Long-term safety and efficacy of upadacitinib versus adalimumab in patients with rheumatoid arthritis: 5-year data from the phase 3, randomised SELECT-COMPARE study.

OBJECTIVES: To assess the safety and efficacy of upadacitinib versus adalimumab from SELECT-COMPARE over 5 years. METHODS: Patients with rheumatoid arthritis and inadequate response to methotrexate were randomised to receive upadacitinib 15 mg once daily, placebo or adalimumab 40 mg every other week, all with concomitant methotrexate. By week 26, patients with insufficient response to randomised treatment were rescued; patients remaining on placebo switched to upadacitinib. Patients completing the 48-week double-blind period could enter a long-term extension. Safety and efficacy were assessed through week 264, with radiographic progression analysed through week 192. Safety was assessed by treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs). Efficacy was analysed by randomised group (non-responder imputation (NRI)) or treatment sequence (as observed). RESULTS: Rates of TEAEs were generally similar with upadacitinib versus adalimumab, although numerically higher rates of herpes zoster, lymphopenia, creatine phosphokinase elevation, hepatic disorder and non-melanoma skin cancer were reported with upadacitinib. Numerically greater proportions of patients randomised to upadacitinib versus adalimumab achieved clinical responses (NRI); Clinical Disease Activity Index remission (≤2.8) and Disease Activity Score based on C reactive protein <2.6 were achieved by 24.6% vs 18.7% (nominal p=0.042) and 31.8% vs 23.2% (nominal p=0.006), respectively. Radiographic progression was numerically lower with continuous upadacitinib versus adalimumab at week 192. CONCLUSION: The safety profile of upadacitinib through 5 years was consistent with the known safety profile of upadacitinib, with no new safety risks. Clinical responses were numerically higher with upadacitinib versus adalimumab at 5 years. Upadacitinib demonstrates a favourable benefit-risk profile for long-term rheumatoid arthritis treatment. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT02629159.

Long-term safety and efficacy of upadacitinib or adalimumab in patients with rheumatoid arthritis: results through 3 years from the SELECT-COMPARE study.

OBJECTIVES: To assess the long-term safety and efficacy of the Janus kinase inhibitor upadacitinib versus adalimumab over 3 years in the ongoing long-term extension (LTE) of SELECT-COMPARE, a randomised controlled phase 3 trial of patients with active rheumatoid arthritis and inadequate response to methotrexate (MTX). METHODS: Patients on stable background MTX were randomised 2:2:1 to upadacitinib 15 mg, placebo or adalimumab 40 mg. Patients with an insufficient response were switched by week 26 from placebo to upadacitinib, upadacitinib to adalimumab or adalimumab to upadacitinib. Patients who completed the 48-week double-blind period could enter an LTE for up to 10 years. Safety and efficacy results were analysed here through 3 years. Treatment-emergent adverse events (AEs) were summarised based on exposure to upadacitinib and adalimumab. Efficacy was analysed by original randomised groups (non-responder imputation), as well as separately by treatment sequence (as observed). RESULTS: Rates of several AEs were generally comparable between upadacitinib and adalimumab, including AEs leading to discontinuation, serious infections and serious AEs, malignancies, major adverse cardiac events, venous thromboembolism and deaths. Consistent with earlier results, herpes zoster, lymphopaenia, hepatic disorder and CPK elevation were reported at higher rates with upadacitinib versus adalimumab. In terms of efficacy, upadacitinib continued to show numerically better clinical responses than adalimumab over 3 years across all endpoints, including low disease activity and remission. CONCLUSION: The safety profile of UPA 15 mg was consistent with previous study-specific and integrated safety reports. Higher levels of clinical response continued to be observed with upadacitinib versus adalimumab through 3 years of treatment.

CSF1 receptor inhibition of tenosynovial giant cell tumor using novel disease-specific MRI measures of tumor burden.

Aim: Monitoring treatment of tenosynovial giant cell tumor (TGCT) is complicated by the irregular shape and asymmetrical growth of the tumor. We compared responses to pexidartinib by Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST) 1.1 with those by tumor volume score (TVS) and modified RECIST (m-RECIST). Materials & methods: MRIs acquired every two cycles were assessed centrally using RECIST 1.1, m-RECIST and TVS and tissue damage score (TDS). Results: Thirty-one evaluable TGCT patients were treated with pexidartinib. From baseline to last visit, 94% of patients (29/31) showed a decrease in tumor size (median change: -60% [RECIST], -66% [m-RECIST], -79% [TVS]). All methods showed 100% disease control rate. For TDS, improvements were seen in bone erosion (32%), bone marrow edema (58%) and knee effusion (46%). Conclusion: TVS and m-RECIST offer potentially superior alternatives to conventional RECIST for monitoring disease progression and treatment response in TGCT. TDS adds important information about joint damage associated with TGCT.

Results from Phase I Extension Study Assessing Pexidartinib Treatment in Six Cohorts with Solid Tumors including TGCT, and Abnormal CSF1 Transcripts in TGCT.

