Trial of Anti-BDCA2 Antibody Litifilimab for Systemic Lupus Erythematosus.

BACKGROUND: Antibody-binding of blood dendritic cell antigen 2 (BDCA2), which is expressed exclusively on plasmacytoid dendritic cells, suppresses the production of type I interferon that is involved in the pathogenesis of systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE). The safety and efficacy of subcutaneous litifilimab, a humanized monoclonal antibody that binds to BDCA2, in patients with SLE have not been extensively studied. METHODS: We conducted a phase 2 trial of litifilimab involving participants with SLE. The initial trial design called for randomly assigning participants to receive litifilimab (at a dose of 50, 150, or 450 mg) or placebo administered subcutaneously at weeks 0, 2, 4, 8, 12, 16, and 20, with the primary end point of evaluating cutaneous lupus activity. The trial design was subsequently modified; adults with SLE, arthritis, and active skin disease were randomly assigned to receive either litifilimab at a dose of 450 mg or placebo. The revised primary end point was the change from baseline in the total number of active joints (defined as the sum of the swollen joints and the tender joints) at week 24. Secondary end points were changes in cutaneous and global disease activity. Safety was also assessed. RESULTS: A total of 334 adults were assessed for eligibility, and 132 underwent randomization (64 were assigned to receive 450-mg litifilimab, 6 to receive 150-mg litifilimab, 6 to receive 50-mg litifilimab, and 56 to receive placebo). The primary analysis was conducted in the 102 participants who had received 450-mg litifilimab or placebo and had at least four tender and at least four swollen joints. The mean (±SD) baseline number of active joints was 19.0±8.4 in the litifilimab group and 21.6±8.5 in the placebo group. The least-squares mean (±SE) change from baseline to week 24 in the total number of active joints was -15.0±1.2 with litifilimab and -11.6±1.3 with placebo (mean difference, -3.4; 95% confidence interval, -6.7 to -0.2; P = 0.04). Most of the secondary end points did not support the results of the analysis of the primary end point. Receipt of litifilimab was associated with adverse events, including two cases of herpes zoster and one case of herpes keratitis. CONCLUSIONS: In a phase 2 trial involving participants with SLE, litifilimab was associated with a greater reduction from baseline in the number of swollen and tender joints than placebo over a period of 24 weeks. Longer and larger trials are required to determine the safety and efficacy of litifilimab for the treatment of SLE. (Funded by Biogen; LILAC ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02847598.).

Trial of Anti-BDCA2 Antibody Litifilimab for Cutaneous Lupus Erythematosus.

BACKGROUND: Blood dendritic cell antigen 2 (BDCA2) is a receptor that is exclusively expressed on plasmacytoid dendritic cells, which are implicated in the pathogenesis of lupus erythematosus. Whether treatment with litifilimab, a humanized monoclonal antibody against BDCA2, would be efficacious in reducing disease activity in patients with cutaneous lupus erythematosus has not been extensively studied. METHODS: In this phase 2 trial, we randomly assigned adults with histologically confirmed cutaneous lupus erythematosus with or without systemic manifestations in a 1:1:1:1 ratio to receive subcutaneous litifilimab (at a dose of 50, 150, or 450 mg) or placebo at weeks 0, 2, 4, 8, and 12. We used a dose-response model to assess whether there was a response across the four groups on the basis of the primary end point, which was the percent change from baseline to 16 weeks in the Cutaneous Lupus Erythematosus Disease Area and Severity Index-Activity score (CLASI-A; scores range from 0 to 70, with higher scores indicating more widespread or severe skin involvement). Safety was also assessed. RESULTS: A total of 132 participants were enrolled; 26 were assigned to the 50-mg litifilimab group, 25 to the 150-mg litifilimab group, 48 to the 450-mg litifilimab group, and 33 to the placebo group. Mean CLASI-A scores for the groups at baseline were 15.2, 18.4, 16.5, and 16.5, respectively. The difference from placebo in the change from baseline in CLASI-A score at week 16 was -24.3 percentage points (95% confidence interval [CI] -43.7 to -4.9) in the 50-mg litifilimab group, -33.4 percentage points (95% CI, -52.7 to -14.1) in the 150-mg group, and -28.0 percentage points (95% CI, -44.6 to -11.4) in the 450-mg group. The least squares mean changes were used in the primary analysis of a best-fitting dose-response model across the three drug-dose levels and placebo, which showed a significant effect. Most of the secondary end points did not support the results of the primary analysis. Litifilimab was associated with three cases each of hypersensitivity and oral herpes infection and one case of herpes zoster infection. One case of herpes zoster meningitis occurred 4 months after the participant received the last dose of litifilimab. CONCLUSIONS: In a phase 2 trial involving participants with cutaneous lupus erythematosus, treatment with litifilimab was superior to placebo with regard to a measure of skin disease activity over a period of 16 weeks. Larger and longer trials are needed to determine the effect and safety of litifilimab for the treatment of cutaneous lupus erythematosus. (Funded by Biogen; LILAC ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02847598.).

Phase 2 Trial of Iberdomide in Systemic Lupus Erythematosus.

