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.

The prevalence and impact of polypharmacy in rheumatology.

Polypharmacy is increasingly common in rheumatology due to the complex nature of managing chronic autoimmune diseases. To date there has been limited research into the impact of polypharmacy on rheumatology patients. In this article we reviewed the literature to characterize the prevalence of polypharmacy and its effect on patients. In addition, we have highlighted some key drug-drug interactions to consider involving DMARDs as well as complementary and alternative medicines. There is emerging evidence demonstrating that polypharmacy contributes to adverse outcomes and alters treatment response. This association is best described in RA and is less clear in other patient cohorts. It is also unclear whether polypharmacy is directly harmful or just a surrogate marker for other factors affecting outcomes. Rheumatologists should be aware of the risk of polypharmacy as well as specific drug-drug interactions that can occur in managing chronic autoimmune disease.

Comparative Effectiveness, Time to Discontinuation, and Patient-Reported Outcomes with Baricitinib in Rheumatoid Arthritis: 2-Year Data from the Multinational, Prospective Observational RA-BE-REAL Study in European Patients.

INTRODUCTION: RA-BE-REAL is a 3-year, multinational, prospective, observational study of adult patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) evaluating time to discontinuation of initial RA treatment along with patient baseline characteristics. This study's primary objective was to assess the time to discontinuation of initial baricitinib, any other targeted synthetic disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drug (tsDMARD), or any biologic disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drug (bDMARD) treatment for all causes (excluding sustained clinical response) over 24 months in a European population. METHODS: Patients initiated treatment with baricitinib (cohort A) or any bDMARD or tsDMARD (cohort B) for the first time. This study's primary objective was to assess the time to discontinuation of initial baricitinib, any other targeted synthetic disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drug (tsDMARD), or any biologic disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drug (bDMARD) treatment for all causes (excluding sustained clinical response) over 24 months in a European population. Comparative effectiveness analyses, over 24 months, included time to treatment discontinuation for all causes (excluding sustained clinical response), percentage of patients achieving Clinical Disease Activity Index (CDAI) remission or low disease activity (LDA), as well as mean changes from baseline for CDAI, pain visual analogue scale, and the Health Assessment Questionnaire-Disability Index (HAQ-DI). For this European subpopulation, comparative analyses were performed using a frequentist model averaging (FMA) framework based on a data-driven machine learning causal inference approach to compare time to discontinuation, effectiveness, rates of remission or LDA, and patient-reported outcomes over 24 months comparing baricitinib with TNFi, as well as non-TNFi and tsDMARD grouped as other mechanism of action (OMA) drugs. RESULTS: In the European sample of RA-BE-REAL, patients with RA treated with baricitinib experienced fewer discontinuations in comparison to those treated with tumour necrosis factor inhibitors or OMA. Overall, patients naïve to b/tsDMARDs achieved a higher rate of LDA and remission compared with experienced patients. A significantly greater proportion of patients treated with baricitinib achieved LDA compared with b/tsDMARDs. CONCLUSION: This real-world data can better inform clinicians about baricitinib effectiveness and drug survival when prescribing treatment for patients with RA across different subpopulations.

Clinical and Economic Benefit of Advanced Therapies for the Treatment of Active Ankylosing Spondylitis.

