Upadacitinib in Active Non-radiographic Axial Spondyloarthritis: 1-Year Data From a Double-Blind, Randomized, Placebo-Controlled, Phase 3 Trial.

OBJECTIVE: Upadacitinib improved the signs and symptoms of non-radiographic axial spondyloarthritis (nr-axSpA) versus placebo over 14 weeks in the primary analysis of the SELECT-AXIS 2 nr-axSpA study. Here, we evaluated the efficacy and safety of upadacitinib through 1 year in patients with nr-axSpA in SELECT-AXIS 2. METHODS: Patients aged at least 18 years diagnosed with nr-axSpA who fulfilled the 2009 Assessment of SpondyloArthritis International Society (ASAS) classification criteria and were receiving stable background therapy were randomized to upadacitinib 15 mg once daily or placebo for the 52-week double-blind period. Efficacy was assessed using non-responder imputation incorporating multiple imputation (NRI-MI) and as-observed analyses for binary endpoints, and mixed-effects model repeated measures for continuous endpoints. RESULTS: Of 314 randomized patients, 259 (upadacitinib, n = 129; placebo, n = 130) completed 52 weeks of treatment. More patients receiving upadacitinib versus placebo achieved ≥40% improvement in ASAS at week 52 (63% vs 43%, NRI-MI; nominal P < 0.001). Similar treatment effects were observed for the achievement of axSpA Disease Activity Score inactive disease (33% v 11%, NRI-MI; nominal P < 0.001). Overall, patients receiving upadacitinib versus placebo showed greater improvement in disease activity, inflammation, pain, function, enthesitis, and quality of life through 52 weeks. Adverse events were generally comparable between the treatment groups. No opportunistic infections, malignancies, major adverse cardiovascular events, venous thromboembolic events, inflammatory bowel disease, or deaths were reported in those receiving upadacitinib. CONCLUSION: Treatment with upadacitinib showed sustained efficacy versus placebo with no new safety findings identified through 1 year. These results support the continued favorable benefit-risk profile of upadacitinib treatment for nr-axSpA.

BASDAI versus ASDAS in evaluating axial involvement in patients with psoriatic arthritis: a pooled analysis of two phase 3 studies.

Objective: In the absence of axial psoriatic arthritis (axPsA)-specific tools, the BASDAI and Ankylosing Spondylitis Disease Activity Score (ASDAS) are used to assess axial symptoms in patients with PsA. Here, we assessed the performance of BASDAI and ASDAS in patients with PsA. Methods: Patients with active PsA in DISCOVER-1 and DISCOVER-2 (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT03162796 and NCT03158285, respectively) with or without axPsA but with available baseline BASDAI information were analysed; those with investigator-identified axial symptoms and imaging-confirmed sacroiliitis comprised the axPsA cohort. Correlations between BASDAI/ASDAS and clinical variables were assessed with Pearson's coefficient (r). Longitudinal effects of enthesitis (Leeds Enthesitis Index [LEI]), swollen joint count and presence versus absence of axPsA on BASDAI/ASDAS (normalized 0-10 scale) were analysed with mixed models for repeated measures. Results: At baseline in the axPsA (n = 312) and non-axPsA (n = 124) cohorts, BASDAI scores showed no or weak correlation with swollen joint count (0.18-0.20), tender joint count (0.12-0.29), LEI (-0.04 to 0.24) and physician global assessment (0.35-0.43); moderate correlation with fatigue (both -0.56); and strong correlation with patient global assessment of disease activity (0.62-0.69) and patient-reported pain (0.66-0.70). Similar correlations were observed for ASDAS. Axial involvement versus non-involvement was associated with higher BASDAI scores and ASDAS (all ß ≥ 0.5), without differences between instruments; longitudinal associations between swollen joint count (ß ≤ 0.06)/LEI (ß ≤ 0.19) and BASDAI/ASDAS were clinically unimportant. Conclusion: BASDAI and ASDAS performed similarly in patients with active PsA and axial involvement, independent of peripheral disease involvement, supporting their performance in assessing axial disease activity. Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov, http://clinicaltrials.gov, NCT03162796 and NCT03158285.

Effect of Secukinumab Versus Adalimumab Biosimilar on Radiographic Progression in Patients With Radiographic Axial Spondyloarthritis: Results From a Head-to-Head Randomized Phase IIIb Study.