BACKGROUND: Iberdomide, a cereblon modulator promoting degradation of the transcription factors Ikaros and Aiolos, which affect leukocyte development and autoimmunity, is being evaluated for the treatment of systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE). METHODS: In this phase 2 trial, we randomly assigned patients in a 2:2:1:2 ratio to receive oral iberdomide (at a dose of 0.45, 0.30, or 0.15 mg) or placebo once daily for 24 weeks, in addition to standard medications. The primary end point at week 24 was a response on the SLE Responder Index (SRI-4), which was defined as a reduction of at least 4 points in the Systemic Lupus Erythematosus Disease Activity Index 2000 score (a 24-item weighted score of lupus activity that ranges from 0 to 105, with higher scores indicating greater disease activity), no new disease activity as measured on the British Isles Lupus Assessment Group 2004 index, and no increase of 0.3 points or more in the Physician's Global Assessment score (on a visual-analogue scale ranging from 0 [no disease activity] to 3 [maximal disease]). RESULTS: A total of 288 patients received the assigned intervention: 81 received iberdomide at a dose of 0.45 mg, 82 received iberdomide at a dose of 0.30 mg, 42 received iberdomide at a dose of 0.15 mg, and 83 received placebo. At week 24, the percentages of patients with an SRI-4 response were 54% in the iberdomide 0.45-mg group, 40% in the iberdomide 0.30-mg group, 48% in the iberdomide 0.15-mg group, and 35% in the placebo group (adjusted difference between the iberdomide 0.45-mg group and the placebo group, 19.4 percentage points; 95% confidence interval, 4.1 to 33.4; P = 0.01), with no significant differences between the groups that received the lower doses of iberdomide and the group that received placebo. Iberdomide-associated adverse events included urinary tract and upper respiratory tract infections and neutropenia. CONCLUSIONS: In this 24-week, phase 2 trial involving patients with SLE, iberdomide at a dose of 0.45 mg resulted in a higher percentage of patients with an SRI-4 response than did placebo. Data from larger, longer trials are needed to determine the efficacy and safety of iberdomide in SLE. (Funded by Bristol Myers Squibb; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03161483; EudraCT number, 2016-004574-17.).

Baricitinib for systemic lupus erythematosus: a double-blind, randomised, placebo-controlled, phase 3 trial (SLE-BRAVE-I).

BACKGROUND: Baricitinib is an oral selective inhibitor of Janus kinase 1 and 2 approved for the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis, atopic dermatitis, and alopecia areata. In a 24-week phase 2 study in patients with systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE), baricitinib 4 mg significantly improved SLE disease activity compared with placebo. The objective of this trial was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of baricitinib in patients with active SLE in a 52-week phase 3 study. METHODS: In a multicentre, double-blind, randomised, placebo-controlled, parallel-group, phase 3 study, SLE-BRAVE-I, patients (aged ≥18 years) with active SLE receiving stable background therapy were randomly assigned 1:1:1 to baricitinib 4 mg, 2 mg, or placebo once daily for 52 weeks with standard of care. Glucocorticoid tapering was encouraged but not required per protocol. The primary endpoint was the proportion of patients reaching an SLE Responder Index (SRI)-4 response at week 52 in the baricitinib 4 mg treatment group compared with placebo. The primary endpoint was assessed by logistic regression analysis with baseline disease activity, baseline corticosteroid dose, region, and treatment group in the model. Efficacy analyses were done on a modified intention-to-treat population, comprising all participants who were randomly assigned and received at least one dose of investigational product. Safety analyses were done on all randomly assigned participants who received at least one dose of investigational product and who did not discontinue from the study for the reason of lost to follow-up at the first post-baseline visit. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03616912. FINDINGS: 760 participants were randomly assigned and received at least one dose of baricitinib 4 mg (n=252), baricitinib 2 mg (n=255), or placebo (n=253). A significantly greater proportion of participants who received baricitinib 4 mg (142 [57%]; odds ratio 1·57 [95% CI 1·09 to 2·27]; difference with placebo 10·8 [2·0 to 19·6]; p=0·016), but not baricitinib 2 mg (126 [50%]; 1·14 [0·79 to 1·65]; 3·9 [-4·9 to 12·6]; p=0·47), reached SRI-4 response compared with placebo (116 [46%]). There were no significant differences between the proportions of participants in either baricitinib group reaching any of the major secondary endpoints compared with placebo, including glucocorticoid tapering and time to first severe flare. 26 (10%) participants receiving baricitinib 4 mg had serious adverse events, 24 (9%) participants receiving baricitinib 2 mg, and 18 (7%) participants receiving placebo. The safety profile of baricitinib in participants with SLE was consistent with the known baricitinib safety profile. INTERPRETATION: The primary endpoint in this study was met for the 4 mg baricitinib group. However, key secondary endpoints were not. No new safety signals were observed. FUNDING: Eli Lilly and Company.

Telitacicept in patients with active systemic lupus erythematosus: results of a phase 2b, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial.

