Treatment of early oligoarticular psoriatic arthritis with apremilast: primary outcomes at week 16 from the FOREMOST randomised controlled trial.

OBJECTIVES: Oligoarticular psoriatic arthritis (PsA) is frequent but rarely studied. The objective was to assess the efficacy of apremilast in early oligoarticular PsA. METHODS: FOREMOST (NCT03747939) was a phase 4 multicentre, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial. Patients had early (symptom duration ≤5 years) oligoarticular PsA (>1 but ≤4 swollen and >1 but ≤4 tender joints; 2-8 total active joints). Patients were randomised 2:1 to apremilast 30 mg two times per day or placebo for 24 weeks, with an early escape at week 16. The primary endpoint was the proportion of patients at week 16 who achieved minimal disease activity (MDA)-Joints (modification of MDA mandating ≤1 swollen joint and ≤1 tender joint) based on sentinel joints (those affected at baseline) with a combination of non-responder imputation and multiple imputations. Exploratory analysis assessed all joints. RESULTS: Of 308 patients randomised (apremilast: n=203; placebo: n=105), mean (SD) PsA duration was 9.9 (10.2) months, mean (SD) age was 50.9 (12.5) years and 39.9% of patients were using a conventional synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drug. MDA-Joints (sentinel joints (primary endpoint) and all joints) were achieved by significantly more patients with apremilast (33.9% and 21.3%) vs placebo (16.0% and 7.9%) at week 16 (p=0.0008 and nominal p=0.0028, respectively). Greater improvements in patient-reported outcomes, clinical disease activity and skin involvement were also seen with apremilast versus placebo. CONCLUSIONS: FOREMOST is the first randomised controlled trial designed for early oligoarticular PsA and showed apremilast improves clinical and patient-reported outcomes. This trial may inform the optimal management of PsA in these patients. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT03747939.

Effect of Bimekizumab on Patient-Reported Disease Impact in Patients with Psoriatic Arthritis: 1-Year Results from Two Phase 3 Studies.

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate 1-year bimekizumab efficacy in psoriatic arthritis (PsA) from the patient perspective using the 12-item PsA Impact of Disease (PsAID-12) questionnaire. METHODS: BE OPTIMAL (NCT03895203; biologic disease-modifying antirheumatic drug [bDMARD]-naïve), BE COMPLETE (NCT03896581; inadequate response/intolerance to tumour necrosis factor inhibitors [TNFi-IR]) and BE VITAL (NCT04009499; open-label extension) assessed bimekizumab 160 mg every 4 weeks in patients with PsA. Post hoc analyses of patient-reported disease impact, assessed by the PsAID-12 questionnaire, are reported to 1 year (collected to week 40 in BE COMPLETE). RESULTS: Overall, 1,112 total patients were included (698 bimekizumab, 414 placebo). Rapid improvements observed with bimekizumab treatment at week 4 continued to week 16 and were sustained to 1 year. At 1 year, mean (standard error) change from baseline in PsAID-12 total score was comparable between bimekizumab-randomized patients and patients who switched to bimekizumab at week 16 (bDMARD-naïve bimekizumab -2.3 [0.1], placebo/bimekizumab -2.2 [0.1]; TNFi-IR bimekizumab -|2.5 [0.1], placebo/bimekizumab -2.2 [0.2]). Proportions of bimekizumab-randomized patients achieving clinically meaningful within-patient improvement (≥3-point decrease from baseline) at week 16 were sustained to 1 year (bDMARD-naïve 49.0%; TNFi-IR 48.5%) and were similar for placebo/bimekizumab patients (bDMARD-naïve 44.4%; TNFi-IR 40.6%). Across studies and arms, 35.3% to 47.8% of patients had minimal or no symptom impact at 1 year. Improvements were observed to 1 year across all single-item domains, including pain, fatigue and skin problems. CONCLUSION: Bimekizumab treatment resulted in rapid and sustained clinically meaningful improvements in disease impact up to 1 year in bDMARD-naïve and TNFi-IR patients with PsA.