OBJECTIVE: Spinal radiographic progression is an important outcome in radiographic axial spondyloarthritis (SpA). The objective of the phase IIIb SURPASS study was to compare spinal radiographic progression in patients with radiographic axial SpA treated with secukinumab (interleukin-17A inhibitor) versus adalimumab biosimilar (Sandoz adalimumab [SDZ-ADL]; tumor necrosis factor inhibitor). METHODS: Biologic-naive patients with active radiographic axial SpA, at high risk of radiographic progression (high-sensitivity C-reactive protein [hsCRP] ≥5 mg/L and/or ≥1 syndesmophyte[s] on spinal radiographs), were randomized (1:1:1) to secukinumab (150/300 mg) or SDZ-ADL (40 mg). The proportion of patients with no radiographic progression (change from baseline [CFB] in modified Stoke Ankylosing Spondylitis Spinal Score [mSASSS] ≤0.5) on secukinumab versus SDZ-ADL at week 104 (primary endpoint), mean CFB-mSASSS, proportion of patients with ≥1 syndesmophyte(s) at baseline with no new syndesmophyte(s), and safety were evaluated. RESULTS: Overall, 859 patients (78.5% male, mSASSS 16.6, Bath Ankylosing Spondylitis Disease Activity Index 7.1, hsCRP 20.4 mg/L, and 73.0% with ≥1 syndesmophyte[s]) received secukinumab 150 mg (n = 287), secukinumab 300 mg (n = 286), or SDZ-ADL (n = 286). At week 104, the proportion of patients with no radiographic progression was 66.1%, 66.9%, and 65.6% (P = not significant, both secukinumab doses) and mean CFB-mSASSS was 0.54, 0.55, and 0.72 in secukinumab 150 mg, secukinumab 300 mg, and SDZ-ADL arms, respectively. Overall, 56.9%, 53.8%, and 53.3% of patients on secukinumab 150 mg, secukinumab 300 mg, and SDZ-ADL, respectively, with ≥1 syndesmophyte(s) at baseline did not develop new syndesmophyte(s) by week 104. There were no unexpected safety findings. CONCLUSION: Spinal radiographic progression over two years was low with no significant difference between secukinumab and SDZ-ADL arms. The safety of both treatments was consistent with previous reports.

Earlier clinical response predicts low rates of radiographic progression in biologic-naïve patients with active psoriatic arthritis receiving guselkumab treatment.

OBJECTIVE: Assess relationship between earlier clinical improvement and radiographic progression (RP) over 2 years in guselkumab-treated patients with active psoriatic arthritis (PsA). METHOD: Post hoc analyses combined data from DISCOVER-2 biologic-naïve adults with active PsA randomized to either guselkumab 100 mg every 4 weeks (Q4W) or guselkumab at W0, W4, then Q8W. Correlations (Spearman's coefficient) between baseline disease parameters and total PsA-modified van der Heijde-Sharp (vdH-S) score were examined. Repeated-measures mixed models, adjusted for known RP risk factors, assessed the relationship between Disease Activity Index in PsA (DAPSA) improvement, DAPSA improvement exceeding the median or the minimal clinically important difference (MCID), or DAPSA low disease activity (LDA) at W8 and RP rate, assessed by change from baseline in vdH-S score through W100. RESULTS: Baseline age, PsA duration, CRP level, and swollen joint count, but not psoriasis duration/severity, weakly correlated with baseline vdH-S score. Elevated baseline CRP (parameter estimate [ß] = 0.17-0.18, p < 0.03) and vdH-S score (ß = 0.02, p < 0.0001) significantly associated with greater RP through W100. Greater improvement in DAPSA (ß = -0.03, p = 0.0096), achievement of DAPSA improvement > median (least squares mean [LSM] difference: -0.66, p = 0.0405) or > MCID (-0.67, p = 0.0610), or DAPSA LDA (-1.44, p = 0.0151) by W8 with guselkumab significantly associated with less RP through W100. The effect of W8 DAPSA LDA on future RP was strengthened over time among achievers vs. non-achievers (LSM difference enhanced from -1.05 [p = 0.0267] at W52 to -1.84 [p = 0.0154] at W100). CONCLUSIONS: In guselkumab-treated patients with active PsA, earlier improvement in joint symptoms significantly associated with lower RP rates through 2 years, indicating blockade of the IL-23 pathway may modify long-term disease course and prevent further joint damage. Key Points • Greater improvement in DAPSA at Week 8 of guselkumab treatment was significantly associated with less progression of structural joint damage at 2 years in patients with active psoriatic arthritis (PsA). • Early control of peripheral joint disease activity with blockade of the IL-23 pathway may modify long-term PsA trajectory and prevent further joint damage.

Effect of Upadacitinib on Quality of Life and Work Productivity in Active Non-radiographic Axial Spondyloarthritis: Results From Randomized Phase 3 Trial SELECT-AXIS 2.

