The COMPARE head-to-head, randomized controlled trial of SEL-212 (pegadricase plus rapamycin-containing nanoparticle, ImmTOR™) versus pegloticase for refractory gout.

OBJECTIVES: Serum urate (SU) lowering with PEGylated uricases in gout can reduce flares and tophi. However, treatment-emergent anti-drug antibodies adversely affect safety and efficacy and the currently approved PEGylated uricase pegloticase requires twice-monthly infusions. Investigational SEL-212 therapy aims to promote uricase-specific tolerance via monthly sequential infusions of a proprietary rapamycin-containing nanoparticle (ImmTOR) and pegadricase. METHODS: COMPARE was a randomized, phase 2, open-label trial of SEL-212 vs pegloticase in adults with refractory gout. SEL-212 [ImmTOR (0.15 mg/kg) and pegadricase (0.2 mg/kg)] was infused monthly or pegloticase (8 mg) twice monthly for 6 months. The primary endpoint was the proportion of participants with SU <6 mg/dl for ≥80% of the time during 3 and 6 months. Secondary outcomes were mean SU, gout flares, number of tender and/or swollen joints and safety. RESULTS: During months 3 and 6 combined, numerically more participants achieved and maintained a SU <6 mg/dl for ≥80% of the time with SEL-212 vs pegloticase (53.0% vs 46.0%, P = 0.181). The percentage reductions in SU levels were statistically greater during months 3 and 6 with SEL-212 vs pegloticase (-73.79% and -47.96%, P = 0.0161). Reductions in gout flare incidence and number of tender and/or swollen joints were comparable between treatments. There were numerical differences between the most common treatment-related adverse events of interest with SEL-212 and pegloticase: gout flares (60.2% vs 50.6%), infections (25.3% vs 18.4%) and infusion-related reactions (15.7% vs 11.5%), respectively. Stomatitis (and related terms) was experienced by eight participants (9.6%) with SEL-212 and none with pegloticase. Stomatitis, a known event for rapamycin, was associated with ImmTOR only. CONCLUSIONS: SEL-212 efficacy and tolerability were comparable to pegloticase in refractory gout. This was associated with a substantial reduction in treatment burden with SEL-212 due to decreased infusion frequency vs pegloticase. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT03905512.

A secukinumab dose-escalation study in patients with ankylosing spondylitis not achieving inactive disease after 16 weeks of treatment.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate the clinical response at week 52 in patients with ankylosing spondylitis (AS) who received secukinumab 300 vs 150 mg after inadequate response to 150 mg at week 16. METHODS: ASLeap (NCT03350815) was a randomized, double-blind, parallel-group, multicentre, phase 4 trial. After 16 weeks of open-label secukinumab 150 mg (Treatment Period 1), patients who did not achieve inactive disease (Ankylosing Spondylitis Disease Activity Score [ASDAS] <1.3) at both Weeks 12 and 16 were considered to have an inadequate response and were randomized 1:1 to receive secukinumab 300 or 150 mg every 4 weeks until week 52 (Treatment Period 2). The primary efficacy variable was achievement of ASDAS <1.3 at week 52 using week 16 as baseline. Safety was evaluated by the incidence of treatment-emergent adverse events through week 52. RESULTS: Of 322 patients treated with secukinumab in Treatment Period 1, 207 (64.3%) had inadequate response. Similar proportions of patients with inadequate response randomized to secukinumab 300 mg (n = 101) and 150 mg (n = 105) in Treatment Period 2 completed the study (83.8% and 84.3%, respectively). At week 52, 8.8% and 6.7% of patients receiving secukinumab 300 and 150 mg, respectively, achieved ASDAS <1.3. The incidence of treatment-emergent adverse events was similar in both groups through week 52. No new safety signals were observed. CONCLUSION: Patients with AS who did not achieve ASDAS <1.3 after receiving secukinumab 150 mg for 16 weeks experienced similar clinical response and safety through week 52 regardless of dose escalation. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03350815.

