Ten-year safety and clinical benefit from open-label etanercept treatment in children and young adults with juvenile idiopathic arthritis.

OBJECTIVES: CLIPPER2 was an 8-year, open-label extension of the phase 3b, 2-year CLIPPER study on the safety and efficacy of etanercept in patients with JIA, categorized as extended oligoarticular arthritis (eoJIA), enthesitis-related arthritis (ERA) or PsA. METHODS: Participants with eoJIA (2-17 years old), ERA or PsA (each 12-17 years old) who received ≥1 etanercept dose (0.8 mg/kg weekly; maximum 50 mg) in CLIPPER could enter CLIPPER2. Primary end point was occurrence of malignancy. Efficacy assessments included proportions achieving JIA ACR 30/50/70/90/100 criteria and ACR inactive disease criteria, and clinical remission (ACR criteria) or Juvenile Arthritis DAS (JADAS) ≤1. RESULTS: Overall, 109/127 (86%) CLIPPER participants entered CLIPPER2 [n = 55 eoJIA, n = 31 ERA, n = 23 PsA; 99 (78%) on active treatment]; 84 (66%) completed 120 months' follow-up [32 (25%) on active treatment]. One malignancy (Hodgkin's disease in 18-year-old patient with eoJIA treated with methotrexate for 8 years) was reported; there were no cases of active tuberculosis or deaths. Numbers and incidence rates (events per 100 patient-years) of TEAEs (excluding infections/ISRs) decreased from 193 (173.81) in Year 1 to 9 (27.15) in Year 10; TE infections and serious infections also decreased. Over 45% of participants (n = 127) achieved JIA ACR50 responses from Month 2 onwards; 42 (33%) and 34 (27%) participants achieved JADAS and ACR clinical remission, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Etanercept treatment up to 10 years was well tolerated, consistent with the known safety profile, with durable response in the participants still on active treatment. The benefit-risk assessment of etanercept in these JIA categories remains favourable. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov IDs: CLIPPER (NCT00962741); CLIPPER2 (NCT01421069).

Erosions on T1-Weighted Magnetic Resonance Imaging Versus Radiography of Sacroiliac Joints in Recent-Onset Axial Spondyloarthritis: 2-Year Data (EMBARK Trial and DESIR Cohort).

OBJECTIVE: (1) To compare the capacity to detect sacroiliac joint (SIJ) erosions and baseline-to-week 104 change in erosions between magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and radiographs in recent-onset axial spondyloarthritis (axSpA); and (2) to compare treatment-discriminatory capacities of MRI and radiographic scores for erosion detection in patients receiving etanercept in the Effect of Etanercept on Symptoms and Objective Inflammation in Nonradiographic axSpA (EMBARK) trial vs controls in the DESIR (Devenir des Spondylarthropathies Indifférenciées Récentes) cohort. METHODS: Anonymized SIJ MRI and radiographs were assessed at patient and joint surface levels. Three readers evaluated MRI; 3 different readers evaluated radiographs. Final scores for comparison of radiographs and MRI for detection of erosions were assigned based on agreement of ≥ 2 of 3 readers' assessments. RESULTS: At baseline, discordance in erosion detection between imaging methods was more frequent for MRI erosions in the absence of radiographic erosions (48/224 [21.4%] patients) than for radiographic erosions in the absence of MRI erosions (14/224 [6.3%] patients; P < 0.001). After 104 weeks, a decrease in erosions was observed on MRI but not radiographs in 49/221 (22.2%) patients, and on radiographs but not MRI in 6/221 (2.7%) patients (P < 0.001). In the treatment-discriminant capacity analysis, the largest standardized differences between etanercept and control cohorts at week 104 were changes in Spondyloarthritis Research Consortium of Canada MRI erosion discrete score, changes in erosion average score, and meeting the modified New York criteria on radiographs, with unadjusted/adjusted Hedges G effect sizes of 0.40/0.50, 0.40/0.56, and 0.40/0.43, respectively. CONCLUSION: In recent-onset axSpA, SIJ erosions and erosion change were observed more frequently on MRI than radiography. The significance of interval improvement of MRI erosions warrants further research. [ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT01258738, NCT01648907].

Efficacy and safety of crisaborole ointment, 2%, in participants aged ≥45 years with stasis dermatitis: Results from a fully decentralized, randomized, proof-of-concept phase 2a study.

