Association of the clinical components in the distal interphalangeal joint synovio-entheseal complex and subsequent response to ixekizumab or adalimumab in psoriatic arthritis.

OBJECTIVES: To assess the frequency of simultaneous distal interphalangeal (DIP) joint disease and adjacent nail psoriasis (finger unit) among patients with psoriatic arthritis (PsA) and compare the efficacy of the interleukin (IL)-17A antagonist ixekizumab (IXE) and the tumour necrosis factor (TNF)-α inhibitor adalimumab (ADA). METHODS: This post hoc analysis evaluated the simultaneous occurrence of DIP joint involvement (tenderness and/or swelling) and adjacent nail psoriasis among patients with PsA from the SPIRIT-H2H (NCT03151551) trial comparing IXE to ADA. Among patients with simultaneous DIP joint involvement and adjacent nail psoriasis in ≥ 1 digit at baseline, treatment effects were assessed through week 52 for each affected finger unit; 'finger unit' defines the connected DIP joint and adjacent nail of an individual digit. RESULTS: A total of 354 patients had simultaneous DIP joint involvement and adjacent nail psoriasis in ≥ 1 finger unit at baseline. Among them, 1309 (IXE = 639, ADA = 670) finger units had baseline DIP joint tenderness and/or swelling and adjacent nail psoriasis. Proportions of affected finger units achieving complete resolution were significantly higher with IXE vs ADA as early as week 12 (38.8% vs 28.4%, p< 0.0001) and at all post-baseline assessments through week 52 (64.9% vs 57.5%, p= 0.0055). CONCLUSIONS: In this study cohort, patients with DIP joint involvement almost always had adjacent nail psoriasis. Greater resolution of DIP joint tenderness, swelling, and adjacent nail psoriasis was achieved at all timepoints over 52 weeks through targeting IL-17A with IXE than TNF-α with ADA, which is noteworthy given prior comparable musculoskeletal outcomes for both drug classes.

Evaluating the efficacy of biologics with and without methotrexate in the treatment of psoriatic arthritis: a network meta-analysis.

INTRODUCTION: An important consideration in the treatment of patients with psoriatic arthritis (PsA) is whether the addition of methotrexate (MTX) to biologics has greater efficacy than biologic monotherapy with respect to efficacy outcomes in these patients. OBJECTIVES: To conduct a network meta-analysis (NMA) comparing biologics by treatment class with and without MTX for treatment of adults with active PsA. METHODS: A systematic literature review (SLR) identified randomised, double-blinded, controlled trials, and a Bayesian NMA compared biologics with and without MTX by treatment class (tumour necrosis factor inhibitors (TNFi), interleukin-23 inhibitors (IL-23i) and IL-17i). Efficacy outcomes included American College of Rheumatology 20%, 50% and 70% (ACR20, ACR50 and ACR70) improvement response. RESULTS: The SLR initially identified 31 studies, of which 17 met feasibility criteria for the NMA by containing the 'without MTX' subgroup. For ACR20 efficacy (the most robust assessment examined), all active treatments were significantly better than placebo. No statistically significant differences were demonstrated between biologic monotherapy (for all classes examined) and biologics in combination with MTX for ACR20/50. IL-17i were comparable to IL-23i, and IL-17i were significantly better than TNFi for ACR20. Although limited by fewer trials, TNFi, IL-23i and IL-17i were not statistically different for ACR50/70. CONCLUSIONS: Concomitant use of MTX and biologics did not improve ACR efficacy outcomes versus biologic monotherapy. MTX does not appear to be necessary as a background therapy when biologics are used for the achievement of ACR20/50 responses in patients with PsA.

Efficacy and Safety of Ixekizumab Versus Adalimumab in Biologic-naïve Patients With Active Psoriatic Arthritis and Moderate-to-severe Psoriasis: 52-week Results From the Randomized SPIRIT-H2H Trial.

