Topical Isotretinoin (TMB-001) Treatment for 12 Weeks Did Not Result in Clinically Relevant Laboratory Abnormalities in Participants with Congenital Ichthyosis in the Phase 2b CONTROL Study.

INTRODUCTION: Treatment with oral retinoids can be effective in patients with congenital ichthyosis (CI) but may be associated with clinically significant laboratory changes. In this Phase 2b CONTROL study analysis, we characterize the effects of TMB-001, a novel topical isotretinoin formulation, on laboratory values in participants with X-linked recessive (XLRI) and autosomal recessive lamellar (ARCI-LI) ichthyosis at 12 weeks. METHODS: A randomized, double-blind, vehicle-controlled, Phase 2b study was conducted with participants ≥ 9 years of age with confirmed XLRI and ARCI-LI. Participants were randomized 1:1:1 and stratified by CI subtype to receive TMB-001 0.05%:TMB-001 0.1%:vehicle twice daily for 12 weeks. Laboratory analyses were performed at screening and Week 12. RESULTS: Among 33 enrolled participants (TMB-001 0.05% n = 11, TMB-001 0.1% n = 10, and vehicle n = 12), 52% had ARCI-LI and 48% had XLRI. At 12 weeks, there were single reports of anemia, neutropenia, leukopenia, lymphocytosis, and leukocytosis after vehicle treatment; neutropenia was reported in one participant receiving TMB-001 0.1%. There were single reports of abnormal biochemistry values-liver enzymes, creatinine, urea nitrogen, hyperkalemia, and hyperproteinemia-across treatment cohorts. Non-fasting hyperglycemia was observed in three participants receiving TMB-001 0.1% and one participant receiving vehicle. Urinalysis abnormalities reported in > 1 participant included urobilinogen (TMB-001 0.1% n = 2, vehicle n = 2), protein (TMB-001 0.1% n = 3, vehicle n = 2), and leukocyte esterase (TMB-001 0.1% n = 2). Laboratory parameter changes were asymptomatic and did not require study discontinuation or drug withdrawal. CONCLUSION: There were no clinically significant laboratory changes in participants receiving TMB-001 isotretinoin ointment through 12 weeks of treatment, which differs from reported results for systemic isotretinoin. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT04154293.

Characteristics and outcomes for participants with congenital ichthyosis who responded to treatment with the topical isotretinoin formulation TMB-001: results from the Phase IIb CONTROL study.

BACKGROUND: Emollients and keratolytics are frequently used to manage symptoms of congenital ichthyosis (CI). Systemic retinoid treatment is complicated by teratogenicity and dose-limiting adverse effects. OBJECTIVES: This analysis from the randomized Phase IIb CONTROL study investigated the characteristics of participants who responded to treatment with TMB-001, a novel topical isotretinoin ointment formulation. METHODS: Participants ≥ 9 years of age with genetically confirmed CI and ≥ 2 (out of 4) Visual Index for Ichthyosis Severity (VIIS) assessment areas with ≥ 3 scaling score were randomized 1 : 1 : 1 to TMB-001 0.05%, TMB-001 0.1% or vehicle, twice daily for 12 weeks. Efficacy endpoints included the proportion of participants with ≥ 50% reduction in VIIS-scaling (VIIS-50) compared with baseline and ≥ 2-grade reduction in Investigator's Global Assessment (IGA)-scaling score compared with baseline. Changes in body surface area (BSA) involvement, Dermatology Life Quality Index (DLQI) scores and Itch-Numeric Rating Scale (I-NRS) scores were assessed. RESULTS: Among the 33 participants (11 randomized to TMB-001 0.05%, 10 to TMB-001 0.1% and 12 to vehicle), median age was 29 years (range 9-80), and most were male (64%) and White (79%). Baseline demographics were generally similar among participants who did or did not achieve TMB-001 treatment success. Participants who had lower mean BSA involvement and higher DLQI and I-NRS scores at baseline were more likely to achieve VIIS-50. Similarly, higher baseline DLQI and I-NRS scores were associated with IGA response; BSA involvement was similar for IGA responders vs. nonresponders. CONCLUSIONS: Higher DLQI and I-NRS scores at baseline were associated with participants achieving treatment success by VIIS-50 and IGA response. Lower BSA involvement was associated with VIIS-50 success.

