OP0227 SECUKINUMAB VERSUS ADALIMUMAB HEAD-TO-HEAD COMPARISON IN BIOLOGIC-NAÏVE PATIENTS WITH ACTIVE PSORIATIC ARTHRITIS THROUGH 52-WEEKS (EXCEED): A RANDOMISED, DOUBLE-BLIND, PHASE-3B STUDY

Background:

Secukinumab (SEC), an interleukin-17A inhibitor, has demonstrated improvements on multiple domains of psoriatic arthritis (PsA).1Adalimumab (ADA), a TNF inhibitor, is widely used as a first–line biologic in PsA.

Objectives:

To report efficacy and safety outcomes from the head-to-head EXCEED trial (NCT02745080) that compares SECvs.ADA as first–line biologic monotherapy through 52-weeks (wks), with a musculoskeletal primary endpoint in pts with active PsA.

Methods:

Head-to-head, phase-3b, randomised, double-blind trial: biologic naïve active PsA pts were randomised to receive SEC 300mg subcutaneous at baseline, Wk1-4, and then every 4wks (q4w) until Wk48 or ADA 40mg subcutaneous at baseline and then q2w until Wk50. The primary endpoint was superiority of SECvs.ADA on ACR20 response at Wk52. Binary and continuous variables were analysed using logistic-regression model and MMRM, respectively. Safety analysis included patients who received ≥1 dose of study-drug.

Results:

853 pts were randomised to receive SEC (n=426) or ADA (n=427). Baseline demographics and disease characteristics were comparable between treatment-groups except higher proportion of female pts and pts without enthesitis in the SEC group. ACR20 response at Wk52 for SECvs.ADA were 67·4%vs.61·5%, respectively (p=0·0719) (Figure). Higher clinical responses were observed with SECvs.ADA for a range of musculoskeletal, skin, and higher-hurdle outcomes (Table). A higher retention rate was observed for SEC (85.7%)vs.ADA (76.3%). Safety profiles of SEC and ADA were consistent with previous reports.2,3

Conclusion:

Results suggest that SEC is at least as efficacious as ADA on musculoskeletal endpoints whilst providing higher responses on skin endpoints, and is associated with a higher retention rate. No new safety signals were reported.

References:

[1]van der Heijde, et al. Rheumatol. (Oxford).2019; DOI10.1093/rheumatology/kez420.

[2]Deodhar A, et al. Arthritis Res Ther. 2019;21:111.

[3]Burmester GR, et al. Ann Rheum Dis.2013; 72:517-24.

Figure.

ACR20 Response through Wk 52

Table.

Efficacy Outcomes at Wk 52

Endpoints, % response unless specified otherwiseSEC 300 mg(N=426)ADA 40 mg(N=427)P-value (unadjusted)*ACR2067·461·50·0719aACR2066·959·50·0239Key SecondarybPASI 9065·443·2<0·0001ACR5049·044·80·2251HAQ-DI mean change from baseline ± SE-0·58 ± 0.03-0·56 ± 0.030·5465cResolution of enthesitis (based on LEI)60·554·20·1498ExploratoryMDA43·037·90·1498VLDA18·116·60·6107DAPSA LDA+Remission61·753·10·0178PASDAS LDA+Remission51·144·10·0557

*Unadjusted P-valuesvsADA

Binary variables were analysed using logistic regression. Pts who discontinued study treatment prematurely or took csDMARDs after week-36 were considered non-responders. Multiple imputation was used for all other missing data. HAQ-DI mean change from baseline was analysed using mixed-effect model repeated measures

aNon-responder imputation was used for pre-specified sensitivity analysis

bN=215 in SEC and N=202 in ADA in psoriasis subset

cN=234 in SEC and N=264 in ADA in enthesitis subset

Disclosure of Interests:

Iain McInnes Grant/research support from: Bristol-Myers Squibb, Celgene, Eli Lilly and Company, Janssen, and UCB, Consultant of: AbbVie, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Celgene, Eli Lilly and Company, Gilead, Janssen, Novartis, Pfizer, and UCB, Frank Behrens Grant/research support from: Pfizer, Janssen, Chugai, Celgene, Lilly and Roche, Consultant of: Pfizer, AbbVie, Sanofi, Lilly, Novartis, Genzyme, Boehringer, Janssen, MSD, Celgene, Roche and Chugai, Philip J Mease Grant/research support from: Abbott, Amgen, Biogen Idec, BMS, Celgene Corporation, Eli Lilly, Novartis, Pfizer, Sun Pharmaceutical, UCB – grant/research support, Consultant of: Abbott, Amgen, Biogen Idec, BMS, Celgene Corporation, Eli Lilly, Novartis, Pfizer, Sun Pharmaceutical, UCB – consultant, Speakers bureau: Abbott, Amgen, Biogen Idec, BMS, Eli Lilly, Genentech, Janssen, Pfizer, UCB – speakers bureau, Arthur Kavanaugh Grant/research support from: Abbott, Amgen, AstraZeneca, BMS, Celgene Corporation, Centocor-Janssen, Pfizer, Roche, UCB – grant/research support, Christopher T. Ritchlin Grant/research support from: UCB Pharma, AbbVie, Amgen, Consultant of: UCB Pharma, Amgen, AbbVie, Lilly, Pfizer, Novartis, Gilead, Janssen, Peter Nash Grant/research support from: AbbVie, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Celgene, Eli Lilly and Company, Gilead, Janssen, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer Inc, Roche, Sanofi, UCB, Consultant of: AbbVie, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Celgene, Eli Lilly, Gilead, Janssen, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer Inc, Roche, Sanofi, UCB, Speakers bureau: AbbVie, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Celgene, Eli Lilly, Gilead, Janssen, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer Inc, Roche, Sanofi, UCB, Jordi Gratacos-Masmitja Grant/research support from: a grant from Pfizzer to study implementation of multidisciplinary units to manage PSA in SPAIN, Consultant of: Pfizzer, MSD, ABBVIE, Janssen, Amgen, BMS, Novartis, Lilly, Speakers bureau: Pfizzer, MSD, ABBVIE, Janssen, Amgen, BMS, Novartis, Lilly, Philippe Goupille Grant/research support from: AbbVie, Amgen, Biogen, BMS, Celgene, Chugai, Lilly, Janssen, Medac, MSD France, Nordic Pharma, Novartis, Pfizer, Sanofi and UCB, Consultant of: AbbVie, Amgen, Biogen, BMS, Celgene, Chugai, Lilly, Janssen, Medac, MSD France, Nordic Pharma, Novartis, Pfizer, Sanofi and UCB, Speakers bureau: AbbVie, Amgen, Biogen, BMS, Celgene, Chugai, Lilly, Janssen, Medac, MSD France, Nordic Pharma, Novartis, Pfizer, Sanofi and UCB, Tatiana Korotaeva Grant/research support from: Pfizer, Consultant of: Abbvie, BIOCAD, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Celgene, Eli Lilly, Janssen, Merck Sharp & Dohme, Novartis, Novartis-Sandoz, Pfizer, UCB, Speakers bureau: Abbvie, BIOCAD, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Celgene, Eli Lilly, Janssen, Merck Sharp & Dohme, Novartis, Novartis-Sandoz, Pfizer, UCB, Alice B Gottlieb Grant/research support from:: Research grants, consultation fees, or speaker honoraria for lectures from: Pfizer, AbbVie, BMS, Lilly, MSD, Novartis, Roche, Sanofi, Sandoz, Nordic, Celltrion and UCB., Consultant of:: Research grants, consultation fees, or speaker honoraria for lectures from: Pfizer, AbbVie, BMS, Lilly, MSD, Novartis, Roche, Sanofi, Sandoz, Nordic, Celltrion and UCB., Speakers bureau:: Research grants, consultation fees, or speaker honoraria for lectures from: Pfizer, AbbVie, BMS, Lilly, MSD, Novartis, Roche, Sanofi, Sandoz, Nordic, Celltrion and UCB., Ruvie Martin Shareholder of: Novartis, Employee of: Novartis, Kevin Ding Employee of: Novartis, Pascale Pellet Shareholder of: Novartis, Employee of: Novartis, Shephard Mpofu Shareholder of: Novartis, Employee of: Novartis, Luminita Pricop Shareholder of: Novartis, Employee of: Novartis

FRI0345 HEAD-TO-HEAD STUDY EVALUATING THE COMBINED ACR50/PASI100 TREATMENT RESPONSE OF IXEKIZUMAB VERSUS ADALIMUMAB: INDIVIDUAL PATIENT DATA FROM A RANDOMIZED, OPEN-LABEL STUDY IN BIOLOGIC-NAÏVE PATIENTS WITH PSORIATIC ARTHRITIS THROUGH WEEK 52

Background:

Multiple biologic DMARDs (bDMARDs) are available for the treatment of psoriatic arthritis (PsA), but there are few direct comparisons of their efficacy and safety. In SPIRIT-H2H study, ixekizumab (IXE), a high-affinity monoclonal antibody selectively targeting IL-17A, was superior to adalimumab (ADA) at Week 24 for simultaneous achievement of ACR50 and 100% improvement from baseline in the Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI 100) in patients (pts) with active PsA. Efficacy on other PsA domains was shown.1

Objectives:

To provide individual patient data demonstrating the simultaneous improvement in musculoskeletal and skin symptoms as assessed by American College of Rheumatology (ACR) response criteria and Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI) percent improvement, respectively.