PURPOSE: To assess the response to pexidartinib treatment in six cohorts of adult patients with advanced, incurable solid tumors associated with colony-stimulating factor 1 receptor (CSF1R) and/or KIT proto-oncogene receptor tyrosine kinase activity. PATIENTS AND METHODS: From this two-part phase I, multicenter study, pexidartinib, a small-molecule tyrosine kinase inhibitor that targets CSF1R, KIT, and FMS-like tyrosine kinase 3 (FLT3), was evaluated in six adult patient cohorts (part 2, extension) with advanced solid tumors associated with dysregulated CSF1R. Adverse events, pharmacokinetics, and tumor responses were assessed for all patients; patients with tenosynovial giant cell tumor (TGCT) were also evaluated for tumor volume score (TVS) and patient-reported outcomes (PRO). CSF1 transcripts and gene expression were explored in TGCT biopsies. RESULTS: Ninety-one patients were treated: TGCT patients (n = 39) had a median treatment duration of 511 days, while other solid tumor patients (n = 52) had a median treatment duration of 56 days. TGCT patients had response rates of 62% (RECIST 1.1) and 56% (TVS) for the full analysis set. PRO assessments for pain showed improvement in patient symptoms, and 76% (19/25) of TGCT tissue biopsy specimens showed evidence of abnormal CSF1 transcripts. Pexidartinib treatment of TGCT resulted in tumor regression and symptomatic benefit in most patients. Pexidartinib toxicity was manageable over the entire study. CONCLUSIONS: These results offer insight into outcome patterns in cancers whose biology suggests use of a CSF1R inhibitor. Pexidartinib results in tumor regression in TGCT patients, providing prolonged control with an acceptable safety profile.

Inhibition of structural joint damage progression with upadacitinib in rheumatoid arthritis: 1-year outcomes from the SELECT phase 3 program.

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the inhibition of progression of structural joint damage through week 48 in patients with moderately to severely active RA receiving upadacitinib as monotherapy or in combination with MTX. METHODS: Radiographic progression was assessed in two phase 3 randomized controlled trials. MTX-naïve patients were randomized to upadacitinib 15 or 30 mg once daily or MTX monotherapy (SELECT-EARLY, n = 945), while MTX inadequate responders (IRs) were randomized to upadacitinib 15 mg once daily or adalimumab 40 mg every other week or placebo added to background MTX (SELECT-COMPARE, n = 1629). The mean changes from baseline in modified total Sharp score (mTSS), joint space narrowing and erosion scores were determined. Data were analysed both by linear extrapolation for missing data imputation and treatment switching and as observed. RESULTS: In patients naïve or with limited exposure to MTX (SELECT-EARLY), mean changes from baseline to week 48 in mTSS were 0.03 for upadacitinib 15 mg, 0.14 for upadacitinib 30 mg and 1.00 for MTX based on linear extrapolation (P < 0.001 for both upadacitinib doses vs MTX). Among patients with an inadequate response to MTX (SELECT-COMPARE), the mean change from baseline in mTSS was significantly reduced in the upadacitinib 15 mg plus MTX group vs placebo plus MTX (0.28 vs 1.73; P < 0.001). The mean change from baseline in the adalimumab plus MTX group was 0.39. CONCLUSION: Upadacitinib monotherapy or in combination with background MTX was effective in inhibiting the progression of structural joint damage through week 48 in MTX-naïve and MTX-IR patients with RA. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov (https://clinicaltrials.gov), NCT02706873 and NCT02629159.

A randomized, placebo-controlled experimental medicine study of RIPK1 inhibitor GSK2982772 in patients with moderate to severe rheumatoid arthritis.

BACKGROUND: Receptor-interacting protein kinase 1 (RIPK1) is a key mediator of inflammation through cell death and proinflammatory cytokine production. This multicenter, randomized, double-blind (sponsor-unblinded), placebo-controlled, experimental medicine study evaluated the safety, pharmacokinetics (PK), and preliminary efficacy of GSK2982772, a RIPK1 inhibitor, in moderate to severe rheumatoid arthritis (RA). METHODS: Patients with moderate to severe RA who had received ≥12 weeks' stable-dose conventional synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drug (csDMARD) therapy were randomized (2:1) to GSK2982772 60 mg or placebo orally 2 or 3 times daily for 84 days. Safety, PK, disease activity, joint damage, and pharmacodynamic (PD) biomarkers were assessed at days 43 and 85. RESULTS: A total of 52 patients were randomized (placebo, 18; GSK2982772, 34). Adverse events (AEs) were reported in 13 (72%) in patients in the placebo group (n = 3 b.i.d; n = 10 t.i.d.) and 20 (61%) in the GSK2982772 group (n = 3 b.i.d; n = 17 t.i.d.). All treatment-related AEs were mild/moderate, except one severe case of alopecia areata at day 49 and retinal vein thrombosis at day 66 (which led to withdrawal from the study) in patients receiving GSK2982772 t.i.d. Disease Activity Score in 28 Joints-C-reactive protein (DAS28-CRP) scores, ACR20/50/70 response, and rates of low disease activity and remission were similar between placebo and GSK2982772 arms. CONCLUSIONS: These results suggest that inhibition of RIPK1 activity at the GSK2982772 exposure levels evaluated do not translate into meaningful clinical improvement of RA. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02858492 . Registered 8 August 2016.