OBJECTIVES: This phase 2b, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial evaluated the efficacy and safety of telitacicept, a novel fusion protein that neutralises signals of B lymphocyte stimulator and a proliferation-inducing ligand, in active systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE). METHODS: Adult patients with active SLE (n=249) were recruited from 29 hospitals in China and randomised 1:1:1:1 to receive subcutaneous telitacicept at 80 mg (n=62), 160 mg (n=63), 240 mg (n=62) or placebo (n=62) once weekly in addition to standard therapy. The primary endpoint was the proportion of patients achieving an SLE Responder Index 4 (SRI-4) response at week 48. Missing data were imputed using the last observation carried forward method. RESULTS: At week 48, the proportion of patients achieving an SRI-4 response was 75.8% in the 240 mg telitacicept group, 68.3% in the 160 mg group, 71.0% in the 80 mg group and 33.9% in the placebo group (all p<0.001). Significant treatment responses were observed in secondary endpoints, including a ≥4-point reduction on the Systemic Lupus Erythematosus Disease Activity Index, a lack of Physician's Global Assessment score worsening and a glucocorticoid dose reduction in the 240 mg group. Telitacicept was well tolerated, and the incidence of adverse events and serious adverse events was similar between the telitacicept and placebo groups. CONCLUSIONS: This phase 2b clinical trial met the primary endpoint. All telitacicept groups showed a significantly higher proportion of patients achieving an SRI-4 response than the placebo group at week 48, and all doses were well tolerated. These results support further investigations of telitacicept in clinical trials involving more diverse populations and larger sample sizes. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ClinicalTrials.gov Registry (NCT02885610).

Unmet need in rheumatology: reports from the Advances in Targeted Therapies meeting, 2023.

The Advances in Targeted Therapies meets annually, convening experts in the field of rheumatology to both provide scientific updates and identify existing scientific gaps within the field. To review the major unmet scientific needs in rheumatology. The 23rd annual Advances in Targeted Therapies meeting convened with more than 100 international basic scientists and clinical researchers in rheumatology, immunology, infectious diseases, epidemiology, molecular biology and other specialties relating to all aspects of immune-mediated inflammatory diseases. We held breakout sessions in five rheumatological disease-specific groups including: rheumatoid arthritis (RA), psoriatic arthritis (PsA), axial spondyloarthritis (axSpa), systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE), systemic sclerosis (SSc) and vasculitis, and osteoarthritis (OA). In each group, experts were asked to identify and prioritise current unmet needs in clinical and translational research. An overarching theme across all disease states is the continued need for clinical trial design innovation with regard to therapeutics, endpoint and disease endotypes. Within RA, unmet needs comprise molecular classification of disease pathogenesis and activity, pre-/early RA strategies, more refined pain profiling and innovative trials designs to deliver on precision medicine. Continued scientific questions within PsA include evaluating the genetic, immunophenotypic, clinical signatures that predict development of PsA in patients with psoriasis, and the evaluation of combination therapies for difficult-to-treat disease. For axSpA, there continues to be the need to understand the role of interleukin-23 (IL-23) in pathogenesis and the genetic relationship of the IL-23-receptor polymorphism with other related systemic inflammatory diseases (eg, inflammatory bowel disease). A major unmet need in the OA field remains the need to develop the ability to reliably phenotype and stratify patients for inclusion in clinical trials. SLE experts identified a number of unmet needs within clinical trial design including the need for allowing endpoints that reflect pharmacodynamic/functional outcomes (eg, inhibition of type I interferon pathway activation; changes in urine biomarkers). Lastly, within SSc and vasculitis, there is a lack of biomarkers that predict response or disease progression, and that allow patients to be stratified for therapies. There remains a strong need to innovate clinical trial design, to identify systemic and tissue-level biomarkers that predict progression or response to therapy, endotype disease, and to continue developing therapies and therapeutic strategies for those with treatment-refractory disease. This document, based on expert consensus, should provide a roadmap for prioritising scientific endeavour in the field of rheumatology.

EULAR recommendations for the management of systemic lupus erythematosus: 2023 update.

OBJECTIVES: To update the EULAR recommendations for the management of systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) based on emerging new evidence. METHODS: An international Task Force formed the questions for the systematic literature reviews (January 2018-December 2022), followed by formulation and finalisation of the statements after a series of meetings. A predefined voting process was applied to each overarching principle and recommendation. Levels of evidence and strengths of recommendation were assigned, and participants finally provided their level of agreement with each item. RESULTS: The Task Force agreed on 5 overarching principles and 13 recommendations, concerning the use of hydroxychloroquine (HCQ), glucocorticoids (GC), immunosuppressive drugs (ISDs) (including methotrexate, mycophenolate, azathioprine, cyclophosphamide (CYC)), calcineurin inhibitors (CNIs, cyclosporine, tacrolimus, voclosporin) and biologics (belimumab, anifrolumab, rituximab). Advice is also provided on treatment strategies and targets of therapy, assessment of response, combination and sequential therapies, and tapering of therapy. HCQ is recommended for all patients with lupus at a target dose 5 mg/kg real body weight/day, considering the individual's risk for flares and retinal toxicity. GC are used as 'bridging therapy' during periods of disease activity; for maintenance treatment, they should be minimised to equal or less than 5 mg/day (prednisone equivalent) and, when possible, withdrawn. Prompt initiation of ISDs (methotrexate, azathioprine, mycophenolate) and/or biological agents (anifrolumab, belimumab) should be considered to control the disease and facilitate GC tapering/discontinuation. CYC and rituximab should be considered in organ-threatening and refractory disease, respectively. For active lupus nephritis, GC, mycophenolate or low-dose intravenous CYC are recommended as anchor drugs, and add-on therapy with belimumab or CNIs (voclosporin or tacrolimus) should be considered. Updated specific recommendations are also provided for cutaneous, neuropsychiatric and haematological disease, SLE-associated antiphospholipid syndrome, kidney protection, as well as preventative measures for infections, osteoporosis, cardiovascular disease. CONCLUSION: The updated recommendations provide consensus guidance on the management of SLE, combining evidence and expert opinion.