Methods:

Pts with active PsA fulfilling Classification for Psoriatic Arthritis (CASPAR) criteria, ≥3/66 tender and ≥3/68 swollen joints, ≥3% psoriasis body surface area (BSA) involvement, no prior treatment with bDMARDs, and prior inadequate response to ≥1 conventional synthetic DMARD (csDMARD), were randomized 1:1 to open-label IXE or ADA (label dosing according to presence/absence of moderate-to-severe psoriasis [baseline BSA≥10%, PASI≥12, and static Physician’s Global Assessment≥3]) in Study I1F-MC-RHCF (NCT03151551). In this analysis, max ACRx was defined as the maximum ACRx response a patient can achieve where ACRx derivation follows the typical ACR response criteria: ≥x% improvement in both tender joint count (TJC) and swollen joint count (SJC) and ≥x% improvement in ≥3 of the 5 remaining components, Health Assessment Questionnaire-Disability Index total score (HAQ-DI), C-reactive protein (CRP), Patient Global Assessment (PatGA), Physician Global Assessment (PhyGA), and patient assessment of joint pain (patJP). Missing data were imputed using the last observation carried forward (LOCF) method.

Results:

At baseline, demographic and disease characteristics were similar across treatment groups. Mean baseline values for the ACR core data set were 20.2 (TJC), 10.4 (SJC), 63.8 (PatGA), 10.2 (CRP), 59.2 (PhyGA), 1.2 (HAQ-DI), and 61.0 (patJP). Mean PASI total score was 7.8. Figures 1 and 2 show the maximum ACR response by PASI percent improvement at Weeks 24 and 52, respectively. Independent of joint improvement, more ixekizumab-treated patients compared to adalimumab-treated patients achieved ≥PASI 90 (76.6% vs. 57.5% at week 24 and 83.0% vs. 59.6% at Week 52). Evaluation of patient-level data shows that while very few patients had joint improvement but little skin improvement (max ACRx≥50 and PASI<50; Figures 1 and 2) in both treatment arms (IXE: 1.8%; ADA: 1.4%), fewer patients treated with IXE had no to little improvement in both joint and skin symptoms (PASI<50 and max ACRx<50) than those treated with ADA at Week 24 (IXE: 3.6%; ADA: 13.3%). A similar pattern was observed at Week 52 (Figure 2).

Conclusion:

Ixekizumab treatment was superior to adalimumab when evaluating the combination of musculoskeletal and skin symptoms of PsA as measured by ACR response and PASI response.

References:

[1]Mease PJ, Smolen JS, Behrens F et al., Ann Rheum Dis 2019; 79(1):123-131.

Disclosure of Interests:

Arthur Kavanaugh Grant/research support from: AbbVie, Amgen, Eli Lilly, Novartis, Janssen, Pfizer, Gilead, UCB, Consultant of: AbbVie, Amgen, Eli Lilly, Novartis, Janssen, Pfizer, Gilead, UCB, Ennio Lubrano: None declared, Talia Muram Shareholder of: Eli Lilly and Company, Employee of: Eli Lilly and Company, Chen-Yen Lin Shareholder of: Eli Lilly and Company, Employee of: Eli Lilly and Company, Soyi Liu Leage Shareholder of: Eli Lilly and Company, Employee of: Eli Lilly and Company, Filip van den Bosch Consultant of: AbbVie, Celgene Corporation, Eli Lilly, Galapagos, Janssen, Novartis, Pfizer, and UCB, Speakers bureau: AbbVie, Celgene Corporation, Eli Lilly, Galapagos, Janssen, Novartis, Pfizer, and UCB, Lars Erik Kristensen Consultant of: UCB Pharma (Advisory Board), Sannofi (Advisory Board), Abbvie (Advisory Board), Biogen (Advisory Board), Speakers bureau: AbbVie, Amgen, Biogen, Bristol-Myers Squibb,Celgene, Eli Lilly, Gilead, Forward Pharma, Janssen Pharmaceuticals, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, and UCB Pharma

AB0803 EFFICACY OF TILDRAKIZUMAB IN PsA: DAS28-CRP SCORES THROUGH WEEK 52

Background:

Tildrakizumab (TIL), an anti–interleukin (IL)-23p19 monoclonal antibody, is approved in the US, EU, and Australia for treatment of moderate-to-severe plaque psoriasis.1A randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, multiple-dose, phase 2b study (NCT02980692) evaluating efficacy and safety of TIL for treatment of psoriatic arthritis (PsA) was recently completed.

Objectives:

To evaluate the effect of TIL in PsA, using the DAS28-CRP responses up to week (W)52.

Methods:

Patients (pts) ≥18 years old with PsA2and ≥3 tender and ≥3 swollen joints were randomised 1:1:1:1:1 to receive TIL (200 mg once every 4 weeks [Q4W], 200 mg every 12 weeks [Q12W], 100 mg Q12W, or 20 mg Q12W) or placebo (PBO Q4W) to W24. Thereafter, PBO Q4W and TIL 20 mg Q12W arms crossed over to TIL 200 mg Q12W to W52. DAS28-CRP was shown to be reliable in PsA studies,3and pts achieving scores <3.2 satisfied responder criteria. Adverse events (AEs), including treatment-emergent AEs (TEAEs) and serious AEs (SAEs), were monitored throughout the study.

Results:

Overall, 391/500 pts screened met the inclusion criteria; 55% were female with a mean age of 48.8 years. At baseline, disease characteristics were generally consistent across treatment arms (Table).

At W24, DAS28-CRP response rates increased across all TIL treatment arms relative to PBO (Figure). After W24, response rates continued to increase and were sustained through W52, including in pts who switched from PBO to TIL.

From W0–W24/W25–W52, 50.4%/39.9% and 2.3%/1.0% of pts experienced a TEAE and SAE, respectively. There were no reports of candidiasis, inflammatory bowel disease, major adverse cardiac events or elevated liver enzymes. From W0–W24, 1 pt (0.3%) had urinary tract infection (TIL 100 mg Q12W). From W25–W52, 1 pt (0.3%) had an intraductal proliferative breast lesion (TIL 20→200 mg Q12W). One pt (0.3%) discontinued before 24 weeks due to hypertension. No deaths were reported.

Table.

Baseline disease characteristics related to DAS28-CRP

TIL 200 mg Q4Wn = 78TIL 200 mg Q12Wn = 79TIL 100 mg Q12Wn = 77TIL 20→200 mg Q12Wn = 78PBO→TIL 200 mg Q12Wn = 79hsCRP, mg/L7.8 ± 18.610.5 ± 14.410.6 ± 20.010.7 ± 14.013.0 ± 20.8ESR, mm/h*22.8 ± 18.922.5 ± 19.824.7 ± 19.827.2 ± 20.726.9 ± 20.5Swollen joint count (66)10.4 ± 7.410.0 ± 8.011.0 ± 8.29.4 ± 6.411.8 ± 9.8Tender joint count (68)16.6 ± 11.919.5 ± 13.921.3 ± 14.819.0 ± 13.019.7 ± 14.7PtGA57.8 ± 18.361.1 ± 20.760.3 ± 20.261.9 ± 17.465.2 ± 18.1

Data are reported as mean ± standard deviation unless otherwise stated.

*Total pts analysed (n) = 71, 69, 70, 68, 62, respectively.

ESR, erythrocyte sedimentation rate; hsCRP, high-sensitivity C-Reactive Protein; PBO, placebo; PtGA, Patient Global Assessment; pts, patients; Q4W, every 4 weeks; Q12W, every 12 weeks; TIL tildrakizumab.

Conclusion:

Treatment with all doses of TIL increased the rate of DAS28-CRP responders in pts with active PsA and was well tolerated, suggesting a reduction in PsA-related disease activity for up to 52 weeks of treatment. Ongoing analyses will assess whether DAS28-CRP responses correlate with baseline clinical characteristics.

References:

[1]Reich K, et al.Lancet. 2017;390(10091):276−88.

[2]Taylor W, et al.Arthritis Rheum. 2006; 54(8):2665−73.