Long-term outcomes of pexidartinib in tenosynovial giant cell tumors.

BACKGROUND: The objective of this study was to report on the long-term effects of pexidartinib on tenosynovial giant cell tumor (TGCT). METHODS: This was a pooled analysis encompassing 3 pexidartinib-treated TGCT cohorts: 1) a phase 1 extension study (NCT01004861; 1000 mg/d; n = 39), 2) ENLIVEN patients randomized to pexidartinib (1000 mg/d for 2 weeks and then 800 mg/d; n = 61), and 3) ENLIVEN crossover patients (NCT02371369; 800 mg/d; n = 30). Eligible patients were 18 years old or older and had a histologically confirmed TGCT that was unresectable and symptomatic. Efficacy endpoints included the best overall response (complete or partial response) and the duration of response (DOR) by the Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST) and the tumor volume score (TVS). The safety assessment included the frequency of treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) and hepatic laboratory abnormalities (aminotransferase elevations and mixed/cholestatic hepatotoxicity). The data cutoff was May 31, 2019. RESULTS: One hundred thirty patients with TGCT received pexidartinib (median treatment duration, 19 months; range, 1 to 76+ months); 54 (42%) remained on treatment at the end of the analysis (26 months after initial data cut of March 2017). The RECIST overall response rate (ORR) was 60%; the TVS ORR was 65%. The median times to response were 3.4 (RECIST) and 2.8 months (TVS), with 48 of the responding patients (62%) achieving a RECIST partial response by 6 months and with 72 (92%) doing so by 18 months. The median DOR was reached for TVS (46.8 months). Reported TEAEs were mostly low-grade, with hair color changes being most frequent (75%). Most liver abnormalities (92%) were aminotransferase elevations; 4 patients (3%) experienced mixed/cholestatic hepatotoxicity (all within the first 2 months of treatment), which was reversible in all cases (recovery spanned 1-7 months). CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrates the prolonged efficacy and tolerability of long-term pexidartinib treatment for TGCT.

Non-invasive vagus nerve stimulation for rheumatoid arthritis: a proof-of-concept study.

BACKGROUND: Vagus nerve stimulation delivered with an implanted device has been shown to improve rheumatoid arthritis severity. We aimed to investigate the safety and efficacy of non-invasive stimulation of the auricular branch of the vagus nerve for the treatment of patients with moderately to severely active rheumatoid arthritis. METHODS: This prospective, multicentre, open-label, single-arm proof-of-concept study enrolled patients aged 18-80 years with active rheumatoid arthritis who had an inadequate response to conventional synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs) and up to one biological DMARD. Biological DMARDs were stopped at least 4 weeks before enrolment and concomitant use was not allowed during the study. All eligible participants were assigned to use a non-invasive, wearable vagus nerve stimulation device for up to 30 min per day, which delivered pulses of 20 kHz. Follow-up visits occurred at week 1, week 2, week 4, week 8, and week 12 after the baseline visit. The primary endpoint was the mean change in Disease Activity Score of 28 joints with C-reactive protein (DAS28-CRP) at week 12 compared with baseline. Secondary endpoints included the mean change in the Health Assessment Questionnaire-Disability Index (HAQ-DI), the proportion of patients with a minimal clinically important difference of 0·22 on HAQ-DI, the proportion achieving American College of Rheumatology (ACR) 20, ACR50, and ACR70 response, and safety analysis. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT04116866). FINDINGS: Of 35 patients screened for eligibility, 30 (86%) were enrolled at six centres in Spain between Dec 27, 2018, and Oct 24, 2019, of whom 27 (90%) completed the week 12 visit. The mean change in DAS28-CRP at 12 weeks was -1·4 (95%CI -1·9 to -0·9; p<0·0001) from a mean baseline of 5·3 (SD 1·0). 11 (37%) of 30 patients reached DAS28-CRP of 3·2 or less, and seven (23%) patients reached DAS28-CRP of less than 2·6 at week 12. The mean HAQ-DI change was -0·5 (95%CI -0·7 to -0·2; p<0·0001) from a mean baseline of 1·6 (SD 0·7), and 17 (57%) patients reached a minimal clinically important difference of 0·22 or more. ACR20 responses were reached by 16 (53%) patients, ACR50 responses by 10 (33%) patients, and ACR70 by five (17%) patients. Four adverse events were reported, none of which were serious and all of which resolved without intervention. INTERPRETATION: Use of the device was well tolerated, and patients had clinically meaningful reductions in DAS28-CRP. This was an uncontrolled, open-label study, and the results must be interpreted in this context. Further evaluation in larger, controlled studies is needed to confirm whether this non-invasive approach might offer an alternative treatment for rheumatoid arthritis. FUNDING: Nesos.

Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) Results Following Discontinuation of Methotrexate in Rheumatoid Arthritis Treated with Subcutaneous Tocilizumab: The COMP-ACT MRI Substudy.

OBJECTIVE: To assess differences in joint damage and inflammation using magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) between patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) who achieved low disease activity with tocilizumab (TCZ) + methotrexate (MTX) and subsequently continued or discontinued MTX. METHODS: In the COMP-ACT trial, US patients with RA received subcutaneous TCZ 162 mg + MTX. Those who achieved 28-joint count Disease Activity Score calculated with erythrocyte sedimentation rate (DAS28-ESR) ≤ 3.2 at Week 24 were randomized 1:1 (double-blind) to discontinue MTX (TCZ monotherapy; mono) or continue TCZ + MTX until Week 52. In a subset of patients, 1.5-Tesla MRI was used to obtain images of bilateral hands and wrists at weeks 24 and 40. Outcomes included changes in MRI-assessed synovitis, osteitis, erosion, and cartilage loss from Week 24 to Week 40, and in the proportion of patients with progression of each score. RESULTS: Of 296 patients who achieved DAS28-ESR ≤ 3.2 at Week 24, 79 were enrolled in the pilot MRI substudy and randomized to TCZ mono (n = 38) or TCZ + MTX (n = 41). Treatment with either TCZ mono or TCZ + MTX suppressed erosion progression, synovitis, osteitis, and cartilage loss. The proportion of patients with no progression in each outcome measure was similar between groups (range, TCZ mono: 84.8-97.0%; TCZ + MTX: 92.3-100%). CONCLUSION: In a subset of patients who achieved low disease activity with TCZ + MTX, MRI changes were minimal in intraarticular inflammation and damage measures in patients who discontinued MTX versus those who continued TCZ + MTX.

Safety and efficacy of neurostimulation with a miniaturised vagus nerve stimulation device in patients with multidrug-refractory rheumatoid arthritis: a two-stage multicentre, randomised pilot study.

Background The inflammatory reflex plays a role in regulating innate and adaptive immunity by modulating cellular and molecular inflammatory pathways. The vagus nerve is a major constituent of the inflammatory reflex and studies have shown that the reflex can be activated by electrical stimulation of the vagus nerve. In this first in-human pilot study, we assessed the safety and efficacy of a novel miniaturised vagus nerve stimulation (VNS) device for the treatment of multidrug-refractory rheumatoid arthritis. METHODS: Participants with moderately to severely active rheumatoid arthritis and prior insufficient response to two or more biological disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs or Janus kinase inhibitors with at least two different modes of action were enrolled in a two-stage study done at five clinical research sites in the USA. Stage 1 was open label; participants were implanted with a miniaturised VNS device, which was activated for 1 min once a day. In stage 2, participants were randomly assigned (1:1:1) to receive active stimulation (1 min once a day or 1 min four times a day) or sham stimulation (device implanted but not activated), with the sites and participants masked to treatment assignment. The primary outcome was incidence of treatment-emergent adverse events. Clinical efficacy was assessed as a key secondary outcome. The study was registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03437473. FINDINGS: 14 patients were enrolled between March 13 and Aug 8, 2018. Three patients received stimulation in stage 1 and, following safety review board approval, the remaining 11 patients were implanted during stage 2 and randomly assigned to receive 1 min of stimulation once daily (n=3), 1 min of stimulation four times daily (n=4), or no stimulation (n=4) for 12 weeks. There were no device-related or treatment-related serious adverse events. Surgery-related adverse events were Horner's syndrome and vocal cord paralysis (in one patient each), which resolved without clinically significant sequelae. No deaths were recorded. INTERPRETATION: VNS with a miniaturised neurostimulator was safe and well tolerated and reduced signs and symptoms of rheumatoid arthritis in patients with multidrug-refractory disease. These results support further evaluation in a larger randomised sham-controlled study. FUNDING: SetPoint Medical.

MRI of the joint and evaluation of the granulocyte-macrophage colony-stimulating factor-CCL17 axis in patients with rheumatoid arthritis receiving otilimab: a phase 2a randomised mechanistic study.