INTRODUCTION: To evaluate the effect of upadacitinib vs. placebo on health-related quality of life (HRQoL) and work productivity in patients with active non-radiographic axial spondyloarthritis (nr-axSpA) enrolled in the SELECT-AXIS 2 phase 3 randomized controlled trial. METHODS: Adult patients with active nr-axSpA and an inadequate response to non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs were randomized 1:1 to receive upadacitinib 15 mg once daily or placebo. Mean changes from baseline in measures of HRQoL (Ankylosing Spondylitis QoL [ASQoL], Assessment of SpondyloArthritis international Society Health Index [ASAS HI], Short-Form 36 Physical Component Summary [SF-36 PCS] score) and Work Productivity and Activity Impairment (WPAI) were assessed through 14 weeks based on mixed-effects repeated measures or analysis of covariance models. The proportions of patients with improvements ≥ minimum clinically important differences (MCID) were assessed in HRQoL measures at week 14 using non-responder imputation with multiple imputation. RESULTS: At week 14, upadacitinib- vs. placebo-treated patients reported greater improvements from baseline in ASQoL and ASAS HI (ranked, P < 0.001) and in SF-36 PCS and WPAI overall work impairment (nominal P < 0.05). Improvements were observed as early as week 2 in ASAS HI. Greater proportions of upadacitinib vs. placebo-treated patients reported improvements ≥ MCID in ASQoL (62.6 vs. 40.9%), ASAS HI (44.8 vs. 28.8%), and SF-36 PCS (69.3 vs. 52.0%), with numbers needed to treat < 10 for all (nominal P ≤ 0.01). Improvements ≥ MCID were consistently observed irrespectively of prior exposure to tumor necrosis factor inhibitors. CONCLUSIONS: Upadacitinib provides clinically meaningful improvements in HRQoL and work productivity in patients with active nr-axSpA. CLINICAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT04169373, SELECT-AXIS 2.

Non-drug and surgical treatment algorithm and recommendations for the 2020 update of the Japan College of Rheumatology clinical practice guidelines for the management of rheumatoid arthritis-secondary publication.

OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to update the Japan College of Rheumatology (JCR) clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) for the management of rheumatoid arthritis (RA) and prepare an algorithm for non-drug and surgical treatments. This article is a digest version of the guidelines. METHODS: The Japanese Ministry of Health, Labour and Welfare's research group, in collaboration with the JCR, used the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation method to update the 2014 JCR CPG for RA. The consensus was formed by CPG panel members. RESULTS: We raised 19 clinical questions regarding non-drug and surgical treatments for RA and developed recommendations. The treatments included exercise therapy; occupational therapy; joint injection of corticosteroids; and orthopaedic surgeries including cervical spine surgery, wrist and foot arthroplasty, ankle arthrodesis, and replacement arthroplasty of the shoulder, elbow, finger, hip, knee, and ankle. Recommendations regarding the risks of surgery and perioperative discontinuation of medications have also been developed. Based on these recommendations, we created an original algorithm for the non-drug and surgical treatment of RA. CONCLUSIONS: These recommendations are expected to serve rheumatologists, health care professionals, and patients with RA as tools for shared decision-making to treat residual limb joint symptoms and functional impairment.

Efficacy and Safety of Upadacitinib in Patients with Psoriatic Arthritis: 2-Year Results from the Phase 3 SELECT-PsA 1 Study.

INTRODUCTION: Efficacy and safety of the Janus kinase (JAK) inhibitor upadacitinib (UPA) was evaluated in patients with psoriatic arthritis (PsA) through week 104 of the ongoing long-term extension of the phase 3 trial SELECT-PsA 1. METHODS: Exploratory analyses of all primary and secondary endpoints (non-responder imputation and as observed for binary endpoints; mixed-effect model repeated measures and as observed for continuous endpoints), and summary of treatment-emergent adverse events, in patients receiving UPA 15 mg (UPA15) or 30 mg (UPA30) once daily, or adalimumab 40 mg (ADA) every other week, through week 104 are reported. RESULTS: Of 1704 patients, 25.4% discontinued the study drug by week 104. Proportions of patients achieving ≥ 20%/50%/70% improvement in American College of Rheumatology criteria (ACR20/50/70), ≥ 75%/90%/100% improvement in Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI75/90/100), or minimal disease activity (MDA) were maintained through week 104; greater responses by nominal P value were observed with UPA15 and UPA30 versus ADA for ACR20/50/70 and MDA. Mean change from baseline in modified total Sharp/van der Heijde Score (mTSS) was similar across groups and to week 56 results. The safety profile of UPA was generally comparable to ADA and not altered from week 56 data. Rates of serious infection, herpes zoster, anemia, neutropenia, lymphopenia, and elevated creatine phosphokinase remained numerically higher with UPA15 and/or UPA30 versus ADA. Rates of malignancies excluding non-melanoma skin cancer (NMSC), major adverse cardiovascular events, and venous thromboembolism were similar across groups; rates of NMSC were higher with UPA versus ADA. Two deaths were reported with UPA15, one with UPA30, and one with ADA. CONCLUSIONS: In PsA patients, efficacy responses were similar or greater with UPA15 or UPA30 versus ADA through week 104, and inhibition of radiographic progression was maintained. No new safety risks were identified with exposure to UPA through 2 years (week 104). CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03104400.

