European League Against Rheumatism (EULAR) recommendations for the management of psoriatic arthritis with pharmacological therapies: 2015 update

[Translational healthcare research : Show what is-Angela Zink, the grande dame of public health research in rheumatology]

BACKGROUND

As director of the program area epidemiology and health care research at the German Rheumatism Research Center, Angela Zink established the German National Database, a national register for the care of people with inflammatory rheumatic diseases and other important registers for public health research in rheumatology.

OBJECTIVE

This publication summarizes Angela Zink's life work and sheds light on the national significance of this extraordinary achievement from the background of the research results achieved.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

The available literature and personal memories of the author formed the basis of this summary.

RESULTS

The German National Database, which regularly collects data from more than 15,000 patients with inflammatory rheumatic diseases per year, shows that the prognosis has steadily improved in many areas, disease activity has decreased, the burden of illness due to pain or functional limitations has decreased, the incidence of incapacity for work and early retirement has decreased and those affected can nowadays participate to a much greater extent in social and working life; however, the data also revealed existing shortcomings, regional differences and differences between treatment by specialists or general practitioners. This made the database a central instrument of quality assurance. The biologics register RABBIT, in which side effects of biologics were registered and used for risk management, has also gained great importance.

CONCLUSION

The registers which were set up and systematically developed in the program area epidemiology under the leadership of Angela Zink, are a treasure trove of national importance. A continuation, even after the retirement of Angela Zink from active professional life, seems urgently necessary if the healthcare research of German rheumatology does not want to lose the international connection.

Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Sequential Biologic Therapy with Ixekizumab Versus Secukinumab in the Treatment of Active Psoriatic Arthritis with Concomitant Moderate-to-Severe Psoriasis in the UK

BACKGROUND

Interleukin-17A (IL-17A) antagonists are a recent innovation for treating psoriatic arthritis (PsA). There are currently no cost-effectiveness analyses (CEAs) comparing the IL-17A antagonists ixekizumab and secukinumab in PsA from a UK perspective.

OBJECTIVE

We conducted a CEA from the UK National Health Service perspective to compare ixekizumab versus secukinumab in patients with PsA and concomitant moderate-to-severe plaque psoriasis.

METHODS

A Markov model was developed based on the widely accepted York model. In biologic disease-modifying antirheumatic drug (bDMARD)-naïve patients, ixekizumab → ustekinumab → best supportive care (BSC) was compared with secukinumab → ustekinumab → BSC. For bDMARD-experienced patients, ixekizumab → BSC was compared with secukinumab → BSC. At the end of the bDMARD trial period, Psoriatic Arthritis Response Criteria (PsARC) responders continued to receive the bDMARD in the continuous treatment period. PsARC nonresponders and patients who ceased continuous treatment transitioned to the trial period of the next treatment.

RESULTS

Ixekizumab was less costly and provided more quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) than secukinumab in bDMARD-naïve and -experienced patients based on list prices, although cost savings and QALY gains were small to modest. In bDMARD-naïve patients, total costs were £155,455 compared with £155,530 for secukinumab (year 2017 values). Total QALYs were 8.127 versus 7.989. In bDMARD-experienced patients, the corresponding values were £140,051 versus £140,264 for total costs and 3.996 versus 3.875 for total QALYs.

CONCLUSION

Ixekizumab provided more QALYs at a marginally lower cost than secukinumab, and the results were most sensitive to changes in drug costs. Other factors, such as patient preferences for the number of injections and confidential price discounts, may be important considerations in clinical decision-making.

Evaluating Inflammatory Versus Mechanical Back Pain in Individuals with Psoriatic Arthritis: A Review of the Literature

Psoriatic arthritis (PsA) is a chronic immune-mediated disease characterized by psoriatic skin and nail changes, peripheral joint inflammation, enthesitis, dactylitis, and/or axial involvement, either alone or in combination with each other. The presence of axial involvement has been shown to be a marker of PsA severity; however, there is no widely accepted definition of axial involvement in PsA (axPsA) or consensus on how or when to screen and treat patients with suspected axPsA. Chronic back pain is a prominent feature of axPsA and is thought to have a relevant role in early identification of disease. Chronic back pain can be caused by inflammatory back pain (IBP) or mechanical back pain (MBP). However, MBP can complicate recognition of IBP and delay diagnosis of axPsA. While MBP can also be associated with chronic back pain of ≥ 3 months in duration that is typical of IBP, IBP is characterized by inflammation of the sacroiliac joint and lower spine that is differentiated from MBP by key characteristic features, including insidious onset at age < 40 years, improvement with exercise but not with rest, and nighttime pain. This review discusses the differences in identification and management of IBP and MBP in patients with PsA with axPsA. The summary of available evidence highlights the importance of appropriate and timely screening, difficulties and limitations of differential diagnoses and treatment, and unmet needs in axPsA.

Patients' perceptions on shared decision making during prescription of subcutaneous biological drug treatments for inflammatory arthritis: The RHEU-LIFE survey

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this study was to explore the preferences of patients with rheumatic diseases and their perceived experience regarding participation in shared decision making (SDM) when they were prescribed a subcutaneous (SC) biological drug.

METHODS

A printed survey was handed to 1,000 patients with inflammatory rheumatic diseases treated with SC biological drug. The survey included closed questions about preferences regarding decision making and about patients' experience when they were prescribed an SC biological drug. Descriptive statistics were performed with stratification by patient profiles, using chi-square for comparisons between groups.

RESULTS

A total of 592 surveys were received (response rate 59.2%, mean age 51.7 years, 57.6% women). Some 28.2% of patients reported preferring to take part in treatment selection, a percentage that was higher in younger patients, in those with higher academic degree and in those who search information in sources different to that of health care professionals. Over half of patients (56.3%) perceived that the rheumatologist considered their opinion when prescribing an SC biological drug, a percentage higher in younger people. Only in 40.8% of cases did the patients' preference match their perception of their participation in the process. No differences were observed by sex, disease or number of biologics.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with inflammatory rheumatic diseases want information about their treatments but mostly leave the prescription decision to the rheumatologist. Younger people, or those with higher academic degree, more often want to participate in the SDM. There are discrepancies between patient preferences and perceptions of this process.

Dermatologists' Role in the Early Diagnosis of Psoriatic Arthritis: Expert Recommendations

Psoriatic arthritis is a common type of inflammatory arthritis found in up to 40% of patients with psoriasis. Because skin involvement usually precedes joint involvement, dermatologists play a key role in early detection. Early diagnosis is important for reducing the risk of irreversible structural damage, attenuating the deterioration of physical function, and improving patients' quality of life. This consensus statement was drafted by a group of 9 dermatologists and 1 rheumatologist to provide simple recommendations to help dermatologists screen for psoriatic arthritis in patients with psoriasis. The experts offer consensus-based guidelines that draw on a review of available scientific evidence and on experience acquired in routine clinical practice.

Efficacy and Safety of Ixekizumab with or Without Methotrexate in Biologic-Naïve Patients with Psoriatic Arthritis: 52-Week Results from SPIRIT-H2H Study

Introduction

In the SPIRIT-H2H (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT03151551) trial in biologic-naïve patients with active psoriatic arthritis (PsA), ixekizumab (IXE) was superior to adalimumab (ADA) at week 24 in terms of achieving a combined endpoint of ≥ 50% improved response in the American College of Rheumatology scale score (ACR50) and 100% improvement in the Psoriasis Areas and Severity Index (PASI100), and was non-inferior in terms of achieving ACR50. IXE resulted in similar improvements of PsA manifestations irrespective of the use of concomitant conventional synthetic disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs (csDMARDs), while ADA response was higher with concomitant csDMARD use. The aim of this study was to determine the efficacy and safety of treatment with IXE and ADA with or without methotrexate (MTX), the most commonly use csDMARD, through week 52 in patients with PsA.

Methods

In the open-label, rater-blinded, head-to-head SPIRIT-H2H trial, randomization of patients was stratified by concomitant use of csDMARD and moderate-to-severe plaque psoriasis involvement. In the post-hoc subgroup analysis presented here, subgroups were defined as with/without concomitant MTX use at baseline. Treatment group effects within subgroups were tested using Fisher’s exact test. Missing data were imputed using non-responder imputation.