[3]Fransen J, et al.Ann Rheum Dis. 2004; 62:151.

Disclosure of Interests:

Saima Chohan Employee of: Partner/physician at Arizona Arthritis and Rheumatology Associates, Arthur Kavanaugh Grant/research support from: AbbVie, Amgen, Eli Lilly, Novartis, Janssen, Pfizer, Gilead, UCB, Consultant of: AbbVie, Amgen, Eli Lilly, Novartis, Janssen, Pfizer, Gilead, UCB, Vibeke Strand Consultant of: AbbVie, Amgen, Biogen, Celltrion, Consortium of Rheumatology Researchers of North America, Crescendo Bioscience, Eli Lilly, Genentech/Roche, GlaxoSmithKline, Hospira, Janssen, Merck, Novartis, Pfizer, Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Sanofi, UCB, Richard C Chou Consultant of: Sun Pharmaceutical Industries, Inc, Alan M Mendelsohn Shareholder of: Johnson and Johnson, Employee of: Sun Pharmaceutical Industries, Inc, Stephen Rozzo Employee of: Sun Pharmaceutical Industries, Inc, Philip J Mease Grant/research support from: Abbott, Amgen, Biogen Idec, BMS, Celgene Corporation, Eli Lilly, Novartis, Pfizer, Sun Pharmaceutical, UCB – grant/research support, Consultant of: Abbott, Amgen, Biogen Idec, BMS, Celgene Corporation, Eli Lilly, Novartis, Pfizer, Sun Pharmaceutical, UCB – consultant, Speakers bureau: Abbott, Amgen, Biogen Idec, BMS, Eli Lilly, Genentech, Janssen, Pfizer, UCB – speakers bureau

AB0783 THE IMPACT OF SKIN ITCHING ON HEALTH RELATED QUALITY OF LIFE IN PSORIATIC ARTHRITIS OUTPATIENT CLINIC PATIENTS

Background:

In psoriatic arthritis (PsA) both skin and musculoskeletal involvement can contribute to reduce health related quality of life (HRQoL) (1). Although itch is considered an important symptom in psoriasis, less is known about its extent and potential impact on HRQoL in PsA.

Objectives:

The aim of the study was to assess the prevalence of itchy, sore, painful or stinging skin in PsA patients and also to explore the impact of these symptoms on overall HRQoL and skin related HRQoL.

Methods:

PsA patients were consecutively recruited from a rheumatology outpatient clinic. Data collection included variables listed in the table. Patients also answered the question: “Over the last week, how itchy, sore, painful or stinging has your skin been? With answer alternatives: Not at all (score 0), a little (score 1), a lot (score 2) and very much (score 3)”. For analysis the variable was dichotomized; ‘Not at all’ and ‘a little’ were scored as ‘not itching’, and ‘a lot’ and ‘very much’ were scored as ‘itching’. HRQoL was assessed using the 15D questionnaire and skin HRQoL using the Dermatology Life Quality Index (DLQI). Categorical variables are presented as numbers and (%) and continuous variables as mean with (SD). An association with 15D and DLQI was explored using univariate and multivariate linear regression analysis.

Results:

Among 125 PsA patients (63 men and 63 women), means age was 52.2 years, BMI 28.3 kg/m2, disease duration 8.9 years; 15.2% were smokers. The number and percentage (%) of PsA patients reporting their skin to be itchy, sore, painful or stinging was as follows: Not at all 25 (20.0%), a little 71 (56.8%), a lot 23 (18.4%) and very much 6 patients (4.8%). The table shows data for all PsA patients and for patients defined to have no itching or having itching skin.

Total (n=125)No itching (n=96)Itching (n=29)PAge (SD), years52.2 (10.1)52.3 (10.1)51.6 (10.2)0.73Women, n (%)62 (49.6%)49 (51.0%)13 (44.8%)0.56BMI (SD), kg/m228.3 (4.3)28.0 (4.0)29.4 (4.9)0.12Smoking, n (%)19 (15.2%)14 (14.6%)5 (17.2%)0.73Dis.dur. (SD), years8.9 (6.7)9.1 (6.7)8.0 (6.9)0.42CRP (SD), mg /L4.8 (8.5)4.4 (8.5)6.1 (8.5)0.37TJC68 (SD)9.70 (11.07)9.21 (10.32)11.39 (13.41)0.36SJC66 (SD)0.57 (0.99)0.56 (1.00)0.61 (0.96)0.84MASES (SD)2.9 (3.1)2.5 (2.9)4.0 (3.7)0.02IGA (SD), (VAS 0-100)14.0 (11.7)12.9 (10.2)17.8 (15.4)0.12PGA (SD), (VAS 0-100)35.3 (24.2)30.5 (22.6)50.9 (22.8)<0.01Pain (SD), (VAS 0-100)33.4 (23.4)28.6 (21.3)49.1 (23.6)<0.01Fatigue (SD), (VAS 0-100)45.1 (32.0)40.3 (31.7)61.0 (28.1)<0.01MHAQ (SD), (0-3)0.40 (0.35)0.35 (0.32)0.58 (0.39)<0.01PASI (SD), (0-72)2.4 (3.5)1.9 (3.2)4.1 (4.1)0.01DLQI (SD), (0-30)3.5 (3.6)2.2 (2.3)7.9 (3.9)<0.0115D (SD), (0-1)0.84 (0.09)0.86 (0.09)0.80 (0.08)<0.01bDMARDs, n (%)43 (34.7%)33 (34.7%)10 (34.5%)0.98csDMARDs, n (%)73 (58.4%)61 (63.5%)12 (41.4)0.03

Dis.dur.: disease duration

In univariate analysis itching was found to be associated with impaired HRQoL assessed by 15D but not in adjusted analysis. In a regression model adjusting for age, gender, BMI and including variables with p<0.2 in univariate analysis (MASES enthesitis score, investigator [IGA] and patients global assessment [PGA], fatigue, pain, MHAQ, Psoriasis Area Severity Index [PASI] score and itching and treatment), only female gender, PASI score and itching were independently associated with reduced skin HRQoL.

Conclusion:

Skin itching was frequently reported in our PsA patients (20-25%) and was also found to be associated with impaired HRQoL, in particular for skin HRQoL (DLQI). The association was independent of the extent of skin involvement (PASI). More needs to be understood about subjective skin symptoms such as itch in order to improve HRQoL in PsA.

References:

[1]Kavanaugh A, et al. Ann Rheum Dis 2019;9:1215-9

Disclosure of Interests:

Glenn Haugeberg: None declared, Arthur Kavanaugh Grant/research support from: Abbott, Amgen, AstraZeneca, BMS, Celgene Corporation, Centocor-Janssen, Pfizer, Roche, UCB – grant/research support, Brigitte Michelsen Grant/research support from: Research support from Novartis, Consultant of: Consulting fees Novartis

AB0782 EXPLORING OCCURRENCE AND CORRELATES OF SLEEP DISTURBANCES AND FATIGUE IN PSORIATIC ARTHRITIS PATIENTS

Background:

Psoriatic arthritis (PsA) patients have been reported to suffer from increased sleep disturbances (1) and fatigue (2). Sleep disturbances and fatigue in PsA may not only be influenced by skin and musculoskeletal manifestations, but also by psychosocial consequences of the disease and the patients’ mental status (3).

Objectives:

To explore the occurrence and correlates of sleep disturbances and fatigue in PsA clinic patients.

Methods:

A broad data collection was completed from 137 PsA patients including demographics, disease activity measures for both skin and musculoskeletal involvement and patient reported outcome measures. Pain was reported on a VAS scale 0-100 mm and sleep and fatigue on a numeric rating scale (NRS) 0-10. Depression was scored as: 1 not, 2 moderately and 3 extremely depressed. Sleep disturbances and fatigue were defined as present if the NRS score was ≥5. Descriptive statistics (mean (SD) for continuous variables and percentage for categorical variables) were applied. Associations were explored using univariate and adjusted linear regression analyses, with inclusion of variables in multivariate analysis that had a p value <0.2 in univariate analyses.

Results:

Demographic patient characteristics: mean age 52.3 (SD 10.3) years, BMI 28.4 (4.3) kg/m2, women 50.4%, current smoker 17.5%, living together 76.6%, working 54.8%. Musculoskeletal disease status: PsA disease duration mean 8.8 (SD 6.8) years, CRP 5.0 (8.3) mg/L, 68 tender joint count (68TJC) 10.1 (11.1), 66 swollen joint count 0.6 (1.0), MASES enthesitis score 3.0 (3.2). Psoriasis skin status: PASI 2.6 (3.7) and itching skin 23.1%. Patient reported outcome measures: pain 34.8 (23.3) mm, sleep disturbances 3.5 (2.9), fatigue 4.2 (2.6), MHAQ 0.44 (0.40) and depression 1.4 (0.4). Mean numbers of comorbidities was 0.72 (0.93) and 45.3% exercised ≥1 time per week and 32.4% currently used bDMARDs and 58.4% csDMARDs.