BACKGROUND: Crisaborole ointment, 2%, is a nonsteroidal topical phosphodiesterase 4 inhibitor approved for the treatment of mild-to-moderate atopic dermatitis. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of crisaborole in stasis dermatitis (SD). METHODS: In this randomized, double-blind, vehicle-controlled, decentralized phase 2a study (NCT04091087), 65 participants aged ≥45 years with SD without active ulceration received crisaborole or vehicle (1:1) twice-daily for 6 weeks. The primary end point was percentage change from baseline in total sign score at week 6 based on in-person assessment. RESULTS: Crisaborole-treated participants had significantly reduced total sign score from baseline versus vehicle based on in-person (nondermatologist) assessment (-32.4% vs -18.1%, P = .0299) and central reader (dermatologists) assessment of photographs (-52.5% vs -10.3%, P = .0004). Efficacy according to success and improvement per Investigator's Global Assessment score and lesional percentage body surface area reached statistical significance based on central reader but not in-person assessments. Skin and subcutaneous tissue disorders were common all-causality treatment-emergent adverse events with crisaborole. LIMITATIONS: Small sample size and short treatment duration were key limitations. In-person assessment was not conducted by dermatologists. CONCLUSION: Crisaborole improved signs and symptoms of SD and was well tolerated. Central reader assessment represents a promising approach for siteless clinical research.

Relationship between disease activity status or clinical response and patient-reported outcomes in patients with non-radiographic axial spondyloarthritis: 104-week results from the randomized controlled EMBARK study.

BACKGROUND: We assessed the external validity of composite indices Ankylosing Spondylitis Disease Activity Score (ASDAS), Bath Ankylosing Spondylitis Disease Activity Index (BASDAI), and Assessment in SpondyloArthritis international Society (ASAS) 40 response (ASAS40) by evaluating the correlations between the changes in some patient reported outcomes (PROs) for patients with non-radiographic axial spondyloarthritis (nr-axSpA) and the changes in the scores of the composite indices. METHODS: This was a post-hoc analysis of data from the EMBARK study in patients with nr-axSpA treated with etanercept. PROs were grouped according to ASDAS status (inactive [< 1.3], low [≥ 1.3 to < 2.1], high [≥ 2.1 to ≤3.5], and very high [> 3.5]), patient achievement of > 50% improvement in BASDAI (BASDAI50 responders), and > 40% improvement in ASAS (ASAS40 responders) at 104 weeks. Analyses were conducted on observed cases available at Week 104. Changes in PROs from Baseline to Week 104 were assessed using analysis of covariance with adjustment for baseline with linear contrast. RESULTS: Higher ASDAS disease activity at 104 weeks was associated with lower long-term improvement from baseline in PROs (e.g., total back pain [visual analog scale, cm (95% confidence interval): - 4.58 (- 4.95, - 4.21), - 3.86 (- 4.28, - 3.43), - 2.15 (- 2.68, - 1.61), and 1.30 (- 0.51, 3.12) for inactive, low, high, and very high ASDAS disease activity, respectively; Multidimensional Fatigue Inventory (MFI) general fatigue: - 4.77 (- 5.70, - 3.84), - 2.96 (- 4.04, - 1.87), - 1.00 (- 2.32, 0.31), and 2.14 (- 2.10, 6.38); all p < 0.001)]. BASDAI50 non-responders had less improvement in PROs from Baseline to Week 104 vs. responders (e.g., total back pain: - 1.61 (- 2.05, - 1.18) vs. -4.43 (- 4.69, - 4.18); MFI general fatigue: - 0.01 (- 1.12, 1.09) vs. -4.30 (- 4.98, - 3.62); all p < 0.001). ASAS40 non-responders also had less improvement in PROs from Baseline to Week 104 vs. responders (e.g., total back pain: - 1.91 (- 2.30, - 1.52) vs. -4.75 (- 5.05, - 4.46); MFI general fatigue: - 0.63 (- 1.56, 0.30) vs. -4.64 (- 5.37, - 3.91); all p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Composite indices are valid for monitoring treatment response and adequately reflect treatment-related changes experienced by patients with nr-axSpA. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT01258738. Registered 9 December 2010.

Improvement in disease severity and pruritus outcomes with crisaborole ointment, 2%, by baseline atopic dermatitis severity in children and adolescents with mild-to-moderate atopic dermatitis.