Results

By week 52, IXE provided similar improvements in the combined ACR50 and PASI100 endpoint, ACR50, and other PsA-related domains regardless of whether IXE was used with or without MTX, while ADA efficacy appeared to be improved with concomitant MTX use. When used without concomitant MTX, IXE resulted in significantly higher response versus ADA in terms of the combined ACR50 and PASI100 (p = 0.002) endpoint, minimal disease activity (p = 0.016), and very low disease activity (p = 0.037). The safety of both agents was consistent with their known safety profiles regardless of concomitant MTX use.

Conclusion

In PsA patients with inadequate control of the disease, IXE delivers consistent efficacy in several clinical domains of the disease regardless of concomitant MTX use. The efficacy of ADA is increased by the concomitant use of MTX. These findings can inform treatment decisions when considering the need for concomitant MTX use with IXE or ADA at initiation or for long-term maintenance.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1007/s40744-020-00250-3) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Descriptive Comparisons of the Effect of Apremilast and Methotrexate Monotherapy in Oligoarticular Psoriatic Arthritis: The Corrona Psoriatic Arthritis/Spondyloarthritis Registry Results

OBJECTIVE

Therapeutic response was evaluated among new apremilast, methotrexate (MTX), or biologic disease-modifying antirheumatic drug (bDMARD) initiators with oligoarticular psoriatic arthritis (PsA).

METHODS

Patients with oligoarticular PsA in the Corrona PsA/Spondyloarthritis Registry initiating treatment with apremilast, MTX, or bDMARD, and completing 6-month follow-up were included.

RESULTS

In total, 150 patients initiated monotherapy (apremilast: n = 34; MTX: n = 15; bDMARD: n = 101). Apremilast initiators had higher baseline disease activity than MTX initiators. At follow-up, apremilast initiators experienced numerically greater disease activity improvements than MTX initiators and similar improvements to bDMARD initiators.

CONCLUSION

Findings suggest apremilast monotherapy is an effective option for patients with oligoarticular PsA.

Healthcare Cost and Utilization Associated with Biologic Treatment Patterns Among Patients with Psoriatic Arthritis: Analyses from a Large US Claims Database

Background

Costs associated with biologic switching and discontinuation can be high in psoriatic arthritis (PsA), and their inappropriate use may have cost implications for patients, healthcare professionals, and payers.

Objective

To compare direct costs of treatment switchers, non-switchers, and discontinuers among patients with PsA who newly initiated a biologic.

Methods

Patients with PsA aged ≥ 18 years with ≥ 1 pharmacy claim for an FDA-approved subcutaneous biologic from 1 January 2016 to 31 December 2016 were identified from the Truven Health MarketScan Databases. Patients were categorized into three mutually exclusive groups of non-switchers, switchers, and discontinuers, and healthcare costs and utilization during 1-year follow-up were described across the three groups separately.

Results

A total of 2560 patients with PsA newly initiating a biologic were categorized as non-switchers (54.8%), switchers (18.5%), and discontinuers (26.7%). During 1-year follow-up, after adjusting for age, sex, full-time work status, and co-morbidities, switchers had higher mean total all-cause healthcare costs than non-switchers (US$80,380 vs. US$69,031), driven by increased pharmacy (US$66,531 vs. US$56,674) and outpatient (US$10,881 vs. US$8,235) costs (all P < 0.0001). Discontinuers had the lowest mean total all-cause healthcare costs (US$50,054) but the highest medical costs (US$20,323). Switchers and discontinuers had higher all-cause healthcare utilization than non-switchers during 1-year follow-up, except switchers had fewer hospitalizations.

Conclusions

Patients with PsA who switch or discontinue biologics have higher medical costs and healthcare utilization than those continuing the same biologic. These findings highlight that  discontinuing or switching biologic therapies is associated with higher costs in patients with PsA, which may inform treatment and/or formulary decision-making.

Ixekizumab in the treatment of psoriatic arthritis

Psoriatic arthritis (PsA) is a heterogeneous chronic rheumatic disorder with numerous phenotypic facets. A better in deep understanding of the pathophysiologic mechanisms leading to psoriasis and PsA has contributed to the introduction of novel therapeutic agents. IL-17 is at the heart and a critical factor in the onset of PsA. Ixekizumab, a high-affinity monoclonal antibody against IL-17 A, has been approved by the US FDA in March 2016 for baseline psoriasis and Dec 2017 for PsA; by the EMA in April 2016 and January 2018, respectively. This article reviews the published data relating to ixekizumab efficacy and safety in the PsA treatment.

Pathogenesis of psoriasis in the "omic" era. Part IV. Epidemiology, genetics, immunopathogenesis, clinical manifestation and treatment of psoriatic arthritis

Psoriatic arthritis (PsA) is a chronic, progressive, inflammatory arthropathy associated with psoriasis as well as a complex pathogenesis. Genetic and environmental factors trigger the development of the immune-mediated auto-inflammatory response in different sites: skin, bone marrow, entheses and synovial tissues. Studies of the last two decades have changed the view of PsA from a mild, non-progressive arthritis to an inflammatory systemic disease with serious health consequences, not only associated with joint dysfunction, but also with an increased risk of cardiovascular disease and socioeconomic consequences with significantly reduced quality of life. The joint damage starts early in the course of the disease, thus early recognition and treatment with modern biological treatments, which may modify the natural history and slow down progression of this debilitating disease, is essential for the patient long-term outcome.

Management of psoriatic arthritis in rheumatology and dermatology settings: sub-analysis of the Italian population from the international LOOP study

Psoriatic arthritis (PsA) patients are often treated by dermatology and rheumatology specialities and may receive different treatments. To evaluate the impact of dermatology/rheumatology specialist settings on diagnosis and therapeutic approach in PsA patients. This cross-sectional multicounty study in Italy involved twenty-eight rheumatology or dermatology clinics. Patients with suspected or confirmed PsA were examined by both a dermatologist and a rheumatologist. A total of 413 patients were enrolled and 347 (84%) were diagnosed with PsA. The majority of patients were enrolled from a rheumatology setting (N = 224, 64.6%). Patients with PsA in the dermatology settings had significantly higher disease activity, including skin involvement and musculoskeletal symptoms. Time from PsA onset to diagnosis was 22.3 ± 53.8 vs. 39.4 ± 77.5 months (p = 0.63) in rheumatology and dermatology settings; time from diagnosis to initiation of csDMARD was 7.3 ± 27.5 vs. 19.5 ± 50.6 months, respectively (p < 0.001). In contrast, time from diagnosis to bDMARD use was shorter in dermatology settings (54.9 ± 69 vs. 44.2 ± 65.6 months, p = 0.09, rheumatology vs. dermatology), similar to the time taken from first csDMARDs and bDMARDs (48.7 ± 67.9 vs. 35.3 ± 51.9 months, p = 0.34). The choice to visit a rheumatologist over a dermatologist was positively associated with female gender and swollen joints and negatively associated with delay in time from musculoskeletal symptom onset to PsA diagnosis. This study highlights a diagnostic delay emerging from both settings with significantly different therapeutic approaches. Our data reinforce the importance of implementing efficient strategies to improve early identification of PsA that can benefit from the integrated management of PsA patients. Key Points • A diagnostic delay was observed from both dermatology and rheumatology settings with significantly different therapeutic approaches. • Shared dermatology and rheumatology clinics offer the combined expertise to improve in the early identification and management of PsA.

Comparison of the Heel Enthesitis MRI Scoring System (HEMRIS) with clinical enthesitis and local metabolic activity on PET-CT

OBJECTIVE

To compare the Heel Enthesitis MRI Scoring model (HEMRIS) with clinical and PET/CT outcomes in patients with cutaneous psoriasis (Pso), psoriatic arthritis (PsA) or ankylosing spondylitis (AS).

METHODS

This prospective, observational study included 38 patients with Pso, PsA and AS. Patients were included regardless of presence or absence of clinical heel enthesitis. MRI-scans of both ankles and a whole-body 18F-FDG PET/CT were acquired. MRIs were assessed for enthesitis by two independent and blinded observers according to the HEMRIS. A physician, blinded for imaging results, performed clinical evaluations of enthesitis at the Achilles tendon and plantar fascia.