BACKGROUND: Otilimab is a human monoclonal antibody that inhibits granulocyte-macrophage colony-stimulating factor (GM-CSF), a driver in many immune-mediated inflammatory conditions. We evaluated the effect of otilimab on the GM-CSF-chemokine (C-C motif) ligand 17 (CCL17) axis and synovitis in patients with rheumatoid arthritis. METHODS: This phase 2a, randomised, double-blind, multicentre, placebo-controlled, parallel-group study was done at nine sites across the USA, Poland, and Germany. Patients aged 18 years or older with rheumatoid arthritis per American College of Rheumatology-European League Against Rheumatism 2010 criteria and receiving stable methotrexate were randomly assigned (3:1) by an interactive response technology system to either subcutaneous otilimab 180 mg or placebo once weekly for 5 weeks, then every other week until week 10 (within a 12-week treatment period), followed by a 10-week safety follow-up. Randomisation was stratified by early rheumatoid arthritis (≤2 years since diagnosis) and established rheumatoid arthritis (>2 years since diagnosis). Patients and study personnel (except for an unblinded coordinator or nurse who prepared and administered the study drug) were blinded to treatment assignment; the syringe was shielded during administration. Patients were enrolled by study investigators and allocated to a treatment by central randomisation on the basis of a schedule generated by the sponsor. The primary endpoint was change over time (assessed at baseline and weeks 1, 2, 4, 6, 8, 12, and 22 of follow-up) in 112 biomarkers, including target engagement biomarkers and those that may be indicative of rheumatoid arthritis disease activity and response to otilimab. Secondary endpoints were change from baseline in synovitis, osteitis and erosion assessed by rheumatoid arthritis MRI scoring system (RAMRIS) and rheumatoid arthritis MRI quantitative score (RAMRIQ), and safety evaluation. The primary, secondary, and safety endpoints were assessed in the intention-to-treat population. Biomarker and MRI endpoints were analysed for differences between treatment groups using a repeated measures model. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02799472. FINDINGS: Between Aug 9, 2016, and Oct 30, 2017, 39 patients were randomly assigned and included in the analysis (otilimab n=28; placebo n=11). In the otilimab group, mean serum concentrations of GM-CSF-otilimab complex peaked at week 4 (138·4 ng/L, 95% CI 90·0-212·9) but decreased from week 6-12. CCL17 concentrations decreased from baseline to week 1, remained stable to week 8, and returned to baseline at week 12; least-squares mean ratio to baseline was 0·65 (95% CI 0·49-0·86; coefficient of variation 13·60) at week 2, 0·68 (0·53-0·88; 12·51) at week 4, 0·78 (0·60-1·00; 12·48) at week 6, and 0·68 (0·54-0·85; 11·21) at week 8. No meaningful change in CCL17 concentrations was observed with placebo. In the otilimab group, the least-squares mean ratio to baseline in MMP-degraded type I collagen was 0·86-0·91 over weeks 1-8, returning to baseline at week 12; concentrations remained above baseline at all timepoints in the placebo group. There were no observable differences between otilimab and placebo for all other biomarkers. At week 12, least-squares mean change in RAMRIS synovitis score from baseline was -1·3 (standard error [SE] 0·6) in the otilimab group and 0·8 (1·2) with placebo; RAMRIQ synovitis score showed a least-squares mean change from baseline of -1417·0 µl (671·5) in the otilimab group and -912·3 µl (1405·8) with placebo. Compared with placebo, otilimab did not show significant reductions from baseline to week 12 in RAMRIS synovitis, osteitis and bone erosion, or in RAMRIQ synovitis and erosion damage. Adverse events were reported in 11 (39%) of 28 otilimab-treated and four (36%) of 11 placebo-treated patients, most commonly cough in the otilimab group (2 [7%] of 28; not reported in placebo group), and pain in extremity (four [36%] of 11) and rheumatoid arthritis (two [18%] of 11) in the placebo group (not reported in otilimab group). There were no serious adverse events or deaths. INTERPRETATION: Serum concentrations of GM-CSF-otilimab complex indicated that target engagement was achieved with initial weekly dosing, but not sustained with every other week dosing. CCL17 might be a pharmacodynamic biomarker for otilimab activity in future studies. Otilimab was well tolerated and, despite suboptimal exposure, showed some evidence for improved synovitis over 12 weeks in patients with active rheumatoid arthritis. FUNDING: GlaxoSmithKline.

Safety and effectiveness of upadacitinib or adalimumab plus methotrexate in patients with rheumatoid arthritis over 48 weeks with switch to alternate therapy in patients with insufficient response.

BACKGROUND: In SELECT-COMPARE, a randomised double-blind study, upadacitinib 15 mg once daily was superior to placebo or adalimumab on background methotrexate (MTX) for treating rheumatoid arthritis signs and symptoms and inhibited radiographical progression versus placebo at 26 weeks. Here we report 48-week safety and efficacy in patients who continued their original medication or were rescued to the alternative medication for insufficient response. METHODS: Patients on MTX received upadacitinib 15 mg, placebo or adalimumab for 48 weeks. Rescue without washout, from placebo or adalimumab to upadacitinib or upadacitinib to adalimumab occurred if patients had <20% improvement in tender joint count (TJC) or swollen joint count (SJC) (weeks 14/18/22) or Clinical Disease Activity Index (CDAI) >10 (week 26); remaining placebo patients were switched to upadacitinib at week 26. Efficacy was analysed by randomised group (non-responder imputation), as well as separately for rescued patients (as observed). Treatment-emergent adverse events per 100 patient-years were summarised. RESULTS: Consistent with responses through week 26, from weeks 26 to 48, responses by randomised group including low disease activity, clinical remission and improvements in pain and function remained superior for upadacitinib versus adalimumab; radiographical progression remained lower for upadacitinib versus placebo (linear extrapolation). Although both switch groups responded, a higher proportion of patients rescued to upadacitinib from adalimumab achieved CDAI ≤10 at 6 months postswitch versus patients rescued from upadacitinib to adalimumab. Safety at week 48 was comparable to week 26. CONCLUSION: Upadacitinib+MTX demonstrated superior clinical and functional responses versus adalimumab+MTX and maintained inhibition of structural damage versus placebo+MTX through week 48. Patients with an insufficient response to adalimumab or upadacitinib safely achieved clinically meaningful responses after switching to the alternative medication without washout.

