Safety Profile of Upadacitinib up to 5 Years in Psoriatic Arthritis, Ankylosing Spondylitis, and Non-radiographic Axial Spondyloarthritis: An Integrated Analysis of Clinical Trials.

INTRODUCTION: This integrated analysis of the phase 2/3 and phase 3 SELECT trials describes the safety profile of upadacitinib, an oral Janus kinase inhibitor, for up to 5 years of exposure across psoriatic arthritis (PsA), ankylosing spondylitis (AS), and non-radiographic axial spondyloarthritis (nr-axSpA) (including pooled axial spondyloarthritis [axSpA]). METHODS: Safety data from five trials of upadacitinib in PsA (2 trials), AS (2 trials), and nr-axSpA (1 trial) were analyzed up to a data cut-off of August 15, 2022. One PsA study included adalimumab as an active comparator. Treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) were summarized for PsA (pooled upadacitinib 15 mg once daily and adalimumab 40 mg biweekly), AS (pooled upadacitinib 15 mg), nr-axSpA (upadacitinib 15 mg), and pooled axSpA (pooled upadacitinib 15 mg from axSpA trials). TEAEs were reported as exposure-adjusted event rates per 100 patient-years (E/100 PY). RESULTS: A total of 1789 patients (PsA, n = 907; AS, n = 596; nr-axSpA, n = 286) received ≥ 1 dose of upadacitinib 15 mg for 3689 PY of exposure or adalimumab (n = 429) for 1147 PY of exposure. Overall TEAEs and serious TEAEs were highest in PsA and numerically higher with upadacitinib versus adalimumab; rates were similar between AS and nr-axSpA. In PsA, higher rates of serious infection, herpes zoster (HZ), lymphopenia, and nonmelanoma skin cancer (NMSC) were observed with upadacitinib versus adalimumab. Rates of malignancy excluding NMSC, adjudicated major adverse cardiovascular events, and adjudicated venous thromboembolic events were comparable between upadacitinib and adalimumab in PsA and were similar across diseases. CONCLUSION: Higher rates of serious infection, HZ, lymphopenia, and NMSC were observed with upadacitinib versus adalimumab in PsA; slightly elevated rates for most of these TEAEs were seen with upadacitinib in PsA versus axSpA. Upadacitinib 15 mg demonstrated a generally consistent safety profile across disease states with no new safety signals identified. TRIAL REGISTRATION: SELECT-AXIS 1: NCT03178487; SELECT-AXIS 2: NCT04169373; SELECT-PsA 1: NCT03104400; SELECT-PsA 2: NCT03104374.

Psoriatic arthritis, ankylosing spondylitis, and non-radiographic axial spondyloarthritis are a group of diseases that cause pain and inflammation of the joints and/or spine. Safety data were combined from five studies: two in psoriatic arthritis, two in ankylosing spondylitis, and one in non-radiographic axial spondyloarthritis. Patients were treated with upadacitinib or adalimumab for up to 5 years. Adalimumab was only used for patients participating in one of the two psoriatic arthritis studies. Side effects from treatment were more common in patients with psoriatic arthritis than those with ankylosing spondylitis and non-radiographic axial spondyloarthritis; more patients with psoriatic arthritis had side effects with upadacitinib than adalimumab. A similar number of patients across treatment groups and diseases had side effects that made them stop treatment. The number of cancer cases (except cancer of the upper layer of the skin), cardiovascular issues, and blood clots were similar between the upadacitinib and adalimumab groups in psoriatic arthritis and across diseases. Serious infections, painful rashes that cause blisters (herpes zoster, also commonly referred to as shingles), low levels of white blood cells, and cancer of the upper layer of the skin were more common with upadacitinib than adalimumab in patients with psoriatic arthritis; overall, these events occurred more often with upadacitinib in patients with psoriatic arthritis than with ankylosing spondylitis and non-radiographic axial spondyloarthritis. Our results showed that the safety of upadacitinib was generally similar across diseases, and patients could tolerate it well for up to 5 years. No new safety risks were found with upadacitinib treatment.

Efficacy and Safety of Risankizumab for Active Psoriatic Arthritis: 100-Week Results from the KEEPsAKE 2 Randomized Clinical Trial.

INTRODUCTION: Long-term therapeutic options providing durable response and tolerability are needed for psoriatic arthritis (PsA). The ongoing KEEPsAKE 2 trial is evaluating risankizumab treatment in patients with active PsA who previously had inadequate response/intolerance to ≥ 1 conventional synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drug (csDMARD-IR) and/or 1-2 biologic DMARDs (bDMARD-IR). Herein, we report results through 100 weeks of treatment. METHODS: KEEPsAKE 2 is a global phase 3 trial. Patients with active PsA were randomized 1:1 to double-blind subcutaneous risankizumab 150 mg or placebo (weeks 0, 4, and 16). At week 24, all patients received open-label risankizumab every 12 weeks until end of study. Efficacy endpoints included achieving ≥ 20% improvement in PsA symptoms using American College of Rheumatology criteria (ACR20), attaining minimal disease activity (MDA; meeting ≥ 5/7 criteria of low disease activity and extent), and improving in other measures. RESULTS: At the cutoff date, 345/443 (77.9%) patients were ongoing in the study. ACR20 was achieved in 57.1% and 52.5% of the continuous risankizumab and placebo/risankizumab cohorts, respectively, at week 100 and in 60.0% and 55.8%, respectively, at week 52. In week 52 responders, maintenance of ACR20 at week 100 was achieved in 74.8% (continuous risankizumab) and 78.7% (placebo/risankizumab) of patients. In the continuous risankizumab and placebo/risankizumab cohorts, respectively, MDA was achieved by 33.0% and 33.3% of patients at week 100 and by 27.2% and 33.8% at week 52. Among MDA responders at week 52, maintenance of MDA response was achieved by 83.6% and 73.0% of the continuous risankizumab and placebo/risankizumab cohorts, respectively. Risankizumab was well tolerated through week 100. CONCLUSIONS: Risankizumab demonstrated durable efficacy and tolerability through 100 weeks; most patients who achieved ACR20 and MDA responses at week 52 maintained this achievement through week 100. There were no new safety signals in patients who had csDMARD-IR and bDMARD-IR. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03671148.

