Bimekizumab treatment in patients with active axial spondyloarthritis: 52-week efficacy and safety from the randomised parallel phase 3 BE MOBILE 1 and BE MOBILE 2 studies

Treatment-emergent Candida infections in patients with psoriasis, psoriatic arthritis, and axial spondyloarthritis treated with ixekizumab: an integrated safety analysis of 25 clinical studies

BACKGROUND

This safety analysis investigates treatment-emergent mucosal/cutaneous Candida infections in patients treated with ixekizumab (IXE), an anti-interleukin-17A monoclonal antibody, across the approved indications: psoriasis (PsO), psoriatic arthritis (PsA), and axial spondyloarthritis (axSpA).

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

Safety data were pooled from 25 clinical studies. Incidence rates (IRs) are expressed as per 100 patient-years (PY), using the entire duration of exposure.

RESULTS

Candida infections had an IR of 1.9 per 100 PY in patients with PsO (N = 6892; total PY = 18025.7), 2.0 per 100 PY in patients with PsA (N = 1401; total PY = 2247.7), and 1.2 per 100 PY in patients with axSpA (N = 932; total PY = 2097.7). The majority of treatment-emergent Candida infections were: (i) experienced only once by patients (IR = 1.3;IR = 1.6;IR = 1.0), (ii) mild/moderate in severity (IR = 0.8/0.9;IR = 1.5/0.4;IR = 0.8/0.5) as opposed to severe (IR = 0.0; IR = 0.0; IR = 0.0), (iii) oral Candida or genital Candida (IR = 0.9/0.6;IR = 1.0/0.7;IR = 0.4/0.6), (iv) marked as recovered/resolved during the studies (89.3%;93.8%;90.3%), (v) not leading to IXE discontinuation (0.0%;0.0%;0.1% discontinued), (vi) managed with topical (34.7%;22.2%;11.5%) or no anti-fungal medications (63.5%;77.8%;80.8%) as opposed to systemic therapies (1.5%;0.0%;7.7%), (vii) typically resolved before next visit.

CONCLUSIONS

This integrated safety analysis shows that the risk of developing Candida infections is low with IXE, and the severity is mild-to-moderate in most instances across the approved IXE indications.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

A comprehensive list of the clinical trials and their registration numbers is reported in Table S1 of the supplemental material.

Bimekizumab for the treatment of hidradenitis suppurativa

Hidradenitis suppurativa (HS) is a painful, inflammatory dermatosis involving recurrent abscesses, nodules and tunnels in intertriginous regions. Biologics and other immunomodulators have significantly expanded the treatment options available for HS. Bimekizumab is a monoclonal antibody targeting both interleukin-17A and interleukin-17F, key mediators of inflammation, that is already approved for psoriasis, psoriatic arthritis and axial spondylarthritis. It is currently pending FDA review for HS treatment but has already received marketing authorization for this indication in Europe. This review aims to explore drug-specific characteristics of bimekizumab including its mechanism of action, pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics and the current state of the literature regarding its use in HS such as safety, efficacy and dosing, while highlighting its implications in clinical practice. Recent Phase II and III trial data demonstrating positive efficacy and safety profiles in the treatment of HS will also be detailed.

IL-17 inhibitors in axial spondyloarthritis. An overview

INTRODUCTION

The therapeutic armamentarium for spondyloarthritis has expanded considerably in recent years, and there is growing evidence to support the increasing use of IL-17 inhibitors (IL-17i) in axial spondyloarthritis (axSpA).

AREAS COVERED

This literature review provides an update on the role of IL-17 in the pathogenesis of axSpA, efficacy and safety from clinical trials and real-life studies on the use of IL17i in axSpA. We also review the impact of extra-musculoskeletal manifestations on the decision to treat with IL17i and the efficacy of IL17i on structural progression.

EXPERT OPINION

There are still some unanswered questions concerning the use of IL-17i in axSpA in clinical practice such as their respective place in the management of axSpA compared to TNFα inhibitors (TNFi). Their main differences rely on their specific efficacy in extra-articular manifestations such as psoriasis, uveitis, and inflammatory bowel diseases leading to the choice of the best treatment in a given patient. Regarding their real impact on structural progression, the rate of progression under IL-17i appears to be low and presumably similar to TNFi. One final question is the advantage of blocking the two IL-17 isoforms A and F compared to the single inhibition of IL-17A.

Sequencing of Targeted Therapy in Psoriasis: Does it Matter?