Introduction: The randomized, open-label, assessor-blinded, parallel-group SPIRIT-H2H trial (NCT03151551) demonstrated superiority of ixekizumab over adalimumab in simultaneously achieving improvement in joint symptoms (American College of Rheumatology [ACR]50) and skin clearance (Psoriasis Area and Severity Index [PASI]100) in biologic-naïve patients with active psoriatic arthritis (PsA) and plaque psoriasis (PsO) at Week (W) 24. Higher efficacy of ixekizumab versus adalimumab was maintained through W52. Objectives: This analysis investigated efficacy and safety of ixekizumab and adalimumab in the subgroup of patients with PsA and moderate-to-severe PsO through W52. Methods: Efficacy and safety outcomes were analyzed in patients with PsA and moderate-to-severe PsO (PASI ≥ 12, Body Surface Area ≥ 10%, static Physician Global Assessment ≥ 3) through W52. Categorical and continuous outcomes were analyzed using logistic regression models and mixed model for repeated measures, respectively. Results: More ixekizumab-versus adalimumab-treated patients simultaneously achieved PASI100 and ACR50 at W24 (40.8% versus 17.6%, P = 0.015) and W52 (38.8% versus 17.6%, P = 0.026). Likewise, more ixekizumab-versus adalimumab-treated patients achieved PASI100 (59.2% versus 25.5%, P = 0.001) and PASI90 (81.6% versus 60.8%, P = 0.028) through W52, and nail PsO clearance at W24. Joint symptom improvements were comparable between groups. No new safety findings were reported. Conclusions: Ixekizumab had higher efficacy than adalimumab in simultaneous achievement of ACR50 and PASI100 at W24 and W52 in patients with PsA and moderate-to-severe PsO. Ixekizumab-treated patients showed higher response rates for nail PsO clearance and for reporting minimal or no impact on quality of life at W24.

Ixekizumab Demonstrates Consistent Efficacy Versus Adalimumab in Biologic Disease-Modifying Anti-rheumatic Drug-Naïve Psoriatic Arthritis Patients Regardless of Psoriasis Severity: 52-Week Post Hoc Results from SPIRIT-H2H.

INTRODUCTION: Ixekizumab, a selective interleukin-17A antagonist, was compared with adalimumab in the SPIRIT-H2H study (NCT03151551) in patients with psoriatic arthritis (PsA) and concomitant psoriasis. This post hoc analysis reports outcomes to week 52 in patients from SPIRIT-H2H, stratified by baseline psoriasis severity. METHODS: SPIRIT-H2H was a 52-week, multicenter, randomized, open-label, rater-blinded, parallel-group study of biologic disease-modifying antirheumatic drug (DMARD)-naïve patients (N = 566) with PsA and active psoriasis (≥ 3% body surface area involvement). Patients were randomized to ixekizumab or adalimumab (1:1) with stratification by baseline concomitant use of conventional synthetic DMARDs and psoriasis severity (with/without moderate-to-severe psoriasis). Patients received on-label dosing according to psoriasis severity. The primary endpoint was the proportion of patients simultaneously achieving ≥ 50% improvement in American College of Rheumatology criteria (ACR50) and 100% improvement in Psoriasis Area Severity Index (PASI100) at week 24. Secondary endpoints included musculoskeletal, disease activity (defined by composite indices), skin and nail, quality of life and safety outcomes. In this post hoc analysis, primary and secondary endpoints of SPIRIT-H2H were analyzed by baseline psoriasis severity. RESULTS: A greater proportion of patients achieved the combined endpoint of ACR50 + PASI100 and PASI100 with ixekizumab compared with adalimumab at weeks 24 and 52, regardless of baseline psoriasis severity. ACR response rates were similar for ixekizumab and adalimumab across both patient subgroups. For musculoskeletal outcomes, similar efficacy was seen for ixekizumab and adalimumab, but ixekizumab showed greater responses for skin outcomes regardless of psoriasis severity. The safety profiles of ixekizumab and adalimumab were consistent between subgroups. CONCLUSIONS: Regardless of baseline psoriasis severity, ixekizumab demonstrated greater efficacy than adalimumab with respect to simultaneous achievement of ACR50 + PASI100, and showed consistent and sustained efficacy across PsA-related domains. It also demonstrated higher response rates for skin outcomes. These subgroup analyses highlight the efficacy of ixekizumab in patients with PsA irrespective of the severity of concomitant psoriasis.