Risankizumab, a biologic disease-modifying antirheumatic drug, helps control the body's immune system to reduce symptoms of psoriatic arthritis (a disease that inflames the joints of people who have the skin condition psoriasis). The ongoing KEEPsAKE 2 study is evaluating how well risankizumab works and how safe it is for treating adult patients with active psoriatic arthritis who previously experienced inadequate response to one or more specific types of disease-modifying anti-arthritis drugs. Patients were randomly assigned to receive either risankizumab or an inactive drug; after 24 weeks, all patients received risankizumab. At study week 100, 57% of patients who were assigned to receive continuous risankizumab since the start of the study experienced a 20% or more improvement in a measure of psoriatic arthritis symptoms using criteria established by the American College of Rheumatology (ACR20); a similar proportion of patients achieved a 20% improvement at both weeks 24 and 52. Similarly, 56% and 53% of patients who switched from inactive drug to risankizumab achieved ACR20 at weeks 52 and 100 (more than before switching to risankizumab at week 24). Minimal disease activity (MDA) was evaluated by assessing joint and skin symptoms, affected body surface area, pain, and physical function. At week 100, 33% of patients achieved MDA (both groups), which was similar to week 52. Most patients who achieved ACR20 or MDA at week 52 maintained responses at week 100. Improvements with risankizumab were seen in several other measures of treatment outcomes through week 100. Risankizumab was generally safe through 100 weeks.

Efficacy and Safety of Risankizumab for Active Psoriatic Arthritis: 100-Week Results from the Phase 3 KEEPsAKE 1 Randomized Clinical Trial.

INTRODUCTION: Patients with psoriatic arthritis (PsA) require treatment providing durable long-term efficacy in different disease domains as well as safety. We present 100-week efficacy and safety results of risankizumab in patients with active PsA and previous inadequate response/intolerance to ≥ 1 conventional synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drug (csDMARD-IR). METHODS: KEEPsAKE 1 (NCT03675308) is a global phase 3 study, including a 24-week, double-blind, placebo-controlled and ongoing open-label extension periods. Patients were randomized 1:1 to receive risankizumab 150 mg or placebo at baseline and weeks 4 and 16. After week 24, all patients received open-label risankizumab every 12 weeks thereafter. Patients were evaluated through 100 weeks. Endpoints included achieving ≥ 20% reduction in American College of Rheumatology criteria for symptoms of rheumatoid arthritis (ACR20), minimal disease activity (MDA; defined as ≥ 5/7 criteria of low disease activity and extent), and other measures. RESULTS: Overall, 828/964 (85.9%) patients completed week 100. For patients receiving continuous risankizumab, 57.3%, 70.6%, and 64.3% achieved ACR20 at weeks 24, 52, and 100, respectively. For the placebo/risankizumab cohort, 33.5% achieved ACR20 at week 24 but increased after switching to active treatment at weeks 52 (63.7%) and 100 (62.1%). In ACR20 responders at week 52, 81.2% of both treatment cohorts maintained response at week 100. MDA was achieved by 25.0%, 38.3%, and 38.2% of the continuous risankizumab cohort at weeks 24, 52, and 100. In the placebo/risankizumab cohort, 10.2% achieved MDA at week 24, increasing at weeks 52 (28.0%) and 100 (35.2%). MDA response was maintained at week 100 in week 52 responders in the continuous risankizumab (75.5%) and placebo/risankizumab cohorts (78.2%). Similar trends were observed for other efficacy measures. Risankizumab was generally well tolerated through 100 weeks. CONCLUSIONS: For patients with active PsA who are csDMARD-IR, risankizumab demonstrated durable long-term efficacy and was generally well tolerated, with a consistent long-term safety profile. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier, NCT03675308.

Psoriatic arthritis (PsA) often affects individuals with the skin condition psoriasis. A biologic disease-modifying antirheumatic drug can help control inflammation and regulate the immune system to ease symptoms and slow progression of PsA. The ongoing KEEPsAKE 1 study is evaluating the efficacy and safety of risankizumab in patients with active PsA who previously have not had success with ≥ 1 conventional disease-modifying antirheumatic drug. Patients were initially treated with risankizumab 150 mg (continuous risankizumab group) or inactive drug (inactive drug/risankizumab group). After 24 weeks, all received risankizumab for the rest of the study. At week 100, 64% (continuous risankizumab group) and 62% (inactive drug/risankizumab group) of patients had ≥ 20% improvement in PsA symptoms (measured using American College of Rheumatology [ACR20] criteria). Both groups showed similar percentages at week 52 and improvement from week 24. In patients who achieved ACR20 at week 52, 81% maintained their ACR20 response at week 100. Minimal disease activity was defined as a combination of joint and skin symptoms, affected body surface area, pain, and physical functioning. At week 100, 38% of the continuous risankizumab group and 35% of the inactive drug/risankizumab group achieved minimal disease activity. Percentages were similar at week 52 and higher than week 24 in both groups. In patients who achieved minimal disease activity at week 52, 81% maintained response at week 100. All other measures of treatment responses showed similar patterns from the start of risankizumab through week 100. Risankizumab was considered generally safe by the treating physicians.

