Secukinumab in United States Biologic-Naïve Patients With Psoriatic Arthritis: Results From the Randomized, Placebo-Controlled CHOICE Study.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate secukinumab (SEC) 300 mg and 150 mg vs placebo in a United States-only population of biologic-naïve patients with psoriatic arthritis (PsA). METHODS: CHOICE was a double-blind, randomized controlled trial conducted in the US. Biologic-naïve patients with PsA and psoriasis (PsO) were randomized 2:2:1 to SEC 300 mg (n = 103), SEC 150 mg (n = 103), or placebo (n = 52). The primary objective was to show superiority of SEC 300 mg vs placebo in American College of Rheumatology 20% (ACR20) response at week 16. Additional objectives included the effect of SEC on dactylitis, enthesitis, PsO, and safety. RESULTS: ACR20 response rates at week 16 were higher with SEC 300 mg than with placebo (51.5% vs 23.1%; odds ratio 3.51 [95% CI 1.65-7.45]; P = 0.001). SEC 300 mg also led to greater ACR50/70 responses and improvements in other variables vs placebo. Responses were generally sustained over time. Patients with inadequate response to SEC 150 mg at weeks 16, 28, or 40 who received dose escalation to 300 mg experienced improved clinical response after uptitration. The most common adverse events were upper respiratory tract infections and diarrhea. No inflammatory bowel disease was reported or new safety signals observed. CONCLUSION: SEC 300 mg led to rapid and significant improvements over placebo in symptoms of PsA in this heavier population of US-only, biologic-naïve patients. Findings were consistent with previous studies and suggest that SEC 300 mg is a safe and efficacious first-line biologic treatment for patients with PsA. [ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT02798211].

Observed efficacy and clinically important improvements in participants with osteoarthritis treated with subcutaneous tanezumab: results from a 56-week randomized NSAID-controlled study.

BACKGROUND: A recent phase 3 study demonstrated that treatment with tanezumab, a nerve growth factor inhibitor, or nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) improves pain and physical function in participants with moderate-to-severe osteoarthritis (OA) of the hip or knee. Here, we evaluated the time course and clinical importance of these initial efficacy findings using a mixture of primary, secondary, and post hoc endpoints. METHODS: Participants on stable NSAID therapy and with a history of inadequate response to other standard OA analgesics were enrolled in an 80-week (56-week treatment/24-week safety follow-up), randomized, NSAID-controlled, phase 3 study primarily designed to assess the safety of tanezumab for moderate-to-severe OA of the knee or hip. Participants received oral NSAID (twice daily naproxen, celecoxib, or diclofenac) or subcutaneous tanezumab (2.5mg or 5mg every 8 weeks). Non-responders were discontinued at week 16. Changes from baseline in WOMAC Pain and Physical Function, Patient's Global Assessment of Osteoarthritis (PGA-OA), and average pain in the index joint were compared between tanezumab and NSAID groups over the 56-week treatment period. Clinically meaningful response (e.g., ≥30% and ≥50% improvement in WOMAC Pain and Physical Function), rescue medication use, and safety were also assessed. RESULTS: All groups improved WOMAC Pain, WOMAC Physical Function, PGA-OA, and average pain in the index joint over the 56-week treatment period relative to baseline. Across all groups, improvements generally occurred from the time of first assessment (week 1 or 2) to week 16 and then slightly decreased from week 16 to 24 before stabilizing from weeks 24 to 56. The magnitude of improvement and the proportion of participants achieving ≥30% and ≥50% improvement in these measures was greater (unadjusted p≤0.05) with tanezumab than with NSAID at some timepoints on or before week 16. Adverse events of abnormal peripheral sensation, prespecified joint safety events, and total joint replacement surgery occurred more frequently with tanezumab than with NSAID. CONCLUSIONS: Tanezumab and NSAID both provided early and sustained (up to 56 weeks) efficacy relative to baseline. Improvements in pain and function were clinically meaningful in a substantial proportion of participants. Adverse events of abnormal peripheral sensation and joint safety events occurred more frequently with tanezumab than with NSAID. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02528188 . Registered on 19 July 2015.