Long-term safety and efficacy of sarilumab with or without background csDMARDs in rheumatoid arthritis.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the long-term safety and efficacy of sarilumab with/without conventional synthetic (cs)DMARDs in RA. METHODS: The analyses evaluated two open-label extensions (OLEs): EXTEND and MONARCH OLE, which included patients from six randomized trials. Patients received sarilumab 200 mg once every 2 weeks (q2w) for at least 264 weeks up to 516 weeks (EXTEND: Sarilumab Monotherapy and Sarilumab + csDMARD groups) or for 276 weeks (MONARCH OLE: Continuation and Switch groups). Primary endpoints included safety, immunogenicity and changes in laboratory parameters. Secondary endpoints included clinical signs and symptoms along with health-related quality-of-life (HRQOL) questionnaires. RESULTS: The Sarilumab Monotherapy (n = 111), Continuation (n = 165) and Switch (n = 155) groups received sarilumab monotherapy, while the Sarilumab + csDMARD group (n = 1910) received sarilumab in combination with csDMARDs. Incidence of one or more treatment-emergent adverse events was 126 (Sarilumab Monotherapy group), 169 (Sarilumab + csDMARD group), 159 (Continuation group) and 159 (Switch group) events/100 patient-years. Neutropenia was the most common adverse event. Neutropenia was not associated with an increased incidence of infections. Most neutropenia cases normalized on-treatment. Adverse events of special interests, such as malignancies, major adverse cardiovascular events, venous thromboembolism and gastrointestinal perforations, were rare. Immunogenicity was low and not associated with hypersensitivity reactions or discontinuations due to lack or loss of efficacy. Improvements in clinical signs and symptoms and HRQOL, observed during the initial blinded trials, were maintained throughout the OLE assessment period. CONCLUSIONS: Long-term sarilumab treatment with/without csDMARDs in patients with RA revealed no new safety findings. Efficacy and HRQOL were maintained or further increased over the open-label assessment period. TRIAL REGISTRATION: EXTEND, ClinicalTrials.gov, https://www.clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT01146652, NCT01146652; MONARCH OLE, ClinicalTrials.gov, https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02332590, NCT02332590.

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.

Efficacy and safety of selective TYK2 inhibitor, deucravacitinib, in a phase II trial in psoriatic arthritis.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of an oral selective tyrosine kinase 2 (TYK2) inhibitor, deucravacitinib, in patients with active psoriatic arthritis (PsA). METHODS: In this double-blind, phase II trial, 203 patients with PsA were randomised 1:1:1 to placebo, deucravacitinib 6 mg once a day or 12 mg once a day. The primary endpoint was American College of Rheumatology-20 (ACR-20) response at week 16. RESULTS: ACR-20 response was significantly higher with deucravacitinib 6 mg once a day (52.9%, p=0.0134) and 12 mg once a day (62.7%, p=0.0004) versus placebo (31.8%) at week 16. Both deucravacitinib doses resulted in significant improvements versus placebo (p≤0.05) in the multiplicity-controlled secondary endpoints of change from baseline in Health Assessment Questionnaire-Disability Index and Short Form-36 Physical Component Summary score and in Psoriasis Area and Severity Index-75 response. Improvements were also seen in multiple exploratory endpoints with deucravacitinib treatment. The most common adverse events (AEs) (≥5%) in deucravacitinib-treated patients were nasopharyngitis, upper respiratory tract infection, sinusitis, bronchitis, rash, headache and diarrhoea. There were no serious AEs and no occurrence of herpes zoster, opportunistic infections and major adverse cardiovascular events, or differences versus placebo in mean changes in laboratory parameters with deucravacitinib treatment. CONCLUSIONS: Treatment with the selective TYK2 inhibitor deucravacitinib was well tolerated and resulted in greater improvements than placebo in ACR-20, multiplicity-controlled secondary endpoints and other exploratory efficacy measures in patients with PsA. Larger trials over longer periods of time with deucravacitinib are warranted to confirm its safety profile and benefits in PsA. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT03881059.

Apremilast monotherapy for long-term treatment of active psoriatic arthritis in DMARD-naïve patients.