INTRODUCTION: Recent changes to treatment guidelines for ankylosing spondylitis (AS) have listed first-line advanced therapies as tumor necrosis factor (TNF), interleukin (IL)-17, and Janus kinase (JAK) inhibitors. This study sought to assess the comparative clinical and economic benefit of advanced therapies approved for AS. METHODS: A systematic literature review was conducted to identify randomized clinical trials for JAK inhibitors (upadacitinib [UPA], tofacitinib [TOF]), anti-IL-17 therapies (secukinumab [SEC], ixekizumab [IXE]), and TNF inhibitors (adalimumab [ADA], etanercept [ETN], golimumab [GOL]) used for the treatment of active AS. Clinical efficacy was evaluated by Assessment of Spondyloarthritis International Society 40 (ASAS40) criteria and treatment discontinuation due to adverse events (AEs) was used to generate response rates synthesized via a Bayesian network meta-analysis. Number needed to treat (NNT) was calculated as the reciprocal of incremental response rate of each treatment versus placebo. Cost per ASAS40 responder (CPR) was calculated as the 12-week treatment costs divided by ASAS40 response rates. Data were stratified by biologic treatment status (i.e., biologic naïve [bio-naïve] or inadequate response or intolerance to biologics [bio-IR]) for efficacy and CPR analyses. RESULTS: Among bio-naïve patients, the response rate for ASAS40 was 53.6% for UPA-treated patients, whereas most other treatments had response rates between 41% and 49%. NNTs were lowest for UPA-treated patients at 2.8 (other therapies 3.2-4.8). Estimated CPR among UPA-treated patients was lowest (UPA $39.5k vs others $44.2k-102.5k). Efficacy and CPR trends were similar among bio-IR and TNF-IR patients. Among bio-naïve and bio-IR patients, the rate of AEs leading to discontinuation was lowest among UPA and SEC-treated patients (0.0, others 0.6-3.7%). CONCLUSIONS: Relative to other treatments assessed in this study, UPA demonstrated numerically greater clinical and economic benefit for the treatment of AS. Head-to-head or real-world comparisons of these therapies are warranted and may inform clinical decision-making.

What is new in pharmacological treatment for osteoarthritis?

Osteoarthritis (OA) is a degenerative joint disease in which structural changes of hyaline articular cartilage, subchondral bone, ligaments, capsule, synovium, muscles, and periarticular changes are involved. The knee is the most commonly affected joint, followed by the hand, hip, spine, and feet. Different pathological mechanisms are at play in each of these various involvement sites. Although systemic inflammation is more prominent in hand OA, knee and hip OA have been associated with excessive joint load and injury. As OA has varied phenotypes and the primarily affected tissues differ, treatment options must be tailored accordingly. In recent years, ongoing efforts have been made to develop disease-modifying options that halt or slow disease progression. Many are still in clinical trials, and as insights into the pathogenesis of OA evolve, novel therapeutic strategies will be developed. In this chapter, we provide an overview of the novel and emerging strategies in the management of OA.

Efficacy and Safety of the TYK2/JAK1 Inhibitor Brepocitinib for Active Psoriatic Arthritis: A Phase IIb Randomized Controlled Trial.

OBJECTIVE: Brepocitinib is a TYK2/JAK1 inhibitor in development for the treatment of several immunologic diseases. The efficacy and safety of oral brepocitinib were assessed in participants with moderately-to-severely active psoriatic arthritis (PsA) for up to 52 weeks. METHODS: In this placebo-controlled, dose-ranging, phase IIb study, participants were randomized to receive 10 mg, 30 mg, or 60 mg of brepocitinib once daily or placebo, advancing to 30 mg or 60 mg of brepocitinib once daily at week 16. The primary endpoint was the response rate according to the American College of Rheumatology criteria for 20% improvement (ACR20) in disease activity at week 16. Secondary endpoints included response rates according to the ACR50/ACR70 response criteria, 75% and 90% improvement in the Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI75/PASI90) score, and minimal disease activity (MDA) at weeks 16 and 52. Adverse events were monitored throughout the study. RESULTS: Overall, 218 participants were randomized and treated. At week 16, the brepocitinib 30 mg and 60 mg once daily groups had significantly greater ACR20 response rates (66.7% [P = 0.0197] and 74.6% [P = 0.0006], respectively), versus the placebo group (43.3%), and significantly higher ACR50/ACR70, PASI75/PASI90, and MDA response rates. Response rates were maintained or improved through week 52. Adverse events were mostly mild/moderate; serious adverse events (15) in 12 participants (5.5%) included infections in 6 participants (2.8%) in the brepocitinib 30 mg and 60 mg once daily groups. No major adverse cardiovascular events or deaths occurred. CONCLUSION: Treatment with brepocitinib at dosages of 30 mg and 60 mg once daily was superior to placebo at reducing signs and symptoms of PsA. Brepocitinib was generally well tolerated throughout the 52-week study, with a safety profile consistent with those found in other brepocitinib clinical trials.

