Tofacitinib in juvenile idiopathic arthritis: a double-blind, placebo-controlled, withdrawal phase 3 randomised trial.

BACKGROUND: Tofacitinib is an oral Janus kinase inhibitor. This trial assessed the efficacy and safety of tofacitinib versus placebo in patients with polyarticular course juvenile idiopathic arthritis (JIA). METHODS: This double-blind, withdrawal phase 3 trial enrolled patients with polyarticular course JIA (extended oligoarthritis, rheumatoid factor-positive or rheumatoid factor-negative polyarthritis, or systemic JIA without active systemic features) aged 2 years to younger than 18 years, and was done at 64 centres of the Paediatric Rheumatology International Trials Organisation and Pediatric Rheumatology Collaborative Study Group networks in 14 countries. Patients with psoriatic arthritis or enthesitis-related arthritis were enrolled for exploratory endpoints. During part 1 of the study, patients received oral open-label tofacitinib (weight-based doses; 5 mg twice daily or lower) for 18 weeks. Patients achieving at least JIA/American College of Rheumatology 30 response were randomly assigned (1:1) using an Interactive Response Technology system to continue tofacitinib or switch to placebo in part 2 of the study for 26 weeks. The primary endpoint was JIA flare rate by week 44 in part 2 in patients with polyarticular course JIA; the intention-to-treat principle was applied. Safety was evaluated throughout part 1 and part 2 of the study in all patients who received one dose or more of study medication. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02592434. FINDINGS: Between June 10, 2016, and May 16, 2019, of 225 patients enrolled, 184 (82%) patients had polyarticular course JIA, 20 (9%) had psoriatic arthritis, and 21 (9%) had enthesitis-related arthritis. 147 (65%) of 225 patients received concomitant methotrexate. In part 2, 142 patients with polyarticular course JIA were assigned to tofacitinib (n=72) or placebo (n=70). Flare rate by week 44 was significantly lower with tofacitinib (21 [29%] of 72 patients) than with placebo (37 [53%] of 70 patients; hazard ratio 0·46, 95% CI 0·27-0·79; p=0·0031). In part 2 of the study, adverse events occurred in 68 (77%) of 88 patients receiving tofacitinib and 63 (74%) of 85 in the placebo group. Serious adverse events occurred in one (1%) and two (2%), respectively. In the entire tofacitinib exposure period, 107 (48%) of 225 patients had infections or infestations. There were no deaths during this study. INTERPRETATION: The results of this pivotal trial show that tofacitinib is an effective treatment in patients with polyarticular course JIA. New oral therapies are particularly relevant for children and adolescents, who might prefer to avoid injections. FUNDING: Pfizer.

Relationships between psoriatic arthritis composite measures of disease activity with patient-reported outcomes in phase 3 studies of tofacitinib.

BACKGROUND: In psoriatic arthritis (PsA), further understanding of the relationships between clinical measures and patient-reported outcomes (PROs) is needed. This post hoc analysis evaluated associations between minimal disease activity (MDA) as a continuous outcome (termed ScoreMDA) or Psoriatic Arthritis Disease Activity Score (PASDAS) with selected PROs not included in the composite measures. METHODS: Data from two phase 3 studies of tofacitinib in PsA (OPAL Broaden [NCT01877668; N = 422]; OPAL Beyond [NCT01882439; N = 394]) were included. MDA (binary outcome) was defined as meeting ≥5/7 criteria. For ScoreMDA, each criterion was assigned a value (1 = true; 0 = false; score range, 0-7; scores ≥5 indicated MDA). For PASDAS (score range, 0-10), higher scores indicated worse disease activity. PROs analyzed included Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy-Fatigue (FACIT-F), Patient's Assessment of Arthritis Pain visual analog scale (Pain VAS), and EuroQoL-Five Dimensions-Three Level Health Questionnaire visual analog scale (EQ-5D-3L VAS) and utility index. Relationships were evaluated using repeated measures regression models. RESULTS: Similar, approximately linear relationships were confirmed between PASDAS or ScoreMDA and PROs in both studies. In OPAL Broaden and OPAL Beyond, a one-point difference in PASDAS was associated with clinically relevant differences in PROs, including EQ-5D-3L VAS (- 6.7 mm, - 6.9 mm), Pain VAS (9.9 mm, 10.7 mm), and FACIT-F (- 2.8, - 3.3). A one-point difference in ScoreMDA was associated with clinically relevant differences in PROs, including EQ-5D-3L VAS (5.0 mm, 5.5 mm) and FACIT-F (1.9, 2.7) in OPAL Broaden and OPAL Beyond, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Linear associations between PASDAS or ScoreMDA and PROs provide interpretable and quantifiable metrics between composite clinical measures and PROs, highlighting the importance of these measures in understanding the relevance of treat-to-target goals in PsA. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT01877668 . Registered on June 12, 2013. ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT01882439 . Registered on June 18, 2013.

Development and Content Validation of Pruritus and Symptoms Assessment for Atopic Dermatitis (PSAAD) in Adolescents and Adults with Moderate-to-Severe AD.

