Upadacitinib monotherapy improves patient-reported outcomes in rheumatoid arthritis: results from SELECT-EARLY and SELECT-MONOTHERAPY.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the effect of upadacitinib (UPA) monotherapy vs MTX on patient-reported outcomes (PROs) in patients with RA who were MTX-naïve or who had an inadequate response to MTX (MTX-IR). METHODS: PROs from the SELECT-EARLY and SELECT-MONOTHERAPY randomized controlled trials were evaluated at Weeks 2 and 12/14. Patients were ≥18 years of age with RA symptoms for ≥6 weeks (SELECT-EARLY, MTX-naïve) or diagnosed RA for ≥3 months (SELECT-MONOTHERAPY, MTX-IR) and received UPA monotherapy (15 or 30 mg) or MTX. PROs included Patient Global Assessment of Disease Activity (PtGA), pain visual analogue scale, HAQ Disability Index (HAQ-DI), morning stiffness duration/severity, Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy (FACIT)-Fatigue (SELECT-EARLY), health-related quality of life (HRQOL) by the 36-iem Short Form Health Survey and Work Productivity and Activity Impairment (WPAI; SELECT-EARLY). Least square mean (LSM) changes and proportions of patients reporting improvements greater than or equal to the minimum clinically important differences and normative values were determined. RESULTS: In 945 MTX-naïve and 648 MTX-IR patients, UPA monotherapy (15 mg, 30 mg) vs MTX resulted in greater reported LSM changes from baseline at Weeks 12/14 in PtGA, pain, HAQ-DI, morning stiffness duration/severity, FACIT-F (SELECT-EARLY), HRQOL and WPAI (SELECT-EARLY). These changes were statistically significant with both doses of UPA vs MTX at Weeks 12/14 in both RCTs. Improvements were reported as early as week 2. Compared with MTX, more UPA-treated MTX-naïve and MTX-IR patients reported improvements greater than or equal to the minimum clinically important differences and scores greater than or equal to normative values. CONCLUSION: Among MTX-naïve and MTX-IR patients with active RA, UPA monotherapy at 15 or 30 mg for 12/14 weeks resulted in statistically significant and clinically meaningful improvements in pain, physical function, morning stiffness, HRQOL and WPAI compared with MTX alone. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: SELECT-EARLY (NCT02706873) and SELECT-MONOTHERAPY (NCT02706951) are registered with ClinicalTrials.gov.

Canakinumab in patients with systemic juvenile idiopathic arthritis and active systemic features: results from the 5-year long-term extension of the phase III pivotal trials.

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the long-term efficacy and safety of canakinumab in patients with active systemic juvenile idiopathic arthritis (JIA). METHODS: Patients (2-19 years) entered two phase III studies and continued in the long-term extension (LTE) study. Efficacy assessments were performed every 3 months, including adapted JIA American College of Rheumatology (aJIA-ACR) criteria, Juvenile Arthritis Disease Activity Score (JADAS) and ACR clinical remission on medication criteria (CRACR). Efficacy analyses are reported as per the intent-to-treat population. RESULTS: 144 of the 177 patients (81%) enrolled in the core study entered the LTE. Overall, 75 patients (42%) completed and 102 (58%) discontinued mainly for inefficacy (63/102, 62%), with higher discontinuation rates noted in the late responders group (n=25/31, 81%) versus early responders (n=11/38, 29%). At 2 years, aJIA-ACR 50/70/90 response rates were 62%, 61% and 54%, respectively. CRACR was achieved by 20% of patients at month 6; 32% at 2 years. A JADAS low disease activity score was achieved by 49% of patients at 2 years. Efficacy results were maintained up to 5 years. Of the 128/177 (72.3%) patients on glucocorticoids, 20 (15.6%) discontinued and 28 (22%) tapered to 0.150 mg/kg/day. Seven patients discontinued canakinumab due to CR. There were 13 macrophage activation syndrome (three previously reported) and no additional deaths (three previously reported). No new safety findings were observed. CONCLUSION: Response to canakinumab treatment was sustained and associated with substantial glucocorticoid dose reduction or discontinuation and a relatively low retention-on-treatment rate. No new safety findings were observed on long-term use of canakinumab. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBERS: NCT00886769, NCT00889863, NCT00426218 and NCT00891046.

Safety of Tofacitinib in the Treatment of Rheumatoid Arthritis in Latin America Compared With the Rest of the World Population.