Differential properties of Janus kinase inhibitors in the treatment of immune-mediated inflammatory diseases.

Janus kinases (JAKs) are a family of cytosolic tyrosine kinases that regulate cytokine signal transduction, including cytokines involved in a range of inflammatory diseases, such as RA, psoriasis, atopic dermatitis and IBD. Several small-molecule JAK inhibitors (JAKis) are now approved for the treatment of various immune-mediated inflammatory diseases. There are, however, key differences between these agents that could potentially translate into unique clinical profiles. Each JAKi has a unique chemical structure, resulting in a distinctive mode of binding within the catalytic cleft of the target JAK, and giving rise to distinct pharmacological characteristics. In addition, the available agents have differing selectivity for JAK isoforms, as well as off-target effects against non-JAKs. Other differences include effects on haematological parameters, DNA damage repair, reproductive toxicity and metabolism/elimination. Here we review the pharmacological profiles of the JAKis abrocitinib, baricitinib, filgotinib, peficitinib, tofacitinib and upadacitinib.

Malignancy in the Upadacitinib Clinical Trials for Rheumatoid Arthritis, Psoriatic Arthritis, Ankylosing Spondylitis, and Non-radiographic Axial Spondyloarthritis.

INTRODUCTION: This article aims to describe malignancies in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA), psoriatic arthritis (PsA), ankylosing spondylitis (AS), or non-radiographic axial spondyloarthritis (nr-axSpA) treated with upadacitinib (UPA) or active comparators. METHODS: This integrated safety analysis includes data from 11 phase 3 UPA trials across RA (6 trials), PsA (2 trials), AS (2 trials; one phase 2b/3), and nr-axSpA (1 trial). Treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) were summarized for RA (pooled UPA 15 mg [UPA15], pooled UPA 30 mg [UPA30], adalimumab 40 mg [ADA], methotrexate monotherapy [MTX]), PsA (pooled UPA15, pooled UPA30, ADA), AS (pooled UPA15), and nr-axSpA (UPA15). TEAEs were reported as exposure-adjusted event rates (events/100 patient-years). RESULTS: Median treatment duration ranged from 1.0 to 4.0 years (with a maximum of 6.6 years in RA). Across treatments and indications, rates of malignancy excluding nonmelanoma skin cancer (NMSC) ranged from 0.2 to 1.1, while NMSC ranged from 0.0 to 1.4. In RA, rates of malignancy excluding NMSC were generally similar between UPA15, UPA30, ADA, and MTX (breast and lung cancer were the most common). In RA and PsA, Kaplan-Meier analyses revealed no differences in event onset of malignancy excluding NMSC with UPA15 versus UPA30 over time. In RA, NMSC rates were higher with UPA30 than UPA15; both UPA15 and UPA30 were higher than ADA and MTX. In PsA, rates of malignancy excluding NMSC and NMSC were generally similar between UPA15, UPA30, and ADA. In AS and nr-axSpA, malignancies were reported infrequently. Few events of lymphoma were reported across the clinical programs. CONCLUSION: Rates of malignancy excluding NMSC were generally similar between UPA15, UPA30, ADA, and MTX and were consistent across RA, PsA, AS, and nr-axSpA. A dose-dependent increased rate of NMSC was observed with UPA in RA. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicaTrials.gov identifier: NCT02706873, NCT02675426, NCT02629159, NCT02706951, NCT02706847, NCT03086343, NCT03104400, NCT03104374, NCT03178487, and NCT04169373.

MACE and VTE across upadacitinib clinical trial programmes in rheumatoid arthritis, psoriatic arthritis and ankylosing spondylitis.

OBJECTIVES: To provide an integrated analysis of major adverse cardiovascular events (MACEs) and events of venous thromboembolism (VTE) and associated risk factors across rheumatoid arthritis (RA), psoriatic arthritis (PsA), and ankylosing spondylitis (AS) phase 2b/3 upadacitinib clinical programmes. METHODS: Data were analysed and summarised from clinical trials of RA, PsA and AS treated with upadacitinib 15 mg once daily (QD) and 30 mg QD (as of 30 June 2021). Data from adalimumab (RA and PsA) and methotrexate (RA) arms were included as comparators. Adjudicated MACEs and VTE events were presented as exposure-adjusted rates per 100 patient-years (E/100 PY). Univariable Cox proportional hazard regression analyses assessed potential associations of risk factors for MACE and VTE. RESULTS: In total, 4298 patients received upadacitinib 15 mg (RA n=3209, PsA n=907 and AS n=182) and 2125 patients received upadacitinib 30 mg (RA n=1204 and PsA n=921). In patients with RA and PsA, rates of MACE (0.3-0.6 E/100 PY) and VTE (0.2-0.4 E/100 PY) were similar across upadacitinib doses; in patients with AS, no MACEs and one VTE event occurred. Most patients experiencing MACEs or VTE events had two or more baseline cardiovascular risk factors. Across RA and PsA groups, rates of MACEs and VTE events were similar. CONCLUSIONS: Rates of MACEs and VTE events with upadacitinib were consistent with previously reported data for patients receiving conventional synthetic and biologic disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs and comparable with active comparators adalimumab and methotrexate. Associated patient characteristics are known risk factors for MACEs and VTE events. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBERS: RA (SELECT-NEXT: NCT02675426; SELECT-MONOTHERAPY: NCT02706951; SELECT-BEYOND: NCT02706847; SELECT-COMPARE: NCT02629159; SELECT-EARLY: NCT02706873, SELECT-CHOICE: NCT03086343), PsA (SELECT-PsA 2: NCT03104374; SELECT-PsA 1: NCT03104400), and AS (SELECT-AXIS 1: NCT03178487).