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVES: Crisaborole ointment, 2%, is a nonsteroidal phosphodiesterase 4 inhibitor for the treatment of mild-to-moderate atopic dermatitis (AD). This pooled post hoc analysis of two phase 3 trials (NCT02118766, NCT02118792) assessed improvement and time to improvement in Investigator's Static Global Assessment (ISGA) and Severity of Pruritus Scale (SPS) outcomes in pediatric patients with mild-to-moderate AD. METHODS: Patients aged ≥2 years were randomly assigned 2:1 to receive twice-daily crisaborole or vehicle for 28 days. Patients aged 2-17 years were pooled for this analysis. Proportions of patients and time to achieving ISGA success (clear [0] or almost clear [1] with ≥2-grade improvement from baseline), ISGA clear/almost clear, ≥1-grade improvement in ISGA, SPS success (SPS score ≤1 with ≥1-grade improvement), or ≥1-grade improvement in SPS score were analyzed and stratified by baseline ISGA. RESULTS: At first postbaseline assessment (day 8), significantly higher proportions of crisaborole- than vehicle-treated patients achieved ISGA success, ISGA clear/almost clear, ≥1-grade ISGA improvement, SPS success, or ≥1-grade improvement in SPS regardless of baseline ISGA. Differences were significantly greater over time for all outcomes for patients with moderate baseline ISGA and numerically greater for those with mild baseline ISGA. Median times to ISGA and SPS outcomes were shorter for crisaborole versus vehicle. CONCLUSION: Improvement in ISGA and SPS outcomes were observed with crisaborole in pediatric patients with mild-to-moderate baseline AD.

Crisaborole and atopic dermatitis skin biomarkers: An intrapatient randomized trial.

BACKGROUND: Crisaborole ointment 2% is a nonsteroidal phosphodiesterase 4 inhibitor for the treatment of mild-to-moderate atopic dermatitis (AD). The mechanism of action of crisaborole and its effects on lesional measures of disease severity are not yet well defined. OBJECTIVE: This phase 2a, single-center, vehicle-controlled, intrapatient study was designed to further characterize the mechanism of action of crisaborole through evaluation of clinical efficacy and changes in skin biomarkers in adults (n = 40) with mild-to-moderate AD. METHODS: Two target lesions were randomized in an intrapatient (1:1) manner to double-blind crisaborole/vehicle applied twice daily for 14 days. Patients then applied crisaborole (open-label) to all affected areas for 28 days. Punch biopsy specimens were collected for biomarker analysis at baseline, day 8 (optional), and day 15. RESULTS: Crisaborole treatment resulted in early improvement in lesional signs/symptoms versus vehicle, with improvement in pruritus (pruritus numeric rating scale) observed as early as 24 hours after the first application. Crisaborole-treated lesions showed significant percentage improvement from baseline in lesional transcriptomic profile compared with vehicle at day 8 (91.15% vs 36.02%, P < 10-15) that was sustained until day 15 (92.90% vs 49.59%, P < 10-15). Crisaborole significantly modulated key AD biomarkers versus vehicle, including TH2 and TH17/TH22 pathways and epidermal hyperplasia/proliferation. Molecular profiles and epidermal pathology normalized toward nonlesional skin and correlated with clinical changes in lesion severity and barrier function. CONCLUSION: Crisaborole reversed biomarker profiles of skin inflammation and barrier function, with associated improvements in clinical efficacy measures, highlighting the therapeutic utility of targeting phosphodiesterase 4 in patients with AD.

Evaluation of the change in structural radiographic sacroiliac joint damage after 2 years of etanercept therapy (EMBARK trial) in comparison to a contemporary control cohort (DESIR cohort) in recent onset axial spondyloarthritis.

OBJECTIVE: To compare 2 years of radiographic sacroiliac joint (SIJ) changes in patients with recent onset axial spondyloarthritis (axSpA) receiving etanercept in a clinical trial (EMBARK) to similar patients not receiving biologics in a cohort study (DESIR). METHODS: Endpoints were changes at week 104 per the modified New York (mNY) grading system in total SIJ score (primary endpoint) and net percentage of patients with progression defined three ways. Treatment effect was analysed with and without adjustment for baseline covariates. RESULTS: At 104 weeks, total SIJ score improved in the etanercept group (n=154, adjusted least-squares mean change: -0.14) and worsened in the control group (n=182, change: 0.08). The adjusted difference between groups (etanercept minus control) was -0.22 (95% CI -0.38 to -0.06), p=0.008. The net percentage of patients with progression was significantly lower in the etanercept versus the control group for two of three binary endpoints: -1.9% versus 1.6% (adjusted difference for etanercept minus control: -4.7%,95% CI -9.9 to 0.5, p=0.07) for change in mNY criteria; -1.9% versus 7.8% (adjusted difference: -18.2%,95% CI -30.9 to -5.6, p=0.005) for change ≥1 grade in ≥1 SIJ; and -0.6% versus 6.7% (adjusted difference: -16.4%,95% CI -27.9 to -5.0, p=0.005) for change ≥1 grade in ≥1 SIJ, with shift from 0 to 1 or 1 to 0 considered no change. CONCLUSION: Despite the slow radiographic SIJ progression rate over 2 years in axSpA, this study suggests a lower rate of progression in the SIJ with etanercept than without anti-tumour necrosis factor therapy. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBERS: NCT01258738, NCT01648907; Post-results.

Sustained remission with etanercept tapering in early rheumatoid arthritis.