OBJECTIVE: Rheumatoid arthritis (RA) is a chronic, autoimmune disease characterized by joint destruction. Tofacitinib is an oral Janus kinase inhibitor for the treatment of RA. This post hoc analysis assessed the safety of tofacitinib in Latin American (LA) patients with RA versus the Rest of World (RoW) population. METHODS: Data were pooled from 14 clinical studies of tofacitinib: six Phase 2, six Phase 3 and two long-term extension studies. Incidence rates (IRs; patients with events/100 patient-years of treatment exposure) were calculated for safety events of special interest combined across tofacitinib doses. 95% confidence intervals (CI) for IRs were calculated using the maximum likelihood method. Descriptive comparisons were made between LA and RoW (excluding LA) populations. RESULTS: This analysis included data from 984 LA patients and 4687 RoW patients. IRs for safety events of special interest were generally similar between LA and RoW populations, with overlapping 95% CIs. IRs for discontinuation due to adverse events, serious infections, tuberculosis, all herpes zoster (HZ), serious HZ, malignancies (excluding non-melanoma skin cancer) and major adverse cardiovascular events were numerically lower for LA versus RoW patients; IR for mortality was numerically higher. No lymphoma was reported in the LA population versus eight cases in the RoW population. Exposure (extent and length) was lower in the LA population (2148.33 patient-years [mean = 2.18 years]) versus RoW (10515.68 patient-years [mean = 2.24 years]). CONCLUSION: This analysis of pooled data from clinical studies of tofacitinib in patients with RA demonstrates that tofacitinib has a consistent safety profile across LA and RoW patient populations.

Treatment of early rheumatoid arthritis in a multinational inception cohort of Latin American patients: the GLADAR experience.

BACKGROUND: Treatment of rheumatoid arthritis (RA) has evolved dramatically in the last decade. However, little is known about the way rheumatologists in Latin America treat their patients in clinical practice, outside the scope of clinical trials. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to describe treatment patterns at disease onset in early RA with data from a large, multicenter, multinational inception cohort of Latin American patients. METHODS: Consecutive patients with early RA (<1 year of disease duration as diagnosed by a rheumatologist) from 46 centers in 14 Latin American countries were enrolled in the study. Clinical data, laboratory assessments, and a detailed registry on type of prescriptions were collected at baseline and at 3, 6, 12, 18, and 24 months of follow-up. Hands and feet x-rays were obtained at baseline and at 12 and 24 months. All data were captured in Arthros 6.1 database. Continuous variables were expressed as means and SDs, and categorical variables were expressed as percentages and 95% confidence intervals (95% CIs). Only therapeutic data at baseline are presented, corresponding to the period between disease onset and second visit (3 months). RESULTS: A total of 1093 patients were included. Eighty-five percent were female, and 76% had a positive rheumatoid factor. Mean age at diagnosis was 46.5 (SD, 14.2) years, and mean disease duration at the first visit was 5.8 (SD, 3.8) months. Between baseline and second visit (3 months), 75% of patients (95% CI, 72%-78%) received disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs. Methotrexate (MTX) alone or in combination was the most frequently used (60.5%), followed by antimalarials (chloroquine or hydroxychloroquine, 32.1%), sulfasalazine (7.1%), and leflunomide (LEF, 4%). In 474 patients (43%), initiation of disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs was within the first month after the first visit. In addition, 290 patients (26%; 95% CI, 23%-29%) received combination therapy as initial treatment. The most frequently used combinations were MTX + chloroquine (45%), MTX + hydroxychloroquine (25%), and MTX + sulfasalazine (16%). Eleven patients (1%; 95% CI, 0.5%-1.8%) received biologics. Sixty-four percent (95% CI, 60%-66%) received corticosteroids. Of those, 80% (95% CI, 77%-84%) received 10 mg of oral prednisone or less. CONCLUSIONS: In this cohort of Latin American patients with early RA, most patients received MTX very early in their disease course. Combination therapy was used approximately in 1 of every 4 patients as initial therapy. Biologics were rarely used at this early stage, and low-dose prednisone was commonly used.

Upadacitinib in patients from China, Brazil, and South Korea with rheumatoid arthritis and an inadequate response to conventional therapy.

