Guselkumab provides sustained domain-specific and comprehensive efficacy using composite indices in patients with active psoriatic arthritis

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the efficacy of guselkumab for the treatment of active PsA utilizing composite indices.

METHODS

Data were pooled from the phase 3 DISCOVER-1 (n = 381) and DISCOVER-2 (n = 739) studies. In both studies, patients were randomized 1:1:1 to subcutaneous guselkumab 100 mg every 4 weeks (Q4W); guselkumab 100 mg at week 0, week 4, then Q8W; or placebo Q4W with crossover to guselkumab 100 mg Q4W at week 24. Composite indices used to assess efficacy through week 52 included Disease Activity Index for Psoriatic Arthritis (DAPSA), Psoriatic Arthritis Disease Activity Score (PASDAS), minimal disease activity (MDA), and very low disease activity (VLDA). Through week 24, treatment failure rules were applied. Through week 52, non-responder imputation was used for missing data.

RESULTS

Greater proportions of guselkumab- than placebo-treated patients achieved DAPSA low disease activity (LDA) and remission, PASDAS LDA and VLDA, MDA, and VLDA at week 24 vs placebo (all unadjusted P < 0.05). At week 52, in the guselkumab Q4W and Q8W groups, respectively, response rates were as follows: DAPSA LDA, 54.2% and 52.5%; DAPSA remission, 18.2% and 17.6%; PASDAS LDA, 45.3% and 41.9%; PASDAS VLDA, 16.9% and 19.5%; MDA, 35.9% and 30.7%; and VLDA, 13.1% and 14.4%. In the placebo-crossover-to-guselkumab group, response rates for all composite indices increased after patients switched to guselkumab, from week 24 through week 52.

CONCLUSION

Treatment with guselkumab provided robust and sustained benefits across multiple PsA domains through 1 year, indicating that guselkumab is an effective therapy for the diverse manifestations of PsA.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

NCT03162796; NCT03158285.

Safety of Guselkumab With and Without Prior Tumor Necrosis Factor Inhibitor Treatment: Pooled Results Across 4 Studies in Patients With Psoriatic Arthritis

OBJECTIVE

Assess pooled safety results through the end of the phase II/III studies of guselkumab (GUS; ≤ 2 years) in tumor necrosis factor inhibitor (TNFi)-naïve and -experienced patients with psoriatic arthritis (PsA).

METHODS

Data were pooled from the Phase 2 and DISCOVER-1 (both TNFi-naïve and -experienced), DISCOVER-2 (TNFi-naïve), and COSMOS (TNFi-experienced) studies. Patients with active PsA were randomized to GUS 100 mg every 4 or 8 weeks (Q4W + Q8W = Combined GUS) or placebo (PBO) with crossover to GUS Q4W or Q8W at week 24. Time-adjusted adverse event (AE) rates (events/100 patient-years [PY]) and clinical laboratory findings were assessed during the PBO-controlled period and through end of study (≤ 2 years).

RESULTS

Of 1554 randomized patients (n = 373 [GUS Q4W], 664 [GUS Q8W], and 517 [PBO]), 1138 (73.23%) were TNFi-naïve and 416 (26.77%) were TNFi-experienced. Respective AE rates through week 24 were 220.8/100 PY (TNFi-naïve) and 251.6/100 PY (TNFi-experienced) in the Combined GUS group and 196.1/100 PY (TNFi-naïve) and 303.0/100 PY (TNFi-experienced) in the PBO group. Among all GUS-treated patients (including those who crossed over from PBO), low AE rates were maintained during long-term evaluation in both TNFi-naïve (139.7/100 PY) and TNFi-experienced (174.0/100 PY) patients. Rates/100 PY of AEs leading to treatment discontinuation, serious AEs, and other AEs of interest, as well as occurrence of elevated hepatic transaminase levels and decreased neutrophil counts were consistent between PBO and GUS-treated patients through week 24 regardless of prior TNFi use and remained low through the end of the studies.

CONCLUSION

The safety profile of GUS in TNFi-experienced patients was consistent with that in TNFi-naïve patients, which remained favorable for up to 2 years. [ClinicalTrials.gov: Phase 2 (NCT02319759), DISCOVER-1 (NCT03162796), DISCOVER-2 (NCT03158285), and COSMOS (NCT03796858)].

The effect of guselkumab on inhibiting radiographic progression in patients with active psoriatic arthritis: study protocol for APEX, a Phase 3b, multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Guselkumab, a fully human monoclonal antibody targeting the interleukin (IL)-23p19 subunit, is approved to treat adults with active psoriatic arthritis (PsA). In the Phase 3 DISCOVER-2 trial of 739 bilogico-naïve patients with active PsA, guselkumab 100 mg resulted in less radiographic progression, assessed via change from baseline in PsA-modified van der Heijde-Sharp (vdH-S) score, compared with placebo at week (W) 24 when given at W0, W4, and then every 4 weeks (Q4W) or Q8W. The least squares mean differences from placebo were -0.66 for guselkumab Q4W (p=0.011) and -0.43 for guselkumab Q8W (p=0.072). Reports suggest baseline C-reactive protein (CRP) and joint erosions are strongly prognostic of poor outcomes, especially radiographic progression, in PsA patients. We designed a trial (APEX) to further assess the effect of guselkumab on radiographic progression in patients with active PsA and risk factors for radiographic progression.

METHODS

Patients are eligible for APEX if they have had PsA for ≥6 months and active disease (≥3 swollen and ≥3 tender joints, CRP ≥0.3 mg/dL) despite prior therapy with conventional synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs, apremilast, and/or nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, with ≥2 joints with erosions on baseline radiographs (hands and feet). The primary and major secondary endpoints are the proportion of patients achieving ≥20% improvement in American College of Rheumatology response criteria (ACR20) response at W24 and change from baseline at W24 in PsA-modified vdH-S score, respectively. Sample sizes of 350/250/350 for guselkumab Q8W/guselkumab Q4W/placebo are expected to provide >99% power to detect significant differences in W24 ACR20 response rates for each guselkumab group vs placebo, as well as ≥90% (Q4W vs placebo) and ≥80% (Q8W vs placebo) power to detect a significant difference in PsA-modified vdH-S score change at W24. A Cochran-Mantel-Haenszel test and analysis of covariance will compare treatment efficacy for the primary and major secondary endpoints, respectively.

DISCUSSION

DISCOVER-2 findings informed the design of APEX, a Phase 3b study intended to further evaluate the impact of guselkumab in patients with active PsA and known risk factors for radiographic progression.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

This trial was registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04882098 . Registered on 11 May 2021.

Efficacy of guselkumab, a selective IL-23 inhibitor, in Preventing Arthritis in a Multicentre Psoriasis At-Risk cohort (PAMPA): protocol of a randomised, double-blind, placebo controlled multicentre trial

INTRODUCTION

Psoriatic arthritis (PsA) is a complex, immune-mediated disease associated with skin psoriasis that, if left untreated, can lead to joint destruction. Up to 30% of patients with psoriasis progress to PsA. In most cases, psoriasis precedes synovio-entheseal inflammation by an average of 5-7 years, providing a unique opportunity for early and potentially preventive intervention in a susceptible and identifiable population. Guselkumab is an effective IL-23p19 inhibitor Food and Drug Administration (FDA-approved for treatment of moderate-to-severe psoriasis and PsA. The Preventing Arthritis in a Multicentre Psoriasis At-Risk cohort (PAMPA) study aims to evaluate the efficacy of guselkumab in preventing PsA and decreasing musculoskeletal power Doppler ultrasound (PDUS) abnormalities in a population of patients with psoriasis who are at-increased risk for PsA progression.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

The PAMPA study is a multicentre, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, interventional, preventive trial comparing PDUS involvement and conversion to PsA in patients with psoriasis at-increased risk for progression treated with guselkumab compared with non-biological standard of care. The study includes a screening period, a double-blind treatment period (24 weeks) and an open-label follow-up period (72 weeks). At baseline, 200 subjects will be randomised (1:1) to receive either guselkumab 100 mg (arm 1) or placebo switching to guselkumab 100 mg starting at week 24 (arm 2). Arm 3 will follow 150 at-risk psoriasis patients who decline biological therapy and randomisation. Changes from baseline in the PDUS score at week 24 and the difference in proportion of patients transitioning to PsA at 96 weeks will be examined as the coprimary endpoints.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

Ethics approval for this study was granted by the coordinating centre's (NYU School of Medicine) Institutional Review Board (IRB). Each participating site received approval through their own IRBs. The findings will be shared in peer-reviewed articles and scientific conference presentations.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT05004727.

Work-Related Issues and Physical and Psychological Burden in Canadian Patients With Axial Spondyloarthritis: Results From the International Map of Axial Spondyloarthritis

OBJECTIVE

To identify factors associated with work-related issues in Canadian patients with axial spondyloarthritis.

METHODS

Data from 542 Canadian patients who participated in the International Map of Axial Spondyloarthritis online survey were analyzed. Participants who were employed, unemployed, or on short-term disability were included in this analysis. Regression analysis was used to study the association between work-related issues, disease activity (Bath Ankylosing Spondylitis Disease Activity Index [BASDAI]), and psychological distress (12-item General Health Questionnaire [GHQ-12]).

RESULTS

The mean age of surveyed participants was 44.3 (SD 13.9) years, 81% were university educated, and 52.6% employed. A substantial proportion had high disease activity (BASDAI ≥ 4, 72.1%) and psychological distress (GHQ-12 ≥ 3, 53.1%); 81% had work-related issues. This study analyzed responses from a subset of participants who were either employed, unemployed, or on short-term disability (n = 339). Ninety percent of this subset reported at least 1 work-related issue in the year before questionnaire completion, with the most frequent being absenteeism (49.3%) and missing work for healthcare provider visits (42.5%). Factoring in disability benefits eliminated the association between work-related issues and disease activity for all variables except fatigue (r = 0.217; P = 0.03) and discomfort (r = 0.196; P = 0.047). Difficulty fulfilling working hours (β 2.342, 95% CI 1.413-3.272) and effect on professional advancement (β 1.426, 95% CI 0.355-2.497) were associated with psychological distress. In the presence of disability benefits, only the effect on professional advancement remained (β 2.304, 95% CI 0.082-4.527).

CONCLUSION

Work-related issues are associated with worse patient-reported outcomes, both physical and psychological.

The Effect of Guselkumab on General Health State in Biologic-Naïve Patients with Active Psoriatic Arthritis Through Week 52 of the Phase 3, Randomized, Placebo-Controlled DISCOVER-2 Trial

INTRODUCTION

In DISCOVER-2, guselkumab, an interleukin-23 p19 subunit inhibitor, was efficacious in biologic-naïve psoriatic arthritis (PsA) patients. We report the effect of guselkumab on health-related quality of life (HRQoL) using the EuroQol 5-Dimension 5-Level (EQ-5D-5L) Index and Visual Analog Scale (EQ-VAS) through Week 52.

METHODS

Adults with active PsA were randomized to guselkumab 100 mg every 4 weeks (Q4W) or Weeks 0, 4, then every 8 weeks (Q8W), or placebo (crossover to guselkumab Q4W at Week 24). Least squares (LS) mean changes in EQ-5D-5L Index (0-1, US-based value set) and EQ-VAS (0-100) from baseline through Week 52 were assessed. Proportions of patients achieving minimally important differences (MIDs) were assessed through Week 52. Associations between patient clinical features and EQ-5D-5L Index and EQ-VAS scores were examined cross-sectionally with pooled data through Week 24.

RESULTS

The analysis included 738 patients (Q4W n = 245; Q8W n = 248; placebo n = 245). At Week 24, LS mean changes from baseline in the Q4W, Q8W, and placebo groups were 0.12, 0.12, and 0.05, respectively, for EQ-5D-5L Index, and 18.2, 18.4, and 6.8, respectively, for EQ-VAS. At Week 52, improvement was maintained in the guselkumab groups and increased in the placebo crossover group. EQ-5D-5L Index MID was achieved by 56.0% in each guselkumab group at Week 24 and 66.2% in Q4W, 68.5% in Q8W, and 66.1% in placebo crossover group at Week 52. Higher C-reactive protein level, Psoriasis Area and Severity Index score, fatigue, and pain were correlated with worse EQ-5D-5L Index and EQ-VAS, based on pooled data through Week 24. Higher tender joint count was correlated with worse EQ-5D-5L, while higher swollen joint count was correlated with worse EQ-VAS.

CONCLUSIONS

Guselkumab improved HRQoL through 52 weeks in patients with active PsA. Impairment in HRQoL was correlated with increased inflammation, fatigue, pain, and measures of skin and joint symptom severity.

CLINICALTRIALS

GOV: NCT03158285.

Glutathione, polyamine, and lysophosphatidylcholine synthesis pathways are associated with circulating pro-inflammatory cytokines

INTRODUCTION

Pro-inflammatory cytokines are responsible for initiating an effective defense against exogenous pathogens, and their regulation has a vital role in maintaining physiological homeostasis. The involvement of pro-inflammatory cytokines in pathological conditions have been explored in great detail, however, studies investigating metabolic pathways associated with these cytokines under normal homeostatic conditions are scarce.

OBJECTIVES

The aim of the current study was to identify metabolites and metabolic pathways associated with circulating pro-inflammatory cytokines under homeostatic conditions using a metabolomics approach.

METHODS

The study participants (n = 133) were derived from the Newfoundland Osteoarthritis Study (NFOAS) and the Complex Diseases in the Newfoundland population: Environment and Genetics (CODING) study. Plasma concentrations of cytokines including tumor necrosis factor-alpha (TNF-α), interleukin-6 (IL-6), interleukin-1 beta (IL-1β), and macrophage migration inhibitory factor (MIF) were assessed by enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay. Targeted metabolomic profiling on fasting plasma samples was performed using Biocrates MxP® Quant 500 kit which measures a total of 630 metabolites. Associations between natural log-transformed metabolite concentrations and metabolite sums/ratios and cytokine levels were assessed using linear regression with adjustment for age, sex, body mass index (BMI), and osteoarthritis status.

RESULTS

Seven metabolites and 11 metabolite sums/ratios were found to be significantly associated with TNF-α, IL-1β, and MIF (all p ≤ 5.13 × 10^- 5) after controlling multiple testing with Bonferroni method, indicating the association between glutathione (GSH), polyamine, and lysophosphatidylcholine (lysoPC) synthesis pathways and these pro-inflammatory cytokines.

CONCLUSION

GSH, polyamine, and lysoPC synthesis pathways were positively associated with circulating TNF-α, IL-1β, and MIF levels under homeostatic conditions.