Upadacitinib Versus Placebo or Adalimumab in Patients With Rheumatoid Arthritis and an Inadequate Response to Methotrexate: Results of a Phase III, Double-Blind, Randomized Controlled Trial.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the efficacy, including capacity for inhibition of radiographic progression, and safety of upadacitinib, a JAK1-selective inhibitor, as compared to placebo or adalimumab in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) who have experienced an inadequate response to methotrexate (MTX). METHODS: In total, 1,629 RA patients with an inadequate response to MTX were randomized (2:2:1) to receive upadacitinib (15 mg once daily), placebo, or adalimumab (40 mg every other week) while continuing to take a stable background dose of MTX. The primary end points were achievement of an American College of Rheumatology 20% (ACR20) improvement response and a Disease Activity Score in 28 joints using C-reactive protein level (DAS28-CRP) of <2.6 in the upadacitinib group compared to the placebo group at week 12; inhibition of radiographic progression was evaluated at week 26. The study was also designed and powered to test for the noninferiority and superiority of upadacitinib compared to adalimumab, as measured both clinically and functionally. RESULTS: At week 12, both primary end points were met in patients receiving upadacitinib compared to those receiving placebo (P ≤ 0.001). An ACR20 improvement response was achieved by 71% of patients in the upadacitinib group compared to 36% in the placebo group, and a DAS28-CRP score of <2.6 was observed in 29% of patients receiving upadacitinib compared to 6% of patients receiving placebo. Upadacitinib was superior to adalimumab based on the ACR50 response rate, achievement of a DAS28-CRP score of ≤3.2, change in pain severity score, and change in the Health Assessment Questionnaire disability index. At week 26, more patients receiving upadacitinib than those receiving placebo or adalimumab achieved low disease activity or remission (P ≤ 0.001). Radiographic progression was significantly inhibited in patients receiving upadacitinib and was observed in fewer upadacitinib-treated patients than placebo-treated patients (P ≤ 0.001). Up to week 26, adverse events (AEs), including serious infections, were comparable between the upadacitinib and adalimumab groups. The proportions of patients with serious AEs and AEs leading to discontinuation were highest in the adalimumab group; the proportions of patients with herpes zoster and those with creatine phosphokinase (CPK) elevations were highest in the upadacitinib group. Three malignancies, 5 major adverse cardiovascular events, and 4 deaths were reported among the groups, but none occurred in patients receiving upadacitinib. Six venous thromboembolic events were reported (1 in the placebo group, 2 in the upadacitinib group, and 3 in the adalimumab group). CONCLUSION: Upadacitinib was superior to placebo and adalimumab for improving signs, symptoms, and physical function in RA patients who were receiving background MTX. In addition, radiographic progression was significantly inhibited by upadacitinib as compared to placebo. The overall safety profile of upadacitinib was generally similar to that of adalimumab, except for higher rates of herpes zoster and CPK elevations in patients receiving upadacitinib.

Pexidartinib versus placebo for advanced tenosynovial giant cell tumour (ENLIVEN): a randomised phase 3 trial.

BACKGROUND: Tenosynovial giant cell tumour (TGCT), a rare, locally aggressive neoplasm, overexpresses colony-stimulating factor 1 (CSF1). Surgery is standard with no approved systemic therapy. We aimed to evaluate pexidartinib, a CSF1 receptor inhibitor, in patients with TGCT to provide them with a viable systemic treatment option, especially in cases that are not amenable to surgical resection. METHODS: This phase 3 randomised trial had two parts. Part one was a double-blind study in which patients with symptomatic, advanced TGCT for whom surgery was not recommended were randomly assigned via an integrated web response system (1:1) to the pexidartinib or placebo group. Individuals in the pexidartinib group received a loading dose of 1000 mg pexidartinib per day orally (400 mg morning; 600 mg evening) for the first 2 weeks, followed by 800 mg per day (400 mg twice a day) for 22 weeks. Part two was an open-label study of pexidartinib for all patients. The primary endpoint, assessed in all intention-to-treat patients, was overall response at week 25, and was centrally reviewed by RECIST, version 1.1. Safety was analysed in all patients who received at least one dose of the study drug. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT02371369. FINDINGS: Between May 11, 2015, and Sept 30, 2016, of 174 patients assessed for eligibility, 120 patients were randomly assigned to, and received, pexidartinib (n=61) or placebo (n=59). There were 11 dropouts in the placebo group and nine in the pexidartinib group. Emergence of mixed or cholestatic hepatotoxicity caused the data monitoring committee to stop enrolment six patients short of target. The proportion of patients who achieved overall response was higher for pexidartinib than placebo at week 25 by RECIST (24 [39%] of 61 vs none of 59; absolute difference 39% [95% CI 27-53]; p<0·0001). Serious adverse events occurred in eight (13%) of 61 patients in the pexidartinib group and one (2%) of 59 patients in the placebo group. Hair colour changes (67%), fatigue (54%), aspartate aminotransferase increase (39%), nausea (38%), alanine aminotransferase increase (28%), and dysgeusia (25%) were the most frequent pexidartinib-associated adverse events. Three patients given pexidartinib had aminotransferase elevations three or more times the upper limit of normal with total bilirubin and alkaline phosphatase two or more times the upper limit of normal indicative of mixed or cholestatic hepatotoxicity, one lasting 7 months and confirmed by biopsy. INTERPRETATION: Pexidartinib is the first systemic therapy to show a robust tumour response in TGCT with improved patient symptoms and functional outcomes; mixed or cholestatic hepatotoxicity is an identified risk. Pexidartinib could be considered as a potential treatment for TGCT associated with severe morbidity or functional limitations in cases not amenable to improvement with surgery. FUNDING: Daiichi Sankyo.

