A wide distribution of Beiji nairoviruses and related viruses in Ixodes ticks in Japan

Beiji nairovirus (BJNV), in the family Nairoviridae, the order Bunyavirales, was recently reported as a causative agent of an emerging tick-borne zoonotic infection in China. This study investigated the prevalence of BJNV in ticks in Japan. Screening of over 2,000 ticks from multiple regions revealed a widespread distribution of BJNV and BJNV-related viruses in Japan, particularly in the northern island, and in other high altitude areas with exclusive occurrence of Ixodes ticks. Phylogenetic analysis identified three distinct groups of nairoviruses in ticks in Japan: BJNV, Yichun nairovirus (YCNV) and a newly identified Mikuni nairovirus (MKNV). BJNV and YCNV variants identified in ticks in Japan exhibited high nucleotide sequence identities to those in China and Russia with evidence of non-monophyletic evolution among BJNVs, suggesting multiple cross-border transmission events of BJNV between the Eurasian continent and Japan. Whole genome sequencing of BJNV and MKNV revealed a unique GA-rich region in the S segment, the significance of which remains to be determined. In conclusion, the present study has shown a wide distribution and diversity of BJNV-related nairoviruses in Ixodes ticks in Japan and has identified unique genomic structures. The findings demonstrate the significance of BJNV as well as related viruses in Japan and highlight the necessity of monitoring emerging nairovirus infections and their potential risks to public health.

Combination therapy with oral antiviral and anti-inflammatory drugs improves the efficacy of delayed treatment in a COVID-19 hamster model

BACKGROUND

Pulmonary infection with SARS-CoV-2 stimulates host immune responses and can also result in the progression of dysregulated and critical inflammation. Throughout the pandemic, the management and treatment of COVID-19 has been continuously updated with a range of antiviral drugs and immunomodulators. Monotherapy with oral antivirals has proven to be effective in the treatment of COVID-19. However, treatment should be initiated in the early stages of infection to ensure beneficial therapeutic outcomes, and there is still room for further consideration on therapeutic strategies using antivirals.

METHODS

We studied the therapeutic effects of monotherapy with the oral antiviral ensitrelvir or the anti-inflammatory corticosteroid methylprednisolone and combination therapy with ensitrelvir and methylprednisolone in a delayed dosing model of hamsters infected with SARS-CoV-2.

FINDINGS

Combination therapy with ensitrelvir and methylprednisolone improved respiratory conditions and reduced the development of pneumonia in hamsters even when the treatment was started after 2 days post-infection. The combination therapy led to a differential histological and transcriptomic pattern in comparison to either of the monotherapies, with reduced lung damage and down-regulation of expression of genes involved in the inflammatory response. Furthermore, we found that the combination treatment is effective in case of infection with either the highly pathogenic delta or circulating omicron variants.

INTERPRETATION

Our results demonstrate the advantage of combination therapy with antiviral and corticosteroid drugs in COVID-19 treatment from the perspective of lung pathology and host inflammatory responses.

FUNDING

Funding bodies are described in the Acknowledgments section.

Development of flavivirus subviral particles with low cross-reactivity by mutations of a distinct antigenic domain

The most conserved fusion loop (FL) domain present in the flavivirus envelope protein has been reported as a dominant epitope for cross-reactive antibodies to mosquito-borne flaviviruses (MBFVs). As a result, establishing accurate serodiagnosis for MBFV infections has been difficult as anti-FL antibodies are induced by both natural infection and following vaccination. In this study, we modified the most conserved FL domain to overcome this cross-reactivity. We showed that the FL domain of lineage I insect-specific flavivirus (ISFV) has differences in antigenicity from those of MBFVs and lineage II ISFV and determined the key amino acid residues (G106, L107, or F108), which contribute to the antigenic difference. These mutations were subsequently introduced into subviral particles (SVPs) of dengue virus type 2 (DENV2), Zika virus (ZIKV), Japanese encephalitis virus (JEV), and West Nile virus (WNV). In indirect enzyme-linked immunosorbent assays (ELISAs), these SVP mutants when used as antigens reduced the binding of cross-reactive IgG and total Ig induced by infection of ZIKV, JEV, and WNV in mice and enabled the sensitive detection of virus-specific antibodies. Furthermore, immunization of ZIKV or JEV SVP mutants provoked the production of antibodies with lower cross-reactivity to heterologous MBFV antigens compared to immunization with the wild-type SVPs in mice. This study highlights the effectiveness of introducing mutations in the FL domain in MBFV SVPs with lineage I ISFV-derived amino acids to produce SVP antigens with low cross-reactivity and demonstrates an improvement in the accuracy of indirect ELISA-based serodiagnosis for MBFV infections. KEY POINTS: • The FL domain of Lineage I ISFV has a different antigenicity from that of MBFVs. • Mutated SVPs reduce the binding of cross-reactive antibodies in indirect ELISAs. • Inoculation of mutated SVPs induces antibodies with low cross-reactivity.

Impact of Imprinted Immunity Induced by mRNA Vaccination in an Experimental Animal Model

The emergence of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) Omicron variants has led to concerns that ancestral SARS-CoV-2-based vaccines may not be effective against newly emerging Omicron subvariants. The concept of "imprinted immunity" suggests that individuals vaccinated with ancestral virus-based vaccines may not develop effective immunity against newly emerging Omicron subvariants, such as BQ.1.1 and XBB.1. In this study, we investigated this possibility using hamsters. Although natural infection induced effective antiviral immunity, breakthrough infections in hamsters with BQ.1.1 and XBB.1 Omicron subvariants after receiving the 3-dose mRNA-lipid nanoparticle vaccine resulted in only faintly induced humoral immunity, supporting the possibility of imprinted immunity.

Comparative pathogenicity of SARS-CoV-2 Omicron subvariants including BA.1, BA.2, and BA.5

The unremitting emergence of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) variants necessitates ongoing control measures. Given its rapid spread, the new Omicron subvariant BA.5 requires urgent characterization. Here, we comprehensively analyzed BA.5 with the other Omicron variants BA.1, BA.2, and ancestral B.1.1. Although in vitro growth kinetics of BA.5 was comparable among the Omicron subvariants, BA.5 was much more fusogenic than BA.1 and BA.2. Airway-on-a-chip analysis showed that, among Omicron subvariants, BA.5 had enhanced ability to disrupt the respiratory epithelial and endothelial barriers. Furthermore, in our hamster model, in vivo pathogenicity of BA.5 was slightly higher than that of the other Omicron variants and less than that of ancestral B.1.1. Notably, BA.5 gains efficient virus spread compared with BA.1 and BA.2, leading to prompt immune responses. Our findings suggest that BA.5 has low pathogenicity compared with the ancestral strain but enhanced virus spread /inflammation compared with earlier Omicron subvariants.

Morphogenesis of Bullet-Shaped Rabies Virus Particles Regulated by TSG101

Viral protein assembly and virion budding are tightly regulated to enable the proper formation of progeny virions. At this late stage in the virus life cycle, some enveloped viruses take advantage of the host endosomal sorting complex required for transport (ESCRT) machinery, which contributes to the physiological functions of membrane modulation and abscission. Bullet-shaped viral particles are unique morphological characteristics of rhabdoviruses; however, the involvement of host factors in rhabdovirus infection and, specifically, the molecular mechanisms underlying virion formation are not fully understood. In the present study, we used a small interfering RNA (siRNA) screening approach and found that the ESCRT-I component TSG101 contributes to the propagation of rabies virus (RABV). We demonstrated that the matrix protein (M) of RABV interacts with TSG101 via the late domain containing the PY and YL motifs, which are conserved in various viral proteins. Loss of the YL motif in the RABV M or the downregulation of host TSG101 expression resulted in the intracellular aggregation of viral proteins and abnormal virus particle formation, indicating a defect in the RABV assembly and budding processes. These results indicate that the interaction of the RABV M and TSG101 is pivotal for not only the efficient budding of progeny RABV from infected cells but also for the bullet-shaped virion morphology. IMPORTANCE Enveloped viruses bud from cells with the host lipid bilayer. Generally, the membrane modulation and abscission are mediated by host ESCRT complexes. Some enveloped viruses utilize their late (L-) domain to interact with ESCRTs, which promotes viral budding. Rhabdoviruses form characteristic bullet-shaped enveloped virions, but the underlying molecular mechanisms involved remain elusive. Here, we showed that TSG101, one of the ESCRT components, supports rabies virus (RABV) budding and proliferation. TSG101 interacted with RABV matrix protein via the L-domain, and the absence of this interaction resulted in intracellular virion accumulation and distortion of the morphology of progeny virions. Our study reveals that virion formation of RABV is highly regulated by TSG101 and the virus matrix protein.

S-217622, a SARS-CoV-2 main protease inhibitor, decreases viral load and ameliorates COVID-19 severity in hamsters

In parallel with vaccination, oral antiviral agents are highly anticipated to act as countermeasures for the treatment of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). Oral antiviral medication demands not only high antiviral activity but also target specificity, favorable oral bioavailability, and high metabolic stability. Although a large number of compounds have been identified as potential inhibitors of SARS-CoV-2 infection in vitro, few have proven to be effective in vivo. Here, we show that oral administration of S-217622 (ensitrelvir), an inhibitor of SARS-CoV-2 main protease (M^pro; also known as 3C-like protease), decreases viral load and ameliorates disease severity in SARS-CoV-2-infected hamsters. S-217622 inhibited viral proliferation at low nanomolar to submicromolar concentrations in cells. Oral administration of S-217622 demonstrated favorable pharmacokinetic properties and accelerated recovery from acute SARS-CoV-2 infection in hamster recipients. Moreover, S-217622 exerted antiviral activity against SARS-CoV-2 variants of concern, including the highly pathogenic Delta variant and the recently emerged Omicron BA.5 and BA.2.75 variants. Overall, our study provides evidence that S-217622, an antiviral agent that is under evaluation in a phase 3 clinical trial (clinical trial registration no. jRCT2031210350), has remarkable antiviral potency and efficacy against SARS-CoV-2 and is a prospective oral therapeutic option for COVID-19.

Virological characteristics of the SARS-CoV-2 Omicron BA.2 subvariants, including BA.4 and BA.5

After the global spread of the SARS-CoV-2 Omicron BA.2, some BA.2 subvariants, including BA.2.9.1, BA.2.11, BA.2.12.1, BA.4, and BA.5, emerged in multiple countries. Our statistical analysis showed that the effective reproduction numbers of these BA.2 subvariants are greater than that of the original BA.2. Neutralization experiments revealed that the immunity induced by BA.1/2 infections is less effective against BA.4/5. Cell culture experiments showed that BA.2.12.1 and BA.4/5 replicate more efficiently in human alveolar epithelial cells than BA.2, and particularly, BA.4/5 is more fusogenic than BA.2. We further provided the structure of the BA.4/5 spike receptor-binding domain that binds to human ACE2 and considered how the substitutions in the BA.4/5 spike play roles in ACE2 binding and immune evasion. Moreover, experiments using hamsters suggested that BA.4/5 is more pathogenic than BA.2. Our multiscale investigations suggest that the risk of BA.2 subvariants, particularly BA.4/5, to global health is greater than that of original BA.2.