OBJECTIVES: Apremilast monotherapy was evaluated up to 5 years in PALACE 4 (fourth PsA Long-term Assessment of Clinical Efficacy study) DMARD-naïve patients with PsA. METHODS: Patients with active PsA were randomized (1:1:1) to placebo, apremilast 30 mg or apremilast 20 mg twice a day. Placebo patients were rerandomized to apremilast at week 16 or 24. Double-blind apremilast continued to week 52, with a 4-year open-label extension (≤260 weeks of exposure). Analyses through week 260 were based on observed data. RESULTS: A total of 527 patients were treated. Among patients randomized to apremilast 30 mg at baseline, 45.5% completed week 260. At study end, 24.8% reported conventional synthetic DMARD or steroid use for any reason. At week 260, 65.8%/39.0%/20.3% of apremilast 30 mg patients achieved ACR20/ACR50/ACR70 responses, respectively. PsA sign and symptom improvements were sustained up to week 260 with continued treatment, including reductions in swollen (84.8%) and tender (76.4%) joint counts. Among apremilast 30 mg patients with baseline enthesitis or dactylitis, 71.2% achieved a Maastricht Ankylosing Spondylitis Enthesitis Score of 0 and 95.1% achieved a dactylitis count of 0. Over 50% of patients achieved a HAQ Disability Index minimal clinically important difference (≥0.35). In patients with ≥3% baseline psoriasis-involved body surface area, 60.3% and 47.6% achieved ≥50% and ≥75% improvement in Psoriasis Area and Severity Index scores, respectively. Patients continuing apremilast 20 mg also demonstrated consistent, sustained improvements. The most common adverse events were diarrhoea, nausea, headache, upper respiratory tract infection and nasopharyngitis. No new safety concerns were observed long term. CONCLUSIONS: Apremilast led to sustained PsA efficacy up to 260 weeks and was well tolerated. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov (http://clinicaltrials.gov), NCT01307423.

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 fasinumab in patients with chronic low back pain: a phase II/III randomised clinical trial.

OBJECTIVES: To study the efficacy and safety of fasinumab in moderate-to-severe, chronic low back pain (CLBP). METHODS: In this phase II/III, double-blind, placebo-controlled study, patients with CLBP aged ≥35 years with inadequate pain relief/intolerance to acetaminophen, non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs and opioids were randomised to fasinumab 6 or 9 mg subcutaneous every 4 weeks (Q4W), 9 mg intravenous every 8 weeks (Q8W) or placebo. Primary endpoint was change from baseline to week 16 in average daily low back pain intensity (LBPI) numeric rating score. Key secondary efficacy variables included Roland-Morris Disability Questionnaire (RMDQ) and Patient Global Assessment (PGA). The results are based on a modified intent-to-treat analysis of 563/800 planned patients when enrolment was stopped early given emerging signals of joint risk in other osteoarthritis (OA) studies at doses being tested here. RESULTS: Significant placebo-adjusted LBPI reductions at week 16 were observed for fasinumab 9 mg Q4W and Q8W (least squares mean (standard error) -0.7 (0.3); both nominal p<0.05), but not 6 mg (-0.3 (0.3); p=0.39). RMDQ and PGA improvements to week 16 were greatest for fasinumab 9 mg intravenous. Numerically greater efficacy occurred in patients with, versus those without, peripheral OA (pOA) over 16 weeks. Treatment-emergent adverse events (AEs) occurred in 274/418 (65.6%) patients in the combined fasinumab groups and 94/140 (67.1%) placebo patients. Joint AEs, mostly rapid progressive OA type 1, were more frequent in the combined fasinumab groups (19 events in 16 patients (3.8%) vs 1 event in 1 patient (0.7%) for placebo); all except one occurred in pOA patients. CONCLUSIONS: Fasinumab highest doses, but not lower dose, improved both CLBP pain and function. Most joint AEs occurred in pOA patients, consistent with earlier findings in symptomatic OA. Further study is needed of patients with CLBP with and without pOA to determine optimal benefit-risk.

Long-term safety of sarilumab in rheumatoid arthritis: an integrated analysis with up to 7 years' follow-up.