INTRODUCTION: Most patient-reported outcome (PRO) instruments that measure atopic dermatitis (AD) symptoms do not have sufficient documented evidence of content validity to satisfy regulatory agency guidance for inclusion in product-labelling claims in the USA or Europe. The objective of this study was to develop a PRO instrument in accordance with regulatory agency guidance to assess daily AD symptoms during the course of therapy and to establish its content validity and psychometric properties. METHODS: The Pruritus and Symptoms Assessment for Atopic Dermatitis (PSAAD) daily diary was developed based on qualitative interviews with US adolescents and adults with mild-to-severe AD. Content validity, test-retest reliability, internal consistency reliability, clinically important difference, clinically important responder, convergent validity, and known-group validity were evaluated using correlational and regression methods from phase 2b data from US adults with moderate-to-severe AD who were treated with abrocitinib. RESULTS: Patient interviews conducted with US adolescents and adults with mild-to-severe AD identified 11 relevant symptoms (itch, dryness, redness, flaking, discolouration, pain, bleeding, cracking, bumps, swelling, and weeping/oozing) for inclusion in the PSAAD instrument. All PSAAD psychometric parameters were acceptable based on phase 2b data from US adults with moderate-to-severe AD. Convergent validity and known-group validity were confirmed by significant correlations between PSAAD and six other PRO measures (r = 0.24-0.91, all p ≤ 0.01) and Dermatology Life Quality Index category (p ≤ 0.0001), respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Evidence supports the PSAAD instrument validity, reliability, responsiveness and definitions of clinically important changes/differences for adults with moderate-to-severe AD.

Tofacitinib as monotherapy following methotrexate withdrawal in patients with psoriatic arthritis previously treated with open-label tofacitinib plus methotrexate: a randomised, placebo-controlled substudy of OPAL Balance.

BACKGROUND: Tofacitinib is an oral Janus kinase inhibitor for the treatment of psoriatic arthritis, rheumatoid arthritis, and ulcerative colitis. This study evaluated the efficacy and safety of tofacitinib 5 mg twice daily monotherapy after methotrexate withdrawal. METHODS: OPAL Balance was an open-label, long-term extension study of tofacitinib in patients with psoriatic arthritis who participated in the OPAL Broaden and OPAL Beyond phase 3 studies. This 12-month, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, methotrexate withdrawal substudy (50 centres, 14 countries) included patients from OPAL Balance who completed tofacitinib treatment for 24 months or more (≥3 months' stable tofacitinib 5 mg twice daily) and were receiving methotrexate (7·5-20 mg/week). Patients were blindly randomised (1:1) using interactive response technology and received open-label tofacitinib 5 mg twice daily with either placebo (tofacitinib 5 mg twice daily plus placebo group) or continued methotrexate (tofacitinib 5 mg twice daily plus methotrexate group). Patients were masked to placebo or methotrexate, with identical capsules used. Coprimary endpoints were changes from substudy baseline in psoriatic arthritis disease activity score (PASDAS) and health assessment questionnaire-disability index (HAQ-DI) at month 6 in all randomised patients with one or more substudy drug dose. Safety was assessed throughout. No specific statistical hypothesis (either superiority or non-inferiority) was tested. The study (OPAL Balance) is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT01976364) and is complete. FINDINGS: Between Oct 30, 2017, and May 20, 2019, 180 patients from OPAL Balance who were eligible for the substudy were randomly assigned to treatment (90 patients received tofacitinib 5 mg twice daily plus placebo and 89 patients assigned to tofacitinib plus methotrexate; one patient was not treated because of randomisation error). At month 6, least squares mean (LSM) changes in PASDAS were 0·23 (SE 0·08) for tofacitinib 5 mg twice daily plus placebo and 0·14 (0·08) for tofacitinib 5 mg twice daily plus methotrexate (treatment difference LSM 0·09 [95% CI -0·13 to 0·31]), and changes in HAQ-DI were 0·04 (0·03) and 0·02 (0·03), respectively (treatment difference 0·03 [-0·05 to 0·10]). Rates of adverse events, discontinuations because of adverse events, adverse events of special interest, and laboratory changes were generally similar between treatment groups, although liver enzyme elevations were more common with tofacitinib 5 mg twice daily plus methotrexate than tofacitinib 5 mg twice daily plus placebo. Flares of worsening symptoms was reported in one (1%) of 90 patients in the tofacitinib 5 mg twice daily plus placebo group (recorded as psoriatic arthropathy). INTERPRETATION: Some patients with psoriatic arthritis who are stable on tofacitinib 5 mg twice daily with background methotrexate might be able to discontinue methotrexate without clinically meaningful changes in disease activity and safety. FUNDING: Pfizer Inc.

Safety and efficacy of tofacitinib up to 48 months in patients with active psoriatic arthritis: final analysis of the OPAL Balance long-term extension study.