Efficacy and safety of upadacitinib in patients with active psoriatic arthritis and axial involvement: results from two phase 3 studies.

BACKGROUND: The objective of this post-hoc analysis was to assess the efficacy and safety of upadacitinib in psoriatic arthritis (PsA) patients with axial involvement. METHODS: Post-hoc analysis of SELECT-PsA 1 and SELECT-PsA 2 in patients randomized to upadacitinib 15 mg (UPA15), placebo (switched to UPA15 at week 24), or adalimumab 40 mg (ADA; SELECT-PsA 1 only). Axial involvement was determined by investigator judgement (yes or no; based on the totality of available clinical information, such as duration and characteristics of back pain, age of onset, and previous lab investigations and imaging, if available) alone, or investigator judgement and patient-reported outcome (PRO)-based criteria (Bath Ankylosing Spondylitis Disease Activity Index [BASDAI] ≥ 4 and BASDAI Q2 ≥ 4). Efficacy outcomes that describe axial disease activity, including BASDAI endpoints, such as change from baseline in the overall BASDAI score or proportion of patients achieving BASDAI50 (≥ 50% improvement from baseline), as well as Ankylosing Spondylitis Disease Activity Score (ASDAS) endpoints, such as mean change from baseline in overall ASDAS or proportion of patients achieving ASDAS inactive disease or low disease activity, were evaluated at weeks 12, 24, and 56, with nominal P-values shown. Treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) are summarized through week 56. RESULTS: 30.9% of patients in SELECT-PsA 1 and 35.7% in SELECT-PsA 2 had axial involvement by investigator judgement alone; 22.6% (SELECT-PsA 1) and 28.6% (SELECT-PsA 2) had axial involvement by investigator judgement and PRO-based criteria. Greater proportions of patients achieved BASDAI50 with UPA15 versus placebo using either criterion, and versus ADA using investigator judgement alone, at week 24 in SELECT-PsA 1 (investigator alone: UPA15, 59.0%, placebo, 26.9%, P < 0.0001, ADA, 44.1%, P = 0.015; investigator and PRO-based: UPA15, 60.4%, placebo, 29.3%, P < 0.0001, ADA, 47.1%, P = 0.074), with comparable findings in SELECT-PsA 2. Similar results were observed with UPA15 for additional BASDAI and ASDAS endpoints at weeks 12 and 24, with improvements maintained at week 56. Rates of TEAEs were generally similar across sub-groups irrespective of axial involvement status. CONCLUSIONS: PsA patients with axial involvement determined by predefined criteria showed greater BASDAI and ASDAS responses with UPA15 versus placebo, and numerically similar/greater responses versus ADA. Safety results were generally comparable between patients with or without axial involvement. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov: SELECT-PsA 1, NCT03104400; SELECT-PsA 2, NCT0310437.

Effect of Upadacitinib on Disease Activity, Pain, Fatigue, Function, Health-Related Quality of Life and Work Productivity for Biologic Refractory Ankylosing Spondylitis.