Phase IIb randomized CONTROL study demonstrates a novel topical isotretinoin formulation, TMB-001, is safe and effective in participants with either recessive X-linked or autosomal recessive lamellar congenital ichthyosis.

BACKGROUND: In two severe congenital ichthyosis subtypes, autosomal recessive lamellar ichthyosis (ARCI-LI) and X-linked recessive ichthyosis (XLRI), cutaneous manifestations include widespread scaling. Approved topical treatment options are limited to emollients and keratolytics. AIM: This analysis from the randomized phase IIb CONTROL study assessed whether the efficacy and safety of TMB-001, a novel topical isotretinoin ointment formulation, differed between ARCI-LI and XLRI subtypes. METHODS: Participants ≥ 9 years with genetically confirmed XLRI or ARCI-LI and ≥ 2 (of 4) Visual Index for Ichthyosis Severity (VIIS) assessment areas with ≥ 3 scaling score were randomized 1 : 1 : 1 to TMB-001 0.05%/TMB-001 0.1%/vehicle, twice daily for 12 weeks. The proportion of participants with ≥ 50% reduction vs. baseline in VIIS scaling (VIIS 50; primary endpoint) and ≥ 2-grade reduction in Investigator's Global Assessment (IGA)-scaling score vs. baseline (key secondary endpoint) were evaluated. Adverse events (AEs) were monitored. RESULTS: Among enrolled participants (TMB-001 0.05%, n = 11; 0.1%, n = 10; and vehicle, n = 12), 52% had ARCI-LI and 48% XLRI subtypes. Mean age was 33.6 and 35.4 years for participants with ARCI-LI and XLRI, respectively. Overall, 33%, 50% and 17% of participants with ARCI-LI and 100%, 33% and 75% of participants with XLRI achieved VIIS 50 in the TMB-001 0.05%, TMB-001 0.1% and vehicle groups, respectively (nominal P = 0.24 for 0.05% vs. vehicle, intent-to-treat population). Improvement of ≥ 2-grade IGA score was observed in 33%, 50% and 0% of participants with ARCI-LI and 83%, 33% and 25% of participants with XLRI in the TMB-001 0.05%, TMB-001 0.1% and vehicle groups, respectively (nominal P = 0.03 for 0.05% vs. vehicle, intention-to-treat population). Most AEs were application-site reactions. CONCLUSION: Regardless of congenital ichthyosis subtype, TMB-001 demonstrated greater proportions of participants achieving VIIS 50 and ≥ 2-grade IGA improvement vs. vehicle.

Cost-effectiveness of tildrakizumab for the treatment of moderate-to-severe psoriasis in the United States.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the relative cost-effectiveness of tildrakizumab and other biologic and targeted systemic treatments compared with a mix of topical therapies, phototherapies, and other conventional systemic therapies as first-line treatment for moderate-to-severe plaque psoriasis from a United States payer's perspective. METHODS: A Markov model consisting of health states based on Psoriasis Area Severity Index (PASI) response rate categories and death was developed. The probabilities of achieving PASI responses were derived from a network meta-analysis based on published efficacy data. Health care costs and effectiveness measured in quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) were estimated. Incremental costs per QALY gained of each biologic/targeted first-line treatment versus a mix of conventional treatments were compared to provide relative cost-effectiveness among biologic and targeted first-line treatments. RESULTS: Over 10 years, the incremental cost per QALY gained compared with a mix of topical therapies, phototherapies, and other oral systemic therapies was lowest for brodalumab, infliximab, apremilast, and tildrakizumab, followed by secukinumab, ixekizumab, guselkumab, adalimumab, ustekinumab, and etanercept. The position of tildrakizumab relative to the other treatments remained the same across multiple scenarios. CONCLUSIONS: Tildrakizumab is among the most cost-effective first-line therapies for moderate-to-severe plaque psoriasis and is more cost-effective than secukinumab, ixekizumab, guselkumab, adalimumab, ustekinumab, and etanercept.