Remission and low disease activity are associated with lower healthcare costs: results from the Systemic Lupus International Collaborating Clinics (SLICC) inception cohort.

OBJECTIVES: This study aims to determine the independent impact of definitions of remission/low disease activity (LDA) on direct/indirect costs (DCs, ICs) in a multicentre inception cohort. METHODS: Patients from 31 centres in 10 countries were enrolled within 15 months of diagnosis and assessed annually. Five mutually exclusive disease activity states (DAS) were defined as (1) remission off-treatment: clinical (c) SLEDAI-2K=0, without prednisone/immunosuppressants; (2) remission on-treatment: cSLEDAI-2K=0, prednisone ≤5 mg/day and/or maintenance immunosuppressants; (3) LDA-Toronto Cohort (TC): cSLEDAI-2K≤2, without prednisone/immunosuppressants; (4) modified lupus LDA state (mLLDAS): SLEDAI-2K≤4, no activity in major organs/systems, no new activity, prednisone ≤7.5 mg/day and/or maintenance immunosuppressants and (5) active: all remaining assessments.At each assessment, patients were stratified into the most stringent DAS fulfilled and the proportion of time in a DAS since cohort entry was determined. Annual DCs/ICs (2021 Canadian dollars) were based on healthcare use and lost workforce/non-workforce productivity over the preceding year.The association between the proportion of time in a DAS and annual DC/IC was examined through multivariable random-effects linear regressions. RESULTS: 1692 patients were followed a mean of 9.7 years; 49.0% of assessments were active. Remission/LDA (per 25% increase in time in a remission/LDA state vs active) were associated with lower annual DC/IC: remission off-treatment (DC -$C1372; IC -$C2507), remission on-treatment (DC -$C973; IC -$C2604,) LDA-TC (DC -$C1158) and mLLDAS (DC -$C1040). There were no cost differences between remission/LDA states. CONCLUSIONS: Our data suggest that systemic lupus erythematosus patients who achieve remission, both off and on-therapy, and reductions in disease activity incur lower costs than those experiencing persistent disease activity.

Prevalence of coeliac disease in patients with rheumatoid arthritis and juvenile idiopathic arthritis: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVES: The reported prevalence of coeliac disease (CD) in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) and juvenile idiopathic arthritis (JIA) varies in previous studies. We aimed to examine the prevalence of CD in patients with RA and JIA. METHODS: We searched Medline, Embase, Cochrane and Web of Science Core Collection between 1 January 1990 and 31 October 2022. In our primary analysis, the prevalence of biopsy-confirmed CD in RA and JIA patients was investigated. In secondary analyses, the prevalence of serological markers for CD was examined. Pooled weighted prevalences of CD and serological markers with 95% confidence intervals (95%CI) were calculated and quality of included studies was assessed. Meta-regression analysis was performed on publication year, sample size, CD prevalence in the general population, proportion of females, and quality assessment score. RESULTS: In this systematic review, 14 publications were deemed relevant for RA and 22 for JIA, with nine and 18 included in the primary analyses of CD prevalence, respectively. Among a total of 754 RA patients and 2077 patients with JIA, the weighted pooled prevalence estimates of biopsy-confirmed CD were 0.4% (95%CI=0.0-1.2) and 1.4% (95%CI=0.7-2.2), respectively. The pooled prevalence estimates of positive CD serology were 0.9% (95%CI=0.3-1.9) in RA and 5.4% (95%CI=2.5-9.2) in JIA. CONCLUSIONS: In this meta-analysis, we found a pooled prevalence of biopsy-confirmed CD in patients with RA and JIA comparable to that in the general population. Routine screening for CD is not warranted in RA but could be considered in JIA patients with additional risk factors for CD.

Certolizumab pegol, abatacept, tocilizumab or active conventional treatment in early rheumatoid arthritis: 48-week clinical and radiographic results of the investigator-initiated randomised controlled NORD-STAR trial.