Efficacy and Safety of Subcutaneous Golimumab in Methotrexate-Naive Patients With Rheumatoid Arthritis: Five-Year Results of a Randomized Clinical Trial.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the safety and efficacy of golimumab through 5 years in adults with active rheumatoid arthritis (RA) who had not previously received methotrexate (MTX). METHODS: In the GO-BEFORE study, 637 MTX-naive adult patients with active RA were randomized (1:1:1:1) to placebo + MTX (group 1), golimumab 100 mg + placebo (group 2), golimumab 50 mg + MTX (group 3), or golimumab 100 mg + MTX (group 4). Inadequate responders in groups 1, 2, and 3 entered early escape at week 28 to golimumab 50 mg + MTX, golimumab 100 mg + MTX, or golimumab 100 mg + MTX, respectively; remaining patients in group 1 could cross over to golimumab 50 mg + MTX at week 52. Assessments included the American College of Rheumatology 20%/50%/70% improvement criteria (ACR20/50/70) response, the Disease Activity Score in 28 joints (DAS28) using C-reactive protein (CRP) level, and the modified Sharp/van der Heijde score (SHS). Efficacy was analyzed using an intent-to-treat (ITT) analysis. Pharmacokinetics and immunogenicity were evaluated at selected visits. RESULTS: A total of 422 patients completed golimumab treatment through week 256. At week 256, 72.8%, 54.6%, and 38.0% of all patients in the full ITT population (n = 637) had an ACR20/50/70 response, respectively; 84.1% had a good or moderate DAS28-CRP response; and 72.7% had a clinically meaningful improvement in physical function. Radiographic progression was minimal in all treatment groups through week 256, and the overall mean change from baseline in SHS was 1.36. Serum trough golimumab concentrations were approximately dose proportional and maintained through week 256. Antibodies to golimumab occurred in 9.6% of patients through week 256. Infections were the most common type of adverse event (AE); 204 of 616 patients (33.1%) had ≥1 serious AE. CONCLUSION: Clinical efficacy with golimumab treatment was maintained through week 256 of the GO-BEFORE trial of MTX-naive RA patients. No unexpected AEs occurred; safety results through 5 years are consistent with earlier reports.

A Randomized Trial Comparing Disease Activity Measures for the Assessment and Prediction of Response in Rheumatoid Arthritis Patients Initiating Certolizumab Pegol.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of the Patient/Physician Reported Efficacy Determination In Clinical Practice Trial (PREDICT; ClinicalTrials identifier NCT01255761) was to compare the patient-reported Routine Assessment of Patient Index Data 3 (RAPID-3) instrument with the investigator-based Clinical Disease Activity Index (CDAI) for assessing certolizumab pegol (CZP) treatment response in rheumatoid arthritis patients at 12 weeks and to predict the treatment response at week 52 using the data from week 12 (coprimary end points). METHODS: Patients received 400 mg of CZP at weeks 0, 2, and 4 (loading dose), followed by 200 mg every 2 weeks thereafter. Patients were randomized 1:1 to assessment with the RAPID-3 or the CDAI. Responder classification was performed at week 12; treatment response was defined as a score of ≤6 or a 20% improvement over baseline on the RAPID-3 or a score of ≤10 or a 20% improvement over baseline on the CDAI. Long-term treatment success was defined as a Disease Activity Score in 28 joints using the erythrocyte sedimentation rate (DAS28-ESR) of ≤3.2 at week 52. Comparisons were made for the coprimary end points using noninferiority methods. Patients with improvement of <1 on the CDAI score or with no improvement on the RAPID-3 score at week 12 or patients with high levels of disease activity (CDAI score >22 or RAPID-3 score >12) at 2 consecutive visits were withdrawn from the study. RESULTS: Patients had longstanding disease (mean 8.9 years) and high levels of disease activity (mean scores of 6.3 on the DAS28-ESR, 16.1 on the RAPID-3, and 40.2 on the CDAI). Previous anti-tumor necrosis factor therapy had failed in 55.5% of them. At week 12, a total of 64.7% (by RAPID-3) and 76.4% (by CDAI) of the patients were classified as responders (difference of -11.9% [95% confidence interval -18.4%, -5.3%]). At week 52, a total of 31.5% (by RAPID-3) and 32.3% (by CDAI) of the responders achieved a low level of disease activity on the DAS28-ESR (difference of -1.3% [95% confidence interval -9.3%, 6.6%]). CONCLUSION: The CDAI classified more patients as CZP responders at week 12 than did the RAPID-3. Although these outcome measures were not statistically comparable, the positive predictive value for low disease activity at week 52 was similar. As these tools cover differing domains of therapy response, further evaluation for clinical disease activity assessments and treatment decisions is needed.

A randomized clinical trial to evaluate two doses of an intra-articular injection of LMWF-5A in adults with pain due to osteoarthritis of the knee.