BACKGROUND: Tofacitinib is an oral Janus kinase inhibitor for the treatment of psoriatic arthritis. Here we report the final analysis of Oral Psoriatic Arthritis Trial (OPAL) Balance, a 36-month long-term extension study, with a 12-month methotrexate withdrawal substudy, that assessed tofacitinib safety, tolerability, and efficacy in patients with active psoriatic arthritis. METHODS: For this open-label, long-term extension study, which was run at 124 centres in 16 countries, eligible patients had participated in the OPAL Broaden or OPAL Beyond phase 3 studies. Patients could enter OPAL Balance up to 3 months after completing one of the qualifying studies or discontinuing for reasons other than an adverse event related to study drug. In OPAL Balance, patients received open-label tofacitinib 5 mg twice daily, with increases to 10 mg twice daily for inadequate symptom control allowed from month 1, and reductions to 5 mg twice daily allowed thereafter for safety. Specific conventional synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs could be continued concomitantly. The primary endpoints were incidence and severity of adverse events, the incidence of laboratory abnormalities, and changes from baseline in laboratory parameters. Participants who were eligible could enter the randomised, double-blind, methotrexate withdrawal substudy (open-label tofacitinib 5 mg twice daily plus either masked placebo or masked methotrexate); safety data from which are included here (up to month 48). Efficacy was reported up to month 36 (substudy data excluded). The risk period for safety outcomes was the time from treatment exposure to the last dose plus 28 days or date of last observation. OPAL Balance is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT01976364) and is now complete. FINDINGS: Between Feb 17, 2014, and March 28, 2016, 686 patients were enrolled and given tofacitinib 5 mg or 10 mg twice daily (179 patients were treated in the substudy and 453 [66%] of 686 completed the long-term extension study or substudy; mean treatment duration 794·6 days [SD 329·2] in long-term extension study, 879·0 days [396·6] in long-term extension study plus substudy). The mean age of participants in the all tofacitinib group was 48·8 years (SD 11·8) and 370 (54%) of 686 participants were female. Up to month 48, 574 (84%) of 686 participants reported all-cause adverse events, 115 (17%) reported serious adverse events, and 78 (11%) discontinued due to an adverse event. Six patients died, one within the risk period (incidence of 0·1 patients with events [95% CI 0·0-0·3] per 100 person-years). The incidences of adverse events of special interest, reported as number of patients with events per 100 person-years, included: 1·7 (1·2-2·5) for herpes zoster (non-serious and serious); 1·0 (0·6-1·6) for serious infections; 0·4 (0·1-0·8) for opportunistic infections; 0·7 (0·4-1·2) for malignancies (excluding non-melanoma skin cancer [NMSC]); 0·9 (0·5-1·5) for NMSC; 0·2 (0·1-0·6) for major adverse cardiovascular events; 0·1 (0·0-0·3) for pulmonary embolism; and 0·4 (0·1-0·8) for arterial thromboembolism. No deep vein thromboses occurred. Laboratory parameter changes were as expected with treatment. Efficacy was sustained up to month 36. INTERPRETATION: This analysis supports the long-term safety (up to 48 months) and efficacy (up to 36 months) of tofacitinib in patients with psoriatic arthritis, which were consistent with previous phase 3 studies. FUNDING: Pfizer.

Network Meta-Analysis of Tofacitinib, Biologic Disease-Modifying Antirheumatic Drugs, and Apremilast for the Treatment of Psoriatic Arthritis.

BACKGROUND: Tofacitinib and other new treatments approved for use in psoriatic arthritis have only recently been included in psoriatic arthritis treatment guidelines, and studies evaluating the relative efficacy of available therapies are important to inform treatment decisions by healthcare professionals. OBJECTIVE: To perform a network meta-analysis to evaluate the efficacy and safety profiles of tofacitinib, biologic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (bDMARDs), and apremilast in patients with psoriatic arthritis naïve to tumor necrosis factor inhibitor therapy (TNFi-naïve) or with an inadequate response (TNFi-IR). METHODS: A systematic literature review used searches of MEDLINE, Embase, and The Cochrane Library on October 9, 2017. Randomized controlled trials including adult patients with psoriatic arthritis receiving treatment administered as monotherapy or with conventional synthetic DMARDs were selected. Efficacy outcomes included American College of Rheumatology 20 response, change from baseline in Health Assessment Questionnaire-Disability Index, ≥75% improvement in Psoriasis Area and Severity Index, and change from baseline in Dactylitis Severity Score and Leeds Enthesitis Index. Treatment effects were evaluated during placebo-controlled phases, using a binomial logit model for binary outcomes and a normal identify link model for other outcomes. Discontinuations due to adverse events and serious infection events were assessed as safety outcomes. RESULTS: The network meta-analysis included 24 published randomized controlled trials, of which 13 enrolled TNFi-naïve patients only, 3 enrolled TNFi-IR patients only, and 8 enrolled both TNFi-naïve and TNFi-IR patients. Placebo-controlled treatment durations ranged from 12 to 24 weeks. Indirect comparisons showed tofacitinib 5 and 10 mg BID to have similar efficacy compared with most bDMARDs and apremilast in improving joint symptoms (based on American College of Rheumatology 20 response), and with some bDMARDs in improving skin symptoms (based on Psoriasis Area and Severity Index) (tofacitinib 10 mg BID only in TNFi-IR) in patients with psoriatic arthritis who were TNFi-naïve or TNFi-IR. Results also showed that, compared with placebo, the improvement in physical functioning (based on Health Assessment Questionnaire-Disability Index) with tofacitinib 5 and 10 mg BID was similar to that observed with most bDMARDs and apremilast in TNFi-naïve patients, and similar to that observed with all bDMARDs with available data in the TNFi-IR population. Improvements in Dactylitis Severity Score and Leeds Enthesitis Index scores were comparable between treatments. Tofacitinib 5 and 10 mg BID were median-ranked 8 and 15, respectively, for discontinuation due to any adverse events, and 5 and 16, respectively, for a serious infection event out of a total of 20 treatments in the network (lower numbers are more favorable). CONCLUSIONS: Tofacitinib provides an additional treatment option for patients with psoriatic arthritis, both in patients naïve to TNFi and in those with TNFi-IR. (Curr Ther Res Clin Exp. 2020; 81:XXX-XXX).

