Integrated safety analysis of filgotinib treatment for rheumatoid arthritis in patients from Japan over a median of 1.5 years.

OBJECTIVE: Characterize safety of the Janus kinase-1 preferential inhibitor filgotinib (FIL) in Japanese patients with moderately to severely active rheumatoid arthritis (RA). METHODS: Data from three Phase 3 trials (NCT02889796, NCT02873936, and NCT02886728) and a long-term extension (NCT03025308) through September 2019 were integrated; patients received ≥1 dose of FIL 200 (FIL200) or 100 mg (FIL100) daily, or placebo (PBO). We calculated exposure-adjusted incidence rates (EAIRs) per 100 patient-years FIL exposure (100PYE) for treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) and adverse events of special interest. RESULTS: Among 3691 total patients and 6080.7 PYE, 229 Japanese patients received FIL for 311.4 PYE (median 1.5, maximum 2.5 years). During the 12-week PBO-controlled period, serious TEAEs and TEAEs leading to study drug disruption were comparable between FIL and PBO. Serious infection rates were 1.9%, 0%, and 2% for FIL200, FIL100, and PBO during the PBO-controlled period; long-term FIL200 and FIL100 EAIRs were 3.8 and 2.1/100PYE. No herpes zoster (HZ) or major adverse cardiovascular events (MACEs) occurred during the PBO-controlled period; long-term FIL200 and FIL100 EAIRs were 3.0 and 2.1/100PYE (HZ) and 0.6 and 0/100PYE (MACE). CONCLUSION: Long-term FIL treatment (median 1.5, maximum 2.5 years exposure) was well tolerated at 100- and 200-mg doses in Japanese patients with RA.

Safety and efficacy of filgotinib for Japanese patients with RA and inadequate response to MTX: FINCH 1 52-week results and FINCH 4 48-week results.

OBJECTIVES: To present safety and efficacy of the JAK1 preferential inhibitor filgotinib in Japanese patients with prior inadequate response (IR) to methotrexate (MTX) from a 52-week randomised controlled parent study (PS) and long-term extension (LTE) through June 2020. METHODS: The PS (NCT02889796) randomised MTX-IR patients to filgotinib 200 (FIL200) or 100 mg (FIL100), adalimumab (ADA) 40 mg, or placebo; all took stable background MTX. At week (W) 24, placebo patients were rerandomised to FIL200 or FIL100. The primary endpoint was W12 American College of Rheumatology 20% improvement; safety was assessed by adverse event (AE) reporting. For the LTE (NCT03025308), eligible filgotinib patients continued FIL200/FIL100; ADA patients were rerandomised (blinded) to FIL200 or FIL100; all continued MTX. RESULTS: In all, 114/147 Japanese patients completed the PS, 115 enrolled in LTE, and 103 remained on study in June 2020. In the PS, AEs were consistent with the overall population, and W24 efficacy was maintained or improved through W52, comparable with the overall population. LTE AE incidences were similar between doses; filgotinib efficacy was consistent from baseline to W48 and similar between PS ADA and filgotinib patients. CONCLUSIONS: Among MTX-IR Japanese patients, filgotinib maintained efficacy over 1 year; LTE safety was consistent with the PS.

Long-term safety and efficacy of filgotinib treatment for rheumatoid arthritis in Japanese patients naïve to MTX treatment (FINCH 3).

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the long-term safety and efficacy of filgotinib (FIL) for Japanese patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) and limited/no prior methotrexate (MTX) exposure. We present a Japanese population subanalysis of a global randomised-controlled trial at Week 52 and interim long-term extension (LTE) to Week 48 through June 2020. METHODS: Patients were randomised to FIL 200 mg plus MTX, FIL 100 mg plus MTX, FIL 200 mg, or MTX for 52 weeks. At completion, eligible patients could enrol in the LTE. Those receiving FIL continued; those receiving MTX were rerandomised (blinded) to FIL 200 or 100 mg upon discontinuation of MTX. After a 4-week washout period, MTX could be re-added. RESULTS: Adverse event rates at Week 52 and in the LTE to Week 48 were comparable across treatment groups. Week 52 American College of Rheumatology 20% improvement (ACR20) rates were 83% (19/23), 82% (9/11), 75% (9/12), and 76% (19/25) for FIL 200 mg plus MTX, FIL 100 mg plus MTX, FIL 200 mg, and MTX, respectively. Through LTE Week 48, ACR20 rates were maintained. CONCLUSIONS: In the 56 Japanese patients treated with FIL, efficacy was maintained through Week 52 and beyond, with no increases in the incidence of adverse events.