Efficacy and Safety of Upadacitinib in Patients with Psoriatic Arthritis: 2-Year Results from the Phase 3 SELECT-PsA 1 Study.

INTRODUCTION: Efficacy and safety of the Janus kinase (JAK) inhibitor upadacitinib (UPA) was evaluated in patients with psoriatic arthritis (PsA) through week 104 of the ongoing long-term extension of the phase 3 trial SELECT-PsA 1. METHODS: Exploratory analyses of all primary and secondary endpoints (non-responder imputation and as observed for binary endpoints; mixed-effect model repeated measures and as observed for continuous endpoints), and summary of treatment-emergent adverse events, in patients receiving UPA 15 mg (UPA15) or 30 mg (UPA30) once daily, or adalimumab 40 mg (ADA) every other week, through week 104 are reported. RESULTS: Of 1704 patients, 25.4% discontinued the study drug by week 104. Proportions of patients achieving ≥ 20%/50%/70% improvement in American College of Rheumatology criteria (ACR20/50/70), ≥ 75%/90%/100% improvement in Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI75/90/100), or minimal disease activity (MDA) were maintained through week 104; greater responses by nominal P value were observed with UPA15 and UPA30 versus ADA for ACR20/50/70 and MDA. Mean change from baseline in modified total Sharp/van der Heijde Score (mTSS) was similar across groups and to week 56 results. The safety profile of UPA was generally comparable to ADA and not altered from week 56 data. Rates of serious infection, herpes zoster, anemia, neutropenia, lymphopenia, and elevated creatine phosphokinase remained numerically higher with UPA15 and/or UPA30 versus ADA. Rates of malignancies excluding non-melanoma skin cancer (NMSC), major adverse cardiovascular events, and venous thromboembolism were similar across groups; rates of NMSC were higher with UPA versus ADA. Two deaths were reported with UPA15, one with UPA30, and one with ADA. CONCLUSIONS: In PsA patients, efficacy responses were similar or greater with UPA15 or UPA30 versus ADA through week 104, and inhibition of radiographic progression was maintained. No new safety risks were identified with exposure to UPA through 2 years (week 104). CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03104400.

Disease Control with Upadacitinib in Patients with Psoriatic Arthritis: A Post Hoc Analysis of the Randomized, Placebo-Controlled SELECT-PsA 1 and 2 Phase 3 Trials.

INTRODUCTION: Low disease activity (LDA)/remission is the target of treatment in patients with psoriatic arthritis (PsA). We assessed the proportions of patients with PsA receiving upadacitinib who achieved LDA/remission over 1 year. METHODS: This was a post hoc analysis of the double-blind, placebo-controlled SELECT-PsA 1 (also adalimumab-controlled) and SELECT-PsA 2 trials. Treatment targets assessed included LDA/remission defined by Disease Activity in Psoriatic Arthritis (≤ 14/ ≤ 4) and Psoriatic Arthritis Disease Activity Scores (≤ 3.2/ ≤ 1.9), as well as minimal disease activity (MDA)/very low disease activity (VLDA) states (5/7 and 7/7 components, respectively, of MDA criteria). Targets were assessed at 24 and 56 weeks. For binary outcomes, non-responder imputation was used for missing data. Data from patients receiving upadacitinib 30 mg was not included in the analysis. RESULTS: Overall, 1386 patients were analyzed. Disease control (i.e., LDA/MDA) was achieved at 24 weeks in upadacitinib 15 mg-treated patients across both studies: LDA/MDA was achieved by 25-48% of patients receiving upadacitinib 15 mg versus 2-16% of patients receiving placebo, and remission/VLDA rates were 7-14% with upadacitinib 15 mg versus 0-4% with placebo. The proportions of patients achieving treatment targets were numerically similar to upadacitinib 15 mg and adalimumab. All responses were sustained at 56 weeks. CONCLUSIONS: Remission and LDA are feasible targets with upadacitinib treatment in patients with PsA. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrial.gov identifiers NCT03104400 (SELECT-PsA 1) and NCT03104374 (SELECT-PsA 2).

Psoriatic arthritis is a disease that causes inflammation of the skin and joints. Doctors measure how bad a patient's disease is by measuring signs and symptoms of the disease, and using these to make a "score." The aim of treatment is to reduce the score to low levels (known as "low disease activity") or very low levels ("remission"). This study looked at results from two clinical trials that compared upadacitinib, a medicine used to treat psoriatic arthritis, with no medicine (placebo) to see how many patients had low disease activity or were in remission after 1 year of treatment. The results showed that more patients who were taking upadacitinib had low disease activity or were in remission after the first 6 months of treatment compared with those who took placebo. This difference between upadacitinib and placebo could still be seen after 1 year of treatment. These results show that treatment with upadacitinib is effective enough for some patients with psoriatic arthritis to achieve low disease activity or remission and to stay at this level, even after more than 1 year of treatment.

Effect of upadacitinib on reducing pain in patients with active psoriatic arthritis or ankylosing spondylitis: post hoc analysis of three randomised clinical trials.