Enhancing current guidance for psoriatic arthritis and its comorbidities: recommendations from an expert consensus panel.

OBJECTIVES: Existing guidelines for psoriatic arthritis (PsA) cover many aspects of management. Some gaps remain relating to routine practice application. An expert group aimed to enhance current guidance and develop recommendations for clinical practice that are complementary to existing guidelines. METHODS: A steering committee comprising experienced, research-active clinicians in rheumatology, dermatology and primary care agreed on themes and relevant questions. A targeted literature review of PubMed and Embase following a PICO framework was conducted. At a second meeting, recommendations were drafted and subsequently an extended faculty comprising rheumatologists, dermatologists, primary care clinicians, specialist nurses, allied health professionals, non-clinical academic participants and members of the Brit-PACT patient group, was recruited. Consensus was achieved via an online voting platform when 75% of respondents agreed in the range of 7-9 on a 9-point scale. RESULTS: The guidance comprised 34 statements covering four PsA themes. Diagnosis focused on strategies to identify PsA early and refer appropriately, assessment of diagnostic indicators, use of screening tools and use of imaging. Disease assessment centred on holistic consideration of disease activity, physical functioning and impact from a patient perspective, and on how to implement shared decision-making. For comorbidities, recommendations included specific guidance for high-impact conditions such as depression and obesity. Management statements (which excluded extant guidance on pharmacological therapies) covered multidisciplinary team working, implementation of lifestyle modifications and treat-to-target strategies. Minimising corticosteroid use was recommended where feasible. CONCLUSION: The consensus group have made evidence-based best practice recommendations for the management of PsA to enhance the existing guidelines.

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

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

How do patient reported outcome measures affect treatment intensification and patient satisfaction in the management of psoriatic arthritis? A cross sectional study of 503 patients.

OBJECTIVES: The ASSIST study investigated prescribing in routine psoriatic arthritis (PsA) care and whether the patient reported outcome: PsA Impact of Disease questionnaire (PsAID-12), impacted treatment. This study also assessed a range of patient and clinician factors and their relationship to PsAID-12 scoring and treatment modification. METHODS: Patients with PsA were selected across the UK and Europe between July 2021-March 2022. Patients completed the PsAID questionnaire, with the results shared with their physician. Patient characteristics, disease activity, current treatment methods, treatment strategies, medication changes and patient satisfaction scores were recorded. RESULTS: 503 patients recruited. 36.2% had changes made to treatment, 88.8% of this had treatment escalation. Overall, the mean PsAID-12 score was higher for patients with treatment escalation; the PsAID-12 score was associated with odds of treatment escalation (OR: 1.58; p< 0.0001). However, most clinicians reported PsAID-12 did not impact their decision to escalate treatment, instead supporting treatment reduction decisions. Physician's assessment of disease activity had the most statistically significant effect on likelihood of treatment escalation, (OR = 2.68, per 1-point score increase). Escalation was more likely in patients not treated with biologic therapies. Additional factors associated with treatment escalation included: patient characteristics, physician characteristics, disease activity and disease impact. CONCLUSION: This study highlights multiple factors impacting treatment decision making for individuals with PsA. PsAID-12 scoring correlates with multiple measures of disease severity and odds of treatment escalation. However, most clinicians reported the PsAID-12 did not influence treatment escalation decisions. PsAID scoring could be used to increase confidence in treatment de-escalation.

GRAPPA 2023: Major Projects, Key Advances, and Milestones.

At the Group for Research and Assessment of Psoriasis and Psoriatic Arthritis (GRAPPA) 2023 annual meeting, members were updated on a number of ongoing activities during the key project update session. These activities included the Axial Involvement in Psoriatic Arthritis (AXIS) cohort, the Axial Psoriatic Arthritis Molecular and Clinical Characterization study, the Diagnostic Ultrasound Enthesitis Tool (DUET) study, the Sex- and Gender-Based Analysis of the Effectiveness of Advanced Therapies in Psoriatic Arthritis (SAGE-PsA) study, the Health Initiatives in Psoriasis and Psoriatic Arthritis Consortium European States (HIPPOCRATES), the GRAPPA slide library, and the GRAPPA treatment recommendations.