The prevalence of sleep disturbances was 38.0% and that of fatigue 44.5%.

Identified associations with impaired sleep disturbances in univariate analyses were female gender, higher BMI, smoking, not working, higher scores for 68TJC, MASES score, pain, fatigue, depression, lower MHAQ, not exercising and itching skin. For fatigue the identified associations were female gender, smoking, not working, higher scores for 68TJC, MASES score, pain, sleep disturbances, depression, lower MHAQ and itching skin.

In adjusted analysis only pain, fatigue and higher MHAQ were independently associated with sleep disturbances and pain, sleep disturbances and depression were independently associated with fatigue.

Conclusion:

The prevalence of sleep disturbances and fatigue was frequently reported in our PsA patients. No measures reflecting skin involvement or objective measures of inflammatory musculoskeletal involvement were independently associated with sleep disturbances and fatigue. Our data suggest that patient’s perceptions of musculoskeletal involvement (pain or MHAQ) play an important role causing sleep disturbances and fatigue in PsA patients. However, mental status also seems to play an important role in the perception of fatigue.

References:

[1]Duvetorp A, et al. Arch Dermatol Res 2019;311:351-60.

[2]Husted JA, et al. Ann Rheum Dis 2009;68:1553-8.

[3]Husni ME, et al. Semin Arthritis Rheum 2017;47:351-60

Disclosure of Interests:

Glenn Haugeberg: None declared, Mari Hoff: None declared, Brigitte Michelsen Grant/research support from: Research support from Novartis, Consultant of: Consulting fees Novartis, Arthur Kavanaugh Grant/research support from: Abbott, Amgen, AstraZeneca, BMS, Celgene Corporation, Centocor-Janssen, Pfizer, Roche, UCB – grant/research support

AB0802 SAFETY PROFILES OF IXEKIZUMAB VERSUS ADALIMUMAB: 52-WEEK RESULTS FROM A HEAD-TO-HEAD COMPARISON IN PATIENTS WITH ACTIVE PSORIATIC ARTHRITIS

Background:

Ixekizumab (IXE) was shown to be superior to adalimumab (ADA) in achievement of simultaneous improvement of joint and skin disease (ACR50 and PASI100) in patients with active psoriatic arthritis (PsA) and inadequate response to conventional synthetic disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs (csDMARDs).1

Objectives:

To compare the safety and tolerability profile of IXE vs ADA in patients with PsA up to 52 weeks of treatment.

Methods:

SPIRIT-H2H (NCT03151551) was an open-label, head-to-head, blinded assessor clinical trial which included patients with active PsA (≥3 tender joint count + ≥3 swollen joint count) and plaque psoriasis (BSA ≥3%) who were inadequate responders to csDMARD therapy but naïve to biologic DMARDs. Patients were randomized (1:1) to approved dosing of IXE or ADA. Safety events were assessed at each patient visit up to Week 52. Frequencies of adverse events (AEs) were based on the number of patients in the safety population (patients who received ≥1 dose of study drug). Cases of inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) and cerebro-cardiovascular events were adjudicated by external committees. Kaplan-Meier analysis of time to onset of serious adverse events (SAEs) was performed.

Results:

Of the 283 patients randomized to each treatment, 87% (246/283) of patients who received IXE and 84% (237/283) of patients who received ADA completed 52 weeks of treatment. The frequency of treatment-emergent AEs (TEAEs) was similar between the groups (74% IXE vs 69% ADA), however fewer severe TEAEs were reported in the IXE group (3.2% IXE vs 7.1% ADA) (Table). SAEs were significantly more frequent in the ADA group compared to the IXE group (12% vs 4.2%; p<0.001), and the time to develop a patient’s first SAE was significantly shorter for ADA versus IXE (p<0.001; Figure). Discontinuations due to AEs were numerically more frequent in the ADA group versus the IXE group (7.4% vs 4.2%; p=0.15). IXE-treated patients reported more injection-site reactions (ISR) than ADA-treated patients (11% vs. 3.5%; p=0.002). Study withdrawals due to ISR were comparable, and only one injection-site reaction was severe on ADA (Table). There were two IBD cases reported for IXE; one case was confirmed as IBD.

Conclusion:

Safety results were consistent with previous trials with IXE and ADA. Compared with IXE, patients with PsA treated with ADA had significantly more serious AEs.

References:

[1]Mease PJ, et al.Ann Rheum Dis.2020;79(1):123-31.

Table.

Safety results at 52 weeks

IXE N=283n (%)ADA N=283n (%)TEAEs209 (74)194 (69) Severea9 (3.2)20 (7.1) Related to study treatmentb98 (35)87 (31)Serious adverse events12 (4.2)35 (12)***Deaths00Discontinuation due to AE12 (4.2)21 (7.4)Serious infections3 (1.1)4 (1.4)Injection-site reactionsc30 (11)10 (3.5)** Severe01 (0.4) Resulted in discontinuation2 (0.7)3 (1.1)Anaphylaxis00Inflammatory bowel disease2 (0.7)0 Ulcerative colitis1 (0.4)d0 Crohn’s disease1 (0.4)0Cerebro-cardiovascular events5 (1.8)7 (2.5) MACE02 (0.7)Malignancies04 (1.4)Depression5 (1.8)9 (3.2)Interstitial lung disease01 (0.4)Cytopenias9 (3.2)12 (4.2)Hepatic events18 (6.4)20 (7.1)

aPatients with multiple occurrences of the same event are counted under the highest severity.bThe TEAE’s relationship to study treatment was judged by the investigator.cMedDRA high-level term.dThis event was adjudicated but it was not a confirmed IBD. ***p<0.001; **p<0.01 by Fisher’s exact test. ADA=adalimumab, AE=adverse event; IBD=inflammatory bowel disease; IXE=ixekizumab; MACE=major adverse cardiovascular event; TEAE=treatment-emergent adverse event.

Disclosure of Interests:

Philip J Mease Grant/research support from: AbbVie, Amgen, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Janssen, Eli Lilly, Novartis, Pfizer, Sun Pharma, UCB Pharma, Consultant of: AbbVie, Amgen, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Celgene, Janssen, Eli Lilly, Galapagos, Gilead, Novartis, Pfizer, Sun Pharma, UCB Pharma, Speakers bureau: AbbVie, Amgen, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Celgene, Genentech, Janssen, Novartis, Pfizer, UCB Pharma, Josef S. Smolen Grant/research support from: AbbVie, AstraZeneca, Celgene, Celltrion, Chugai, Eli Lilly, Gilead, ILTOO, Janssen, Novartis-Sandoz, Pfizer Inc, Samsung, Sanofi, Consultant of: AbbVie, AstraZeneca, Celgene, Celltrion, Chugai, Eli Lilly, Gilead, ILTOO, Janssen, Novartis-Sandoz, Pfizer Inc, Samsung, Sanofi, Arthur Kavanaugh Grant/research support from: Abbott, Amgen, AstraZeneca, BMS, Celgene Corporation, Centocor-Janssen, Pfizer, Roche, UCB – grant/research support, Peter Nash Grant/research support from: AbbVie, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Celgene, Eli Lilly and Company, Gilead, Janssen, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer Inc, Roche, Sanofi, UCB, Consultant of: AbbVie, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Celgene, Eli Lilly, Gilead, Janssen, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer Inc, Roche, Sanofi, UCB, Speakers bureau: AbbVie, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Celgene, Eli Lilly, Gilead, Janssen, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer Inc, Roche, Sanofi, UCB, Gaia Gallo Shareholder of: Eli Lilly and Company, Employee of: Eli Lilly and Company, Soyi Liu Leage Shareholder of: Eli Lilly and Company, Employee of: Eli Lilly and Company, Christophe Sapin Shareholder of: Eli Lilly and Company, Employee of: Eli Lilly and Company, Mark C. Genovese Grant/research support from: Abbvie, Eli Lilly and Company, EMD Merck Serono, Galapagos, Genentech/Roche, Gilead Sciences, Inc., GSK, Novartis, Pfizer Inc., RPharm, Sanofi Genzyme, Consultant of: Abbvie, Eli Lilly and Company, EMD Merck Serono, Genentech/Roche, Gilead Sciences, Inc., GSK, Novartis, RPharm, Sanofi Genzyme

THU0482 PAIN CATASTROPHIZING AND DISEASE PERCEPTION DIFFERS BETWEEN NORWEGIAN AND FINNISH OUTPATIENT CLINIC PSORIATIC ARTHRITIS PATIENTS DESPITE COMPARABLE OUTCOMES ON OBJECTIVE MEASURES OF DISEASE

Background:

Pain catastrophizing (the tendency to describe a pain experience in more exaggerated terms than the average person, to ruminate on it more, or to feel more helpless about it), has been associated with reduced likelihood of achieving remission in rheumatoid arthritis patients (1). Cultural and societal differences between countries may have an impact on outcome such as patients’ perceptions of disease.