Clinical implications and predictive values of early PASI responses to tildrakizumab in patients with moderate-to-severe plaque psoriasis.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate whether early Psoriasis Area Severity Index (PASI) improvements can predict week 28 tildrakizumab responders and nonresponders. METHODS: Psoriasis patients pooled from two tildrakizumab phase 3 trials randomized to receive tildrakizumab 100 mg at weeks 0, 4, 16, and 28 were included. Patients were grouped by week 28 PASI responses (<50, 50-74, 75-89, and 90-100). PASI improvements from baseline at weeks 4 and 16 were analyzed for each response group. RESULTS: Of 575 patients included, 8.3%, 14.3%, 23.8%, and 53.6%, respectively, achieved PASI <50, 50-74, 75-89, and 90-100 at week 28. Of patients with PASI <50 at week 16, 85% did not achieve PASI ≥75 at week 28 (nonresponders). Rapid response, defined as PASI ≥50 at week 4 (after a single tildrakizumab dose), was observed in 41% of patients. Of these patients, 87% were week 28 responders (PASI ≥75); 67% were 'super responders' (PASI 90-100). Among week 28 responders and super responders, 45% and 50% achieved PASI ≥50 at week 4, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Tildrakizumab week 28 nonresponders can be identified by week 16 PASI response. PASI improvements as early as week 4 can predict patients' week 28 PASI improvement status.

Real-world biologic and apremilast treatment patterns in patients with psoriasis and psoriatic arthritis.

PURPOSE: Real-world treatment patterns among psoriasis patients with and without psoriatic arthritis (PsA) newly initiating treatment with a biologic or apremilast were assessed. PATIENTS AND METHODS: MarketScan claims data from adults with psoriasis and ?1 new prescription for secukinumab, adalimumab, ustekinumab, etanercept, or apremilast from January 1, 2015, to August 31, 2018, were assessed for adherence, switching, and combination therapy by index medication and PsA diagnosis. RESULTS: At treatment initiation, 22.0%-45.7% of patients had PsA. Over 24 months, discontinuation rates were high (34.4%-54.6%) overall and higher in patients with versus without PsA (all P<0.05 except secukinumab). Adherence was poor (16.8%-34.8%); switching and combination therapy were common. CONCLUSION: Treatment patterns varied, with better outcomes in PsA patients receiving anti-tumor necrosis factor versus anti-IL17/IL12/23 agents.

Efficacy and safety of tildrakizumab in patients with active psoriatic arthritis: results of a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, multiple-dose, 52-week phase IIb study.

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate efficacy and safety of the anti-interleukin-23p19 monoclonal antibody tildrakizumab in patients with psoriatic arthritis (PsA). METHODS: In this randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase IIb study, patients with active PsA were randomised 1:1:1:1:1 to tildrakizumab 200 mg every 4 weeks (Q4W); tildrakizumab 200, 100 or 20 mg Q12W; or placebo Q4W. Patients receiving tildrakizumab 20 mg or placebo switched to tildrakizumab 200 mg Q12W at W24; treatment continued to W52. The primary efficacy endpoint was proportion of patients with ACR20 response (≥20% improvement by American College of Rheumatology criteria) at W24. Secondary efficacy endpoints were assessed without adjustment for multiplicity. Safety was evaluated from treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs). RESULTS: 391/500 patients screened were randomised and treated. At W24, 71.4%-79.5% of tildrakizumab-treated versus 50.6% of placebo-treated patients achieved ACR20 (all p<0.01). Patients receiving tildrakizumab versus placebo generally achieved higher rates of ACR50, Disease Activity Score in 28 joints with C reactive protein <3.2, minimal disease activity and 75%/90%/100% improvement from baseline Psoriasis Area and Severity Index responses at W24 and through W52. Improvement in dactylitis and enthesitis was not observed; results were mixed for other outcomes. Responses in patients switched to tildrakizumab 200 mg at W24 were consistent with treatment from baseline. TEAEs and serious TEAEs occurred in 64.5% and 3.3%, respectively, of all patients through W52 and were comparable among treatment arms. CONCLUSIONS: Tildrakizumab treatment significantly improved joint and skin manifestations of PsA other than dactylitis and enthesitis. Treatment was generally well tolerated through W52. Clinicaltrials.gov NCT02980692.

Real-world biologic and apremilast treatment patterns and healthcare costs in moderate-to-severe plaque psoriasis.