BACKGROUND: The optimal first-line treatment in early rheumatoid arthritis (RA) is debated. We compared clinical and radiographic outcomes of active conventional therapy with each of three biological treatments with different modes of action. METHODS: Investigator-initiated, randomised, blinded-assessor study. Patients with treatment-naïve early RA with moderate-severe disease activity were randomised 1:1:1:1 to methotrexate combined with (1) active conventional therapy: oral prednisolone (tapered quickly, discontinued at week 36) or sulfasalazine, hydroxychloroquine and intra-articular glucocorticoid injections in swollen joints; (2) certolizumab pegol; (3) abatacept or (4) tocilizumab. Coprimary endpoints were week 48 Clinical Disease Activity Index (CDAI) remission (CDAI ≤2.8) and change in radiographic van der Heijde-modified Sharp Score, estimated using logistic regression and analysis of covariance, adjusted for sex, anticitrullinated protein antibody status and country. Bonferroni's and Dunnet's procedures adjusted for multiple testing (significance level: 0.025). RESULTS: Eight hundred and twelve patients were randomised. Adjusted CDAI remission rates at week 48 were: 59.3% (abatacept), 52.3% (certolizumab), 51.9% (tocilizumab) and 39.2% (active conventional therapy). Compared with active conventional therapy, CDAI remission rates were significantly higher for abatacept (adjusted difference +20.1%, p<0.001) and certolizumab (+13.1%, p=0.021), but not for tocilizumab (+12.7%, p=0.030). Key secondary clinical outcomes were consistently better in biological groups. Radiographic progression was low, without group differences.The proportions of patients with serious adverse events were abatacept, 8.3%; certolizumab, 12.4%; tocilizumab, 9.2%; and active conventional therapy, 10.7%. CONCLUSIONS: Compared with active conventional therapy, clinical remission rates were superior for abatacept and certolizumab pegol, but not for tocilizumab. Radiographic progression was low and similar between treatments. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT01491815.

Machine learning identifies clusters of longitudinal autoantibody profiles predictive of systemic lupus erythematosus disease outcomes.

OBJECTIVES: A novel longitudinal clustering technique was applied to comprehensive autoantibody data from a large, well-characterised, multinational inception systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) cohort to determine profiles predictive of clinical outcomes. METHODS: Demographic, clinical and serological data from 805 patients with SLE obtained within 15 months of diagnosis and at 3-year and 5-year follow-up were included. For each visit, sera were assessed for 29 antinuclear antibodies (ANA) immunofluorescence patterns and 20 autoantibodies. K-means clustering on principal component analysis-transformed longitudinal autoantibody profiles identified discrete phenotypic clusters. One-way analysis of variance compared cluster enrolment demographics and clinical outcomes at 10-year follow-up. Cox proportional hazards model estimated the HR for survival adjusting for age of disease onset. RESULTS: Cluster 1 (n=137, high frequency of anti-Smith, anti-U1RNP, AC-5 (large nuclear speckled pattern) and high ANA titres) had the highest cumulative disease activity and immunosuppressants/biologics use at year 10. Cluster 2 (n=376, low anti-double stranded DNA (dsDNA) and ANA titres) had the lowest disease activity, frequency of lupus nephritis and immunosuppressants/biologics use. Cluster 3 (n=80, highest frequency of all five antiphospholipid antibodies) had the highest frequency of seizures and hypocomplementaemia. Cluster 4 (n=212) also had high disease activity and was characterised by multiple autoantibody reactivity including to antihistone, anti-dsDNA, antiribosomal P, anti-Sjögren syndrome antigen A or Ro60, anti-Sjögren syndrome antigen B or La, anti-Ro52/Tripartite Motif Protein 21, antiproliferating cell nuclear antigen and anticentromere B). Clusters 1 (adjusted HR 2.60 (95% CI 1.12 to 6.05), p=0.03) and 3 (adjusted HR 2.87 (95% CI 1.22 to 6.74), p=0.02) had lower survival compared with cluster 2. CONCLUSION: Four discrete SLE patient longitudinal autoantibody clusters were predictive of long-term disease activity, organ involvement, treatment requirements and mortality risk.

Sustained glucocorticoid tapering in the phase 3 trials of anifrolumab: a post hoc analysis of the TULIP-1 and TULIP-2 trials.

OBJECTIVES: Glucocorticoid sparing is a key priority for SLE management. We evaluated the effects of sustained glucocorticoid tapering in patients with SLE. MATERIAL AND METHODS: This was a post hoc analysis of the randomized, placebo-controlled, 52-week phase 3 Treatment of Uncontrolled Lupus via the Interferon Pathway (TULIP)-1 and TULIP-2 trials of anifrolumab (300 mg i.v. once every 4 weeks for 48 weeks) plus standard therapy in patients with moderate to severe SLE. In a cohort of patients receiving glucocorticoids (prednisone or equivalent) 10 mg or more per day at baseline, we assessed changes in glucocorticoid dosage, patient-reported outcomes (PROs) and safety. Outcome measures were compared between sustained glucocorticoid taper responders (7.5 mg or less per day by week 40 sustained through week 52) and non-responders, regardless of treatment group, and between patients receiving anifrolumab or placebo. RESULTS: Among the 726 patients in the TULIP trials, 375 patients received glucocorticoids 10 mg or more per day at baseline, and of these, 155 (41%) patients were sustained glucocorticoid taper responders. Compared with non-responders (n = 220), sustained glucocorticoid taper responders reduced their mean cumulative glucocorticoid dose by 32%, improved PRO scores, reduced blood pressure and experienced fewer serious adverse events. Sustained glucocorticoid tapering was achieved by 51% (96/190) of patients receiving anifrolumab vs 32% (59/185) receiving placebo. Compared with placebo, more anifrolumab-treated patients achieved both sustained glucocorticoid taper and reduced overall disease activity [38% (72/190) vs 23% (43/185)]. CONCLUSIONS: Sustained glucocorticoid tapering is associated with clinical benefits. Anifrolumab treatment has potential to reduce disease activity and glucocorticoid exposure, a key goal of SLE management. STUDY REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02446912 and NCT02446899.