Individual participant data meta-analysis of metabolomics on sustained knee pain in primary osteoarthritis patients

OBJECTIVES

Knee pain is the major driver for osteoarthritis (OA) patients to seek healthcare; but after pursuing both conservative and surgical pain interventions, approximately 20% of patients continue to report long-term pain following total knee arthroplasty (TKA). The study aimed to identify a metabolomic signature for sustained knee pain after TKA to elucidate possible underlying mechanisms.

METHODS

Two independent cohorts from St. John's, NL, Canada (n = 430), and Toronto, ON, Canada (n = 495) were included in the study. Sustained knee pain was assessed using the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) pain subscale (five questions) at least one year after TKA for primary OA. Those reporting any pain on all five questions were considered to have sustained knee pain. Metabolomic profiling was performed on fasted pre-operative plasma samples using the Biocrates Absolute IDQ p180 kit. Associations between metabolites and pair-wise metabolite ratios with sustained knee pain in each individual cohort were assessed using logistic regression with adjustment for age, sex, and BMI. Random-effects meta-analysis using inverse variance as weights was performed on summary statistics from both cohorts.

RESULTS

One metabolite, phosphatidylcholine (PC) diacyl (aa) C28:1 (OR = 0.66, p = 0.00026), and three metabolite ratios, PC aa C32:0 to PC aa C28:1, PC aa C28:1 to PC aa C32:0, and tetradecadienylcarnitine (C14:2) to sphingomyelin C20:2 (ORs=1.59, 0.60, and 1.59, respectively; all p < 2 × 10-5), were significantly associated with sustained knee pain.

CONCLUSIONS

Though further investigations are needed, our results provide potential predictive biomarkers and drug targets that could serve as a marker for poor response and be modified pre-operatively to improve knee pain and surgical response to TKA.

Laying the foundation for Real-world evidence studies: a case study from Newfoundland and Labrador

The Janssen and Newfoundland and Labrador Health Innovation Partnership (JANL-HIP) was established to carry out Real-World Evidence (RWE) projects to generate evidence about disease pathways, healthcare delivery, the effects of clinical interventions. Doing so will support and influence clinical decision-making in Newfoundland and Labrador (NL). This case study describes the foundational elements necessary for a real-world evidence generation project in NL and may provide learning for the effective execution of real-world studies in other jurisdictions. It uses an ongoing project in psoriatic disease in NL to illustrate the partnership and the benefits of RWE studies. Ultimately, the JANL-HIP RWE project aims to inform decisions that will drive improvements in health outcomes, system delivery, and policy mutually beneficial to health ecosystem stakeholders.

Real World Studies of Psoriasis and Mental Illness in Newfoundland and Labrador

Background

Psoriasis is a chronic, immune-mediated inflammatory disease with an implied connection to psychiatric disorders.

Objective

This study aims to illustrate an association between psoriasis and psychiatric disorders using real world data gathered from the Newfoundland and Labrador population.

Methods

Data on 15,100 patients with psoriasis and 75,500 controls (1:5) was collected from the Newfoundland and Labrador Centre for Health Information’s Electronic Health Records. The cases and controls were matched for age, sex, and geography. Indicators for psychiatric disorders include diagnosis of mental illnesses from physician’s visits and hospitalization records (all coded for mental health using ICD-9 and ICD-10 codes).

Results

9,991 (66.2%) cases were identified to have at least one visit with a diagnostic code for mental illness compared to 42,276 (56.0%), P < .0001 in the control group. The percentage of people coded for anxiety was 36.50% compared to 28.95%, P < .0001; depression was 37.04% compared to 30.19%, P < .0001; and adjustment disorder was 6.89% versus 5.48%, P < .0001, among those with and without psoriasis, respectively. The greatest risk for anxiety [OR 1.4 (1.20, 1.67)] and depression [OR 1.65 (1.36, 2.00)] among psoriasis patients was between the 0 to 20 age group. Women with psoriasis are more likely to have anxiety [OR 1.08 (1.03, 1.13)], depression [OR 1.04 (1.01, 1.09)] and adjustment disorder [OR 1.07 (0.98, 1.17)] compared to female controls.

Conclusion

Our result shows that patients with psoriasis have an increased prevalence of mental illness. Using real world data to carry out further investigations will better elucidate this association and provide an increased understanding of the association between psoriasis and mental disorders.

POS1035 LOW RATES OF RADIOGRAPHIC PROGRESSION WITH 2 YEARS OF GUSELKUMAB, A SELECTIVE INHIBITOR OF THE INTERLEUKIN-23p19 SUBUNIT: RESULTS FROM A PHASE 3, RANDOMIZED, DOUBLE-BLIND, PLACEBO-CONTROLLED STUDY OF BIOLOGIC-NAÏVE PATIENTS WITH ACTIVE PSORIATIC ARTHRITIS

Background

In the phase 3 DISCOVER-2 (D2) study, guselkumab (GUS) 100 mg every 4/8 weeks (Q4W/Q8W) significantly improved joint and skin symptoms in patients (pts) with active psoriatic arthritis (PsA); GUS-treated pts had smaller mean changes in radiographic progression vs placebo (PBO) at W24.1 Clinical response rates and favorable safety profile were durable through W100.2, 3

Objectives

To report details of radiographic assessments comprising Reading Session 3 through W100 of D2, including relationships between radiographic changes and measures of clinical outcomes.

Methods

Biologic-naïve adults with active PsA (≥5 swollen + ≥5 tender joint count; CRP ≥0.6 mg/dL) were 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, all through W100. Radiographic Reading Session 3 included assessments at W0/24/52/100 (or at discontinuation after W52) from pts ontinuing study treatment at W52; readers were blinded to treatment group and timepoint. Observed mean changes in total PsA-modified van der Heijde-Sharp (vdH-S), joint space narrowing (JSN), and erosion scores were reported. Changes in total vdH-S scores from W0-100 were determined in pts who did and did not achieve clinical response at W100, assessed by ACR20/50/70, low disease activity (LDA) based on Disease Activity in Psoriatic Arthritis score (DAPSA; ≤14) or Psoriatic Arthritis Disease Activity Score (PASDAS; ≤3.2), minimal disease activity (MDA), and normalized Health-Assessment Questionnaire-Disability Index (HAQ-DI) score (<0.5).

Results

Of 739 randomized pts, 664 had evaluable data from Reading Session 3; 629 had evaluable data from W52-100. Mean total baseline vdH-S scores were: Q4W, 28.0; Q8W, 23.9; PBO→Q4W, 25.6. Mean progression of joint damage from W0-24 was numerically lower in GUS- than PBO-treated pts for erosion, JSN, and total vdH-S scores (Table 1), consistent with the results from Reading Session 1.1 Mean changes in radiographic scores from W52-100 indicated low rates of radiographic progression across GUS groups. Among GUS-randomized pts, mean changes in vdH-S score from W0-100 were numerically lower for pts achieving clinical response assessed using ACR20/50/70, DAPSA LDA, PASDAS LDA, MDA, and HAQ-DI vs pts not achieving response at W100 (Figure 1).

Table 1.

Observed erosion, joint space narrowing, and total PsA-modified vdH-S scores through W100 of DISCOVER-2

GUS Q4WGUS Q8WPBO→GUS Q4WBaseline PsA-modified vdH-S score, n221228215Erosion14.2 (23.3)12.0 (21.9)12.1 (21.9)Joint space narrowing13.8 (21.8)11.9 (19.5)13.5 (21.6)Total28.0 (43.6)23.9 (40.4)25.6 (42.4)Mean (SD) change in PsA-modified vdH-S scoreW0-24 N=221W24-52 N=221W52-100 N=211W0-24 N=228W24-52 N=228W52-100 N=216W0-24 N=215W24-52 N=213W52-100 N=202Erosion0.27 (1.91)0.36 (1.77)0.45 (2.90)0.51 (1.96)0.20 (1.24)0.26 (1.75)0.73 (2.20)0.25 (1.85)0.09 (1.98)Joint space narrowing0.21 (1.17)0.21 (1.11)0.30 (1.32)0.17 (0.69)0.12 (0.66)0.20 (0.92)0.39 (1.72)0.09 (1.11)0.04 (1.90)Total0.48 (2.70)0.57 (2.66)0.75 (4.02)0.68 (2.36)0.31 (1.57)0.46 (2.42)1.12 (3.80)0.34 (2.79)0.13 (3.74)

Data presented as mean (SD).

GUS, guselkumab; PBO, placebo; PsA, Psoriatic Arthritis; Q4W, every 4 weeks; Q8W, every 8 weeks; SD, standard deviation; vdH-S, van der Heijde-Sharp; W, week

Conclusion

In biologic-naïve pts with active PsA enriched for greater risk of radiographic progression, GUS 100 mg (Q4W or Q8W) was associated with low rates of radiographic progression through 2 years. Pts achieving clinical response across several global measures of disease activity or normalized physical function at W100 had lower mean changes in total PsA-modified vdH-S scores compared with nonresponders.

References

[1]Mease PJ. Lancet. 2020;395:1126-1136

[2]McInnes IB. Arthritis Rheumatol. 2021;73:604-616

[3]McInnes IB. Innovations in Dermatology. Presentation: March 16-20, 2021

Disclosure of Interests

Philip J Mease Consultant of: AbbVie, Aclaris, Amgen, Bristol Myers Squibb, Celgene, Eli Lilly, Galapagos, Gilead, GlaxoSmithKline, Inmagene, Janssen, Novartis, Pfizer, SUN Pharma, and UCB, Grant/research support from: AbbVie, Aclaris, Amgen, Bristol Myers Squibb, Celgene, Eli Lilly, Galapagos, Gilead, GlaxoSmithKline, Inmagene, Janssen, Novartis, Pfizer, SUN Pharma, and UCB, Alice B Gottlieb Shareholder of: Xbiotech (stock options only), Consultant of: Anaptyps Bio, Avotres Therapeutics, Beiersdorf, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol Myers Squibb, Dermavant, Eli Lilly, Incyte, Janssen, LEO Pharma, Novartis, Pfizer, Sun Pharmaceuticals, UCB, Grant/research support from: Boehringer Ingelheim, Janssen, Novartis, Sun Pharmaceuticals, UCB, and Xbiotech, Iain McInnes Consultant of: AbbVie, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Celgene, Eli Lilly and Company, Gilead, Janssen, Novartis, Pfizer, and UCB, Grant/research support from: Bristol-Myers Squibb, Celgene, Eli Lilly and Company, Janssen, and UCB, Proton Rahman Speakers bureau: AbbVie, Eli Lilly, Janssen, Novartis, Pfizer, and UCB, Consultant of: AbbVie, Amgen, Bristol Myers Squibb, Celgene, Eli Lilly, Janssen, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, and UCB, Grant/research support from: Janssen and Novartis, Alexa Kollmeier Shareholder of: Johnson & Johnson, Employee of: Janssen Research and Development, LLC, Xie L Xu Shareholder of: Johnson & Johnson, Employee of: Janssen Research and Development, LLC, Yusang Jiang Employee of: Cytel, Inc., Shihong Sheng Shareholder of: Johnson & Johnson, Employee of: Janssen Research and Development, LLC, May Shawi Shareholder of: Johnson & Johnson, Employee of: Janssen Global Services, LLC, Soumya D Chakravarty Shareholder of: Johnson & Johnson, Employee of: Janssen Scientific Affairs, LLC, Frederic Lavie Shareholder of: Johnson & Johnson, Employee of: Janssen Global Services, LLC, Désirée van der Heijde Consultant of: AbbVie, Amgen, Astellas, AstraZeneca, Bayer, BMS, Boehringer Ingelheim, Celgene, Cyxone, Daiichi, Eisai, Eli Lilly, Galapagos, Gilead, GlaxoSmithKline, Janssen, Merck, Novartis, Pfizer, Regeneron, Roche, Sanofi, Takeda, and UCB Pharma, Employee of: Director of Imaging and Rheumatology BV

POS0074 IMMUNOLOGICAL DIFFERENCES BETWEEN PsA PATIENTS WHO ARE TUMOR NECROSIS FACTOR INHIBITOR-NAIVE AND WHO HAVE INADEQUATE RESPONSE TO TUMOR NECROSIS FACTOR INHIBITORS

Background

A better understanding of the immunological differences between psoriatic arthritis (PsA) patients (pts) who are tumor necrosis factor inhibitor (TNFi)-naïve & who have inadequate response to TNFi (TNFi-IR) may guide treatment choices. In DISCOVER-1, benefit of the IL-23p19 subunit inhibitor guselkumab (GUS) every-four-weeks (Q4W) & Q8W vs placebo (PBO) in improving PsA signs & symptoms was seen in adults with active PsA.1 The Ph3b COSMOS study of GUS Q8W vs PBO in TNFi-IR PsA pts corroborated these findings.2

Objectives

Assess baseline (BL) molecular differences between TNFi-naïve & -IR PsA pts & investigate GUS pharmacodynamic (PD) effect on cytokine expression over time in these cohorts.

Methods

Serum samples collected from consenting biomarker substudy pts in DISCOVER-11 (TNFi-naïve [n=101] & -IR [n=17]), DISCOVER-23 (TNFi-naïve [n=150]), & COSMOS2 (TNFi-IR [n=76]) were analyzed for selected serum cytokine levels. TNFi-IR pts in this post-hoc analysis had active PsA & discontinued 1-2 TNFi due to inadequate efficacy; these pts required a TNFi-specific washout period prior to starting GUS. PD effect of GUS Q8W on cytokine levels was assessed. Differential BL cytokine expression, associations between BL cytokine levels & clinical response (Psoriasis [PsO] Area & Severity Index 75% improvement from BL [PASI75] & American College of Rheumatology 20% improvement [ACR20]), & GUS effect on cytokine levels were analyzed with a General linear model & Spearman linear regression.

Results

BL pt demographics, disease characteristics, & conventional synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drug (csDMARD) use were comparable between TNFi-naïve (DISCOVER-1 & -2, N=251) & -IR (DISCOVER-1 & COSMOS, N=93) pts, with differences in mean PASI score (8.9 v 12.5), swollen joint count (SJC) (11.7 v 10.3), PsA duration (5.8 v 9.8 yrs), & PsO duration (16.7 v 20.4 yrs; Table 1). BL serum IL-22 & TNFα levels for pooled treatment groups were higher in TNFi-IR than -naïve pts (p<0.05). At W24, GUS reduced IL-22, IL-17A/F, IL-6, C-reactive protein (CRP), & serum amyloid A protein to similar levels in both cohorts (p<0.05; Figure 1). W24 PASI75 responders had higher BL IL-17F levels with GUS in both cohorts (p<0.05) & higher IL-22 levels in TNFi-IR pts only (p<0.05). A trend of upregulated BL IL-22 expression in W24 ACR20 responders was seen for TNFi-IR pts with GUS (p=0.07).