Plaque psoriasis is a chronic disease requiring long-term therapy. However, long-term real-world treatment patterns and costs are not well characterized. This study examined treatment patterns and healthcare costs among patients newly initiating a biologic or apremilast for moderate-to-severe plaque psoriasis. Included patients had ?1 prescription for secukinumab, ixekizumab, adalimumab, ustekinumab, etanercept, or apremilast between 01/01/2015 and 08/31/2018, no prior use of the index medication, and continuous enrolment 12 months pre-index and 24 months post-index. Treatment adherence, non-persistence, discontinuation, switching, use of combination therapy, and re-initiation were assessed at 12, 18, and 24 -months post-index. In addition, total and psoriasis-related healthcare costs were evaluated at 24 months. A total of 7,773 patients with 24-month follow-up were included. Overall, adherence was low (21.3%-33.5%) and non-persistence was high (58.4%-86.5%) over 24 months. Discontinuation (38.4%-51.3%), switching (29.7%-52.6%), combination therapy (27.6%-42.9%), and re-initiation of the index medication (19.3%-44.5%) were common. Healthcare costs were high and mostly contributed by psoriasis treatment. Therefore, maintaining disease control on long-term therapy is still challenging for many patients.

Efficacy and safety of tildrakizumab in Japanese patients with moderate to severe plaque psoriasis: Results from a 64-week phase 3 study (reSURFACE 1).

Tildrakizumab is a high-affinity, humanized immunoglobulin G1κ, anti-interleukin-23p19 monoclonal antibody recently approved in Japan for treatment of plaque psoriasis. We report results from Japanese patients treated with tildrakizumab in the multinational, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled reSURFACE 1 study (clinicaltrials.gov NCT01722331). Adults with moderate to severe plaque psoriasis were randomized (2:2:1) to receive subcutaneous tildrakizumab 100 or 200 mg or placebo every 12 weeks. Placebo recipients were rerandomized to tildrakizumab 100 or 200 mg at week 12. The global study coprimary endpoints were the proportions of patients achieving 75% improvement from baseline Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI 75) and Physician Global Assessment (PGA) response (0/1 with ≥2 grade reduction from baseline) at week 12. Analyses included 158 Japanese patients randomized to tildrakizumab 100 (n = 64) or 200 mg (n = 62) or placebo (n = 32). Japanese patients had higher mean baseline body surface area involvement and PASI versus all reSURFACE 1 patients. At week 12, significantly more Japanese patients receiving tildrakizumab 100 and 200 mg versus placebo achieved PASI 75 (54.7% and 54.8% vs 6.3%, respectively, both nominal p < 0.001) and PGA 0/1 response (54.7% and 56.5% vs 9.4%, respectively, both nominal P < 0.001). Response rates increased over time with maximal efficacy after 22-28 weeks; >80% of patients achieving PASI 75 or PASI 90 at week 28 and continuing tildrakizumab treatment at the same dose maintained response at week 64. From baseline to week 28, absolute PASI decreased from >12 in all patients to ≤2 in >40% and ≤3 in >50% of patients receiving tildrakizumab. Tildrakizumab was generally well tolerated with an adverse event profile similar to that of placebo. Tildrakizumab treatment was associated with durable efficacy in Japanese patients with moderate to severe plaque psoriasis despite greater baseline disease severity versus the global reSURFACE 1 population.

Tildrakizumab efficacy, drug survival, and safety are comparable in patients with psoriasis with and without metabolic syndrome: Long-term results from 2 phase 3 randomized controlled studies (reSURFACE 1 and reSURFACE 2).

BACKGROUND: Data for the effect of metabolic syndrome (MetS) on the efficacy and safety of biologic agents for psoriasis treatment are limited. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate long-term tildrakizumab efficacy, drug survival, and safety in patients with psoriasis by baseline MetS status. METHODS: Post hoc analyses of up to 3 years of efficacy data and 5 years of safety data from the phase 3, double-blind, randomized controlled reSURFACE 1 and 2 trial (NCT01722331 and NCT01729754) base and extension studies were conducted for patients receiving continuous tildrakizumab 100 or 200 mg. RESULTS: Of 338 (n = 124/214 in reSURFACE 1/2) and 307 (n = 147/160 in reSURFACE 1/2) patients continuously receiving tildrakizumab 100 and 200 mg, respectively, throughout the studies, 26/44 (21%/21%) and 34/30 (23%/19%) met MetS criteria. Proportions of patients who achieved a 75% improvement in the Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI) in reSURFACE 1/2 were generally comparable among those with versus without MetS at week 52 (tildrakizumab 100 mg, 85%/86% vs 86%/94%; tildrakizumab 200 mg, 76%/87% vs 76%/87%) and through week 148. Results were similar for responders with 90% and 100% improvement in the PASI. Tildrakizumab's safety profile did not vary by MetS status. LIMITATIONS: Small sample size and post hoc analysis limit interpretation. CONCLUSION: Long-term tildrakizumab efficacy and safety were comparable between patients with and without MetS.