Objectives:

To compare patient pain catastrophizing, patient perception of disease, objective measures of disease and treatment in psoriatic arthritis (PsA) patients between a Norwegian and a Finnish outpatient clinic. Further, to explore for associations with pain catastrophizing.

Methods:

All PsA patients followed at the outpatient clinics are routinely monitored using a structured medical support system (GoTreatIT® Rheuma). Data collection, done in 2018-19 is listed in the table.

Patients reported their pain catastrophizing answering the two questions, “When I feel pain it is terrible and I feel it is never going to get any better. When I feel pain, I can’t stand it anymore.” Each question is scored 0-6 and mean value of both is calculated. Pain catastrophizing was defined if mean score ≥4.

Categorical variables were presented as numbers (%) and continuous variables as mean (SD) and associates explored using univariate and multivariate analysis.

Results:

A total of 302 Finnish and 363 Norwegian PsA patients were examined. Pain catastrophizing was reported significantly less commonly among the Finnish as compared to the Norwegian PsA clinic patients, both expressed as mean (SD) values (1.48 (1.42) vs 2.05 (1.42), p<0.001) and proportions of patients having a score ≥4 (7.6% (n=23) vs 12.5% (n=45), p=0.043, respectively). As shown in the table the Finnish patients had significantly more years of education, shorter disease duration and less pain and fatigue than the Norwegian patients. For the other features, no significant differences between the two cohorts were found.

Finland (n=302)Norway (n=363)PAge, years54.0 (13.3)54.7 (12.5)0.49Females153 (50.7%)181 (49.9%)0.84BMI. Kg/m228.8 (5.6)28.1(5.1)0.06Current smoking44 (14.6%)51 (14.1%)0.86Education, years13.6 (3.5)12.7 (3.8)0.001Disease duration, years4.7 (4.3)9.9 (8.9)<0.001CRP, mg/L4.3 (6.8)4.0 (8.8)0.69MDglobal assessment, VAS 0-100 mm6.84 (1.29)5.71 (8.50)0.1928 swollen joint count0.48 (1.35)0.31 (1.16)0.1428 tender joint count1.01 (2.83)1.37 (2.80)0.14DAPSA9.66 (8.95)11.33 (9.60)0.06Pain, VAS 0-100 mm30.73 (25.92)35.55 (25.76)0.023Fatigue, VAS 0-100 mm29.96 (29.24)42.56 (31.94)<0.001MHAQ, 0-30.39 (0.44)0.43 (0.41)0.24Body surface area for psoriasis2.45 (8.15)2.66 (6.15)0.17Current b-tsDMARDs121 (40.1%)139 (38.3%)0.64

In univariate analyses female gender, higher BMI, less years of education, Dr. global, tender joint count, DAPSA, pain, fatigue, MHAQ and psoriasis body surface area were found to be associated with more pain catastrophizing.

In multivariate analysis (mandatory adjusting for age, gender, BMI, years of education and disease duration) fewer years of education, higher scores for pain, fatigue and MHAQ and being patient at the Norwegian center were independently associated with more pain catastrophizing.

Conclusion:

Our data indicate that cultural differences across countries may have a significant impact on outcomes that reflecting patients’ perceptions of disease. This may have an implication when merging heterogeneous databases across countries.

References:

[1]Hammer HB et al. Arthritis Care Res 2018;70:703-12.

Disclosure of Interests: :

Glenn Haugeberg: None declared, Inger Johanne Widding Hansen: None declared, Hilde Berner Hammer: None declared, Arthur Kavanaugh Grant/research support from: Abbott, Amgen, AstraZeneca, BMS, Celgene Corporation, Centocor-Janssen, Pfizer, Roche, UCB – grant/research support, Brigitte Michelsen: None declared, Kirsi Paalanen: None declared, Tuulikki Sokka-Isler: None declared

FRI0333 ACHIEVEMENT OF VERY LOW DISEASE ACTIVITY AND REMISSION TREATMENT TARGETS IS ASSOCIATED WITH REDUCED RADIOGRAPHIC PROGRESSION IN PATIENTS WITH PSORIATIC ARTHRITIS TREATED WITH CERTOLIZUMAB PEGOL

Background:

Several disease activity measures and thresholds have been recommended as psoriatic arthritis (PsA) treatment targets, although consensus on the most appropriate assessment tool is lacking.1Reports suggest low disease activity (LDA) and remission may be associated with minimal structural progression in PsA.2

Objectives:

To report the relationship between PsA disease activity and structural progression over 216 weeks’ (wks) treatment with certolizumab pegol (CZP), an Fc-free, PEGylated, tumour necrosis factor inhibitor (TNFi) that has shown long-term efficacy and safety in PsA.3

Methods:

Patients (pts) enrolled in RAPID-PsA (NCT01087788) with active PsA (≥3 tender joints; ≥3 swollen joints; ESR ≥28 mm/hour and/or CRP >upper limit of normal) who had failed treatment with ≥1 csDMARD were randomised 1:1:1 to CZP 200 mg every 2 wks (Q2W), CZP 400 mg every 4 wks (Q4W), or placebo (PBO). All CZP pts received CZP 400 mg at Wks 0/2/4. PBO pts were re-randomised to CZP 200 mg Q2W or 400 mg Q4W at Wk 16 or 24.3

Pts were heterogenous for structural damage and disease duration at baseline. Disease activity was assessed using minimal disease activity (MDA) criteria (MDA: 5–6/7 criteria; very LDA [VLDA]: 7/7 criteria), Psoriatic Arthritis Disease Activity Score (PASDAS) (LDA: >1.9–≤3.2; remission: ≤1.9), or Disease Activity Index for Psoriatic Arthritis (DAPSA) (LDA: >4–≤14; remission: ≤4). Radiographs were read in four reading campaigns using the van der Heijde modified Total Sharp Score (mTSS) for PsA. A risk of structural progression (RSP) subgroup (baseline mTSS >median for all pts) was also assessed. Mean change from baseline (CFB) in mTSS and associations with disease activity states were estimated using a hierarchical linear mixed effects model (fixed effects: reading campaign/interactions of concurrent disease activity levels with time; random effects: pt/reading campaign nested within pt) which allowed mean mTSS trajectory, and impact of disease activity levels on this, to differ over time.

Results:

407/409 randomised pts were assessed for mTSS at least once. At Wk 0, mean (standard deviation) DAPSA=44.5 (22.7), PASDAS=6.0 (1.1). 3/409 (0.7%) pts reported MDA. The proportion of pts achieving remission/VLDA states increased to Wk 216, as did estimated mean mTSS. Estimated mean mTSS CFB remained low overall (0.46 at Wk 216; standard error 0.16;Figure). Across disease activity measures, remission/VLDA states were associated with mTSS estimated mean CFB ≤0 in both the overall group and RSP subgroup (Table).

Conclusion:

These data indicate that achievement of remission in PsA is important to prevent further structural damage, particularly in pts with pre-existing structural changes. This supports the rationale for strict disease activity targets.

References:

[1]Coates L. Arthritis Rheumatol 2018;70:345–55;2.Tucker LJ. Curr Rheumatol Rep 2018;20:71;3.van der Heijde D. RMD Open 2018;4:e000582.

Table.

Estimated mTSS (mixed effects model)

mTSS estimated mean CFB (standard error)All patients(N=407)RSP(n=202)PASDASRemission-0.20 (0.25)-0.55 (0.49)LDA0.01 (0.23)-0.07 (0.47)>LDA1.31 (0.22)2.54 (0.43)DAPSARemission-0.34 (0.23)-0.67 (0.46)LDA0.40 (0.22)0.81 (0.44)>LDA1.37 (0.24)2.46 (0.48)MDAVLDA-0.40 (0.28)-0.84 (0.55)MDA0.39 (0.24)0.55 (0.48)>MDA0.89 (0.20)1.73 (0.39)

mTSS estimated mean CFB: ≤0; ≤0.5; >0.5. Data to Wk 216 pooled for all pts randomised.

Acknowledgments:

This study was funded by UCB Pharma. Editorial services were provided by Costello Medical.