OBJECTIVE: Sarilumab is a human monoclonal antibody that blocks IL-6 from binding to membrane-bound and soluble IL-6 receptor-α. We assessed the long-term safety of sarilumab in patients from eight clinical trials and their open-label extensions. METHODS: Data were pooled from patients with rheumatoid arthritis who received at least one dose of sarilumab in combination with conventional synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (csDMARDs; combination group) or as monotherapy (monotherapy group). Treatment-emergent adverse events (AEs) and AEs and laboratory values of special interest were assessed. RESULTS: 2887 patients received sarilumab in combination with csDMARDs and 471 patients received sarilumab monotherapy, with mean exposure of 2.8 years and 1.7 years, maximum exposure 7.3 and 3.5 years, and cumulative AE observation period of 8188 and 812 patient-years, respectively. Incidence rates per 100 patient-years in the combination and monotherapy groups, respectively, were 9.4 and 6.7 for serious AEs, 3.7 and 1.0 for serious infections, 0.6 and 0.5 for herpes zoster (no cases were disseminated), 0.1 and 0 for gastrointestinal perforations, 0.5 and 0.2 for major adverse cardiovascular events, and 0.7 and 0.6 for malignancy. Absolute neutrophil counts <1000 cells/mm3 were recorded in 13% and 15% of patients, respectively. Neutropenia was not associated with increased risk of infection or serious infection. Analysis by 6-month interval showed no signal for increased rate of any AE over time. CONCLUSION: The long-term safety profile of sarilumab, either in combination with csDMARDs or as monotherapy, remained stable and consistent with the anticipated profile of a molecule that inhibits IL6 signalling.

Efficacy and safety of tofacitinib monotherapy, tofacitinib with methotrexate, and adalimumab with methotrexate in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (ORAL Strategy): a phase 3b/4, double-blind, head-to-head, randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Tofacitinib is an oral Janus kinase inhibitor for the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis. The Oral Rheumatoid Arthritis triaL (ORAL) Strategy aimed to assess the comparative efficacy of tofacitinib monotherapy, tofacitinib plus methotrexate, and adalimumab plus methotrexate for the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis in patients with a previous inadequate response to methotrexate. METHODS: ORAL Strategy was a 1 year, double-blind, phase 3b/4, head-to-head, non-inferiority, randomised controlled trial in patients aged 18 years or older with active rheumatoid arthritis despite methotrexate therapy. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1:1) to receive oral tofacitinib (5 mg twice daily) monotherapy, oral tofacitinib (5 mg twice daily) plus methotrexate, or subcutaneous adalimumab (40 mg every other week) plus methotrexate at 194 centres in 25 countries. Eligible patients received live zoster vaccine at investigators' discretion. The primary endpoint was the proportion of patients who attained an American College of Rheumatology response of at least 50% (ACR50) at month 6 in the full analysis set (patients who were randomly assigned to a group and received at least one dose of the study treatment). Non-inferiority between groups was shown if the lower bound of the 98·34% CI of the difference between comparators was larger than -13·0%. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT02187055. FINDINGS: 1146 patients received treatment (384 had tofacitinib monotherapy; 376 had tofacitinib and methotrexate; and 386 had adalimumab and methotrexate). At 6 months, ACR50 response was attained in 147 (38%) of 384 patients with tofacitinib monotherapy, 173 (46%) of 376 patients with tofacitinib and methotrexate, and 169 (44%) of 386 patients with adalimumab and methotrexate. Non-inferiority was declared for tofacitinib and methotrexate versus adalimumab and methotrexate (difference 2% [98·34% CI -6 to 11]) but not for tofacitinib monotherapy versus either adalimumab and methotrexate (-6 [-14 to 3]) or tofacitinib and methotrexate (-8 [-16 to 1]). In total, 23 (6%) of 384 patients receiving tofacitinib monotherapy, 26 (7%) of 376 patients receiving tofacitinib plus methotrexate, and 36 (9%) of 386 patients receiving adalimumab plus methotrexate discontinued due to adverse events. Two (1%) of the 384 patients receiving tofacitinib monotherapy died. No new or unexpected safety issues were reported for either treatment in this study for up to 1 year. INTERPRETATION: Tofacitinib and methotrexate combination therapy was non-inferior to adalimumab and methotrexate combination therapy in the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis in patients with an inadequate response to methotrexate in this trial. Tofacitinib monotherapy was not shown to be non-inferior to either combination. FUNDING: Pfizer Inc.

Apremilast monotherapy in DMARD-naive psoriatic arthritis patients: results of the randomized, placebo-controlled PALACE 4 trial.