The Development and Validation of a Novel Training Infographic for the Physician Global Visual Analog Scale in Psoriatic Arthritis.

OBJECTIVE: Psoriatic arthritis (PsA) is a heterogenous condition with musculoskeletal and skin manifestations. The physician global visual analog scale (VAS) is an important component of many composite scores used in clinical trials and observational studies. Currently, no training material exists to standardize this assessment. METHODS: The Psoriatic Arthritis Validation of Physician Global VAS (PAVLOVAS) project describes the development of a novel training infographic with stakeholder involvement, which was then evaluated in a Latin square design in which 20 patients with PsA were assessed by 10 clinicians. For each group of 10 patients, 5 assessors conducted traditional assessment (consisting of 66/68-joint count, body surface area, Leeds Enthesitis Index, and dactylitis and nail counts) and 5 assessors conducted a standardized, thorough general examination informed by the infographic. Assessors switched assessment type between groups. The 3-item (3VAS) and 4VAS informed by traditional and infographic methods were compared, alongside other composite scores. RESULTS: There was strong agreement between traditional and infographic physician global VAS (intraclass correlation coefficient [ICC] 0.69, P = 0.01). This improved to very strong agreement when incorporated into the 3VAS (ICC 0.99, P < 0.001) and 4VAS (ICC 0.99, P < 0.001). The duration of assessment was significantly less for the infographic vs traditional groups (6.5 vs 7.8 mins, P < 0.001). There was moderately high agreement between the 3VAS and 4VAS categories of disease activity, with the same categories defined by Psoriatic Arthritis Disease Activity Score (PASDAS) and Disease Activity Index for Psoriatic Arthritis (DAPSA; Ⲭ2 17.0, P = 0.049). CONCLUSION: Our group developed and validated a novel training infographic that informs a briefer assessment of the physician global VAS than traditional assessments. This tool has potential applications in training and routine clinical practice.

Breakout Session and Report Back: Collaboration of Rheumatologists and Dermatologists for the Care of Patients With Psoriatic Disease.

Multidisciplinary care is essential for the management of patients with psoriatic disease (PsD), considering the great range of cutaneous and musculoskeletal symptoms and the potential for associated comorbidities and extraarticular manifestations. Consequently, combined rheumatology/dermatology clinics represent a gold standard model of care for patients with PsD. Many challenges are associated with the establishment of these clinics in routine clinical practice. In this report, we describe the thoughts and debates within a collaborative care breakout session during the Group for Research and Assessment of Psoriasis and Psoriatic Arthritis (GRAPPA) 2023 annual meeting. The breakout discussion focused around 3 main topics: (1) challenges of dermatologist-rheumatologist collaboration; (2) innovative approaches to encourage collaboration; and (3) how to identify patients with psoriasis at high risk of developing PsA.

Arthritis complicating inflammatory bowel disease- the future is now.

Fundamental advances are occurring across immune-mediated inflammatory diseases. Recent therapeutic developments include strategies to prevent rheumatoid arthritis in high-risk individuals, using baseline cellular immunophenotypes to predict response to biologics in psoriatic arthritis, and using biologics in a top-down approach for Crohn's disease. However, meaningful progress has not occurred in the management of patients with spondyloarthropathy complicating inflammatory bowel disease (IBD). Currently, the pathophysiology of IBD-related spondyloarthropathy is poorly understood; moreover, there are no accepted or disease-specific screening tools, diagnostic criteria, or licenced treatments. Current approaches to clinical care from rheumatologists and gastroenterologists largely involve the extrapolation of spondyloarthropathy and IBD clinical guidelines, respectively, despite increasing recognition of IBD-related spondyloarthropathy being its own entity, with a unique phenotype. There is an obvious contrast between spondyloarthropathy complicating IBD and the management of arthropathy complicating psoriasis, a disease area where defined diagnostic criteria and dedicated clinical trials allow clear management guidelines. We argue that the time has come for a parallel approach and dedicated focus on IBD-related spondyloarthropathy.