Measuring treatment effect on psoriatic arthritis-related domains: insights from the SPIRIT-H2H study at weeks 24 and 52.

INTRODUCTION: Improvements in both musculoskeletal and non-musculoskeletal manifestations are important treatment goals in psoriatic arthritis (PsA). OBJECTIVE: These post hoc analyses determined whether additional benefits related to various PsA domains are observed in patients simultaneously achieving 50% improvement in American College of Rheumatology criteria (ACR50) and 100% improvement in Psoriasis Area Severity Index (PASI100), the primary endpoint of the SPIRIT-H2H study. METHODS: Patients with active PsA and psoriasis in SPIRIT-H2H (N = 566) were categorised into two sets of four response groups irrespective of treatment allocation (approved dosages of ixekizumab or adalimumab): patients who simultaneously achieved ACR50 and PASI100 response, achieved ACR50 response only, achieved PASI100 response only, or did not achieve ACR50 or PASI100 response after 24 and 52 weeks of treatment. Patients achieving simultaneous ACR50 and PASI100 response were compared with the other patient response groups at the corresponding time point for efficacy and health-related quality of life (HRQoL) outcomes. RESULTS: Patients simultaneously achieving ACR50 and PASI100 responses at week 24 or 52 showed higher rates of ACR70 response, minimal disease activity, Disease Activity in Psoriatic Arthritis ≤ 4, resolution of enthesitis and dactylitis, and HRQoL improvement at weeks 24 and 52, respectively, than the other corresponding response groups at both time points. CONCLUSION: High levels of disease control, such as those obtained with simultaneous achievement of ACR50 and PASI100 response, were linked to better outcomes across a wide range of endpoints that are important for patients with PsA. Patients meeting this combined endpoint showed more comprehensive and thus greater control of disease activity. Trial registration NCT03151551 Key Points • Treatment goals for patients with psoriatic arthritis emphasise the importance of improving both musculoskeletal and non-musculoskeletal manifestations of the disease. • A combined endpoint considering both these manifestations, achievement of at least 50% improvement in American College of Rheumatology criteria and 100% improvement in Psoriasis Area Severity Index, was linked with achievement of a number of other endpoints relevant to psoriatic arthritis, including health-related quality of life that are important to patients with psoriatic arthritis. • Patients meeting the combined endpoint were more likely to achieve a disease state of remission, which is the stated aim of treatment for psoriasis.

Efficacy and Safety of Ixekizumab with or Without Methotrexate in Biologic-Naïve Patients with Psoriatic Arthritis: 52-Week Results from SPIRIT-H2H Study.