Isolation and characterization of an orthoreovirus from Indonesian fruit bats

Nelson Bay orthoreovirus (NBV) is an emerging bat-borne virus and causes respiratory tract infections in humans sporadically. Over the last two decades, several strains genetically related to NBV were isolated from humans and various bat species, predominantly in Southeast Asia (SEA), suggesting a high prevalence of the NBV species in this region. In this study, an orthoreovirus (ORV) belonging to the NBV species was isolated from Indonesian fruit bats' feces, tentatively named Paguyaman orthoreovirus (PgORV). Serological studies revealed that 81.2% (108/133) of Indonesian fruit bats sera had neutralizing antibodies against PgORV. Whole-genome sequencing and phylogenetic analysis of PgORV suggested the occurrence of past reassortments with other NBV strains isolated in SEA, indicating the dispersal and circulation of NBV species among bats in this region. Intranasal PgORV inoculation of laboratory mice caused severe pneumonia. Our study characterized PgORV's unique genetic background and highlighted the potential risk of PgORV-related diseases in Indonesia.

Virological characteristics of the SARS-CoV-2 Omicron BA.2 spike

Soon after the emergence and global spread of the SARS-CoV-2 Omicron lineage BA.1, another Omicron lineage, BA.2, began outcompeting BA.1. The results of statistical analysis showed that the effective reproduction number of BA.2 is 1.4-fold higher than that of BA.1. Neutralization experiments revealed that immunity induced by COVID vaccines widely administered to human populations is not effective against BA.2, similar to BA.1, and that the antigenicity of BA.2 is notably different from that of BA.1. Cell culture experiments showed that the BA.2 spike confers higher replication efficacy in human nasal epithelial cells and is more efficient in mediating syncytia formation than the BA.1 spike. Furthermore, infection experiments using hamsters indicated that the BA.2 spike-bearing virus is more pathogenic than the BA.1 spike-bearing virus. Altogether, the results of our multiscale investigations suggest that the risk of BA.2 to global health is potentially higher than that of BA.1.

Virological characteristics of the SARS-CoV-2 Omicron BA.2 spike

Soon after the emergence and global spread of the SARS-CoV-2 Omicron lineage BA.1, another Omicron lineage, BA.2, began outcompeting BA.1. The results of statistical analysis showed that the effective reproduction number of BA.2 is 1.4-fold higher than that of BA.1. Neutralization experiments revealed that immunity induced by COVID vaccines widely administered to human populations is not effective against BA.2, similar to BA.1, and that the antigenicity of BA.2 is notably different from that of BA.1. Cell culture experiments showed that the BA.2 spike confers higher replication efficacy in human nasal epithelial cells and is more efficient in mediating syncytia formation than the BA.1 spike. Furthermore, infection experiments using hamsters indicated that the BA.2 spike-bearing virus is more pathogenic than the BA.1 spike-bearing virus. Altogether, the results of our multiscale investigations suggest that the risk of BA.2 to global health is potentially higher than that of BA.1.

AB0761 Are we treating-to-target in spondyloarthritis (SpA)? A cross sectional analysis from the Asia Pacific League of Associations for Rheumatology (APLAR) SpA Registry

Background

Data on the extent of treat-to-target (T2T) recommendations application in SpA patients across Asia Pacific region is lacking. APLAR SpA Registry aimed to assess the utility of T2T on long term clinical outcomes, and to improve disease management and inform health care policy.

Objectives

To provide a snapshot of the registry including demographics, disease activity and medication use.

Methods

Patients fulfill the CASPAR 2006 for psoriatic arthritis (PsA) and 2009 ASAS criteria for axial spondylitis (AxSpA) were recruited. This cross sectional analysis included the first 188 patients recruited across 7 Asia Pacific regions (Hong Kong, Singapore, Korea, Thailand, India, Qatar & Pakistan).

Results

83 patients PsA and 115 AxSpA patients were included. They had moderate inflammation (DAPSA: 19.61±14.29, ASDAS: 2.32±1.07). Majority of PsA patients received conventional synthetic disease-modifying drug (csDMARDs, 81%) with relatively low prevalence of biologic DMARDs (bDMARDs) (24%). Most AxSpA patients used NSAIDs (79%) while nearly half of them received bDMARDs (49%). Other details listed in Table 1. Prevalence of bDMARDs use in our registry was lower than that from the USA (Corrona PsA Registry, 59%), Turkey & Canada (PsArt-ID, 40%) and the Netherlands AxSpA registry (56%) (1-3). Regarding T2T, 28% and 44% of PsA patient achieved minimal disease activity (MDA) and Disease Activity in Psoriatic Arthritis low disease activity (DAPSA LDA) respectively. The proportion of patients achieving target in other cohorts were 46% for MDA (PsArt-ID) and 46% for DAPSA LDA (Corrona) (1, 2). 37% and 47% of AxSpA patient achieved Bath Ankylosing Spondylitis Disease Activity Index (BASDAI)<4 and Ankylosing Spondylitis Disease Activity Score (ASDAS) LDA. Proportion of patients achieving ASDAS LDA were similar to the Netherlands registry for patients with ASDAS LDA or BASDAI<4 (Figure 1A)(3). Patient on bDMARD were more likely to achieve treatment target (Figure 1B). There were no significant difference between socio-economic status and disease features between bDMARD user and non-user.

Table 1.

Demographics, clinical features and disease activity of patients

PsA (n=83)AxSpA (n=115)Age50.012.836.512.4Male n, %4251%8583%Asian n, %83100%10196%Disease duration, years7.17.35.27.6Any sacroiliitis n, %10299%HLA B27, positive n, %9189%Duration of early morning stiffness, min30392529Tender joint count7901Swollen joint count3400No. of dactylitis digit1100PASI4.05.0SPRACC1201BASDAI2.82.0ESR, mm/h31262016CRP, mg/L10151127HAQ-DI0.610.610.390.51DAPSA19.6114.29ASDAS CRP2.321.07

Data given in mean SD unless stated

. No. of case from Hong Kong 40; Singapore 46; Korea 24; Thailand 20, India 15; Qatar 10; Pakistan 33; HLA - human leucucyte antigen; PASI - psoriasis area and severity index; SPRACC - Spondyloarthritis Research Consortium of Canada Enthesitis Index; BASDAI - Bath Ankylosing Spondylitis Disease Activity Index; ESR - erythrocyte sedimentation rate; CRP - C-reactive protein; HAQ-DI - Health assessment questionnaire disability index; DAPSA - Disease activity in Psoriatic Arthritis; ASDAS - Ankylosing Spondylitis Disease Activity Score

Figure 1.

(A) Achievement of LDA in APLAR SpA registry and other registry and (B) use of bDMARDs among patients in APLAR SpA registry with or without achieving LDA

Conclusion

Patient using bDMARDs were more likely to achieve treatment target. We expect that when T2T is widely applied, better outcomes will be reported in future.

References

[1]Bakirci, S., et al. (2019). “What are the main barriers to achieve minimal disease activity in psoriatic arthritis in real life?” Clin Exp Rheumatol37(5): 808-812.

[2]Beckers, E., et al. (2021). “Treat-to-target in axial spondyloarthritis: an observational study in daily practice.” Rheumatology (Oxford).

[3]Ogdie, A., et al. (2021). “Effect of Multidomain Disease Presentations on Patients With Psoriatic Arthritis in the Corrona Psoriatic Arthritis/Spondyloarthritis Registry.” J Rheumatol48(5): 698-706.

Disclosure of Interests

Isaac T. Cheng: None declared, Ho SO: None declared, Ying Ying Leung Speakers bureau: received honorarium/ speaker fee from AbbVie, DKSH, Janssen, Novartis and Pfizer., Praveena Chiowchanwisawakit: None declared, Stanley Angkodjojo Speakers bureau: Boehringer Ingelheim Singapore in Nov 2021, Consultant of: Abbvie (Singapore), DKSH (Singapore) in 2021, Muhammad Ahmed Saeed: None declared, Kichul Shin: None declared, Mohit Goyal: None declared, Muhammad Haroon: None declared, Mohammed Hammoudeh Speakers bureau: Have you been paid as a speaker for (pharmaceutical) companies, Grant/research support from: participated in drug companies sponsored trials, Nallasivan Subramanian: None declared, Ho Yin Chung: None declared, James Cheng-Chung Wei: None declared, Mitsumasa Kishimoto Consultant of: MK received consulting fees and/or speaker fees from AbbVie, Amgen, Asahi-Kasei Pharma, Astellas, Ayumi Pharma, BMS, Chugai, Daiichi-Sankyo, Eisai, Eli Lilly, Gilead, Janssen, Kyowa Kirin, Novartis, Ono Pharma, Pfizer, Tanabe-Mitsubishi, and UCB Pharma., Lai-Shan Tam Consultant of: has acted as a consultant for Janssen, Pfizer, Sanofi, AbbVie, Boehringer Ingelheim, and Lilly, Grant/research support from: has received grant/research support from Amgen, Boehringer Ingelheim, Janssen, GSK, Novartis, and Pfizer

POS1025 COMPARISON OF COMPOSITE INDICES FOR DISEASE ACTIVITY IN PATIENTS WITH PSORIATIC ARTHRITIS TREATED WITH UPADACITINIB: A POST-HOC ANALYSIS FROM SELECT-PsA 1

Background

Achieving low disease activity (LDA) or remission is a main treatment target in PsA. Composite indices used to assess disease activity include Disease Activity index for PsA (DAPSA) and PsA Disease Activity Score (PASDAS), which both have cut points for the states of remission and LDA. In addition, LDA and remission can be assessed by the pure state instrument Minimal Disease Activity (MDA)/Very Low Disease Activity (VLDA).

Objectives

These analyses aim to identify overlap and differences between these composite indices in PsA patients treated with upadacitinib (UPA), a Janus kinase inhibitor, or adalimumab (ADA) in the phase 3 SELECT-PsA 1 trial.

Methods

In SELECT-PsA 1 (phase 3, randomized controlled trial, with long-term extension up to 5 years), patients with moderate to severely active PsA with prior inadequate response or intolerance to ≥1 non-biologic DMARD were randomized to oral UPA at doses of 15 mg or 30 mg (once daily), subcutaneous ADA 40 mg (every other week), or placebo.1 LDA was assessed using MDA (threshold: 5/7 criteria), DAPSA (≤14), PASDAS (≤3.2), and Patient Global Assessment of Disease Activity (PtGA; ≤3).2,3 These post-hoc descriptive analyses include 1-year (cut off: week 56) as observed data from UPA 15 mg and ADA.

Results

In total, 858 patients (UPA 15 mg: n=429; ADA: n=429) were included in these analyses. Patients receiving UPA and ADA were on average 52 years of age, 54% were female, with an average disease duration of approximately 6 years.1 With both UPA and ADA, there was a high degree of overlap in the proportion of patients achieving LDA thresholds in MDA, DAPSA, and PASDAS (Figure 1), with reported PtGA improvements showing a similar trend. Defining LDA according to MDA or respective cut points for DAPSA, PASDAS, or PtGA, the proportion of “non-responders” (ie, patients who did not reach such states) is shown in Figure 2. Of the individual components included in these indices, fewer patients reported low levels of SF-36 Physical Component Summary (SF36-PCS), Patient Assessment of Pain Numeric Rating Scale (Pain NRS), and Health Assessment Questionnaire - Disability Index (HAQ-DI) scores, as well as Tender Joint Count 68 (TJC68), with similar responses observed across all indices.

Conclusion

In this post-hoc analysis from the SELECT-PsA 1 trial, there was a high degree of overlap between patients in LDA across the composite indices, including MDA, DAPSA, and PASDAS, irrespective of treatment with UPA 15 mg or ADA and despite variability in inclusion of certain components in some indices but not others. Across all indices, fewer patients reported low levels of SF36-PCS, Pain NRS, and HAQ-DI scores, and TJC68. These data show that improvements in (subjective) “patient-driven” components were the most challenging to achieve. These data indicate a similar pattern of residual disease activity, or influence by residual damage or external factors, regardless of composite endpoint utilized.