Evaluation of VTE, MACE, and Serious Infections Among Patients with RA Treated with Baricitinib Compared to TNFi: A Multi-Database Study of Patients in Routine Care Using Disease Registries and Claims Databases.

INTRODUCTION: The aim of this work is to evaluate baricitinib safety with respect to venous thromboembolism (VTE), major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE), and serious infection relative to tumor necrosis factor inhibitors (TNFi) in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA). METHODS: Patients with RA from 14 real-world data sources (three disease registries, eight commercial and three government health insurance claims databases) in the United States (n = 9), Europe (n = 3), and Japan (n = 2) were analyzed using a new user active comparator design. Propensity score matching (1:1) controlled for potential confounding. Meta-analysis of incidence rate ratios (IRR) and incidence rate differences (IRD) for each outcome, from each data source was executed using modified Poisson regression and Cochran-Mantel-Haenszel analysis. RESULTS: Of 9013 eligible baricitinib-treated patients, 7606 were propensity score-matched with TNFi-treated patients, contributing 5879 and 6512 person-years of baricitinib and TNFi exposure, respectively. Across data sources, 97 patients (56 baricitinib) experienced VTE during follow-up, 93 experienced MACE (54 baricitinib), and 321 experienced serious infection (176 baricitinib). Overall IRRs comparing baricitinib with TNFi treatment were 1.51 (95% CI 1.10, 2.08) for VTE, 1.54 (95% CI 0.93, 2.54) for MACE, and 1.36 (95% CI 0.86, 2.13) for serious infection. IRDs for VTE, MACE, and serious infection, respectively, were 0.26 (95% CI -0.04, 0.57), 0.22 (95% CI -0.07, 0.52), and 0.57 (95% CI -0.07, 1.21) per 100 person-years greater for baricitinib than TNFi. CONCLUSIONS: Overall results suggest increased risk of VTE with baricitinib versus TNFi, with consistent point estimates from the two largest data sources. A numerically greater risk was observed for MACE and serious infection when comparing baricitinib versus TNFi, with different point estimates from the two largest data sources. Findings from this study and their impact on clinical practice should be considered in context of limitations and other evidence regarding the safety and efficacy of baricitinib and other Janus kinase inhibitors. TRIAL REGISTRATION: EU PAS Register ( http://encepp.eu ), identifier #32271.

Management of Psoriatic Arthritis in Patients With Comorbidities: An Updated Literature Review Informing the 2021 GRAPPA Treatment Recommendations.

OBJECTIVE: The 2021 Group for Research and Assessment of Psoriasis and Psoriatic Arthritis (GRAPPA) treatment recommendations provide an evidence-based guide for selecting therapy based on the individual's disease features. Beyond the disease features and associated conditions (eg, uveitis and inflammatory bowel disease), comorbidities play an important role in selecting therapy for an individual patient. METHODS: We performed a systematic literature review. We examined the available evidence to inform treatment selection based on the presence or absence of comorbidities in psoriatic arthritis (PsA). RESULTS: Common comorbidities in PsA that may affect treatment selection include presence of baseline cardiovascular disease (CVD) or high risk for CVD, obesity and metabolic syndrome, liver disease, mood disorders, including depression in particular, chronic infections, malignancies, osteoporosis, and fibromyalgia and/or central sensitization. CONCLUSION: Comorbidities may influence both the effectiveness of a given therapy but also the potential for adverse events. It is important to assess for the presence of comorbidities prior to therapy selection.

Advantages of an alternate-day glucocorticoid treatment strategy for the treatment of IgG4-related disease: A preliminary retrospective cohort study.