Filgotinib or lanraplenib in moderate to severe cutaneous lupus erythematosus: a phase 2, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study.

OBJECTIVES: To explore the safety and efficacy of filgotinib (FIL), a Janus kinase 1 inhibitor, and lanraplenib (LANRA), a spleen kinase inhibitor, in cutaneous lupus erythematosus (CLE). METHODS: This was a phase 2, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, exploratory, proof-of-concept study of LANRA (30 mg), FIL (200 mg) or placebo (PBO) once daily for 12 weeks in patients with active CLE. At week 12, PBO patients were rerandomized 1:1 to receive LANRA or FIL for up to 36 additional weeks. RESULTS: Of 47 randomized patients, 45 were treated (PBO, n = 9; LANRA, n = 19; FIL, n = 17). The primary endpoint [change from baseline in Cutaneous Lupus Erythematosus Disease Area and Severity Index Activity (CLASI-A) score at week 12] was not met. The least squares mean CLASI-A score change from baseline was -5.5 (s.e. 2.56) with PBO, -4.5 (1.91) with LANRA and -8.7 (1.85) with FIL. Numerical differences between FIL and PBO were greater in select subgroups. A ≥5-point improvement in the CLASI-A score at week 12 was achieved by 50.0%, 56.3% and 68.8% in the PBO, LANRA and FIL arms, respectively. A numerically greater proportion of patients in the FIL arm (50%) also achieved ≥50% improvement in the CLASI-A score at week 12 (37.5% PBO, 31.3% LANRA). Most adverse events (AEs) were mild or moderate in severity. Two serious AEs were reported with LANRA and one with FIL. CONCLUSION: The primary endpoint was not met. Select subgroups displayed a numerically greater treatment response to FIL relative to PBO. LANRA and FIL were generally well tolerated. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier NCT03134222.

Safety and efficacy of filgotinib, lanraplenib and tirabrutinib in Sjögren's syndrome: a randomized, phase 2, double-blind, placebo-controlled study.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to characterize the safety and efficacy of filgotinib, lanraplenib and tirabrutinib in patients with active SS. METHODS: This multicentre, double-blind study randomized patients with active primary or secondary SS [EULAR SS disease activity index (ESSDAI) ≥5) to receive filgotinib 200 mg (Janus kinase-1 inhibitor), lanraplenib 30 mg (spleen tyrosine kinase inhibitor), tirabrutinib 40 mg (Bruton's tyrosine kinase inhibitor), or placebo. The composite primary end point was the week-12 proportion of patients fulfilling protocol-specified improvement criteria (based on CRP and SS-related symptoms). The EULAR SS patient-reported index (ESSPRI) and the ESSDAI change from baseline (CFB) were secondary end points. Exploratory end points included disease-related biomarkers. Treatment-emergent adverse events (AEs) represented safety outcomes. RESULTS: The mean of the baseline ESSDAI was 10.1, and of ESSPRI was 6.2 in the 150 patients who were treated; 125 completed the 24-week placebo-controlled treatment period. At week 12, 43.3% of the filgotinib group achieved the primary end point (P = 0.17 vs placebo) vs 42.3% (P = 0.16), 34.7% (P = 0.33), and 26.7% of lanraplenib, tirabrutinib, and placebo groups, respectively. Neither secondary end point was met. Biomarker reductions included immunoglobulins classically associated with SS disease activity. Filgotinib ESSDAI CFB appeared more pronounced in subgroups with baseline ESSDAI ≥14 or without DMARDs/CSs. Most AEs were Grade 1 or 2. CONCLUSION: Three drugs with disparate mechanisms were tested, but no significant differences vs placebo in primary or secondary end points were observed. These results may be considered hypothesis-generating, given the drug tolerability, subgroup analysis, and biomarker findings. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov, https://clinicaltrials.gov, NCT03100942.

Efficacy and safety of filgotinib in Japanese patients with refractory rheumatoid arthritis: Subgroup analyses of a global phase 3 study (FINCH 2).