AIM: This study assessed the efficacy and safety of upadacitinib (UPA), in combination with conventional synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (csDMARDs), in Chinese, Brazilian, and South Korean patients with active rheumatoid arthritis (RA) and an inadequate response (IR) to csDMARDs. METHODS: Patients on stable csDMARDs were randomized (1:1) to once-daily UPA 15 mg or matching placebo (PBO) for a 12-week, double-blind period. The primary endpoint was the proportion of patients achieving ≥20% improvement in American College of Rheumatology criteria (ACR20) at week 12. RESULTS: In total, 338 patients were randomized and treated, of whom 310 (91.7%) completed the double-blind phase. The study met the primary endpoint of ACR20 at week 12 for UPA 15 mg vs PBO (71.6% vs 31.4%, P < .001), with a treatment difference observed as early as week 1. All ranked and other key secondary endpoints, including more stringent responses such as ACR50, ACR70 (≥50%/70% improvement in ACR criteria), and Disease Activity Score in 28 joints using C-reactive protein <2.6, were met for UPA 15 mg vs PBO. The incidence of serious infections (2.4% vs 0.6%) and herpes zoster (HZ: 1.8% vs 0.6%) was higher with UPA 15 mg vs PBO. There was one case of venous thromboembolism reported in the UPA group. CONCLUSION: UPA 15 mg in combination with csDMARDs demonstrated clinical and functional improvement and an acceptable safety profile over 12 weeks among patients from China, Brazil, and South Korea who had moderately to severely active RA and an IR to csDMARDs.

High Levels of Polypharmacy in Rheumatoid Arthritis-A Challenge Not Covered by Current Management Recommendations: Data From a Large Real-Life Study.

BACKGROUND: Rheumatoid arthritis (RA) is associated with high frequency of comorbidities and increased risk of polypharmacy. Although there is a great potential for complications, there is a gap in literature on polypharmacy in patients with rheumatic arthritis. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the prevalence and factors associated with polypharmacy in a population in a real-life setting. METHODS: A cross-sectional multicenter study was conducted in Brazil. Patients underwent clinical evaluation and medical records analysis. Polypharmacy was considered as a dependent variable. To test independent variables, we used Poisson regression. RESULTS: We evaluated 792 patients (89% female, median age 56.6 years). Median duration of disease was 12.7 years, 78.73% had a positive rheumatoid factor. The median of disease activity score-28 was 3.5 (disease with mild activity), median of the clinical disease activity index score was 9, and median of health assessment questionnaire-disability index was 0.875; 47% used corticosteroids, 9.1% used nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, 90.9% used synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs, 35.7% used biologic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs). In total, 537 (67.9%) patients used 5 or more drugs. Polypharmacy showed a relationship with a number of comorbidities and use of specific drugs (corticosteroids, methotrexate, and biological DMARDs). CONCLUSION: We found a high prevalence of polypharmacy (67.9%) in RA. Solutions to management this problem should be stimulated.

A comparative study of PF-06438179/GP1111 (an infliximab biosimilar) and reference infliximab in patients with moderate to severe active rheumatoid arthritis: A subgroup analysis.

AIM: PF-06438179/GP1111 (PF-SZ-IFX) is a biosimilar of reference infliximab (Remicade® ). This analysis compared the efficacy of PF-SZ-IFX and reference infliximab sourced from the European Union (IFX-EU) in patient subgroups from a randomized, comparative study of PF-SZ-IFX versus IFX-EU. METHODS: Patients with rheumatoid arthritis were randomized 1:1 to PF-SZ-IFX (n = 324) or IFX-EU (n = 326); study drug (3 mg/kg) was administered intravenously at weeks 0, 2, and 6, then every 8 weeks thereafter. Subgroup analyses of efficacy endpoints such as American College of Rheumatology criteria for ≥20% clinical improvement (ACR20), change in high-sensitivity C-reactive protein (hs-CRP), and change in Disease Activity Score in 28 joints, four components based on hs-CRP (DAS28-CRP) at weeks 14 and 30 were performed by age, gender, race, region, immunogenicity status, and treatment history. RESULTS: Overall, ACR20 response rates as well as changes in DAS28-CRP and hs-CRP at week 14 were similar between PF-SZ-IFX and IFX-EU within the subgroups of age, gender, race, region, treatment history, and immunogenicity status. Results to week 30 support overall similarity in efficacy between the two treatment arms in all subgroups. CONCLUSION: Overall, PF-SZ-IFX and IFX-EU were similar in efficacy within the analyzed subgroups of age, gender, race, region, treatment history, and immunogenicity status. The efficacy results from these subgroup analyses were aligned with the previously described results for the overall population up to week 30.

Long-term Efficacy, Safety, and Immunogenicity of the Infliximab (IFX) Biosimilar, PF-06438179/GP1111, in Patients with Rheumatoid Arthritis After Switching from Reference IFX or Continuing Biosimilar Therapy: Week 54-78 Data From a Randomized, Double-Blind, Phase III Trial.