INTRODUCTION: In the SPIRIT-H2H (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT03151551) trial in biologic-naïve patients with active psoriatic arthritis (PsA), ixekizumab (IXE) was superior to adalimumab (ADA) at week 24 in terms of achieving a combined endpoint of ≥ 50% improved response in the American College of Rheumatology scale score (ACR50) and 100% improvement in the Psoriasis Areas and Severity Index (PASI100), and was non-inferior in terms of achieving ACR50. IXE resulted in similar improvements of PsA manifestations irrespective of the use of concomitant conventional synthetic disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs (csDMARDs), while ADA response was higher with concomitant csDMARD use. The aim of this study was to determine the efficacy and safety of treatment with IXE and ADA with or without methotrexate (MTX), the most commonly use csDMARD, through week 52 in patients with PsA. METHODS: In the open-label, rater-blinded, head-to-head SPIRIT-H2H trial, randomization of patients was stratified by concomitant use of csDMARD and moderate-to-severe plaque psoriasis involvement. In the post-hoc subgroup analysis presented here, subgroups were defined as with/without concomitant MTX use at baseline. Treatment group effects within subgroups were tested using Fisher's exact test. Missing data were imputed using non-responder imputation. RESULTS: By week 52, IXE provided similar improvements in the combined ACR50 and PASI100 endpoint, ACR50, and other PsA-related domains regardless of whether IXE was used with or without MTX, while ADA efficacy appeared to be improved with concomitant MTX use. When used without concomitant MTX, IXE resulted in significantly higher response versus ADA in terms of the combined ACR50 and PASI100 (p = 0.002) endpoint, minimal disease activity (p = 0.016), and very low disease activity (p = 0.037). The safety of both agents was consistent with their known safety profiles regardless of concomitant MTX use. CONCLUSION: In PsA patients with inadequate control of the disease, IXE delivers consistent efficacy in several clinical domains of the disease regardless of concomitant MTX use. The efficacy of ADA is increased by the concomitant use of MTX. These findings can inform treatment decisions when considering the need for concomitant MTX use with IXE or ADA at initiation or for long-term maintenance.

Multicentre, randomised, open-label, parallel-group study evaluating the efficacy and safety of ixekizumab versus adalimumab in patients with psoriatic arthritis naïve to biological disease-modifying antirheumatic drug: final results by week 52.

OBJECTIVES: SPIRIT head-to-head (H2H) is a 52-week (Wk) trial comparing ixekizumab (IXE) with adalimumab (ADA) for simultaneous American College of Rheumatology (ACR)50 and Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI)100 responses in 566 patients (distributed evenly across both groups) with psoriatic arthritis (PsA). IXE was superior to ADA for this primary end point at Wk24. We aimed to determine the final efficacy and safety results through Wk52 including a prespecified subgroup analysis of concomitant conventional synthetic disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs (csDMARD) use. METHODS: SPIRIT-H2H is a Wk52 multicentre, open-label, blinded-assessor study comparing IXE and ADA in bionaïve patients with PsA. Patients were randomised 1:1 to IXE or ADA with stratification by concomitant csDMARD use and presence of moderate-to-severe plaque psoriasis. Prespecified end points at Wk24 and Wk52 included musculoskeletal, psoriasis, quality-of life outcomes, subgroup analyses and safety. RESULTS: A significantly higher proportion of patients treated with IXE versus ADA simultaneously achieved ACR50 and PASI100 (39% vs 26%, p<0.001), PASI100 (64% vs 41%, p<0.001) at Wk52. Efficacy of IXE and ADA was similar at Wk52 for ACR50 (49.8% vs 49.8%, p=0.924), treat-to-target outcomes, enthesitis and dactylitis resolution. Responses to IXE were consistent irrespective of concomitant csDMARD use. Significantly more patients on IXE monotherapy versus ADA monotherapy had simultaneous ACR50 and PASI100 (38% vs 19%, p=0.007), and PASI100 responses (66% vs 35%, p<0.001) at Wk52. There were no new safety findings for IXE or ADA. CONCLUSIONS: IXE provided significantly greater simultaneous joint and skin improvement than ADA through Wk52 in bionaïve patients with PsA. IXE showed better efficacy on psoriasis and performed at least as well as ADA on musculoskeletal manifestations. IXE efficacy was consistent irrespective of concomitant csDMARD use. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT03151551.

Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Sequential Biologic Therapy with Ixekizumab Versus Secukinumab in the Treatment of Active Psoriatic Arthritis with Concomitant Moderate-to-Severe Psoriasis in the UK.