OBJECTIVE: Evaluate the effect of upadacitinib on pain outcomes in patients with active psoriatic arthritis (PsA) or ankylosing spondylitis (AS) across 3 randomised trials (SELECT-PsA 1 and 2 for PsA; SELECT-AXIS 1 for AS). METHODS: Patients were randomised to upadacitinib 15 mg once daily or placebo (all 3 studies), or adalimumab 40 mg every other week (SELECT-PsA 1 only). Pain outcomes included proportion of patients achieving ≥30%, ≥50% and ≥70% reduction from baseline in patient global assessment of pain and other end points. RESULTS: A higher proportion of patients receiving upadacitinib versus placebo achieved ≥30%, ≥50% and ≥70% reduction in pain end points as early as week 2; these improvements with upadacitinib were generally sustained or increased through year 1 (PsA 1/2 studies: 64%/48%, 58%/42% and 38%/22%, respectively; SELECT-AXIS 1 study: 76%, 72% and 54%). Results were similar with adalimumab in PsA 1 (59%, 49% and 32%). Patients who switched from placebo to upadacitinib 15 mg were able to reach a similar level of improvement as the continuous upadacitinib groups by year 1 (PsA 1/2 studies: 46%-60%, 35%-49% and 15%-34%; AS study: 83%, 72% and 46%). Results were similar with other pain end points. CONCLUSION: Rapid and sustained improvements in pain outcomes across several end points were consistently shown with upadacitinib over 1 year in patients with active PsA or AS who had either inadequate response to prior non-biologic or biologic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (PsA studies) or were biologic-naïve with inadequate response to non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (AS study).

A review of JAK-STAT signalling in the pathogenesis of spondyloarthritis and the role of JAK inhibition.

Spondyloarthritis (SpA) comprises a group of chronic inflammatory diseases with overlapping clinical, genetic and pathophysiological features including back pain, peripheral arthritis, psoriasis, enthesitis and dactylitis. Several cytokines are involved in the pathogenesis of SpA, variously contributing to each clinical manifestation. Many SpA-associated cytokines, including IL-23, IL-17, IL-6, type I/II interferon and tumour necrosis factor signal directly or indirectly via the Janus kinase (JAK)-signal transducer and activator of transcription pathway. JAK signalling also regulates development and maturation of cells of the innate and adaptive immune systems. Accordingly, disruption of this signalling pathway by small molecule oral JAK inhibitors can inhibit signalling implicated in SpA pathogenesis. Herein we discuss the role of JAK signalling in the pathogenesis of SpA and summarize the safety and efficacy of JAK inhibition by reference to relevant SpA clinical trials.

Safety Profile of Upadacitinib up to 3 Years in Psoriatic Arthritis: An Integrated Analysis of Two Pivotal Phase 3 Trials.

INTRODUCTION: This integrated analysis describes the safety profile of upadacitinib, an oral Janus kinase inhibitor, at 15 and 30 mg once daily for up to 3 years of exposure in patients with active psoriatic arthritis (PsA) who had a prior inadequate response or intolerance to ≥ 1 non-biologic or biologic disease-modifying antirheumatic drug. METHODS: Safety data were pooled and analyzed from two randomized, placebo-controlled phase 3 trials. Both trials evaluated upadacitinib 15 mg and 30 mg once daily, and one trial also evaluated adalimumab 40 mg every other week. Treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) and laboratory data were summarized for four groups: pooled placebo, pooled upadacitinib 15 mg, pooled upadacitinib 30 mg, and adalimumab. TEAEs were reported as exposure-adjusted event rates (events per 100 patient-years [E/100 PY]) up to a data cut-off of June 29, 2020. RESULTS: A total of 2257 patients received ≥ 1 dose of upadacitinib 15 mg (N = 907) or 30 mg (N = 921) for 2504.6 PY of exposure or adalimumab (N = 429) for 549.7 PY of exposure. Upper respiratory tract infection, nasopharyngitis, and increased creatine phosphokinase (CPK) were the most common TEAEs with upadacitinib. Rates of malignancies, adjudicated major adverse cardiovascular events (MACEs) and venous thromboembolic events (VTEs), and deaths were similar across treatment groups. Rates of herpes zoster (HZ) and opportunistic infections (OI; excluding tuberculosis, HZ, and oral candidiasis) were higher with upadacitinib versus adalimumab. Serious infection, anemia, and CPK elevations were most frequent with upadacitinib 30 mg. Potentially clinically significant laboratory abnormalities were uncommon. CONCLUSIONS: Upadacitinib 15 mg and adalimumab had similar safety profiles with the exception of HZ and OIs, consistent with what was observed in rheumatoid arthritis. Rates of malignancies, MACEs, VTEs, and deaths were comparable among patients receiving upadacitinib and adalimumab. No new safety risks emerged with longer-term exposure to upadacitinib. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBERS: SELECT-PsA 1: NCT03104400; SELECT-PsA 2: NCT03104374.

Psoriatic arthritis is a disease that causes inflammation of the skin and joints. Upadacitinib and adalimumab are medicines that can be used to treat this condition. This analysis combined safety data from two studies of adults with psoriatic arthritis who took upadacitinib, adalimumab, or placebo (no medicine) for up to 3 years. The most common side effects of treatment with upadacitinib were infection and inflammation of the nose and throat and higher amounts of a protein in the blood called creatinine phosphokinase. The total number of cancer cases, heart (cardiovascular) problems, blood clots (embolisms), and deaths were similar across treatment groups, including the placebo (no medicine) group. However, more patients who took upadacitinib than adalimumab or placebo (no medicine) had a painful rash that causes blisters known as herpes zoster (shingles) and infections usually seen in people with a weakened immune system. Most patients had normal blood test results and continued their treatment. Overall, upadacitinib was well tolerated for up to 3 years in patients with psoriatic arthritis. These results agree with what has been found in studies of upadacitinib in patients with rheumatoid arthritis. Safety data of upadacitinib use over a longer time will be reported later.