OBJECTIVE: The Low Molecular Weight Fraction of 5% human serum Albumin (LMWF-5A) is being investigated as a treatment for knee pain from osteoarthritis. METHODS: This was a multicenter randomized, vehicle-controlled, double-blind, parallel study designed to evaluate the safety and efficacy of two doses of an intra-articular injection of LMWF-5A. Patients with symptomatic knee osteoarthritis were randomized 1∶1∶1∶1 to receive a single 4 mL or 10 mL intra-articular knee injection of either LMWF-5A or vehicle control (saline). The primary efficacy endpoint was the difference between treatment groups in the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities (WOMAC) pain change from baseline over 12 weeks. Safety was examined as the incidence and severity of adverse events (AEs). RESULTS: A total of 329 patients were randomized and received treatment. LMWF-5A resulted in a significant decrease in pain at 12 weeks compared to vehicle control (-0.93 vs -0.72; estimated difference from control: -0.25, p = 0.004); an injection volume effect was not observed (p = 0.64). The effect of LMWF-5A on pain was even more pronounced in patients with severe knee OA (Kellgren Lawrence Grade IV): the estimated difference from control was -0.42 (p = 0.02). Adverse events were generally mild and were similar in patients who received vehicle control (47%) and LMWF-5A (41%). CONCLUSIONS: This clinical trial demonstrated that LMWF-5A is safe and effective at providing relief for the pain of moderate to severe OA of the knee over 12 weeks when administered by intra-articular injection into the knee. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01839331.

A phase Ib multiple ascending dose study evaluating safety, pharmacokinetics, and early clinical response of brodalumab, a human anti-IL-17R antibody, in methotrexate-resistant rheumatoid arthritis.

INTRODUCTION: The aim of this study was to evaluate the safety, pharmacokinetics, and clinical response of brodalumab (AMG 827), a human, anti-IL-17 receptor A (IL-17RA) monoclonal antibody in subjects with moderate-to-severe rheumatoid arthritis (RA). METHODS: This phase Ib, randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind multiple ascending dose study enrolled subjects with moderate to severe RA (≥ 6/66 swollen and ≥ 8/68 tender joints). Subjects were randomized 3:1 to receive brodalumab (50 mg, 140 mg, or 210 mg subcutaneously every two weeks for 6 doses per group; or 420 mg or 700 mg intravenously every 4 weeks for two doses per group) or placebo. Endpoints included incidence of adverse events (AEs) and pharmacokinetics. Exploratory endpoints included pharmacodynamics, and improvements in RA clinical metrics. RESULTS: Forty subjects were randomized to investigational product; one subject discontinued due to worsening of RA (placebo). The study was not designed to assess efficacy. AEs were reported by 70% (7/10) of placebo subjects and 77% (22/30) of brodalumab subjects. Three serious AEs were reported in two subjects; there were no opportunistic infections. Brodalumab treatment resulted in inhibition of IL-17 receptor signaling and receptor occupancy on circulating leukocytes. No treatment effects were observed with individual measures of RA disease activity. On day 85 (week 13) 37% (11/30) of brodalumab subjects and 22% (2/9) of placebo subjects achieved ACR20; 7% (2/30) brodalumab subjects and 11% (1/9) of placebo subjects achieved ACR50; and 0% (0/30) brodalumab subjects and 0% (0/9) of placebo subjects achieved ACR70. CONCLUSIONS: Multiple dose administration of brodalumab was tolerated in subjects with active RA. There was no evidence of a clinical response to brodalumab in subjects with RA. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT00771030.

Golimumab, a human anti­tumor necrosis factor monoclonal antibody, injected subcutaneously every 4 weeks in patients with active rheumatoid arthritis who had never taken methotrexate: 1-year and 2-year clinical, radiologic, and physical function findings of a phase III, multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study.

OBJECTIVE: To assess 2-year golimumab efficacy/safety in patients with active rheumatoid arthritis (RA) who had never taken methotrexate (MTX). METHODS: RA patients who had never taken MTX (n = 637) were randomized (1:1:1:1) to placebo + MTX (group 1), golimumab 100 mg + placebo (group 2), golimumab 50 mg + MTX (group 3), or golimumab 100 mg + MTX (group 4) every 4 weeks. Nonresponders based on week 28 swollen/tender joint counts changed treatment as follows: group 1 added golimumab 50 mg, group 2 added MTX, group 3 increased golimumab to 100 mg, and group 4 had no change. Most group 1 patients (85%) initiated golimumab 50 mg + MTX at week 28 or subsequently at week 52. After the last patient completed week 52 and blinding was broken, the investigator could escalate golimumab to 100 mg and/or adjust MTX. The co­primary end points (week 24 American College of Rheumatology criteria for 50% improvement [ACR50] response and week 52 change in Sharp/van der Heijde score [SHS]) have been published previously. We now detail week 52 major secondary end points (Health Assessment Questionnaire [HAQ] disability index [DI] scores and SHS among patients with a baseline C-reactive protein [CRP] level >1.0 mg/dl) and week 104 findings. RESULTS: At week 52 for combined groups 3 and 4 versus group 1, the respective proportions of patients achieving ACR20 and ACR50 responses were 63.2% versus 51.9% (P = 0.017) and 45.3% versus 35.6% (P = 0.044). Respective week 52 mean HAQ DI improvements were 0.70 versus 0.58 (P = 0.053); mean SHS changes were 0.41 versus 1.37 (P = 0.006) among all patients and 0.74 versus 2.16 (P = 0.003) in patients with a CRP level >1.0 mg/dl. Improvements were maintained through week 104. Golimumab + MTX for 2 years yielded statistically less radiographic progression than initial MTX or golimumab 100 mg monotherapy. Golimumab safety profiles through weeks 24, 52, and 104 were generally consistent with those observed in other golimumab studies. CONCLUSION: In RA patients who had never taken MTX, up to 2 years of golimumab + MTX yielded sustained improvements in clinical signs/symptoms, physical function, and radiographic progression.