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

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

Safety and Efficacy of Tofacitinib in Patients with Active Psoriatic Arthritis: Interim Analysis of OPAL Balance, an Open-Label, Long-Term Extension Study.

INTRODUCTION: Tofacitinib is an oral Janus kinase inhibitor for the treatment of psoriatic arthritis (PsA). We report the interim safety, tolerability, and efficacy of tofacitinib in PsA patients in OPAL Balance, a 3-year, open-label, long-term extension study (data cut-off: August 2017; database not locked, data may change). METHODS: Eligible patients from two phase (P) 3 (P3) tofacitinib PsA studies (OPAL Broaden, NCT01877668; OPAL Beyond, NCT01882439) entered OPAL Balance ≤ 3 months after completing the P3 study or discontinuing for reasons other than study-drug-related adverse events (AEs). Patients received open-label tofacitinib 5 mg twice daily (BID), with adjustments to 10 mg BID permitted post-month (M) 1. Certain concomitant conventional synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs were allowed. Primary endpoints were incidence/severity of AEs and laboratory abnormalities, and changes from baseline in laboratory parameters (reported up to M36 and M30, respectively). Efficacy (clinical/patient-reported outcomes) was reported through M30. RESULTS: A total of 686 patients were treated; at data cut-off, 68.2% remained in the study. Mean (range) treatment duration was 641 (1-1032) days; total treatment duration was 1153.2 patient-years. By M36, 79.6, 13.8, and 8.6% of patients reported AEs, serious AEs, and discontinuations due to AEs, respectively. Five deaths occurred; one within the risk period (incidence rate [IR; patients with events/100 patient-years] 0.1). IRs for AEs of special interest were: all (non-serious and serious) herpes zoster, 1.7; serious infections, 0.9; opportunistic infections, 0.3 (all disseminated/multi-dermatomal herpes zoster); malignancies excluding non-melanoma skin cancer (NMSC), 0.8; NMSC, 1.0; major adverse cardiovascular events, 0.3; pulmonary embolisms, 0.1; and arterial thromboembolisms, 0.4. No patients had deep vein thrombosis. Alanine aminotransferase and aspartate aminotransferase levels were elevated ≥ 3-fold the upper limit of normal in 4.0 and 2.2% of patients, respectively. Changes in laboratory parameters were generally stable over time, although lymphocyte counts decreased slightly. Efficacy was maintained through M30. CONCLUSIONS: In this interim analysis of OPAL Balance, tofacitinib safety and efficacy in patients with PsA appeared to be consistent with those of the P3 studies. Efficacy was maintained over time. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT01976364.

In many countries, tofacitinib is an approved medicine that can be used to treat psoriatic arthritis (PsA). In the study reported here (OPAL Balance), adult patients with PsA took tofacitinib for up to 3 years. We report a planned interim analysis, i.e., an analysis of information collected before the study finished. This early information suggests that the safety of tofacitinib, and how well it improved symptoms and quality of life (efficacy), was similar in this long study as in shorter studies. Information from the finished study will be reported later. OPAL Balance started on 17 February 2014. This interim analysis includes information collected by 31 August 2017. Before joining, patients had finished a 6-month or 12-month tofacitinib study (OPAL Broaden or OPAL Beyond). Patients in OPAL Balance took a 5 mg tofacitinib pill twice a day, but if PsA symptoms did not improve after 1 month, they could take a 10 mg pill twice a day. They could also take other medicines (including methotrexate or corticosteroids). Of the 686 patients who took tofacitinib, 546 (80%) experienced side effects over 3 years. These were considered serious for 95 patients (14%) and caused 59 patients (9%) to leave the study. Five patients died from causes not related to tofacitinib. Known tofacitinib side effects, including shingles (herpes zoster), serious infections (needing hospitalization), infections in patients with weakened immune systems, cancer, heart (cardiovascular) problems, and vein blockages (embolisms), were each reported by fewer than 20 patients. Most blood test results and tofacitinib efficacy were stable over 2.5 years.

Efficacy of tofacitinib in reducing pain in patients with rheumatoid arthritis, psoriatic arthritis or ankylosing spondylitis.