INTRODUCTION: Patients with ankylosing spondylitis (AS) have significant unmet treatment needs, despite advancements in biologic therapies. This study evaluated the impact of upadacitinib on clinically meaningful improvement in patient-reported outcomes (PROs) assessing disease activity, pain, fatigue, function, health-related quality of life (HRQoL), and work productivity in patients with AS with inadequate responses or intolerance to biologic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (bDMARD-IR). METHODS: Patients enrolled in the phase 3 SELECT-AXIS 2 AS bDMARD-IR study received blinded once-daily oral upadacitinib 15 mg or placebo for 14 weeks. The percentage of patients achieving improvements ≥ minimum clinically important differences (MCID) at week 14 were compared between treatment groups for disease activity (Bath Ankylosing Spondylitis Disease Activity Index, BASDAI), patient global assessment of disease activity (PtGA), total and nocturnal back pain, fatigue (Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy-Fatigue, FACIT-F), physical function (Bath Ankylosing Spondylitis Functional Index, BASFI), HRQoL (Assessment of SpondyloArthritis international Society Health Index [ASAS HI], Ankylosing Spondylitis Quality of Life [ASQoL], Short form-36 [SF-36] physical [PCS] and mental [MCS] component summary scores), and work productivity (Work Productivity and Activity Impairment [WPAI] Questionnaire). Mean changes from baseline through week 14 in fatigue and HRQoL were compared between treatment groups. RESULTS: A total of 420 patients with active AS who were bDMARD-IR were included. A higher proportion of patients reported MCIDs at week 14 across all PROs with upadacitinib compared with placebo (nominal p ≤ 0.05). Greater improvements in mean change from baseline through week 14 were reported with upadacitinib compared with placebo across FACIT-F, HRQoL, and WPAI, with improvements differentiated as early as week 1 for ASAS HI, ASQoL and SF-36 PCS and week 4 for SF-36 MCS. CONCLUSIONS: Upadacitinib 15 mg demonstrated rapid and clinically meaningful improvements in disease activity, pain, FACIT-F, function, HRQoL, and WPAI among bDMARD-IR patients with active AS. TRIAL REGISTRY: Clinical Registration number: NCT04169373, SELECT-AXIS 2.

Efficacy and safety of risankizumab for active psoriatic arthritis: 52-week results from the KEEPsAKE 2 study.

OBJECTIVE: PsA is a chronic inflammatory disease in which the skin and joints are affected. In this follow-up analysis, the 52-week efficacy and safety of risankizumab 150 mg in patients with active PsA who had previous inadequate response/intolerance to one or two biologic therapies (Bio-IR) or one or more conventional synthetic DMARDs (csDMARD-IR) were evaluated. METHODS: In the ongoing, phase 3, KEEPsAKE 2 trial, patients with active PsA were randomized 1:1 to receive subcutaneous risankizumab 150 mg or placebo at weeks 0, 4 and 16 (period 1). At week 24 (period 2), patients who received placebo were switched to risankizumab, and all patients received risankizumab 150 mg every 12 weeks from weeks 28 to 208. RESULTS: At week 24, 51.3% of risankizumab-treated patients (n = 224) achieved ≥20% improvement in ACR criteria (ACR 20) vs 26.5% of placebo-treated patients (n = 220; P < 0.001). At week 52, 58.5% of patients randomized to receive continuous risankizumab achieved ACR20, and 55.7% of patients who switched from placebo to risankizumab at week 24 achieved ACR20. Similar trends were observed for other efficacy measures. Rates of serious treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) and TEAEs leading to discontinuation remained stable through week 52, and no deaths were reported. CONCLUSION: Risankizumab was well tolerated and improved symptoms of PsA in Bio-IR/csDMARD-IR patients, with a consistent long-term safety profile from weeks 24 to 52. TRIAL REGISTRATION: United States National Library of Medicine clinical trials database www.clinicaltrials.gov; KEEPsAKE 2; NCT03671148.

Emerging injectable therapies for osteoarthritis.

Osteoarthritis (OA) affects more than 240 million people worldwide. In 2016, the Osteoarthritis Research Society International submitted a report to the United States Food and Drug Administration highlighting OA as a 'serious' disease, and appealed for the urgent development and review of new therapies to address a significant unmet need. Despite this, international guidelines for the treatment of OA have been largely unchanged for over a decade. There is now an updated understanding that OA is more than simply a non-inflammatory 'wear-and-tear' process involving articular cartilage. Based on this, potential emerging therapies are being developed that target novel inflammatory, pain, and regeneration pathways. Drugs targeting the latter are being lauded as 'Disease-Modifying Osteoarthritis Drugs' - a concept which has so far proved elusive in OA research. While this review does not recommend a change in current practice, it should prompt readers to rethink the OA treatment paradigm. The global pandemic has added another layer of consideration when managing patients with OA. At a time when there is more strain on hospital systems, there is a need to expand our pharmacological armamentarium in order to manage OA without elective surgery and hospital admission.