Table 1.

BL demographics, disease characteristics, & drug use in TNFi-naïve & -IR cohorts with available cytokine data in DISCOVER-1&2 & COSMOS.*

TNFi-naïve (N=251)TNFi-IR (N=93)Age [yrs]47.2 (11.3)48.5 (11.1)Female, n (%)132 (52.6)46 (49.5)Body mass index [kg/m2]29.6 (6.1)30.3 (6.4)Median (range) CRP [mg/dL]0.9 (0.0-12.9)1.0 (0.0-13.2)Log2 IL-22 / TNFα [pg/mL]2.0 (1.4) / 1.1 (0.6)2.5 (1.5) / 1.9 (1.2)Log2 IL-17A / F [pg/mL]-0.4 (1.5) / 1.7 (1.5)-0.1 (1.7) / 2.0 (1.6)SJC [0-66]11.7 (7.1)10.3 (8.3)TJC [0-68]20.3 (13.1)20.6 (14.2)PsA duration [yrs]5.8 (5.9)9.8 (8.2)PsO duration [yrs]16.7 (12.8)20.4 (12.0)PsO Body surface area (%)14.8 (18.6)19.1 (21.3)Investigator’s Global Assessment score [0-4]2.3 (0.9)2.3 (1.0)PASI score [0-72]8.9 (10.6)12.5 (12.0)Enthesitis [Y], n (%)160 (63.7)58 (62.4)csDMARD use [Y], n (%)164 (65.3)62 (66.7)Corticosteroid use (Y), n (%)45 (17.9)19 (20.4)Methotrexate use [Y], n (%)136 (54.2)54 (58.1)

Data are mean (SD) unless otherwise noted. *Pts with serum CRP level ≥0.3 mg/dL, SJC ≥3, & TJC ≥3 (to mimic D1 inclusion criteria1). TJC= tender joint count

Conclusion

Elevated BL IL-22 expression & association between BL IL-22 levels & W24 PASI75 response, & a W24 trend for an association between upregulated BL IL-22 & ACR20 response, in TNFi-IR pts seen in this exploratory analysis may suggest increased involvement of the IL-23 pathway in TNFi-IR pts. GUS showed comparable & significant PD effects for TNFi-naïve & -IR pts, consistent with observed clinical responses.

References

[1]Deodhar A, et al. Lancet. 2020;395:1115-25.

[2]Coates LC, et al. Ann Rheum Dis. 2021;80:140-1.

[3]Mease P, et al. Lancet. 2020;395:1126-36.

Disclosure of Interests

Stefan Siebert Speakers bureau: AbbVie, Biogen, GSK, Janssen, Novartis, UCB, Grant/research support from: AbbVie, Amgen, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol Myers Squibb, GSK, Janssen, Novartis, and UCB, Laura Coates Speakers bureau: AbbVie, Amgen, Biogen, Celgene, Eli Lilly, Galapagos, Gilead, Janssen, Medac, Novartis, Pfizer and UCB, Consultant of: AbbVie, Amgen, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol Myers Squibb, Celgene, Eli Lilly, Gilead, Galapagos, Janssen, Novartis, Pfizer, and UCB, Grant/research support from: AbbVie, Amgen, Celgene, Eli Lilly, Janssen, Novartis, Pfizer, and UCB, Georg Schett Speakers bureau: AbbVie, Amgen, Bristol Myers Squibb, Eli Lilly, Gilead, Janssen, Novartis, and UCB, Siba P Raychaudhuri Speakers bureau: AbbVie, Amgen, Celgene, Eli Lilly, Janssen, Novartis, Pfizer, SUN Pharma, and UCB, Consultant of: AbbVie, Amgen, Celgene, Eli Lilly, Janssen, Novartis, Pfizer, SUN Pharma, and UCB, Grant/research support from: AbbVie, Amgen, Celgene, Eli Lilly, Janssen, Novartis, Pfizer, SUN Pharma, and UCB, Warner Chen Shareholder of: Johnson & Johnson, Employee of: Janssen Research & Development, LLC (a wholly owned subsidiary of Johnson & Johnson), Sheng Gao Shareholder of: Johnson & Johnson, Employee of: Janssen Research & Development, LLC (a wholly owned subsidiary of Johnson & Johnson), Soumya D Chakravarty Shareholder of: Johnson & Johnson, Employee of: Janssen Scientific Affairs, LLC (a wholly owned subsidiary of Johnson & Johnson), May Shawi Shareholder of: Johnson & Johnson, Employee of: Janssen Pharmaceutical Companies of Johnson & Johnson, Frederic Lavie Shareholder of: Johnson & Johnson, Employee of: Janssen Pharmaceutical Companies of Johnson & Johnson, Elke Theander Shareholder of: Johnson & Johnson, Employee of: Janssen Scientific Affairs, LLC (a wholly owned subsidiary of Johnson & Johnson), Marlies Neuhold Shareholder of: Johnson & Johnson, Employee of: Janssen Scientific Affairs, LLC (a wholly owned subsidiary of Johnson & Johnson), Alexa Kollmeier Shareholder of: Johnson & Johnson, Employee of: Janssen Research & Development, LLC (a wholly owned subsidiary of Johnson & Johnson), Xie L Xu Shareholder of: Johnson & Johnson, Employee of: Janssen Research & Development, LLC (a wholly owned subsidiary of Johnson & Johnson), Proton Rahman Consultant of: AbbVie, Amgen, Bristol Myers Squibb, Celgene, Eli Lilly, Janssen, Merck, Novartis, Pfizer, and UCB, Grant/research support from: Janssen and Novartis, 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, GSK, 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, Atul Deodhar Speakers bureau: AbbVie, Eli Lilly, Janssen, Novartis, Pfizer, and UCB, Consultant of: AbbVie, Amgen, Aurinia, Bristol Myers Squibb, Celgene, Eli Lilly, GSK, Janssen, MoonLake, Novartis, Pfizer, and UCB, Grant/research support from: AbbVie, Eli Lilly, GSK, Novartis, Pfizer, and UCB

AB0888 Guselkumab Provides Sustained Improvements in Work Productivity and Daily Activity in Patients With Active Psoriatic Arthritis Through 2 Years of DISCOVER-2

Background

Psoriatic arthritis (PsA) impacts patients’ (pts) work productivity (WP) and daily activity.1 DISCOVER-2 (D2), a Phase 3 trial of the selective interleukin-23 p19-subunit inhibitor guselkumab (GUS) in biologic-naïve pts with PsA,2 demonstrated significant improvements in pt-reported WP and daily activity following 1 year (Y) of GUS treatment.3

Objectives

Assess WP and daily activity impairment in D2 pts through 2Y. Estimate indirect savings associated with GUS treatment and assess changes in employment status.

Methods

Pts with active PsA received GUS 100 mg every 4 weeks (Q4W); GUS 100 mg at W0, W4, then Q8W; or placebo (PBO). At W24, PBO pts crossed over to GUS 100 mg Q4W. WPAI-PsA assesses PsA-related work time missed (absenteeism), impairment while working (presenteeism), and impaired overall WP (absenteeism + presenteeism) for pts employed at baseline (EBL) and daily activity for all pts, including those unemployed at baseline (UBL) during the previous week. Mean changes in WPAI-PsA domains were calculated for each multiple imputation (MI) dataset using an analysis of covariance (ANCOVA); the reported LS mean is the average of all MI datasets. Significance was defined as p<0.05. Among pts EBL, potential indirect savings from improved overall WP were estimated using 2020 European Union mean yearly wage estimate (all occupations) combined with LS mean change from BL in WPAI-PsA overall work impairment.4 A shift analysis evaluated proportions of pts employed vs unemployed by treatment group using observed data over time.

Results

Pts EBL comprised 64% of the analysis cohort. Significant improvements in WP in pts EBL and in daily activity among all pts were observed with GUS Q4W/Q8W vs PBO at W24;3 mean improvements in WP and daily activity increased with continued GUS through 2Y (Table 1). Potential annual indirect savings from improved overall WP in pts EBL were €10,826 GUS Q4W, €12,712 GUS Q8W, and €10,948 PBO→ GUS Q4W at 2Y. Shift analysis showed relatively stable employment in pts EBL with GUS up to 2Y (>83% continued to work). Among pts UBL (36% of cohort), the proportion of pts employed increased by >20% through 2Y of GUS (Figure 1).

Table 1.

Model-Based Estimates of Change From BL in WPAI-PsA Domains1

GUS 100mg Q4WGUS 100mg Q8WPBO (W0-24) → GUS 100 mg Q4W (W24-100)VisitW24W100W24W100W24W100Absenteeism, N145147147149162166  LS Mean (95% CI)-3.4 (-6.5, -0.3)-1.8 (-4.5, 0.9)-3.0 (-6.0, 0.1)-4.2 (-6.8,-1.5)-3.0 (-6.0, 0.04)-4.2 (-6.8,-1.6)  Diff vs. PBO-0.4 (-4.6, 3.8)--0.01 (-4.2, 4.2)---Presenteeism, N145147147149162166  LS Mean (95% CI)-20.1 (-23.7, -16.6)-26.3 (-30.1,-22.5)-19.6 (-23.2, -16.1)-28.0 (-31.8, -24.2)-10.5 (-13.9, -7.0)-24.2 (-27.9, -20.5)  Diff vs PBO-9.7* (-14.4, -5.0)--9.2* (-13.9, -4.5)---Work productivity, N145147147149162166  LS Mean (95% CI)-20.1 (-24.1, -16.1)-23.8 (-28.0, -19.6)-19.2 (-23.1, -15.2)-28.0 (-32.1, -23.8)-10.6 (-14.4, -6.8)-24.1 (-28.1, -20.1)  Diff vs PBO-9.5* (-14.8, -4.2)--8.6* (-13.9, -3.3)---Daily Activity, N242242246246245245  LS Mean (95% CI)-20.5 (-23.3, -17.7)-29.2 (-32.2, -26.1)-21.2 (-23.9, -18.4)-28.0 (-31.0, -24.9)-9.9 (-12.6, -7.1)-26.6 (-29.6, -23.6)  Diff vs PBO-10.6* (-14.4, -6.8)--11.3* (-15.1, -7.5)-

1Mean changes in WPAI-PsA domains were calculated for each MI dataset using an ANCOVA; reported LS mean (95% confidence interval [CI]) = average of all MI datasets.

*p<0.002

Conclusion

In GUS-treated bio-naïve PsA pts, robust improvements in WP and daily activity seen at W24 were maintained and increased through 2Y of GUS. Long-term improvements in WP achieved may result in substantial indirect cost savings for GUS-treated pts. Rates of employment remained stable in pts employed and increased in those unemployed at BL.

References

[1]Tillett W et al. Rheumatol (Oxford). 2012;51:275–83.

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

[3]Curtis JR et al. EULAR, June 2–5, 2021. POS1026.

[4]OECD (2020). Average wages (indicator). https://data.oecd.org/earnwage/average-wages.htm

Disclosure of Interests

Jeffrey Curtis Consultant of: AbbVie, Amgen, Bristol-Myers Squibb, CorEvitas, Eli Lilly and Company, Janssen, Myriad, Novartis, Pfizer, Sanofi, and UCB, Grant/research support from: AbbVie, Amgen, Bristol-Myers Squibb, CorEvitas, Eli Lilly and Company, Janssen, Myriad, Novartis, Pfizer, Sanofi, and UCB, Iain McInnes Shareholder of: Causeway Therapeutics, and Evelo Compugen, Consultant of: Astra Zeneca, AbbVie, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Amgen, Eli Lilly and Company, Cabaletta, Compugen, GSK, Gilead, Janssen, Novartis, Pfizer, Sanofi, Roche, and UCB, Grant/research support from: Astra Zeneca, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Amgen, Eli Lilly and Company, GSK, Janssen, Novartis, Roche, and UCB, Proton Rahman Consultant of: AbbVie, Amgen, Bristol Myers Squibb, Celgene, Eli Lilly, Janssen, Merck, Novartis, Pfizer, and UCB, Grant/research support from: Janssen and Novartis, Dafna D Gladman Consultant of: Abbvie, Amgen, BMS, Eli Lilly, Galapagos, Gilead, janssen, Novartis, Pfizer and UCB., Grant/research support from: Abbvie, Amgen, Eli Lilly, Janssen, Pfizer, UCB, Feifei Yang Shareholder of: Johnson & Johnson, Employee of: Janssen Global Services, LLC, Steve Peterson Shareholder of: Johnson & Johnson, Employee of: Janssen Global Services, LLC, Alexa Kollmeier Shareholder of: Johnson & Johnson, Employee of: Janssen Research & Development, LLC, Natalie Shiff Shareholder of: Johnson & Johnson, Abbvie, Gilead, Employee of: Janssen Scientific Affairs, LLC, Chenglong Han Shareholder of: Johnson & Johnson, Employee of: Janssen Research & Development, LLC, May Shawi Shareholder of: Johnson & Johnson, Employee of: Immunology Global Medical Affairs, Janssen Pharmaceutical Companies, William Tillett Speakers bureau: Abbvie, Amgen, Eli-Lilly, Janssen, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, and UCB, Consultant of: Abbvie, Amgen, Eli-Lilly, Janssen, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, and UCB, Grant/research support from: Abbvie, Amgen, Eli-Lilly, Janssen, and UCB, 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

POS1030 PAIN RESPONSE IN PSORIATIC ARTHRITIS PATIENTS TREATED WITH GUSELKUMAB IS DRIVEN PREDOMINANTLY BY INFLAMMATION-INDEPENDENT EFFECTS

Background

Although reducing inflammation has been associated with pain improvement, the two do not always correlate. Recent studies have suggested that, in addition to its role in inflammation pathogenesis, IL-23 may be involved in pain regulation in a lymphocyte-independent manner1. Guselkumab (GUS), a fully human monoclonal antibody that selectively inhibits IL-23, has demonstrated safety and efficacy in treating multiple domains of active PsA in the DISCOVER-1&2 (D1&D2) trials2,3.

Objectives

To quantify the role of reducing inflammation on the observed relationship between GUS and pain response in PsA patients (pts) using mediation modelling.