Qualitative interview study of rheumatology patients' experiences of COVID-19 shielding to explore the physical and psychological impact and identify associated support needs.

OBJECTIVE: Many clinically extremely vulnerable rheumatology patients have only recently ceased shielding from COVID-19, while some continue to minimise in-person contact. The objective of this study was to understand the impact of shielding and associated support needs in patients with rheumatic conditions and to understand how rheumatology teams can meet these needs both currently and in future pandemics. DESIGN, PARTICIPANTS AND SETTING: The study was conducted in the Southwest of England using a case-study design. The participants were 15 patients with rheumatic conditions who were advised to shield and/or chose to shield at any time during the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: Qualitative data collected via telephone and online semi-structured interviews and analysed using reflexive thematic analysis. RESULTS: Fifteen interviews were conducted. Three main themes represent the data:'Just shove them over there in the corner' captures changes in patients' self-perception. They felt different to most other people, vulnerable and left behind. The initial sense of shock was followed by a sense of loss as changes became long term.'A long and lonely road' captures patients' psychological isolation due to a perceived lack of understanding and support. This included having to prove their health status and justify their shielding behaviours, which impacted their relationships. At times, they felt abandoned by their healthcare providers.'You can't just flip a switch' captures the difficulty of getting back to pre-pandemic normal after shielding. Patients did not recognise themselves physically and mentally. They wanted to collaborate with health professionals and identified the need for specific guidance to support their recovery. CONCLUSION: Patients are dealing with lasting physical and mental effects from shielding and consequences of delayed healthcare. Health professionals need time and resources to ask about patients' well-being, identify their health needs and refer/signpost to appropriate sources of support.

The protocol of a clinical effectiveness trial comparing standard step-up care, early combination DMARD therapy and early use of TNF inhibitors for the treatment of moderate to severe psoriatic arthritis: the 3-arm parallel group SPEED randomized controlled trial.

Objectives: The aim of the Severe Psoriatic arthritis - Early intervEntion to control Disease trial is to compare outcomes in psoriatic arthritis (PsA) patients with poor prognostic factors treated with standard step-up conventional synthetic disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs (csDMARDs), combination csDMARDs or a course of early biologics. Design: This multicentre UK trial was embedded within the MONITOR-PsA cohort, which uses a trial within cohort design. Methods and analysis: Patients with newly diagnosed PsA and at least one poor prognostic factor (polyarthritis, C-reactive protein >5 mg/dL, health assessment questionnaire >1, radiographic erosions) were randomized equally and open-label to either standard care with 'step-up' csDMARD therapy, initial therapy with combination csDMARDs (methotrexate with either sulfasalazine or leflunomide) or to early biologics induction therapy (adalimumab plus methotrexate). The primary outcome is the PsA disease activity score at week 24. Ethics: Ethical approval for the study was granted by the South Central Research Ethics Committee (ref 18/SC/0107). Discussion: Treatment recommendations for PsA suggest more intensive therapy for those with poor prognostic factors but there are no studies that have previously used prognostic factors to guide therapy. Applying initial intensive therapy has shown improved outcomes in other inflammatory arthritides but has never been tried in PsA. Combination csDMARDs have shown some superiority over single therapies but there are limited data and concerns about side effects. Early use of biologics has also been shown to be superior to methotrexate but these drugs are costly and not usually funded first line. However, if a short course of biologics can rapidly suppress inflammation allowing treatment to be withdrawn and response maintained on methotrexate, this may be a cost-effective model for early use. Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT03739853) and EudraCT (2017-004542-24).

Gender Differences in Perceptions of Psoriatic Arthritis Disease Impact, Management, and Physician Interactions: Results from a Global Patient Survey.