RESULTS

In total, 146 entheses were scored according to the HEMRIS and clinically assessed for enthesitis (6 entheses were clinically affected). In Achilles tendons with clinical enthesitis, the HEMRIS structural damage score was significantly higher, compared to Achilles tendons without clinical enthesitis (respective median scores 1.0 and 0.5; p=0.04). In clinically unaffected entheses, HEMRIS abnormalities occurred in 44/70 (63%) of Achilles tendons and in 23/70 (33%) of plantar fascia. At the Achilles tendon, local metabolic activity measured on PET/CT was weakly associated with the structural (rs=0.25, p=0.03) and total HEMRIS (rs=0.26, p=0.03).

CONCLUSION

This study revealed a high prevalence of subclinical HEMRIS abnormalities and discrepancy between HEMRIS and clinical and PET/CT findings. This may suggest that the HEMRIS is a sensitive method for detection of inflammatory and structural disease of enthesitis at the Achilles tendon and plantar fascia, although the clinical significance of these MRI findings remains to be determined in longitudinal studies.

Brodalumab in psoriatic arthritis: results from the randomised phase III AMVISION-1 and AMVISION-2 trials

Objective

To compare the efficacy and safety of brodalumab, an interleukin-17 receptor subunit A inhibitor, with placebo, in patients with psoriatic arthritis (PsA).

Methods

Adult patients with active PsA and inadequate response to, or intolerance to, conventional treatment were enrolled into two phase III studies (NCT02029495 and NCT02024646) and randomised 1:1:1 to receive subcutaneous brodalumab 140 mg or 210 mg or placebo at weeks 0, 1 and every 2 weeks up to 24 weeks. About 30% of patients had prior use of biologics. The primary endpoint for both studies was the American College of Rheumatology 20 (ACR20) response at week 16.

Results

962 patients were randomised across the studies prior to early termination due to sponsor decision. The primary endpoint was met in both studies. Based on comparable design and eligibility criteria, data from both studies were pooled. Significantly more patients achieved ACR20 at week 16 in both brodalumab treatment groups (45.8% and 47.9% for 140 mg and 210 mg, respectively) versus placebo (20.9%) (p<0.0001). Similar results were observed at week 24. Significantly higher proportions of patients receiving brodalumab achieved ACR50/70, Psoriasis Area and Severity Index 75/90/100 and resolution of dactylitis and enthesitis versus placebo (p<0.01). Adverse event rates were similar across treatments at week 16 (54.4%, 51.6% and 54.5% for placebo, brodalumab 140 mg and 210 mg, respectively). No new safety signals were reported.

Conclusion

Brodalumab was associated with rapid and significant improvements in signs and symptoms of PsA versus placebo. Brodalumab was well tolerated, with a safety profile consistent with other interleukin-17 inhibitors.

Evaluation of Improvement in Skin and Nail Psoriasis in Bio-naïve Patients With Active Psoriatic Arthritis Treated With Golimumab: Results Through Week 52 of the GO-VIBRANT Study

Objective

To evaluate whether intravenous (IV) golimumab produces improvements in skin and nail symptoms that are concomitant with improvements in quality of life (QoL) and joint symptoms in patients with psoriatic arthritis.

Methods

Patients were randomized to either IV golimumab 2 mg/kg at weeks 0, 4, then every 8 weeks (q8w) through week 52 or placebo at weeks 0, 4, then q8w, with crossover to IV golimumab 2 mg/kg at weeks 24, 28, and then q8w through week 52. Assessments included Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI), modified Nail Psoriasis Severity Index (mNAPSI), Dermatology Life Quality Index (DLQI), and American College of Rheumatology (ACR) rheumatoid arthritis response criteria.

Results

Through week 24, achievement of PASI 75/90/100 responses (P ≤ .0098) and mean improvements in mNAPSI (−11.4 vs −3.7; P < .0001) and DLQI (−9.8 vs −2.9; P < .0001) were significantly greater with golimumab versus placebo. Responses were maintained in patients treated with golimumab through week 52. In placebo‐crossover patients, increases in the proportion of patients achieving PASI 75/90/100 responses were observed from weeks 24 to 52, and mean improvements in mNAPSI (from −3.7 to −12.9) and DLQI (from −2.9 to −7.8) increased from weeks 24 to 52. Simultaneous achievement of PASI and DLQI responses, PASI and ACR responses, and mNAPSI and DLQI responses were also observed. Similar responses were observed for all assessments regardless of concomitant methotrexate use.

Conclusion

Improvements in skin and nail psoriasis symptoms with IV golimumab in patients with psoriatic arthritis were concomitant with improvements in QoL and arthritis disease activity through 1 year.

Association of Nail Psoriasis With Disease Activity Measures and Impact in Psoriatic Arthritis: Data From the Corrona Psoriatic Arthritis/Spondyloarthritis Registry

OBJECTIVE

To examine the association of nail psoriasis with disease activity, quality of life, and work productivity in patients with psoriatic arthritis (PsA).

METHODS

All patients with PsA who enrolled in the Corrona PsA/Spondyloarthritis Registry between March 2013 and October 2018 and had data on physician-reported nail psoriasis were included and stratified by presence vs absence of nail psoriasis at enrollment. Patient demographics, disease activity, quality of life (QOL), and work productivity at enrollment were compared between patients with vs without nail psoriasis using t-tests or Wilcoxon rank-sum tests for continuous variables and chi-square or Fisher exact tests for categorical variables.

RESULTS

Of the 2841 patients with PsA included, 1152 (40.5%) had nail psoriasis and 1689 (59.5%) did not. Higher proportions of patients with nail psoriasis were male (51.9% vs 44.1%) and disabled from working (12.3% vs 7.8%) compared with patients without nail psoriasis (all P < 0.05). Patients with nail psoriasis had higher disease activity than those without nail psoriasis, including higher tender and swollen joint counts, worse Disease Activity Index for Psoriatic Arthritis and Psoriatic Arthritis Disease Activity Score values, and increased likelihood of having enthesitis and dactylitis (all P < 0.05). Patients with nail psoriasis had worse pain, fatigue, and work and activity impairment than those without nail psoriasis (all P < 0.05).

CONCLUSION

Patients with PsA who have nail psoriasis had worse disease activity, QOL, and work productivity than those without nail involvement, emphasizing the importance of identification and management of nail disease in patients with PsA.

Apremilast and its role in psoriatic arthritis

Psoriatic arthritis (PsA) is a seronegative inflammatory arthritis often observed in patients with skin psoriasis. Treatment of PsA, especially peripheral PsA, has typically relied on disease-modifying anti-rheumatic agents (DMARDs); however, these agents have limited efficacy and considerable associated toxicity. More recently, monoclonal antibodies (biologic agents) have revolutionized management of immune-mediated diseases; however, these therapies carry a high cost and require parenteral administration. Apremilast, a novel oral DMARD, was approved by the European Union for psoriatic arthritis in 2015. Apremilast inhibits the function of phosphodiesterase-4, a regulator of cyclic adenosine monophosphate, leading to a broad inhibition of proinflammatory mediators and subsequent reduction in tumour necrosis factor-alpha (TNF-α) response. The PALACE and ACTIVE trials, phase III randomized controlled trials for apremilast, showed that apremilast is effective at improving various clinical and patient-reported outcome measures for psoriatic arthritis in both DMARD-naïve and DMARD-experienced PsA patients. Efficacy was limited in patients with previous biologic DMARD failure and the overall efficacy of apremilast appears to be less than biologics agents, though no head-to-head trials exist comparing apremilast to biologic DMARDs. Apremilast is generally well tolerated, with short-lived gastrointestinal side effects being the most commonly reported adverse events. Guidelines suggest a trial of apremilast in patients who have failed traditional oral DMARDs and for whom, biologics are contraindicated. More studies directly comparing apremilast to conventional DMARDs and biologic DMARDs are needed and will be crucial in informing clinical and economic decisions about apremilast role in management of PsA.

The switch from etanercept originator to SB4: data from a real-life experience on tolerability and persistence on treatment in joint inflammatory diseases

Aims:

Switching from originator to biosimilar is part of current practice in inflammatory rheumatic musculoskeletal diseases (iRMDs) such as rheumatoid arthritis (RA), psoriatic arthritis (PsA) and axial spondylarthritis (axSpA), with evidences derived from both etanercept (ETN) to SB4-switching randomized controlled trials and real-life registries. We investigated the safety and treatment persistence of ETN/SB4 in a multi-iRMD cohort derived from two rheumatology departments in our region.