Upadacitinib in active ankylosing spondylitis: results of the 2-year, double-blind, placebo-controlled SELECT-AXIS 1 study and open-label extension.

INTRODUCTION: Long-term safety and efficacy of upadacitinib in patients with active ankylosing spondylitis (AS) has not been previously reported. METHODS: In SELECT-AXIS 1, patients receiving placebo were switched to upadacitinib 15 mg once daily at week 14 while patients initially randomised to upadacitinib continued their regimen through week 104. Efficacy was assessed using as-observed (AO) and non-responder imputation (NRI). RESULTS: Of 187 patients randomised, 144 patients (77%) completed week 104. Among patients receiving continuous upadacitinib, 85.9% (AO) and 65.6% (NRI) achieved Assessment of SpondyloArthritis international Society 40 response (ASAS40) at week 104. Similar magnitude of ASAS40 responses were observed among patients who switched from placebo to upadacitinib (88.7% and 63.8%, respectively). The mean change from baseline to week 104 in Spondyloarthritis Research Consortium of Canada MRI spine and sacroiliac joint inflammation scores were -7.3 and -5.3, respectively, in the continuous upadacitinib group and -7.9 and -4.9 in the placebo-to-upadacitinib switch group. The mean (95% CI) change from baseline to week 104 in the modified Stoke Ankylosing Spondylitis Spine Score was 0.7 (0.3, 1.1) in the total group. Adverse event rate was 242.7/100 patient-years. No serious infections, adjudicated major adverse cardiovascular events, lymphoma, non-melanoma skin cancer, or gastrointestinal perforations were observed. CONCLUSIONS: Upadacitinib 15 mg once daily showed sustained and consistent efficacy over 2 years for ASAS40 and other clinically relevant endpoints. A low rate of radiographic progression was observed and no new safety findings were observed.

Improved patient-reported outcomes in patients with psoriatic arthritis treated with risankizumab: analysis of the Phase 3 trial KEEPsAKE 2.

OBJECTIVES: Determine the impact of 24-week risankizumab (RZB) versus placebo (PBO) on patient-reported outcomes (PROs) in patients with psoriatic arthritis (PsA) and inadequate response to one or two biologics (Bio-IR) and/or ≥1 conventional synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drug (csDMARD-IR). METHODS: Patients in the Phase 3 trial, KEEPsAKE 2, were randomised (1:1) to RZB 150 mg or PBO by subcutaneous injection. PROs assessed: 36-Item Short-Form Health Survey (SF-36), Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy-Fatigue (FACIT-Fatigue), Patient's Assessment of Pain by visual analogue scale (VAS), Patient's global assessment of disease activity (PtGA), EuroQoL-5 Dimension-5 Level (EQ-5D-5L) and Work Productivity and Activity Impairment-PsA (WPAI-PsA). Least squares mean change from baseline at week 24 was compared between RZB versus PBO by mixed-effects repeated regression modelling. RESULTS: At week 24, RZB versus PBO treatment resulted in significant differences (95% CIs) in mean change from baseline in ranked secondary endpoints SF-36 physical component summary score (3.9 (2.4 to 5.3); p<0.001) and FACIT-Fatigue (2.2 (0.6 to 3.9); p=0.009) and improvements in pain (-8.1 (-12.8 to -3.5)), PtGA (-8.8 (-13.5 to -4.2)) and EQ-5D-5L index (0.08 (0.04 to 0.11)) and VAS (5.9 (1.9 to 9.8)) (all nominal p<0.01). More RZB-treated versus PBO-treated patients reported improvements from baseline at week 24 in 7 of 8 SF-36 subdomains (nominal p<0.05). At week 24, more RZB-treated versus PBO-treated patients reported improvements in 3 of 4 WPAI-PsA domains (nominal p≤0.01). CONCLUSION: Overall, RBZ treatment resulted in improvements in pain, fatigue, health-related quality of life and ability to perform work in Bio-IR and/or csDMARD-IR patients with PsA. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT03671148.