OBJECTIVE: To describe the efficacy of tofacitinib in reducing pain in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA), psoriatic arthritis (PsA) or ankylosing spondylitis (AS) in a post-hoc analysis of randomised controlled trials. METHODS: Data were collected from patients in seven tofacitinib studies: six phase III (four RA, two PsA) and one phase II study (AS), and grouped into five analysis populations based on rheumatic disease diagnosis and category of prior inadequate response (IR) to treatment: conventional synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs-IR (RA and PsA), tumour necrosis factor inhibitors-IR (RA and PsA), or non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs-IR (AS). Only patients who received tofacitinib 5 or 10 mg twice daily or placebo were included. Pain assessments included: Patient's Assessment of Arthritis Pain, Short-Form Health Survey 36v2 Question (Q)7 and Bodily Pain domain, Ankylosing Spondylitis Quality of Life Q9 and Q14, EuroQol Five Dimensions Pain/Discomfort dimension and Bath Ankylosing Spondylitis Disease Activity Index Q2 and Q3. Data were reported to month 6 (placebo to month 3) in the RA and PsA populations, and week 12 (tofacitinib and placebo) in the AS population. RESULTS: Overall, 3330 patients were included in this analysis. In the RA and PsA populations, pain improvements in tofacitinib-treated patients compared with placebo were observed at the earliest time point assessed and at month 3 (maintained to month 6). In the AS population, pain improvements compared with placebo were observed at week 12. CONCLUSION: Tofacitinib was associated with rapid and sustained improvements across multiple pain measures in patients with inflammatory rheumatic musculoskeletal diseases.

Costs and Health Outcomes Associated with Tofacitinib Treatment for Active Psoriatic Arthritis in the United States.

BACKGROUND: Psoriatic arthritis (PsA) is a chronic progressive inflammatory condition associated with significant direct and indirect costs. Tofacitinib is an oral Janus kinase inhibitor for the treatment of PsA. Economic evaluations, alongside clinical data, help inform papers and formulary decisions in the United States. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate outcomes and costs of including tofacitinib in treatment strategies for PsA from a third-party U.S. payer perspective, using a health economic model. METHODS: A decision tree model was developed to evaluate treatment sequences (up to 4 lines of advanced PsA therapy) with or without tofacitinib. Patients included in the model had active PsA and a previous inadequate response (IR) to conventional synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drug (csDMARD) or tumor necrosis factor inhibitor (TNFi) therapy. The analysis time horizon was 2 years; decision points for continuing/switching treatments occurred quarterly, based on clinical response (assessed using the primary rheumatoid measure of efficacy, American College of Rheumatology [ACR]20 response only) and adverse drug reactions (ADRs). Costs included those related to ADRs and drug acquisition, monitoring, and administration. Other endpoints of PsA, such as assessment of enthesitis and dactylitis, were not integrated into the model. RESULTS: Treatment strategies including tofacitinib were associated with cost savings versus strategies without tofacitinib across all modeled scenarios, with an estimated 2-year cost saving of up to $8,454,858, based on 1 million insurants. Similarly, costs per member per month and per ACR20 responder were lower for sequences including tofacitinib versus sequences without. These savings arose because of lower ADR and drug acquisition/administration costs for sequences including tofacitinib. Deterministic sensitivity analyses showed these results to be robust. CONCLUSIONS: This analysis suggests that including tofacitinib in the treatment of active PsA in csDMARD-IR or TNFi-IR patients is a cost-saving alternative to sequences without tofacitinib, potentially reducing costs for PsA advanced therapies by up to $8.4 million over 2 years for payers insuring 1 million individuals. DISCLOSURES: This work was sponsored by Pfizer Inc. Bungey is an employee of Decision Resources Group, which received financial support from Pfizer Inc to develop the treatment-cost model used in the development of this manuscript. Chang-Douglass was an employee of Decision Resources Group at the time of the analysis. During development of this publication, Chang-Douglass started a role at the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE). The publication only reflects her views and does not reflect the views of NICE. Hsu, Cappelleri, Young, and Woolcott are employees of Pfizer Inc and own stock or stock options in Pfizer Inc. The data reported in this manuscript have been previously presented at the American College of Rheumatology Annual Scientific Meeting; October 19-24, 2018; Chicago, IL, and the AMCP Annual Meeting and Expo; March 25-28, 2019; San Diego, CA.

Content validity and psychometric evaluation of Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy-Fatigue in patients with psoriatic arthritis.

BACKGROUND: To evaluate the measurement properties (e.g., content validity, reliability, and ability to detect change) of the Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy (FACIT)-Fatigue scale in patients with active psoriatic arthritis (PsA). METHODS: One-on-one semi-structured qualitative interviews with adult patients with active PsA evaluated the content validity of FACIT-Fatigue. Quantitative measurement properties were evaluated using data from phase III tofacitinib randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in PsA: OPAL Broaden (NCT01877668) and OPAL Beyond (NCT01882439). RESULTS: Of 12 patients included in the qualitative study, 2 (17%) had mild, 8 (67%) had moderate, and 2 (17%) had severe PsA disease activity; 7 (58%) attributed fatigue to PsA, and 7 (58%) rated fatigue as important or extremely important. Most patients considered the FACIT-Fatigue items relevant to their PsA experience, and understood item content and response options as intended. In the psychometric analysis of RCT data, a second-order confirmatory factor model fit the data well (Bentler's Comparative Fit Index ≥0.92). FACIT-Fatigue demonstrated good internal consistency (Cronbach's coefficient α ≥ 0.90), test-retest reliability (Intraclass Correlation Coefficient ≥ 0.80) and a strong correlation with SF-36 Vitality (r > 0.80). A robust relationship between disease activity (based on Patient's Global Assessment of Psoriasis and Arthritis) and FACIT-Fatigue was observed (effect sizes > 1.4), with clinically important difference for the FACIT-Fatigue total score estimated as 3.1 points, and the responder definition estimated as a 4-point improvement for FACIT-Fatigue total score. CONCLUSION: Fatigue was confirmed to be an important symptom to patients with PsA, and FACIT-Fatigue was found to be a reliable and valid measure in this population.