Disclosure of Interests:

Laura C Coates: None declared, Joseph F. Merola Consultant of: Merck, AbbVie, Dermavant, Eli Lilly, Novartis, Janssen, UCB Pharma, Celgene, Sanofi, Regeneron, Arena, Sun Pharma, Biogen, Pfizer, EMD Sorono, Avotres and LEO Pharma, Arthur Kavanaugh Grant/research support from: Abbott, Amgen, AstraZeneca, BMS, Celgene Corporation, Centocor-Janssen, Pfizer, Roche, UCB – grant/research support, Philip J Mease Grant/research support from: Abbott, Amgen, Biogen Idec, BMS, Celgene Corporation, Eli Lilly, Novartis, Pfizer, Sun Pharmaceutical, UCB – grant/research support, Consultant of: Abbott, Amgen, Biogen Idec, BMS, Celgene Corporation, Eli Lilly, Novartis, Pfizer, Sun Pharmaceutical, UCB – consultant, Speakers bureau: Abbott, Amgen, Biogen Idec, BMS, Eli Lilly, Genentech, Janssen, Pfizer, UCB – speakers bureau, Owen Davies Employee of: UCB Pharma, Oscar Irvin-Sellers Employee of: UCB Pharma, Tommi Nurminen Employee of: UCB Pharma, Désirée van der Heijde Consultant of: AbbVie, Amgen, Astellas, AstraZeneca, BMS, Boehringer Ingelheim, Celgene, Cyxone, Daiichi, Eisai, Eli-Lilly, Galapagos, Gilead Sciences, Inc., Glaxo-Smith-Kline, Janssen, Merck, Novartis, Pfizer, Regeneron, Roche, Sanofi, Takeda, UCB Pharma; Director of Imaging Rheumatology BV

FRI0351 DOES SEX OR BODY MASS INDEX IMPACT RESPONSE TO THERAPY IN PSORIATIC ARTHRITIS?: RESULTS FROM A PHASE 3, DOUBLE-BLIND, RANDOMIZED TRIAL EXAMINING METHOTREXATE AND ETANERCEPT AS MONOTHERAPY OR IN COMBINATION FOR TREATING PSORIATIC ARTHRITIS

Background:

In psoriatic arthritis (PsA), contextual factors such as sex and body mass index (BMI) may affect response to therapy.

Objectives:

To examine if sex and BMI influenced 24-week (wk) outcomes in a 48-wk PsA trial of methotrexate (MTX) and etanercept (ETN) as monotherapy (mono) or combined.1

Methods:

MTX- and biologic-naïve adult patients with active PsA were randomized to weekly: MTX 20mg (n=284), ETN 50mg (n=284), or MTX 20mg+ETN 50mg (n=283). Wk-24 outcomes included ACR 20, MDA, VLDA, PASDAS, DAPSA, LDI, SPARCC, BSA, sPGA, and mNAPSI. Descriptive statistics examined outcomes in each treatment arm by sex (male vs female) or BMI (≤30kg/m2vs >30kg/m2). Modeling analyses also examined sex or BMI effect on outcomes when comparing MTX mono to the ETN-containing arms (analyses were adjusted for any prior use of a nonbiologic disease-modifying antirheumatic drug; the model for the influence of sex also adjusted for baseline BMI status). Nominal P-values are provided.

Results:

Baseline disease activity was slightly higher in women, especially with MTX+ETN. Descriptive statistics showed men and women had similar results at wk 24 in the MTX mono and ETN mono arms; with MTX+ETN, men had better outcomes for ACR20, MDA, VLDA, and PASDAS. In treatment-interaction analyses, men had more favorable responses at wk 24 with MTX+ETN vs MTX mono for PASDAS, MDA, and LDI (Table).

Baseline disease activity was similar in both BMI categories. Descriptive statistics in each treatment arm showed no consistent differences in results at wk 24 between BMI categories. In treatment-interaction analyses, BMI ≤30kg/m2had a more favorable response at wk 24 with MTX+ETN vs MTX mono for sPGA (Table).

Conclusion:

Results suggest contextual factors may affect response to therapy in PsA. The treatment-interaction analyses suggest disparate responses to MTX+ETN by sex; BMI only affected skin response.

References:

[1]Mease et al.Arthritis Rheumatol. 2019;71:1112-24

Disclosure of Interests:

Philip J Mease Grant/research support from: Abbott, Amgen, Biogen Idec, BMS, Celgene Corporation, Eli Lilly, Novartis, Pfizer, Sun Pharmaceutical, UCB – grant/research support, Consultant of: Abbott, Amgen, Biogen Idec, BMS, Celgene Corporation, Eli Lilly, Novartis, Pfizer, Sun Pharmaceutical, UCB – consultant, Speakers bureau: Abbott, Amgen, Biogen Idec, BMS, Eli Lilly, Genentech, Janssen, Pfizer, UCB – speakers bureau, Dafna D Gladman Grant/research support from: AbbVie, Amgen Inc., BMS, Celgene Corporation, Janssen, Novartis, Pfizer, UCB – grant/research support, Consultant of: AbbVie, Amgen Inc., BMS, Celgene Corporation, Janssen, Novartis, Pfizer, UCB – consultant, Joseph F. Merola Consultant of: Merck, AbbVie, Dermavant, Eli Lilly, Novartis, Janssen, UCB Pharma, Celgene, Sanofi, Regeneron, Arena, Sun Pharma, Biogen, Pfizer, EMD Sorono, Avotres and LEO Pharma, Atul Deodhar Grant/research support from: AbbVie, Eli Lilly, GSK, Novartis, Pfizer, UCB, Consultant of: AbbVie, Amgen, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol Myer Squibb (BMS), Eli Lilly, GSK, Janssen, Novartis, Pfizer, UCB, Speakers bureau: AbbVie, Amgen, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol Myer Squibb (BMS), Eli Lilly, GSK, Janssen, Novartis, Pfizer, UCB, Alexis Ogdie Grant/research support from: Novartis, Pfizer – grant/research support, Consultant of: AbbVie, BMS, Eli Lilly, Novartis, Pfizer, Takeda – consultant, David Collier Shareholder of: Amgen Inc., Employee of: Amgen Inc., Elaine Karis Shareholder of: Amgen Inc., Employee of: Amgen Inc., Lyrica Liu Shareholder of: Amgen Inc., Employee of: Amgen Inc., Arthur Kavanaugh Grant/research support from: AbbVie, Amgen, Eli Lilly, Novartis, Janssen, Pfizer, Gilead, UCB, Consultant of: AbbVie, Amgen, Eli Lilly, Novartis, Janssen, Pfizer, Gilead, UCB

FRI0131 SUSTAINABILITY OF RESPONSE BETWEEN UPADACITINIB AND ADALIMUMAB AMONG PATIENTS WITH RHEUMATOID ARTHRITIS AND PRIOR INADEQUATE RESPONSE TO METHOTREXATE

Background:

The primary treatment goal for patients (pts) with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) is a state of sustained clinical remission (REM) or low disease activity (LDA).1,2

Objectives:

To assess the long-term sustainability of response to upadacitinib (UPA), a JAK inhibitor, and adalimumab (ADA), both with background methotrexate (MTX), among pts with RA and prior inadequate response to MTX.

Methods:

In the phase 3, randomized, placebo (PBO) and active-controlled SELECT-COMPARE trial, pts on stable background MTX received UPA 15 mg once daily, PBO, or ADA 40 mg every other week. Pts not achieving 20% improvements in tender/swollen joint counts (Weeks 14-22) or LDA (CDAI ≤10 at Week 26) were rescued from UPA to ADA or PBO/ADA to UPA; all non-rescued PBO pts were switched to UPA at Week 26. This post hoc analysis evaluated clinical REM (CDAI ≤2.8; SDAI ≤3.3), LDA (CDAI≤10; SDAI≤11), and DAS28(CRP) <2.6/≤3.2 at first occurrence before Week 72 or prior to treatment switch; additionally, these measures were evaluated at 3, 6, and 12 months after the first occurrence for the total number of pts randomized to UPA (n=651) or ADA (n=327). Sustainability of response was evaluated by Kaplan-Meier only for those pts who achieved REM/LDA and was defined as time to the earliest date of losing response at two consecutive visits, discontinuation of study drug, or losing response at the time of rescue. The predictive ability of time to clinical REM/LDA was assessed using Harrell’s concordance (c)-index (for reference, an index ~ 0.5, indicates no ability to predict; an index of 1 or -1 would be a perfect prediction). The date of the last follow up was 6 July, 2018, when all pts had reached the Week 72 visit.