Alternate-day glucocorticoid (GC) therapy is a treatment option that can reduce GC-associated adverse events. We investigated the safety and efficacy of alternate-day GC therapy in patients with immunoglobulin G4-related disease (IgG4-RD). Medical records of patients with IgG4-RD who were followed for at least one year at St. Luke's International Hospital, Tokyo, Japan, from 2004 to 2020 were reviewed. Patients who fulfilled comprehensive IgG4-RD diagnostic criteria were divided into alternate-day or daily GC treatment groups based on their treatment protocol. The effect of alternate-day GC therapy on glucocorticoid toxicity index (GTI) score was evaluated using multilinear analysis with adjustments for cumulative GC doses until each assessment point and propensity scores (PS) for alternate-day GC therapy. Kaplan-Meier curves and Cox proportional hazard models were used to assess the efficacy of alternate-day GC therapy for disease control. Among the 67 patients with IgG4-RD, patients with alternate-day (n = 13) and daily (n = 31) GC treatments were analyzed after excluding 23 ineligible patients. The median (interquartile range) age was 64 (60-70) years, 29 (65.9%) were male patients, 26 (59.1%) patients had positive biopsy results, and the median follow-up period was 1643 days. Significantly more patients with alternate-day GC treatment used concomitant immunosuppressants (11 [84.6%] vs 11 [35.5%]; P = .007). The alternate-day strategy significantly lowered the GTI score after adjusting for cumulative GC dose until the assessment and PS (adjusted coefficient: -29.5 [-54.3, -4.8], P = .021 at 12 months; -20.0 [-39.8, -0.1], P = .049 at 24 months). Serious infections were numerically less frequent in the alternate-day group (incidence ratio [95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.45 [0.05, 3.63], P = .45). Most patients (92.3%) in the alternate-day GC treatment group and all patients in the daily GC treatment group showed treatment responses in the remission induction therapy. The PS-adjusted hazard ratio of alternate-day GC treatment for disease flares was not significant (1.55 [0.53, 4.51]; P = .43). The alternate-day treatment strategy significantly reduced GC-related adverse events regardless of the cumulative GC dose. Alternate-day GC treatment is a feasible option for patients with IgG4-RD, without a significant increase in disease flares particularly when combined with immunosuppressants.

Upadacitinib in active ankylosing spondylitis: results of the 2-year, double-blind, placebo-controlled SELECT-AXIS 1 study and open-label extension.

INTRODUCTION: Long-term safety and efficacy of upadacitinib in patients with active ankylosing spondylitis (AS) has not been previously reported. METHODS: In SELECT-AXIS 1, patients receiving placebo were switched to upadacitinib 15 mg once daily at week 14 while patients initially randomised to upadacitinib continued their regimen through week 104. Efficacy was assessed using as-observed (AO) and non-responder imputation (NRI). RESULTS: Of 187 patients randomised, 144 patients (77%) completed week 104. Among patients receiving continuous upadacitinib, 85.9% (AO) and 65.6% (NRI) achieved Assessment of SpondyloArthritis international Society 40 response (ASAS40) at week 104. Similar magnitude of ASAS40 responses were observed among patients who switched from placebo to upadacitinib (88.7% and 63.8%, respectively). The mean change from baseline to week 104 in Spondyloarthritis Research Consortium of Canada MRI spine and sacroiliac joint inflammation scores were -7.3 and -5.3, respectively, in the continuous upadacitinib group and -7.9 and -4.9 in the placebo-to-upadacitinib switch group. The mean (95% CI) change from baseline to week 104 in the modified Stoke Ankylosing Spondylitis Spine Score was 0.7 (0.3, 1.1) in the total group. Adverse event rate was 242.7/100 patient-years. No serious infections, adjudicated major adverse cardiovascular events, lymphoma, non-melanoma skin cancer, or gastrointestinal perforations were observed. CONCLUSIONS: Upadacitinib 15 mg once daily showed sustained and consistent efficacy over 2 years for ASAS40 and other clinically relevant endpoints. A low rate of radiographic progression was observed and no new safety findings were observed.

Upadacitinib for the treatment of active non-radiographic axial spondyloarthritis (SELECT-AXIS 2): a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3 trial.