Methods

Pooled data from the D1&D2 studies were analyzed. Pts in D1 had ≥3 swollen and ≥3 tender joints (SJC/TJC) and C-reactive protein (CRP)≥0.3 mg/dL; in D2, pts had ≥5 SJC and ≥5 TJC and CRP≥0.6 mg/dL. 31% of D1 pts received 1-2 prior tumor necrosis factor inhibitors (TNFi); D2 pts were bio-naïve. Pts were randomized 1:1:1 to GUS 100 mg every 4 weeks (Q4W); GUS 100 mg at W0, W4, then every 8 weeks (Q8W); or placebo (PBO); PBO pts crossed over to GUS 100 mg Q4W at W24. Pts with history of fibromyalgia were excluded from the analysis. Least square mean changes in pt-reported pain (0-100 VAS) through W52 were estimated with a repeated measures linear mixed model adjusting for known pain determinants. Mediation modelling was performed separately for Q4W & Q8W, W4 & W24, and TNFi-naïve & -experienced (exp) pts. In each model, change in pt-reported pain was the dependent variable; treatment regimen was the independent variable; inflammation, measured by change in SJC or CRP, was the designated mediator; covariates were: age; sex; and baseline (BL) pain score, BMI, SF-36 MCS score, and NSAID use.

Results

Mean (SD) BL pain levels in the GUS Q4W, GUS Q8W, and PBO groups were 60.4 (19.8), 62.0 (20.2), and 61.1 (19.6), respectively. Treatment with GUS was associated with significantly greater pain improvement compared with PBO as early as W4 (ΔQ4W-PBO [95%CI]: -4.9 [-7.6, -2.2]; ΔQ8W-PBO [95%CI]: -5.2 [-7.9, -2.5] (Figure 1). These between-group differences were further enhanced by W24 (ΔQ4W-PBO [95%CI]: -14.6 [-17.6, -11.5]; ΔQ8W-PBO [95%CI]: -14.3 [-17.3, -11.2]); by W52, GUS-randomized pts exhibited an approximate 30-point (̴50%) decrease in pain. Similar results were observed for TNFi-naïve and TNFi-exp pts.

Figure 1.

Mediation analyses demonstrated that the majority of GUS effect on pain at W4 was not attributable to SJC (direct effect), specifically ≤6% was mediated by inflammation as assessed by changes in SJC (indirect effect; Table 1). Similarly, at W24, the indirect effect via SJC improvement represented ≤10% of the GUS treatment effect. No differences were observed between TNFi-naïve and -exp pts at either timepoint.

Consistent results were obtained when using CRP as the mediator variable instead of SJC, whereby ≤2-9%% of GUS effect on pan was mediated by inflammation and 91-98% was direct (Table 1).

Table 1.

Direct (D) Treatment Effect vs. Indirect (IND) Effect via Inflammation Markers on Pain Improvement

MediatorWeekPt GroupEffectGUS Q4WGUS Q8WSJC4AllD96.7%*97.0%*IND†3.3%3%TNFi-NaiveD93.7%*98.5%*IND†6.3%1.5%TNFi-ExpD100%*100%*IND†0%0%24AllD94.8%*92.0%*IND†5.2%*8.0%*TNFi-NaiveD89.6%*90.1%*IND†10.4%*9.9%*TNFi-ExpD99.8%*95.7%*IND†0.2%4.3%CRP4AllD97.6%*95.0%*IND‡2.4%5.0%TNFi-NaiveD98.2%*95.4%*IND‡1.8%4.6%TNFi-ExpD97.6%*95.3%*IND‡2.4%4.7%24AllD97.2%*94.2%*IND‡2.8%5.8%*TNFi-NaiveD98.1%*95.9%*IND‡1.9%4.1%TNFi-ExpD96.5%*91.4%*IND‡3.5%8.6%

*p<0.05; †via SJC; ‡via CRP

Conclusion

GUS induced significant improvement in pt-reported pain as early as W4 of treatment, which was continuously enhanced through W52. While the known mediation effect of SJC and CRP, as markers of inflammation, on pain was confirmed, the majority of GUS’s effect on pain reduction was independent of its effect on these markers, regardless of dosing regimen or prior TNFi experience.

References

[1]Arthritis Res Ther. 2020;22:123

[2]Lancet. 2020;395:1115

[3]Lancet. 2020;395:1126

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, Enrique Soriano Speakers bureau: AbbVie, Amgen, Bristol Myers Squibb, Eli Lilly, Janssen, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, and UCB, Consultant of: AbbVie, Janssen, Novartis, and Roche, Grant/research support from: AbbVie, Janssen, Novartis, Pfizer, 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, May Shawi Shareholder of: Johnson & Johnson, Employee of: Janssen Pharmaceutical Companies of Johnson & Johnson, Peter Nash Speakers bureau: Janssen, Abbvie, Pfizer, Novartis, Lilly, Gilead, Roche, Sandoz, Celgene, Sun, Boehringer, and Bristol Myers Squibb, Consultant of: Janssen, Abbvie, Pfizer, Novartis, Lilly, Gilead, Roche, Sandoz, Celgene, Sun, Boehringer, and Bristol Myers Squibb, Grant/research support from: Janssen, Abbvie, Pfizer, Novartis, Lilly, Gilead, Roche, Sandoz, Celgene, Sun, Boehringer, and Bristol Myers Squibb, 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

POS1070 BASELINE DETERMINANTS OF PAIN RESPONSE IN PATIENTS WITH PSORIATIC ARTHRITIS RECEIVING GUSELKUMAB

Background

Pain in patients (pts) with psoriatic arthritis (PsA) has multifaceted origins; sustained improvement is difficult to achieve.1 Guselkumab (GUS), a fully human monoclonal antibody that selectively inhibits IL-23, is effective in treating multiple domains of PsA including joint, skin, and entheseal symptoms, and also elicits long-lasting improvements in pt-reported pain in the DISCOVER-1&2 trials of pts with active PsA.2

Objectives

These post hoc analyses were conducted to identify determinants of changes in pt-reported pain in PsA pts using pooled data through 1 year of DISCOVER-1&2.

Methods

Enrolled adult pts had active PsA despite standard therapies. DISCOVER-1 pts had ≥3 swollen and ≥3 tender joints and C-reactive protein (CRP) ≥0.3 mg/dL; DISCOVER-2 pts had ≥5 swollen and ≥5 tender joints and CRP ≥0.6 mg/dL. 31% of DISCOVER-1 pts received 1-2 prior tumor necrosis factor inhibitors; DISCOVER-2 pts were biologic-naïve. Pts were randomized 1:1:1 to GUS 100 mg every 4 weeks (wks) (Q4W); GUS 100 mg at W0, W4, then every 8 wks (Q8W); or placebo (PBO); PBO pts crossed over to GUS 100 mg Q4W at W24. Determinants with a statistically important effect (p<0.15) on pain (0-100 mm Visual Analogue Scale) in univariate Repeated Measures Generalized Linear Mixed Effects Models were included in a multivariate model employing backward stepwise selection (Pout=0.1) to identify independent determinants of pain improvement over 24 wks; the model was then tested separately in pts treated with PBO (through W24) and with GUS (through W24 and through W52).

Results

GUS was associated with significantly greater improvement in pain compared to PBO as early as 2 wks post-treatment; there was a significant interaction between treatment group and time, with effect of GUS on pain continuously enhanced through W24. Higher baseline (BL) pain score, worse mental health (assessed with the Short-Form-36 Mental Component Summary [SF-36 MCS] score), and lower fatigue level and lower tender joint count [TJC] were also associated with significantly greater pain improvements at W24, while background use of NSAIDs was a negative predictor of pain improvement (Table 1). Treatment effect on pain was independent of PsA duration, gender, PsA subtype, prior TNFi exposure, BL skin disease, and BL swollen joint count (SJC). Continuous significant improvement from BL in pain with GUS extended through W52 even after adjustment for the identified determinants of pain improvement through W24 (Figure 1). At W52, predictors of change in pain remained significant with the exception of SF-36 MCS score (Table 1). Results did not exclude a small number of enrolled pts with fibromyalgia (FM: nGUS=8; nPBO=4). According to these exploratory findings, medical history of FM was associated with lower pain improvement through W24 (p=0.066); in the models run separately in pts with GUS and PBO, pts with FM treated with GUS had a mean (95% CI) pain improvement (-9.1 [-19.5, 1.2]) while pts treated with PBO had a mean worsening (0.7 [-12.5, 13.9]). Pain improvement through 52 wks was significant regardless of FM: pts with FM had a mean (95% CI) improvement of -14.7

Table 1.

Significant Predictors of Change in Pain (W24 and W52)

BL DeterminantW24W52Estimate (95% CL)Estimate (95% CL)Pain score-0.62 (-0.69:-0.55) ‡-0.75 (-0.83:-0.67) ‡Fatigue-0.38 (-0.50:-0.27) ‡-0.37 (-0.53:-0.22) ‡SF-36 MCS0.20 (0.11:0.30)‡0.11 (-0.02:0.24)TJC0.13 (0.06:0.19) †0.12 (0.04:0.21) †NSAID use (Y vs N)2.29 (0.62:3.96) †2.76 (0.55:4.98) *

* p <0.05; †p <0.01; ‡p ≤0.0001

(-25.9, -3.6) comparable to non-FM pts at W24, while pain improvement in pts with no FM was -22.2 (-24.0, -20.4).

Conclusion

Early significant effects of GUS on pain were enhanced through 1 year. Significant predictors of change in pain were consistent at W24 and W52, with the exception of mental health measures. The impact of mental status on pt-reported pain and the potential for GUS to improve pain in pts with FM warrant further consideration.

References

[1]Gudu T et al. Expert Rev Clin Immunol 2018;14(5):405-17.

[2]Nash P et al. ACR Convergence 2021;Nov 5-9 (Poster 21-1368).

Disclosure of Interests

Peter Nash Grant/research support from: Janssen, Abbvie, Pfizer, Novartis, Lilly, Gilead, Roche, Sandoz, Celgene, Sun, Boehringer, and Bristol Myers Squibb, Christopher T. Ritchlin Consultant of: UCB Pharma, Amgen, AbbVie, Lilly, Pfizer, Novartis, Gilead, Janssen, Grant/research support from: UCB Pharma, AbbVie, Amgen, Proton Rahman Consultant of: AbbVie, Amgen, Bristol Myers Squibb, Celgene, Eli Lilly, Janssen, Merck, Novartis, Pfizer, and UCB, Grant/research support from: Janssen and Novartis, May Shawi Shareholder of: Johnson & Johnson, Employee of: Janssen Pharmaceutical Companies of Johnson & Johnson, Emmanouil Rampakakis Consultant of: Janssen, Employee of: JSS Medical Research, YoungJa Lee Shareholder of: Johnson & Johnson, Employee of: Janssen Asia Pacific, 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, Jonathan Sherlock Shareholder of: Johnson & Johnson, Employee of: Janssen Research & Development, LLC, Daniel Cua Shareholder of: Johnson & Johnson, Employee of: Janssen Research & Development, LLC, Saakshi Khattri Speakers bureau: AbbVie, Eli Lilly, Glenmark, Ichnos Sciences, Janssen, Novartis, Pfizer, and UCB, Consultant of: AbbVie, Eli Lilly, Glenmark, Ichnos Sciences, Janssen, Novartis, Pfizer, and UCB, Enrique Soriano Speakers bureau: AbbVie, Amgen, Bristol Myers Squibb, Eli Lilly, Janssen, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, and UCB, Consultant of: AbbVie, Janssen, Novartis, and Roche, Grant/research support from: AbbVie, Janssen, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, and UCB, Dennis McGonagle Grant/research support from: AbbVie, Amgen, Bristol Myers Squibb, Celgene, Eli Lilly, Gilead, Janssen, Novartis, Pfizer, and UCB

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

AB0881 Guselkumab Provides Sustained Improvements in Health-Related Quality of Life in Patients With Active Psoriatic Arthritis Through 2 Years of DISCOVER-2

Background

Psoriatic arthritis (PsA), a chronic inflammatory disease characterized by peripheral arthritis, axial inflammation, dactylitis, enthesitis, and skin/nail psoriasis, is associated with reduced health-related quality of life (HRQoL).

Objectives

To assess long-term effect of guselkumab (GUS), a human monoclonal antibody that selectively targets the interleukin (IL)-23p19 subunit, on HRQoL of bio-naïve PsA patients (pts) who participated in the Phase 3 2-year DISCOVER-2 trial.1

Methods

Pts with active PsA despite nonbiologic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs) and/or nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) received GUS 100 mg every 4 weeks (Q4W); GUS 100 mg at W0, W4, then Q8W; or placebo (PBO). At W24, PBO pts crossed over to GUS 100 mg Q4W. HRQoL was assessed using the pt-reported EuroQoL-5 Dimension-5 Level (EQ-5D-5L) questionnaire index and EuroQol Visual Analog Scale (EQ-VAS), widely used and complimentary tools that allow pts to provide a global assessment of their HRQoL. The EQ-5D-5L index assesses mobility, self-care, usual activities, pain/discomfort, and anxiety/depression; an index score is derived ranging from 0 (death) to 1 (perfect health).2 EQ-VAS assesses pt health state on a scale of 0-100, with higher scores indicating better health. Using mixed effects models for repeated measures (MMRM), least squares (LS) mean changes from baseline in the EQ-5D-5L index and EQ-VAS through W100 were assessed. Observed changes from baseline were evaluated; in pts who met treatment failure rules before W24 and in pts who discontinued with missing data after W24, changes from baseline were imputed as 0.

Results

GUS-treated pts achieved greater improvements in pt-reported health status than PBO at both W16 and W24 when evaluated using both the EQ-5D-5L index score and the EQ-VAS. The improvements by GUS in EQ-5D-5L index scores through W24 (0.12 for GUS Q4W/Q8W vs 0.05 for PBO; each nominal p<0.0001) were maintained with continued GUS through 2 years (0.15 for GUS Q4W/Q8W) (Table 1). PBO-treated pts who started GUS at W24 reported comparable improvements in their HRQoL by W52 (0.12), with maintenance though W100 (0.14). Similar results were observed with EQ-VAS (Figure 1). W24 improvements in EQ-VAS scores were greater following GUS treatment (18.2/18.4 GUS Q4W/Q8W) vs PBO (6.8; nominal p<0.0001). EQ-VAS scores continued to improve with GUS through 2 years (25.0/24.6 GUS Q4W/Q8W). Likewise, PBO-treated pts who crossed over to GUS at W24 experienced improvements in HRQoL by W52 (18.8), with maintenance through W100 (21.2).

Table 1.

LS mean change from baseline through W100 in EQ-5D-5L index

GUS 100mg Q4W(W0-100)GUS 100mg Q8W(W0-100)PBO → GUS 100 mg Q4WPBO(W0-24)GUS(W24-100)Week162410016241001624100N243244243247246248244244244LS mean change (95% CI)0.10 (0.09,0.12)0.12 (0.1,0.13)0.15 (0.13,0.16)0.11 (0.1,0.13)0.12 (0.1,0.13)0.15 (0.13,0.17)0.06 (0.04,0.07)0.05 (0.04,0.07)0.14 (0.12,0.16)  Diff vs. PBO0.04 (0.02,0.06)0.06 (0.04,0.09)--0.05 (0.03,0.07)0.06 (0.04,0.08)--------  Nominal p-value<0.0001<0.0001--<0.0001<0.0001--------

CI=Confidence interval; Diff=Difference

Conclusion

In bio-naïve pts with active PsA receiving GUS, earlier improvements (at the first timepoint assessed) in self-reported HRQoL measures were sustained through 2 years.