Real-world treatment patterns and healthcare costs of biologics and apremilast among patients with moderate-to-severe plaque psoriasis by metabolic condition status.

OBJECTIVES: To compare treatment patterns and costs among psoriasis patients with and without metabolic conditions newly initiating a biologic or apremilast. METHODS: Adult patients included had ≥1 prescription for secukinumab, adalimumab, ustekinumab, etanercept, or apremilast between 01/01/2015 and 08/31/2018 (date of first prescription was index date) and no index drug use in the 12-months pre-index, and continuous enrollment in the 12-month pre-index and 24-month post-index periods. Patients were divided into mutually exclusive treatment cohorts and stratified by their pre-index metabolic condition status. Treatment patterns (adherence, non-persistence, switching, discontinuation, use of combination therapy, and re-initiation) and healthcare costs were compared. RESULTS: Overall, 7773 patients were included; 47.5-56.7% had a metabolic condition. Except for the apremilast group, patients with metabolic conditions had higher discontinuation (secukinumab: 50.6% vs. 43.7%; adalimumab*: 53.9% vs. 48.7%; ustekinumab*: 41.9% vs. 35.1%; etanercept: 42.8% vs. 41.2%; apremilast: 43.1% vs. 46.1%) and switching (secukinumab: 48.1% vs. 41.2%; adalimumab*: 47.8% vs. 41.9%; ustekinumab*: 34.5% vs. 25.3%; etanercept*: 53.6% vs. 51.5%; apremilast: 45.8% vs. 44.6%) than patients without (*p < .05). Patients with metabolic conditions incurred significantly higher costs. CONCLUSION: Many psoriasis patients initiating biologics or apremilast had metabolic conditions. These patients had higher discontinuation and switching, and significantly higher healthcare costs.

The Effect of Tildrakizumab on Cardiometabolic Risk Factors in Psoriasis by Metabolic Syndrome Status: Post Hoc Analysis of Two Phase 3 Trials (ReSURFACE 1 and ReSURFACE 2).

Background: Metabolic syndrome (MetS) is the most prevalent comorbidity in psoriasis and increases the risk of cardiovascular disease, diabetes, and mortality. Assessment of impacts of biologic therapies on cardiometabolic risk factors are relatively limited. This study evaluated the effect of tildrakizumab on cardiometabolic risk factors in patients with moderate to severe plaque psoriasis and stratified by MetS status. Methods: In this post hoc analysis of reSURFACE 1/2, tildrakizumab 100 and 200 mg were continuously administered to patients with moderate to severe plaque psoriasis at weeks 0 and 4, and every 12 weeks thereafter. Mean and mean percent changes from baseline were assessed for fasting serum glucose, low/high-density lipoprotein-cholesterol, total cholesterol, triglyceride levels, body weight, and blood pressure at week 64/52 for reSURFACE 1 and 2, respectively, in patients with and without MetS. Results: A total of 369 patients in reSURFACE 1 and 2 received continuous tildrakizumab 100 mg and 330 received tildrakizumab 200 mg; 21.4% and 20.3% in reSURFACE 1 and 2, respectively, had MetS. At week 64/52, mean changes in cardiometabolic risk factors from baseline did not significantly differ regardless of MetS status. Numerically larger mean decreases in fasting glucose, triglycerides, and systolic blood pressure following tildrakizumab 100 mg and in systolic and diastolic blood pressure following tildrakizumab 200 mg were observed in patients with MetS relative to those without MetS. Conclusions: Changes in cardiometabolic disease risk factors following tildrakizumab treatment were limited. Risk factors were not increased in patients with MetS vs without MetS. J Drugs Dermatol. 2020;19(8): doi:10.36849/JDD.2020.5337.