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).

Safety and Efficacy of Upadacitinib in Patients With Active Ankylosing Spondylitis and an Inadequate Response to Nonsteroidal Antiinflammatory Drug Therapy: One-Year Results of a Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled Study and Open-Label Extension.

OBJECTIVE: To report the efficacy and safety of upadacitinib through 1 year in patients with ankylosing spondylitis (AS). METHODS: In the SELECT-AXIS 1 study, adults with active AS and an inadequate response to nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drugs were randomized to receive upadacitinib 15 mg once daily or placebo. At week 14, patients who had been randomized to receive placebo were switched to upadacitinib, and all patients continued in the open-label extension and received upadacitinib up to week 104; interim data up to week 64 are reported herein. RESULTS: Of 187 patients, 178 completed week 14 on study drug and entered the open-label extension. Similar proportions of patients in either group (continuous upadacitinib or placebo-to-upadacitinib) achieved Assessment of SpondyloArthritis international Society 40% response (ASAS40) or Ankylosing Spondylitis Disease Activity Score (ASDAS) showing low disease activity at week 64: ≥70% of patients achieved these end points based on nonresponder imputation (NRI) and ≥81% based on as-observed analyses. Furthermore, ≥34% (NRI) and ≥39% (as-observed analysis) achieved ASDAS showing inactive disease or ASAS showing partial remission at week 64. Mean changes from baseline (week 0) to week 64 in pain, function, and inflammation showed consistent improvement or sustained maintenance through the study. Among 182 patients receiving upadacitinib (237.6 patient-years), 618 adverse events (260.1 per 100 patient-years) were reported. No serious infections, major adverse cardiovascular events, venous thromboembolic events, gastrointestinal perforation, or deaths were reported. CONCLUSION: Upadacitinib 15 mg once daily showed sustained and consistent efficacy over 1 year. Patients who switched from placebo to upadacitinib at week 14 showed similar efficacy versus those who received continuous upadacitinib.

Value of Remission in Patients with Rheumatoid Arthritis: A Targeted Review.

The treat-to-target strategy, which defines clinical remission as the primary therapeutic goal for rheumatoid arthritis (RA), is a widely recommended treatment approach in clinical guidelines. Achieving remission has been associated with improved clinical outcomes, quality of life, and productivity. These benefits are likely to translate to reduced economic burden in terms of lower healthcare costs and resource utilization. As such, a literature review was conducted to better understand the economic value of remission. Despite the large heterogeneity found in RA-related economic outcomes across studies, patients in remission consistently had lower direct medical and indirect costs, less healthcare resource utilization, and greater productivity compared to those without remission. Remission was associated with 19-52% savings in direct medical costs and 37-75% savings in indirect costs. The economic value of remission should thus be considered in economic analyses of RA therapies to inform treatment and reimbursement decisions.

Efficacy and safety of risankizumab for active psoriatic arthritis: 24-week results from the randomised, double-blind, phase 3 KEEPsAKE 2 trial.