OBJECTIVE: Our objective was to evaluate the long-term efficacy, safety, and immunogenicity of the infliximab biosimilar, PF-06438179/GP1111 (PF-SZ-IFX), in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) who continued biosimilar treatment throughout 78 weeks or who switched from reference infliximab (Remicade®) sourced from the EU (IFX-EU) at week 30 or week 54 in the REFLECTIONS B537-02 study. METHODS: In this phase III, double-blind, active-controlled study, patients with moderate-to-severe active RA were initially randomized to PF-SZ-IFX or IFX-EU, each with methotrexate (treatment period [TP] 1; N = 650). At week 30, patients receiving PF-SZ-IFX continued PF-SZ-IFX; patients receiving IFX-EU were re-randomized to continue IFX-EU or switch to PF-SZ-IFX (TP2; n = 566). From weeks 54 to 78, all patients received open-label treatment with PF-SZ-IFX (TP3; n = 505). Efficacy, safety, and immunogenicity data were analyzed during TP3. RESULTS: Efficacy was sustained and comparable across groups at week 78, with American College of Rheumatology criteria for ≥ 20% clinical improvement response rates of 75.9% (biosimilar group), 77.8% (week 30 switch group), and 68.3% (week 54 switch group). The incidence of treatment-emergent adverse events was 28.9%, 29.4%, and 30.2%, respectively. The proportion of patients who were antidrug antibody (ADA) positive and neutralizing antibody positive (as a percentage of ADA-positive patients) was stable and comparable between groups. CONCLUSIONS: Results to week 78 continue to support the efficacy, safety, and immunogenicity of PF-SZ-IFX in patients with moderate-to-severe active RA. There were no clinically meaningful differences between groups, independent of a single treatment transition from IFX-EU to PF-SZ-IFX at week 30 or week 54. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT02222493.

Randomised, double-blind, phase III study comparing the infliximab biosimilar, PF-06438179/GP1111, with reference infliximab: efficacy, safety and immunogenicity from week 30 to week 54.

Objective: To investigate the efficacy, safety and immunogenicity of PF-06438179/GP1111 (PF-SZ-IFX) compared with European reference infliximab (Remicade®; ref-IFX) in patients with moderate-to-severe, active rheumatoid arthritis after continued long-term use of PF-SZ-IFX, and in patients who were switched from ref-IFX to PF-SZ-IFX. Methods: REFLECTIONS B537-02 was a double-blind, active-controlled, multinational study in which patients (N=650) were initially randomised to PF-SZ-IFX or ref-IFX for 30 weeks (treatment period [TP] 1). During weeks 30-54 (TP2), the PF-SZ-IFX group (n=280) continued treatment with PF-SZ-IFX (PF-SZ-IFX/PF-SZ-IFX) and patients in the ref-IFX group (n=286) were rerandomised (1:1) to continue ref-IFX (ref-IFX/ref-IFX) (n=143) or switch to PF-SZ-IFX (ref-IFX/PF-SZ-IFX) (n=143) for a further 24 weeks. Efficacy, safety, immunogenicity and pharmacokinetics were evaluated. Results: During TP2, patients in all three treatment groups continued to maintain comparable treatment response. At week 54, the American College of Rheumatology (ACR20) response rates were 71.1% (PF-SZ-IFX/PF-SZ-IFX), 64.3% (ref-IFX/ref-IFX) and 70.6% (ref-IFX/PF-SZ-IFX). Observations for other endpoints, including ACR50/70, Disease Activity Score in 28 Joints Based on High-Sensitivity C Reactive Protein(DAS28-CRP) remission, and mean change in DAS28-CRP and Health Assessment Questionnaire-Disability Index, were also comparable. Treatment-emergent adverse events were reported in 36.8% (PF-SZ-IFX/PF-SZ-IFX), 33.6% (ref-IFX/ref-IFX) and 37.8% (ref-IFX/PF-SZ-IFX) of patients; there were no clinically meaningful differences in the safety profiles between groups. The percentage of patients who were antidrug antibody-positive was generally stable through the treatment period and comparable overall between the PF-SZ-IFX/PF-SZ-IFX (52.1%; neutralising: 80.8%), ref-IFX/ref-IFX (60.1%; neutralising: 84.9%) and ref-IFX/PF-SZ-IFX (58.0%; neutralising 78.3%) groups. Conclusions: The similar efficacy, safety and immunogenicity of PF-SZ-IFX compared with ref-IFX were maintained for up to 54 weeks and were not affected by blinded treatment switch from ref-IFX to PF-SZ-IFX at week 30. Trial registration number: NCT02222493.

Correction to: Clinical predictors of remission and low disease activity in Latin American early rheumatoid arthritis: data from the GLADAR cohort.