References

[1]McInnes IB et al. N Engl J Med. 2021; 384(13):1227-39

[2]Kerschbaumer et al. Baillieres Best Pract Res Clin Rheumatol. 2018; 32:401-14

[3]Gorlier et al. Ann Rheum Dis. 2019; 78:201-208

Acknowledgements

AbbVie funded these studies and participated in the study design, research, analysis, data collection, interpretation of data, reviewing, and approval of the publication. No honoraria or payments were made for authorship. Medical writing support was provided by Monica R.P. Elmore, PhD of AbbVie.

Disclosure of Interests

Josef S. Smolen Consultant of: AbbVie, BMS, Celgene, Chugai, Eli Lilly, Gilead, Janssen, MSD, Novartis-Sandoz, Pfizer, Roche, Samsung, Sanofi, and UCB, Grant/research support from: AbbVie, BMS, Celgene, Chugai, Eli Lilly, Gilead, Janssen, MSD, Novartis-Sandoz, Pfizer, Roche, Samsung, Sanofi, and UCB, Ennio Lubrano Speakers bureau: AbbVie, Celgene, Galapagos, Janssen, MSD, Novartis, and Pfizer, Consultant of: AbbVie, Celgene, Galapagos, Janssen, MSD, Novartis, and Pfizer, Grant/research support from: AbbVie, Celgene, Galapagos, Janssen, MSD, Novartis, and Pfizer, Mitsumasa Kishimoto Speakers bureau: AbbVie, Amgen-Astellas BioPharma, Asahi-Kasei Pharma, Astellas, Ayumi Pharma, BMS, Celgene, Chugai, Daiichi-Sankyo, Eisai, Eli Lilly, Gilead, Janssen, Kyowa Kirin, Novartis, Ono Pharma, Pfizer, Tanabe-Mitsubishi, and UCB, Consultant of: AbbVie, Amgen-Astellas BioPharma, Asahi-Kasei Pharma, Astellas, Ayumi Pharma, BMS, Celgene, Chugai, Daiichi-Sankyo, Eisai, Eli Lilly, Gilead, Janssen, Kyowa Kirin, Novartis, Ono Pharma, Pfizer, Tanabe-Mitsubishi, and UCB, Andra Balanescu Speakers bureau: AbbVie, Amgen, Angellini, Astra-Zeneca, Berlin-Chemie, BMS, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, Sandoz, Teva, UCB, and Zentiva, Consultant of: AbbVie, Pfizer, and Ewopharma, Vibeke Strand Consultant of: AbbVie, Amgen, Arena, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Celltrion, Eli Lilly, Genentech/Roche, Gilead, GlaxoSmithKline, Ichnos, Inmedix, Janssen, Kiniksa, Merck, Myriad Genetics, Novartis, Pfizer, Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Samsung, Sandoz, Sanofi, Setpoint, and UCB, Tianming Gao Shareholder of: AbbVie Inc., Employee of: AbbVie Inc., Nancy Vranich Shareholder of: AbbVie Inc., Employee of: AbbVie Inc., Ralph Lippe Shareholder of: AbbVie Inc., Employee of: AbbVie Inc., William Tillett Shareholder of: AbbVie Inc., Employee of: AbbVie Inc.

AB0904 Evaluating Numeric Rating Scale Versions of the 3 and 4 Visual Analog Scale (3/4-VAS) Composite Measures in Patients with Active Psoriatic Arthritis from the SELECT-PsA Program

Background

The multifaceted nature of psoriatic arthritis (PsA) can make it challenging to evaluate treatment targets and disease activity. Moreover, most existing assessment tools are time-consuming and not always feasible in routine clinical care, indicating a need for new disease measures that are easy to perform and calculate. Composite measures using 3-visual analog scale (VAS; physician’s global assessment, patient’s global assessment, and skin) or 4-VAS (physician’s global assessment, joints, skin, and pain) have been proposed as simpler alternatives.1 Given potential advantages of numeric rating scales (NRS) over VAS, we here adapted 3/4-VAS for use with NRS components and tested its validity via post hoc analysis of the upadacitinib (UPA) SELECT-PsA program.

Objectives

Evaluate the ability of 3/4-NRS scores to assess treatment response in SELECT-PsA 1 and 2, as well as the correlation of 3/4-NRS with other common disease activity measures.

Methods

Data are from the SELECT-PsA 1 and 2 phase 3 trials in patients with prior inadequate response or intolerance to ≥1 non-biologic DMARD or ≥1 biologic DMARD, respectively. In both trials, patients received once daily UPA 15 mg, UPA 30 mg, or placebo (PBO); SELECT-PsA 1 also included the active comparator adalimumab (ADA) 40 mg every other week (wk). 3-NRS scores were determined using the mean of SAPS questions 1–10, physician’s global assessment of disease activity, and patient’s global assessment of disease activity; 4-NRS scores were determined using the mean of SAPS questions 1–10, physician’s global assessment of disease activity, patient’s assessment of pain, and BASDAI question 3 related to joint pain and swelling. The 3/4-NRS scale ranges from 0 (no disease activity) to 10 (severe activity). 3/4-NRS and cDAPSA (DAPSA without the CRP component) were assessed at all available visits through wk 56. Correlations between 3/4-NRS with PsA disease activity score (PASDAS), routine assessment of patient index data 3 (RAPID3), DAPSA, cDAPSA, and other disease activity measures were determined by nonparametric Spearman rank correlation coefficient for UPA 15 mg patients from both trials and ADA for SELECT-PsA 1. All data are shown as observed; nominal p-values are provided throughout.

Results

A total of 1281 and 423 patients were included from SELECT-PsA 1 and 2, respectively. For both cDAPSA and 3/4-NRS scores, patients receiving UPA 15 mg showed clear numerical improvements compared with PBO at wk 24 in both trials (Table 1). 3/4-NRS scores were highly correlated with RAPID3 and PASDAS measures (r >0.6, P <0.0001) for UPA 15 mg patients at baseline (Figure 1). Moderate correlations were observed between 3/4-NRS and DAPSA/cDAPSA (r = ~0.4, P <0.0001), as well as physical function (HAQ-DI) and quality of life measures (SF-36). Nominally significant but weaker correlations were detected for joints, skin, and other disease activity assessments. Similar overall results were observed for patients receiving ADA.

Table 1.

3/4-NRS and cDAPSA Disease Activity Scores at Week 24 and 56 (As Observed)

SELECT-PsA 1Wk 24Wk 56Mean score [n]PBOUPA 15 mgADAUPA 15 mgADA3-NRS3.7 [370]2.2 [398]2.4 [398]1.8 [372]2.0 [359]4-NRS3.8 [367]2.3 [392]2.6 [395]1.9 [367]2.2 [357]cDAPSA24.0 [372]14.9 [399]16.6 [400]10.2 [372]11.3 [358]SELECT-PsA 2Wk 24Wk 56Mean score [n]PBOUPA 15 mgUPA 15 mg3-NRS4.7 [172]2.9 [190]2.4 [164]4-NRS4.9 [170]3.1 [188]2.7 [162]cDAPSA37.1 [172]21.6 [190]15.3 [166]

3/4-NRS ranges from 0–10; cDAPSA ranges from 0–154. Lower scores indicate decreased disease activity.

Conclusion

3/4-NRS was able to successfully discriminate between PBO and therapeutic groups in SELECT-PsA 1 and 2. 3/4-NRS scores correlated well with other clinical and patient reported outcome measures, including those focused on joints (DAPSA) or multiple manifestations (PASDAS), supporting 3/4-NRS as a viable and easy to use tool in daily clinical practice.

References

[1]Tillett W, et al. J Rheumatol 2021; 201675.

Acknowledgements

AbbVie and the authors thank the patients, study sites, and investigators who participated in these clinical trials. AbbVie funded these studies and participated in the study design, research, analysis, data collection, interpretation of data, reviewing, and approval of the publication. All authors had access to relevant data and participated in the drafting, review, and approval of this publication. No honoraria or payments were made for authorship. Medical writing support was provided by Matthew Eckwahl, PhD, of AbbVie.

Disclosure of Interests

William Tillett Speakers bureau: AbbVie, Amgen, Celgene, Lilly, Janssen, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, and UCB, Consultant of: AbbVie, Amgen, Celgene, Lilly, Janssen, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, and UCB., Laura Coates Speakers bureau: AbbVie, Amgen, Biogen, BMS, Boehringer Ingelheim, Celgene, Galapagos, Gilead, GSK, Janssen, Lilly, Medac, Novartis, Pfizer, Serac, and UCB., Consultant of: AbbVie, Amgen, Biogen, BMS, Boehringer Ingelheim, Celgene, Galapagos, Gilead, GSK, Janssen, Lilly, Medac, Novartis, Pfizer, Serac, and UCB., Mitsumasa Kishimoto Consultant of: AbbVie, Amgen-Astellas BioPharma, Asahi-Kasei Pharma, Astellas, Ayumi Pharma, BMS, Celgene, Chugai, Daiichi-Sankyo, Eisai, Eli Lilly, Gilead, Janssen, Kyowa Kirin, Novartis, Ono Pharma, Pfizer, Tanabe-Mitsubishi, Teijin Pharma, and UCB Pharma., Arathi Setty Shareholder of: AbbVie, Employee of: AbbVie, Tianming Gao Shareholder of: AbbVie, Employee of: AbbVie, Ralph Lippe Shareholder of: AbbVie, Employee of: AbbVie, Philip Helliwell Paid instructor for: Educational services: Abbvie, Amgen, Novartis, Janssen, Consultant of: Eli Lilly

POS1031 EARLIER CLINICAL RESPONSE PREDICT LOW RATES OF RADIOGRAPHIC PROGRESSION IN BIO-NAIVE ACTIVE PSORIATIC ARTHRITIS PATIENTS RECEIVING GUSELKUMAB TREATMENT

Background

Guselkumab (GUS), an IL-23p19-subunit inhibitor, demonstrated efficacy and a favorable safety profile in patients (pts) with psoriasis (PsO) and psoriatic arthritis (PsA). In the Phase 3, double-blind, placebo (PBO)-controlled DISCOVER-2 study, GUS 100 mg every 4 or 8 weeks (Q4W or Q8W) significantly improved joint and skin symptoms; GUS-treated pts had smaller mean changes in radiographic progression vs. PBO at W24.1 Low rates of radiographic progression were observed through 2 years among GUS-treated pts, regardless of dosing regimen.2,3

Objectives

Determine whether earlier clinical improvement predicts long-term radiographic progression through 2 years in DISCOVER-2.

Methods

DISCOVER-2 included biologic-naïve pts with active PsA (≥5 swollen and ≥5 tender joint counts [SJC/TJC]; CRP ≥0.6 mg/dL) randomized (1:1:1) to GUS 100 mg Q4W; GUS 100 mg at W0, W4, then Q8W; or PBO with crossover to GUS 100 mg Q4W (PBO→Q4W) at W24. For pts randomized to GUS Q4W or Q8W, predictive models (mixed linear) were developed post-hoc to assess the associations of earlier (at W16) improvement in disease activity (DAPSA remission, DAPSA Improvement, DAPSA Improvement more than the median of 20.7 [>20.7]) or skin improvement (PASI90, PASI≤1) with changes in total PsA modified van der Heijde-Sharp [vdH-S] score through W100, after adjusting for known baseline (BL) determinants of radiographic progression (vdH-S score, age, gender, and CRP).