OBJECTIVES: Risankizumab is an interleukin-23 inhibitor under study for the treatment of patients with psoriatic arthritis (PsA). The phase 3 KEEPsAKE 2 trial investigated the efficacy and safety of risankizumab versus placebo in patients with active PsA who had previous inadequate response or intolerance to ≤2 biological therapies (Bio-IR) and/or ≥1 conventional synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drug (csDMARD-IR). Results through week 24 are reported here. METHODS: Adults with PsA who were Bio-IR and/or csDMARD-IR were randomised to receive subcutaneously administered risankizumab 150 mg or placebo at weeks 0, 4 and 16 during a 24-week, double-blind treatment period. The primary endpoint was the proportion of patients who achieved ≥20% improvement in American College of Rheumatology score (ACR20) at week 24. Secondary endpoints assessed key domains of PsA and patient-reported outcomes. RESULTS: A total of 444 patients (median age 53 years, range 23-84 years) were randomised to risankizumab (n=224) or placebo (n=220); 206 patients (46.5%) were Bio-IR. At week 24, a significantly greater proportion of patients receiving risankizumab achieved the primary endpoint of ACR20 (51.3% vs 26.5%, p<0.001) and all secondary endpoints (p<0.05) compared with placebo. Serious adverse events were reported for 4.0% and 5.5% of risankizumab-treated and placebo-treated patients, respectively; serious infections were reported for 0.9% and 2.3%, respectively. CONCLUSION: Treatment with risankizumab resulted in significant improvements versus placebo in key disease outcomes and was well tolerated in patients with PsA who were Bio-IR and/or csDMARD-IR. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT03671148.

Biological Therapies for Rheumatoid Arthritis: An Overview for the Clinician.

Rheumatoid arthritis (RA) is a disease characterised by inflammation of synovial joints and poses a substantial healthcare burden on both the individual and society. One of the most significant shifts in the RA therapeutic landscape has occurred with the introduction of biological disease modifying anti-rheumatic drugs (bDMARDs). There are five classes of bDMARDs currently available, each with a different molecular target and subtle differences in their efficacy and safety profile. This review also describes the "real-world" use of bDMARDs and how they fit into the overall RA treatment guidelines.

Upadacitinib improves patient-reported outcomes vs placebo or adalimumab in patients with rheumatoid arthritis: results from SELECT-COMPARE.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the impact of upadacitinib vs placebo and adalimumab treatment, on patient-reported outcomes (PROs) in SELECT-COMPARE in an active RA population with inadequate responses to MTX (MTX-IR). METHODS: PROs in patients receiving upadacitinib (15 mg QD), placebo, or adalimumab (40 mg EOW) while on background MTX were evaluated over 48 weeks. PROs included Patient Global Assessment of Disease Activity (PtGA) and pain by visual analogue scale (VAS), the HAQ Disability Index (HAQ-DI), the 36-Item Short Form Survey (SF-36), morning (AM) stiffness duration and severity, the Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy-Fatigue (FACIT-F), and work instability. Least squares mean (LSM) changes and proportions of patients reporting improvements ≥ minimal clinically important differences (MCIDs) and scores ≥ normative values were evaluated. RESULTS: Upadacitinib and adalimumab resulted in greater LSM changes from baseline vs placebo across all PROs (P < 0.05) at week 12, and pain and AM stiffness severity (P < 0.05) at week 2. More upadacitinib- vs placebo-treated (P < 0.05) and similar percentages of upadacitinib- vs adalimumab-treated patients reported improvements ≥ MCID across all PROs at week 12. Upadacitinib vs adalimumab resulted in greater LSM changes from baseline in PtGA, pain, HAQ-DI, stiffness severity, FACIT-F, and the SF-36 Physical Component Summary (PCS) (all P < 0.05) at week 12. More upadacitinib- vs adalimumab-treated patients reported scores ≥ normative values in HAQ-DI and SF-36 PCS (P < 0.05) at week 12. More upadacitinib- vs adalimumab-treated patients maintained clinically meaningful improvements in PtGA, pain, HAQ-DI, FACIT-F, and AM stiffness through 48 weeks. CONCLUSION: In MTX-IR patients with RA, treatment with upadacitinib resulted in statistically significant and clinically meaningful improvements in PROs equivalent to or greater than with adalimumab. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov, http://clinicaltrials.gov, NCT02629159.