Phase 3, multicentre, randomised, placebo-controlled study evaluating the efficacy and safety of ustekinumab in patients with systemic lupus erythematosus.

OBJECTIVE: Evaluate the efficacy and safety of ustekinumab, an anti-interleukin-12/23 p40 antibody, in a phase 3, randomised, placebo-controlled study of patients with active systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) despite receiving standard-of-care. METHODS: Active SLE patients (SLE Disease Activity Index 2000 (SLEDAI-2K) ≥6 during screening and SLEDAI-2K ≥4 for clinical features at week 0) despite receiving oral glucocorticoids, antimalarials, or immunomodulatory drugs were randomised (3:2) to receive ustekinumab (intravenous infusion ~6 mg/kg at week 0, followed by subcutaneous injections of ustekinumab 90 mg at week 8 and every 8 weeks) or placebo through week 48. The primary endpoint was SLE Responder Index (SRI)-4 at week 52, and major secondary endpoints included time to flare through week 52 and SRI-4 at week 24. RESULTS: At baseline, 516 patients were randomised to placebo (n=208) or ustekinumab (n=308). Following the planned interim analysis, the sponsor discontinued the study due to lack of efficacy but no safety concerns. Efficacy analyses included 289 patients (placebo, n=116; ustekinumab, n=173) who completed or would have had a week 52 visit at study discontinuation. At week 52, 44% of ustekinumab patients and 56% of placebo patients had an SRI-4 response; there were no appreciable differences between the treatment groups in the major secondary endpoints. Through week 52, 28% of ustekinumab patients and 32% of placebo patients had a British Isles Lupus Assessment Group flare, with a mean time to first flare of 204.7 and 200.4 days, respectively. Through week 52, 70% of ustekinumab patients and 74% of placebo patients had ≥1 adverse event. CONCLUSIONS: Ustekinumab did not demonstrate superiority over placebo in this population of adults with active SLE; adverse events were consistent with the known safety profile of ustekinumab. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT03517722.

Remission and low disease activity (LDA) prevent damage accrual in patients with systemic lupus erythematosus: results from the Systemic Lupus International Collaborating Clinics (SLICC) inception cohort.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the independent impact of different definitions of remission and low disease activity (LDA) on damage accrual. METHODS: Patients with ≥2 annual assessments from a longitudinal multinational inception lupus cohort were studied. Five mutually exclusive disease activity states were defined: remission off-treatment: clinical Systemic Lupus Erythematosus Disease Activity Index (cSLEDAI)-2K=0, without prednisone or immunosuppressants; remission on-treatment: cSLEDAI-2K score=0, prednisone ≤5 mg/day and/or maintenance immunosuppressants; low disease activity Toronto cohort (LDA-TC): cSLEDAI-2K score of ≤2, without prednisone or immunosuppressants; modified lupus low disease activity (mLLDAS): Systemic Lupus Erythematosus Disease Activity Index-2K score of 4 with no activity in major organ/systems, no new disease activity, prednisone ≤7.5 mg/day and/or maintenance immunosuppressants; active: all remaining visits. Only the most stringent definition was used per visit. Antimalarials were allowed in all. The proportion of time that patients were in a specific state at each visit since cohort entry was determined. Damage accrual was ascertained with the Systemic Lupus International Collaborating Clinics/American College of Rheumatology Damage Index (SDI). Univariable and multivariable generalised estimated equation negative binomial regression models were used. Time-dependent covariates were determined at the same annual visit as the disease activity state but the SDI at the subsequent visit. RESULTS: There were 1652 patients, 1464 (88.6%) female, mean age at diagnosis 34.2 (SD 13.4) years and mean follow-up time of 7.7 (SD 4.8) years. Being in remission off-treatment, remission on-treatment, LDA-TC and mLLDAS (per 25% increase) were each associated with a lower probability of damage accrual (remission off-treatment: incidence rate ratio (IRR)=0.75, 95% CI 0.70 to 0.81; remission on-treatment: IRR=0.68, 95% CI 0.62 to 0.75; LDA: IRR=0.79, 95% CI 0.68 to 0.92; and mLLDAS: IRR=0.76, 95% CI 0.65 to 0.89)). CONCLUSIONS: Remission on-treatment and off-treatment, LDA-TC and mLLDAS were associated with less damage accrual, even adjusting for possible confounders and effect modifiers.

Longitudinal analysis of ANA in the Systemic Lupus International Collaborating Clinics (SLICC) Inception Cohort.