Results

PsA duration, CRP, and SJC at BL weakly correlated with BL vdH-S score. No correlation was seen between BL PASI and BL vdH-S score (Table 1). Greater improvement in DAPSA score (β [95%CI]: -0.03 [-0.04, -0.01]) and improvement >20.7 in DAPSA from BL to W16 was associated with significantly less radiographic progression through W100 after adjusting for BL DAPSA score, vdH-S score, age, gender, and CRP level. Achievement of PASI90, PASI≤1, and DAPSA remission at W16 was associated with numerically less radiographic progression through W100 after adjusting for BL PASI, vdH-S score, age, gender, and CRP (Figure).

Table 1.

Correlation of Select BL Disease Characteristics with BL vdH-S Score Among GUS Randomized Pts

BL DeterminantsSpearman’s correlation coefficientp-valueAge0.27335<.0001CRP0.28181<.0001PASI Score0.030780.5153PsA Duration0.37070<.0001PsO Duration0.20509<.0001SJC (66)0.26321<.0001

Conclusion

In GUS-treated biologic-naïve pts with active PsA, following adjustment for known BL determinants of radiographic progression, earlier (W16) DAPSA improvement was a significant predictor of less radiographic progression through W100; DAPSA remission and skin improvement at W16 each showed a numerical trend toward less radiographic progression through W100.

References

[1]Mease PJ, et al. Lancet. 2020;395:1126–36.

[2]McInnes IB, et al. Arthritis Rheumatol. 2021;73:604-16.

[3]McInnes IB, et al. Arthritis Rheumatol. 2021 Nov 1. doi: 10.1002/art.42010. Online ahead of print.

Disclosure of Interests

Philip J Mease Speakers bureau: AbbVie, Amgen, Eli Lilly, Janssen, Novartis, Pfizer, Sun Pharma, and UCB, Consultant of: AbbVie, Aclaris, Amgen, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol Myers Squibb, Eli Lilly, Galapagos, Gilead, GlaxoSmithKline, Inmagene, Janssen, Novartis, Pfizer, Sun Pharma, and UCB, Grant/research support from: AbbVie, Amgen, Bristol Myers Squibb, Eli Lilly, Galapagos, Gilead, Janssen, Novartis, Pfizer, Sun Pharma, and UCB, Alice B Gottlieb Speakers bureau: AnaptsysBio, Avotres Therapeutics, Beiersdorf, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Incyte, GSK, Janssen, LEO Pharma, Eli Lilly, Novartis, Pfizer, Sun Pharmaceutical Industries, Inc., UCB, and Dermavant, Consultant of: AnaptsysBio, Avotres Therapeutics, Beiersdorf, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Incyte, GSK, Janssen, LEO Pharma, Eli Lilly, Novartis, Pfizer, Sun Pharmaceutical Industries, Inc., UCB, and Dermavant, Grant/research support from: Boehringer Ingelheim, Incyte, Janssen, Novartis, UCB, Xbiotech, and Sun Pharma, Alexis Ogdie Consultant of: Abbvie, Amgen, BMS, Celgene, CorEvitas, Gilead, Happify Health, Janssen, Lilly, Novartis, Pfizer, and UCB, Grant/research support from: University of Pennsylvania from Abbvie, Pfizer and Novartis and to Forward from Amgen, Iain McInnes Shareholder of: Causeway Therapeutics, and Evelo Compugen, Consultant of: Astra Zeneca, AbbVie, Amgen, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Eli Lilly, Cabaletta, Compugen, GSK, Gilead, Janssen, Novartis, Pfizer, Sanofi, Roche, and UCB, Grant/research support from: Astra Zeneca, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Amgen, Eli Lilly, GSK, Janssen, Novartis, Roche, and UCB, Soumya D Chakravarty Shareholder of: Johnson & Johnson, Employee of: Janssen Scientific Affairs, LLC and Drexel University College of Medicine, Emmanouil Rampakakis Consultant of: Janssen, Employee of: JSS Medical Research, Alexa Kollmeier Shareholder of: Johnson & Johnson, Employee of: Janssen Research & Development, LLC, Xie L Xu Shareholder of: Johnson & Johnson, Employee of: Janssen Research & Development, LLC, May Shawi Shareholder of: Johnson & Johnson, Employee of: Janssen Pharmaceutical Companies of Johnson & Johnson, Frederic Lavie Shareholder of: Johnson & Johnson, Employee of: Janssen Cilag Global Medial Affairs, Mitsumasa Kishimoto Speakers bureau: AbbVie, Amgen-Astellas BioPharma, Asahi-Kasei Pharma, Astellas, Ayumi Pharma, BMS, Chugai, Daiichi-Sankyo, Eisai, Eli Lilly, Gilead, Janssen, Kyowa Kirin, Novartis, Pfizer, Tanabe-Mitsubishi, Teijin Pharma, and UCB, Consultant of: AbbVie, Amgen-Astellas BioPharma, Asahi-Kasei Pharma, Astellas, Ayumi Pharma, BMS, Chugai, Daiichi-Sankyo, Eisai, Eli Lilly, Gilead, Janssen, Kyowa Kirin, Novartis, Pfizer, Tanabe-Mitsubishi, Teijin Pharma, and UCB, Proton Rahman Speakers bureau: Janssen, Consultant of: AbbVie, Amgen, Bristol Myers Squibb, Celgene, Eli Lilly, Janssen, Merck, Novartis, Pfizer, and UCB, Grant/research support from: Janssen and Novartis

POS0081 LONG-TERM EFFICACY AND SAFETY OF UPADACITINIB IN PATIENTS WITH PSORIATIC ARTHRITIS: 2-YEAR RESULTS FROM THE PHASE 3 SELECT-PsA 1 STUDY

Background

In SELECT-PsA 1, patients (pts) with psoriatic arthritis (PsA) and an inadequate response or intolerance to ≥1 non-biologic disease-modifying antirheumatic drug showed improvement in the signs and symptoms of PsA with upadacitinib 15 mg (UPA15) or 30 mg (UPA30), an oral Janus kinase (JAK) inhibitor, through week (wk) 56.1

Objectives

To evaluate the efficacy and safety of UPA and UPA vs adalimumab (ADA) at wk 104 from the ongoing long-term extension of SELECT-PsA 1.

Methods

Pts received UPA15, UPA30, ADA 40 mg, or placebo (PBO) for 24 wks, at which point, PBO pts switched to UPA15 or UPA30. Efficacy endpoints were analyzed using non-responder imputation (NRI) and as observed (AO) (binary endpoints) or mixed-effect model repeated measures and AO (continuous endpoints), with nominal P-values shown, for continuous UPA and ADA treatment groups. Treatment-emergent adverse events were summarized for pts who received ≥1 dose of study drug using a visit-based cut-off at wk 104.

Results

1704 pts received ≥1 dose of study drug. At wk 104, 25.4% of patients had discontinued study drug. The proportions of pts who achieved ACR20/50/70, MDA, PASI75/90/100, and resolution of enthesitis or dactylitis showed consistent responses, or further improvements, from wk 561 to wk 104 (Table 1). ACR20/50/70 and MDA responses, as well as mean change from baseline (BL) in HAQ-DI, patient’s assessment of pain, BASDAI, and ASDAS, were greater with UPA vs ADA. Mean change from BL in modified total Sharp/van der Heijde Score (mTSS) was generally similar across groups and comparable to wk 56.1 The safety profile of UPA was generally comparable to ADA (Figure 1) and consistent with wk 561 data. Rates of serious infection, herpes zoster, lymphopenia, and elevated CPK remained numerically higher with UPA30 vs UPA15; rates in both UPA groups were higher vs ADA. Rates of malignancies, MACE, or VTE were similar across groups, and consistent with wk 561 data. Two deaths were reported with UPA15, 1 with UPA30, and 1 with ADA.

Table 1.

Efficacy Endpoints at Week 104

EndpointUPA15(n=429)UPA30(n=423)ADA(n=429)Proportion of Pts (%)aNRIAONRIAONRIAOACR2069.087.969.587.963.485.1ACR5053.667.459.3*74.147.162.3ACR7038.0*47.443.5*54.429.439.1Minimal Disease Activity (MDA)42.054.845.9*56.837.850.3PASI75b57.973.462.478.658.876.5PASI90b46.759.053.366.548.863.3PASI100b34.143.442.451.434.144.0Resolution of enthesitis by LEIc53.375.552.272.049.173.9Resolution of dactylitis by LDId69.994.571.796.272.495.2Change from BLeMMRMAOMMRMAOMMRMAOHealth Assessment Questionnaire - Disability Index (HAQ-DI)-0.55*-0.57-0.55*-0.59-0.45-0.47Patient’s assessment of pain (numeric rating scale)-3.3-3.5-3.4*-3.6-3.0-3.2Bath Ankylosing Spondylitis Disease Activity Index (BASDAI)f-3.0-3.2-3.3-3.6-2.7-2.6Ankylosing Spondylitis Disease Activity Score (ASDAS)f-1.6-1.8-1.9*-2.1-1.5-1.6Modified total Sharp/van der Heijde Score (mTSS)0.030.010.010.000.110.11

ACR20/50/70, ≥20%/50%/70% improvement in American College of Rheumatology criteria; ADA, adalimumab; AO, as observed; BL, baseline; LDI, Leeds Dactylitis Index; LEI, Leeds Enthesitis Index; MMRM, mixed effect model repeated measurement; NRI, non-responder imputation; PASI75/90/100, ≥75%/90%/100% improvement in Psoriasis Area and Severity Index; pts, patients; UPA, upadacitinib.

aData shown as NRI and AO for binary endpoints.

bFor pts with psoriasis affecting ≥3% of body surface area at BL.

cFor pts with LEI >0 at BL; resolution LEI=0.

dFor pts with LDI >0 at BL; resolution LDI=0.

eData shown as MMRM (LS mean) and AO (mean) for continuous endpoints.

fFor pts with psoriatic spondylitis at BL.

Nominal *P<0.05, UPA15 or UPA30 vs ADA for NRI and MMRM; AO descriptive only.

Conclusion

In PsA pts, efficacy responses were similar or greater with UPA15 or UPA30 vs ADA at wk 104, and inhibition of radiographic progression was maintained. No new safety signals were identified with long-term exposure to UPA up to 2 years.

References

[1]McInnes I, et al. RMD Open, 2021; 7(3):e001838.

Acknowledgements

AbbVie and the authors thank the patients, study sites, and investigators who participated in this clinical trial (NCT03104400). AbbVie funded this study and participated in the study design, research, analysis, data collection, interpretation of data, reviewing, and approval of the publication. All authors had access to relevant data and participated in the drafting, review, and approval of this publication. No honoraria or payments were made for authorship. Medical writing support was provided by Monica R.P. Elmore, PhD of AbbVie.