Results:

Through Week 72, a significantly higher proportion of pts receiving UPA + MTX vs ADA + MTX achieved CDAI REM (41% vs 31%, p=.0035) as well as CDAI LDA (70% vs 59%, p=.0007). 26%/22% of pts randomized to UPA + MTX and 16%/14% of pts randomized to ADA + MTX achieved sustained CDAI REM at 6/12 months after the first occurrence. Additionally, 49%/46% of pts randomized to UPA + MTX and 36%/34% of pts randomized to ADA + MTX achieved sustained CDAI LDA at 6/12 months after the first occurrence (Figure 1). Time to initial clinical REM/LDA did not appear to be associated with sustained disease control. The c-indices (95% CI) for CDAI REM in the UPA +MTX and ADA + MTX groups were 0.528 (0.48, 0.58) and 0.510 (0.43, 0.59) and that of LDA were 0.601 (0.56, 0.64) and 0.555 (0.50, 0.61), respectively. Through last follow-up visit, 51% of UPA + MTX pts and 45% of ADA + MTX pts remained in CDAI REM while 65% of UPA + MTX pts and 58% of ADA + MTX pts remained in CDAI LDA, respectively (Figure 2). Similar results were observed across other disease activity measures (SDAI REM/LDA and DAS28(CRP) <2.6/≤3.2).

Conclusion:

A significantly greater proportion of pts with RA and prior inadequate response to MTX receiving UPA + MTX vs ADA + MTX achieved clinical REM or LDA across disease activity measures. REM and LDA were sustained through Week 72 in both treatment arms, with numerically higher proportions retaining response among UPA-treated pts.

References:

[1]EULAR: Smolen JS, et al. Ann Rheum Dis 2017;76:960–977.

[2]ACR: Singh et al. Arthritis & Rheumatology Vol. 68, No. 1, January 2016, pp 1–26.

Disclosure of Interests:

Peter Nash Grant/research support from: AbbVie, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Celgene, Eli Lilly and Company, Gilead, Janssen, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer Inc, Roche, Sanofi, UCB, Consultant of: AbbVie, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Celgene, Eli Lilly, Gilead, Janssen, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer Inc, Roche, Sanofi, UCB, Speakers bureau: AbbVie, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Celgene, Eli Lilly, Gilead, Janssen, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer Inc, Roche, Sanofi, UCB, Arthur Kavanaugh Grant/research support from: Abbott, Amgen, AstraZeneca, BMS, Celgene Corporation, Centocor-Janssen, Pfizer, Roche, UCB – grant/research support, Maya H Buch Grant/research support from: Pfizer, Roche, and UCB, Consultant of: Pfizer; AbbVie; Eli Lilly; Gilead Sciences, Inc.; Merck-Serono; Sandoz; and Sanofi, Bernard Combe Grant/research support from: Novartis, Pfizer, Roche-Chugai, Consultant of: AbbVie; Gilead Sciences, Inc.; Janssen; Eli Lilly and Company; Pfizer; Roche-Chugai; Sanofi, Speakers bureau: Bristol-Myers Squibb; Gilead Sciences, Inc.; Eli Lilly and Company; Merck Sharp & Dohme; Pfizer; Roche-Chugai; UCB, Louis Bessette Grant/research support from: AbbVie, Amgen, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Celgene, Eli Lilly, Janssen, Merck, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, Sanofi, UCB Pharma, Consultant of: AbbVie, Amgen, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Celgene, Eli Lilly, Janssen, Merck, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, Sanofi, UCB Pharma, Speakers bureau: AbbVie, Amgen, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Celgene, Eli Lilly, Janssen, Merck, Novartis, Pfizer, Sanofi, In-Ho Song Shareholder of: AbbVie Inc., Employee of: AbbVie Inc., Yanna Song Shareholder of: AbbVie Inc., Employee of: AbbVie Inc., Jessica Suboticki Shareholder of: AbbVie Inc., Employee of: AbbVie Inc., Roy Fleischmann Grant/research support from: AbbVie, Akros, Amgen, AstraZeneca, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Boehringer, IngelhCentrexion, Eli Lilly, EMD Serono, Genentech, Gilead, Janssen, Merck, Nektar, Novartis, Pfizer, Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Roche, Samsung, Sandoz, Sanofi Genzyme, Selecta, Taiho, UCB, Consultant of: AbbVie, ACEA, Amgen, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Eli Lilly, Gilead, GlaxoSmithKline, Novartis, Pfizer, Sanofi Genzyme, UCB

FRI0352 PROBABILITY OF ACHIEVING LOW DISEASE ACTIVITY OR REMISSION WITH APREMILAST TREATMENT AMONG DMARD-NAIVE SUBJECTS WITH ACTIVE PSORIATIC ARTHRITIS

Background:

Apremilast (APR) is associated with comparable ACR response rates in DMARD-naive vs DMARD-experienced patients (pts) with psoriatic arthritis (PsA).1,2A question that remains is if DMARD-naive pts treated with APR have greater chances of achieving treatment targets than DMARD-experienced pts. cDAPSA is a commonly used treatment target.

Objectives:

To assess the predictive value of baseline (BL) clinical disease status on achieving long-term cDAPSA treatment targets at Wk 52 among DMARD-naive subjects in PALACE 4; to compare these findings vs those recently reported from the PALACE 1-3 studies in subjects with prior exposure to DMARDs; and to provide further evidence that at a group level, achievement of cDAPSA disease targets with APR is associated with no or mild articular and extra-articular disease activity by Wk 52.

Methods:

This post hoc analysis included subjects assigned to APR 30 mg twice daily at BL who had available cDAPSA data at BL. We calculated the probabilities of shifting across different cDAPSA categories (remission [REM]: ≤4; low disease activity [LDA]: >4 to ≤13; moderate disease activity [Mod]: >13 to ≤27; high disease activity [HDA]: >273) from BL to Wk 52. Mean values of articular and non-articular variables (e.g., PASI, SJC/TJC, MASES, dactylitis) from BL to Wk 52 were assessed by cDAPSA category achieved at Wk 52 to determine the association between achievement of targets and control of articular and non-articular manifestations. Results from the current analyses were compared with the previously reported results from PALACE 1-3.

Results:

A total of 175 subjects receiving APR were included; at BL, 66.3% were in HDA, 31.4% in Mod, and 2.3% were in LDA. Overall, subjects who achieved treatment targets (LDA or REM) by Wk 52 had lower levels of disease activity at BL, as shown by a lower number of swollen and tender joints and lower presence of enthesitis and dactylitis. Higher prevalence of psoriasis-involved body surface area ≥3% at BL was observed. Subjects in Mod at BL were estimated to be more than twice as likely to achieve REM or LDA at Wk 52 vs subjects in HDA at BL; for subjects in LDA at BL, the estimated probability of achieving cDAPSA treatment targets was 100% (Figure). PALACE 4 subjects with LDA and Mod at BL exhibited higher estimated probabilities of achieving treatment targets (100.0% and 61.7%, respectively) than those observed in the DMARD-experienced population of PALACE 1-3 (71.1% and 46.9%). Subjects in PALACE 4 who achieved REM or LDA by Wk 52 showed no or mild articular and extra-articular disease activity by Wk 52, similar to what was observed in the PALACE 1-3 population.4

Conclusion:

DMARD-naive subjects in PALACE 4 who had LDA or Mod at BL had the highest likelihood of achieving treatment targets (cDAPSA REM or LDA) by Wk 52 with continued APR treatment. Results from the current probability analyses revealed higher probability rates than those observed in the DMARD-experienced PALACE 1-3 population; control of articular and extra-articular manifestations was observed in the DMARD-naive and DMARD-experienced populations.

References:

[1]Wells AF, et al. Rheumatology. 2018;57:1253-63. 2. Kavanaugh A, et al. Arthritis Res Ther. 2019;21:118. 3. Machado PM. Ann Rheum Dis. 2016;75:787-90. 4. Mease PJ, et al. Arthritis Care Res. 2020 Jan 7.