BACKGROUND: We assessed the effects of reduction and withdrawal of treatment in patients with rheumatoid arthritis who had a remission while receiving etanercept-plus-methotrexate therapy. METHODS: Patients with early active disease who had not previously received methotrexate or biologic therapy received 50 mg of etanercept plus methotrexate weekly for 52 weeks (open-label phase). We then randomly assigned patients who had qualifying responses at weeks 39 and 52 to receive 25 mg of etanercept plus methotrexate (combination-therapy group), methotrexate alone, or placebo for 39 weeks (double-blind phase). Patients who had qualifying responses at week 39 of the double-blind phase had all treatment withdrawn at that time and were followed to week 65 (treatment-withdrawal phase). The primary end point was the proportion of patients with sustained remission in the double-blind phase. RESULTS: Of 306 patients enrolled, 193 underwent randomization in the double-blind phase; 131 qualified for the treatment-withdrawal phase. More patients in the combination-therapy group than in the methotrexate-alone group or the placebo group met the criterion for the primary end point (40 of 63 [63%] vs. 26 of 65 [40%] and 15 of 65 [23%], respectively; P=0.009 for combination therapy vs. methotrexate alone; P<0.001 for combination therapy vs. placebo). At 65 weeks, 28 patients (44%) who had received combination therapy, 19 (29%) who had received methotrexate alone, and 15 (23%) who had received placebo were in remission (P=0.10 for combination therapy vs. methotrexate alone; P=0.02 for combination therapy vs. placebo; P=0.55 for methotrexate alone vs. placebo). No significant between-group differences were observed in radiographic progression of disease. Serious adverse events were reported in 3 patients (5%) in the combination-therapy group, 2 (3%) in the methotrexate-alone group, and 2 (3%) in the placebo group. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with early rheumatoid arthritis who had a remission while receiving full-dose etanercept-plus-methotrexate therapy, continuing combination therapy at a reduced dose resulted in better disease control than switching to methotrexate alone or placebo, but no significant difference was observed in radiographic progression. (Funded by Pfizer; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00913458.).

Maintenance of remission with combination etanercept-DMARD therapy versus DMARDs alone in active rheumatoid arthritis: results of an international treat-to-target study conducted in regions with limited biologic access.

In this transglobal, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, treat-to-target study, the maintenance of efficacy was compared between biologic-and biologic-free-disease-modifying antirheumatic drug (DMARD) combination regimens after low disease activity (LDA) was achieved with biologic DMARD induction therapy. Patients with moderate-to-severe rheumatoid arthritis despite methotrexate therapy received open-label etanercept 50 mg subcutaneously once weekly plus methotrexate with or without other conventional synthetic (cs) DMARDs for 24 weeks. Patients achieving LDA [disease activity score in 28 joints based on erythrocyte sedimentation rate (DAS28-ESR) <3.2] at week 24 were randomized to receive etanercept-methotrexate combination therapy or placebo-methotrexate combination therapy, with or without other csDMARDs, for 28 weeks. In the open-label period, 72% of patients achieved DAS28-ESR LDA at week 24. Patients enrolled in the double-blind period had long-standing rheumatoid arthritis and high disease activity at baseline (mean duration, 8.1 years; DAS28-ESR, 6.4). In the etanercept and placebo combination groups, 44% versus 17% achieved DAS28-ESR LDA and 34 versus 13% achieved DAS28-ESR remission at week 52 (p < 0.001). Adverse events were reported in 37 and 43%, serious adverse events in 0 and 4%, and serious infections in 0 and 2% in these groups, respectively, in the double-blind period. After induction of response with etanercept combination therapy following a treat-to-target approach in patients with long-standing rheumatoid arthritis and high disease activity at baseline, the etanercept combination regimen was significantly more effective in maintaining LDA and remission than a biologic-free regimen. ClinicalTrials.gov identifier. NCT01578850.

Clinical and MRI responses to etanercept in early non-radiographic axial spondyloarthritis: 48-week results from the EMBARK study.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of etanercept (ETN) after 48 weeks in patients with early active non-radiographic axial spondyloarthritis (nr-axSpA). METHODS: Patients meeting Assessment of SpondyloArthritis international Society (ASAS) classification criteria for axSpA, but not modified New York radiographic criteria, received double-blind ETN 50 mg/week or placebo (PBO) for 12 weeks, then open-label ETN (ETN/ETN or PBO/ETN). Clinical, health, productivity, MRI and safety outcomes were assessed and the 48-week data are presented here. RESULTS: 208/225 patients (92%) entered the open-label phase at week 12 (ETN, n=102; PBO, n=106). The percentage of patients achieving ASAS40 increased from 33% to 52% between weeks 12 and 48 for ETN/ETN and from 15% to 53% for PBO/ETN (within-group p value <0.001 for both). For ETN/ETN and PBO/ETN, the EuroQol 5 Dimensions utility score improved by 0.14 and 0.08, respectively, between baseline and week 12 and by 0.23 and 0.22 between baseline and week 48. Between weeks 12 and 48, MRI Spondyloarthritis Research Consortium of Canada sacroiliac joint (SIJ) scores decreased by -1.1 for ETN/ETN and by -3.0 for PBO/ETN, p<0.001 for both. Decreases in MRI SIJ inflammation and C-reactive protein correlated with several clinical outcomes at weeks 12 and 48. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with early active nr-axSpA demonstrated improvement from week 12 in clinical, health, productivity and MRI outcomes that was sustained to 48 weeks. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT01258738.