Disclosure of Interests

Iain McInnes Consultant of: AbbVie, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Celgene, Eli Lilly, Gilead, Janssen, Novartis, Pfizer, Sanofi Regeneron, and UCB Pharma, Grant/research support from: AbbVie, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Celgene, Eli Lilly, Gilead, Janssen, Novartis, Pfizer, Sanofi Regeneron, and UCB Pharma, Koji Kato Shareholder of: Employee of AbbVie and may hold stock or options, Employee of: Employee of AbbVie, Marina Magrey Consultant of: UCB, Novartis, Eli Lilly, Pfizer, and Janssen, Grant/research support from: Amgen, AbbVie, and UCB Pharma, Joseph F. Merola Consultant of: Merck, Bristol-Myers Squibb, AbbVie, Dermavant, Eli Lilly, Novartis, Janssen, UCB, Celgene, Sanofi, Regeneron, Arena, Sun Pharma, Biogen, Pfizer, EMD Sorono, Avotres, and Leo Pharma, Mitsumasa Kishimoto Consultant of: AbbVie, Amgen-Astellas BioPharma, Asahi-Kasei Pharma, Astellas, Ayumi Pharma, BMS, Celgene, Chugai, Daiichi-Sankyo, Eisai, Eli Lilly, Gilead, Janssen, Kyowa Kirin, Novartis, Ono Pharma, Pfizer, Tanabe-Mitsubishi, Teijin Pharma, and UCB Pharma, Derek Haaland Speakers bureau: AbbVie, Amgen, AstraZeneca, Bristol-Myers Squibb, GlaxoSmithKline, Janssen, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, Sanofi Genzyme, Takeda, Consultant of: AbbVie, Amgen, AstraZeneca, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Eli-Lilly, GlaxoSmithKline, Janssen, Merck, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, Sanofi Genzyme, Takeda, UCB, Grant/research support from: AbbVie, Adiga Life-Sciences, Amgen, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Can-Fite Biopharma, Celgene, Eli-Lilly, Gilead, GlaxoSmithKline, Janssen, Novartis, Pfizer, Regeneron, Sanofi-Genzyme, UCB, Liang Chen Shareholder of: Employee of AbbVie and may hold stock or options, Employee of: Employee of AbbVie, Yuanyuan Duan Shareholder of: Employee of AbbVie and may hold stock or options, Employee of: Employee of AbbVie, Jianzhong Liu Shareholder of: Employee of AbbVie and may hold stock or options, Employee of: Employee of AbbVie, Ralph Lippe Shareholder of: Employee of AbbVie and may hold stock or options, Employee of: Employee of AbbVie, Peter Wung Shareholder of: Employee of AbbVie and may hold stock or options, Employee of: Employee of AbbVie

POS0970 SAME OR DIFFERENT? ANALYSIS OF SIMILARITIES AND DIFFERENCES OF CROHN’S DISEASE AND ULCERATIVE COLITIS IN SPONDYLOARTHRITIS: AN ANCILLARY ANALYSIS FROM THE WORLDWIDE ASAS-perSpA STUDY

Background

Crohn’s disease (CD) and ulcerative colitis (UC) are grouped as inflammatory bowel disease (IBD), and both are frequently found as extra-musculoskeletal manifestations in spondyloarthritis (SpA). Several studies have described the connection between SpA and IBD in both directions. Still until today, no studies have investigated possible differences in the musculoskeletal manifestations between the two main entities of inflammatory bowel disease: CD and UC.

Objectives

To evaluate the clinical characteristics associated with the presence of CD or UC in patients with spondyloarthritis from the international cross-sectional ASAS-perSpA study.

Methods

We analyzed 3152 patients from the ASAS per-SpA cohort who had a diagnosis of axial SpA or peripheral SpA according to the treating rheumatologist. Patients with IBD - confirmed by endoscopy - were identified and stratified by CD or UC. Patients in which their IBD disease was not specified, were excluded. Demographics, clinical characteristics, treatments and patient-reported outcomes were compared between both subgroups.

Results

Among the 146 patients diagnosed with IBD from the 3152 patients included in the analysis, 87 (59.6%) presented with CD (75 patients with axial SpA and 12 with peripheral SpA) and 39 (26.7%) with UC (34 patients with axial SpA and 5 with peripheral SpA) - Figure 1. A total of 20 (13.7%) patients with IBD were excluded, due to an inconclusive diagnosis of IBD. Patients with CD and UC had similar age (44.9 vs 44.0 years old) and sex distribution, although a slightly higher frequency of males was observed in CD than UC (63.2% vs 51.3%). The diagnostic delay for SpA was 7.0 years for CD and 8.1 years for UC. We did not find differences between both groups related to any musculoskeletal manifestations such as chronic back pain, uveitis, arthritis, enthesitis or dactylitis (Table 1). The only parameter showing a significant difference between CD and UC was the Bath Ankylosing Spondylitis Functional Index (BASFI) with a mean score of 3.3 vs 2.2 respectively (p=0.02) (Table 1). CD patients showed a higher tendency to be HLA-B27 positive (51.9% in CD vs. 39.4% in UC), but this did not reach statistical significance. No differences were observed regarding treatment patterns between both groups.

Table 1.

Demographics and clinical characteristics related to spondyloarthritis of patients with concomitant Crohn’s disease or ulcerative colitis (n=146).

Crohn’s Disease N=87Ulcerative Colitis N=39PAge, mean (SD)44.9 (13.5)44.0 (13.0)0.68Sex, n/N (%) male55/87 (63.2)20/39 (51.3)0.21Smoker ever, n/N (%)36/87 (41.4)19/39 (48.7)0.44Diagnostic delay of SpA (years), mean (SD)7.0 (6.9)8.8 (8.1)0.38Psoriasis ever, n/N (%)9/87 (10.3)6/39 (15.4)0.47Uveitis ever, n/N (%)17/87 (19.5)11/39 (28.2)0.28Synovitis ever, n/N (%)42/87 (48.3)18/39 (46.2)0.83Enthesitis ever, n/N (%)26/87 (29.9)14/39 (35.9)0.50Dactylitis ever, n/N (%)3/87 (3.4)1/39 (2.6)0.79Axial involvement ever (according to the rheumatologist), n/N (%)79/87 (90.8)37/39 (94.9)0.44Sacroiliitis on X-ray, n/N (%)64/87 (73.6)26/39 (66.7)0.19HLA-B27 positive, n/N (%)28/54 (51.9)13/33 (39.4)0.26CRP mg/L, mean (SD)11.1 (33.8)15.3 (30.1)0.13ASDAS-CRP, mean (SD)2.4 (1.0)2.4 (1.1)0.84BASFI, mean (SD) 0-103.3 (2.6)2.2 (2.1)0.02csDMARDs ever, n/N (%)71/87 (81.6)35/39 (89.7)0.25bDMARDs ever, n/N (%)72/87 (82.8)33/39 (84.6)0.80

ASDAS, Ankylosing Spondylitis Disease Activity Score; BASFI, Bath Ankylosing Spondylitis Functional Index; bDMARD, biological disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs; CRP, c-reactive protein; csDMARD, conventional synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs; SD, standard deviation; SpA, spondyloarthritis.

Conclusion

In our ancillary analysis of the ASAS-perSpA study in patients with SpA and concomitant CD or UC, no differences in the clinical presentation or demographic characteristics between the two subgroups were observed, except for the BASFI.

Disclosure of Interests

None declared

OP0016 EFFICACY AND SAFETY OF UPADACITINIB IN PATIENTS WITH ACTIVE NON-RADIOGRAPHIC AXIAL SPONDYLOARTHRITIS: A DOUBLE-BLIND, RANDOMIZED, PLACEBO-CONTROLLED PHASE 3 TRIAL

Background

Janus kinase (JAK) inhibitors have been recognized as a potential therapeutic option in ankylosing spondylitis (AS), also known as radiographic axial spondyloarthritis (r-axSpA).1 Upadacitinib (UPA), a JAK inhibitor, has demonstrated efficacy and safety in the treatment of AS2; however, no JAK inhibitor studies have been conducted in non-radiographic axSpA (nr-axSpA) to date.

Objectives

To assess the efficacy and safety of UPA in patients (pts) with active nr-axSpA.

Methods

SELECT-AXIS 2 (NCT04169373) was conducted under a master protocol comprising two independent studies, one in an AS population with an inadequate response to biologic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs and one in an nr-axSpA population. The nr-axSpA study is a randomized, double-blind, placebo(PBO)-controlled, phase 3 trial that enrolled adults ≥18 years with a clinical diagnosis of nr-axSpA (who also fulfilled 2009 ASAS classification criteria for axSpA but did not meet the radiologic criterion of modified New York criteria), who had objective signs of active inflammation consistent with axSpA on MRI of the sacroiliac (SI) joints and/or high sensitivity C-reactive protein (hs-CRP) >upper limit of normal (2.87 mg/L) at screening, and who had BASDAI and pt’s assessment of total back pain scores ≥4 based on a 0 to 10 numeric rating scale at study entry. Pts were randomized 1:1 to receive oral UPA 15 mg once daily (QD) or PBO during a 52-week (wk) double-blind treatment period. The primary endpoint was ASAS40 response at wk 14. Multiplicity-controlled secondary endpoints assessed at wk 14 included BASDAI50, ASDAS ID (<1.3), ASDAS LDA (<2.1), ASDAS PR, and ASAS20, and the change from baseline (Δ) in ASDAS (CRP), SPARCC MRI SI joint inflammation score, total and nocturnal back pain, BASFI, ASQoL, ASAS HI, BASMI, and MASES. Treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) are reported through wk 14 for pts who received ≥1 dose of study drug.

Results

Of 314 pts randomized at baseline, 313 received study drug (UPA 15 mg, n=156; PBO, n=157) and 295 (94%) received study drug through wk 14. Baseline demographic and disease characteristics were balanced across treatment groups and consistent with an active nr-axSpA population (58% female; mean age 42.1 years; mean BASDAI 6.9; mean hs-CRP 12.1 mg/L). A significantly higher ASAS40 response rate at wk 14 was achieved with UPA vs PBO (45% vs 23%; P<0.0001; Figure 1). Statistical significance was also achieved in the first 12 of the 14 multiplicity-controlled secondary endpoints (ie, all endpoints except BASMI and MASES) at wk 14 for UPA compared with PBO (P<0.01; Figure 1). The proportion of pts who experienced a TEAE was similar between treatment groups (UPA, 48%; PBO, 46%). Serious TEAEs and TEAEs leading to discontinuation were reported in 4 (2.6%) pts treated with UPA and 2 (1.3%) pts treated with PBO, respectively. Few pts had serious infection or herpes zoster (each 2 [1.3%] pts on UPA; each 1 [0.6%] pt on PBO, respectively). Uveitis was reported in 1 (0.6%) pt on UPA who had a history of uveitis and none on PBO. No malignancy other than non-melanoma skin cancer, major adverse cardiovascular events, venous thromboembolic events, inflammatory bowel disease (IBD), or death were reported in the study; 1 event of basal cell carcinoma occurred with PBO.

Conclusion

UPA 15 mg QD demonstrated significantly greater improvements in disease activity, pain, function, quality of life, and MRI-detected SI joint inflammation than PBO after 14 wks of treatment in pts with active nr-axSpA. The safety profile of UPA was consistent with what has been observed with other inflammatory musculoskeletal diseases,3–5 and no new risks were identified. These results support the potential use of UPA in pts with active nr-axSpA.

References

[1]Ward MM, et al. Arthritis Rheumatol. 2019;71(10):1599–63.

[2]van der Heijde D, et al. Arthritis Rheumatol. 2021;73(suppl 10).

[3]Cohen SB, et al. ARD. 2021;80:304–311.

[4]Burmester G, et al. Rheumatol Ther. 2021;1–19.

[5]van der Heijde D, et al. Lancet. 2019;394(10214):2108–2117.

Acknowledgements

AbbVie funded this study and participated in the study design, research, analysis, data collection, interpretation of data, review, and approval of the abstract. No honoraria or payments were made for authorship. Medical writing support was provided by Julia Zolotarjova, MSc, MWC, of AbbVie.