References

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

[2]EuroQol Group. 1990;16:199-208.

Disclosure of Interests

Jeffrey Curtis Consultant of: AbbVie, Amgen, Bristol-Myers Squibb, CorEvitas, Eli Lilly, Janssen, Myriad, Novartis, Pfizer, Sanofi, and UCB, Grant/research support from: AbbVie, Amgen, Bristol-Myers Squibb, CorEvitas, Eli Lilly, Janssen, Myriad, Novartis, Pfizer, Sanofi, and UCB, Iain McInnes Shareholder of: Causeway Therapeutics, and Evelo Compugen, Consultant of: Astra Zeneca, AbbVie, Amgen, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Cabaletta, Compugen, Eli Lilly, Gilead, GSK, Janssen, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, Sanofi, and UCB, Grant/research support from: Astra Zeneca, Amgen, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Eli Lilly, GSK, Janssen, Novartis, Roche, and UCB, Proton Rahman Consultant of: AbbVie, Amgen, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Celgene, Eli Lilly, Janssen, Merck, Novartis, Pfizer, and UCB, Grant/research support from: Janssen and Novartis, Dafna D Gladman Consultant of: AbbVie, Amgen, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Eli Lilly, Galapagos, Gilead, Janssen, Novartis, Pfizer, and UCB, Grant/research support from: AbbVie, Amgen, Eli Lilly, Janssen, Pfizer, and UCB, Feifei Yang Shareholder of: Johnson & Johnson, Employee of: Janssen Global Services, LLC (a wholly owned subsidiary of Johnson & Johnson), Steve Peterson Shareholder of: Johnson & Johnson, Employee of: Janssen Global Services, LLC (a wholly owned subsidiary of Johnson & Johnson), Alexa Kollmeier Shareholder of: Johnson & Johnson, Employee of: Janssen Research & Development, LLC (a wholly owned subsidiary of Johnson & Johnson), Natalie Shiff Shareholder of: AbbVie, Gilead, and Johnson & Johnson, Employee of: Janssen Scientific Affairs, LLC (a wholly owned subsidiary of Johnson & Johnson), Chenglong Han Shareholder of: Johnson & Johnson, Employee of: Janssen Research & Development, LLC (a wholly owned subsidiary of Johnson & Johnson), May Shawi Shareholder of: Johnson & Johnson, Employee of: Immunology Global Medical Affairs, Janssen Pharmaceutical Companies (a wholly owned subsidiary of Johnson & Johnson), William Tillett Speakers bureau: AbbVie, Amgen, Eli Lilly, Janssen, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, and UCB, Consultant of: AbbVie, Amgen, Eli Lilly, Janssen, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, and UCB, Grant/research support from: AbbVie, Amgen, Eli Lilly, Janssen, and UCB, 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, GSK, 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

POS1015 SAFETY OF GUSELKUMAB IN PATIENTS WITH ACTIVE PSORIATIC ARTHRITIS WHO ARE BIO-NAÏVE OR TNFi-EXPERIENCED: POOLED RESULTS FROM 4 RANDOMIZED CLINICAL TRIALS THROUGH 2 YEARS

Background

Guselkumab (GUS), a selective IL-23p19 subunit inhibitor, demonstrated efficacy and a favorable safety profile in active psoriatic arthritis (PsA) in the Phase (Ph)21, Ph3 (DISCOVER [D]-1&2)2,3, and Ph3b COSMOS4 randomized controlled trials (RCTs).

Objectives

Assess GUS safety through 2 years (Y) in biologic (bio)-naïve and tumor necrosis factor inhibitor (TNFi)-experienced (exp) active PsA patients (pts) pooled across 4 RCTs (Week [W] 56: Ph2 and COSMOS; W60: D1; W112: D2).

Methods

Eligible pts in COSMOS had inadequate response to 1 or 2 prior TNFi; 9% of Ph2 pts and 30% of D1 pts had 1 or 2 prior TNFi; D2 pts were bio-naïve. Incidence rates of adverse events (AEs) are summarized among all treated pts for the placebo (PBO)-controlled (W0-24) and active treatment periods through 2Y (max duration of exposure 100 W) according to actual treatment received, calculated as the number of events per 100 pt-Y of follow-up (PY), along with 95% confidence intervals (CI). Gastrointestinal (GI)-related serious AEs (SAEs) were identified using the Medical Dictionary for Regulatory Activities (MedDRA) system-organ class; major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE; predefined as MI, Stroke, or CV death) and opportunistic infections (OIs) were identified through medical review.

Results

Across the 4 RCTs, 1508 pts with active PsA received GUS 100 mg every 4 weeks (Q4W) or Q8W and were followed for a median of 1.2 Y, representing 2125 PY. In the overall population (N=1554), which includes PBO-treated pts that discontinued study agent prior to W24, 1138 pts were bio-naïve and 416 pts were TNFi-exp. Among all treated pts, the overall GUS safety profile was generally consistent with that of PBO through W24; rates remained low through 2Y of GUS (Table 1). The GUS safety profile was similar to that observed with PBO within the bio-naïve and TNFi-exp cohorts through W24. Incidence rates of AEs were generally consistent between cohorts in GUS-treated pts; whereas, TNFi-exp PBO-treated pts had more SAEs, study agent d/c due to AEs, and serious infections than bio-naïve PBO pts (Figure).

Table 1.

Overall Treatment-emergent AEs

PBO-controlled (W0-24)aThrough up to 2YPBOb(N=517)GUS Q8W (N=664)GUS Q4W (N=373)Combined GUS (N=1037)GUS Q8W (N=664)GUS Q4W (N=373)Combined GUSc(N=1508)Total (median) PY230 (0.5)305 (0.5)172 (0.5)478 (0.5)941 (1.1)645 (2.1)2125 (1.2)Events/100 PY (95% CI)AEs223 (204, 243)233 (216, 250)223 (201, 246)229 (216, 243)164 (156, 172)139 (130, 148)146 (141, 151)SAEs8.7 (5.3, 13)4.9 (2.8, 8.1)5.2 (2.4, 9.9)5.0 (3.2, 7.5)6.4 (4.9, 8.2)4.7 (3.1, 6.6)5.7 (4.7, 6.8)AEs leading to study agent d/c4.4 (2.1, 8.0)3.6 (1.8, 6.5)7.0 (3.6, 12.2)4.8 (3.1, 7.2)2.6 (1.6, 3.8)2.9 (1.8, 4.6)2.7 (2.1, 3.5)Infections59 (50, 70)56 (48, 65)57 (47, 70)57 (50, 64)43 (38, 47)37 (33, 42)39 (36, 42)Serious Infections2.2 (0.71, 5.1)0.33 (0.01, 1.8)1.7 (0.36, 5.1)0.84 (0.23, 2.1)1.7 (0.97, 2.8)0.77 (0.25, 1.8)1.5 (1.0, 2.1)Malignancy0.44 (0.01, 2.4)0.98 (0.20, 2.9)0.00 (0.00, 1.7)0.63 (0.13, 1.8)0.42 (0.12, 1.1)0.00 (0.00, 0.46)0.28 (0.10, 0.61)MACE0.44 (0.01, 2.4)0.33 (0.01, 1.8)0.58 (0.01, 3.2)0.42 (0.05, 1.5)0.21 (0.03, 0.77)0.46 (0.10, 1.4)0.24 (0.08, 0.55)GI-related SAEs1.3 (0.27, 3.8)0.33 (0.01, 1.8)0.00 (0.00, 1.7)0.21 (0.01, 1.2)0.32 (0.07, 0.93)0.46 (0.10, 1.4)0.28 (0.10, 0.61)OIs0.00 (0.00, 1.3)0.00 (0.00, 0.98)0.00 (0.00, 1.7)0.00 (0.00, 0.63)0.21 (0.03, 0.77)0.00 (0.00, 0.46)0.14 (0.03, 0.41)

MedDRA Version 23.1.

a Includes safety follow-up data through 2Y for pts who d/c study agent prior to W24 and did not receive any study agent at or after W24.

b Includes data prior to GUS in PBO pts who switched from PBO to GUS.

c Includes PBO to GUS cross-over at W24.

Conclusion

The favorable GUS safety profile demonstrated through W24 persisted through 2Y across bio-naïve and TNFi-exp pts.

References

[1]Deodhar A, et al. Lancet. 2018;391:2213-2224.

[2]Deodhar A, et al. Lancet. 2020;395:1115-1125.

[3]Mease PJ, et al. Lancet. 2020;395:1126-1136.

[4]Coates LC, et al. ARD. 2021;80:140-141. OP0230.

Disclosure of Interests

Proton Rahman Consultant of: AbbVie, Amgen, Bristol Myers Squibb, Celgene, Eli Lilly, Janssen, Merck, Novartis, Pfizer, and UCB, Grant/research support from: Janssen and Novartis, Wolf-Henning Boehncke Speakers bureau: AbbVie, Almirall, Janssen, Leo, Lilly, Novartis, and UCB, Consultant of: AbbVie, Almirall, Janssen, Leo, Lilly, Novartis, and UCB, 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 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, 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, Marlies Neuhold Shareholder of: Johnson & Johnson, Employee of: Janssen Scientific Affairs, LLC, May Shawi Shareholder of: Johnson & Johnson, Employee of: Janssen Pharmaceutical Companies of Johnson & Johnson, Yanli Wang Consultant of: Janssen, Employee of: IQVIA, Shihong Sheng Shareholder of: Johnson & Johnson, Employee of: Janssen Research & Development, LLC, Paul Bergmans Shareholder of: Johnson & Johnson, Employee of: Janssen Biostatistics, Alexa Kollmeier Shareholder of: Johnson & Johnson, Employee of: Janssen Research & Development, LLC, Elke Theander Employee of: Janssen Scientific Affairs, LLC, Jenny Yu Shareholder of: Johnson & Johnson, Employee of: Janssen Research & Development, LLC, Evan Leibowitz Shareholder of: Johnson & Johnson, Employee of: Janssen Scientific Affairs, LLC, Marilise Marrache Shareholder of: Johnson & Johnson, Employee of: Medical Affairs, Janssen Inc., Laura Coates Speakers bureau: AbbVie, Amgen, Biogen, Celgene, Eli Lilly, Galapagos, Gilead, Janssen, Medac, Novartis, Pfizer and UCB, Consultant of: AbbVie, Amgen, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol Myers Squibb, Celgene, Eli Lilly, Gilead, Galapagos, Janssen, Novartis, Pfizer, and UCB, Grant/research support from: AbbVie, Amgen, Celgene, Eli Lilly, Janssen, Novartis, Pfizer, and UCB

POS0969 GENETIC AND MOLECULAR DISTINCTIONS BETWEEN AXIAL PSORIATIC ARTHRITIS AND ANKYLOSING SPONDYLITIS

Background

Psoriatic arthritis (PsA) and ankylosing spondylitis (AS) represent the prototypical spondyloarthritides. PsA patients may also suffer from axial disease (axPsA). Despite overlapping symptoms, axPsA and AS may be distinct disorders with differing clinical manifestations, genetic associations, and radiographic findings.1 These disorders also respond differently to immunomodulatory therapies such as anti-interleukin (IL)-23 inhibitors. While guselkumab, a human monoclonal antibody targeting the IL-23p19 subunit, improved symptoms of axPsA,2 risankizumab, a humanized monoclonal antibody targeting the IL-23p19 subunit, did not show improvement in the primary endpoint of proportion of AS patients achieving an Assessment of SpondyloArthritis International Society 40% (ASAS40) response at week (W) 12.3

Objectives

To understand molecular distinctions between axPsA and AS to differentiate these diseases and guide treatment choice.

Methods

Whole blood and serum samples were collected from consenting patients in the NCT03162796/NCT0315828 studies of guselkumab in PsA and the NCT02437162/NCT02438787 studies of ustekinumab in AS. axPsA patients were investigator-verified as having magnetic resonance imaging- or pelvic x-ray-confirmed sacroiliitis at screening (locally read). Human leukocyte antigen (HLA) genotypes were determined by RNA sequencing, limited to Caucasian patients to reduce genetic variability,4 and select serum cytokine levels were analyzed alongside samples from healthy individuals. Differential prevalence of HLA alleles in axPsA versus AS was determined using a Fisher’s Exact test. Statistical significance of differential baseline serum cytokine expression among axPsA versus non-axPsA versus AS patients, and of guselkumab effect on serum cytokine reduction versus placebo among axPsA and non-axPsA patients, were determined with a generalized linear model performed on log2-transformed data. Biomarker data from guselkumab every-4-weeks and every-8-weeks treatment arms were pooled.

Results

Among the 186/234 Caucasian axPsA/AS patients with available data, 34%/15% were female, 70%/14% used methotrexate at baseline, mean serum C-reactive protein (CRP) levels were 2.8/2.4 mg/dL and mean Bath Ankylosing Spondylitis Disease Activity Index (BASDAI) scores were 6.4/7.5, respectively. Aside from race, baseline demographics and disease characteristics were representative of the overall population. The prevalence of class I HLA allele -B27, -C01, and -C02 carriers was significantly lower in axPsA than AS patients (30.7% versus 92.3%, p<0.001; 5.9% versus 31.6%, p<0.001; and 28.0% versus 62.0%, p<0.001, respectively), while the prevalence of HLA-C06 was significantly higher in axPsA than AS populations (36.0% versus 8.6%, p<0.001). Baseline serum levels of IL-17A and IL-17F were significantly higher in axPsA (N=71) than in AS (N=58) patients (p<0.01 and p<0.001, respectively). Comparable IL-17A/F expression was seen for axPsA and non-axPsA (N=229) patients (both p=not significant). Significant and comparable reductions from baseline in serum IL-17A/F in axPsA and non-axPsA patients were seen with guselkumab treatment (axPsA N=41, non-axPsA N=160) versus placebo (axPsA N=30, non-axPsA N=69) at W4/24 (all p<0.05).

Conclusion

Adults with axPsA and AS exhibit different genetic risk factors and serum IL-17 levels, supporting the concept of distinct disorders. Guselkumab demonstrated significant pharmacodynamic effects in axPsA patients that aligned with such effects in non-axPsA patients, consistent with observed clinical improvement.2

References

[1]Feld et al. Nat Rev Rheumatol. 2018;14(6):363-371.

[2]Mease et al. Lancet Rheumatol. 2021;3(10)E715-E723.