Pharmacokinetics, efficacy and safety profiles of etanercept monotherapy in Japanese patients with rheumatoid arthritis: review of seven clinical trials.

Abstract Conventional synthetic disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs, including methotrexate, may not be tolerated by all patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA), and limited international data for etanercept (ETN) monotherapy are available. The aim of this review was to summarize the clinical program for ETN monotherapy in Japanese patients with RA, which has included a pharmacokinetic study, clinical trials for registration, long-term studies, and once-weekly dosing studies. Pharmacokinetic results showed that serum concentrations of ETN were linear with dose levels and were similar to other international studies. Across interventional studies, 652 Japanese patients with active RA were treated with ETN. In the registration studies, ETN treatment led to consistent improvement in American College of Rheumatology 20/50/70 scores, European League Against Rheumatism Good Response, Disease Activity Score 28 erythrocyte sedimentation rate remission, and Health Assessment Questionnaire disability index. In the long-term studies, efficacy was maintained for up to 180 weeks. Similar results were seen in the once-weekly studies. Across the studies, more than 870 patient-years of exposure to ETN were recorded. Discontinuations owing to lack of efficacy or adverse events were modest and no new safety signals were recorded. These studies demonstrated that ETN monotherapy is efficacious and well-tolerated in Japanese patients with RA.

Maintenance, reduction, or withdrawal of etanercept after treatment with etanercept and methotrexate in patients with moderate rheumatoid arthritis (PRESERVE): a randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Clinical remission and low disease activity are essential treatment targets in patients with rheumatoid arthritis. Although moderately active rheumatoid arthritis is common, treatment effects in moderate disease have not been well studied. Additionally, optimum use of biologics needs further investigation, including the use of induction, maintenance, and withdrawal treatment strategies. The aim of the PRESERVE trial was to assess whether low disease activity would be sustained with reduced doses or withdrawal of etanercept in patients with moderately active disease. METHODS: In a randomised controlled trial, patients aged between 18 and 70 years with moderately active rheumatoid arthritis (disease activity score in 28 joints [DAS28] >3.2 and ≤5.1) despite treatment with methotrexate were enrolled at 80 centres in Europe, Latin America, Asia, and Australia between March 6, 2008, and Sept 9, 2009. To be eligible, patients had to have been receiving 15-25 mg of methotrexate every week for at least 8 weeks. In an open-label period of 36 weeks, all patients were given 50 mg etanercept plus methotrexate every week. To be eligible for a subsequent double-blind period of 52 weeks, participants had to have achieved sustained low disease activity. These patients were randomly assigned (1:1:1) by an interactive voice-response system to one of three treatment groups: 50 mg etanercept plus methotrexate, 25 mg etanercept plus methotrexate, or placebo plus methotrexate. Patients were stratified in blocks of three by DAS28 response (low disease activity or remission) at week 36. Patients, investigators, data analysts, and study staff were all masked to treatment allocation. The primary endpoint was the proportion of patients with low disease activity at week 88 in the groups given 50 mg etanercept or placebo in the double-blind period. A conditional primary endpoint was the proportion of patients receiving 25 mg etanercept who achieved low disease activity. Modified intention-to-treat populations were used for analyses. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00565409. FINDINGS: 604 (72.4%) of 834 enrolled patients were eligible for the double-blind period, of whom 202 were assigned to 50 mg etanercept plus methotrexate, 202 to 25 mg etanercept plus methotrexate, and 200 to placebo plus methotrexate. At week 88, 166 (82.6%) of 201 patients who had received at least one dose of 50 mg etanercept and one or more DAS28 evaluations had low disease activity, compared with 84 (42.6%) of 197 who had received placebo (mean difference 40.8%, 95% CI 32.5-49.1%; p<0.0001). Additionally, 159 (79.1%) of 201 patients given 25 mg etanercept had low disease activity at week 88 (mean difference from placebo 35.9%, 27.0-44.8%; p<0.0001). INTERPRETATION: Conventional or reduced doses of etanercept with methotrexate in patients with moderately active rheumatoid arthritis more effectively maintain low disease activity than does methotrexate alone after withdrawal of etanercept. FUNDING: Pfizer.