OBJECTIVES: The PALACE 4 trial evaluated apremilast monotherapy in patients with active PsA who were DMARD-naive. METHODS: Eligible patients were randomized (1:1:1) to placebo, apremilast 20 mg twice a day or apremilast 30 mg twice a day. At week 16 or 24, placebo patients were rerandomized to apremilast. Double-blind apremilast treatment continued to week 52, with extension up to 4 years. The primary endpoint was the proportion of patients achieving ⩾20% improvement in ACR response criteria (ACR20) at week 16; secondary endpoints included the mean change in the HAQ Disability Index (HAQ-DI) score at week 16. RESULTS: A total of 527 patients with mean disease duration of 3.4 years and high disease activity were randomized and received treatment. More apremilast patients achieved ACR20 response at week 16 [placebo, 15.9%; 20 mg, 28.0% (P = 0.0062); 30 mg, 30.7% (P = 0.0010)]. The mean HAQ-DI improvements were -0.17 (20 mg; P = 0.0008) and -0.21 (30 mg; P < 0.0001) vs 0.03 (placebo). Both apremilast doses showed significant ACR50 responses vs placebo at week 16 and improvements in secondary efficacy measures (swollen/tender joint counts) and psoriasis assessments, with sustained improvements through week 52. Common adverse events (AEs) over 52 weeks were diarrhoea, nausea, headache and upper respiratory tract infection; most events were mild or moderate. Serious AEs and AEs leading to discontinuation were comparable between groups. Laboratory abnormalities were infrequent and transient. CONCLUSIONS: In DMARD-naive patients, apremilast monotherapy improved PsA signs/symptoms over 52 weeks and was generally well tolerated. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov (http://clinicaltrials.gov), NCT01307423.

Long-term effects of interleukin-17A inhibition with secukinumab in active ankylosing spondylitis: 3-year efficacy and safety results from an extension of the Phase 3 MEASURE 1 trial.

OBJECTIVES: Secukinumab, a fully human anti-IL-17A monoclonal antibody, provided rapid and sustained improvements in signs and symptoms of ankylosing spondylitis (AS) over 2 years in the Phase 3 MEASURE 1 trial. Here, we report efficacy and safety after 3 years of treatment. METHODS: AS subjects completing 2 years of treatment every 4 weeks with subcutaneous secukinumab 150 or 75 mg (following intravenous loading or initial placebo treatment to 16/24 weeks) entered a separate 3-year extension study (NCT01863732). Assessments included ASAS20/40, ASAS5/6, BASDAI, BASDAI 50, BASFI, BASMI, SF-36 physical component summary, ASAS partial remission and ASDAS-CRP. Results were also analysed by prior anti-TNF treatment status. RESULTS: Among 290 subjects completing the core trial, 274 entered the extension study, with 260 subjects (94.9%) completing 156 weeks of treatment. ASAS20/40 response (observed) was 80.2%/61.6% in the IV→150 mg group and 75.5%/50.0% in the IV→75 mg group after 156 weeks. Sustained improvements were also seen in BASDAI, BASFI, BASMI and across all other endpoints regardless of previous exposure to anti-TNF agents. Mean secukinumab exposure was 964.3 days (137.8 weeks). Discontinuation rates were low, and secukinumab had a favourable safety profile, consistent with previous reports. Exposure-adjusted incidence rates for serious infections, Candida infections, Crohn's disease, ulcerative colitis, malignant/unspecified tumours, and adjudicated major adverse cardiac events were 1.1, 0.4, 0.5, 0.1, 0.5 and 0.7 per 100 subject-years, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Secukinumab provided sustained efficacy in signs, symptoms and physical function in subjects with AS over 3 years. No new safety signals were observed.

Blood-Borne RNA Correlates with Disease Activity and IFN-Stimulated Gene Expression in Systemic Lupus Erythematosus.

The loss of tolerance and the presence of circulating autoantibodies directed against nuclear Ags is the hallmark of systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE). Many of these Ags are complexed with short, noncoding RNAs, such as U1 and Y1. The amount of U1 and Y1 RNA complexed with SLE patient Abs and immune complexes was measured in a cross-section of 228 SLE patients to evaluate the role of these RNA molecules within the known biochemical framework of SLE. The study revealed that SLE patients had significantly elevated levels of circulating U1 and/or Y1 RNA compared with healthy volunteers. In addition, the blood-borne RNA molecules were correlated with SLE disease activity and increased expression of IFN-inducible genes. To our knowledge, this study provides the first systematic examination of the role of circulating RNA in a large group of SLE patients and provides an important link with IFN dysregulation.