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate efficacy and safety of filgotinib in Japanese RA patients who have failed or were intolerant to one or more biologic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (bDMARD) from the global FINCH 2 study (NCT02873936). METHODS: This subgroup analysis was performed using the predefined statistical analyses. The FINCH 2 study is a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, Phase 3 study in adult RA patients with inadequate response to bDMARDs. The randomized patients were treated with once-daily filgotinib 200 mg, filgotinib 100 mg or placebo on a background of csDMARDs for 24 weeks. RESULTS: Of 449 patients enrolled in the overall population, 40 patients were enrolled from Japan. In the Japanese population, the American College of Rheumatology 20% response rates at week 12 (primary endpoint) were 83.3% and 53.3% for filgotinib, 200 mg and 100 mg, respectively, vs 30.8% for placebo. Filgotinib was well tolerated, similar to the overall population. CONCLUSIONS: Both doses of once-daily filgotinib 200 mg and filgotinib 100 mg were effective, and generally well-tolerated in Japanese patients with active refractory RA.

Efficacy and safety of filgotinib in combination with methotrexate in Japanese patients with active rheumatoid arthritis who have an inadequate response to methotrexate: Subpopulation analyses of 24-week data of a global phase 3 study (FINCH 1).

OBJECTIVES: Evaluate the efficacy and safety of the Janus kinase-1 inhibitor filgotinib in Japanese patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) and inadequate response to methotrexate (MTX). METHODS: Data from 147 Japanese patients in FINCH 1, a 52-week global Phase 3 study, were analysed up to 24 weeks. Patients received once-daily filgotinib 200 or 100 mg, biweekly adalimumab, or placebo, all with stable background MTX. RESULTS: In the Japanese population, American College of Rheumatology 20% response rates at Week 12 (primary endpoint) were 77.5%, 65.9%, 53.6%, and 36.8% for filgotinib 200 mg, filgotinib 100 mg, adalimumab, and placebo. Proportions of patients achieving Disease Activity Score with 28 joints <2.6 at Week 24: filgotinib 200 mg, 65.0%; filgotinib 100 mg, 51.2%; adalimumab, 42.9%; and placebo, 5.3%. Incidence rates of serious infections: filgotinib 200 mg, 2.5%; filgotinib 100 mg, 0%; adalimumab, 10.7%; and placebo, 5.3%. Treatment-emergent laboratory abnormalities Grade ≥3 occurred in five (12.5%) filgotinib 200 mg, three (7.3%) filgotinib 100 mg, one (3.6%) adalimumab, and no placebo patients. No deaths were reported among Japanese patients. CONCLUSIONS: Filgotinib once daily combined with MTX was effective and generally safe and well tolerated up to Week 24 in Japanese patients with RA and inadequate response to MTX.

Efficacy and safety of filgotinib alone and in combination with methotrexate in Japanese patients with active rheumatoid arthritis and limited or no prior exposure to methotrexate: Subpopulation analyses of 24-week data of a global phase 3 study (FINCH 3).

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of filgotinib for Japanese patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) and limited or no prior methotrexate (MTX) exposure. METHODS: Data up to 24 weeks were analysed for 71 Japanese patients from a 52-week global Phase 3 study. Patients with RA and limited or no prior MTX exposure were randomised in a 2:1:1:2 ratio to filgotinib 200 mg plus MTX, filgotinib 100 mg plus MTX, filgotinib 200 mg, or MTX. Maximum MTX dose was 15 mg/week. Primary endpoint was proportion achieving 20% improvement in American College of Rheumatology criteria (ACR20) at Week 24. RESULTS: Week 24 ACR20 rates in Japanese patients were 82.6%, 90.9%, 83.3%, and 80.0% for filgotinib 200 mg plus MTX, filgotinib 100 mg plus MTX, filgotinib 200 mg, and MTX, respectively. Greater ACR20 rates with filgotinib vs MTX occurred at Week 2. Greater proportions receiving filgotinib vs MTX achieved DAS28-CRP <2.6 at Weeks 12 and 24. Adverse event rates were comparable across treatments and between the Japanese and overall populations. CONCLUSIONS: While Week 24 ACR20 rates were similar, filgotinib provided faster responses and higher remission rates vs MTX. In Japanese patients with RA and limited or no prior MTX exposure, filgotinib was generally well tolerated.

Benefit of Filgotinib, a JAK1 Preferential Inhibitor, in Rheumatoid Arthritis Patients with Previous Rapid Radiographic Progression: Post Hoc Analysis of Two Trials.