Efficacy and safety of open-label etanercept on extended oligoarticular juvenile idiopathic arthritis, enthesitis-related arthritis and psoriatic arthritis: part 1 (week 12) of the CLIPPER study.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate the efficacy and safety of etanercept (ETN) in paediatric subjects with extended oligoarticular juvenile idiopathic arthritis (eoJIA), enthesitis-related arthritis (ERA), or psoriatic arthritis (PsA). METHODS: CLIPPER is an ongoing, Phase 3b, open-label, multicentre study; the 12-week (Part 1) data are reported here. Subjects with eoJIA (2-17 years), ERA (12-17 years), or PsA (12-17 years) received ETN 0.8 mg/kg once weekly (maximum 50 mg). Primary endpoint was the percentage of subjects achieving JIA American College of Rheumatology (ACR) 30 criteria at week 12; secondary outcomes included JIA ACR 50/70/90 and inactive disease. RESULTS: 122/127 (96.1%) subjects completed the study (mean age 11.7 years). JIA ACR 30 (95% CI) was achieved by 88.6% (81.6% to 93.6%) of subjects overall; 89.7% (78.8% to 96.1%) with eoJIA, 83.3% (67.2% to 93.6%) with ERA and 93.1% (77.2% to 99.2%) with PsA. For eoJIA, ERA, or PsA categories, the ORs of ETN vs the historical placebo data were 26.2, 15.1 and 40.7, respectively. Overall JIA ACR 50, 70, 90 and inactive disease were achieved by 81.1, 61.5, 29.8 and 12.1%, respectively. Treatment-emergent adverse events (AEs), infections, and serious AEs, were reported in 45 (35.4%), 58 (45.7%), and 4 (3.1%), subjects, respectively. Serious AEs were one case each of abdominal pain, bronchopneumonia, gastroenteritis and pyelocystitis. One subject reported herpes zoster and another varicella. No differences in safety were observed across the JIA categories. CONCLUSIONS: ETN treatment for 12 weeks was effective and well tolerated in paediatric subjects with eoJIA, ERA and PsA, with no unexpected safety findings.

Open-label observation of addition of etanercept versus a conventional disease-modifying antirheumatic drug in subjects with active rheumatoid arthritis despite methotrexate therapy in the Latin American region.

BACKGROUND: Previous global studies examined etanercept (ETN) + methotrexate (MTX) for treatment of rheumatoid arthritis (RA), but included few subjects from Latin America. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to compare the safety and efficacy of ETN + MTX versus a standard-of-care disease-modifying antirheumatic drug (DMARD) + MTX in Latin American subjects with moderate to severe active RA despite MTX therapy. METHODS: This open-label, active-comparator study (NCT00848354) randomized subjects 2:1 to ETN 50 mg/wk + MTX or investigator-selected DMARD (sulfasalazine or hydroxychloroquine) + MTX (ETN + MTX, n = 281; DMARD + MTX, n = 142). The primary end point was the proportion achieving American College of Rheumatology (ACR) 50 at week 24. Secondary end points included ACR20/70, disease activity score (DAS) 28 measures, and mean change in modified total Sharp score. Patient-reported outcomes were the Health Assessment Questionnaire, 36-item Short-Form, Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale, Work Productivity and Activity Impairment: RA (WPAI:RA), and Caregiver Burden and Resource Utilization. Statistical analyses were stratified by country; χ test and analysis of covariance were used. Adverse events were monitored. RESULTS: More subjects achieved ACR50 at week 24 with ETN + MTX versus DMARD + MTX (62% vs 23%, respectively), in addition to secondary end points (P < 0.0001 for all); mean change in modified total Sharp score was lower for the ETN + MTX group (0.4 vs 1.4, respectively; P = 0.0270). Improvements in patient-reported outcomes favored ETN + MTX for Health Assessment Questionnaire, 36-item Short-Form, Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale for depression, WPAI:RA, and Caregiver Burden and Resource Utilization emergency department visits for RA (P < 0.01). Overall, adverse events were similar between the groups (69% vs 68%,); serious adverse events were also similar (4% vs 1%). The rate of overall infections was higher with ETN + MTX (38%) than DMARD + MTX (22%, P ≤ 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Consistent with published global data among RA patients with inadequate response to MTX, adding ETN to MTX demonstrated better efficacy than adding one other conventional DMARD to MTX. No new safety issues were observed. ETN + MTX provided favorable benefit-risk profile among RA patients from LA region.