Sustained efficacy, safety and patient-reported outcomes of certolizumab pegol in axial spondyloarthritis: 4-year outcomes from RAPID-axSpA.

Objective: The aim was to assess the long-term safety and efficacy of certolizumab pegol over 4 years of continuous treatment in patients with axial spondyloarthritis (axSpA), including both AS and non-radiographic (nr-) axSpA. Methods: RAPID-axSpA was a phase 3 randomized trial, double blind and placebo controlled to week 24, dose blind to week 48 and open label to week 204. Patients had a clinical diagnosis of axSpA, meeting Assessment of SpondyloArthritis international Society (ASAS) criteria, and had active disease. The assessed outcomes included ASAS20, ASAS40, AS DAS (ASDAS), BASDAI, BASFI and BASMI scores, along with selected measures of remission. Further patient-reported outcomes, peripheral arthritis, enthesitis, uveitis and quality-of-life measures are also reported. Results: Two hundred and eighteen of 325 patients randomized (AS: 121; nr-axSpA: 97) received certolizumab pegol from week 0. Of these, 65% remained in the study at week 204 (AS: 67%; nr-axSpA: 63%). Across all outcomes, for AS and nr-axSpA, sustained improvements were observed to week 204 [week 204 overall axSpA: ASAS20: 54.1% (non-responder imputation); 83.7% (observed case, OC); ASAS40: 44.0% (non-responder imputation); 68.1% (OC); ASDAS inactive disease: 32.1% (last observation carried forward); 31.4% (OC)]. In the safety set (n = 315), there were 292.8 adverse events and 10.4 serious adverse events per 100 patient-years. No deaths were reported. Conclusion: In the first study to evaluate the efficacy of an anti-TNF across both axSpA subpopulations, improvements in clinical and patient-reported outcomes at 24 and 96 weeks were sustained through 4 years of treatment, with no new safety signals. Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov, http://clinicaltrials.gov, NCT01087762.

Evaluation of two doses of etoricoxib, a COX-2 selective non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug (NSAID), in the treatment of Rheumatoid Arthritis in a double-blind, randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Treatment with non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAID) is a common component of treatment regimens for rheumatoid arthritis (RA). Etoricoxib is a COX-2 selective NSAID that has demonstrated efficacy in the treatment of RA at a dose of 90 mg. The current study further evaluated the efficacy of etoricoxib 60 mg and 90 mg in RA patients with active disease. METHODS: This was a 2-part, double-blind, placebo-controlled study in RA (NCT01208181). Patients were required to have a diagnosis of RA (according to ARA 1987 revised classification criteria) and were to demonstrate symptom flare upon discontinuation of previous NSAID treatment prior to randomization. Part I was a 6-week, placebo-controlled period to assess the efficacy of etoricoxib 90 mg and etoricoxib 60 mg, each compared to placebo, as well as to each other. Part II was a 6-week period to evaluate the potential benefit of dose escalation from etoricoxib 60 mg to etoricoxib 90 mg after 6 weeks exposure to etoricoxib 60 mg in Part I compared to maintaining a steady dose of etoricoxib 60 mg throughout Parts I and II. Primary endpoints were Disease Activity Score evaluating 28 joints and C reactive protein level (DAS28-CRP) index and Patient Global Assessment of Pain (Pain) score (0-100 mm VAS) after 6 weeks of treatment in Part I. Adverse events were monitored throughout the study. RESULTS: In total, 1404 patients were randomized in a 2:7:7:8 ratio; 1228 patients completed Part I and 713 patients continued to Part II. Both etoricoxib doses were superior to placebo on both primary efficacy endpoints (p = 0.004 for 60 mg and p = 0.034 for 90 mg for DAS28-CRP; p < 0.001 for both doses for PGAP) in Part I. Further in Part I, etoricoxib 90 mg was not significantly different from 60 mg for DAS28-CRP, but did demonstrate a small, but statistically significant decrease in baseline PGAP score vs. 60 mg (p = 0.019). In Part II, there was no significant decrease in PGAP score after increasing to 90 mg in subjects with inadequate pain relief on 60 mg as compared to subjects who stayed on 60 mg. The incidence of AEs and SAEs were similar between etoricoxib 60 mg and 90 mg in both Part I and II. CONCLUSION: Both etoricoxib 90 mg and 60 mg are superior to placebo in relieving the symptoms of RA. Etoricoxib 90 mg vs 60 mg resulted in a statistically significant, though small, improvement in PGAP score, but not DAS28-CRP. Dose escalation from 60 mg to 90 mg in pain inadequate responders did not significantly improve efficacy. These results confirm the efficacy and tolerability of etoricoxib 90mg in patients with RA. In addition, this study demonstrated that etoricoxib 60 mg is also efficacious and well-tolerated in RA. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT01208181 (registered September 22, 2010).