Methods:

Adult patients with iRMDs, treated with ETN for at least 6 months and switched to SB4 in stable clinical condition, were eligible for this retrospective evaluation. Retrospective data on adverse events, loss of efficacy and persistence on treatment were collected until latest available follow-up.

Results:

A total of 220 patients (85 RA, 81 PsA, 33 axSpA, 14 juvenile idiopathic arthritis and seven other conditions; 142 females, mean age 58 ± 7 years, disease duration 12 ± 4 years, ETN duration 7 ± 4 years) were enrolled, with median follow-up of 12.1 (9.7–15.8) months. A total of 50 patients (22.7%) presented with at least one adverse event, with 36 (16.4%) disease flares and 30 (13.6%: 11 for safety and 19 loss of efficacy) SB4 withdrawals. Cumulative SB4 treatment persistence was 99.1%, 88.6% and 64.6% at 6, 12 and 18 months respectively. Back-switch to ETN was performed in 17/30 cases, the remaining cases were managed with change of biologic disease modifying or conventional synthetic anti-rheumatic drug. Age was the only significant predictor of SB4 interruption at 6 months.

Conclusion:

Our real-life data confirm the safety profile of switching from ETN to SB4, with slightly higher treatment persistence rates compared with other real-life registries.

Choosing the right treatment for patients with psoriatic arthritis

Psoriatic arthritis (PsA) is a chronic inflammatory condition with articular and extra-articular manifestations: peripheral arthritis, axial disease, enthesitis, dactylitis, psoriasis, inflammatory bowel disease and uveitis. Anti-tumour necrosis factors (anti-TNFs) have demonstrated clinical efficacies exceeding those of conventional disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs). New understanding in pathogenic pathways have led to novel therapeutic targets. The current treatment paradigms emphasize early diagnosis and treatment, and treating towards remission and low disease activity status, particularly in long-standing disease. This review addresses the evidence of current treatment options for each of the domains of PsA. We present a simple guide that weighs on clinical efficacies for each PsA domain to aid clinicians in choosing the most appropriate treatment for patients. We highlight the unmet need for biomarkers of treatment response, and future perspectives with precision medicine in PsA.

Defining Pre-Clinical Psoriatic Arthritis in an Integrated Dermato-Rheumatology Environment

In excess of three quarters of patients with psoriatic arthritis (PsA) have preceding psoriasis (PsO), which offers a clinical biomarker for the recognition of early PsA. Numerous surveys have shown a remarkably high frequency of clinically occult musculoskeletal symptoms in psoriasis patients. Imaging studies, particularly ultrasound, show a high prevalence of subclinical enthesitis and other inflammatory changes in psoriasis subjects. Since a serum biomarker, such as the case of anti-citrullinated protein antibodies (ACPA) in rheumatoid arthritis, neither exists nor seems biologically plausible at this point, this article explores how integration of rheumatological and dermatological assessment can be facilitated for the early recognition of potential PsA. Given that scalp disease is a PsA predictor, but may be managed in the community, then a particular need to access this group is needed. An integrated approach between rheumatology and dermatology can involve joint clinics, parallel clinics with discussion of relevant cases or virtual contact between specialties. Early therapy evaluation and integrated strategies have considerable implications for minimizing suffering and joint damage in PsA.

Efficacy of certolizumab pegol in naïve versus multi-treated patients affected by psoriatic arthritis

BACKGROUND

The efficacy and safety of certolizumab pegol over 52 weeks was compared in two groups of patients: Group 1 comprised patients naïve to biologic treatments; Group 2 comprised patients previously treated with one or more antitumor necrosis factor (TNF)-α and/or anti-interleukin (IL) agents.

METHODS

We reported results in 50 patients affected by both mild psoriasis (PsO) and psoriatic arthritis (PsA). Primary endpoint was a reduction from baseline at week 52 of Disease Activity Score (DAS44-ESR) in both groups of patients. Secondary endpoints were a reduction from baseline at week 52 of Psoriasis Area Severity Index (PASI), Visual Analog Scale for Pain (PAIN VAS), ESR, CRP, and Dermatology Life Quality Index (DLQI).

RESULTS

We observed a statistically significant improvement of both cutaneous and rheumatic disease in all patients, with a consistent reduction of DAS44-ESR, PASI, and PAIN VAS from baseline to week 52. DAS44-ESR decreased from 3.9 at BL to 1.5 at W52 (Group 1), and from 3.8 to 1.7 at W52 (Group 2). Mean PASI Score decreased from 3.2 at baseline (BL) to 0.4 at W52 (Group 1), and from 5.4 to 0.7 at W52 (Group 2). Mean PAIN-VAS decreased from a value of 73.5 at BL to 2.5 at W52 (Group 1), and from a value of 62.4 at BL to 9.2 at W52 (Group 2). We also found a reduction in ESR, CRP and DLQI values for each time point.

CONCLUSIONS

Our results confirm that CZP can be administered safely and effectively to treat both psoriasis and psoriatic arthritis irrespective of previous treatments with biologic agents.

Neoplasm Risk in Rheumatic Diseases Has No Correlation With Conventional Synthetic Disease-Modifying Anti-rheumatic Drugs Usage-A Population-Based Nested Case-Control Study

Objectives: To investigate whether there is an elevated neoplasm risk in patients with rheumatic diseases treated with conventional synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (csDMARDs). Methods: A population-based nested case-control study was performed by retrieving all patients newly diagnosed with rheumatoid arthritis (RA), systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE), and psoriatic arthritis (PsA) or psoriasis vulgaris (PsO) from the 2000 Longitudinal Health Insurance Database (LHID 2000) in Taiwan. Two hundred and sixty-one patients with neoplasm from 1997 to 2013 were enrolled in this study, and controls were matched in a 1:1 ratio with age, sex, and year of enrollment. Composition of demographic indices, comorbidities, medication usage, and differences in days of prescription of different medications between neoplasm and neoplasm-free (control) groups were compared. Results: Between the control and neoplasm groups, no differences in ratio were observed in the usage of hydroxychloroquine (50.96 vs. 49.04%, p = 0.6616), methotrexate (26.82 vs. 27.59%, p = 0.8441), azathioprine (3.45 vs. 3.07%, p = 0.8052), and cyclophosphamide (1.15 vs. 2.30%, p = 0.3131) from enrollment to index date. Medications within 3 years before the index date in patients that had ≥3 months of comparable duration also showed no difference (hydroxychloroquine: 33.06 vs. 30.25%, p = 0.6404; methotrexate: 20.66 vs. 25.21%, p = 0.4018; azathioprine: 2.48 vs. 2.52%, p = 0.9835; cyclophosphamide: 0.83 vs. 0.84%, p = 0.9906). We also made a subgroup analysis focusing on RA and SLE patients; no difference between control and neoplasm group in both the ratio of usage and days of prescription of hydroxychloroquine, methotrexate, azathioprine, and cyclophosphamide was observed. Conclusion: Neoplasm risk in patients with rheumatic diseases has no correlation with csDMARD usage.

Performance and Predictors of Minimal Disease Activity Response in Peripheral Spondyloarthritis Patients Treated With Adalimumab

OBJECTIVES

To examine concurrent validity and discrimination of modified minimal disease activity (mMDA) criteria in peripheral spondyloarthritis (pSpA) following OMERACT filter principles and determine predictors of mMDA response.

METHODS

Four mMDA versions were derived in the ABILITY-2 study using the SPondyloArthritis Research Consortium of Canada (SPARCC) or Leeds Enthesitis Index (LEI) but excluding psoriasis. To assess concurrent validity, mMDA versions were correlated with Peripheral SpondyloArthritis Response Criteria (PSpARC) remission, Ankylosing Spondylitis Disease Activity Score for inactive disease (ASDAS ID), and physician global. Treatment discrimination was assessed between adalimumab and placebo at week 12. Multiple logistic regression was used to determine baseline predictors of long-term mMDA responses and sustained mMDA.

RESULTS

The four mMDA versions showed a stronger positive correlation with PSpARC remission (r_tet >0.95) versus ASDAS ID (r_tet >0.75) at week 12 and years 1-3 and were able to show discrimination (p<0.001). Responsiveness was shown at week 12; significantly more patients receiving adalimumab versus placebo achieved all four versions of mMDA. Approximately 40-60% of adalimumab-treated patients achieved mMDA-LEI or SPARCC at years 1-3. Achieving mMDA response after 12 weeks of adalimumab treatment was a robust positive predictor of attaining long-term mMDA through 3 years (odds ratios: 11.38-27.13 for mMDA-LEI; 17.98-37.85 for mMDA-SPARCC).