[3]Baeten et al. Ann Rheum Dis. 2018;77(9):1295-1302.

[4]Buchkovich et al. Genome Med. 2017;9(86).

Disclosure of Interests

Arthur Kavanaugh Consultant of: AbbVie, Amgen, BMS, Genentech, Janssen, Eli Lilly, Merck, Novartis, Pfizer and UCB, Xenofon Baraliakos Consultant of: AbbVie, Chugai, Eli Lilly, Galapagos, Janssen, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, and UCB, Grant/research support from: AbbVie, MSD, and Novartis, Sheng Gao Employee of: Janssen Research & Development, LLC, and may own stock or stock options in Johnson & Johnson, Warner Chen Employee of: Janssen Research & Development, LLC, and may own stock or stock options in Johnson & Johnson, Kristen Sweet Employee of: Janssen Research & Development, LLC, and may own stock or stock options in Johnson & Johnson, Soumya D Chakravarty Employee of: Janssen Scientific Affairs, LLC, and may own stock or stock options in Johnson & Johnson, Qingxuan Song Employee of: Janssen Research & Development, LLC, and may own stock or stock options in Johnson & Johnson, May Shawi Employee of: Janssen Pharmaceutical Companies of Johnson & Johnson, and may own stock or stock options in Johnson & Johnson, Frank Behrens Speakers bureau: AbbVie, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol Myers Squibb, Celgene, Chugai, Eli Lilly, Galapagos, Genzyme, Gilead, Janssen, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, Sanofi, and UCB, Consultant of: AbbVie, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol Myers Squibb, Celgene, Chugai, Eli Lilly, Galapagos, Genzyme, Gilead, Janssen, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, Sanofi, and UCB, Grant/research support from: Celgene, Chugai, Janssen, Pfizer, and Roche, Proton Rahman Consultant of: AbbVie, Amgen, Bristol Myers Squibb, Celgene, Eli Lilly, Janssen, Merck, Novartis, Pfizer, and UCB, Grant/research support from: Janssen, research grants from Janssen and Novartis

POS1028 GUSELKUMAB MAINTAINS RESOLUTION OF DACTYLITIS AND ENTHESITIS IN PATIENTS WITH ACTIVE PSORIATIC ARTHRITIS: RESULTS THROUGH 2 YEARS FROM A PHASE 3 STUDY

Background

Guselkumab (GUS), a selective inhibitor of IL-23, significantly improved the diverse manifestations of active psoriatic arthritis (PsA), including dactylitis and enthesitis, in DISCOVER (D)-1 & 2 trials of patients (pts) with active PsA1,2, with maintenance of response rates through 1 year (yr).3,4 Dactylitis and enthesitis, extra-articular manifestations of PsA, can be difficult to treat and cause significant disease burden.5,6

Objectives

To evaluate the ability of GUS to provide long-term resolution of dactylitis and enthesitis in pts with PsA through 2 yrs of D-2.

Methods

D-2 biologic naïve pts with active PsA were randomized 1:1:1 to GUS 100 mg every 4 weeks (Q4W); GUS 100 mg at W0, W4, Q8W; or placebo (PBO). At W24, PBO pts crossed over to GUS Q4W. Independent assessors evaluated dactylitis (total score: 0-60) and enthesitis (Leeds Enthesitis Index [LEI]; total score 0-6). These post hoc analyses assessed baseline (BL) frequency and severity of enthesitis in pts with dactylitis and dactylitis frequency in pts with enthesitis. Post BL, changes in dactylitis and LEI scores over time (least squares [LS] mean changes; analysis of covariance [ANCOVA]) and rates of resolution of dactylitis and enthesitis (Chi square correlation test) were determined in pts with these manifestations at BL (missing data imputed as no change/response).

Results

At BL, more D-2 pts had enthesitis (68%) than dactylitis (45%). At BL, 78% of pts with dactylitis vs 61% without (w/o) dactylitis had enthesitis and 51% of pts with enthesitis vs 32% w/o enthesitis had dactylitis. Among pts with enthesitis at BL, a higher percentage of pts with dactylitis (52%) had severe enthesitis (LEI score ≥3) vs pts w/o dactylitis (44%). Among those with the condition at BL, resolution rates of dactylitis (57%, Q4W; 64%, Q8W) and enthesitis (44%, Q4W; 54%, Q8W) at W24 increased through W52 (dactylitis: 74%, Q4W; 78%, Q8W; enthesitis: 57%, Q4W; 61%, Q8W) and were maintained at W100 (dactylitis: 72%, Q4W; 83%, Q8W; enthesitis: 62%, Q4W; 70%, Q8W). Consistent results were observed when evaluating mean changes in dactylitis and LEI scores and in pts who crossed over from PBO to GUS Q4W at W24 (Table 1). In pts with dactylitis and enthesitis at BL, GUS-treated pts showed significant correlations between resolution of enthesitis and dactylitis at W24 (p=0.004), W52 (p<0.001) and W100 (p=0.039), with nearly 90% of pts with enthesitis resolution also achieving dactylitis resolution at W52 and W100 (Figure).

Table 1.

LS mean change from baseline over time in dactylitis and LEI scores in pts with manifestation at baseline

GUS 100 mg Q4WGUS 100 mg Q8WPBO → GUS 100 mg Q4WDactylitis score (0-60)Pts, N12111199W24a-5.9 (-6.7, -5.0)-6.0 (-6.8, -5.1)-4.0 (-5.0, -3.1)W52a-6.5 (-7.2, -5.8)-7.2 (-7.9, -6.5)-6.9 (-7.6, -6.2)W100a-6.5 (-7.1, -5.8)-7.5 (-8.1, -6.8)-6.9 (-7.6, -6.2)LEI score (1-6)Pts, N170158178W24a-1.5 (-1.8, -1.3)-1.6 (-1.8, -1.4)-1.0 (-1.3, -0.8)W52a-1.8 (-2.0, -1.6)-1.9 (-2.1, -1.7)-2.0 (-2.2, -1.8)W100a-1.9 (-2.1, -1.7)-2.1 (-2.3, -1.8)-2.1 (-2.3, -1.9)

aResults are LS mean change (95% confidence interval [CI]); LS mean change determined by ANCOVA; missing data was imputed as no change for pts who discontinued treatment and using multiple imputation for remaining missing data

GUS, guselkumab; LEI, Leeds Enthesitis Index; LS, least squares; PBO, placebo; pts, patients; Q4W, every 4 weeks; Q8W, every 8 weeks; W, week

Conclusion

Pts with PsA often present with concurrent enthesitis and dactylitis, both of which can be recalcitrant to treatment. GUS resolved enthesitis and dactylitis in substantial proportions of pts through W100. GUS-treated pts who achieved enthesitis resolution were more likely to achieve dactylitis resolution and vice versa.

References

[1]Deodhar A et al. Lancet. 2020;395:1115

[2]Mease PJ et al. Lancet. 2020;395:1126

[3]Ritchlin C et al. RMD Open. 2021;7(1):e001457

[4]McInnes IB et al. Arthritis Rheumatol. 2021;73:604

[5]Kaeley GS et al. Semin Arthritis Rheum. 2018;48:35

[6]McGonagle D et al. Nat Rev Rheumatol. 2019;15:113

Disclosure of Interests

Proton Rahman Speakers bureau: AbbVie, Eli Lilly, Janssen, Novartis, Pfizer, and UCB, Consultant of: AbbVie, Amgen, Bristol Myers Squibb, Celgene, Eli Lilly, Janssen, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, and UCB, Grant/research support from: Janssen and Novartis, Iain McInnes Consultant of: AbbVie, Bristol Myers Squibb, Boehringer Ingelheim, Celgene, Eli Lilly, Gilead, Janssen, Novartis, and UCB, Grant/research support from: AstraZeneca, Bristol Myers Squibb, Celgene, Janssen, Eli Lilly, Novartis, and UCB, Atul Deodhar Speakers bureau: AbbVie, Eli Lilly, Janssen, Novartis, Pfizer, and UCB, Consultant of: AbbVie, Amgen, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol Myers Squibb, Celgene, Eli Lilly, Galapagos, GlaxoSmithKline, Janssen, Novartis, Pfizer, and UCB, Grant/research support from: AbbVie, Eli Lilly, GlaxoSmithKline, Novartis, Pfizer, and UCB, Georg Schett Speakers bureau: Abbvie, Janssen, and Novartis, Philip J Mease Speakers bureau: AbbVie, Aclaris, Amgen, Bristol Myers Squibb, Celgene, Eli Lilly, Galapagos, Gilead, GlaxoSmithKline, Inmagene, Janssen, Novartis, Pfizer, SUN Pharma, and UCB, Consultant of: AbbVie, Aclaris, Amgen, Bristol Myers Squibb, Celgene, Eli Lilly, Galapagos, Gilead, GlaxoSmithKline, Inmagene, Janssen, Novartis, Pfizer, SUN Pharma, and UCB, Grant/research support from: AbbVie, Aclaris, Amgen, Bristol Myers Squibb, Celgene, Eli Lilly, Galapagos, Gilead, GlaxoSmithKline, Inmagene, Janssen, Novartis, Pfizer, SUN Pharma, and UCB, May Shawi Shareholder of: Janssen Global Services, LLC, Employee of: Janssen Global Services, LLC, Daniel Cua Shareholder of: Janssen Research & Development, LLC, Employee of: Janssen Research & Development, LLC, Jonathan Sherlock Shareholder of: Janssen Research & Development, LLC, Employee of: Janssen Research & Development, LLC, Alexa Kollmeier Shareholder of: Janssen Research & Development, LLC, Employee of: Janssen Research & Development, LLC, Xie L Xu Shareholder of: Janssen Research & Development, LLC, Employee of: Janssen Research & Development, LLC, Yusang Jiang Consultant of: Janssen, Employee of: Cytel Inc, Shihong Sheng Shareholder of: Janssen Research & Development, LLC, Employee of: Janssen Research & Development, LLC, Christopher T. Ritchlin Consultant of: AbbVie, Amgen, Gilead, Janssen, Eli Lilly, Novartis, Pfizer, and UCB Pharma, Grant/research support from: AbbVie, Amgen, and UCB Pharma, Dennis McGonagle Grant/research support from: AbbVie, Amgen, Bristol Myers Squibb, Celgene, Eli Lilly, Gilead, Janssen, Novartis, Pfizer, and UCB

POS0930 SAFETY AND EFFICACY OF IXEKIZUMAB TREATMENT IN PATIENTS WITH AXIAL SPONDYLOARTHRITIS: 3-YEAR CLINICAL TRIAL RESULTS FROM THE COAST PROGRAMME

Background

Ixekizumab (IXE) has demonstrated efficacy at week (wk) 16 which was maintained through 2 years (yrs) and was associated with a consistent safety profile in patients (pts) with r- and nr-axSpA, who are bDMARD-naïve and TNFi-experienced.1-3

Objectives

To report safety and efficacy from the COAST programme at 3 yrs: 1 yr of the originating studies (COAST-V/W/X) and 2 yrs of COAST-Y.

Methods

COAST-Y (NCT03129100) is the phase 3, long-term extension study of the 3 originating studies COAST-V/W/X. Pts continued with the dose received at the end of the originating trial at week (wk) 52: either with 80 mg IXE every 4 wks (Q4W) or every 2 wks (Q2W). Pts assigned to adalimumab (ADA) or placebo (PBO) were re-randomised to IXE Q4W or Q2W at wk 16 in COAST-V and -W. Pts who received PBO for 52 wks in COAST-X were switched to IXE Q4W to continue in COAST-Y. Starting at wk 116 (wk 64 of COAST-Y), pts receiving IXE Q4W could have their dose escalated to Q2W. This analysis focused on pts receiving ≥1 dose of IXE Q4W, observed data while on IXE Q2W dose escalation are excluded. Continuous data are summarised as observed. Safety data while on IXE were analysed for pts who received ≥1 dose of IXE; observed data while on PBO or ADA are excluded.

Results

A total of 932 pts received ≥1 dose of IXE, 414 received ≥1 dose of IXE Q4W, and 562/932 (60%) pts completed 3 yrs of follow-up (PBO→IXE Q4W, 63/119 (53%); ADA→IXE Q4W, 29/44 (66%); and IXE Q4W→IXE Q4W, 114/251(45%)). Through 3 yrs, the most frequently reported treatment-emergent adverse events were infections [incidence rate (IR) 25.7/100 patient years (PY)] and injection site reactions [IR 7.4/100 PY]; the majority of which were mild/moderate in severity. Serious adverse events were reported at an IR of 4.8/100 PY, of which osteoarthritis was the most frequent at 0.4/100 PY. A total of 3 deaths were reported among all pts who received ≥1 dose of IXE [IR 0.1/100 PY]. For all pts, baseline disease activity (Ankylosing Spondylitis Disease Activity Score; ASDAS) was high (see Table 1). The 3 yr mean (SD) change from baseline (observed) in ASDAS among bDMARD-naïve pts with r-axSpA, TNFi-experienced pts with r-axSpA, and bDMARD-naïve pts with nr-axSpA is presented in the Table 1. A consistent disease control through 3 yrs was confirmed across additional efficacy endpoints (Table 1).

Table 1.

Baseline demographics and disease activity characteristics through 3 yrs. Data presented as mean (SD) unless otherwise specified.

COAST-VCOAST-WCOAST-XPBO (N=87)ADA (N=90)IXE Q4W (N=81)PBO (N=104)IXE Q4W (N=114)PBO (N=105)IXE Q4W (N=96)Age43 (12)42 (11)41 (12)47 (13)47 (13)40 (12)41 (15)Male, n (%)71 (83)73 (81)68 (84)87 (84)91 (80)44 (42)50 (52)Symptom duration (years)16.6 (10.1)15.6 (9.3)15.8 (11.2)19.9 (11.6)18.8 (11.6)10.1 (8.3)11.3 (10.7)HLA-B27, n (%)76 (89)82 (91)75 (93)86 (83)91 (80)77 (74)71 (75)ASDAS3.9 (0.7)3.7 (0.8)3.7 (0.7)4.1 (0.8)4.2 (0.9)3.8 (0.9)3.8 (0.8)BASDAI6.8 (1.2)6.7 (1.5)6.8 (1.3)7.3 (1.3)7.5 (1.3)7.2 (1.5)7.0 (1.5)3 years (observed)PBO→ADA→IXEPBO→IXEIXEIXE Q4WIXE Q4WQ4W→IXE Q4WQ4W→PBO→Q4W→N=42N=44IXE Q4WN=46IXE Q4WIXE Q4WIXE Q4WN=81N=114N=31N=56ASDAS CFB-1.9 (0.9)-1.5 (0.9)-1.9 (0.9)-1.6 (1.0)-1.7 (1.0)1.8 (1.0)-1.7 (1.4)ASDAS LDA, n (%)13/24 (54)21/29 (72)33/44 (75)7/20 (35)16/41 (39)13/19 (68)19/29 (66)BASDAI CFB-3.9 (1.9)-3.5 (2.3)-4.0 (2.2)-3.7 (1.7)-3.4 (2.2)-4.4 (2.1)-3.4 (2.7)BASDAI50, n (%)15/24 (63)18/29 (62)31/44 (71)9/20 (45)20/41 (49)12/19 (63)16/29 (55)ASAS40, n (%)13/24 (54)18/29 (62)30/44 (68)10/20 (50)23/41 (56)15/19 (79)17/29 (59)

Conclusion

This analysis of a subset of pts in COAST-Y demonstrated that the safety profile is consistent with the established safety profile, with no new safety signals observed. IXE Q4W was efficacious (observed data) in all patients studied who remained on the treatment through 3 yrs.