Efficacy and safety of ascending methotrexate dose in combination with adalimumab: the randomised CONCERTO trial.

OBJECTIVE: CONCERTO was a randomised, double-blind, parallel-armed study of methotrexate (MTX) in combination with adalimumab to assess whether an increasing trend of efficacy and decreased safety exists when increasing MTX dose in patients with early rheumatoid arthritis (RA). METHODS: Early, biologic and MTX-naive RA patients (N=395) were evenly randomised to open-label adalimumab (40 mg every other week) plus weekly blinded 2.5, 5, 10 or 20 mg MTX for 26 weeks. Clinical, radiographic and functional outcomes were analysed using two-sided linear trend tests or one-way analysis of covariance. RESULTS: Statistically significant increasing trends were observed in the proportion of patients achieving the primary endpoint, 28-joint count disease activity score with C reactive protein (DAS28(CRP)) <3.2 (42.9%, 44.0%, 56.6% and 60.2% for 2.5, 5, 10 or 20 mg/week MTX, respectively), DAS28(CRP) <2.6 and American College of Rheumatology 50/70/90 responses with increasing doses of MTX in combination with adalimumab. No statistical differences in minimal clinically important differences in physical function were detected. Statistically significant trends for achieving low disease activity and remission were demonstrated with increasing MTX dose by validated clinical indices; differences comparing 10 and 20 mg MTX were minimal. Adalimumab serum concentrations increased with ascending dose up to 10 mg MTX. More patients experienced infectious adverse events with increasing MTX dose. CONCLUSIONS: Increasing doses of MTX in combination with adalimumab demonstrated a statistically significant trend in improved clinical outcomes that mimicked the adalimumab pharmacokinetic profile. In early RA patients initiating adalimumab combination therapy, efficacy of 10 and 20 mg/week MTX appeared equivalent.

Efficacy and Safety of Secukinumab in US Patients with Psoriatic Arthritis: A Subgroup Analysis of the Phase 3 FUTURE Studies.

INTRODUCTION: The aim of this work is to evaluate secukinumab vs. placebo in a challenging-to-treat and smaller US patient subpopulation of the international FUTURE 2-5 studies in patients with psoriatic arthritis (PsA). METHODS: Data were pooled from US patients enrolled in the phase 3 FUTURE 2-5 studies (NCT01752634, NCT01989468, NCT02294227, and NCT02404350). Patients received secukinumab 300 or 150 mg with subcutaneous loading dose, secukinumab 150 mg without subcutaneous loading dose, or placebo. Categorical efficacy and health-related quality-of-life (QoL) outcomes and safety were evaluated at week 16. Subgroup analyses were performed based on tumor necrosis factor inhibitor (TNFi) status and body mass index (BMI). For hypothesis generation, odds ratios (ORs) for American College of Rheumatology (ACR) 20/50/70 and Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI) 75/90/100 responses by treatment were estimated using logistic regression without adjustment for multiple comparisons. RESULTS: Of 2148 international patients originally randomized, 279 US patients were included in this pooled analysis. Mean BMI was > 30 kg/m2 and 55.2% had prior TNFi treatment. ORs for ACR20/50/70 significantly favored patients receiving secukinumab 300 mg and 150 mg with loading dose vs. placebo (P < 0.05), but not those receiving secukinumab 150 mg without loading dose vs. placebo. For PASI75, ORs favored all secukinumab groups over placebo (P < 0.05); for PASI90 and PASI100, only the secukinumab 300-mg group was significantly favored over placebo (P < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: In this challenging sub-population of US patients with PsA, secukinumab provided rapid improvements in disease activity and QoL. Patients with PsA and active psoriasis might benefit more from secukinumab 300 mg than 150 mg.