Patient-Reported Outcomes in Psoriatic Arthritis Patients with an Inadequate Response to Biologic Disease-Modifying Antirheumatic Drugs: SELECT-PsA 2.

INTRODUCTION: Psoriatic arthritis (PsA) has a major impact on health-related quality of life (HRQOL) and other patient-reported outcomes (PROs), important components in the assessment of therapeutic efficacy. We evaluated the impact of upadacitinib on PROs in PsA patients with inadequate responses or intolerance to biologic disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs (bDMARD-IR). METHODS: Patients enrolled in the phase 3 SELECT-PsA 2 randomized controlled trial (RCT) received 56 weeks of oral upadacitinib 15 mg QD, upadacitinib 30 mg QD, or placebo switched to either dose of upadacitinib at week 24. PROs included patient global assessment of disease activity (PtGA), pain, physical function (HAQ-DI), health-related quality of life (SF-36 physical (PCS) and mental (MCS) component summary and domain scores), fatigue (FACIT-F), psoriasis symptom severity (SAPS), and work productivity (WPAI). Mean changes from baseline in PROs, improvements ≥ minimum clinically important differences (MCID) and scores ≥ normative values, and maintenance of improvements were assessed. RESULTS: At weeks 12 and 24, patients treated with either upadacitinib dose reported statistically and nominally significant improvements from baseline across all PROs versus placebo (p ≤ 0.05), except the WPAI absenteeism domain, which were maintained or further improved to week 56. A significantly greater proportion of patients receiving either upadacitinib dose reported improvements ≥ MCID and scores ≥ normative values versus placebo (nominal p ≤ 0.01) in most PROs at weeks 12 and 24, with clinically meaningful improvements continuing to week 56. Improvements ≥ MCID were reported as early as week 2 in PtGA, pain, and HAQ-DI. CONCLUSIONS: Upadacitinib provides rapid, clinically meaningful, and sustained improvements in PROs reported by bDMARD-IR PsA patients. SELECT-PsA 2 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03104374.

Upadacitinib in patients with psoriatic arthritis and an inadequate response to non-biological therapy: 56-week data from the phase 3 SELECT-PsA 1 study.

BACKGROUND: In SELECT-PsA 1, a randomised double-blind phase 3 study, upadacitinib 15 mg and 30 mg were superior to placebo and non-inferior to adalimumab in ≥20% improvement in American College of Rheumatology (ACR) criteria at 12 weeks in patients with psoriatic arthritis (PsA). Here, we report 56-week efficacy and safety in patients from SELECT-PsA 1. METHODS: Patients received upadacitinib 15 mg or 30 mg once daily, adalimumab 40 mg every other week for 56 weeks or placebo through week 24 switched thereafter to upadacitinib 15 mg or 30 mg until week 56. Efficacy endpoints included the proportion of patients achieving ≥20%/50%/70% improvement in ACR criteria (ACR20/50/70), ≥75%/90%/100% improvement in Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI75/90/100), minimal disease activity (MDA) and change from baseline in modified total Sharp/van der Heijde Score. Treatment-emergent adverse events per 100 patient years (PY) were summarised. RESULTS: Consistent with results through week 24, ACR20/50/70, PASI75/90/100 and MDA responses were maintained with upadacitinib through week 56 and were generally numerically higher than with adalimumab; inhibition of radiographic progression was also maintained. Patients who switched from placebo to upadacitinib exhibited comparable improvements at week 56 as patients originally randomised to upadacitinib. The rates of serious adverse events were 9.1 events/100 PY with upadacitinib 15 mg and 12.3 events/100 PY with upadacitinib 30 mg. Two deaths were reported in each of the upadacitinib groups. CONCLUSION: Efficacy across various domains of PsA were maintained with upadacitinib 15 mg and 30 mg through week 56 with no new safety signals observed.

Treatment Mode Preferences in Psoriatic Arthritis: A Qualitative Multi-Country Study.

OBJECTIVE: Qualitative research exploring patient preferences regarding the mode of treatment administration for psoriatic arthritis (PsA) is limited. We report patient preferences and their reasons across PsA treatment modes. METHODS: In this global, cross-sectional, qualitative study, interviews were conducted with adult patients with PsA in Brazil, France, Germany, Italy, Spain, the UK, and the US. Patients were currently taking a disease-modifying antirheumatic drug (DMARD). Patients indicated the order and strength of preference (0-100; 100 = strongest) across four modes of treatment administration: oral (once daily), self-injection (weekly), clinic injection (weekly), and infusion (monthly); reasons for preferences were qualitatively assessed. Descriptive statistics were reported. Fisher's exact tests and t-tests were conducted for treatment mode outcomes. RESULTS: Overall, 85 patients were interviewed (female, 60.0%; mean age, 49.8 years). First-choice ranking (%) and mean [standard deviation] preference points were: oral (49.4%; 43.9 [31.9]); self-injection (34.1%; 32.4 [24.8]); infusion (15.3%; 14.5 [20.0]); clinic injection (1.2%; 9.2 [10.0]). Of 48 (56.5%) patients with a strong first-choice preference (ie point allocation ≥60), 66.7% chose oral administration. Self-injection was most often selected as second choice (51.8%), clinic injection as third (49.4%), and infusion as fourth (47.1%). Oral administration was the first-choice preference in the US (88.0% vs 38.0% in Europe). The most commonly reported reason for oral administration as the first choice was speed and ease of administration (76.2%); for self-injection, this was convenience (75.9%). The most commonly reported reason for avoiding oral administration was concern about possible drug interactions (63.6%); for self-injection, this was a dislike of needles or the injection process (66.7%). CONCLUSION: Patients with PsA preferred oral treatment administration, followed by self-injection; convenience factors were common reasons for these preferences. Overall, 43.5% of patients did not feel strongly about their first-choice preference and may benefit from discussions with healthcare professionals about PsA treatment administration options.