Safety and Efficacy of Repeat Administration of Triamcinolone Acetonide Extended-release in Osteoarthritis of the Knee: A Phase 3b, Open-label Study.

INTRODUCTION: The aim of this work is to assess the safety and efficacy of repeat administration of triamcinolone acetonide extended-release (TA-ER) in patients with symptomatic knee osteoarthritis (OA), including those with advanced radiographic severity. METHODS: In this phase 3b, single-arm, open-label study, patients aged ≥ 40 years received the first intra-articular TA-ER injection on day 1. Patients received the second injection timed to the response to the first injection (at either week 12, 16, 20, or 24). Patients who received two injections were evaluated every 4 weeks for 52 weeks. Safety was evaluated via treatment-emergent adverse events and any change at 52 weeks in index-knee radiographs (chondrolysis, osteonecrosis, insufficiency fractures, subchondral bone changes). Exploratory efficacy endpoints included Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC)-A (pain), -B (stiffness), -C (function), and Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score-Quality of Life (KOOS-QoL) after each injection. Initiative in Methods, Measurements and Pain Assessment in Clinical Trials (IMMPACT) criteria were used to determine moderate and substantial treatment response. RESULTS: A total of 208 patients were enrolled and received the first injection of TA-ER; 179 (86.1%) received the second injection (median time to second injection: 16.6 weeks). Both injections were well tolerated, with no unexpected adverse events or significant radiographic changes at week 52. The magnitude and duration of clinical benefit after the first and second injections were similar, and most patients reported a substantial (≥ 50%) analgesic response after both doses. CONCLUSIONS: Repeat administration of TA-ER using a flexible dosing schedule timed to patient response was well tolerated, with no radiographic evidence of cartilage impact. Both injections resulted in similar improvements in OA symptoms across a broad spectrum of disease severity reflective of that seen in clinical practice. TRIAL REGISTRATION INFORMATION: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT03046446. FUNDING: Flexion Therapeutics, Inc. Plain language summary available for this article.

Development and Validation of an OMERACT MRI Whole-Body Score for Inflammation in Peripheral Joints and Entheses in Inflammatory Arthritis (MRI-WIPE).

OBJECTIVE: To develop a whole-body magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) scoring system for peripheral arthritis and enthesitis. METHODS: After consensus on definitions/locations of MRI pathologies, 4 multireader exercises were performed. Eighty-three joints were scored 0-3 separately for synovitis and osteitis, and 33 entheses 0-3 separately for soft tissue inflammation and osteitis. RESULTS: In the last exercise, reliability was moderate-good for musculoskeletal radiologists and rheumatologists with previously demonstrated good scoring proficiency. Median pairwise single-measure/average-measure ICC were 0.67/0.80 for status scores and 0.69/0.82 for change scores; κ ranged 0.35-0.77. CONCLUSION: Whole-body MRI scoring of peripheral arthritis and enthesitis is reliable, which encourages further testing and refinement in clinical trials.

MRI and Dose Selection in a Phase II Trial of Baricitinib with Conventional Synthetic Disease-modifying Antirheumatic Drugs in Rheumatoid Arthritis.