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.

Double-blind randomized trials of single-tablet ibuprofen/high-dose famotidine vs. ibuprofen alone for reduction of gastric and duodenal ulcers.

OBJECTIVES: We performed two 24-week double-blind trials (REDUCE-1 and -2 (Registration Endoscopic Studies to Determine Ulcer Formation of HZT-501 Compared with Ibuprofen: Efficacy and Safety Studies)) to assess whether double-dose famotidine given in a single-tablet combination with ibuprofen (HZT-501) significantly reduces gastric and duodenal ulcers as compared with ibuprofen. METHODS: Patients (40-80 years) requiring daily non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) for ≥6 months with no prior ulcer complications, negative H. pylori stool test, and baseline endoscopy showing no ulcers and <5 erosions were randomly assigned in a 2:1 ratio to HZT-501 or identical-appearing ibuprofen 800 mg tablets thrice daily. Study endoscopies were done at 8, 16, and 24 weeks. After unblinding and initial analyses, 12 patients were found to be misclassified as having gastric ulcers based on the adjudication of endoscopy reports, and analyses were re-run. RESULTS: In REDUCE-1, the primary end point analysis of gastric ulcers at 24 weeks with HZT-501 vs. ibuprofen was 12.7% vs. 22.9% (P=0.0044) in the post-adjudication analysis. In REDUCE-2, the primary end point analysis of upper gastrointestinal (GI) ulcers was 13.0% vs. 20.5% (P=0.0587) in the post-adjudication analysis. Prespecified pooled analyses showed significantly fewer gastric (12.5% vs. 20.7%) and duodenal ulcers (1.1% vs. 5.1%) with HZT-501 vs. ibuprofen. Proportional hazards analysis of multiple potential risk factors showed the risk ratio of upper GI ulcers with HZT-501 vs. ibuprofen was 0.46, 95% confidence interval was 0.34-0.61. CONCLUSIONS: Combined results of the REDUCE studies indicate that double-dose famotidine plus ibuprofen, given as a combination tablet, decreases endoscopic upper GI ulcers as compared with ibuprofen alone.

Abatacept in the treatment of patients with psoriatic arthritis: results of a six-month, multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase II trial.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the safety and efficacy of abatacept, a selective T cell costimulation modulator, in patients with psoriatic arthritis (PsA). METHODS: In this 6-month, multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase II study, 170 PsA patients with a psoriasis target lesion (TL) ≥2 cm who had previously taken disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs), including anti-tumor necrosis factor (anti-TNF) agents, were randomized (1:1:1:1) to receive placebo or abatacept at doses of 3 mg/kg, 10 mg/kg, or 30/10 mg/kg (2 initial doses of 30 mg/kg, followed by 10 mg/kg) on days 1, 15, and 29 and then once every 28 days thereafter. The primary end point was the American College of Rheumatology 20% criteria for improvement (ACR20 response) on day 169. Other key end points were magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) scores for joint erosion, osteitis, and synovitis, scores on the Health Assessment Questionnaire (HAQ) and the Short Form-36 (SF-36) health survey, the investigator's global assessment of psoriasis, the TL score, and the Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI) score. RESULTS: Proportions of patients achieving an ACR20 response were 19%, 33%, 48%, and 42% in the placebo, the abatacept 3 mg/kg, the abatacept 10 mg/kg, and the abatacept 30/10 mg/kg groups, respectively. Compared with placebo, improvements were significantly higher for the abatacept 10 mg/kg (P = 0.006) and 30/10 mg/kg (P = 0.022) groups, but not for 3 mg/kg group (P = 0.121). All abatacept regimens resulted in improved MRI, HAQ, and SF-36 scores, with 10 mg/kg showing the greatest improvements. Improvements in the TL and PASI scores were observed in all abatacept arms; a response according to the investigator's global assessment was seen only with 3 mg/kg of abatacept. The safety profiles were similar among the treatment arms. CONCLUSION: The results of this study suggest that 10 mg/kg of abatacept, the approved dosage for rheumatoid arthritis and juvenile idiopathic arthritis, may be an effective treatment option for PsA.