Efficacy of Monotherapy with Biologics and JAK Inhibitors for the Treatment of Rheumatoid Arthritis: A Systematic Review.

Despite recommendations suggesting that biological and targeted synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (b/tsDMARDs) should be used in combination with methotrexate in the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis (RA), up to one-third of patients with RA are treated with monotherapy. The objective of the systematic literature review reported here was to evaluate the clinical evidence regarding the efficacy of b/tsDMARDs as monotherapy in the treatment of RA. MEDLINE®, Embase®, and the Cochrane Central Trials Register (to April 11, 2017) and the American College of Rheumatology and European League Against Rheumatism conference proceedings (2010-2016) were searched for randomized controlled trials evaluating the efficacy of b/tsDMARDs as monotherapy for RA in adults. Forty-four monotherapy studies of abatacept, adalimumab, baricitinib, certolizumab pegol, etanercept, sarilumab, sirukumab, tocilizumab, and tofacitinib reported in 71 publications were identified. Tocilizumab had the most studies (14), followed by etanercept (10) and adalimumab (9). These b/tsDMARDs were consistently shown to be efficacious treatments, regardless of whether patients were intolerant of or had never used conventional synthetic (cs) DMARDs. However, better treatment outcomes were usually achieved with combination therapy, and this was observed for all b/tsDMARDs assessed by this review. Only a few studies provided a head-to-head comparison between b/tsDMARD treatments or between b/tsDMARD monotherapy and combination therapy, and as many were initial RA treatments they were not generalizable to usual care. In conclusion, evidence from randomized trials suggests that the b/tsDMARDs studied are effective as monotherapy. In general, some patient responses seem better with combination therapy and the durability of monotherapy is less than combination therapy. There is, however, a need for longer-term head-to-head trials to establish positioning of these interventions in the treatment algorithm for RA. FUNDING: Pfizer.Plain Language Summary: Plain language summary available on the journal website.

Simultaneous Response in Several Domains in Patients with Psoriatic Disease Treated with Etanercept as Monotherapy or in Combination with Conventional Synthetic Disease-modifying Antirheumatic Drugs.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate patients with psoriatic arthritis (PsA) receiving etanercept (ETN) monotherapy or ETN plus conventional synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (csDMARD) to determine the proportion achieving a clinically meaningful response in arthritis, psoriasis, and quality of life simultaneously. METHODS: A prospective, multicenter, 52-week observational study in patients with active PsA evaluated treatment with ETN in clinical practice (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT00293722). This analysis assessed simultaneous achievement of 3 treatment targets: low disease activity (LDA) based on 28-joint count Disease Activity Score (DAS28); body surface area (BSA) involvement ≤ 3%; and a score > 45 on the Medical Outcomes Study Short Form-12 (SF-12) physical component summary. RESULTS: Of 579 patients, 380 received ETN monotherapy and 199 received combination ETN plus csDMARD. At 52 weeks, data for all 3 disease domains were available for 251 patients receiving monotherapy and 151 receiving combination therapy. In the monotherapy and combination therapy groups, 61 (24.3%) and 37 (24.5%) patients, respectively, achieved all 3 treatment targets simultaneously. A significantly greater proportion of patients receiving monotherapy versus combination therapy achieved SF-12 > 45 (43.0% vs 31.8%; p < 0.05) and DAS28 LDA (72.5% vs 62.3%; p < 0.05). Conversely, BSA ≤ 3% was reached by a significantly greater proportion receiving combination therapy (75.5% vs 56.6%; p < 0.001). However, baseline BSA involvement was higher for the monotherapy group. CONCLUSION: While nearly half the patients achieved arthritis and psoriasis treatment targets simultaneously and one-fourth reached all 3 treatment targets, combining ETN and csDMARD did not substantially improve clinical response compared with ETN monotherapy in this real-world PsA patient population.

Etanercept is effective as monotherapy or in combination with methotrexate in rheumatoid arthritis: subanalysis of an observational study.