The original version of this article, unfortunately, contained an error. The first and family name of Loreto Massardo was interchanged and is now presented correctly in this article.

Clinical predictors of remission and low disease activity in Latin American early rheumatoid arthritis: data from the GLADAR cohort.

OBJECTIVES: To identify baseline predictors of remission and low disease activity (LDA) in early rheumatoid arthritis (RA) from the GLADAR (Grupo Latino Americano De estudio de la Artritis Reumatoide) cohort. METHODS: Patients with 1- and 2-year follow-up visits were included. Remission and LDA were defined by DAS28-ESR (< 2.6 and ≤ 3.2, respectively). Baseline predictors examined were gender, ethnicity, age at diagnosis, socioeconomic status, symptoms' duration, DMARDs, RF, thrombocytosis, anemia, morning stiffness, DAS28-ESR (and its components), HAQ-DI, DMARDs and corticosteroid use, and Sharp-VDH score. Multivariable binary logistic regression models (excluding DAS28-ESR components to avoid over adjustment) were derived using a backward selection method (α-level set at 0.05). RESULTS: Four hundred ninety-eight patients were included. Remission and LDA/remission were met by 19.3% and 32.5% at the 1-year visit, respectively. For the 280 patients followed for 2 years, these outcomes were met by 24.3% and 38.9%, respectively. Predictors of remission at 1 year were a lower DAS28-ESR (OR 1.17; CI 1.07-1.27; p = 0.001) and HAQ-DI (OR 1.48; CI 1.04-2.10; p = 0.028). At 2 years, only DAS28-ESR (OR 1.40; CI 1.17-1.6; p < 0.001) was a predictor. Predictors of LDA/remission at 1 year were DAS28-ESR (OR 1.42; CI 1.26-1.61; p < 0.001), non-use of corticosteroid (OR 1.74; CI 1.11-2.44; p = 0.008), and male gender (OR 1.77; CI 1.2-2.63; p = 0.036). A lower baseline DAS28-ESR (OR 1.45; CI 1.23-1.70; p < 0.001) was the only predictor of LDA/remission at 2 years. CONCLUSIONS: A lower disease activity consistently predicted remission and LDA/remission at 1 and 2 years of follow-up in early RA patients from the GLADAR cohort. Key Points • In patients with early RA, a lower disease activity at first visit is a strong clinical predictor of achieving remission and LDA subsequently. • Other clinical predictors of remission and LDA to keep in mind in these patients are male gender, non-use of corticosteroids and low disability at baseline. • Not using corticosteroids at first visit is associated with a lower disease activity and predicts LDA/remission at 1 year in these patients.

Tofacitinib, an oral Janus kinase inhibitor, in patients from Brazil with rheumatoid arthritis: Pooled efficacy and safety analyses.

BACKGROUND: Tofacitinib is an oral Janus kinase inhibitor for the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis (RA). Efficacy and safety of tofacitinib in Brazilian patients from Phase 2 (P2) and Phase 3 (P3) global studies of up to 24 months' duration were evaluated. METHODS: Data were pooled from Brazilian patients with RA and an inadequate response to conventional synthetic or biologic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs enrolled in P2/P3 tofacitinib studies who received tofacitinib 5 or 10 mg twice daily (BID), or placebo, as monotherapy or in combination with methotrexate. Efficacy, safety, and patient-reported outcomes were assessed over 24 months. RESULTS: Patients (226) from Brazil were treated in tofacitinib global P2/P3 studies. At Month 3, there were improvements in American College of Rheumatology 20/50/70 response rates, Disease Activity Score in 28 joints, erythrocyte sedimentation rate, and Health Assessment Questionnaire-Disability Index scores with both tofacitinib doses. Improvements from baseline in pain, fatigue, and health-related quality of life with tofacitinib 5 and 10 mg BID were reported. Efficacy improvements were sustained up to Month 24. The most frequent class of adverse events was infections and infestations. No cases of tuberculosis or other opportunistic infections were reported. CONCLUSION: In a Brazilian subpopulation of patients with RA, tofacitinib reduced disease signs and symptoms and improved physical function up to Month 24, with a safety profile consistent with findings from global studies.

A randomized controlled trial comparing PF-06438179/GP1111 (an infliximab biosimilar) and infliximab reference product for treatment of moderate to severe active rheumatoid arthritis despite methotrexate therapy.