Sustained and continuously improved efficacy of tildrakizumab in patients with moderate-to-severe plaque psoriasis.

Background: Tildrakizumab is a high-affinity, humanized, IgG1 κ, anti-interleukin-23 monoclonal antibody approved for moderate-to-severe plaque psoriasis.Objectives: This analysis examined whether tildrakizumab's week-28 efficacy can be sustained or improved to week 52.Methods: Psoriasis patients on the same-dose tildrakizumab (100 or 200 mg) in the first 52 weeks achieving week-28 PASI ≥50 were pooled from two phase-3 randomized controlled trials, and grouped into four mutually exclusive week-28 PASI response groups. Patients' week-52 PASI responses were compared to their week-28 PASI responses.Results: Of 352 patients receiving 100-mg tildrakizumab, 10.5%, 25.3%, 38.4%, and 25.9% achieved PASI 50-74, 75-89, 90-99, and 100 at week 28, respectively. Among patients achieving PASI ≥90, ≥75, or ≥50 at week 28, 89.4%, 91.1%, or 97.4% maintained their week-28 PASI responses at week 52, respectively. Among patients achieving PASI 50-74, 75-89, or 90-99 at week 28, 64.8%, 33.7%, or 25.2% improved their week-28 PASI responses at week 52, respectively.Limitations: This post hoc analysis may be less robust than an a priori analysis.Conclusions: Most tildrakizumab-treated patients with week-28 PASI ≥75 maintained their week-28 PASI improvement at week 52. More than half of week-28 partial responders (PASI 50-74) improved their PASI responses to PASI ≥75 at week 52. Clinicaltrials.gov identifiers: NCT01722331, NCT01729754.

Herpes Zoster and Tofacitinib: Clinical Outcomes and the Risk of Concomitant Therapy.

OBJECTIVE: Patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) are at increased risk of herpes zoster (HZ), and the risk appears to be increased in patients treated with tofacitinib. The aim of this study was to evaluate whether concomitant treatment with conventional synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (csDMARDs) or glucocorticoids (GCs) contributes to the increased risk of HZ in RA patients treated with tofacitinib. METHODS: HZ cases were identified from the databases of 2 phase I, 9 phase II, 6 phase III, and 2 long-term extension studies of tofacitinib in RA patients. Crude incidence rates (IRs) of all HZ events (serious and nonserious) per 100 patient-years (with 95% confidence intervals [95% CIs]) were calculated for unique patients. Within phase III studies, we described HZ rates according to concomitant csDMARD treatment and baseline GC use. A multivariable Cox proportional hazards regression model was used to evaluate HZ risk factors across studies. RESULTS: Across all studies (6,192 patients; 16,839 patient-years), HZ was reported in 636 tofacitinib-treated patients (IR 4.0, 95% CI 3.7-4.4). In most cases (93%), HZ was classified as nonserious, and the majority of patients (94%) had involvement of only 1 dermatome. HZ IRs varied across regions, from 2.4 (95% CI 2.0-2.9) in Eastern Europe to 8.0 (95% CI 6.6-9.6) in Japan and 8.4 (95% CI 6.4-10.9) in Korea. Within phase III studies, HZ IRs varied according to tofacitinib dose, background csDMARD treatment, and baseline use of GCs. The IRs were numerically lowest for monotherapy with tofacitinib 5 mg twice daily without GCs (IR 0.56 [95% CI 0.07-2.01]) and highest for tofacitinib 10 mg twice daily with csDMARDs and GCs (IR 5.44 [95% CI 3.72-7.68]). Age, GC use, tofacitinib dose, and enrollment within Asia were independent risk factors for HZ. CONCLUSION: Patients receiving treatment with tofacitinib and GCs appear to have a greater risk of developing HZ compared with patients receiving tofacitinib monotherapy without GCs.

An Economic Evaluation of Tofacitinib Treatment in Rheumatoid Arthritis: Modeling the Cost of Treatment Strategies in the United States.