INTRODUCTION: We evaluated the impact of gender on disease severity, health-related quality of life (HRQoL), treatment management, and patient-healthcare professional (HCP) interactions from the perspectives of patients with psoriatic arthritis (PsA). METHODS: Data were collected from a global online patient survey conducted by The Harris Poll (November 2, 2017 to March 12, 2018). Eligible patients were aged ≥ 18 years, with a self-reported diagnosis of PsA for > 1 year, had visited a rheumatologist/dermatologist in the past 12 months, and had reported previously using ≥ 1 conventional synthetic or biologic disease-modifying antirheumatic drug. Data were stratified by gender and analyzed descriptively, inferentially by binomial (chi-square) tests, and by multivariate logistic regression models. RESULTS: Data from 1286 patients who participated were included: 52% were female, 48% were male. Varying perceptions of disease severity between males and females were indicated by differences in symptoms leading to a diagnosis of PsA, and in symptoms reported despite treatment; more females than males reported joint tenderness, skin patches/plaques, and enthesitis. More females than males reported a major/moderate impact of PsA on their physical activity and emotional/mental well-being. Reasons for switching medication differed between genders, with more females switching because they perceived their medication to not be effective enough related to their joint symptoms. More females than males were very satisfied with their communication with their rheumatologist and were more likely to discuss the impact of PsA on their daily lives, their treatment satisfaction, and treatment goals with their rheumatologist. CONCLUSIONS: Patients' perceptions of the impact of PsA on HRQoL, treatment management, and interactions with HCPs varied between males and females. More females than males reported major/moderate physical and emotional impacts of PsA. When treating patients, it is important for HCPs to consider the potential impact of gender on patients' experience of PsA and its symptoms. Graphical plain language summary available for this article.

Digital health technologies to strengthen patient-centred outcome assessment in clinical trials in inflammatory arthritis.

Common to all inflammatory arthritides, namely rheumatoid arthritis, psoriatic arthritis, axial spondyloarthritis, and juvenile idiopathic arthritis, is a potential for reduced mobility that manifests through joint pain, swelling, stiffness, and ultimately joint damage. Across these conditions, consensus has been reached on the need to capture outcomes related to mobility, such as functional capacity and physical activity, as core domains in randomised controlled trials. Existing endpoints within these core domains rely wholly on self-reported questionnaires that capture patients' perceptions of their symptoms and activities. These questionnaires are subjective, inherently vulnerable to recall bias, and do not capture the granularity of fluctuations over time. Several early adopters have integrated sensor-based digital health technology (DHT)-derived endpoints to measure physical function and activity in randomised controlled trials for conditions including Parkinson's disease, Duchenne's muscular dystrophy, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, and heart failure. Despite these applications, there have been no sensor-based DHT-derived endpoints in clinical trials recruiting patients with inflammatory arthritis. Borrowing from case studies across medicine, we outline the opportunities and challenges in developing novel sensor-based DHT-derived endpoints that capture the symptoms and disease manifestations most relevant to patients with inflammatory arthritis.

Continuous improvement through differential trajectories of individual minimal disease activity criteria with guselkumab in active psoriatic arthritis: post hoc analysis of a phase 3, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study.

BACKGROUND: To explore the trajectory of, and factors contributing to, achievement of individual criteria of minimal disease activity (MDA) in patients with active psoriatic arthritis (PsA) treated with guselkumab. METHODS: The Phase 3, randomized, placebo-controlled DISCOVER-2 study enrolled adults (N = 739) with active PsA despite standard therapies who were biologic/Janus kinase inhibitor-naive. Patients were randomized 1:1:1 to guselkumab 100 mg every 4 weeks; guselkumab 100 mg at week 0, week 4, then every 8 weeks; or placebo. In this post hoc analysis, patients randomized to guselkumab were included and pooled (N = 493). Longitudinal trajectories of achieving each MDA criterion through week 100 were derived using non-responder imputation. Time to achieve each criterion was estimated with Kaplan-Meier analysis. Multivariate regression for time to achieve each criterion (Cox regression) and achievement at week 100 (logistic regression) was used to identify contributing factors. RESULTS: Continuous improvement across all MDA domains was shown over time. ~70% of patients achieved near remission in swollen joint count (SJC), Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI), and enthesitis through week 100. Median times to achieve individual criteria differed significantly (p < 0.0001), with SJC ≤ 1 (20 weeks), PASI ≤ 1 (16 weeks), and ≤ 1 tender entheses (16 weeks) being faster than patient-reported criteria (pain ≤ 15 mm, patient global assessment of arthritis and psoriasis ≤ 20 mm, Health Assessment Questionnaire-Disability Index ≤ 0.5) and tender joint count ≤ 1. Higher baseline domain scores, older age, worse fatigue, and increased body mass index were significant predictors of longer time to achieve minimal levels of disease activity assessed via patient-reported criteria. CONCLUSIONS: Substantial proportions of guselkumab-treated patients achieved individual MDA criteria, each showing continuous improvement through week 100, although with distinct trajectories. Median times to achieve physician-assessed MDA criteria were significantly faster compared with patient-driven criteria. Identification of modifiable factors affecting the time to achieve patient-reported criteria has the potential to optimize the achievement and sustainability of MDA in the clinic via a multidisciplinary approach to managing PsA, involving both medical and lifestyle interventions. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT03158285. TRIAL REGISTRATION DATE: May 16, 2017.