OBJECTIVES: A perception derived from cross-sectional studies of small systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) cohorts is that there is a marked discrepancy between antinuclear antibody (ANA) assays, which impacts on clinicians' approach to diagnosis and follow-up. We compared three ANA assays in a longitudinal analysis of a large international incident SLE cohort retested regularly and followed for 5 years. METHODS: Demographic, clinical and serological data was from 805 SLE patients at enrolment, year 3 and 5. Two HEp-2 indirect immunofluorescence assays (IFA1, IFA2), an ANA ELISA, and SLE-related autoantibodies were performed in one laboratory. Frequencies of positivity, titres or absorbance units (AU), and IFA patterns were compared using McNemar, Wilcoxon and kappa statistics, respectively. RESULTS: At enrolment, ANA positivity (≥1:80) was 96.1% by IFA1 (median titre 1:1280 (IQR 1:640-1:5120)), 98.3% by IFA2 (1:2560 (IQR 1:640-1:5120)) and 96.6% by ELISA (176.3 AU (IQR 106.4 AU-203.5 AU)). At least one ANA assay was positive for 99.6% of patients at enrolment. At year 5, ANA positivity by IFAs (IFA1 95.2%; IFA2 98.9%) remained high, while there was a decrease in ELISA positivity (91.3%, p<0.001). Overall, there was >91% agreement in ANA positivity at all time points and ≥71% agreement in IFA patterns between IFA1 and IFA2. CONCLUSION: In recent-onset SLE, three ANA assays demonstrated commutability with a high proportion of positivity and titres or AU. However, over 5 years follow-up, there was modest variation in ANA assay performance. In clinical situations where the SLE diagnosis is being considered, a negative test by either the ELISA or HEp-2 IFA may require reflex testing.

Flares after hydroxychloroquine reduction or discontinuation: results from the Systemic Lupus International Collaborating Clinics (SLICC) inception cohort.

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) flares following hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) reduction or discontinuation versus HCQ maintenance. METHODS: We analysed prospective data from the Systemic Lupus International Collaborating Clinics (SLICC) cohort, enrolled from 33 sites within 15 months of SLE diagnosis and followed annually (1999-2019). We evaluated person-time contributed while on the initial HCQ dose ('maintenance'), comparing this with person-time contributed after a first dose reduction, and after a first HCQ discontinuation. We estimated time to first flare, defined as either subsequent need for therapy augmentation, increase of ≥4 points in the SLE Disease Activity Index-2000, or hospitalisation for SLE. We estimated adjusted HRs (aHRs) with 95% CIs associated with reducing/discontinuing HCQ (vs maintenance). We also conducted separate multivariable hazard regressions in each HCQ subcohort to identify factors associated with flare. RESULTS: We studied 1460 (90% female) patients initiating HCQ. aHRs for first SLE flare were 1.20 (95% CI 1.04 to 1.38) and 1.56 (95% CI 1.31 to 1.86) for the HCQ reduction and discontinuation groups, respectively, versus HCQ maintenance. Patients with low educational level were at particular risk of flaring after HCQ discontinuation (aHR 1.43, 95% CI 1.09 to 1.87). Prednisone use at time-zero was associated with over 1.5-fold increase in flare risk in all HCQ subcohorts. CONCLUSIONS: SLE flare risk was higher after HCQ taper/discontinuation versus HCQ maintenance. Decisions to maintain, reduce or stop HCQ may affect specific subgroups differently, including those on prednisone and/or with low education. Further study of special groups (eg, seniors) may be helpful.

Blood PD-1+TFh and CTLA-4+CD4+ T cells predict remission after CTLA-4Ig treatment in early rheumatoid arthritis.

OBJECTIVE: Treatment with CTLA-4Ig blocks T-cell activation and is clinically effective in RA. However, it is unknown if specific CD4+ T-cell subsets in blood at baseline predict remission after CTLA-4Ig, or other biological treatments with different modes of action, and how treatment affects CD4+ T cells in patients with untreated early RA (eRA). METHODS: This study included 60 patients with untreated eRA from a larger randomized trial. They were treated with methotrexate combined with CTLA-4Ig (abatacept, n = 17), anti-IL6 receptor (tocilizumab, n = 21) or anti-TNF (certolizumab-pegol, n = 22). Disease activity was assessed by clinical disease activity index (CDAI), DAS28, swollen joint counts, tender joint counts, CRP and ESR. The primary outcome was CDAI remission (CDAI ≤ 2.8) at week 24. Proportions of 12 CD4+ T-cell subsets were measured by flow cytometry at baseline and after 4, 12 and 24 weeks of treatment. RESULTS: In patients treated with CTLA-4Ig, the proportions of PD-1+TFh and CTLA-4+ conventional CD4+ T cells at baseline predicted CDAI remission at week 24. CD4+ T-cell subset proportions could not predict remission after treatment with anti-IL6R or anti-TNF. The percentage of regulatory T cells (Tregs) expressing CTLA-4 decreased in all treatment arms by 24 weeks, but only CTLA-4Ig treatment significantly reduced the proportions of Tregs and PD-1+T follicular helper (TFh) cells. CONCLUSION: These findings indicate that circulating proportions PD-1+TFh and CTLA-4+ conventional CD4+ T cells at baseline may serve as predictive biomarkers for remission in early RA after CTLA-4Ig treatment.

An ultrasound negative for subclinical synovitis in arthralgia patients: is it helpful in identifying those not developing arthritis?

