARD use. Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov (https://clinicaltrials.gov/), NCT01721044.

Efficacy and safety of baricitinib in Japanese patients with active rheumatoid arthritis: A 52-week, randomized, single-blind, extension study.

OBJECTIVES: The objective of this study is to evaluate the efficacy and safety of long-term (64 weeks; 52-week extension of a 12-week study) baricitinib treatment in Japanese patients with active rheumatoid arthritis (RA) despite methotrexate therapy. METHODS: Patients (N = 145) with active RA were randomized to placebo, 1mg, 2mg, 4mg, or 8mg baricitinib for the first 12 weeks. During the 52-week extension period, patients on 4mg or 8mg baricitinib remained on the same dose and all other patients were re-randomized to 4mg or 8mg baricitinib. Most patients on 8mg baricitinib were switched to 4mg by week 64 (protocol amendment); data analysis was based on the treatment group at the beginning of the extension period. RESULTS: Increases in the American College of Rheumatology (ACR) response rates (ACR20, ACR50, and ACR70) observed during the first 12 weeks were maintained during the extension period, accompanied by improvements in ACR core components. At week 64, a large proportion of patients (>40%) had low disease activity. Most treatment-related adverse events were mild or moderate; herpes zoster was the most common reason (11/27 patients) for discontinuation. CONCLUSIONS: The efficacy and safety profile of baricitinib was maintained during long-term treatment of Japanese patients with RA and background methotrexate therapy. Clinicaltrials.gov NCT01469013; Funding: Eli Lilly and Incyte.

Efficacy and safety of baricitinib in Japanese patients with rheumatoid arthritis: Subgroup analyses of four multinational phase 3 randomized trials.

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate efficacy/safety of baricitinib for rheumatoid arthritis (RA) in Japanese subpopulations from four phase 3 studies, and assess whether results in these subpopulations are consistent with the overall study populations. METHODS: Subgroup analyses (394 patients) of four phase 3 randomized controlled trials: RA-BEGIN [no or limited treatment with disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs)], RA-BEAM [inadequate response (IR) to methotrexate], RA-BUILD [IR to conventional synthetic DMARDs (csDMARDs)], and RA-BEACON (IR to tumor necrosis factor inhibitors receiving csDMARDs). RESULTS: For American College of Rheumatology 20% improvement (ACR20) response rate, Japanese patients receiving baricitinib 4-mg showed similar improvement compared to methotrexate at Week 24 (72 versus 69%; RA-BEGIN), and greater improvement compared with placebo at Week 12 (67 versus 34%; RA-BEAM). Japanese patients receiving baricitinib 4-mg also showed greater improvement compared with placebo at Week 12 in RA-BUILD and RA-BEACON. Across all studies, baricitinib was well-tolerated, with no deaths and one malignancy. In RA-BEGIN and RA-BEAM, herpes zoster rates were higher for Japanese patients than for overall populations; all events were mild/moderate. CONCLUSION: Data for baricitinib, with/without methotrexate, in Japanese subpopulations across all stages of the RA treatment continuum accord with the efficacy/safety profile in overall study populations. Baricitinib appears to be similarly effective in Japanese patients.

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.

Baricitinib in patients with inadequate response or intolerance to conventional synthetic DMARDs: results from the RA-BUILD study.

BACKGROUND: Baricitinib is an oral, reversible, selective Janus kinase 1 and 2 inhibitor. METHODS: In this phase III, double-blind 24-week study, 684 biologic disease-modifying antirheumatic drug (DMARD)-naïve patients with rheumatoid arthritis and inadequate response or intolerance to ≥1 conventional synthetic DMARDs were randomly assigned 1:1:1 to placebo or baricitinib (2 or 4 mg) once daily, stratified by region and the presence of joint erosions. Endpoint measures included American College of Rheumatology 20% response (ACR20, primary endpoint), Disease Activity Score (DAS28) and Simplified Disease Activity Index (SDAI) score ≤3.3. RESULTS: More patients achieved ACR20 response at week 12 with baricitinib 4 mg than with placebo (62% vs 39%, p≤0.001). Compared with placebo, statistically significant improvements in DAS28, SDAI remission, Health Assessment Questionnaire-Disability Index, morning joint stiffness, worst joint pain and worst tiredness were observed. In a supportive analysis, radiographic progression of structural joint damage at week 24 was reduced with baricitinib versus placebo. Rates of adverse events during the treatment period and serious adverse events (SAEs), including serious infections, were similar among groups (SAEs: 5% for baricitinib 4 mg and placebo). One patient had an adverse event of tuberculosis (baricitinib 4 mg); one patient had an adverse event of non-melanoma skin cancer (baricitinib 4 mg). Two deaths and three major adverse cardiovascular events occurred (placebo). Baricitinib was associated with a decrease in neutrophils and increases in low-density and high-density lipoprotein. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with rheumatoid arthritis and an inadequate response or intolerance to conventional synthetic DMARDs, baricitinib was associated with clinical improvement and inhibition of progression of radiographic joint damage. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT01721057; Results.