CONCLUSIONS

All four versions of mMDA showed concurrent validity and discriminated well between adalimumab and placebo treatment groups. Early mMDA response is a more consistent predictor of long-term mMDA achievement than baseline characteristics. The 5 of 6 versions of mMDA could be an appropriate treatment target in pSpA patients.

[RABBIT-SpA: a new disease register for axial spondyloarthritis and psoriatic arthritis]

BACKGROUND

The treatment of axial spondyloarthritis (axSpA) and psoriatic arthritis (PsA) has changed enormously in recent years due to market authorization of a number of new biologicals with different modes of action and the increasing use of biosimilars. Real-world data on long-term safety and efficacy under routine daily conditions is not yet sufficient. Therefore, the German Rheumatism Research Center has initiated a new cohort study covering axSpA and PsA.

OBJECTIVE

Presentation of initial results from the new register RABBIT-SpA, which was started in May 2017.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

This is a prospective longitudinal cohort study with a similar study design to the German biologics register RABBIT. Patients can be included at the start of a new treatment either in the so-called index drug group or in the comparison group (conventional systemic treatment, including non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, NSAID). Follow-up per patient should be at least 5 years and preferably 10 years. The RABBIT-SpA uses a web-based documentation system.

RESULTS

Up to mid-December 2018 a total of 514 axSpA patients had been documented in RABBIT-SpA, 410 with an index drug and 104 with conventional treatment. There are differences between these treatment groups, e. g. in the duration of the disease and in parameters of disease activity. It is also noticeable that in axSpA patients, approximately 5 years lie between the onset of the symptoms and confirmation of the diagnosis. Of the 355 PsA patients, 265 were included with an index drug and 90 with conventional treatment. Of the PsA patients 86% have a dominant peripheral manifestation. The average number of pressure tender joints is 8 and the average number of swollen joints is 4.

CONCLUSION

The online register RABBIT-SpA is well-received by the participating rheumatological institutions. The electronic recording of patient data can be carried out in a reasonable time. Participation in the RABBIT-SpA is open to new rheumatological institutions at any time.

BSR Spondyloarthritis Course, 27 February 2020. Spondyloarthritis: pathogenesis, diagnosis and management

High-quality continuous medical education is essential to maintain excellence in health-care delivery, upskilling professionals and improving patient outcomes. This is particularly relevant when addressing rare disease groups, such as the spondyloarthritides, a group of heterogeneous inflammatory conditions that affect joints and other organs, such as the skin, bowel and eye. Professional bodies, such as the British Society for Rheumatology (BSR), are well placed to deliver this type of education. In 2020, the BSR ran a dedicated SpA course aimed at rheumatology health-care professionals wishing to update their basic knowledge of SpA with a review of the latest advances in the field. Here, we summarize the proceedings of the meeting and discuss the value of such an initiative.

Unlocking the Value of Anti-TNF Biosimilars: Reducing Disease Burden and Improving Outcomes in Chronic Immune-Mediated Inflammatory Diseases: A Narrative Review

Immune-mediated inflammatory diseases (IMIDs) are chronic conditions that create a significant disease burden on millions of patients while adding a major financial burden to societies and healthcare systems.

The introduction of biologic medicines has contributed majorly to improving the clinical outcomes of IMIDs and as such these modalities have gained first- or second-line positions in a wide range of treatment guidelines from different international clinical societies. However, the high cost of these biologics traditionally limited their accessibility and delayed their initiation, leaving millions of patients with unmet medical needs for a more affordable and sustainable solution.

The introduction of cost-efficient biosimilar anti-TNFs within Europe since 2013 has allowed more patients with IMIDs to access biologic therapies earlier and for longer, potentially altering the course of the disease into a milder phenotype and reducing the long-term disease burden. This review provides the latest evidence for the impact of biosimilars on patient outcomes and demonstrates their clinical value beyond a reduction in price.

An Update for the Clinician on Biologics for the Treatment of Psoriatic Arthritis

Psoriatic arthritis (PsA) is a chronic inflammatory arthropathy typically associated with psoriasis (PsO). The pathogenesis is strictly related to the association among the presence of genetic risk alleles and innate and acquired immune response with dramatic consequences on bone remodeling. Clinically, PsA patients may present heterogenicity of articular and periarticular manifestations that may be associated with the presence of comorbidities making treatment decision challenging in patients management. The identification of patient-targeted therapies is still a critical issue. Actually, several biological and synthetic drugs are promising in terms of efficacy and safety profile. National and international treatment recommendations support clinicians in the decision of the best treatment, although they may have limits basically related to updates and different outcomes included in the clinical studies evaluated. The aim of this narrative review is therefore to give guidance for clinicians for PsA patients treatment. For this purpose, we evaluated evidence on biological therapies efficacy used for PsA treatment. Specifically, we reviewed data on biological therapies, Janus kinases (JAK) inhibitors, and drugs with a new mechanism of action that are part of the treatment pipeline. The concept of "switching" and "swapping" is also described, as well as data concerning special populations such as pregnant women and elderly patients.

Is axial psoriatic arthritis distinct from ankylosing spondylitis with and without concomitant psoriasis?

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to compare patients with ankylosing spondylitis with psoriasis (ASP) and without psoriasis (AS), to axial PsA (axPsA) patients.

METHODS

Two adult cohorts were recruited from the AS clinic: ASP and AS. These two cohorts were compared with two adult cohorts recruited from the PsA clinic: axPsA (radiographic sacroiliitis: ⩾bilateral grade 2 or unilateral grade 3 or 4); and Peripheral PsA. All patients were followed prospectively according to the same protocol. The demographic, clinical and radiographic variables were compared. Adjusted means were used to account for varying intervals between visits. A logistic regression was performed and adjusted for follow-up duration.

RESULTS

There were 477 axPsA patients, 826 peripheral PsA, 675 AS and 91 ASP patients included. AS patients were younger (P < 0.001), more male and HLA-B*27 positive (76%, 72% vs 64%, P ⩽ 0.001, 82%, 75%, vs 19%, P = 0.001). They had more back pain at presentation (90%, 92% vs 19%, P = 0.001), worse axial disease activity scores (bath ankylosing spondylitis disease activity index: 4.1, 3.9 vs 3.5 P = 0.017), worse back metrology (bath ankylosing spondylitis metrology index: 2.9, 2.2 vs 1.8, P < 0.001), worse physician global assessments (2.4, 2.2 vs 2.1, P < 0.001), were treated more with biologics (29%, 21% vs 7%, P = 0.001) and had a higher grade of sacroiliitis (90%, 84% vs 51%, P < 0.001). Similar differences were detected in the comparison of ASP to axPsA and in a regression model.

CONCLUSION

AS patients, with or without psoriasis, seem to be different demographically, genetically, clinically and radiographically from axPsA patients. axPsA seems to be a distinct entity.

Recommendation for the Management of Spondyloarthritis Patients in Kuwait

OBJECTIVE

In 2016, ASAS and EULAR made joint recommendations for the management of patients with spondyloarthritis. Although Global and European perspectives are important, they cannot accurately reflect the situation for all patients in all countries and regions. As such, the group worked to tailor the existing international recommendations to suit the specific demographic needs of local populations in the Gulf region, with a specific focus on Kuwait.

METHODS

Recommendations drafted following a PubMed search for relevant literature were reviewed and then underwent Delphi vote to reach consensus on those to be included. Advice for newly approved agents, including targeted synthetic disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs, was included based on the group's clinical experience.

RESULTS

The resulting 41 recommendations are grouped into five categories covering key definitions and principles for the management and treatment of both axial and peripheral forms of spondyloarthritis.

CONCLUSION

Through adaptation of existing guidelines and incorporating the current evidence and clinical experience of the members of the group, these recommendations have been developed to reflect the unique situation in Kuwait with regard to differing patient profiles, local culture and approved therapeutic approaches, and are designed to aid in clinical decision-making.

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

Background

Tofacitinib and other new treatments approved for use in psoriatic arthritis have only recently been included in psoriatic arthritis treatment guidelines, and studies evaluating the relative efficacy of available therapies are important to inform treatment decisions by healthcare professionals.