References

[1]Dougados et al. Ann Rheum Dis 2020;79.

[2]Deodhar et al. Lancet 2020; 395.

[3]Braun et al. Ann Rheum Dis, 2021; 80: supp 1

Figure 1.

Observed mean CFB in ASDAS for pts treated with IXE Q4W in COAST-V. At wk 16, PBO pts received IXE Q4W.

Acknowledgements

The authors thank So Young Park, PhD, of Eli Lilly and Company for statistical review, and Edel Hughes, PhD, of Eli Lilly and Company for writing and process support.

Disclosure of Interests

Atul Deodhar Speakers bureau: AbbVie, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol Myers Squibb, Eli Lilly and Company, Janssen, Novartis, Pfizer, UCB, Consultant of: AbbVie, Amgen, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol Myers Squibb, Celgene, Eli Lilly and Company, Galapagos, Glaxo Smith & Kline, Janssen, Novartis, Pfizer, UCB, Grant/research support from: AbbVie, Eli Lilly and Company, Glaxo Smith & Kline, Novartis, Pfizer, UCB, Denis Poddubnyy Speakers bureau: AbbVie, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Eli Lilly and Company, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, and UCB, Consultant of: AbbVie, Biocad, Eli Lilly and Company, Gilead, GlaxoSmithKline, Janssen, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, Samsung Bioepis, and UCB, Grant/research support from: AbbVie, Eli Lilly and Company, MSD, Novartis, and Pfizer, Proton Rahman Speakers bureau: Abbott, AbbVie, Amgen, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Celgene, Eli Lilly and Company, Janssen, Novartis, and Pfizer., Grant/research support from: Janssen, Novartis, Rebecca Bolce 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, Andris Kronbergs Shareholder of: Eli Lilly and Company, Employee of: Eli Lilly and Company, Caroline Johnson Shareholder of: Eli Lilly and Company, Employee of: Eli Lilly and Company, Ann Leung Employee of: Employee of Syneos Health, and a contractor for Eli Lilly and Company, Désirée van der Heijde Consultant of: AbbVie, Bayer, BMS, Cyxone, Eisai, Galapagos, Gilead, Glaxo-Smith-Kline, Janssen, Eli Lilly and Company, Novartis, Pfizer, UCB Pharma, and Director of Imaging Rheumatology BV.

POS1067 DOMAINS CONTRIBUTING TO MINIMAL DISEASE ACTIVITY ACHIEVEMENT IN PATIENTS WITH PSORIATIC ARTHRITIS RECEIVING GUSELKUMAB

Background

Despite effective treatments, a minority of psoriatic arthritis (PsA) patients (pts) realize sustained minimal disease activity (MDA).1 Pt-driven domains of MDA are less frequently achieved, potentially arising from comorbid conditions.1

Objectives

Identify domains contributing to and factors influencing MDA achievement in the 2-year Phase 3 DISCOVER-2 trial.

Methods

Randomized and treated adults (N=739) had active PsA, were biologic/JAK inhibitor-naive, and had swollen and tender joint counts (SJC/TJC) each ≥5 and C-reactive protein ≥0.6 mg/dL. Pts with medical history of fibromyalgia (FM) were not excluded. Pts were randomized 1:1:1 to GUS 100 mg every 4 weeks (Q4W); GUS 100 mg at W0, W4, then every 8 weeks (Q8W); or placebo (PBO); PBO pts crossed over to GUS 100 mg Q4W at W24. MDA requires fulfillment of ≥5/7 criteria: TJC ≤1, SJC ≤1, Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI) score ≤1, Pt Pain score ≤15, Pt global disease activity (PtGA) score ≤20, Health Assessment Questionnaire – Disability Index (HAQ-DI) score ≤0.5, and ≤1 tender entheses. A longitudinal trajectory of achieving each MDA criterion through W100 was derived (nonresponder imputation [NRI]). Time to achieve was estimated via Kaplan-Meier survival curve for scores deriving from native scales and those normalized to a 0-66 scale (corresponding to SJC). Multivariate regression models for time to achievement (cox proportional hazard) and achievement (logistic regression) of MDA at W100 identified predictors of response.

Results

Among 492 GUS pts, continuous improvement across all MDA domains was shown through proportions of pts achieving criteria at W24 & W100 (NRI): SJC (45% & 65%), TJC (16% & 34%), PASI (71% & 72%), Pt Pain (23% & 37%), PtGA (29% & 45%), HAQ-DI (34% & 44%), entheseal points (75% & 80%). Times to achieve minimal SJC, PASI, and enthesitis with GUS were significantly faster than for PtGA, Pt Pain, TJC, and HAQ-DI for native-scale scores; when normalized, PtGA, Pt Pain, and HAQ-DI were achieved less often (Figure 1). Higher baseline (BL) Pt Pain score and lower BL Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy (FACIT)-Fatigue score (worse fatigue) were significant predictors of longer time; lower BMI was associated with shorter time to achieve Pt Pain ≤15. Results for achieving Pt Pain ≤15 at W100 were similar. Worse baseline fatigue and PtGA were significant predictors of longer time to PtGA ≤20; worse fatigue also predicted non-achievement of PtGA ≤20 at W100. For time to achieve HAQ-DI ≤0.5, significant BL negative predictors were higher age and BL HAQ-DI score, which were also significant predictors of HAQ-DI ≤0.5 non-achievement at W100. Although seen in only a small number of pts, a significant impact of FM history and suicidal ideation/behavior on Pt Pain ≤15 and HAQ-DI ≤0.5, respectively, was observed (Table 1).

Table 1.

Predictors of Time to Achievement and Achievement of Recalcitrant MDA Domains at Week 100 in GUS-randomized Pts (N=492)

Time to achievementIndependent BL VariablesPt Pain ≤15PtGA ≤20HAQ-DI ≤0.5HR (95% CI)HR (95% CI)HR (95% CI)Age-0.98 (0.97-0.99)†HAQ-DI-0.26 (0.19-0.36)‡PtGA VAS-0.99 (0.98-1.00)*-Pain VAS0.99 (0.98-1.00)†-FACIT-Fatigue§1.02 (1.00-1.03)*1.02 (1.01-1.04)‡-BMI0.98 (0.96-1.00)*FM (N=8)0.70 (0.55-0.90)†--Achievement at W100OR (95% CL)∥OR (95% CL)∥OR (95% CL)∥Age--0.98 (0.96: 1.00)*HAQ-DI--0.13 (0.08: 0.20)‡Pain VAS0.98 (0.97: 1.00)†--FACIT-Fatigue§1.02 (1.00: 1.05)*1.05 (1.03: 1.07)‡-BMI0.97 (0.94: 1.00)*--Suicidal Ideation/Behaviour (N=9)--0.16 (0.03: 0.86)*FM (N=8)0.59 (0.40: 0.86)†--

HR Hazard Ratio CI Confidence Interval OR Odds Ratio CL Confidence Limits

*p <0.05; †p <0.01; ‡p ≤0.0001

§Higher score indicates less fatigue

∥Wald CL

Conclusion

GUS provided continuous improvement in each MDA domain through W100. BL domain score, as well as age, fatigue, and BMI, were significant determinants of MDA achievement in recalcitrant pt-driven domains (Pt Pain, PtGA, HAQ-DI). The impact of FM and mental health status merits further evaluation.

References

[1]Rahman et al. BMJ Open 2017;7(8): e016619

Disclosure of Interests

Laura Coates Speakers bureau: AbbVie, Amgen, Biogen, Celgene, Eli Lilly, Galapagos, Gilead, Janssen, Medac, Novartis, Pfizer and UCB, Consultant of: AbbVie, Amgen, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol Myers Squibb, Celgene, Eli Lilly, Gilead, Galapagos, Janssen, Novartis, Pfizer, and UCB, Grant/research support from: AbbVie, Amgen, Celgene, Eli Lilly, Janssen, Novartis, Pfizer, and UCB, Proton Rahman Consultant of: AbbVie, Amgen, Bristol Myers Squibb, Celgene, Eli Lilly, Janssen, Merck, Novartis, Pfizer, and UCB, Grant/research support from: Janssen and Novartis, 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, GSK, 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, May Shawi Shareholder of: Johnson & Johnson, Employee of: Janssen Pharmaceutical Companies of Johnson & Johnson, 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,, Soumya D Chakravarty Shareholder of: Johnson & Johnson, Employee of: Janssen Scientific Affairs, LLC, Iain McInnes Shareholder of: Causeway Therapeutics, and Evelo Compugen, Consultant of: Astra Zeneca, AbbVie, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Amgen, Eli Lilly and Company, Cabaletta, Compugen, GSK, Gilead, Janssen, Novartis, Pfizer, Sanofi, Roche, and UCB, Grant/research support from: Astra Zeneca, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Amgen, Eli Lilly and Company, GSK, Janssen, Novartis, Roche, and UCB, Lai-Shan Tam Consultant of: Janssen, Pfizer, Sanofi, AbbVie, Boehringer Ingelheim, and Lilly, Grant/research support from: Amgen, Boehringer Ingelheim, Janssen, GSK, Novartis and Pfizer

AB0357 INCIDENCE AND DETERMINANTS OF INFECTION IN RHEUMATOID ARTHRITIS PATIENTS TREATED WITH GOLIMUMAB IN REAL-WORLD PRACTICE

Background

Although biologic use in rheumatoid arthritis (RA) has a well-characterized infections risk factor, most studies evaluating this association were conducted on first-generation anti-tumor necrosis factor (TNFi) agents or in early years post-drug development (early 2000).

Objectives

To (i) characterize the long-term incidence of infection in a real-world cohort of RA patients treated with subcutaneous golimumab (GLM) in Canadian routine care; (ii) assess the impact of infections on GLM retention, and (iii) explore factors associated with the risk of infection.

Methods

BioTRAC registry was a prospective, multicenter study that collected real-world clinical, laboratory, safety and patient-reported data from TNFi naïve patients or treated with biologics for a period of <6 months before enrolment. This post-hoc analysis included patients with RA who initiated GLM treatment. The incidence density rates (IDR) of total serious (SI) and non-serious (NSI) infections were calculated for the overall follow-up (90 months) period as well as by 6-month interval. Time to first infection and time to treatment discontinuation were assessed with the Kaplan-Meier estimator of the survival function. Determinants of infection over time or within the first 6 months were explored using generalized estimating equation models and logistic regression, respectively.

Results

530 patients were included with a mean (SD) age of 57.7 (13.0) years and disease duration of 8.0 (8.3) years. Of these, 404 (76.2%) were females, 74 (14.0%) were treated with ≤15mg/week MTX, 280 (52.8%) with >15mg/week MTX, while 173 (32.6%) were not on MTX. In terms of corticosteroids (CS), 72 (13.6%) were treated with ≤5mg/day, 63 (11.9%) with >5mg/day, and 391 (73.8%) were not on CS. Diabetes (4.5%), pulmonary disease (8.9%), and renal disease (18.5%) were present.

Over a mean follow-up duration of 27.0 months, the IDR for total infections, NSI, and SI was 35.10 events/100 PYs, 32.90 events/100 PYs, and 2.23 events/100 PYs. Median estimated time to first infection was 52.9 months (SI: 84.9 months; NSI: 55.1 months) (Table 1). The incidence of total infections was 44.0, 37.3, 35.1, 29.4, 31.1, 35.7, 19.3 and 7.4 events/100 PYs at 0-6 months, 6-12 months, 12-24 months, 24-36 months, 36-48 months, 48-60 months, 60-72 months, 72-84 months, respectively and no infections between 84-90 months. In terms of determinants, no significant associations were identified for the incidence of infections within the first 6 months. However, presence of pulmonary disease was identified as a significant determinant of total infections (OR [95%CI]: 2.19 [1.36-3.52]) and NSI (2.22 [1.35-3.66]) over time, while higher age (1.08 [1.00-1.26]) and high (≥5 mg/day) CS dose (7.25 [1.12-46.80]) were associated with significantly higher odds of SI. Incidence of SI (6.48 [1.16-36.13]), but not NSI, was associated with significantly higher odds of GLM discontinuation; additional predictors of discontinuation were increased baseline CDAI (1.06 [1.04-1.08]) and use of concomitant MTX at low dose (0.52 [0.30-0.91]) or high dose (0.71 [0.49-1.04]).

Table 1.

Incidence Density Rate (IDR) by Infection Type.

Infection TypeIDR (Events/100 PYs)Median Time to 1st Infection (months)Total Infections35.152.9Non-serious Infections32.984.9Serious Infections2.255.1

Conclusion

The infection rates reported with GLM in this cohort are low compared to the rates reported in earlier registry studies with TNFi. Changes in the characteristics of patients starting TNFi (lower disease activity, shorter disease duration, less exposure to CS) in recent years may explain the decreased risk of infection. Compared to the available literature, treatment with GLM was associated with relatively low infection rate. Most infections occurred during the first 6 months of treatment and decreased thereafter. Presence of pulmonary disease, higher age, and higher CS dose were identified as significant predictors of infections. SIs, but not NSIs, were associated with significantly higher odds of treatment discontinuation-TNFi.