INTRODUCTION: We conducted a post hoc analysis of efficacy and safety of filgotinib stratified by estimated radiographic progression rate before baseline (BL) in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) who had inadequate response to methotrexate (MTX; FINCH 1; NCT02889796) or were naïve to it (FINCH 3; NCT02886728). METHODS: Radiographic progression rate was BL-Modified Total Sharp Score (mTSS) divided by RA duration (BL mTSS/year); estimated rapid radiographic progression (e-RRP) was BL change in mTSS/year ≥ 5; and estimated nonrapid radiographic progression (e-NRRP) was BL mTSS/year < 5. Efficacy and safety were compared between subgroups. All p-values are nominal. RESULTS: In FINCH 1 and FINCH 3, 558/1755 (31.8%) and 787/1249 (63.0%) patients, respectively, had BL e-RRP. BL characteristics were generally similar between subgroups within each trial. At week (W) 24, in FINCH 1, proportions achieving a Disease Activity Score 28 for rheumatoid arthritis with C-reactive protein < 2.6 were significantly greater with filgotinib 200 (FIL200) and 100 mg (FIL100) versus placebo among e-RRP and e-NRRP subgroups. In each study, proportions of FIL-treated patients achieving Clinical Disease Activity Index ≤ 2.8 and Simple Disease Activity Index ≤ 3.3 were similar between subgroups. In FINCH 3, disease activity measures were at least numerically improved among patients receiving FIL versus MTX monotherapy. At W24, mTSS changes from BL (CFB) were greater among patients with e-RRP in FINCH 1 and FINCH 3 versus e-NRRP (0.81 versus 0.19, p = 0.001; 0.67 versus 0.25, p = 0.31, respectively). At W52, in FINCH 1, mTSS CFBs were smaller among e-RRP patients treated with FIL200 (0.40; p < 0.001) and FIL100 (0.77; p = 0.024) versus adalimumab (ADA; 1.46). In FINCH 3 at W52, mTSS CFBs were significantly smaller with FIL200 versus MTX among e-RRP patients. Rates of treatment-emergent adverse events (AEs) were comparable between subgroups and across treatment arms. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with previous e-RRP who received standard care tended to progress radiographically. FIL200 demonstrated persistent, consistent benefit for disease activity control among e-RRP and e-NRRP subgroups, and AE profiles were similar between subgroups. Although filgotinib efficacy was somewhat reduced among patients with e-RRP, filgotinib treatment slowed radiographic progression in both subgroups. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinicaltrials.gov NCT02889796, NCT02886728.

Efficacy and Safety of Filgotinib in Patients with High Risk of Poor Prognosis Who Showed Inadequate Response to MTX: A Post Hoc Analysis of the FINCH 1 Study.

INTRODUCTION: This exploratory analysis of FINCH 1 (NCT02889796) examined filgotinib (FIL) efficacy and safety in a subgroup of patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) and inadequate response to methotrexate (MTX; MTX-IR) who had four poor prognostic factors (PPFs). METHODS: Patients with MTX-IR received placebo up to week (W)24 or FIL200 mg, FIL100 mg, or adalimumab up to W52; all received MTX. Efficacy and safety data were stratified by four PPFs versus fewer than four PPFs: seropositivity, high-sensitivity C-reactive protein (CRP) ≥ 6 mg/L, Disease Activity Score in 28 joints with CRP > 5.1, and erosions on X-rays. RESULTS: At baseline, 687/1755 patients had four PPFs. At W12, whether with four PPFs or fewer than four PPFs, response rates on all American College of Rheumatology (ACR) measures were significantly greater with FIL200 and FIL100 versus placebo. At W52, FIL200 ACR20/50/70 response rates remained at least numerically higher versus adalimumab in both subgroups. At W52, FIL200 reduced modified total Sharp score (mTSS) change versus adalimumab in patients with four or fewer than four PPFs. CONCLUSIONS: In high-risk (four PPFs) patients with MTX-IR RA, FIL200 and FIL100 showed similar reductions in disease activity versus placebo at W12 as in patients with fewer than four PPFs. mTSS in patients receiving FIL200 changed little from W24 to W52, while that in patients receiving FIL100 progressed comparably to patients who received adalimumab. Tolerability was comparable across treatment arms and subgroups.