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

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

Improvements in Patient-Reported Outcomes After Treatment With Deucravacitinib in Patients With Psoriatic Arthritis: Results From a Randomized Phase 2 Trial.

OBJECTIVE: Deucravacitinib, a tyrosine kinase 2 inhibitor, was assessed in a phase 2 trial in patients with active psoriatic arthritis (PsA). Here, we report effects of deucravacitinib from the patient perspective. METHODS: This phase 2, double-blind trial (NCT03881059) randomized patients with active PsA 1:1:1 to deucravacitinib 6 mg once daily (QD), 12 mg QD, or placebo, for 16 weeks. Key secondary end points were changes from baseline (CFBs) at week 16 in Health Assessment Questionnaire-Disability Index (HAQ-DI) and 36-item Short-Form Health Survey (SF-36) physical component summary (PCS) scores. Additional patient-reported outcomes (PROs) assessed disease impact, including fatigue, pain, and mental health. The mean CFBs in PROs and percentages of patients reporting improvements with minimum clinically important differences (MCIDs) or scores of greater than normal values were also assessed. RESULTS: This study comprised 203 patients (51.2% female; mean ± SD age, 49.8 ± 13.5 years). At week 16, the adjusted mean difference (95% confidence interval) versus placebo in HAQ-DI and SF-36 PCS CFB was significant for each deucravacitinib group (HAQ-DI 6 mg, -0.26 [-0.42 to -0.10], P = 0.0020; HAQ-DI 12 mg, -0.28 [-0.45 to -0.12], P = 0.0008; SF-36 PCS 6 mg, 3.3 [0.9 to 5.7], P = 0.0062; SF-36 PCS 12 mg, 3.5 [1.1 to 5.9], P = 0.0042). MCID at week 16 were reported for all PROs with either dose of deucravacitinib. Improvements of MCID or to normative values were reported by more patients receiving deucravacitinib than placebo. CONCLUSION: Deucravacitinib groups demonstrate significant and clinically meaningful improvements in PROs versus placebo in patients with active PsA, which warrants further study.

Long-Term Safety of Risankizumab in Patients with Psoriatic Disease: A Comprehensive Analysis from Clinical Trials.