Retraction Note to: Content validity and psychometric evaluation of functional assessment of chronic illness therapy-fatigue in patients with psoriatic arthritis.

The publisher has retracted this article [1] because the incorrect version of the article was published in error.

Tofacitinib or adalimumab versus placebo: patient-reported outcomes from OPAL Broaden-a phase III study of active psoriatic arthritis in patients with an inadequate response to conventional synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs.

Objectives: Tofacitinib is an oral Janus kinase inhibitor for treatment of psoriatic arthritis (PsA). We evaluated patient-reported outcomes (PROs) in patients with PsA refractory to ≥1 conventional synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drug (csDMARD-IR) and tumour necrosis factor inhibitor-naïve in a 12-month, phase III randomised controlled trial (OPAL Broaden [NCT01877668]). Methods: Patients (N=422) received tofacitinib 5 mg or 10 mg twice daily, adalimumab 40 mg subcutaneously every 2 weeks or placebo advancing to tofacitinib 5 mg or 10 mg twice daily at month 3. Least squares mean changes from baseline and percentages of patients reporting improvements ≥minimum clinically important differences (MCID); and scores ≥normative values in: Patient Global Assessment of disease activity (PtGA), Pain, Patient Global Joint and Skin Assessment (PGJS), Short Form-36 Health Survey version 2 (SF-36v2), Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy-Fatigue (FACIT-Fatigue), EuroQol 5-Dimensions-3-level questionnaire (EQ-5D-3L) and Ankylosing Spondylitis Quality of Life (ASQoL) were determined. Nominal p values were cited without multiple comparison adjustments. Results: At month 3, PtGA, Pain, PGJS, FACIT-Fatigue, EQ-5D-3L, ASQoL and SF-36v2 Physical Component Summary (PCS), physical functioning (PF), bodily pain (BP) and vitality domain scores exceeded placebo with both tofacitinib doses (p≤0.05); SF-36v2 social functioning with 5 mg twice daily (p≤0.05). Percentages reporting improvements ≥MCID in PtGA, Pain, PGJS, FACIT-Fatigue, ASQoL and SF-36v2 PCS, PF, BP and general health scores exceeded placebo with both tofacitinib doses (p≤0.05) and were similar with adalimumab. Conclusion: csDMARD-IR patients with active PsA reported statistically and clinically meaningful improvements in PROs with tofacitinib compared with placebo at Month 3.

Effect of tofacitinib on patient-reported outcomes in patients with active psoriatic arthritis and an inadequate response to tumour necrosis factor inhibitors in the phase III, randomised controlled trial: OPAL Beyond.

Objectives: Tofacitinib is an oral Janus kinase inhibitor for treatment of psoriatic arthritis (PsA). Patient-reported outcomes (PROs) were evaluated in patients with PsA with inadequate responses to tumour necrosis factor inhibitors (TNFi-IR) in a 6-month, phase III randomised controlled trial (OPAL Beyond [NCT01882439]). Methods: Patients (N=394) received tofacitinib 5 or 10 mg twice daily or placebo (advancing to tofacitinib 5 or 10 mg twice daily at month 3). Least squares mean changes from baseline and percentages of patients reporting improvements ≥minimum clinically important differences and scores ≥normative values were determined in Patient Global Assessment of disease activity (PtGA), Pain, Patient Global Joint and Skin Assessment (PGJS), Short Form-36 Health Survey version 2 (SF-36v2), Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy-Fatigue (FACIT-Fatigue), EuroQol 5-Dimensions-3-level (EQ-5D-3L), EQ-VAS and Ankylosing Spondylitis Quality of Life (ASQoL). Nominal p values are without multiple comparison adjustments. Results: At month 3, PtGA, Pain, PGJS, SF-36v2 Physical Component Summary (PCS), physical functioning (PF), bodily pain (BP), vitality and social functioning (SF) domains, FACIT-Fatigue Total score, EQ-5D-3L pain/discomfort, EQ-VAS and ASQoL scores exceeded placebo with both tofacitinib doses (role physical [RP] with 10 mg twice daily only; p≤0.05). Patients reporting improvements ≥MCID (%) in PtGA, PGJS, Pain, ASQoL and SF-36v2 PCS, PF, RP, BP, SF (both tofacitinib doses) exceeded placebo (p≤0.05). Conclusion: TNFi-IR patients with PsA receiving tofacitinib reported statistically and clinically meaningful improvements in PROs versus placebo over 3 months, which were maintained to month 6. Despite lower baseline scores, these improvements were similar to the csDMARD-IR TNFi-naive OPAL Broaden trial.