BACKGROUND: Tofacitinib is an oral Janus kinase inhibitor for the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis (RA). Tofacitinib is approved in the United States for use in adults with moderately to severely active RA and an inadequate response or intolerance to methotrexate. OBJECTIVES: To (a) evaluate, using an economic model, the treatment costs of an RA strategy including tofacitinib, compared with adalimumab, etanercept, certolizumab and tocilizumab biologic RA treatment strategies, which are commonly prescribed in the United States, and (b) assess the economic impact of monotherapy and combination therapy in patients who had an inadequate response to methotrexate therapy (MTX-IR analysis) and to combination therapy in patients who had an inadequate response to a tumor necrosis factor inhibitor (TNF-IR analysis). METHODS: A transparent, Excel-based economic model with a decision-tree approach was developed to evaluate costs over a 1- and 2-year time horizon. The model compared tofacitinib 5 mg twice a day (BID) either as monotherapy or in combination with MTX with similarly labeled biologic therapies. Response to treatment was modeled as American College of Rheumatology (ACR) 20/50/70 response. ACR20 represented clinical response and determined whether patients continued therapy. ACR response rates at 6-month intervals were sourced from prescribing information and safety event rates from a published meta-analysis. Following an adverse event or a lack of response to treatment, it was assumed that 75% of patients switched to the next line of treatment (first to abatacept and then to rituximab). The perspective was that of a U.S. payer. Costs were reported in 2015 U.S. dollars and included drug wholesale acquisition costs, monitoring, drug administration, and treatment for minor and serious adverse events. The patient population eligible for treatment was based on the total number of members (i.e., RA and non-RA) in a payer organization; members with RA treated with biologic therapies were estimated using epidemiological data. Sensitivity analyses were conducted to explore the impact of varying key parameters, including treatment-switching probability, product rebate, major rates of adverse drug reaction, and ACR20 rates, on the model outcomes. RESULTS: Tofacitinib combination therapy after MTX failure was associated with the lowest cost per member per month (PMPM) over a 2-year time frame at $5.53, compared with $6.49 for adalimumab, $6.43 for etanercept, $5.95 for certolizumab, and $5.89 for tocilizumab. Similar savings were observed when all biologics were administered as monotherapy. Tofacitinib combination therapy was also associated with the lower PMPM cost compared with adalimumab combination therapy in the TNF-IR analysis. Tofacitinib was also among the lowest cost per ACR20 responder in each analysis. Sensitivity analyses demonstrated that tofacitinib would potentially be cost saving even in the least optimistic scenarios. CONCLUSIONS: This analysis suggests that tofacitinib 5 mg BID following MTX failure is a lower cost per patient treatment option when used either as monotherapy or combination therapy, compared with adalimumab, etanercept, certolizumab and tocilizumab biologic regimens. Tofacitinib + MTX in TNF-IR patients was also predicted to be a lower-cost treatment option compared with adalimumab+MTX and was associated with the lowest cost per ACR 20/50/70 responder. DISCLOSURES: This study was funded by Pfizer, which determined the research topic and paid York Health Economics Consortium to develop the analysis and conduct the research. York Health Economics Consortium has received consultancy fees from Pfizer. Gerber, Wallenstein, Mendelsohn, Bourret, Singh, and Moynagh are employees and shareholders of Pfizer. Editorial support was funded by Pfizer and was provided by Claxton, Jenks, and Taylor, who are employees of York Health Economics Consortium. Study concept and design were contributed primarily by Taylor, Jenks, Gerber, and Singh, along with the other authors. Gerber, Moynagh, and Singh collected the data, assisted by Bouret and Mendelsohn; data interpretation was performed by Claxton, Gerber, Bouret, and Mendelsohn. The manuscript was written primarily by Claxton, with assistance from the other authors, and revised by Claxton, Gerber, Bouret, and Mendelsohn, with assistance from the other authors.