INTRODUCTION: Risankizumab has demonstrated a favourable safety profile in patients with psoriatic disease (moderate-to-severe psoriasis [PsO] and psoriatic arthritis [PsA]). We evaluated the long-term safety of risankizumab in psoriatic disease. METHODS: Long-term safety was evaluated by analysing data from 20 (phase 1-4) clinical trials for plaque PsO and four (phase 2-3) trials for PsA. Treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) and AEs in areas of special interest were reported among patients receiving ≥ 1 dose of risankizumab. Exposure-adjusted event rates were presented as events (E) per 100 patient-years (PY). RESULTS: The long-term safety data analyses included 3658 patients with PsO (13,329.3 PY) and 1542 patients with PsA (3803.0 PY). The median (range) treatment duration for patients with PsO and PsA was 4.1 (0.2-8.8) years and 2.8 (0.2-4.0) years, respectively. In the PsO population, rates of TEAEs, serious AEs and AEs leading to discontinuation were 145.5 E/100 PY, 7.4 E/100 PY and 1.9 E/100 PY, respectively; in the PsA population, these rates were 142.6 E/100 PY, 8.6 E/100 PY, and 1.8 E/100 PY, respectively. The rates of serious infections (excluding COVID-19-related infections) in the PsO and PsA populations were 1.2 and 1.4 E/100 PY, respectively. The rates of opportunistic infections (excluding tuberculosis and herpes zoster) were low (< 0.1 E/100 PY) in both populations. The rates of both nonmelanoma skin cancer (NMSC) and malignant tumours excluding NMSC were 0.6 and 0.5 E/100 PY in PsO and PsA, respectively, which are within the benchmarks of prior epidemiological studies. Adjudicated major cardiovascular event rates were 0.5 E/100 PY in PsO and 0.3 E/100 PY in PsA, which are within the epidemiologic reference benchmarks for both indications. No additional safety concerns were identified with this long-term exposure. CONCLUSIONS: The results support the favourable safety profile of risankizumab for long-term treatment of psoriatic disease with no new safety concerns and similar safety profiles among both PsO and PsA populations.

Validity and score interpretation of the 12-item Psoriatic Arthritis Impact of Disease: an analysis of pooled data from two phase 3 trials of bimekizumab in patients with psoriatic arthritis.

OBJECTIVES: To investigate psychometric performance of the 12-item Psoriatic Arthritis Impact of Disease (PsAID-12) total and individual item scores in patients with psoriatic arthritis (PsA) and to estimate score change thresholds and scores corresponding to different levels of symptom/impact severity. METHODS: Data up to week 16 from 1252 patients with active PsA enrolled in two randomised controlled trials of bimekizumab (BE OPTIMAL (NCT03895203) and BE COMPLETE (NCT03896581)) were used to assess construct validity (correlations with other patient-reported outcomes), known-groups validity (based on Minimal Disease Activity index, Disease Activity Index for Psoriatic Arthritis and Psoriatic Arthritis Disease Activity Score), reliability (Cronbach's alpha and intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs)) and responsiveness (sensitivity to change). Clinically meaningful within-patient improvement thresholds were estimated by anchor-based and distribution-based analyses, and symptom/impact severity thresholds were estimated by receiver operating characteristic curve analyses. RESULTS: The mean (SD) PsAID-12 total score at baseline was 4.19 (1.94). PsAID-12 scores demonstrated good convergent validity and good known-groups validity. Internal consistency reliability (Cronbach's alpha 0.95) and test-retest reliability (ICC ≥ 0.70) were also good. Responsiveness was acceptable (correlations ≥0.30 for most scores). Improvement thresholds were estimated at 1.5-2 points for the PsAID-12 total score and 2 or 3 points for item scores. Thresholds for different levels of symptom/impact severity could be derived for most PsAID-12 items. CONCLUSIONS: The PsAID-12 demonstrated robust psychometric properties in a large sample of patients with active PsA, supporting its use as a fit-for-purpose patient-reported outcome in this population. Furthermore, thresholds for score interpretation were derived.

Ethnicity data resource in population-wide health records: completeness, coverage and granularity of diversity.

Intersectional social determinants including ethnicity are vital in health research. We curated a population-wide data resource of self-identified ethnicity data from over 60 million individuals in England primary care, linking it to hospital records. We assessed ethnicity data in terms of completeness, consistency, and granularity and found one in ten individuals do not have ethnicity information recorded in primary care. By linking to hospital records, ethnicity data were completed for 94% of individuals. By reconciling SNOMED-CT concepts and census-level categories into a consistent hierarchy, we organised more than 250 ethnicity sub-groups including and beyond "White", "Black", "Asian", "Mixed" and "Other, and found them to be distributed in proportions similar to the general population. This large observational dataset presents an algorithmic hierarchy to represent self-identified ethnicity data collected across heterogeneous healthcare settings. Accurate and easily accessible ethnicity data can lead to a better understanding of population diversity, which is important to address disparities and influence policy recommendations that can translate into better, fairer health for all.