Long-term Etanercept Response for Patients with Radiographic Axial Spondyloarthritis Based on Achievement of Early, Intermediate, or Late Responses During Index Studies.

INTRODUCTION: Short-term placebo (PBO)- or active-controlled clinical studies have demonstrated that etanercept (ETN) is effective and well tolerated in patients with radiographic axial spondyloarthritis (r-axSpA) with long-term efficacy and safety continuing for up to 7 years after treatment start. Short-term randomized controlled trials (RCTs) have shown the efficacy of ETN after 12-24 weeks, with statistically significant improvements as early as week 2. This post hoc analysis investigated the timeframe (i.e., temporal responses) in which patients with r-axSpA achieved their first clinical response with ETN and how patients responded over a longer period according to different temporal responses in index studies. METHODS: Data were analyzed from three phase 3/4 PBO- or sulfasalazine-controlled RCTs of ETN for the treatment of r-axSpA (index studies). Long-term open-label extension (OLE) studies assessed how patients responded over a longer period according to different temporal responses ("Early," "Intermediate," "Late," or "Non-response") in their corresponding index studies. RESULTS: Within each index study, patient responses differed significantly between ETN and control arms for achievement of Assessment in SpondyloArthritis international Society (ASAS) 20 and other measures of treatment response. In general, the proportion of responders in the OLE studies was high for those with "Early" and "Intermediate" responses as defined in the index studies. Despite patients being considered non-responders in the index studies, a large proportion achieved response on continued treatment in the OLE studies over the longer term, including through 48 weeks. CONCLUSIONS: Response in the index studies was maintained in the long term, and continued treatment was warranted in a large proportion of patients despite initial non-response. Absence of an early response in index studies did not predict non-response over the long term, and early response to treatment was not always a predictor for later response. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT00421915; NCT00247962; NCT00356356; NCT00421980; NCT00410046.

Impact of Crisaborole in Treatment-Experienced Patients With Mild-to-Moderate Atopic Dermatitis.

Background: Crisaborole ointment, 2%, is a nonsteroidal phosphodiesterase 4 inhibitor for the treatment of patients with mild-to-moderate atopic dermatitis (AD). Objective: To assess the efficacy and safety of crisaborole in patients with AD who had received prior treatment with (a) corticosteroids (systemic or topical) or topical calcineurin inhibitors (TCIs) or (b) topical corticosteroids (TCSs) or TCIs or (c) who were treatment-naive (TN). Methods: This post hoc analysis comprised patients aged ≥2 years with mild-to-moderate AD. Patients were assigned (2:1) to receive crisaborole or vehicle twice daily for 28 days. Patient response was assessed with the Investigator's Static Global Assessment (ISGA), Dermatology Life Quality Index (DLQI), Children's Dermatology Life Quality Index (CDLQI), and Dermatitis Family Impact (DFI) tools. Safety was also assessed. Results: A significantly higher percentage of patients treated with crisaborole versus vehicle achieved ISGA success regardless of treatment history. Patients treated with crisaborole had significant reductions in DLQI, CDLQI, and DFI scores versus those who received vehicle regardless of treatment history, with the exception of DLQI and DFI scores in the TN group. Crisaborole was well tolerated in all subgroups. Conclusion: Crisaborole demonstrated a favorable efficacy and safety profile in both treatment-experienced and TN patients. ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02118766 and NCT02118792.

Summary of Research: Ten-Year Safety and Clinical Benefit from Open-Label Etanercept Treatment in Children and Young Adults with Juvenile Idiopathic Arthritis.

This is a summary of the original article 'Ten-year safety and clinical benefit from open label etanercept treatment in children and young adults with juvenile idiopathic arthritis'. Juvenile idiopathic arthritis (JIA) usually appears before the age of 16. JIA causes pain, swelling, and stiffness in the joints. People with JIA receive treatment for several years until the disease goes into prolonged remission. Therefore, the long-term safety of these treatments is an important topic. Etanercept is a treatment for JIA, which acts on the body's immune system to reduce arthritis. This summary of research article describes safety and how well etanercept works in children with JIA taking it for up to 10 years.

Maintenance of Investigator's Static Global Assessment Response with Once-Daily Crisaborole in Participants with Mild to Moderate Atopic Dermatitis.