Disclosure of Interests:

Philip J Mease Grant/research support from: Abbott, Amgen, Biogen Idec, BMS, Celgene Corporation, Eli Lilly, Novartis, Pfizer, Sun Pharmaceutical, UCB – grant/research support, Consultant of: Abbott, Amgen, Biogen Idec, BMS, Celgene Corporation, Eli Lilly, Novartis, Pfizer, Sun Pharmaceutical, UCB – consultant, Speakers bureau: Abbott, Amgen, Biogen Idec, BMS, Eli Lilly, Genentech, Janssen, Pfizer, UCB – speakers bureau, Arthur Kavanaugh Grant/research support from: Abbott, Amgen, AstraZeneca, BMS, Celgene Corporation, Centocor-Janssen, Pfizer, Roche, UCB – grant/research support, Alexis Ogdie Grant/research support from: Novartis, Pfizer – grant/research support, Consultant of: AbbVie, BMS, Eli Lilly, Novartis, Pfizer, Takeda – consultant, Alvin F. Wells Grant/research support from: AbbVie, Celgene Corporation, Lilly – grant/research support, Consultant of: AbbVie, Alexion, Amgen, BMS, Celgene Corporation, Horizon, Lilly, Novartis, UCB – consultant, Speakers bureau: AbbVie, Alexion, Amgen, BMS, Celgene Corporation, Horizon, Lilly, Novartis, UCB – speakers bureau, Martin Bergman Shareholder of: Johnson & Johnson – stockholder, Consultant of: AbbVie, BMS, Celgene Corporation, Genentech, Janssen, Merck, Novartis, Pfizer, Sanofi – consultant, Speakers bureau: AbbVie, Celgene Corporation, Novartis, Pfizer, Sanofi – speakers bureau, Dafna D Gladman Grant/research support from: AbbVie, Amgen Inc., BMS, Celgene Corporation, Janssen, Novartis, Pfizer, UCB – grant/research support, Consultant of: AbbVie, Amgen Inc., BMS, Celgene Corporation, Janssen, Novartis, Pfizer, UCB – consultant, Frank Behrens Grant/research support from: AbbVie, Chugai, Janssen, Roche, Pfizer – grant/research support, Consultant of: AbbVie Biotest, Boehringer Ingelheim, Celgene Corporation, Chugai, Eli Lilly, Genzyme, Janssen, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, UCB – consultant, Speakers bureau: AbbVie, Biotest, BMS, Celgene Corporation, Chugai, Eli Lilly, Genzyme, Janssen, Merck Sharp & Dohme, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, Sandoz, UCB - speaker, Sven Richter Employee of: Amgen Inc. – employment; Celgene Corporation – employment at the time of study conduct, Michele Brunori Employee of: Amgen Inc. – employment; Celgene Corporation – employment at the time of study conduct, Lichen Teng Employee of: Amgen Inc. – employment; Celgene Corporation – employment at the time of study conduct, Benoit Guerette Employee of: Amgen Inc. – employment; Celgene Corporation – employment at the time of study conduct, Josef S. Smolen Grant/research support from: AbbVie, Eli Lilly, Janssen, Merck Sharp & Dohme, Pfizer, Roche – grant/research support, Consultant of: AbbVie, Amgen Inc., AstraZeneca, Astro, Celgene Corporation, Celtrion, Eli Lilly, Glaxo, ILTOO, Janssen, Medimmune, Merck Sharp & Dohme, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, Samsung, Sanofi, UCB – consultant, Speakers bureau: AbbVie, Amgen Inc., AstraZeneca, Astro, Celgene Corporation, Celtrion, Eli Lilly, Glaxo, ILTOO, Janssen, Medimmune, Merck Sharp & Dohme, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, Samsung, Sanofi, UCB – speaker

Techniques for improving the initial strength of the tibial tray-cement interface bond

Aims

Loosening of the tibial component after total knee arthroplasty (TKA) is a common indication for revision. Increasing the strength of the initial tibial implant/cement interface is desirable. There is little information about the surgical techniques that lead to the highest strength. We investigated the effects of eight variables on the strength of the initial tibial baseplate/cement interface.

Materials and Methods

A total of 48 tibial trays were cemented into acrylic holders using cement from two manufacturers, at three different times (early, normal, and late) using two techniques: cementing the tibial plateau or the plateau and the keel; and involving two conditions of contamination with marrow fat (at the metal/cement and cement/cement interfaces). Push-out tests were performed with load continuously recorded.

Results

Compared with normal conditions, early cementing increased the mean strength of the interface when using the two cements, Simplex and Palacos, by 48% and 72%, respectively. Late cementing reduced the strength by 47% and 73%, respectively. Cementing the keel increased the mean strength by 153% and 147%, respectively, for the two cements. Contamination of the metal/cement interface with fat reduced the mean strength by 99% and 94% for the two cements but adding cement to the underside of the tibial tray prior to insertion resulted in the mean strength being lowered by only 65% and 43%, respectively.

Conclusion

In order to maximize the strength of the tibial tray/cement interface, cement should be applied to the component soon after mixing, contamination of the interface should be avoided, and the keel and the plateau should be cemented.

Osteoblasts MC3T3-E1 Response in 2D and 3D Cell Cultures Models to High Carbon Content CoCr Alloy Particles. Effect of Metallic Particles on Vimentin Expression

The study of the biocompability of the metallic materials is a priority treating to avoid the osteolysis and aseptic loosening of prosthesis. Wear debris is considered one of the main factors responsible for aseptic loosening of orthopedic endoprostheses. We examined the response of mouse osteoblasts MC3T3-E1 to high carbon cobalt-chrome (HCCoCr) particles obtained a) from wear-corrosion assays on a pin-on-disk tribometer using as pair an alumina ball and a disc of a HCCoCr alloy, and b) HCCoCr bulk particles obtained by nitrogen gas atomization from an alloy used in clinic for prostheses application. Mitochondrial activity and lactate dehydrogenase activity assayed in 2D and 3D osteoblasts cell culture models were used to evaluate the cellular response to size, shape, and chemical composition of the metallic particles. 2D cell model was used to study the direct interaction of cells with particles and 3D cell cultures was used to more closely mimic in vivo conditions. The results showed that vimentin was overexpressed in the 2D osteoblasts cultures in presence of metal particles. This might be related to the appearance of pseudotumor in the peri-prosthetic vicinity described in some implanted patients.

Persistence of low disease activity after tumour necrosis factor inhibitor (TNFi) discontinuation in patients with psoriatic arthritis

Objective

To determine the duration of clinical benefit among patients with psoriatic arthritis (PsA) discontinuing tumour necrosis factor inhibitor (TNFi) therapy while in low disease activity (LDA), and to identify patient characteristics associated with prolonged clinical benefit.

Methods

We performed an observational cohort study assessing patients with PsA from the Consortium of Rheumatology Researchers of North America (CORRONA) registry who had discontinued TNFi after achieving LDA, defined as clinical disease activity index (CDAI) score ≤10 and physician's global assessment (PGA) of skin psoriasis ≤20/100. Kaplan–Meier method was used to estimate the duration of clinical benefit.

Results

Of the 5945 patients with PsA in CORRONA, 302 patients had discontinued TNFi (n=325) while in LDA and had follow-up data available. At time of discontinuation, mean PsA duration was 9.8 years, mean CDAI was 3.9, and mean duration of TNFi use was 1.5 years; 52.6% of patients had discontinued their first TNFi. Median time to loss of benefit was 29.2 months. 179 (55.1%) patients had persistent benefit at their previous clinic visit. An increased risk of losing clinical benefit was seen among patients with higher disease activity at discontinuation (CDAI≥3.2 vs <3.2; HR 1.43 (p=0.32)) and among smokers (HR 1.78 (p=0.027)).

Conclusions

Patients with PsA who achieve LDA may maintain clinical benefit after discontinuation of TNFi therapy.

Filgotinib (GLPG0634/GS-6034), an oral selective JAK1 inhibitor, is effective as monotherapy in patients with active rheumatoid arthritis: results from a randomised, dose-finding study (DARWIN 2)

Objectives

To evaluate the efficacy and safety of different doses of filgotinib, an oral Janus kinase 1 inhibitor, as monotherapy in patients with active rheumatoid arthritis (RA) and previous inadequate response to methotrexate (MTX).

Methods

In this 24-week phase IIb study, patients with moderately to severely active RA were randomised (1:1:1:1) to receive 50, 100 or 200 mg filgotinib once daily, or placebo, after a ≥4-week washout from MTX. The primary end point was the percentage of patients achieving an American College of Rheumatology (ACR)20 response at week 12.

Results

Overall, 283 patients were randomised and treated. At week 12, significantly more patients receiving filgotinib at any dose achieved ACR20 responses versus placebo (≥65% vs 29%, p<0.001). For other key end points at week 12 (ACR50, ACR70, ACR-N, Disease Activity Score based on 28 joints and C reactive protein, Clinical Disease Activity Index, Simplified Disease Activity Index and Health Assessment Questionnaire-Disability Index) significant differences from baseline in favour of filgotinib 100 and 200 mg versus placebo were seen; responses were maintained or improved through week 24. Rapid onset of action was observed for most efficacy end points. Dose-dependent increases in haemoglobin were observed. The percentage of patients with treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAE) was similar in the placebo and filgotinib groups (∼40%). Eight patients on filgotinib and one on placebo had a serious TEAE, and four patients, all of whom received filgotinib, experienced a serious infection. No tuberculosis or opportunistic infections were reported.

Conclusions

Over 24 weeks, filgotinib as monotherapy was efficacious in treating the signs and symptoms of active RA, with a rapid onset of action. Filgotinib was generally well tolerated.

Trial registration number

NCT01894516.