OBJECTIVE: To investigate the negative predictive value (NPV) of musculoskeletal US (MSUS) in arthralgia patients at risk for developing inflammatory arthritis. METHODS: An MSUS examination of hands and feet was performed in arthralgia patients at risk for inflammatory arthritis in four independent cohorts. Patients were followed for one-year on the development of inflammatory arthritis. Subclinical synovitis was defined as greyscale ≥2 and/or power Doppler ≥1. NPVs were determined and compared with the prior risks of not developing inflammatory arthritis. Outcomes were pooled using meta-analyses and meta-regression analyses. In sensitivity analyses, MSUS imaging of tender joints only (rather than the full US protocol) was analysed and ACPA stratification applied. RESULTS: After 1 year 78, 82, 77 and 72% of patients in the four cohorts did not develop inflammatory arthritis. The NPV of a negative US was 86, 85, 82 and 90%, respectively. The meta-analysis showed a pooled non-inflammatory arthritis prevalence of 79% (95% CI 75%, 83%) and a pooled NPV of 86% (95% CI 81, 89%). Imaging tender joints only (as generally done in clinical practice) and ACPA stratification showed similar results. CONCLUSION: A negative US result in arthralgia has a high NPV for not developing inflammatory arthritis, which is mainly due to the high a priori risk of not developing inflammatory arthritis. The added value of a negative US (<10% increase) was limited.

Impact of remission and low disease activity on health-related quality of life in patients with systemic lupus erythematosus.

OBJECTIVES: To investigate the impact of remission and lupus low disease activity state (LLDAS) on health-related quality of life (HRQoL) in systemic lupus erythematosus. METHODS: Short-Form 36 (SF-36), three-level EQ-5D (EQ-5D-3L) and Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy (FACIT)-Fatigue data from the BLISS-52 (NCT00424476) and BLISS-76 (NCT00410384) trials were used. Duration in remission/LLDAS required to reach a HRQoL benefit ≥ minimal clinically important differences (MCIDs) during and post-treatment was determined using quantile regression and generalized estimating equations. RESULTS: Patients (n = 1684) were assessed every fourth week (15 visits). Four cumulative (ß = 0.60) or four consecutive (ß = 0.66) visits in remission were required to achieve a benefit ≥MCID in SF-36 physical component summary (PCS) scores, and six cumulative (ß = 0.44) or five consecutive (ß = 0.49) for a benefit ≥MCID in mental component summary (MCS) scores. Eight cumulative (ß = 0.30 for both) or eight consecutive (ß = 0.32 for both) visits in LLDAS were required for a benefit in PCS/MCS ≥MCID, respectively. For EQ-5D-3L index scores ≥MCID, six cumulative (ß = 0.007) or five consecutive (ß = 0.008) visits in remission were required, and eight cumulative (ß = 0.005) or six consecutive (ß = 0.006) visits in LLDAS. For FACIT-Fatigue scores ≥MCID, 12 cumulative (ß = 0.34) or 10 consecutive (ß = 0.39) visits in remission were required, and 17 cumulative (ß = 0.24) or 16 consecutive (ß = 0.25) visits in LLDAS. CONCLUSION: Remission and LLDAS contribute to a HRQoL benefit in a time-dependent manner. Shorter time in remission than in LLDAS was required for a clinically important benefit in HRQoL, and longer time in remission for a benefit in mental compared with physical HRQoL aspects. When remission/LLDAS was sustained, the same benefit was achieved in a shorter time.

The association between lupus serology and disease outcomes: A systematic literature review to inform the treat-to-target approach in systemic lupus erythematosus.

INTRODUCTION: Serological markers such as anti-double stranded (ds)DNA antibodies and complement fractions C3/C4, are integral components of disease activity assessment in patients with systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE). However, it remains uncertain whether treatment should aim at restoration of serological abnormalities. OBJECTIVES: To analyze and critically appraise the literature on the prognostic impact of active lupus serology despite clinical disease quiescence. METHODS: A systematic literature review was performed in PubMed and EMBASE using the PICOT(S) (population, index, comparator, outcome(s), timing, setting) system to identify studies evaluating the association of serum anti-dsDNA, C3 and C4 levels assessed at the time of clinical remission or during the disease course, against the risk for impending flares and organ damage. Risk of bias was determined by the Quality in Prognosis Studies and ROB2 tools for observational and randomized controlled studies, respectively. RESULTS: Fifty-three studies were eligible, the majority having moderate (70.6%) or high (11.8%) risk of bias and not adequately controlling for possible confounders. C3 hypocomplementemia during stable/inactive disease was associated with increased risk (2.0 to 3.8-fold) for subsequent flare in three out of seven relevant studies. Three out of four studies reported a significant effect of C4 hypocomplementemia on flare risk, including one study in lupus nephritis (likelihood ratio-positive 12.0). An increased incidence of flares (2.0 to 2.8-fold) was reported in 11 out of 16 studies assessing the prognostic effect of high anti-dsDNA, and similarly, the majority of studies yielded significant relationships with renal flares. Six studies examined the effect of combined (rather than individual) serological activity, confirming the increased risk (2.0 to 2.7-fold) for relapses. No consistent association was found with organ damage. CONCLUSION: Notwithstanding the heterogeneity and risk of bias, existing evidence indicates a modest association between abnormal serology and risk for flare in patients with stable/inactive SLE. These findings provide limited support for inclusion of serology in the treat-to-target approach but rationalize to further investigate their prognostic implications especially in lupus nephritis.