INTRODUCTION: Treatments for atopic dermatitis (AD) often fail to achieve lasting disease control. In the CrisADe CONTROL phase III study (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT04040192), participants aged ≥ 3 months with mild to moderate AD treated with once-daily (QD) crisaborole, following initial treatment success with crisaborole twice daily (BID), had longer periods of flare-free maintenance, a higher number of flare-free days, and a lower number of flares compared with those who received vehicle. The study was an exploratory analysis of data on the maintenance of response per Investigator's Static Global Assessment (ISGA; ISGA score of 0 [clear] or 1 [almost clear]) during the CrisADe CONTROL study through week 52. METHODS: Exploratory endpoints were the time to ISGA response during the open-label run-in period, and the maintenance of ISGA response and the severity and duration of flares during the double-blind maintenance period. Outcomes were stratified by age (participants aged 3 months to < 12 years and ≥ 12 years) and duration of crisaborole BID treatment (< 4 weeks or ≥ 4 weeks) during the open-label run-in period. RESULTS: During the open-label run-in period, the median time to ISGA response was 41.5 days. From week 4 to week 52 of the double-blind maintenance period, the proportion of participants who maintained ISGA response was greater with crisaborole versus vehicle, and this difference was statistically significant up to week 36 (P < 0.05). Duration of flare periods during the maintenance period were 54.1 and 54.0 days for the vehicle and crisaborole-treated groups, respectively. Numerically fewer crisaborole-treated participants experienced a flare with an ISGA score of ≥ 2 compared with vehicle-treated participants (64.8% vs. 74.4%, respectively). Findings were comparable across most subgroups. CONCLUSIONS: Adult and pediatric participants with mild to moderate AD at baseline who had achieved responder criteria (treatment success) with crisaborole BID during the run-in period maintained response per ISGA with crisaborole QD during the double-blind maintenance period through week 52. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT04040192.

Atopic dermatitis is a skin disease that causes itchy, red, and dry patches of skin that can affect a person for a long time. Current treatments for atopic dermatitis often fail to keep the symptoms under control. Some creams and ointments applied to the skin (known as topical treatments) can ease the discomfort of atopic dermatitis. Crisaborole is a steroid-free ointment that has been shown to improve symptoms of atopic dermatitis in clinical studies. In a study called the CrisADe CONTROL trial, crisaborole was tested to see if it can keep atopic dermatitis symptoms under control. People who participated in the study were aged 3 months and older and they had mild-to-moderate atopic dermatitis. Participants were asked to use crisaborole on their itchy, red, and dry skin twice daily for 8 weeks. Patients were called "responders" if their symptoms became nearly clear or completely clear based on a doctor's assessment called the Investigator's Static Global Assessment, which rates atopic dermatitis between clear to severe. Some responders were asked to use crisaborole once daily for 52 weeks and another group of responders was asked to use a control (an ointment with no medicine) once daily for 52 weeks. Investigators looked at how long the skin remained nearly clear or completely clear during the 52 weeks. Results of this study showed that after initial treatment success with crisaborole twice daily, adult and pediatric participants who had mild-to-moderate atopic dermatitis were able to keep their skin nearly clear or completely clear with crisaborole once daily.

Improved health outcomes with etanercept versus usual DMARD therapy in an Asian population with established rheumatoid arthritis.

BACKGROUND: Patient reported outcomes (PROs) are especially useful in assessing treatments for rheumatoid arthritis (RA) since they measure dimensions of health-related quality of life that cannot be captured using strictly objective physiological measures. The aim of this study was to compare the effects of combination etanercept and methotrexate (ETN + MTX) versus combination synthetic disease modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs) and methotrexate (DMARD + MTX) on PRO measures among RA patients from the Asia-Pacific region, a population not widely studied to date. Patients with established moderate to severe rheumatoid arthritis who had an inadequate response to methotrexate were studied. METHODS: Patients were randomized to either ETN + MTX (N = 197) or DMARD + MTX (N = 103) in an open-label, active-comparator, multicenter study, with PRO measures designed as prospective secondary endpoints. The Health Assessment Questionnaire (HAQ), Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy Fatigue Scale (FACIT-Fatigue), Medical Outcomes Short Form-36 Health Survey (SF-36), Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS) and the Work Productivity and Activity Impairment Questionnaire: General Health (WPAI:GH) were used. RESULTS: Significantly greater improvements were noted for the ETN + MTX group at week16 for HAQ mean scores and for proportion of patients achieving HAQ score ≤ 0.5, compared to patients in the DMARD + MTX group. SF-36 Summary Scores for physical and mental components and for 6 of 8 health domains showed significantly greater improvements at week16 for the ETN + MTX group; only scores for physical functioning and role-emotional domains did not differ significantly between the two treatment arms. Greater improvements at week16 were noted for the ETN + MTX group for FACIT-Fatigue, HADS, and WPAI:GH mean scores. CONCLUSION: Combination therapy using ETN + MTX demonstrated superior improvements using a comprehensive set of PRO measures, compared to combination therapy with usual standard of care DMARDs plus MTX in patients with established rheumatoid arthritis from the Asia-Pacific region. TRIAL REGISTRATION: clintrials.gov # NCT00422227.