BACKGROUND: This double-blind, active-controlled, randomized, multinational study evaluated the efficacy, safety, pharmacokinetics (PK), and immunogenicity of PF-06438179/GP1111 (IxifiTM/Zessly®), an infliximab biosimilar, vs infliximab (Remicade®) reference product sourced from the European Union (infliximab-EU) in biologic-naïve patients with moderate to severe active rheumatoid arthritis (RA) despite methotrexate therapy. This paper reports results from the initial 30-week treatment period. METHODS: Patients (N = 650) were stratified by geographic region and randomized 1:1 to PF-06438179/GP1111 or infliximab-EU (3 mg/kg intravenous at weeks 0, 2, and 6, then every 8 weeks). Dose escalation to 5 mg/kg was allowed starting at week 14 for patients with inadequate RA response. The primary endpoint was American College of Rheumatology criteria for ≥ 20% clinical improvement (ACR20) response at week 14. Therapeutic equivalence was declared if the two-sided 95% CI for the treatment difference was within the symmetric equivalence margin of ± 13.5%. Statistical analysis was also performed with a two-sided 90% CI using an asymmetric equivalence margin (- 12.0%, 15.0%). RESULTS: Patients (80.3% female; 79.4% seropositive) had a mean RA duration of 6.9 years, and mean baseline Disease Activity Score in 28 joints, four components based on C-reactive protein was 6.0 in both arms. Week 14 ACR20 in the intention-to-treat population was 62.7% for PF-06438179/GP1111 and 64.1% for infliximab-EU. Week 14 ACR20 using nonresponder imputation was 61.1% for PF-06438179/GP1111 and 63.5% for infliximab-EU, and the 95% (- 9.92%, 5.11%) and 90% (- 8.75%, 4.02%) CIs for the treatment difference (- 2.39%) were entirely contained within the prespecified symmetric and asymmetric equivalence margins, respectively. No differences were observed between arms for secondary efficacy endpoints. Overall postdose antidrug antibody (ADA) rates through week 30 were 48.6% and 51.2% for PF-06438179/GP1111 and infliximab-EU, respectively. Efficacy and immunogenicity were similar between treatments for patients with dose escalation (at or after week 14), as well as between treatments for patients without dose escalation. Safety profiles of PF-06438179/GP1111 and infliximab-EU were similar, with no clinically meaningful differences observed between arms, including after ADA development. Serum drug concentrations were similar between arms at each time point during the initial 30-week treatment period. CONCLUSION: PF-06438179/GP1111 and infliximab-EU demonstrated similar efficacy, safety, immunogenicity, and PK with or without dose escalation in patients with moderate to severe active RA on background methotrexate. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02222493 . Registered on 21 August 2014. EudraCT, 2013-004148-49 . Registered on 14 July 2014.

Two-year Efficacy and Safety of Subcutaneous Tocilizumab in Combination with Disease-modifying Antirheumatic Drugs Including Escalation to Weekly Dosing in Rheumatoid Arthritis.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the longterm efficacy and safety of subcutaneous tocilizumab (TCZ-SC) every 2 weeks (q2w) over 2 years in patients with rheumatoid arthritis who have an inadequate response to disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARD). METHODS: Patients (n = 656) were randomized 2:1 to TCZ-SC 162 mg q2w or placebo-SC q2w plus DMARD. After a 24-week double-blind period, patients (n = 457) were rerandomized to open-label TCZ-SC q2w by means of prefilled syringe or autoinjector. Escape therapy with weekly TCZ-SC was available for patients with inadequate efficacy from Week 12. Maintenance of response and safety to 2 years was assessed. Analyses used nonresponder imputation. RESULTS: The American College of Rheumatology (ACR) 20 response after TCZ-SC was maintained beyond Week 24 and was > 70% at each timepoint. ACR50/70, 28-joint Disease Activity Score remission, and ≥ 0.30 decrease from baseline in the Health Assessment Questionnaire-Disability Index response rates were also maintained after Week 24 in the TCZ-SC arm (≥ 50%, > 25%,> 32% and > 56%, respectively). Following escape for inadequate efficacy, many patients achieved ACR20 at the end of the study, 35% after escape from TCZ-SC, and 63% from placebo. The rates of serious adverse events [(11.20/100 patient-years (PY)] including serious infections (3.25/100 PY) were stable through Week 96. No association between anti-TCZ antibody development and loss of efficacy or adverse events was observed. CONCLUSION: Efficacy and safety of TCZ-SC q2w was maintained up to 2 years and remained comparable with previously published data for intravenous TCZ. Dose escalation to weekly TCZ-SC was associated with ACR responses in prior nonresponders and was well tolerated.

Prevalence of cardiovascular disease and major risk factors in patients with rheumatoid arthritis: a multinational cross-sectional study.