Disclosure of Interests

Atul Deodhar Consultant of: AbbVie, Amgen, Aurinia, BMS, Celgene, GSK, Janssen, Lilly, MoonLake, Novartis, Pfizer, and UCB, Grant/research support from: AbbVie, GSK, Lilly, Novartis, Pfizer, and UCB, Filip van den Bosch Speakers bureau: AbbVie, Celgene, Janssen, Lilly, Merck, Novartis, Pfizer, and UCB, Consultant of: AbbVie, Celgene, Janssen, Lilly, Merck, Novartis, Pfizer, and UCB, Denis Poddubnyy Speakers bureau: AbbVie, BMS, Celgene, Janssen, Lilly, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, and UCB, Consultant of: AbbVie, BMS, Celgene, Janssen, Lilly, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, and UCB, Grant/research support from: AbbVie, MSD, Novartis, and Pfizer, Walter P Maksymowych Consultant of: AbbVie, Boehringer Ingelheim, Celgene, Galapagos, Gilead, Janssen, Lilly, Novartis, Pfizer, and UCB, Grant/research support from: AbbVie, Novartis, and Pfizer, Désirée van der Heijde Consultant of: AbbVie, Bayer, BMS, Cyxone, Eisai, Galapagos, Gilead, GSK, Janssen, Lilly, Novartis, Pfizer, UCB, Employee of: Director of Imaging Rheumatology BV, Tae-Hwan Kim Speakers bureau: AbbVie, Celltrion, Kirin, Lilly, and Novartis, Mitsumasa Kishimoto Consultant of: AbbVie, Amgen Astellas BioPharma, Asahi-Kasei Pharma, Astellas, Ayumid Pharma, BMS, Chugai, Daiichi Sankyo, Eisai, Gilead, Janssen, Kyowa Kirin, Lilly, Novartis, Ono Pharma, Pfizer, Tanabe-Mitsubishi, Teijin Pharma, and UCB, Yuanyuan Duan Shareholder of: May own AbbVie stock or options, Employee of: AbbVie, Yihan Li Shareholder of: May own AbbVie stock or options, Employee of: AbbVie, Aileen Pangan Shareholder of: May own AbbVie stock or options, Employee of: AbbVie, Peter Wung Shareholder of: May own AbbVie stock or options, Employee of: AbbVie, In-Ho Song Shareholder of: May own AbbVie stock or options, Employee of: AbbVie.

Attenuated fusogenicity and pathogenicity of SARS-CoV-2 Omicron variant

The emergence of the Omicron variant of SARS-CoV-2 is an urgent global health concern¹. In this study, our statistical modelling suggests that Omicron has spread more rapidly than the Delta variant in several countries including South Africa. Cell culture experiments showed Omicron to be less fusogenic than Delta and than an ancestral strain of SARS-CoV-2. Although the spike (S) protein of Delta is efficiently cleaved into two subunits, which facilitates cell-cell fusion^2,3, the Omicron S protein was less efficiently cleaved compared to the S proteins of Delta and ancestral SARS-CoV-2. Furthermore, in a hamster model, Omicron showed decreased lung infectivity and was less pathogenic compared to Delta and ancestral SARS-CoV-2. Our multiscale investigations reveal the virological characteristics of Omicron, including rapid growth in the human population, lower fusogenicity and attenuated pathogenicity.

Air-liquid interphase culture confers SARS-CoV-2 susceptibility to A549 alveolar epithelial cells

The human lung cell A549 is susceptible to infection with a number of respiratory viruses. However, A549 cells are resistant to Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome-Coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection in conventional submerged culture, and this would appear to be due to low expression levels of the SARS-CoV-2 entry receptor: angiotensin-converting enzyme-2 (ACE2). Here, we examined SARS-CoV-2 susceptibility to A549 cells after adaptation to air-liquid interface (ALI) culture. A549 cells in ALI culture yielded a layer of mucus on their apical surface, exhibited decreased expression levels of the proliferation marker KI-67 and intriguingly became susceptible to SARS-CoV-2 infection. We found that A549 cells increased the endogenous expression levels of ACE2 and TMPRSS2 following adaptation to ALI culture conditions. Camostat, a TMPRSS2 inhibitor, reduced SARS-CoV-2 infection in ALI-cultured A549 cells. These findings indicate that ALI culture switches the phenotype of A549 cells from resistance to susceptibility to SARS-CoV-2 infection through upregulation of ACE2 and TMPRSS2.

P–019 Sperm parameter and ICSI / IVF outcomes after sperm selection using microfluidic sperm separator and density gradient centrifugation with swim-up in split semen sample

Study question

To analyze whether microfluidic sperm selection (MSS) by ZyMōt™ improves sperm DNA fragmentation rate and embryonic development compared to density gradient centrifugation with swim-up (DGCS).

Summary answer

MSS by ZyMōt™ selects sperm for clinical use with less DNA damage significantly compared to DGCS.

What is known already

Conventional sperm preparation methods, such as density gradient centrifugation and the swim-up method utilize centrifugation during processing, may damage the sperm. MSS may allow for improved selection of normal sperm compared with conventional sperm preparation as it yields sperm with a lower DNA fragmentation rate. However, there are few clinical studies by sibling oocytes study compared to DGCS.

Study design, size, duration

This prospective study was performed between March 2020 and May 2020 at a reproductive center. All patients involved gave written consent, and institutional review board approval was granted. A total of 575 metaphase II oocytes were collected from 49 cycles. Wife’s age was 34.7 ± 3.9 years old. Raw sperm concentration and motile sperm concentration was 63.1 ± 78.7M/mL, and 41.6 ± 67.7M/mL, respectively.

Participants/materials, setting, methods

Patients who performed ART for the first or second time were divided into two groups according to MSS and DGCS. Sperm DNA fragmentation rate (SDFR) and motile sperm concentration were compered between MSS and DGCS. SDFR was measured by sperm chromatin structure assay (SCSA) using a flow cytometer. Sibling oocytes were randomized into MSS-IVF, DGCS-IVF, MSS-ICSI, and DGCS-ICSI. Rate of two pronuclear (2PN) oocytes, blastocysts development, and good-quality blastocysts were compared between each group.

Main results and the role of chance

SDFR was 13.5 ± 11.8% for raw semen. SDFR was significantly lower after MSS (3.6 ± 4.1%) than that for raw semen and after DGCS (17.4 ± 14.8%) (P &lt; 0.01). Motile sperm concentration after MSS (19.0 ± 28.3M/mL) was significantly higher after than after DGCS (15.4 ± 15.3M/mL) (P &lt; 0.01). The number of IVF performed was 145 for MSS and 132 for DGCS. IVF results (MSS vs DGCS) were 2PN rate (73.1% vs 72.0%), blastocysts development rate (65.3% vs 55.4%), and good quality blastocysts rate (43.2% vs 34.9%). The number of ICSI performed was 149 for MSS and 149 for DGCS. ICSI results (MSS vs DGCS) were 2PN rate (77.9% vs 79.2%), blastocysts development rate (68.8% vs 65.8%), and good quality blastocysts rate (35.8% vs 30.6%). No significant difference was observed between MSS and DGCS for each parameter both IVF and ICSI.

Limitations, reasons for caution

The participants were limited to those who collected semen of 2mL or more and motile sperm concentration of above 1M/mL, because semen sample needed to be divided to MSS and DGCS.

Wider implications of the findings: This is the first study to conducted in sibling oosytes study with MSS and DGCS, in both IVF and ICSI. MSS is effective in collecting sperm with less DNA damage compared to DGCS. Motile sperm concentration after using MSS is sufficient to perform IVF as well as DGCS.

Trial registration number

Not applicable

POS1030 EFFICACY OF UPADACITINIB IN PATIENTS WITH PSORIATIC ARTHRITIS STRATIFIED BY BASELINE SKIN SEVERITY: A SUBGROUP ANALYSIS OF TWO PHASE III TRIALS

Background:

In the SELECT-PsA 1 and 2 clinical trials, upadacitinib (UPA) demonstrated efficacy and safety in patients (pts) with active psoriatic arthritis (PsA).1,2 PsA is associated with varying degrees of psoriatic symptoms; however, the impact of skin severity on treatment outcomes is not well understood.

Objectives:

This post-hoc analysis assessed the effects of baseline skin severity on UPA efficacy.

Methods:

SELECT-PsA 1 and SELECT-PsA 2 enrolled pts with PsA and prior inadequate response (IR) or intolerance to ≥1 non-biologic disease-modifying antirheumatic drug (DMARD)1 or ≥1 biologic DMARD2, respectively. In both trials, pts received once daily UPA 15 mg or UPA 30 mg or placebo (switched at Wk 24 to either UPA 15 mg or 30 mg); SELECT-PsA 1 also included the active comparator adalimumab (ADA). Only continuous UPA 15 mg and ADA are presented here. In this analysis, pts were divided into subgroups based on the extent of psoriasis at baseline (body surface area [BSA] of ≥3%-<10% or BSA ≥10%); efficacy endpoints were analyzed at Wk 56. Results for binary endpoints are based on non-responder imputation; continuous endpoints are based on mixed model repeated measures analysis with as-observed data.

Results:

In the UPA 15 mg and ADA groups, respectively, 32% (138/429) and 31% (132/429) of pts had a BSA ≥3-<10% at baseline in SELECT-PsA 1; 18% (76/429) in each treatment group had a BSA ≥10%. In SELECT-PsA 2, 38% (80/211) had a BSA ≥3-<10% and 24% (50/211) had a BSA ≥10% at baseline in the UPA 15 mg group. Across pt populations (non-biologic DMARD-IR and biologic DMARD-IR), generally consistent results were observed between patients in both skin severity subgroups (Figure 1). In non-biologic DMARD-IR pts, a numerically greater proportion of UPA 15 mg pts with lower skin involvement compared with higher skin involvement achieved PASI100 and PASI≤1, two more stringent skin endpoints. The achievement of MDA was generally consistent across skin severity subgroups; when pts were required to achieve the skin component of MDA, results were numerically better in the ≥3-<10% skin severity group (Table 1). In non-biologic DMARD-IR pts, results were similar between UPA 15 mg and ADA.

Conclusion:

UPA is a viable treatment option for pts with active PsA regardless of the extent of psoriasis at baseline. Although these results are of interest and hypothesis-generating, they should be interpreted with caution due to low sample size.

References:

[1]McInnes IB et al. Ann Rheum Dis, 2020; 79:12

[2]Mease PJ et al. Ann Rheum Dis, 2020; doi: 10.1136/annrheumdis-2020-218870

Table 1.

Additional Efficacy Outcomes at Week 56 Stratified by Severity of Skin Involvement at Baseline

SELECT-PsA 1n/N (%) [95% CI]UPA 15 mgADAsIGA 0/1 w/at least 2 point improvement from BLa ≥3%-<10%71/128 (55.5) [46.9, 64.1]53/124 (42.7) [34.0, 51.4] ≥10%29/76 (38.2) [27.2, 49.1]33/77 (42.9) [31.8, 53.9]MDA + skinb ≥3%-<10%58/138 (42.0) [33.8, 50.3]56/132 (42.4) [34.0, 50.9] ≥10%19/76 (25.0) [15.3, 34.7]28/79 (35.4) [24.9, 46.0]SELECT-PsA 2n/N (%) [95% CI]UPA 15 mgsIGA 0/1 w/at least 2 point improvement from BLa ≥3%-<10%24/71 (33.8) [22.8, 44.8] ≥10%18/50 (36.0) [22.7, 49.3] MDA + skinb ≥3%-<10%22/80 (27.5) [17.7, 37.3] ≥10%9/50 (18.0) [7.4, 28.6]

a defined as achieving an sIGA score of 0 or 1 and at least a 2 point improvement from BL, evaluated in pts with BL sIGA ≥2.

b defined as achieving 5 of the 7 criteria, with PASI ≤1 or BSA-psoriasis ≤3 as a required component.