Patient-reported outcomes from a randomised phase III study of baricitinib in patients with rheumatoid arthritis and an inadequate response to biological agents (RA-BEACON).

OBJECTIVES: To assess baricitinib on patient-reported outcomes (PROs) in patients with moderately to severely active rheumatoid arthritis, who had insufficient response or intolerance to ≥1 tumour necrosis factor inhibitors (TNFis) or other biological disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (bDMARDs). METHODS: In this double-blind phase III study, patients were randomised to once-daily placebo or baricitinib 2 or 4 mg for 24 weeks. PROs included the Short Form-36, EuroQol 5-D, 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, duration of morning joint stiffness (MJS) and Work Productivity and Activity Impairment Questionnaire-Rheumatoid Arthritis. Treatment comparisons were performed with logistic regression for categorical measures or analysis of covariance for continuous variables. RESULTS: 527 patients were randomised (placebo, 176; baricitinib 2 mg, 174; baricitinib 4 mg, 177). Both baricitinib-treated groups showed statistically significant improvements versus placebo in most PROs. Improvements were generally more rapid and of greater magnitude for patients receiving baricitinib 4 mg than 2 mg and were maintained to week 24. At week 24, more baricitinib-treated patients versus placebo-treated patients reported normal physical functioning (HAQ-DI <0.5; p≤0.001), reductions in fatigue (FACIT-F ≥3.56; p≤0.05), improvements in PtGA (p≤0.001) and pain (p≤0.001) and reductions in duration of MJS (p<0.01). CONCLUSIONS: Baricitinib improved most PROs through 24 weeks compared with placebo in this study of treatment-refractory patients with previously inadequate responses to bDMARDs, including at least one TNFi. PRO results aligned with clinical efficacy data for baricitinib. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT01721044; Results.

Psychometric properties of morning joint stiffness duration and severity measures in patients with moderately to severely active rheumatoid arthritis.

BACKGROUND: To assess the measurement properties of two single-item patient-reported outcome (PRO) measures that assessed the length of time (in minutes) and severity of morning joint stiffness (MJS) experienced each day. METHODS: Data from two Phase 3, randomized placebo-controlled (and active-controlled [RA-BEAM]), clinical studies assessing the safety and efficacy of baricitinib in adults with moderately to severely active rheumatoid arthritis (RA) were used to evaluate the psychometric properties of the Duration of MJS and Severity of MJS PROs. RESULTS: Test-retest reliability of Duration of MJS and Severity of MJS was supported through large intraclass correlation coefficients among stable patients (coefficient range for both studies: 0.88 to 0.93). In support of construct validity, moderate correlations were evidenced between Duration of MJS and other related patient- and clinician-reported assessments of RA symptoms and patient functioning, whereas moderate-to-strong correlations were evidenced between these same patient- and clinician-reported assessments and Severity of MJS. Statistically significant differences between the median and mean values of Duration of MJS and Severity of MJS for differing categories of RA disease severity supported known-groups validity. Finally, large and statistically significant differences in change scores from Day 1 to Week 12 for patients defined as responders versus non-responders using the American College of Rheumatology 20 criteria supported the responsiveness of both PROs. CONCLUSION: Duration of MJS and Severity of MJS PROs demonstrated reliability, validity, and responsiveness in adults with moderately to severely active RA, supporting the measurement of these key symptoms in clinical trials.

Psychometric properties of the single-item measure, severity of worst tiredness, in patients with moderately to severely active rheumatoid arthritis.

BACKGROUND: To assess the reliability, validity, and responsiveness to treatment change of the single-item measure, Severity of Worst Tiredness, in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA). METHODS: Data from two Phase 3, randomized, placebo-controlled (RA-BUILD; and active-controlled [RA-BEAM]), clinical studies of the efficacy of baricitinib in adults with moderately to severely active RA were used. The psychometric properties of the single-item measure, Severity of Worst Tiredness, were assessed, including test-retest reliability, convergent and discriminant validity, known-groups validity, and responsiveness, using other patient- and clinician-reported outcomes frequently assessed in RA patients. RESULTS: Test-retest reliability of the Severity of Worst Tiredness was supported through large intraclass correlation coefficients (0.89 ≤ ICC ≤ 0.91). Moderate-to-large correlations were observed between this patient-reported outcome (PRO) and other related patient- and clinician-reported assessments of RA symptoms and patient functioning, supporting construct validity of the measure (│r│ ≥ 0.41). The instrument also displayed known-groups validity through statistically significant differences between mean values of the Severity of Worst Tiredness defined using other indicators of RA severity. Finally, responsiveness was supported by large and statistically significant differences in change scores from Day 1 to Week 12 for patients comparing responders and nonresponders using the American College of Rheumatology 20 (ACR20) criteria. CONCLUSION: The Severity of Worst Tiredness PRO demonstrated adequate reliability, validity, and responsiveness in clinical trials of adults with moderately to severely active RA and is fit for purpose in this patient population.