To compare the prevalence of cardiovascular disease (CVD) and major CVD risk factors among rheumatoid arthritis (RA) patients enrolled in a large US and multinational registry. We compared CVD and CVD risk factor prevalence from 11 countries enrolled in the CORRONA US and CORRONA International registries; patients from the 10 ex-US participating countries were grouped by region (Eastern Europe, Latin America, and India). Unadjusted summary data were presented for demographics and disease characteristics; comparisons for prevalence of CVD risk factors and CVD were age/gender standardized to the age/gender distribution of the US enrolled patients. Overall, 25,987 patients were included in this analysis. Compared to patients from the ex-US regions, US participants had longer disease duration and lower disease activity, yet were more likely to receive a biologic agent. Additionally, CORRONA US participants had the highest body mass index (BMI). Enrolled patients in India had the lowest BMI, were more rarely smokers, and had a low prevalence of hyperlipidemia, hypertension, and prior CVD compared to the US and other ex-US regions. Participants from Eastern Europe had a higher prevalence of hypertension and hyperlipidemia and highest prevalence of all manifestations of CVD. Differences in the prevalence of both CVD and major CVD risk factors were observed across the four regions investigated. Observed differences may be influenced by variations in both non-modifiable/modifiable characteristics of patient populations, and may contribute to heterogeneity on the observed safety of investigational and approved therapies in studies involving RA patients from different origins.

Analysis of infections and all-cause mortality in phase II, phase III, and long-term extension studies of tofacitinib in patients with rheumatoid arthritis.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the rate of infection and all-cause mortality across tofacitinib phase II, phase III, and long-term extension (LTE) studies in patients with moderately to severely active rheumatoid arthritis (RA). METHODS: Pooled data from studies of tofacitinib in patients with RA were analyzed. In these studies, tofacitinib was administered as monotherapy or in combination with methotrexate or other nonbiologic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs. The cutoff date for inclusion of data was April 19, 2012. RESULTS: Across phase II, phase III, and LTE studies, 4,789 patients received tofacitinib (8,460 patient-years of exposure). The overall rate of serious infection was 3.09 events per 100 patient-years (95% confidence interval [95% CI] 2.73-3.49), and rates were stable over time. A Cox proportional hazards model showed that age, corticosteroid dose, diabetes, and tofacitinib dose were independently linked to the risk of serious infection. Lymphocyte counts of <0.5 × 10(3) /mm(3) were rare but were associated with an increased risk of treated and/or serious infection. Overall, all-cause mortality rates were 0.30 events per 100 patient-years (95% CI 0.20-0.44). CONCLUSION: The overall risk of infection (including serious infection) and mortality rates in RA patients treated with tofacitinib appear to be similar to those observed in RA patients treated with biologic agents. The rates of serious infection were stable over time.

Subcutaneous tocilizumab versus placebo in combination with disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs in patients with rheumatoid arthritis.

OBJECTIVE: The efficacy and safety of subcutaneous tocilizumab (TCZ-SC) versus subcutaneous placebo (PBO-SC) was evaluated in patients with rheumatoid arthritis who had an inadequate response to disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs in the BREVACTA study. METHODS: Patients (n = 656) were randomized 2:1 to receive TCZ-SC 162 mg every other week or PBO-SC every other week for 24 weeks; 20% previously received anti-tumor necrosis factor treatment. Escape therapy with TCZ-SC 162 mg weekly was offered from week 12 for inadequate response. The primary end point was the American College of Rheumatology 20% improvement (ACR20) response at week 24. The key secondary outcomes were radiographic progression and safety. RESULTS: TCZ-SC was superior to PBO-SC for ACR20 response at week 24 (60.9% versus 31.5%; P < 0.0001). All secondary end points showed TCZ-SC to be superior to PBO-SC, including ACR50 and ACR70 response (40% and 20% for TCZ-SC, respectively, and 12% and 5% for PBO-SC, respectively; P < 0.0001 for both) and Disease Activity Score in 28 joints (DAS28) remission (DAS28 <2.6; 32% versus 4% [P < 0.0001]). The mean change in modified Sharp/van der Heijde score was significantly lower in the TCZ-SC group than the PBO-SC group (0.62 versus 1.23; P = 0.0149). Adverse events (AEs) and serious AEs (SAEs) were comparable between the TCZ-SC and PBO-SC groups; 4.6% and 3.7% of patients had at least 1 SAE, respectively, and infection was the most common SAE in 2.1% and 1.8% of patients, respectively. More injection site reactions occurred with TCZ-SC than PBO-SC (7.1% versus 4.1%). No anaphylaxis or serious hypersensitivity reactions occurred. There were 3 deaths in the TCZ-SC group and 0 in the PBO-SC group. CONCLUSION: TCZ-SC every other week had significantly greater efficacy, including ACR end points and inhibition of joint damage, compared with PBO-SC. TCZ-SC was well tolerated and its safety profile was comparable with that of previous intravenous TCZ studies.