ADA, adalimumab; BL, baseline; CI, confidence interval; MDA, minimal disease activity; sIGA, Static Investigator Global Assessment of psoriasis; UPA, upadacitinib

Acknowledgements:

AbbVie and the authors thank the patients, study sites, and investigators who participated in this clinical trial. AbbVie, Inc was the study sponsor, contributed to study design, data collection, analysis & interpretation, and to writing, reviewing, and approval of final version. No honoraria or payments were made for authorship. Medical writing support was provided by Ramona Vladea, PhD and Jamie Urbanik, PharmD both of AbbVie Inc.

Disclosure of Interests:

Joseph F. Merola Consultant of: Merck, Bristol-Myers Squibb, AbbVie, Dermavant, Eli Lilly, Novartis, Janssen, UCB, Celgene, Sanofi, Regeneron, Arena, Sun Pharma, Biogen, Pfizer, EMD Sorono, Avotres and Leo Pharma, Pascal Richette Consultant of: AbbVie, Biogen, Janssen, BMS, Roche, Pfizer, Amgen, Sanofi-Aventis, UCB, Lilly, Novartis, and Celgene, Ennio Lubrano Speakers bureau: AbbVie, Celgene, Janssen, MSD, Novartis, and Pfizer, Consultant of: AbbVie, Celgene, Janssen, MSD, Novartis, and Pfizer, Grant/research support from: AbbVie, Celgene, Janssen, MSD, Novartis, and Pfizer, Edit Drescher: None declared, Lilian Soto: None declared, Charles Lovan Shareholder of: AbbVie, Employee of: AbbVie, Koji Kato Shareholder of: AbbVie, Employee of: AbbVie, Ralph Lippe Shareholder of: AbbVie, Employee of: AbbVie, Michael Lane Shareholder of: AbbVie, Employee of: AbbVie, Mitsumasa Kishimoto Consultant of: AbbVie, Amgen-Astellas BioPharma, Asahi-Kasei Pharma, Astellas, Ayumi Pharma, BMS, Celgene, Chugai, Daiichi-Sankyo, Eisai, Eli Lilly, Gilead, Janssen, Kyowa Kirin, Novartis, Ono Pharma, Pfizer, Tanabe-Mitsubishi, Teijin Pharma, and UCB Pharma.

POS0975 CLINICAL CHARACTERISTICS OF NONRADIOGRAPHIC AXIAL SPONDYLOARTHRITIS IN ASIAN COUNTRIES COMPARED TO OTHER REGIONS: RESULTS OF THE INTERNATIONAL CROSS-SECTIONAL ASAS-COMOSPA STUDY

Background:

Clinical characteristics of nonradiographic axial spondyloarthritis (nr-ax-SpA) are highly variable across patients, and may potentially vary across patient populations, particularly due to differing distributions of human leukocyte antigens (HLA) and other genetic factors. The majority of nr-ax-SpA studies have been conducted in Europe, the United States, and small studies are reported from Asia [1].

Objectives:

To delineate clinical characteristics of patients with nr-ax-SpA in Asian countries in comparison to other areas of the world.

Methods:

Utilizing the ASAS-COMOSPA data, an international cross-sectional observational study of SpA patients, we analyzed information on demographics, disease characteristics, comorbidities, and risk factors. Patients were classified by region: Asia (China, Japan, Singapore, South Korea, and Taiwan), and non-Asian countries (Europe, Americas, and Africa); patient characteristics, including diagnosis and treatment, were compared.

Results:

Among 3984 SpA patients included in the study, 1094 were from centers in Asian countries, and 2890 from other regions. 112/780 (14.4%) of axial SpA patients in Asian countries were nr-ax-SpA, substantially less than in other countries (486/1997, 24.3%). Nr-ax-SpA patients in Asian countries compared to nr-ax-SpA in other countries were more likely male (75.9 vs 47.1%), have onset (22.8 vs 27.8 years) and diagnosis (27.2 vs 34.5 years) at younger age, and experience less diagnostic delay (1.88 vs 2.92 years) (Table 1). Nr-ax-SpA patients in Asian countries have higher prevalence of positive HLA-B27 (90.6% vs 61.9%) and fewer peripheral signs such as arthritis, enthesitis, or dactylitis (53.6% vs 66.3%) but have similar rate of extra-articular manifestations (psoriasis, IBD, or uveitis) and co-morbidities. Disease activity, functional impairment, and inflammation on MRI were less in nr-ax-SpA patients in Asian countries. NSAIDs response was higher and use of methotrexate and b-DMARDs were lower among nr-ax-SpA in Asian countries.

Conclusion:

Among axial SpA patients, substantially lower frequency of nr-ax-SpA was observed in Asian countries compared to other regions of the world. Nr-ax-SpA patients in Asian countries were predominantly male, and had younger disease onset with higher HLA-B27 positivity rate and less peripheral signs, and better response to NSAIDs. These results offer an opportunity to improve both early diagnosis and treatment of nr-ax-SpA patients in Asian countries.

Table 1.

Characteristics of nonradiographic axial SpA in Asia versus non-Asian regions

VariablesAsianon-Asian regionsp valueN112486Age at disease diagnosis, yrs27.2 [21.1, 39.6]34.5 [27.7, 41.7]<0.001Diagnostic delay, yrs1.88 [0.27, 5.56]2.92 [0.59, 9.58]0.011Male (%)85 (75.9)229 (47.1)<0.001Sacroiliitis on MRI among tested (%)49 (67.1)341 (82.2)0.005HLA B27 positivity among measured (%)96 (90.6)273 (61.9)<0.001Inflammatory Back Pain (%)107 (95.5)478 (98.4)0.076Arthritis, enthesitis, or dactylitis (%)60 (53.6)322 (66.3)0.016Psoriasis (%)12 (10.7)82 (16.9)0.142Uveitis (%)20 (17.9)81 (16.7)0.870Inflammatory bowel disease (%)5 (4.5)27 (5.6)0.817Elevated CRP (%)37 (33.0)213 (43.8)0.048Physician global assessment (0-10)2.0 [1.0, 5.0]2.0 [1.0, 4.0]0.741Patient global assessment (0-10)3.0 [1.0, 6.0]4.0 [2.0, 6.0]0.012ASDAS-CRP1.40 [0.95, 2.08]1.97 [1.21, 2.78]<0.001BASFI0.8 [0.05, 2.65]2.9 [0.8, 5.6]<0.001Good response to NSAIDs (%)80 (71.4)272 (56.0)0.004Methotrexate use (%)18 (16.1)134 (27.6)0.016Biological DMARDs use (%)27 (24.1)191 (39.3)0.004

References:

[1]López-Medina C, Ramiro S, van der Heijde D, et al. Characteristics and burden of disease in patients with radiographic and non-radiographic axial Spondyloarthritis: a comparison by systematic literature review and meta-analysis. RMD Open. 2019 Nov 21;5(2): e001108.

Acknowledgements:

This study was conducted under the umbrella of the International Society for Spondyloarthritis Assessment (ASAS) and COMOSPA study was supported by unrestricted grants from Pfizer, AbbVie and UCB.

Disclosure of Interests:

Keisuke Ono: None declared, Mitsumasa Kishimoto Speakers bureau: AbbVie, Amgen-Astellas BioPharma, Asahi-Kasei Pharma, Astellas, Ayumi Pharma, BMS, Chugai, Daiichi-Sankyo, Eisai, Eli Lilly, Gilead, Janssen, Kyowa Kirin, Novartis, Ono Pharma, Pfizer, Tanabe-Mitsubishi, Teijin Pharma, and UCB Pharma, Consultant of: AbbVie, Amgen-Astellas BioPharma, Asahi-Kasei Pharma, Astellas, Ayumi Pharma, BMS, Chugai, Daiichi-Sankyo, Eisai, Eli Lilly, Gilead, Janssen, Kyowa Kirin, Novartis, Ono Pharma, Pfizer, Tanabe-Mitsubishi, Teijin Pharma, and UCB Pharma, Sho Fukui: None declared, Satoshi Kawaai: None declared, Gautam A. Deshpande: None declared, Kazuki Yoshida Consultant of: OM1, Inc., Grant/research support from: Corrona, LLC, Naomi Ichikawa: None declared, Yuko Kaneko Speakers bureau: AbbVie, Astellas, Ayumi, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Chugai, Eisai, Eli Lilly, Hisamitsu, Jansen, Kissei, Pfizer, Sanofi, Takeda, Tanabe-Mitsubishi, and UCB, Taku Kawasaki: None declared, Kazuo Matsui: None declared, Mitsuhiro Morita: None declared, Kurisu Tada: None declared, Naoho Takizawa: None declared, Naoto Tamura: None declared, Atsuo Taniguchi: None declared, Yoshinori Taniguchi: None declared, Shigeyoshi Tsuji: None declared, Shigeto Kobayashi: None declared, Masato Okada: None declared, Clementina López-Medina: None declared, Anna Moltó Consultant of: AbbVie, Pfizer, MSD, Novartis, Gilead, Lilly and UCB, Grant/research support from: AbbVie, Pfizer, MSD, Novartis, Gilead, Lilly and UCB, Désirée van der Heijde Consultant of: AbbVie, Amgen, Astellas, AstraZeneca, Bayer, BMS, Boehringer Ingelheim, Celgene, Cyxone, Daiichi, Eisai, Eli-Lilly, Galapagos, Gilead, Glaxo-Smith-Kline, Janssen, Merck, Novartis, Pfizer, Regeneron, Roche, Sanofi, Takeda, UCB Pharma, Employee of: Imaging Rheumatology bv. (Director), Maxime Dougados: None declared, Yoshinori Komagata: None declared, Tetsuya Tomita: None declared, Shinya Kaname: None declared.

OP0144 EFFICACY AND SAFETY OF UPADACITINIB IN PATIENTS WITH ACTIVE ANKYLOSING SPONDYLITIS: 1-YEAR RESULTS FROM A RANDOMIZED, DOUBLE-BLIND, PLACEBO-CONTROLLED STUDY WITH OPEN-LABEL EXTENSION

Background:

Upadacitinib (UPA) was efficacious and well tolerated vs placebo (PBO) during the first 14 weeks (wks) of the phase 2/3 SELECT-AXIS 1 study in patients (pts) with active ankylosing spondylitis (AS) who had an inadequate response to NSAIDs.1

Objectives:

To report efficacy and safety of UPA through 1 year in the SELECT-AXIS 1 study.

Methods:

In SELECT-AXIS 1 (NCT03178487) pts were randomized 1:1 to UPA 15 mg once daily (QD) or PBO; at wk 14, pts continued in the 90-wk open-label extension and received UPA 15 mg QD; reported here are data up to wk 64. The study enrolled pts (≥18 y) with active AS (defined as BASDAI ≥4 and pt assessment of back pain ≥4 [numeric rating scale, 0–10] at screening and baseline [BL]) who had inadequate response to ≥2 NSAIDs or intolerance to or contraindication for NSAIDs and were biologic DMARD naive. Efficacy assessments included percentage of pts with Assessment of SpondyloArthritis international Society (ASAS) 20/40 response, ASAS partial remission, BASDAI50, AS Disease Activity Score (ASDAS) and change from BL in ASDAS and BASFI. Data are reported as observed and by using non-responder imputation (NRI). Treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) were reported as events per 100 patient-years (PY) up to January 31, 2020.