Approximately 30% of patients with rheumatoid arthritis receiving biological disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (bDMARDs) take them as monotherapy. Although etanercept (ETN) monotherapy has been evaluated in clinical trials, data in the real-world setting are sparse. We compared the efficacy and safety of ETN, given alone or in combination with methotrexate (MTX), in routine clinical practice. This was a subanalysis of patients who received either ETN alone or ETN + MTX during a 52-week prospective, observational study conducted at 329 German centers. The primary endpoint was "Funktionsfragebogen Hannover" (Hannover Functional Ability Questionnaire [FFbH]; low FFbH = worse function) functional remission at week 26 and week 52. Secondary endpoints included the 28-joint count Disease Activity Score (DAS28), DAS28 remission (DAS28 < 2.6), and adverse events (AEs). Participating centers applied ETN monotherapy in 43.1% of patients and ETN + MTX in 56.9%. A smaller proportion of patients achieved FFbH functional remission with ETN vs ETN + MTX (31.9%, 95% confidence interval [CI] 29.1-34.9% vs 39.8%, 37.2-42.5%, respectively; p < 0.001) at 26 weeks and at 52 weeks (38.4%, 35.1-41.7% vs 44.3%, 41.5-47.2%, respectively; p = 0.007). After 52 weeks, the mean DAS28 (±SD) decreased from 5.5 ± 1.3 to 3.4 ± 1.4 (ETN) vs 5.3 ± 1.3 to 3.2 ± 1.3 (ETN + MTX) and DAS28 remission was achieved by 32.5% (95% CI 29.0-36.1%) of patients with ETN vs 38.8% (35.8-41.9%; p = 0.007) with ETN + MTX. Overall, 20.6 (ETN) and 19.7% (ETN + MTX) of patients reported treatment-related AEs. Patients received ETN monotherapy almost as often as ETN + MTX. ETN + MTX appeared marginally more effective than ETN monotherapy in some, but not all, outcomes measured.

CREM Alpha Enhances IL-21 Production in T Cells In Vivo and In Vitro.

The cAMP-responsive element modulator alpha (CREMα) plays a role in autoimmunity and, in particular, in systemic lupus erythematosus. CREMα negatively regulates IL-2 transcription and activates IL-17 expression by direct transcriptional mechanisms. To understand the role of CREM in autoimmunity, we recently generated a mouse with a transgenic overexpression of CREMα selectively in T cells. This mouse is characterized by enhanced IL-17 and IL-21 expression. We, herein, dissect the transcriptional mechanisms of enhanced IL-21 transcription in these mice. T cells of CREMα transgenic mice display an enhanced binding of CREMα to the CD3ζ chain promoter resulting in decreased CD3ζ chain expression. This is accompanied by a decreased excitation threshold and enhanced Ca2+ influx, which is known to induce IL-21 expression via NFATc2 activation. However, CREMα directly binds to cAMP-response element (CRE) half-site within the Il-21 promoter, which results in enhanced promoter activity shown by promoter reporter assays. CREMα-induced IL-21 transcription is not abrogated in the presence of cyclosporine A but depends on an intact CRE site within the IL-21 promoter, which suggests that CREM largely enhances IL-21 expression by direct transcriptional regulation. IL-21 transcription is critical for IL-17 generation in these mice, since IL-21 receptor blockade downregulates IL-17 transcription to wild-type levels. Finally, this is of functional relevance since CREMα transgenic mice display enhanced disease activity in dextran sodium sulfate-induced colitis accompanied by higher local IL-21 expression. Thus, we describe two novel mechanisms of CREMα-dependent IL-21 transcription. Since T cells of systemic lupus erythematosus patients are characterized by enhanced IL-21 transcription, this might also be of functional relevance in humans.

Immune suppression via glucocorticoid-stimulated monocytes: a novel mechanism to cope with inflammation.

Glucocorticoids (GCs) are used as first-line therapies for generalized suppression of inflammation (e.g., allergies or autoimmune diseases), but their long-term use is limited by severe side effects. Our previous work revealed that GCs induced a stable anti-inflammatory phenotype in monocytes, the GC-stimulated monocytes (GCsMs) that we exploited for targeted GC-mediated therapeutic effects. We demonstrate that GCsMs interact with T cells in suppressing proliferation, as well as cytokine release of CD8(+) and, especially, CD4(+) T cells in vitro, and that they support generation of Foxp3(+) cells. Therefore, we tested their immunosuppressive potential in CD4(+) T cell-induced colitis in vivo. We found that injection of GCsMs into mice with severe colitis abolished the inflammation and resulted in significant clinical improvement within a few days. T cells recovered from GCsM-treated mice exhibited reduced secretion of proinflammatory cytokines IFN-γ and IL-17. Furthermore, clusters of Foxp3(+) CD4(+) T cells were detectable at local sites of inflammation in the colon. Thus, GCsMs are able to modify T cell responses in vitro and in vivo, as well as to downregulate and clinically cure severe T cell-mediated colitis.

Overexpression of CREMα in T cells aggravates lipopolysaccharide-induced acute lung injury.

Transcription factor cAMP response element modulator (CREM)α contributes to various cellular and molecular abnormalities in T cells, including increased IL-17 and decreased IL-2 expression. For development of acute lung injury (ALI), the invasion and regulation of immune cells are highly important, but the role of T cells remains unclear. In this study, we show that CREMα is upregulated in LPS-induced ALI. During the early phase of ALI (day 1), T cell-specific CREMα overexpression enhances the numbers of T cells and expression of TNF-α in bronchoalveolar lavage fluid and deteriorates lung functions. On day 3 of ALI, CREMα transgenic mice present a stronger inflammatory response with higher levels of TNF-α, IL-6, and IL-17 correlating with increased numbers of T cells and neutrophils in bronchoalveolar lavage fluid, whereas expression of Foxp3 and IL-2 and numbers of regulatory T cells are decreased. These changes result in restricted lung function in CREMα transgenic mice. Finally, an adoptive transfer of CREM(-/-) CD4(+) T cells, but not of wild-type T cells into RAG-1(-/-) mice results in ameliorated disease levels. Thus, levels of CREM in T cells determine the outcome of ALI, and CREMα transgenic animals represent a model in which proinflammatory T cells aggravate ALI in different phases of the disease. Given the fact that patients with autoimmune diseases like systemic lupus erythematosus show higher levels of CREMα and an increased susceptibility toward infectious complications, our finding is of potential clinical significance and may enable new therapeutic strategies.