Maintenance of Clinical Efficacy and Radiographic Benefit Through Two Years of Ustekinumab Therapy in Patients With Active Psoriatic Arthritis: Results From a Randomized, Placebo-Controlled Phase III Trial.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of ustekinumab through 2 years in adult patients with active psoriatic arthritis (PsA). METHODS: A total of 615 adult patients with active PsA were randomized to placebo, ustekinumab 45 mg, or ustekinumab 90 mg, at weeks 0, 4, and every 12 weeks through week 88 (last dose). At week 16, patients with <5% improvement in both tender and swollen joint counts entered blinded early escape (placebo to 45 mg, 45 mg to 90 mg, and 90 mg to 90 mg). All remaining placebo patients crossed over to ustekinumab 45 mg at week 24. Clinical efficacy measures included American College of Rheumatology criteria for 20% improvement (ACR20), Disease Activity Score in 28 joints using the C-reactive protein level (DAS28-CRP), and ≥75% improvement in the Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI75). Radiographic progression was evaluated using the modified Sharp/van der Heijde score (SHS). RESULTS: At week 100, ACR20, DAS28-CRP moderate/good response, and PASI75 rates ranged from 56.7-63.6%, 71.9-76.7%, and 63.9-72.5%, respectively, across the 3 treatment groups. In both ustekinumab groups, the median percent improvement in dactylitis and enthesitis was 100% at week 100. The mean changes in SHS score from week 52 to week 100 were similar to those observed from week 0 to week 52 in the ustekinumab groups. Through week 108, 70.7% and 9.7% of patients had an adverse event (AE) or serious AE, respectively. The rates and type of AEs were similar between the dose groups. CONCLUSION: Clinical and radiographic benefits from ustekinumab treatment were maintained through week 100 in the PSUMMIT 1 study. No unexpected safety events were observed; the safety profile of ustekinumab in this population was similar to that previously observed in psoriasis patients treated with ustekinumab.

Maintenance of Clinical and Radiographic Benefit With Intravenous Golimumab Therapy in Patients With Active Rheumatoid Arthritis Despite Methotrexate Therapy: Week-112 Efficacy and Safety Results of the Open-Label Long-Term Extension of a Phase III, Double-Blind, Randomized, Placebo-Controlled Trial.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the safety, efficacy, pharmacokinetics, immunogenicity, and radiographic progression through 2 years of treatment with intravenous (IV) golimumab plus methotrexate (MTX) in an open-label extension of a phase III trial of patients with active rheumatoid arthritis (RA) despite MTX therapy. METHODS: In the phase III, double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled GO-FURTHER trial, 592 patients with active RA were randomized (2:1) to intravenous golimumab 2 mg/kg plus MTX (Group 1) or placebo plus MTX (Group 2) at weeks 0 and 4, then every 8 weeks thereafter; placebo patients crossed over to golimumab at week 16 (early escape) or week 24 (crossover). The final golimumab infusion was at week 100. Assessments included American College of Rheumatology 20%, 50%, 70% (ACR20, ACR50, ACR70) response criteria, 28-joint count disease activity score using the C-reactive protein level (DAS28-CRP), physical function and quality of life measures, and changes in the modified Sharp/van der Heijde scores (SHS). Safety was monitored through week 112. RESULTS: In total, 486 patients (82.1%) continued treatment through week 100, and 68.1%, 43.8%, and 23.5% had an ACR20/50/70 response, respectively, at week 100. Clinical response and improvements in physical function and quality of life were generally maintained from week 24 through 2 years. Mean change from baseline to week 100 in SHS score was 0.74 in Group 1 and 2.10 in Group 2 (P = 0.005); progression from week 52 to week 100 was clinically insignificant in both groups. A total of 481 patients completed the safety followup through week 112; 79.1% had an adverse event, and 18.2% had a serious adverse event. CONCLUSION: Clinical response to IV golimumab plus MTX was maintained through week 100. Radiographic progression following golimumab treatment was clinically insignificant between week 52 and week 100. No unexpected adverse events occurred through week 112, and the safety profile was consistent with anti-tumor necrosis factor therapy.

Latent variable indirect response joint modeling of a continuous and a categorical clinical endpoint.

Informative exposure-response modeling of clinical endpoints is important in drug development. There has been much recent progress in latent variable modeling of ordered categorical endpoints, including the application of indirect response (IDR) models and accounting for residual correlations between multiple categorical endpoints. This manuscript describes a framework of latent-variable-based IDR models that facilitate easy simultaneous modeling of a continuous and a categorical clinical endpoint. The model was applied to data from two phase III clinical trials of subcutaneously administered ustekinumab for the treatment of psoriatic arthritis, where Psoriasis Area and Severity Index scores and 20, 50, and 70 % improvement in the American College of Rheumatology response criteria were used as efficacy endpoints. Visual predictive check and external validation showed reasonable parameter estimation precision and model performance.