Objective

To perform a network meta-analysis to evaluate the efficacy and safety profiles of tofacitinib, biologic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (bDMARDs), and apremilast in patients with psoriatic arthritis naïve to tumor necrosis factor inhibitor therapy (TNFi-naïve) or with an inadequate response (TNFi-IR).

Methods

A systematic literature review used searches of MEDLINE, Embase, and The Cochrane Library on October 9, 2017. Randomized controlled trials including adult patients with psoriatic arthritis receiving treatment administered as monotherapy or with conventional synthetic DMARDs were selected. Efficacy outcomes included American College of Rheumatology 20 response, change from baseline in Health Assessment Questionnaire-Disability Index, ≥75% improvement in Psoriasis Area and Severity Index, and change from baseline in Dactylitis Severity Score and Leeds Enthesitis Index. Treatment effects were evaluated during placebo-controlled phases, using a binomial logit model for binary outcomes and a normal identify link model for other outcomes. Discontinuations due to adverse events and serious infection events were assessed as safety outcomes.

Results

The network meta-analysis included 24 published randomized controlled trials, of which 13 enrolled TNFi-naïve patients only, 3 enrolled TNFi-IR patients only, and 8 enrolled both TNFi-naïve and TNFi-IR patients. Placebo-controlled treatment durations ranged from 12 to 24 weeks. Indirect comparisons showed tofacitinib 5 and 10 mg BID to have similar efficacy compared with most bDMARDs and apremilast in improving joint symptoms (based on American College of Rheumatology 20 response), and with some bDMARDs in improving skin symptoms (based on Psoriasis Area and Severity Index) (tofacitinib 10 mg BID only in TNFi-IR) in patients with psoriatic arthritis who were TNFi-naïve or TNFi-IR. Results also showed that, compared with placebo, the improvement in physical functioning (based on Health Assessment Questionnaire-Disability Index) with tofacitinib 5 and 10 mg BID was similar to that observed with most bDMARDs and apremilast in TNFi-naïve patients, and similar to that observed with all bDMARDs with available data in the TNFi-IR population. Improvements in Dactylitis Severity Score and Leeds Enthesitis Index scores were comparable between treatments. Tofacitinib 5 and 10 mg BID were median-ranked 8 and 15, respectively, for discontinuation due to any adverse events, and 5 and 16, respectively, for a serious infection event out of a total of 20 treatments in the network (lower numbers are more favorable).

Conclusions

Tofacitinib provides an additional treatment option for patients with psoriatic arthritis, both in patients naïve to TNFi and in those with TNFi-IR. (Curr Ther Res Clin Exp. 2020; 81:XXX-XXX).

Psoriatic arthritis: A systematic review of non-HLA genetic studies and important signaling pathways

Psoriatic arthritis (PsA) is a common, chronic inflammatory disease with complex pathogenesis. In recent years, a number of susceptibility non-human leukocyte antigen (HLA) genes of PsA have been revealed, which also act as important factors in the pathogenesis of PsA as well as HLA genes. By searching the databases National Center for Biotechnology Information, Google and PubMed, 37 articles are included and 50 susceptibility non-HLA genes for PsA are presented, such as IL23A, TNIP1, TYK2, STAT4, IL12B, RUNX3 and TRAF3IP2. In these non-HLA genes, some are common genes shared with other diseases, whereas most of these susceptibility genes are related to the pathogenesis of PsA by activation or inhibition of the signaling pathways. Several signaling pathways possibly implicated in the pathogenesis of PsA are introduced in this paper, including the 2 mainly signaling pathways, IL23/Th17 signaling pathway and NF-κB signaling pathway, and the other involved signaling pathways, such as JAK-STAT signaling pathway and MAPK signaling pathway.

Major differences in medical and surgical treatment of psoriatic arthritis and rheumatoid arthritis: a comparison of two historic cohorts

OBJECTIVES

Substantial changes in the handling of patients with inflammatory arthritis have occurred during the past half century. Polyarticular psoriatic arthritis (PsA) has been treated with the same synthetic disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs (DMARDs) as rheumatoid arthritis (RA), but for PsA there is less documentation regarding their effect. For biologic DMARDs, evidence of effect is more convincing. We have previously investigated the risk of orthopaedic surgery in patients with RA and PsA to see whether the change in treatment over time has improved the long-term outcome of inflammatory arthritis. For RA, patients diagnosed from 1999 onwards had a lower risk of surgery than patients diagnosed in earlier years. For PsA, the risk of surgery did not change similarly. We wished to compare RA patients to PsA patients with regard to medical and surgical treatment.

METHOD

We compared a historic cohort of 1010 RA patients diagnosed in 1972-2009 to a historic cohort of 590 PsA patients diagnosed in 1954-2011.

RESULTS

PsA patients received significantly less medical treatment both in the first year of disease and during the disease course. Risk of surgery during the disease course was lower for PsA than for RA (20% vs 31%). The risk of surgery in RA patients diagnosed from 1999 onwards was similar to that of PsA patients.

CONCLUSIONS

PsA patients received less intensive treatment than RA patients. Their prognosis, regarding orthopaedic surgery, was also less severe. Contrary to RA, the change in treatment did not have beneficial effects regarding the risk of orthopaedic surgery.

"Hepatic toxicity by methotrexate with weekly single doses associated with folic acid in rheumatoid and psoriatic arthritis. What is its real frequency?"

INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES

Liver injury caused by methotrexate (MTX) has mostly been investigated without applying criteria for the assessment of causality of drug induced liver injury (DILI). Hence, the existence of DILI by MTX in many cases is debatable. This study aimed to describe the frequency and characteristics of liver injury caused by MTX, applying DILI diagnostic criteria.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Rheumatoid arthritis (RA) and psoriatic arthritis (PsA) patients who were treated with MTX in association with folic acid were included. Serial determinations of alanine amino transferase (ALT) and aspartate amino transferase (AST) were performed. The Roussel Uclaf Causality Assessment Method (RUCAM) was applied in cases of increases of ALT/AST over 1.5 upper limit of normal. Liver biopsy was considered when the total cumulative dosage (TCD) of MTX was ≥3.5g.

RESULTS

A total of 43 patients were analyzed (median follow up 32 (range: 1-48) months; 3.33 ALT/AST determinations per year). Five subjects presented an increase of ALT/AST. All presented a RUCAM score for MTX≤2 (improbable). Three had a RUCAM score for non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs ≥7 (probable) and two patients presented non-alcoholic fatty liver disease. Five patients with no other cause for liver disease consented to liver biopsy (TCD MTX: median 5.1; range: 3.5-7.4g). No significant fibrosis or steatosis was evident on histology.

CONCLUSIONS

No biochemical or significant histological liver toxicity for MTX was demonstrated when applying causality criteria for DILI. More studies with this methodology are necessary in order to improve the assessment of its frequency.

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

BACKGROUND

Psoriatic arthritis (PsA) is a chronic progressive inflammatory condition associated with significant direct and indirect costs. Tofacitinib is an oral Janus kinase inhibitor for the treatment of PsA. Economic evaluations, alongside clinical data, help inform papers and formulary decisions in the United States.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate outcomes and costs of including tofacitinib in treatment strategies for PsA from a third-party U.S. payer perspective, using a health economic model.

METHODS

A decision tree model was developed to evaluate treatment sequences (up to 4 lines of advanced PsA therapy) with or without tofacitinib. Patients included in the model had active PsA and a previous inadequate response (IR) to conventional synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drug (csDMARD) or tumor necrosis factor inhibitor (TNFi) therapy. The analysis time horizon was 2 years; decision points for continuing/switching treatments occurred quarterly, based on clinical response (assessed using the primary rheumatoid measure of efficacy, American College of Rheumatology [ACR]20 response only) and adverse drug reactions (ADRs). Costs included those related to ADRs and drug acquisition, monitoring, and administration. Other endpoints of PsA, such as assessment of enthesitis and dactylitis, were not integrated into the model.

RESULTS

Treatment strategies including tofacitinib were associated with cost savings versus strategies without tofacitinib across all modeled scenarios, with an estimated 2-year cost saving of up to $8,454,858, based on 1 million insurants. Similarly, costs per member per month and per ACR20 responder were lower for sequences including tofacitinib versus sequences without. These savings arose because of lower ADR and drug acquisition/administration costs for sequences including tofacitinib. Deterministic sensitivity analyses showed these results to be robust.