BACKGROUND: Upadacitinib, a Janus kinase inhibitor, has been shown to be effective in patients with ankylosing spondylitis. We aimed to assess the efficacy and safety of upadacitinib in non-radiographic axial spondyloarthritis. METHODS: The SELECT-AXIS 2 non-radiographic axial spondyloarthritis study was a multicentre, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3 trial at 113 sites across 23 countries (Argentina, Australia, Belgium, Brazil, Bulgaria, Canada, China, Czech Republic, France, Germany, Hungary, Israel, Japan, Mexico, Poland, Russia, Slovakia, South Korea, Spain, Taiwan, Turkey, Ukraine, and the USA). Eligible adults had active non-radiographic axial spondyloarthritis, with objective signs of inflammation based on MRI or elevated C-reactive protein and an inadequate response to non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive oral upadacitinib 15 mg once daily or placebo using interactive response technology. Random treatment assignment was stratified by MRI inflammation in the sacroiliac joints and screening high-sensitivity C-reactive protein status (MRI-positive and C-reactive protein-positive, MRI-positive and C-reactive protein-negative, and MRI-negative and C-reactive protein-positive) and previous exposure to biologic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (yes vs no). Treatment assignment was masked from patients, investigators, study site personnel, and the study sponsor. The primary endpoint was the proportion of patients with an Assessment of SpondyloArthritis international Society 40 (ASAS40) response at week 14. Analyses were performed on the full analysis set of patients, who underwent random allocation and received at least one dose of study drug. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04169373. FINDINGS: Between Nov 26, 2019, and May 20, 2021, 314 patients with active non-radiographic axial spondyloarthritis were enrolled into the study, and 313 received study drug (156 in the upadacitinib group and 157 in the placebo group); 295 (94%) patients (145 in the upadacitinib group and 150 in the placebo group) received treatment for the full 14 weeks. A significantly higher ASAS40 response rate was achieved with upadacitinib compared with placebo at week 14 (70 [45%] of 156 patients vs 35 [23%] of 157 patients; p<0·0001; treatment difference 22%, 95% CI 12-32). The rate of adverse events up to week 14 was similar in the upadacitinib group (75 [48%] of 156 patients) and placebo group (72 [46%] of 157 patients). Serious adverse events and adverse events leading to discontinuation of study drug occurred in four (3%) of 156 patients in the upadacitinib group and two (1%) of 157 patients in the placebo group. Few patients had serious infections or herpes zoster in either treatment group (each event occurred in two [1%] of 156 patients in the upadacitinib group and one [1%] of 157 patients in the placebo group). Five (3%) of 156 patients in the upadacitinib group had neutropenia; no events of neutropenia occurred in the placebo group. No opportunistic infections, malignancies, major adverse cardiovascular events, venous thromboembolic events, or deaths were reported with upadacitinib treatment. INTERPRETATION: Upadacitinib significantly improved the signs and symptoms of non-radiographic axial spondyloarthritis compared with placebo at week 14. These findings support the potential of upadacitinib as a new therapeutic option in patients with active non-radiographic axial spondyloarthritis. FUNDING: AbbVie.

Patient perceptions of psoriatic disease in Japan: Results from the Japanese subgroup of the Understanding Psoriatic Disease Leveraging Insights for Treatment (UPLIFT) survey.

The population-based Understanding Psoriatic Disease Leveraging Insights for Treatment (UPLIFT) survey was designed to better understand patient and dermatologist perceptions of the disease burden of psoriasis (PsO) and their treatment expectations. UPLIFT was a cross-sectional, quantitative, online survey conducted in Europe, North America, and Japan between 2 March and 3 June 2020. In Japan, 391 patients reporting a diagnosis of PsO and/or psoriatic arthritis (PsA) were surveyed (75% had PsO alone, 23% had PsO and PsA, and 2% had PsA alone). Self-reported body surface area (BSA) data were available for 309 Japanese patients, with the majority (80%) reporting PsO-involved BSA ≤3 palms. Current symptoms of PsO were rated as moderate or severe by 43% of Japanese patients with BSA ≤3 palms, and severe by 44% of patients with BSA 4-10 palms. PsO frequently occurred in ≥1 special areas, most commonly the scalp in 76% of Japanese patients with BSA ≤3 palms, and ≥90% of those with BSA ≥4 palms. Furthermore, musculoskeletal symptoms in 42% of patients with PsO alone were suggestive of PsA. Whereas Japanese patients with BSA ≤3 palms mainly reported receiving topical therapy alone (34%) or no treatment (32%), 64% patients with BSA 4-10 palms reported receiving systemic therapy. Overall, 21% of Japanese patients with self-perceived mild symptoms of PsO and 48% of patients with special area involvement experienced at least a moderate impact of disease on quality of life (Dermatology Life Quality Index score >5). Moreover, patients and dermatologists differed in their perceptions of determinants of PsO severity and treatment, and office visit discussions. In general, these findings from the Japanese subgroup of the UPLIFT survey demonstrated that a high proportion of patients perceived their symptoms to be moderate or severe irrespective of the level of skin involvement, suggesting a persistent unmet treatment need.

Clinical characteristics of patients with spondyloarthritis and inflammatory bowel disease versus inflammatory bowel disease-related arthritis.