BACKGROUND: Interleukin-17A (IL-17A) antagonists are a recent innovation for treating psoriatic arthritis (PsA). There are currently no cost-effectiveness analyses (CEAs) comparing the IL-17A antagonists ixekizumab and secukinumab in PsA from a UK perspective. OBJECTIVE: We conducted a CEA from the UK National Health Service perspective to compare ixekizumab versus secukinumab in patients with PsA and concomitant moderate-to-severe plaque psoriasis. METHODS: A Markov model was developed based on the widely accepted York model. In biologic disease-modifying antirheumatic drug (bDMARD)-naïve patients, ixekizumab → ustekinumab → best supportive care (BSC) was compared with secukinumab → ustekinumab → BSC. For bDMARD-experienced patients, ixekizumab → BSC was compared with secukinumab → BSC. At the end of the bDMARD trial period, Psoriatic Arthritis Response Criteria (PsARC) responders continued to receive the bDMARD in the continuous treatment period. PsARC nonresponders and patients who ceased continuous treatment transitioned to the trial period of the next treatment. RESULTS: Ixekizumab was less costly and provided more quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) than secukinumab in bDMARD-naïve and -experienced patients based on list prices, although cost savings and QALY gains were small to modest. In bDMARD-naïve patients, total costs were £155,455 compared with £155,530 for secukinumab (year 2017 values). Total QALYs were 8.127 versus 7.989. In bDMARD-experienced patients, the corresponding values were £140,051 versus £140,264 for total costs and 3.996 versus 3.875 for total QALYs. CONCLUSION: Ixekizumab provided more QALYs at a marginally lower cost than secukinumab, and the results were most sensitive to changes in drug costs. Other factors, such as patient preferences for the number of injections and confidential price discounts, may be important considerations in clinical decision-making.

Efficacy and safety of biologics in psoriatic arthritis: a systematic literature review and network meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Biologic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (bDMARDs) and targeted synthetic DMARDs are used in patients with psoriatic arthritis (PsA), but few studies directly compare their clinical efficacy. In such situations, network meta-analysis (NMA) can inform evidence-based decision-making. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the comparative efficacy and safety of approved bDMARDs in patients with PsA. METHODS: Bayesian NMA was conducted to compare the clinical efficacy of bDMARDs at weeks 12‒16 in bDMARD-naïve patients with PsA in terms of American College of Rheumatology (ACR) criteria, Psoriatic Arthritis Response Criteria (PsARC) and Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI). Safety end points were evaluated in the overall mixed population of bDMARD-naive and bDMARD-experienced patients. RESULTS: For ACR, all treatments except abatacept were statistically superior to placebo. Infliximab was most effective, followed by golimumab and etanercept, which were statistically superior to most other treatments. Ixekizumab 80 mg every 2 weeks (Q2W) was statistically superior to abatacept subcutaneous, apremilast and both regimens of ustekinumab; similar findings were observed for ixekizumab 80 mg Q4W. For PsARC response, ixekizumab did not significantly differ from other therapies, except for golimumab, infliximab and etanercept, which were superior to most other agents including ixekizumab. For PASI response, infliximab was numerically most effective, but was not statistically superior to ixekizumab, which was the next best performing agent. Analysis of safety end points identified few differences between treatments. CONCLUSION: Our NMA confirms the efficacy and acceptable safety profile of bDMARDs in patients with active PsA. There were generally few statistically significant differences between most treatments.

Cost-effectiveness Analysis of Aripiprazole Once-Monthly for the Treatment of Schizophrenia in the UK.