Content validity and psychometric evaluation of Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy-Fatigue in patients with psoriatic arthritis.

BACKGROUND: To evaluate the measurement properties (e.g. content validity, reliability and ability to detect change) of the Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy (FACIT)-Fatigue scale in patients with active psoriatic arthritis (PsA). METHODS: One-on-one semi-structured qualitative interviews with adult patients with active PsA evaluated the content validity of FACIT-Fatigue. Quantitative measurement properties were evaluated using data from phase III tofacitinib randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in PsA: OPAL Broaden (NCT01877668) and OPAL Beyond (NCT01882439). RESULTS: Of 12 patients included in the qualitative study, 2 (17%) had mild, 8 (67%) had moderate, and 2 (17%) had severe PsA disease activity; 7 (58%) attributed fatigue to PsA, and 7 (58%) rated fatigue as important or extremely important. Most patients considered the FACIT-Fatigue items relevant to their PsA experience and understood item content and response options as intended. In the psychometric analysis of RCT data, a second-order confirmatory factor model fit the data well (Bentler's Comparative Fit Index ≥0.92). FACIT-Fatigue demonstrated good internal consistency (Cronbach's coefficient α ≥ 0.90), test-retest reliability (Intraclass Correlation Coefficient ≥ 0.80) and a strong correlation with SF-36 Vitality (r > 0.80). A robust relationship between disease activity (based on Patient's Global Assessment of Psoriasis and Arthritis) and FACIT-Fatigue was observed (effect sizes > 1.4), with clinically important difference for the FACIT-Fatigue total score estimated as 3.1 points, and the responder definition estimated as a 4-point improvement for FACIT-Fatigue total score. CONCLUSION: Fatigue was confirmed to be an important symptom to patients with PsA, and FACIT-Fatigue was found to be a reliable and valid measure in this population.

Disease-specific composite measures for psoriatic arthritis are highly responsive to a Janus kinase inhibitor treatment that targets multiple domains of disease.

BACKGROUND: The multiple disease domains affected in psoriatic arthritis (PsA) may make composite endpoints appropriate for assessing changes in disease activity over time. Tofacitinib is an oral Janus kinase inhibitor for the treatment of PsA. Data from two phase 3 studies of patients with PsA were used to evaluate the effect of tofacitinib on composite endpoints. METHODS: Oral Psoriatic Arthritis triaL (OPAL) Broaden was a 12-month study of tumor necrosis factor inhibitor (TNFi)-naïve patients with an inadequate response to at least one conventional synthetic disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drug; OPAL Beyond was a 6-month study of patients with inadequate response to TNFi. Patients with active PsA received tofacitinib 5 or 10 mg doses twice daily (BID), adalimumab 40 mg subcutaneous injection once every 2 weeks (OPAL Broaden only), or placebo advancing at month 3 to tofacitinib 5 or 10 mg BID. The disease-specific composites were Psoriatic Arthritis Disease Activity Score (PASDAS), Disease Activity Index for Reactive Arthritis/Psoriatic Arthritis (DAPSA), and Composite Psoriatic Disease Activity Index (CPDAI). Change from baseline in composite endpoints was also assessed for minimal disease activity (MDA) responders versus non-responders. RESULTS: Overall, 422 patients from OPAL Broaden and 394 patients from OPAL Beyond were treated. The mean changes from baseline to month 3 for tofacitinib 5 mg BID, tofacitinib 10 mg BID (standard error; effect size) were OPAL Broaden: PASDAS, -2.0 (0.14; 1.73), -2.4 (0.14; 2.4); DAPSA, -20.2 (1.72; 0.9), -24.4 (1.73; 1.23); and CPDAI, -2.9 (0.34; 1.03), -4.2 (0.36; 1.53); OPAL Beyond: PASDAS, -1.9 (0.14; 1.53), -2.1 (0.14; 1.84); DAPSA, -22.5 (1.67; 0.81), -21.0 (1.70; 0.84); and CPDAI, -3.3 (0.31; 1.41), -3.4 (0.31; 1.45). Greater changes from baseline to month 3 (P ≤0.05) were seen with both doses of tofacitinib versus placebo for all endpoints except CPDAI for tofacitinib 5 mg BID in OPAL Broaden. Effect sizes generally increased from 3 to 6 months. Mean changes from baseline were greater in MDA responders than MDA non-responders for all composite endpoints across all time points and treatments. CONCLUSIONS: This analysis suggests that disease-specific composite measures are appropriate for evaluating treatment efficacy on multiple disease domains in PsA. TRIAL REGISTRATION: OPAL Broaden: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01877668 , first posted June 12, 2013; OPAL Beyond: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01882439 , first posted June 20, 2013.

Patient Preferences Associated with Therapies for Psoriatic Arthritis: A Conjoint Analysis.