CONCLUSIONS

This analysis suggests that including tofacitinib in the treatment of active PsA in csDMARD-IR or TNFi-IR patients is a cost-saving alternative to sequences without tofacitinib, potentially reducing costs for PsA advanced therapies by up to $8.4 million over 2 years for payers insuring 1 million individuals.

DISCLOSURES

This work was sponsored by Pfizer Inc. Bungey is an employee of Decision Resources Group, which received financial support from Pfizer Inc to develop the treatment-cost model used in the development of this manuscript. Chang-Douglass was an employee of Decision Resources Group at the time of the analysis. During development of this publication, Chang-Douglass started a role at the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE). The publication only reflects her views and does not reflect the views of NICE. Hsu, Cappelleri, Young, and Woolcott are employees of Pfizer Inc and own stock or stock options in Pfizer Inc. The data reported in this manuscript have been previously presented at the American College of Rheumatology Annual Scientific Meeting; October 19-24, 2018; Chicago, IL, and the AMCP Annual Meeting and Expo; March 25-28, 2019; San Diego, CA.

Fourteen small molecule and biological agents for psoriatic arthritis: A network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

BACKGROUND

The comparative efficacy and safety of small molecule and biological agents in the treatment of psoriatic arthritis (PsA) remain unknown.

OBJECTIVES

To compare the efficacy and safety of 14 small molecule and biological agents by network meta-analysis (NMA).

METHODS

Relevant randomized controlled trials involving biological treatments for PsA were identified by searching PubMed, Cochrane Library, EMBASE, Web of Science, and Clinicaltrials.gov and by manual retrieval, up to June 2018. NMA was conducted with Stata 14.0 based on the frequentist method. Effect measures were odds ratios (ORs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Intervention efficacy and safety were ranked according to the surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA).

RESULTS

A total of 30 studies involving 10,191 adult subjects were included. According to NMA, ≥ 20% improvement in modifed American College of Rheumatology response criteria (ACR20) response, Psoriasis Area and Severity Index 75 (PASI75) response, and serious adverse events rate (SAEs) were observed. In direct comparisons, most of the biologics performed better than placebo in terms of ACR20 response rate and PASI75 response rate. Additionally, all medicines were comparable to placebo in terms of SAEs except secukinumab. In terms of mixed comparisons, with regard to the ACR20 response, etanercept (ETN) and infliximab (IFX) were more effective than golimumab (GOL), with ORs of 3.33 (95% CI: 1.17-9.48) and 1.24 (95% CI: 0.61-2.52), respectively. For PASI75 response, IFX was superior to certolizumab pegol (OR = 10.08, 95% CI: 1.54-75.48). In addition, these medicines were comparable to each other in terms of SAEs. ETN and IFX were shown to have the most favorable SUCRA for achieving improved ACR20 and PASI75 responses, respectively, while ABT-122 exhibited the best safety according to the SUCRA for SAEs. Considering both the efficacy (ACR20, PASI75) and safety (SAEs), GOL, ETN, and IFX are the top 3 treatments.

CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS

Direct and indirect comparisons and integrated results suggested that the 3 anti- tumor necrosis factor -α biologics (GOL, ETN, and IFX) can be considered the best treatments for PsA after comprehensive consideration of efficacy and safety.

Axial psoriatic arthritis: An update for dermatologists

Psoriasis is a chronic, immune-mediated, systemic, inflammatory disorder characterized by skin plaques and, often, nail disease and arthritis that contribute to reduced quality of life. Psoriatic arthritis-a heterogeneous, inflammatory, musculoskeletal disease that can cause permanent damage to both peripheral and axial joints-is the most common comorbidity of psoriasis. Axial disease occurs in 25% to 70% of patients with PsA, with some patients exclusively experiencing axial joint involvement. Early therapeutic intervention is important for preventing permanent joint and spine damage and loss of functionality in these patients. Because skin symptoms associated with psoriasis often precede psoriatic arthritis, dermatologists are uniquely positioned to play an important role in identifying and treating patients with psoriatic arthritis. Proactive screening of patients with all severities of psoriasis for the signs and symptoms of psoriatic arthritis is key to early diagnosis and intervention. In this review, we discuss the clinical presentation, risk factors, and treatment options for psoriatic arthritis with axial involvement, with the aim of helping dermatologists understand the disease and identify patients who might benefit from further assessment, treatment, and/or referral to a rheumatology practice.

A Cost-Consequence Analysis of the Preferential Use of Secukinumab Versus Adalimumab for the Treatment of Psoriatic Arthritis

OBJECTIVES

To assess the efficiency of secukinumab compared to adalimumab as first biologic treatment for psoriatic arthritis (PsA) from the Spanish National Health System (SNHS) perspective.

METHODS

A cost-consequence analysis of the cost and clinical response of two treatment strategies was conducted over a 2-year time horizon. A hypothetical cohort of 10 patients with PsA initiated treatment with secukinumab 150mg (cohort A) or adalimumab 40mg (cohort B), respectively. Patients achieving clinical response (ACR20/50/70) at week 24 continued the initial treatment, while patients with inadequate response switched to secukinumab 300mg. Pharmacological costs were calculated based on SmPC (notified ex-factory price). The lowest cost of adalimumab biosimilar was considered. Data on clinical response were extracted from the two matching-adjusted indirect comparison (MAIC) published comparing secukinumab vs adalimumab. Results were expressed as the cost difference between the two cohorts (€, 2019) and were calculated for each clinical response criteria (ACR20/50/70) and for each MAIC. Sensitivity analysis assessed the impact of potential discounts on the cost of adalimumab while maintaining the cost of secukinumab unchanged.

RESULTS

Depending on the MAIC used, the cost of initiating biologic treatment for PsA with secukinumab 150mg was 18-33% lower than the one estimated for adalimumab 40mg, for ACR20, 18-28% for ACR50, and 16-23% for ACR70 response rate. Sensitivity analysis showed that it would be necessary a discount of 40-60%, 40-65% and 50-75% over the adalimumab cost to compensate for the differences in efficacy observed for ACR20/50/70, respectively, depending on the MAIC used.

CONCLUSION

In patients with PsA, secukinumab could be considered a more efficient first-line biologic treatment compared to adalimumab, from the SNHS perspective.

Updated therapies for the management of Psoriatic Arthritis

Psoriatic arthritis (PsA) is a large volume of our clinical practice and its management can be challenging. Traditional DMARDs have been used over last six decades and observational studies have substantiated an effective use of many of these drugs. However, in last two decades use of anti-TNF agents has brought a new dimension in treatment of PsA and in many other autoimmune diseases. Regulatory role of the Th17 cells and its cytokines in the pathogenesis of PsA has successfully paved the foundations of anti-IL antibody based therapies in PsA. Newer therapies targeting the IL-23/IL-17 cytokines and its signaling proteins are now in development and bringing new promises for management of PsA. Herein, we provide an overview of the landscape of drug therapies, including IL-17, IL-12/23, IL-23 inhibitors, and janus kinase (JAK) inhibitors, as well as those in development, such as RORγt inhibitors, anti-NGF agents, mTOR inhibitors and T cell ion-channel blockers.

Multicentre, randomised, open-label, parallel-group study evaluating the efficacy and safety of ixekizumab versus adalimumab in patients with psoriatic arthritis naïve to biological disease-modifying antirheumatic drug: final results by week 52

Objectives

SPIRIT head-to-head (H2H) is a 52-week (Wk) trial comparing ixekizumab (IXE) with adalimumab (ADA) for simultaneous American College of Rheumatology (ACR)50 and Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI)100 responses in 566 patients (distributed evenly across both groups) with psoriatic arthritis (PsA). IXE was superior to ADA for this primary end point at Wk24. We aimed to determine the final efficacy and safety results through Wk52 including a prespecified subgroup analysis of concomitant conventional synthetic disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs (csDMARD) use.

Methods

SPIRIT-H2H is a Wk52 multicentre, open-label, blinded-assessor study comparing IXE and ADA in bionaïve patients with PsA. Patients were randomised 1:1 to IXE or ADA with stratification by concomitant csDMARD use and presence of moderate-to-severe plaque psoriasis. Prespecified end points at Wk24 and Wk52 included musculoskeletal, psoriasis, quality-of life outcomes, subgroup analyses and safety.