OBJECTIVE: Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) was used in a phase IIb study of baricitinib in patients with RA to support dose selection for the phase III program. METHODS: Three hundred one patients with active RA who were taking stable methotrexate were randomized 2:1:1:1:1 to placebo or once-daily baricitinib (1, 2, 4, or 8 mg) for up to 24 weeks. One hundred fifty-four patients with definitive radiographic erosion had MRI of the hand/wrist at baseline and at weeks 12 and 24. Two expert radiologists, blinded to treatment and visit order, scored images for synovitis, osteitis, bone erosion, and cartilage loss. Combined inflammation (osteitis + 3× synovitis score) and total joint damage (erosion + 2.5× cartilage loss score) scores were calculated. Treatment groups were compared using ANCOVA adjusting for baseline scores. RESULTS: Mean changes from baseline to Week 12 for synovitis were -0.10, -1.50, and -1.60 for patients treated with placebo, baricitinib 4 mg, and baricitinib 8 mg, respectively (p = 0.003 vs placebo for baricitinib 4 and 8 mg). Mean changes for osteitis were 0.00, -3.20, and -2.10 (p = 0.001 vs placebo for baricitinib 4 mg and p = 0.037 for 8 mg), respectively. Mean changes for bone erosion were 0.90, 0.10, and 0.40 (p = 0.089 for 4 mg and p = 0.275 for 8 mg), respectively, in these treatment groups. CONCLUSION: MRI findings in this subgroup of patients suggest suppression of synovitis, osteitis, and combined inflammation by baricitinib 4 and 8 mg. This corroborates previously demonstrated clinical efficacy of baricitinib and increases confidence that baricitinib 4 mg could reduce the radiographic progression in phase III studies. [Clinical trial registration number (www.ClinicalTrials.gov): NCT01185353].

A Phase II Trial of Lutikizumab, an Anti-Interleukin-1α/ß Dual Variable Domain Immunoglobulin, in Knee Osteoarthritis Patients With Synovitis.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the efficacy and safety of the anti-interleukin-1α/ß (anti-IL-1α/ß) dual variable domain immunoglobulin lutikizumab (ABT-981) in patients with knee osteoarthritis (OA) and evidence of synovitis. METHODS: Patients (n = 350; 347 analyzed) with Kellgren/Lawrence grade 2-3 knee OA and synovitis (determined by magnetic resonance imaging [MRI] or ultrasound) were randomized to receive placebo or lutikizumab 25, 100, or 200 mg subcutaneously every 2 weeks for 50 weeks. The coprimary end points were change from baseline in Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) pain score at week 16 and change from baseline in MRI-assessed synovitis at week 26. RESULTS: The WOMAC pain score at week 16 had improved significantly versus placebo with lutikizumab 100 mg (P = 0.050) but not with the 25 mg or 200 mg doses. Beyond week 16, the WOMAC pain score was reduced in all groups but was not significantly different between lutikizumab-treated and placebo-treated patients. Changes from baseline in MRI-assessed synovitis at week 26 and other key symptom- and most structure-related end points at weeks 26 and 52 were not significantly different between the lutikizumab and placebo groups. Injection site reactions, neutropenia, and discontinuations due to neutropenia were more frequent with lutikizumab versus placebo. Reductions in neutrophil and high-sensitivity C-reactive protein levels plateaued with lutikizumab 100 mg, with further reductions not observed with the 200 mg dose. Immunogenic response to lutikizumab did not meaningfully affect systemic lutikizumab concentrations. CONCLUSION: The limited improvement in the WOMAC pain score and the lack of synovitis improvement with lutikizumab, together with published results from trials of other IL-1 inhibitors, suggest that IL-1 inhibition is not an effective analgesic/antiinflammatory therapy in most patients with knee OA and associated synovitis.

Phase IIa, placebo-controlled, randomised study of lutikizumab, an anti-interleukin-1α and anti-interleukin-1ß dual variable domain immunoglobulin, in patients with erosive hand osteoarthritis.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the efficacy, safety, pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of the anti-interleukin (IL)-1α/ß dual variable domain immunoglobulin lutikizumab (ABT-981) in erosive hand osteoarthritis (HOA). METHODS: Patients with ≥1 erosive and ≥3 tender and/or swollen hand joints were randomised to placebo or lutikizumab 200 mg subcutaneously every 2 weeks for 24 weeks. The primary endpoint was change in Australian/Canadian Osteoarthritis Hand Index (AUSCAN) pain subdomain score from baseline to 16 weeks. At baseline and week 26, subjects had bilateral hand radiographs and MRI of the hand with the greatest number of baseline tender and/or swollen joints. Continuous endpoints were assessed using analysis of covariance models, with treatment and country as main factors and baseline measurements as covariates. RESULTS: Of 132 randomised subjects, 1 received no study drug and 110 completed the study (placebo, 61/67 (91%); lutikizumab, 49/64 (77%)). AUSCAN pain was not different among subjects treated with lutikizumab versus placebo at week 16 (least squares mean difference, 1.5 (95% CI -1.9 to 5.0)). Other clinical and imaging endpoints were not different between lutikizumab and placebo. Lutikizumab significantly decreased serum high-sensitivity C reactive protein levels, IL-1α and IL-1ß levels, and blood neutrophils. Lutikizumab pharmacokinetics were consistent with phase I studies and not affected by antidrug antibodies. Injection site reactions and neutropaenia were more common in the lutikizumab group; discontinuations because of adverse events occurred more frequently with lutikizumab (4/64) versus placebo (1/67). CONCLUSION: Despite adequate blockade of IL-1, lutikizumab did not improve pain or imaging outcomes in erosive HOA compared with placebo.