The effect of three or six years of denosumab exposure in women with postmenopausal osteoporosis: results from the FREEDOM extension.

CONTEXT: The Fracture Reduction Evaluation of Denosumab in Osteoporosis Every 6 Months (FREEDOM) extension is evaluating the long-term efficacy and safety of denosumab for up to 10 years. OBJECTIVE: The objective of the study was to report results from the first 3 years of the extension, representing up to 6 years of denosumab exposure. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: This was a multicenter, international, open-label study of 4550 women. INTERVENTION: Women from the FREEDOM denosumab group received 3 more years of denosumab for a total of 6 years (long-term) and women from the FREEDOM placebo group received 3 years of denosumab (crossover). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Bone turnover markers (BTMs), bone mineral density (BMD), fracture, and safety data are reported. RESULTS: Reductions in BTMs were maintained (long-term) or achieved rapidly (crossover) after denosumab administration. In the long-term group, BMD further increased for cumulative 6-year gains of 15.2% (lumbar spine) and 7.5% (total hip). During the first 3 years of denosumab treatment, the crossover group had significant gains in lumbar spine (9.4%) and total hip (4.8%) BMD, similar to the long-term group during the 3-year FREEDOM trial. In the long-term group, fracture incidences remained low and below the rates projected for a virtual placebo cohort. In the crossover group, 3-year incidences of new vertebral and nonvertebral fractures were similar to those of the FREEDOM denosumab group. Incidence rates of adverse events did not increase over time. Six participants had events of osteonecrosis of the jaw confirmed by adjudication. One participant had a fracture adjudicated as consistent with atypical femoral fracture. CONCLUSION: Denosumab treatment for 6 years remained well tolerated, maintained reduced bone turnover, and continued to increase BMD. Fracture incidence remained low.

Five years of denosumab exposure in women with postmenopausal osteoporosis: results from the first two years of the FREEDOM extension.

The 3-year FREEDOM trial assessed the efficacy and safety of 60 mg denosumab every 6 months for the treatment of postmenopausal women with osteoporosis. Participants who completed the FREEDOM trial were eligible to enter an extension to continue the evaluation of denosumab efficacy and safety for up to 10 years. For the extension results presented here, women from the FREEDOM denosumab group had 2 more years of denosumab treatment (long-term group) and those from the FREEDOM placebo group had 2 years of denosumab exposure (cross-over group). We report results for bone turnover markers (BTMs), bone mineral density (BMD), fracture rates, and safety. A total of 4550 women enrolled in the extension (2343 long-term; 2207 cross-over). Reductions in BTMs were maintained (long-term group) or occurred rapidly (cross-over group) following denosumab administration. In the long-term group, lumbar spine and total hip BMD increased further, resulting in 5-year gains of 13.7% and 7.0%, respectively. In the cross-over group, BMD increased at the lumbar spine (7.7%) and total hip (4.0%) during the 2-year denosumab treatment. Yearly fracture incidences for both groups were below rates observed in the FREEDOM placebo group and below rates projected for a "virtual untreated twin" cohort. Adverse events did not increase with long-term denosumab administration. Two adverse events in the cross-over group were adjudicated as consistent with osteonecrosis of the jaw. Five-year denosumab treatment of women with postmenopausal osteoporosis maintained BTM reduction and increased BMD, and was associated with low fracture rates and a favorable risk/benefit profile.

Lesao immunoproliferativa angiocêntrica: um diagnóstico diferencial com granulomatose de Wegener / Angiocentric immunoproliferative lesion: differential diagnosis with Wegener's granulomatosis

Descreve-se um caso fatal, numa paciente feminina com história de "sinusite crônica" e lesao em bordo interno de olho D desde há quatro meses, que evoluiu com necrose extensa de pele e tecido adjacente dos ossos da face. Apresentava concomitante lesao pulmonar bilateral. O diagnóstico, feito por biópsia profunda da lesao cutânea, foi de lesao imunoproliferativa angiocêntrica, que é o termo atual para designar a granulomatose linfomatóide, o granuloma letal de linha média e o linfoma angiocêntrico. O interesse da apresentaçao desta doença é que ela entra no diagnóstico diferencial das vasculites, particularmente na granulomatose de Wegener