Results

A significantly higher proportion of patients treated with IXE versus ADA simultaneously achieved ACR50 and PASI100 (39% vs 26%, p<0.001), PASI100 (64% vs 41%, p<0.001) at Wk52. Efficacy of IXE and ADA was similar at Wk52 for ACR50 (49.8% vs 49.8%, p=0.924), treat-to-target outcomes, enthesitis and dactylitis resolution. Responses to IXE were consistent irrespective of concomitant csDMARD use. Significantly more patients on IXE monotherapy versus ADA monotherapy had simultaneous ACR50 and PASI100 (38% vs 19%, p=0.007), and PASI100 responses (66% vs 35%, p<0.001) at Wk52. There were no new safety findings for IXE or ADA.

Conclusions

IXE provided significantly greater simultaneous joint and skin improvement than ADA through Wk52 in bionaïve patients with PsA. IXE showed better efficacy on psoriasis and performed at least as well as ADA on musculoskeletal manifestations. IXE efficacy was consistent irrespective of concomitant csDMARD use.

Trial registration number

NCT03151551.

Systematic literature review of non-topical treatments for early, untreated (systemic therapy naïve) psoriatic disease: a GRAPPA initiative

BACKGROUND

Psoriatic disease (PsD) is a complex systemic disorder with cutaneous and musculoskeletal manifestations. Current evidence on pharmacological interventions, effective across the spectrum of clinical manifestations of early, systemic treatment-naïve PsD, is limited. This review aims to appraise such evidence.

METHODS

This systematic review examined seven patient-intervention-comparator-outcome research questions to address the efficacy of the interventions on the following: across the spectrum of clinical manifestations PsD activity; peripheral arthritis; dactylitis; spondylitis; enthesitis; skin; and nails. Early PsD was defined as a disease duration of ≤2 years, except for studies investigating outcomes restricted to the skin. Eligible references were clinical trials or well-designed prospective studies/series reporting on adult humans, untreated, with cutaneous and/or musculoskeletal features of PsD.

RESULTS

Nine references (out of 160 319, publication range 1946-2019) fulfilled the eligibility criteria. No study adopted comprehensive (that is, simultaneous assessment of different PsD manifestations) composite indices as primary outcome measures. Individual studies reported that apremilast and biologics successfully improved outcomes (disease activity index for PsA, minimal disease activity, PsA DAS, psoriasis area and severity index, PsA response criteria) when efficacy analyses were restricted to single manifestations of untreated PsD. Only qualitative synthesis of evidence was possible, owing to the following factors: data heterogeneity (disease classification criteria, outcome measures); unavailable data subsets (focused on early, untreated PsD) at the single study level; and insufficient data on the exposure of participants to previous treatment.

CONCLUSION

Effective interventions, albeit limited in scope, were found for early, treatment-naïve PsD. No study provided evidence about the management of co-occurring cutaneous and musculoskeletal manifestations in early, treatment-naïve PsD. This review highlights an unmet need in research on early PsD.

IBD considerations in spondyloarthritis

Spondyloarthritis (SpA) may be regarded a family of auto-inflammatory conditions with inflammation focused on the joints. These form part of a wider family of immune-mediated inflammatory diseases, which include inflammatory bowel diseases (IBD). These conditions share common elements of pathophysiology and it is perhaps unsurprising, therefore, that individuals with SpA frequently manifest gastrointestinal inflammation, to which the physician managing the patient with SpA must be alert. In this article, we review the shared epidemiology and pathophysiology of these conditions, before discussing approaches to diagnosis and management of inflammatory gastrointestinal pathology in patients seen in rheumatology clinics. In particular, we discuss the difference between non-specific gastrointestinal inflammation commonly described in this patient group and the more specific diagnosis of Crohn's disease or ulcerative colitis. We describe the appropriate diagnostic workup for patients suspected of having IBD. In addition, we discuss how a diagnosis of IBD can inform treatment selection, highlighting important differences in treatment choice, drug dosing, monitoring and drug safety for this particular comorbid patient population.

Patient-Initiated Follow-Up (PIFU) as reorganized support for increased patient involvement - focus group discussions among patients' with inflammatory arthritis

Background

Inflammatory Arthritis is characterized by lifelong medical treatment and an unpredictable trajectory because of the fluctuating nature of the diseases. Proactive disease management is recommended, which includes close monitoring of disease activity that traditionally has been ensured by outpatient visits to rheumatologists at various fixed intervals. Internationally, there is a growing interest in how healthcare systems can be more flexible, individual-oriented and increasingly involve patients with lifelong diseases in their own treatment and care. We aimed to explore how patients with Inflammatory Arthritis with low disease activity or remission (DAS-CRP < 2.9) experience patient involvement in a reorganized follow-up care based on flexibility and patient-initiated contact.

Methods

We conducted a qualitative study based on four mixed group discussions focused on patients with inflammatory arthritis (rheumatoid arthritis [n = 21], axial spondyloarthritis [n = 3] and psoriatic arthritis [n = 1]) participating in a reorganized follow-up care. Changes in follow-up included access to a nurse and patient-initiated follow-up (PIFU). The analysis was based on content analysis. The reporting adheres to the Consolidated Criteria for Reporting Qualitative Research (COREQ).

Results

In total, 25 patients (20 females (80%), mean age 61.8 [range 28–79]) participated. We identified three categories. 1) Patient-Initiated Follow-Up do not affect patients’ perceived support in disease control; this refers to patients’ experience of more time available through better resource utilization, as well as trust that access to professional support would be available whenever needed. The category 2) Information is valued by patients to delineate responsibilities in a new patient role reflects patients’ uncertainty in the transition to PIFU, combined with confusion about the distribution of responsibilities. 3) Patients need both extended perspectives of their arthritis and focused dialogue is about expanding patients’ understanding of their arthritis by interaction over time with both a rheumatologist and a rheumatology nurse in a focused dialogue to involve the patient.

Conclusions

Patients participating in PIFU welcome the flexibility and involvement. However, patients need relevant information to act adequately within a new patient role. Interaction with both rheumatologists and nurses, combined with sufficient time for dialogue, broaden patients’ perspective, make opportunities for action visible, and contribute to patients’ ability to participate in follow-up care.

Treatment Pattern Analysis and Health-care Resource Consumption on Patients with Psoriatic Arthritis or Ankylosing Spondylitis Treated with Biological Drugs in a Northern Italian Region

Purpose

To analyze the treatment patterns of psoriatic arthritis (PSA) or ankylosing spondylitis (AS) patients under biological therapies and to evaluate in this population the health-care resource consumption and related costs.

Patients and Methods

A retrospective analysis was performed on administrative databases of the Veneto region. Patients ≥18 years with at least one prescription of biological drugs and a diagnosis at any level for PSA or AS from January 1, 2011 to December 31, 2016 (inclusion period) were included. Index date (ID) was defined as date of first biological drug prescription during inclusion period. Patients were characterized the year before ID and followed-up for one year after ID. The drug utilization profile in terms of adherence, persistence and therapeutic regimen changes, and the health-care resource consumption was analyzed during follow-up.

Results

A total of 2602 patients were included: 1857 with PSA and 745 with AS. In the PSA cohort, 40.3% of patients were prescribed adalimumab, 35.6% etanercept, 8.0% golimumab, 7.5% infliximab, 5.6% ustekinumab and 3.0% certolizumab. Percentage of PSA patients adherent to treatment was higher among ustekinumab patients (91.3%) and lower among etanercept users (54.3%). Persistence ranged from 53.2% (infliximab) to 70.3% (etanercept). Regarding AS cohort, 45.5% of patients were prescribed adalimumab, 26% etanercept, 17.3% infliximab, 9.7% golimumab and 1.5% certolizumab. Adherence ranged from 46.9% (etanercept) to 90.9% (certolizumab) and persistence from 62.8% (adalimumab) to 81.8% (certolizumab). Mean annual health-care costs (including costs for drug treatment, diagnostic services, specialist visits and hospital admissions) ranged from €9727 (certolizumab) to €14,994 (ustekinumab) among PSA patients and from €9875 (infliximab) to €12,991 (golimumab) among AS patients.

Conclusion

This study in Veneto region gave a picture of biological treatment patterns among PSA and AS patients in a real-world setting. Our findings showed the high degree of variability concerning utilization of each biological drug and provided insight on the economic burden of both diseases.