Results:

Of 187 pts, 178 pts (each n=89 for UPA and PBO arms) completed wk 14 on study drug and entered the open-label extension; 160 pts completed wk 64. Efficacy was maintained or continued to improve throughout the study in the continuous UPA group: 85% (95% CI, 77%–93%) of pts achieved ASAS40 at wk 64 in the as-observed analysis and 72% (63%–81%) in the NRI analysis (Figure). Pts who switched from PBO to UPA at wk 14 showed similar speed of onset and magnitude of response vs pts initially randomized to UPA: 81% (95% CI, 72%–89%) in the as-observed analysis and 70% (61%–80%) in the NRI analysis achieved ASAS40 at wk 64 (Figure). Similar results were observed for other efficacy endpoints (Figure). Among all 182 pts receiving UPA, 618 AEs were reported. AEs leading to discontinuation and serious AEs were low (Table). No serious infections, active tuberculosis, venous thromboembolic events, gastrointestinal perforation, major adverse cardiovascular events, renal dysfunction, or deaths were reported.

Table 1.

TEAEs per 100 PYs

Events/(E/100 PY)UPA 15 mg QDN=182 (237.6 PY)Any AE618 (260.1)Serious AE14 (5.9)AE leading to discontinuation15 (6.3)Infections205 (86.3) Opportunistic infection*2 (0.8) Herpes zoster†5 (2.1)Creatine phosphokinase elevation‡28 (11.8)Hepatic disorder§24 (10.1)Neutropenia||7 (2.9)Anemia||3 (1.3)Lymphopenia||2 (0.8)Malignancy¶1 (0.4)Death0

AE, adverse event; PY, patient-year; QD, once daily; TEAE, treatment-emergent AE; UPA, upadacitinib.

*Two non-serious events of esophageal candidiasis in the same patient.

†Five events in 4 patients; all non-serious and limited to 1 dermatome.

‡All events were non-serious and none led to study drug discontinuation; majority were asymptomatic.

§Majority based on asymptomatic alanine aminotransferase/aspartate aminotransferase elevations; all were non-serious and none led to study drug discontinuation.

||All events were non-serious and none led to study drug discontinuation.

¶Squamous cell carcinoma of tongue in 61-year-old male former smoker; no reasonable possibility to be study drug related per investigator.

Conclusion:

UPA 15 mg QD showed sustained and consistent efficacy over 1 year. Pts who switched from placebo to UPA at wk 14 showed a similar efficacy response compared with pts who received continuous UPA. No new safety findings were observed compared with safety data from the UPA clinical development program in other indications.2

References:

[1]van der Heijde D, et al. Lancet. 2019;394(10214):2108-2117.

[2]Cohen, et al. Arthritis Rheumatol. 2019;71(suppl 10).

Acknowledgements:

AbbVie funded this study and participated in the study design, research, analysis, data collection, interpretation of data, reviewing, and approval of the publication. All authors had access to relevant data and participated in the drafting, review, and approval of this publication. No honoraria or payments were made for authorship. Medical writing support was provided by M Hovenden and J Matsuura of ICON plc (North Wales, PA) and was funded by AbbVie.

Disclosure of Interests:

Atul Deodhar Speakers bureau: Novartis, Pfizer, Consultant of: AbbVie, Boehringer Ingelheim, Celgene, Eli Lilly, Galapagos, GlaxoSmithKline, Janssen, Novartis, Pfizer, UCB, Grant/research support from: AbbVie, Eli Lilly, GlaxoSmithKline, Novartis, Pfizer, UCB, Désirée van der Heijde Consultant of: AbbVie, BMS, Cyxone, Eisai, Galapagos, Gilead, GlaxoSmithKline, Lilly, Novartis, Pfizer, and UCB Pharma, Joachim Sieper Speakers bureau: AbbVie, Janssen, Lilly, Merck, and Novartis, Consultant of: AbbVie, Janssen, Lilly, Merck, and Novartis, Filip van den Bosch Speakers bureau: AbbVie, Celgene, Eli Lilly, Galapagos, Gilead, Janssen, Novartis, Pfizer, and UCB Pharma, Consultant of: AbbVie, Celgene, Eli Lilly, Galapagos, Gilead, Janssen, Novartis, Pfizer, and UCB Pharma, Walter P Maksymowych Consultant of: AbbVie, Boehringer Ingelheim, Celgene, Galapagos, Gilead, Janssen, Lilly, Novartis, Pfizer, UCB Pharma, Grant/research support from: AbbVie, Novartis and Pfizer, Tae-Hwan Kim Speakers bureau: AbbVie, Celltrion, Kirin, Lilly, and Novartis, Mitsumasa Kishimoto Consultant of: AbbVie, Amgen-Astellas BioPharma, Asahi-Kasei Pharma, Astellas, Ayumi Pharma, BMS, Chugai, Daiichi-Sankyo, Eisai, Eli Lilly, Gilead, Janssen, Kyowa Kirin, Novartis, Pfizer, Tanabe-Mitsubishi, Teijin Pharma, and UCB Pharma, Andrew Ostor Consultant of: AbbVie, BMS, Roche, Janssen, Lilly, Novartis, Pfizer, UCB, Gilead, and Paradigm, Bernard Combe Speakers bureau: AbbVie, Lilly, Merck, Consultant of: AbbVie, Lilly, Gilead, Janssen, Novartis, Roche-Chugai, and Sanofi, Grant/research support from: AbbVie and Lilly, Yunxia Sui Shareholder of: AbbVie, Employee of: AbbVie, xin wang Shareholder of: AbbVie, Employee of: AbbVie, Alvina Chu Shareholder of: AbbVie, Employee of: AbbVie, In-Ho Song Shareholder of: AbbVie, Employee of: AbbVie

POS0969 UNVEILING AXIAL INVOLVEMENT IN PSORIATIC ARTHRITIS: AN ANCILLARY ANALYSIS OF THE ASAS-perSpA STUDY

Background:

Heterogeneity in psoriatic arthritis (PsA) is a current matter of discussion, especially concerning axial involvement.

Objectives:

To determine the profile of axial PsA (axPsA) in a worldwide setting. Secondly, to identify predictive factors associated with the development of axial involvement in patients with PsA.

Methods:

Data from 3684 patients with axial spondyloarthritis (axSpA) or PsA from the ASAS-PerSpA study were analysed. The ASAS-PerSpA is an observational, cross-sectional study that recruited consecutive patients with SpA from 68 centers worldwide. For this analysis, 367 PsA patients ever presenting axial involvement according to their rheumatologist were defined as axPsA and compared with 2651 axSpA patients, using logistic regression to later identify predictive factors for rheumatologist diagnosis of axPsA. In addition, the axPsA patients were also compared with 666 PsA patients without axial involvement (pPsA) and the characteristics associated with axial manifestations were determined by logistic regression analysis.

Results:

Among all patients, 2651 were identified as axSpA and 1033 patients as PsA. Among those with axial involvement, 2651 were identified as axSpA (100% of axSpA) and 367 as axPsA (35.5 % of PsA). In comparison with axSpA, axPsA patients were less frequently males, older, less frequently HLA-B27 positive and had a higher body mass index (Table 1). Additionally, while patients with axPsA had more peripheral manifestations and psoriasis, concomitant IBD and uveitis were higher in axSpA. In the multivariable analysis, older age at diagnosis (OR= 1.04), peripheral arthritis (OR= 7.32) and dactylitis (OR= 2.82) were significantly associated with a diagnosis of axPsA. However, uveitis (OR= 0.22), IBD (OR= 0.12) or HLA*B27 carriership (OR= 0.26) were inversely associated with axPsA diagnosis as compared to axSpA. Furthermore, axial involvement in patients with PsA was significantly associated with male gender (OR= 1.68), elevated CRP (OR= 2.87), and the absence of psoriasis (OR= 0.33).

Conclusion:

In this worldwide setting, axPsA was defined by rheumatologists as a unique phenotype, with disease features lying between axSpA and pure pPsA. Male gender, elevated CRP and the absence of psoriasis were associated with axial involvement in patients with PsA.

Table 1.

Demographic and disease characteristics of patients with axial involvement included in the ASAS PerSpA study. Results shown as absolute numbers (percentages) or as the mean ± standard deviation

axSpAn= 2651axPsAn= 367p-valueSex (male)1816 (68.5) 196 (53.4)<0.001Age at study visit42.1(13.0)50.0 (12.7)<0.001Body Mass Index25.9 (5.1)27.4 (5.7)<0.001Family history of SpA944 (35.6)135 (36.8)0.684Past history or current symptoms of back pain2625 (99.0)358 (97.5)0.04Inflammatory back pain (ASAS definition), n/N(%)2500/2632 (94.9)317/362 (87.6)<0.001Sacroiliitis on imaging, n/N (%) by: xRay mNY criteria1997/2586 (77.2)185/298 (62.1)<0.001 MRI-SIJ, ASAS definition1449/1757 (82.4)141/225 (62.6)<0.001 mNY criteria or ASAS definition2446/2634 (92.9)243/339 (71.7)<0.001HLA B27 positive1674 /2126 (78.7)54/182 (29.6)<0.001Elevated CRP (>5 mg/dL)1863/2569 (72.5)274/356 (76.9)0.2Classification criteria ASAS criteria2339 (88.2)185 (50.4)<0.001 CASPAR criteria123 (4.6)274 (74.4)<0.001Peripheral Arthritis946 (35.7)318 (86.6)<0.001Enthesitis1086 (41.0)198 (54.0)<0.001Dactylitis155 (5.8)125 (34.1)<0.001Psoriasis185 (7.0)324 (88.3)<0.001IBD129 (4.9)3 (0.8)<0.001Uveitis576(21.7)13 (3.5)<0.001csDMARD (ever)1359 (51.3)339 (92.4)<0.001bDMARD (ever)1585 (59.8)263 (71.7)<0.001Specific drug for axial involvementNSAIDs2465 (98.6)317 (96.1)0.002csDMARD828 (33.1)187 (56.7)<0.001bDMARD1288 (51.5)180 (54.4)0.32

axSpA: axial spondyloarthritis; axPsA: axial psoriatic arthritis; IBD: Inflammatory Bowel Disease; CRP: C-Reactive Protein; mNY: modified New York; csDMARDs: conventional synthetic DMARDs; bDMARDs: biological DMARDs; NSAID: Non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs

Disclosure of Interests:

Diego Benavent: None declared, Chamaida Plasencia: None declared, Denis Poddubnyy: None declared, Mitsumasa Kishimoto Consultant of: AbbVie, Amgen-Astellas BioPharma, Asahi-Kasei Pharma, Astellas, Ayumi Pharma, BMS, Chugai, Daiichi-Sankyo, Eisai, Eli Lilly, Gilead, Janssen, Kyowa Kirin, Novartis, Ono Pharma, Pfizer, Tanabe-Mitsubishi, Teijin Pharma, and UCB Pharma., Fabian Proft Grant/research support from: AbbVie, AMGEN, BMS, Celgene, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, UCB, Haruki Sawada: None declared, Clementina López-Medina: None declared, Maxime Dougados: None declared, Victoria Navarro-Compán: None declared.