The purpose of this study was to clarify the clinical characteristics of spondyloarthritis (SpA) patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) compared to those without IBD. Furthermore, among patients with SpA and IBD, we aimed to clarify what clinical characteristics lead rheumatologists to diagnose "IBD-related arthritis." Utilizing SpA and psoriatic arthritis (PsA) patients' data from an international, cross-sectional, observational study, we analyzed information on demographics and disease characteristics, dichotomizing patients by IBD status. The presence or absence of IBD was determined based on data collection of treating rheumatologists. Patients with SpA (including PsA) and IBD were also categorized based on treating rheumatologists' definitive diagnosis in regard to SpA type, and compared by whether the patients had IBD-related arthritis or not. Among 4465 SpA patients, 287 (6.4%, 95%CI 5.7-7.2%) were identified with IBD. Compared to SpA patients without IBD, patients with SpA and IBD had a longer diagnostic delay (5.1 vs. 2.9 years, p < 0.001). In patients with SpA and IBD, 111 (38.7%, 95%CI 33.0-44.6%) were diagnosed with IBD-related arthritis. Multivariable analyses showed that HLA-B27 positivity [OR = 0.35, (95%CI 0.15-0.80)], psoriasis [OR = 0.14, (95%CI 0.04-0.50)], IBD as first symptom of SpA [OR = 3.32, (95%CI 1.84-6.01)], and need for IBD-specific treatment [OR = 5.41, (95%CI 2.02-14.50)] were independently associated with the definitive diagnosis of IBD-related arthritis. Collaboration with gastroenterologists is needed to shorten the diagnostic delay in patients with SpA and IBD. The recognition of the factors for the diagnosis of "IBD-related arthritis" may lead to the elucidation of the pathogenesis.

Patient satisfaction with total joint replacement surgery for rheumatoid arthritis: a questionnaire survey for the 2020 update of the Japan college of rheumatology clinical practice guidelines.

OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to evaluate satisfaction with total joint replacement (TJR) surgery among patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA). METHODS: We mailed questionnaires to randomly selected members of the Japan Rheumatism Friendship Association, stratified by age and prefecture, throughout Japan. The questionnaire collected demographic and clinical characteristics as well as patients' satisfaction with TJR and their current therapy. RESULTS: Of the 1156 patients who returned the questionnaire, 339 (29.3%) responded that they had had TJR of any type. The mean age was 66.6 years, and 94.4% were women. The mean time period from the hip and knee TJR was 14-15 years. Over half of the patients who had had TJR were satisfied with the results, especially those who had had hip (89.6%) and knee TJR (87.3%), who reported a high level of satisfaction. Multivariable linear regression analysis revealed that, in patients with knee TJR, satisfaction with current therapy was significantly related to whether they were satisfied with the results of the surgery. CONCLUSION: Most patients with RA who had undergone TJR were satisfied with the results even after a long period of time, and their level of satisfaction was associated with their satisfaction with current therapy.

Systematic review for the treatment of older rheumatoid arthritis patients informing the 2020 update of the Japan College of Rheumatology clinical practice guidelines for the management of rheumatoid arthritis.

OBJECTIVES: To provide an evidence base for clinical practice guidelines (CPG) for the management of rheumatoid arthritis (RA) in older adults. METHODS: PubMed, Cochrane library, and Japan Centra Revuo Medicina databases were searched for articles published between 1990 and 2019. Quality of the evidence was assessed using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation system, with some modifications. RESULTS: Among 702 identified articles, there were 5 post-hoc analyses of randomized controlled trials and 10 observational studies. Meta-analysis of the former yielded a mean difference of the van der Heijde-modified total Sharp score of -2.79 (95% confidence interval [CI] - 3.74 to -1.84) for treatment with tumor necrosis factor inhibitors. The risk ratio (RR) for the American College of Rheumatology 50% response rate, and for serious adverse events was 2.83 (95%CI 1.90-4.21) and 1.32 (95%CI 0.53-3.31), respectively, for Janus kinase inhibitors. Meta-analysis of the observational studies yielded an RR for disease activity score-28 remission and serious infections of 0.76 (95%CI 0.64-0.91) and 1.92 (95%CI 1.31-2.81) for older-versus-younger patients receiving biological disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs, respectively. CONCLUSION: This systematic review provides the necessary evidence for developing CPG for the management of RA in older adults.

Comprehensive risk analysis of postoperative complications in patients with rheumatoid arthritis for the 2020 update of the Japan College of Rheumatology clinical practice guidelines for the management of rheumatoid arthritis.