Disclosure of Interests

Louis Bessette Speakers bureau: Amgen, BMS, Janssen, UCB, AbbVie, Pfizer, Merck, Celgene, Sanofi, Lilly, Novartis, Gilead, Sandoz, Fresenius Kabi, Teva, Consultant of: Amgen, BMS, Janssen, UCB, AbbVie, Pfizer, Merck, Celgene, Sanofi, Lilly, Novartis, Gilead, Sandoz, Fresenius Kabi, Teva, Grant/research support from: Amgen, BMS, Janssen, UCB, AbbVie, Pfizer, Merck, Celgene, Sanofi, Lilly, Novartis, Gilead, Sandoz, Fresenius Kabi, Teva, Proton Rahman Speakers bureau: AbbVie, Amgen, Bristol Myers Squibb, Celgene, Eli Lilly, Janssen, Merck, Novartis, Pfizer, and UCB, Consultant of: AbbVie, Amgen, Bristol Myers Squibb, Celgene, Eli Lilly, Janssen, Merck, Novartis, Pfizer, and UCB, Grant/research support from: Janssen and Novartis, John Kelsall: None declared, Jane Purvis: None declared, Emmanouil Rampakakis Consultant of: Janssen, Allen Lehman Shareholder of: Johnson & Johnson, Employee of: Janssen Pharmaceutical Companies of Johnson & Johnson, Meagan Rachich Shareholder of: Johnson & Johnson, Employee of: Janssen Pharmaceutical Companies of Johnson & Johnson, Francois Nantel Shareholder of: Johnson & Johnson, Employee of: Retiree from Janssen Pharmaceutical Companies of Johnson & Johnson, Marilise Marrache Shareholder of: Johnson & Johnson, Employee of: Janssen Pharmaceutical Companies of Johnson & Johnson, Odalis Asin Milan Shareholder of: Johnson & Johnson, Employee of: Employees of Janssen Pharmaceutical Companies of Johnson & Johnson

OP0025 FACTORS ASSOCIATED WITH FATIGUE AND ITS IMPROVEMENT – A PRINCIPAL COMPONENT ANALYSIS OF PATIENTS WITH ACTIVE PSORIATIC ARTHRITIS FROM GUSELKUMAB PHASE 3 TRIALS

Background

Fatigue, one of the top 3 patient (pt)-reported symptoms of psoriatic arthritis (PsA) and a recent PsA outcome domain,1 causes impaired health-related quality-of-life, diminished productivity, and disability.1-3 Although the origins of fatigue are multifactorial, inflammation is hypothesized to play an important role.4 In pts with active PsA, treatment with guselkumab (GUS) led to clinically meaningful and sustained improvements in fatigue through 1 year in DISCOVER-1 (D1) and DISCOVER-2 (D2).5

Objectives

To identify 1) factors associated with fatigue and 2) factors associated with change in fatigue among pts with PsA treated with GUS.

Methods

In the Phase 3 D1 (N=381, biologic-naïve and tumor necrosis factor inhibitor-experienced) and D2 (N=739, biologic-naïve) studies, pts with active PsA despite standard therapies and/or biologic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs were randomized 1:1:1 to GUS 100 mg every 4 weeks (Q4W); GUS 100 mg at W0, W4, then Q8W; or placebo (PBO) with crossover to GUS 100 mg Q4W at W24. The pt-reported Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy-Fatigue (FACIT-Fatigue) scale measured fatigue (scored 0-52). In these post-hoc analyses of D1 and D2 pts, a principal component analysis (PCA) was performed using W0 data to identify the underlying baseline factors associated with fatigue. Additionally, linear regression analyses were performed to identify covariates associated with change in fatigue from W0 to W24.

Results

In 1120 pts (mean age 47 yrs, mean disease duration 5.9 yrs, 48% female), mean FACIT-Fatigue scores at baseline ranged from 29.1 to 31.4 (vs 43.6 for the general US population).5 PCA showed that 62% of the variability in fatigue could be explained by 3 components (Figure 1). The first component, explaining 34% of variability in fatigue, largely comprised systemic disease activity and function measures such as pain, pt global assessment of disease activity (PtGDA), physician’s global assessment of disease activity, and Health Assessment Questionnaire-Disability Index (HAQ-DI). The second component, explaining 16% of variability, comprised joint manifestations including swollen joint count (SJC) and tender joint count (TJC). Skin involvement as assessed by Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI) and systemic inflammation (C-reactive protein [CRP]) could explain 12% of the variability in fatigue (Figure 1 and Table 1). In a multivariate linear regression analysis, after adjusting for effects from other variables, improvement in CRP, physical function (HAQ-DI), PtGDA, and PASI score were significantly associated with fatigue improvement in GUS-treated pts at W24 (all p<0.001).

Table 1.

PCA of Pts With Active PsA in D1+D2 (N=1120; Pooled W0 data): Factor Loading Estimates by Covariates

Component1 Systemic Disease Activity and FunctionComponent 2 Joint ManifestationsComponent 3 Skin Involvement and InflammationPsA disease duration, yr0.100.140.25PASI total score (0-72)0.220.230.74CRP, mg/dL0.36-0.130.55HAQ-DI score (0-3)0.73-0.09-0.19Pain (0-10 VAS)0.83-0.35-0.13PtGDA (0-10 VAS)0.82-0.36-0.16Physician global assessment of disease activity (0-10 VAS)0.65-0.180.23SJC (0-66)0.500.74-0.12TJC (0-68)0.540.70-0.18

VAS=Visual Analog Scale.

Conclusion

Among pts with PsA, measures of systemic disease activity and function, followed by joint manifestations, and skin involvement/inflammation accounted for 62% of the variability in fatigue. The large residual effect (38%) that was unexplained by the current model suggests the need for further research to identify additional factors (eg, distinct molecular pathways) contributing to the fatigue reported by PsA pts.

References

[1]Leung YY, et al. J Rheumatol (Suppl). 2020;96:46-9.

[2]Gudu T, et al. Joint Bone Spine. 2016;83:439-43.

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

[4]Krajewska-Włodarczyk M, et al. Reumatologia. 2017;55:125-30.

[5]Rahman P, et al. Arthritis Res Ther. 2021;23:190.

Disclosure of Interests

Proton Rahman Consultant of: AbbVie, Amgen, Bristol Myers Squibb, Celgene, Eli Lilly, Janssen, Merck, Novartis, Pfizer, and UCB, Grant/research support from: Janssen and Novartis, 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, GSK, 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, Atul Deodhar Speakers bureau: AbbVie, Eli Lilly, Janssen, Novartis, Pfizer, and UCB, Consultant of: AbbVie, Amgen, Aurinia, Bristol Myers Squibb, Celgene, Eli Lilly, GlaxoSmithKline, Janssen, MoonLake, Novartis, Pfizer, and UCB, Grant/research support from: AbbVie, Eli Lilly, GlaxoSmithKline, Novartis, Pfizer, and UCB, Arthur Kavanaugh Consultant of: AbbVie, Amgen, Bristol Myers Squibb, Eli Lilly, Genentech, Janssen, Merck, Novartis, Pfizer and UCB, Soumya D Chakravarty Shareholder of: Johnson & Johnson, Employee of: Janssen Scientific Affairs, LLC, Alexa Kollmeier Shareholder of: Johnson & Johnson, Employee of: Janssen Research & Development, LLC, Yan Liu Shareholder of: 3 Johnson & Johnson, Employee of: Janssen Research & Development, LLC, May Shawi Shareholder of: Johnson & Johnson, Employee of: Janssen Pharmaceutical Companies of Johnson & Johnson, Chenglong Han Shareholder of: Johnson & Johnson, Employee of: Janssen Research & Development, LLC.

OP0034 IXEKIZUMAB IMPROVES SIGNS, SYMPTOMS, AND QUALITY OF LIFE IN PATIENTS WITH AXIAL SpA IRRESPECTIVE OF DISEASE DURATION: RESULTS FROM THE COAST-V, COAST-W AND COAST-X TRIALS

Background

Ixekizumab (IXE), a high-affinity monoclonal antibody selectively targeting interleukin-17A,1 has demonstrated superior efficacy to placebo (PBO) in the treatment of patients (pts) with radiographic axial spondyloarthritis (r-axSpA) (COAST-V [NCT02696785]; -W [NCT02696798]), and non-radiographic axial spondyloarthritis (nr-axSpA) (COAST-X [NCT02757352]).

Objectives

Assess treatment response to IXE categorised by disease duration since symptom onset (<5 years (yrs), ≥5yrs) in pts with r-axSpA and nr-axSpA up to 52 Weeks (Wks).

Methods

Pts fulfilled ASAS classification criteria for r-axSpA or nr-axSpA and were randomised to receive 80mg subcutaneous IXE every 2Wks or 4Wks, or PBO (16Wks COAST-V/W; 52Wks COAST-X). Data were summarized by disease duration and treatment in eligible intent-to-treat (ITT) pts. Wk16 treatment comparisons were conducted using Cochran-Haenszel-Mantel test and ANCOVA. Missing data were handled using non-responder imputation and modified baseline observation carried forward, for categorical and continuous endpoints, respectively.

Results

Table 1 presents pt demographics and baseline characteristics. Data is from pooled IXE pts. In pts with r-axSpA and <5yrs symptom duration, ASAS40 response was achieved by 51.5% at Wk16 and 60.6% at Wk52, compared to 36.9% at Wk16, significantly different to PBO (p<0.001), and 40.5% at Wk52, in pts with ≥5yrs symptom duration. In pts with nr-axSpA and <5yrs symptom duration, ASAS40 response was achieved by 42.5% at Wk16, significantly different to PBO (p=0.012), and 54.8% at Wk52, compared to 36.0% at Wk16 and 41.4% at Wk52 in pts with ≥5yrs symptom duration (Figure 1). In pts with r-axSpA and <5yrs symptom duration, ASDAS LDA <2.1 response was achieved by 39.4% at Wk16 and 48.5% at Wk52, compared to 27.5% at Wk16, significantly different to PBO (p<0.001), and 35.6% at Wk52 in pts with ≥5yrs symptom duration. In pts with nr-axSpA and <5yrs symptom duration, ASDAS LDA <2.1 response was achieved by 32.9% at Wk16, significantly different to PBO (p=0.003), and 49.3% at Wk52, compared to 23.9% at Wk16 and 36.9% at Wk52 in pts with ≥5yrs symptom duration. At Wk16, in pts with r-axSpA pts and <5yrs symptom duration, the Change from Baseline (CFB) in SF-36 Physical Component Summary (PCS) Score (LSM±SE) was 7.91 (±1.52), compared to 6.81 (±0.40) in pts with ≥5yrs symptom duration. In pts with nr-axSpA and <5yrs symptom duration, this score was 8.95 (±0.95) compared to 7.07 (±0.73) in pts with ≥5yrs symptom duration; both were significantly different to PBO (r-axSpA: p<0.001; nr-axSpA: p=0.037).

Table 1.

Patient demographics and Baseline Characteristics

Pts with r-axSpAPts with nr-axSpA<5yrs (Ns=33)≥5yrs (Ns=306)<5yrs (Ns=73)≥5yrs (Ns=111)Age (years)33.1 (8.15)45.1 (12.12)31.9 (10.07)46.4 (11.86)Male, n (%)26 (78.8)245 (80.1)40 (54.8)53 (47.7)Female, n (%)7 (21.2)61 (19.9)33 (45.2)58 (52.3)Age at axSpA onset (years)30.4 (8.29)27.0 (9.06)29.9 (10.22)29.5 (8.76)ASDAS score, mean (SD)3.87 (0.79)4.03 (0.82)3.79 (0.80)3.85 (0.78)BASDAI score, mean (SD)7.16 (1.64)7.25 (1.35)7.00 (1.33)7.30 (1.26)SF-36 PCS, mean (SD)34.02 (7.73)32.86 (7.63)32.84 (7.86)32.57 (6.97)

Abbreviations: IXE=ixekizumab, n=number of pts in specified category, Ns=number of pts in each subgroup, SD=standard deviation.

Figure 1.

ASAS40 Response Rates for patients with r-axSpA (COAST-V/W) and nr-axSpA (COAST-X) Symptom Duration <5 and ≥5 years up to Week 52, ITT, NRI: Significantly greater response of IXE versus PBO at Week 16 denotated by * (p≤0.05), *** (p≤0.001). Abbreviations: PBO, placebo; IXE, Ixekizumab; NRI, nonresponder imputation; ITT, Intent-to-Treat (population), ASAS, Assessment of Spondyloarthritis International Society.

Conclusion

Efficacy response to the therapy with IXE was observed in both subgroups based on disease duration (<5 and ≥5yrs) with more robust responses in the <5 years subgroup.

References

[1]Paller AS, Br J Dermatol. 2020;183(2):231-241.

Disclosure of Interests

Victoria Navarro-Compán Speakers bureau: AbbVie, Janssen, Eli Lilly and Company, Novartis, Pfizer and UCB, Paid instructor for: AbbVie, Janssen, Eli Lilly and Company, Novartis, Pfizer and UCB, Consultant of: AbbVie, Eli Lilly and Company, Novartis, Pfizer and UCB, Grant/research support from: ASAS: Research grant 2018 and 2021.

Novartis: Research grant 2021 (Payment to institution), John D Reveille Speakers bureau: Eli Lilly and Company and UCB Pharma, Consultant of: UCB Pharma, Grant/research support from: Eli Lilly and Company, Proton Rahman Speakers bureau: Abbott, AbbVie, Amgen, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Celgene, Eli Lilly, and Company Janssen, Novartis, and Pfizer., Paid instructor for: Advisory Board: Abbott, AbbVie, Amgen, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Celgene, Eli Lilly and Company, Janssen, Novartis, and Pfizer., Grant/research support from: Janssen and Novartis, José Maldonado-Cocco Speakers bureau: Pfizer, Merck Sharp Dohme, Wyeth, Sanofi Aventis, Novartis, Bristol Myers Squibb, Roche, Shering-Plough, Abbvie, UCB, Gilead., Consultant of: Pfizer, Merck Sharp Dohme, Wyeth, Sanofi Aventis, Novartis, Bristol Myers Squibb, Roche, Shering-Plough, Abbvie, UCB, Gilead., Grant/research support from: Pfizer, Merck Sharp Dohme, Wyeth, Sanofi Aventis, Novartis, Bristol Myers Squibb, Roche, Shering-Plough, Abbvie, UCB, Gilead., Marina Magrey Speakers bureau: Novartis, Abbvie, Eli Lilly and Company., Consultant of: Novartis, Eli Lilly and Comapny, Pfizer, Janssen, UCB Pharma, Abbvie, BMS., Rebecca Bolce Shareholder of: Eli Lilly and Company, Employee of: Eli Lilly and Company, David Sandoval Shareholder of: Eli Lilly and Company, Employee of: Eli Lilly and Company, So Young Park Shareholder of: Eli Lilly and Company, Employee of: Eli Lilly and Company, Andris Kronbergs Shareholder of: Eli Lilly and Company, Employee of: Eli Lilly and Company, Martin Rudwaleit Speakers bureau: Abbvie, BMS, Boehringer Ingelheim, Chugai, Eli Lilly and Company, Novartis, Pfizer, UCB., Paid instructor for: Abbvie, Eli Lilly, Novartis, UCB., Consultant of: UCB, Grant/research support from: Galapagos, UCB, Novartis.