Golimumab, a human anti-tumor necrosis factor alpha monoclonal antibody, injected subcutaneously every four weeks in methotrexate-naive patients with active rheumatoid arthritis: twenty-four-week results of a phase III, multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study of golimumab before methotrexate as first-line therapy for early-onset rheumatoid arthritis.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the safety and efficacy of golimumab in methotrexate (MTX)-naive patients with active rheumatoid arthritis (RA). METHODS: MTX-naive patients with RA (n = 637) were randomized to receive placebo plus MTX (group 1), golimumab 100 mg plus placebo (group 2), golimumab 50 mg plus MTX (group 3), or golimumab 100 mg plus MTX (group 4). Subcutaneous injections of golimumab or placebo were administered every 4 weeks. The dosage of MTX/placebo capsules started at 10 mg/week and escalated to 20 mg/week. The primary end point, the proportion of patients meeting the American College of Rheumatology 50% improvement criteria (achieving an ACR50 response) at week 24, required significant differences between groups 3 and 4 combined (combined group) versus group 1 and significant differences in a pairwise comparison (group 3 or group 4 versus group 1). RESULTS: An intent-to-treat (ITT) analysis of the ACR50 response at week 24 did not show a significant difference between the combined group and group 1 (38.4% and 29.4%, respectively; P=0.053), while a post hoc modified ITT analysis (excluding 3 untreated patients) of the ACR50 response showed statistically significant differences between the combined group and group 1 (38.5% versus 29.4%; P=0.049) and between group 3 (40.5%; P=0.038) but not group 4 (36.5%; P=0.177) and group 1. Group 2 was noninferior to group 1 for the ACR50 response at week 24 (33.1%; 95% confidence interval lower bound -5.2%; predefined delta value for noninferiority -10%). The combination of golimumab plus MTX demonstrated a significantly better response compared with placebo plus MTX in most other efficacy parameters, including response/remission according to the Disease Activity Score in 28 joints. Serious adverse events occurred in 7%, 3%, 6%, and 6% of patients in groups 1, 2, 3, and 4, respectively. CONCLUSION: Although the primary end point was not met, the modified ITT analysis of the primary end point and other prespecified efficacy measures demonstrated that the efficacy of golimumab plus MTX is better than, and the efficacy of golimumab alone is similar to, the efficacy of MTX alone in reducing RA signs and symptoms in MTX-naive patients, with no unexpected safety concerns.

Treatment of rheumatoid arthritis with methotrexate and hydroxychloroquine, methotrexate and sulfasalazine, or a combination of the three medications: results of a two-year, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial.

OBJECTIVE: To compare the efficacy of combination therapy with methotrexate (MTX) and hydroxychloroquine (HCQ), MTX and sulfasalazine (SSZ), and MTX, HCQ, and SSZ in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA). METHODS: RA patients (n = 171) who had not previously been treated with combinations of the study medications were randomized to receive 1 of the 3 treatment combinations in this 2-year, double-blind, placebo-controlled protocol. HCQ was given at a dosage of 200 mg twice a day. The dosage of MTX was accelerated from 7.5 mg/week to 17.5 mg/week in all patients who were not in remission. Similarly, the dosage of SSZ was escalated from 500 mg twice a day to 1 gm twice a day in patients who were not in remission. The primary end point of the study was the percentage of patients who had a 20% response to therapy according to the American College of Rheumatology (ACR) criteria at 2 years. RESULTS: Intent-to-treat analysis revealed that patients receiving the triple combination responded best, with 78% achieving an ACR 20% response at 2 years, compared with 60% of those treated with MTX and HCQ (P = 0.05) and 49% of those treated with MTX and SSZ (P = 0.002). Similar trends were seen for the ACR 50% response, with 55%, 40%, and 29% of patients in the 3 treatment groups, respectively, achieving these results at 2 years (P = 0.005 for the triple combination group versus the MTX and SSZ group). All combination treatments were well-tolerated. Fourteen patients (evenly distributed among the 3 groups) withdrew from the protocol because of symptoms that were potentially related to the study medication. CONCLUSION: The triple combination of MTX, SSZ, and HCQ is well-tolerated, and its efficacy is superior to that of the double combination of MTX and SSZ and is marginally superior to that of the double combination of MTX and HCQ.