BACKGROUND: Schizophrenia is a severe and debilitating psychiatric disorder. Pharmacological interventions aim to ameliorate symptoms and reduce the risk of relapse and costly hospitalisation. Despite the established efficacy of antipsychotic medication, compliance to treatment is poor, particularly with oral formulation. The emergence of long acting injectable (LAI) antipsychotic formulations in recent years has aimed to counteract the poor compliance rates observed and optimise long term patient outcomes. AIMS OF THE STUDY: To estimate the cost-effectiveness of aripiprazole once-monthly 400mg (AOM 400) vs. risperidone long acting injectable (RLAI), paliperidone long acting injectable (PLAI) and olanzapine long acting injectable (OLAI) in the maintenance treatment of chronic, stable schizophrenia patients in the United Kingdom. METHODS: A Markov model was developed to emulate the treatment pathway of a hypothetical cohort of patients initiating maintenance treatment with LAI antipsychotics. The economic analysis was conducted from a National Health Service (NHS) and Personal Social Services (PSS) perspective over a 10 year time horizon. Efficacy and safety probabilities were derived from mixed treatment comparisons (MTCs) where possible. Analyses were conducted assuming pooled dosing from randomised clinical trials included in the MTCs. RESULTS: The model estimates that AOM 400 improves clinical outcomes by reducing relapses per patient comparative to other LAIs over the model time horizon (2.38, 2.53, 2.70, and 2.67 for AOM 400, RLAI, PLAI and OLAI respectively). In the deterministic analysis, AOM 400 dominated PLAI and OLAI; an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of GBP 3,686 per QALY gained was observed against RLAI. Results from the univariate sensitivity analyses highlighted the probability and cost of relapse as main drivers for cost-effectiveness. In the probabilistic sensitivity analysis, AOM 400 demonstrated a marginally higher probability of being cost-effective (51%) than RLAI, PLAI and OLAI (48%, 1% and 0%, respectively) at a willingness to pay threshold of GBP 20,000. DISCUSSION: The model was built to accommodate results of an adjusted MTC analysis. Furthermore the model effectively captures repercussions of deteriorating compliance to treatment by incorporating three levels of compliance with elevated risks of relapse for partial compliance and non-compliance. Limitations of the analysis include the limited number of studies incorporated in the MTC, the extrapolation of short term clinical data and the exclusion of the wider societal burden. IMPLICATIONS FOR HEALTH CARE PROVISION AND USE: Comparative to other atypical antipsychotics, AOM 400 represents value for money in the maintenance treatment of chronic, stable schizophrenia; however, in light of the PSA findings and comparable cost-effectiveness (i.e. against RLAI), the product profile and wider benefits of the respective treatments must be taken into account when prescribing antipsychotics. IMPLICATIONS FOR FURTHER RESEARCH: Future research should assess the use of LAI antipsychotics earlier in the disease course of schizophrenia to see whether improved compliance and outcomes shortly following the onset of psychosis has the potential to alter the disease trajectory. Moreover it should be assessed whether changes in the disease trajectory can alleviate cost and resource pressures placed on national health services.

A pharmacoeconomic analysis of sertindole in the treatment of schizophrenia in Sweden.

BACKGROUND: Atypical antipsychotics have similar clinical efficacy in the treatment of schizophrenia; variability in their tolerability represents the discerning factor in treatment choices. Sertindole has a relatively good tolerability profile that favours long-term patient adherence and, therefore, is associated with lower rates of relapse and rehospitalization. AIM: A model was developed to compare the cost-effectiveness of a 5-year treatment strategy starting with sertindole versus olanzapine, risperidone, aripiprazole or the typical antipsychotic agent, haloperidol. METHODS: The model was based on published trials and local clinical practice, and considered costs from the perspective of the Swedish National Health Insurance Board. RESULTS: All atypical agents were clinically superior and more cost-effective than haloperidol with a cost per quality-adjusted life year gained of approximately 490,000 Swedish kroner. Sertindole was associated with the lowest direct and indirect medical costs, driven by its tolerability profile. CONCLUSIONS: Sertindole represents a useful alternative to the current treatment options available in Sweden. CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS: The relatively good tolerability profile of sertindole translates into lower costs of schizophrenia management, primarily driven by substantially lower direct and indirect costs. Sertindole appears to be a clinically and cost-effective alternative in the management of patients with schizophrenia in Sweden.