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.

Hurdles in new drug development in rheumatic diseases.

INTRODUCTION: Rheumatic diseases are heterogenous conditions with multifactorial underlying physiologic pathogeneses. Despite recent progress in the identification and development of advanced therapies primarily focusing on disrupting the immunological abnormalities that cause these conditions, rheumatic disease management remains challenging in a notable proportion of patients, with many exhibiting uncontrolled or refractory disease activity. New and improved therapies are needed to respond to this treatment gap. However, there are important hurdles that can affect the expedited identification and assessment of new treatments. METHODS: We present a review of key hurdles in the development of antirheumatic agents, as well as possible solutions to these obstacles. RESULTS: We highlight the challenges presented by incomplete understanding of the complexity of rheumatic disease pathophysiology and the resultant difficulties in the identification, development, and evaluation of new therapies. We further explore the diversity of the underlying disease processes leading to heterogeneity in patient response to treatment, necessitating the re-design of clinical trials of antirheumatic agents to detect efficacy signals and better inform clinical disease management. Finally, emergent strategies and methodologies with potential to improve upon these hurdles are presented. CONCLUSION: New and modified study designs and research tools that leverage ongoing advancements in the elucidation of rheumatic disease pathogenesis coupled with progress in methods to mine available data will be instrumental in overcoming current hurdles in antirheumatic drug development.

Levels of plasma fibrinogen are elevated in well-controlled rheumatoid arthritis.

OBJECTIVE: Patients with RA have systemic inflammation and increased risk of cardiovascular (CV) events, including thrombosis. Levels of fibrinogen, a pro-thrombotic protein with predictive value for CV disease (CVD), are elevated during systemic inflammation. We compared circulating fibrinogen levels in patients with RA with healthy controls and evaluated the relationship with measures of disease activity. METHODS: Patients with RA and controls were recruited at the University of California, San Francisco (UCSF). Disease activity was evaluated using standard composite indices. Fibrinogen, ESR, serum CRP, acute-phase serum amyloid A and levels of selected cytokines were quantified. RESULTS: A total of 105 RA patients and 62 controls were studied. Among patients with RA, disease activity ranged from quiescent to highly active disease. Circulating fibrinogen levels were significantly higher in RA than in controls [median (interquartile range) 466 (391-575) vs 367 (309-419) mg/dl, respectively, P < 0.0001]. This difference remained highly statistically significant after adjustment for demographic variables and BMI. Although fibrinogen correlated significantly with clinical measures of disease activity, significantly elevated levels were observed at low levels of activity, even in RA patients with no detectable swollen or tender joints. In multivariable models, ~ 80% of the increased fibrinogen in RA was accounted for by increases in CRP and ESR. CONCLUSION: Circulating levels of fibrinogen are elevated in RA and correlated with markers of inflammation, but only modestly correlate with clinical assessments of disease activity. Even RA patients with excellent clinical disease control exhibit elevated levels compared with controls.

Synovial tissue and serum biomarkers of disease activity, therapeutic response and radiographic progression: analysis of a proof-of-concept randomised clinical trial of cytokine blockade.

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate synovial tissue and serum biomarkers of disease activity, therapeutic response and radiographic progression during biological therapy for rheumatoid arthritis (RA). METHODS: Patients with active RA entered a randomised study of anakinra 100 mg/day, administered as monotherapy or in combination with pegsunercept 800 microg/kg twice a week. Arthroscopic synovial tissue biopsies were obtained at baseline and two further time points. Following immunohistochemical staining, selected mediators of RA pathophysiology were quantified using digital image analysis. Selected mediators were also measured in the serum. RESULTS: Twenty-two patients were randomly assigned: 11 received monotherapy and 11 combination therapy. American College of Rheumatology 20, 50 and 70 response rates were 64%, 64% and 46% with combination therapy and 36%, 9% and 0% with monotherapy, respectively. In synovial tissue, T-cell infiltration, vascularity and transforming growth factor beta (TGFbeta) expression demonstrated significant utility as biomarkers of disease activity and therapeutic response. In serum, interleukin 6 (IL-6), matrix metalloproteinase (MMP) 1, MMP-3 and tissue inhibitor of metalloproteinase 1 (TIMP-1) were most useful in this regard. An early decrease in serum levels of TIMP-1 was predictive of the later therapeutic outcome. Pretreatment tissue levels of T-cell infiltration and the growth factors vascular endothelial growth factor/TGFbeta, and serum levels of IL-6, IL-8, MMP-1, TIMP-1, soluble tumour necrosis factor receptor types I and II and IL-18 correlated with radiographic progression. CONCLUSIONS: Synovial tissue analysis identified biomarkers of disease activity, therapeutic response and radiographic progression. Biomarker expression in tissue was independent of the levels measured in the serum.