BACKGROUND: As psoriatic arthritis (PsA) treatment choices continue to expand, it is important to consider patient preferences for treatment modalities for PsA. Involving patients in treatment decisions can influence adherence to treatment and outcomes of therapy. OBJECTIVE: To determine patient preferences for medication attributes prescribed for patients with PsA. METHODS: A choice-based conjoint survey was mailed to 2800 randomly selected patients with PsA who were enrolled in Humana Medicare and commercial plans. Patients had been diagnosed with PsA between January 1, 2012, and September 30, 2016. The medication attributes included in the survey were the medication route of administration, frequency of administration, ability to reduce daily joint pain and swelling, likelihood of serious infections, improvement in the patient's ability to perform daily activities, achieving clear or almost clear skin, and cost. Hierarchical Bayesian models were used to score patient preferences after adjusting for demographic and clinical characteristics. The mean attribute importance scores were used to rank patient preferences. RESULTS: A total of 468 patients (258 with a Medicare plan and 210 with a commercial plan) completed the survey. The top 3 medication attributes for patients in Medicare plans were route of administration, cost, and improvement in the ability to perform daily activities. For patients in commercial plans, the top 3 medication attributes were cost, route of administration, and frequency of administration. Within the top 2 attributes for patients in both plans, the oral route of administration and lower cost were most preferred. CONCLUSION: Medication route of administration and cost were the 2 most important considerations for patients diagnosed with PsA who were enrolled in Medicare or commercial plans with Humana. As PsA treatment choices continue to expand, considering patient preferences may improve patient adherence and treatment outcomes and should be considered when making treatment decisions for this patient population.

The impact of multimorbidity on quality of life among midlife women: findings from a U.S. nationally representative survey.

BACKGROUND: Little is known about the prevalence and cumulative burden of coexisting health conditions including chronic joint and muscular pain, urinary incontinence (UI), depression, osteoporosis risk, moderate/severe vasomotor symptoms, and vulvar/vaginal atrophy (VVA). We surveyed a nationally representative U.S. sample of midlife (age 40-64 years) women to ascertain the prevalence, general health-related quality of life (HRQoL), and health-seeking behaviors associated with these six conditions. METHODS: This cross-sectional, telephone survey collected data from a sample of English- and Spanish-speaking U.S. women. The survey contained demographic and menopausal status questions, and also five condition-specific symptom/disease risk-screening instruments. The EuroQol 5 dimensions (EQ-5D) questionnaire was used to measure HRQoL. Health-seeking behavior was measured based on clinician discussion of and recent treatment for each condition. RESULTS: Three thousand fifty eight women (mean age 53.4 years) completed the survey. The majority were white (75.6%), married (60.5%), employed full- or part-time (59.0%), and postmenopausal (69.8%; based on self-report). The prevalence [95% confidence interval] of 0, 1, 2, and ≥3 conditions was 35.2% [33.5-36.9], 34.2% [32.5-35.9], 17.9% [16.6-19.3], and 12.7% [11.5-13.9], respectively. Osteoporosis risk (30.6%) was most prevalent, followed by VVA (27.8%) and UI (26.6%). UI and VVA coexisted most frequently (11.3%), followed by osteoporosis risk and VVA (9.8%). EQ-5D scores decreased with increasing number of illnesses (0, 1, 2, and ≥3 conditions, means: 0.92, 0.87, 0.77, 0.61, respectively; p<0.01). Health-seeking behavior varied by condition. CONCLUSION: Over 25% of women surveyed had multiple coexisting conditions. Lower HRQoL was associated with multiple conditions and with each added condition.

Improvements in quality of life with desvenlafaxine 50mg/d vs placebo in employed adults with major depressive disorder.

BACKGROUND: Diminished quality of life (QOL) is associated with major depressive disorder (MDD). METHODS: QOL was assessed in a post-hoc analysis of a double-blind, placebo-controlled trial. Employed adult outpatients with MDD were randomly assigned to 12 weeks of treatment with desvenlafaxine 50mg/d or placebo. Changes from baseline in the Short Form of the Quality of Life Enjoyment and Satisfaction Questionnaire (Q-LES-Q) item scores at week 12 were analyzed using analysis of covariance with treatment, region, and baseline in the model. Correlations between change from baseline in the 17-item Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression (HAM-D17) total score and Q-LES-Q scores were computed. RESULTS: The intent-to-treat population included 427 patients. There were statistically significant improvements from baseline for desvenlafaxine vs placebo in 10 of 16 Q-LES-Q item scores (P values ≤0.0441). The percentage of patients with severe QOL impairment (≥2 SD below community norm) at week 12 was significantly lower for desvenlafaxine (46%) vs placebo (62%; P=0.0024; baseline: 95% and 94%, respectively). Change in Q-LES-Q total score was highly correlated with change in HAM-D17 score at week 12, LOCF (P<0.0001), and improvement in HAM-D17 total score at week 2 predicted change in Q-LES-Q total score at week 12 for the desvenlafaxine group (F=24.89; P<0.0001) but not placebo. LIMITATIONS: This analysis excluded patients who were unemployed, had severe comorbidities, and those taking multiple, concomitant medications. CONCLUSION: Improvement in QOL and depressive symptoms was significantly greater for employed depressed patients treated with desvenlafaxine vs placebo.