OBJECTIVES: To examine the risk factors of surgical site infection (SSI), delayed wound healing, and death after orthopedic surgery in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA). METHODS: We identified articles indexed in the Cochrane Library, PubMed, and Japan Centra Revuo Medicina Web published from 2013 to 2019 and other articles. Articles fulfilling the predefined inclusion criteria were reviewed systematically and their quality was appraised according to the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation system with some modifications. RESULTS: After inclusion and exclusion by full-text review, 29 articles were analyzed. Use of biological disease modifying antirheumatic drugs was a risk factor of SSI (risk ratio 1.66, 95% confidence interval 1.25-2.19), but not of delayed wound healing. RA itself was a risk factor of SSI, and oral glucocorticoid use was a risk factor of SSI in three of the four studies analyzed and of postoperative death. Age, male sex, comorbidities such as diabetes mellitus and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, surgical factors such as foot/ankle and spine surgery and longer operative time were risk factors of those postoperative complications. CONCLUSION: Patients with those factors should be dealt with appropriate cautions to strike a risk-benefit balance of orthopedic surgeries.

Identification of clinical phenotypes of peripheral involvement in patients with spondyloarthritis, including psoriatic arthritis: a cluster analysis in the worldwide ASAS-PerSpA study.

OBJECTIVE: To identify clusters of peripheral involvement according to the specific location of peripheral manifestations (ie, arthritis, enthesitis and dactylitis) in patients with spondyloarthritis (SpA) including psoriatic arthritis (PsA), and to evaluate whether these clusters correspond with the clinical diagnosis of a rheumatologist. METHODS: Cross-sectional study with 24 participating countries. Consecutive patients diagnosed by their rheumatologist as PsA, axial SpA or peripheral SpA were enrolled. Four different cluster analyses were conducted: one using information on the specific location from all the peripheral manifestations, and a cluster analysis for each peripheral manifestation, separately. Multiple correspondence analyses and k-means clustering methods were used. Distribution of peripheral manifestations and clinical characteristics were compared across the different clusters. RESULTS: The different cluster analyses performed in the 4465 patients clearly distinguished a predominantly axial phenotype (cluster 1) and a predominantly peripheral phenotype (cluster 2). In the predominantly axial phenotype, hip involvement and lower limb large joint arthritis, heel enthesitis and lack of dactylitis were more prevalent. In the predominantly peripheral phenotype, different subgroups were distinguished based on the type and location of peripheral involvement: a predominantly involvement of upper versus lower limbs joints, a predominantly axial enthesitis versus peripheral enthesitis, and predominantly finger versus toe involvement in dactylitis. A poor agreement between the clusters and the rheumatologist's diagnosis as well as with the classification criteria was found. CONCLUSION: These results suggest the presence of two main phenotypes (predominantly axial and predominantly peripheral) based on the presence and location of the peripheral manifestations.

Upadacitinib in patients with psoriatic arthritis and an inadequate response to non-biological therapy: 56-week data from the phase 3 SELECT-PsA 1 study.

BACKGROUND: In SELECT-PsA 1, a randomised double-blind phase 3 study, upadacitinib 15 mg and 30 mg were superior to placebo and non-inferior to adalimumab in ≥20% improvement in American College of Rheumatology (ACR) criteria at 12 weeks in patients with psoriatic arthritis (PsA). Here, we report 56-week efficacy and safety in patients from SELECT-PsA 1. METHODS: Patients received upadacitinib 15 mg or 30 mg once daily, adalimumab 40 mg every other week for 56 weeks or placebo through week 24 switched thereafter to upadacitinib 15 mg or 30 mg until week 56. Efficacy endpoints included the proportion of patients achieving ≥20%/50%/70% improvement in ACR criteria (ACR20/50/70), ≥75%/90%/100% improvement in Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI75/90/100), minimal disease activity (MDA) and change from baseline in modified total Sharp/van der Heijde Score. Treatment-emergent adverse events per 100 patient years (PY) were summarised. RESULTS: Consistent with results through week 24, ACR20/50/70, PASI75/90/100 and MDA responses were maintained with upadacitinib through week 56 and were generally numerically higher than with adalimumab; inhibition of radiographic progression was also maintained. Patients who switched from placebo to upadacitinib exhibited comparable improvements at week 56 as patients originally randomised to upadacitinib. The rates of serious adverse events were 9.1 events/100 PY with upadacitinib 15 mg and 12.3 events/100 PY with upadacitinib 30 mg. Two deaths were reported in each of the upadacitinib groups. CONCLUSION: Efficacy across various domains of PsA were maintained with upadacitinib 15 mg and 30 mg through week 56 with no new safety signals observed.