With the continued development of biologics for the treatment of psoriasis, some patients have achieved optimal control, but a recommended biologic sequence if a biologic fails to initially improve the skin, termed primary nonresponse, or loses efficacy after initial improvement, termed secondary nonresponse, is still lacking. Primary and secondary nonresponse can occur with any class of biologics, and the type of nonresponse can drive the choice of whether to switch within a biologic class or to a different biologic class. The choice of biologic can also be challenging when managing psoriasis and concomitant psoriatic arthritis, as treatment differs on the basis of the severity of both diseases and further classification of axial and peripheral joint involvement. When choosing a biologic, each patient's comorbidities and preferences are also taken into account to provide the optimal therapy. With this lack of an established biologic sequence after biologic failure, the objective of our review is to define a therapy sequence for the tumor necrosis factor (TNF), interleukin-17 (IL-17), and interleukin-23 (IL-23) inhibitor classes in the treatment of psoriasis and psoriatic arthritis. Our proposed biologic sequence was derived through an analysis of the efficacy of each biologic class, primary and secondary nonresponse rates from clinical trials, and clinical experience with expert opinion.

Low uveitis rates in patients with axial spondyloarthritis treated with bimekizumab: pooled results from phase 2b/3 trials

OBJECTIVES

Acute anterior uveitis ('uveitis') is a common axial spondyloarthritis (axSpA) extramusculoskeletal manifestation. Interleukin (IL)-17 is implicated in its pathogenesis, however, there is conflicting evidence for IL-17A inhibition in uveitis management. We report pooled analyses of uveitis incidence in patients receiving bimekizumab (BKZ), a monoclonal IgG1 antibody that selectively inhibits IL-17F in addition to IL-17A, from phase 2b/3 trials.

METHODS

Data were pooled for patients receiving BKZ 160 mg or placebo in the double-blind treatment period of the phase 3 BE MOBILE 1 (NCT03928704; non-radiographic axSpA) and BE MOBILE 2 (NCT03928743; radiographic axSpA) trials. Data were separately pooled for patients treated with at least one BKZ dose in the BE MOBILE trials and their ongoing open-label extension (OLE; NCT04436640), and the phase 2b BE AGILE trial (NCT02963506; radiographic axSpA) and its ongoing OLE (NCT03355573). Uveitis rates and exposure-adjusted incidence rates (EAIR)/100 patient-years (PYs) are reported.

RESULTS

In the BE MOBILE 1 and 2 double-blind treatment period, 0.6% (2/349) of patients receiving BKZ experienced uveitis vs 4.6% (11/237) receiving placebo (nominal p=0.001; EAIR (95% CI): 1.8/100 PYs (0.2 to 6.7) vs 15.4/100 PYs (95% CI 7.7 to 27.5)). In patients with history of uveitis, EAIR was lower in patients receiving BKZ (6.2/100 PYs (95% CI 0.2 to 34.8); 1.9%) vs placebo (70.4/100 PYs (95% CI 32.2 to 133.7); 20.0%; nominal p=0.004). In the phase 2b/3 pool (N=848; BKZ exposure: 2034.4 PYs), EAIR remained low (1.2/100 PYs (95% CI 0.8 to 1.8)).

CONCLUSIONS

Bimekizumab, a dual-IL-17A/F inhibitor, may confer protective effects for uveitis in patients with axSpA.

Matching-Adjusted Indirect Comparison of the 52-Week Efficacy of Bimekizumab Versus Secukinumab and Ixekizumab for the Treatment of Radiographic Axial Spondyloarthritis

INTRODUCTION

A previous network meta-analysis established 16-week relative efficacy with bimekizumab, an inhibitor of interleukin (IL)-17F in addition to IL-17A, versus other treatments for patients with radiographic axial spondyloarthritis (r-axSpA; i.e., ankylosing spondylitis), including the IL-17A inhibitors secukinumab and ixekizumab. This matching-adjusted indirect comparison (MAIC) assessed 52-week relative efficacy of bimekizumab versus secukinumab and ixekizumab.

METHODS

Individual patient data from BE MOBILE 2 (bimekizumab 160 mg; N = 220) were matched to pooled summary data from MEASURE 1/2/3/4 (secukinumab 150 mg), MEASURE 3 (secukinumab 300 mg; escalated dose for inadequate responders), COAST-V (ixekizumab) and COAST-V/-W (ixekizumab). BE MOBILE 2 patients were reweighted using propensity score weights based on age, sex, ethnicity, tumor necrosis factor inhibitor (TNFi) exposure, weight, baseline ASDAS and BASFI (secukinumab) and baseline BASDAI (ixekizumab), and 52-week efficacy outcomes from the trial recalculated. Odds ratios (OR) or mean difference for unanchored comparisons are reported with 95% confidence intervals (CI).

RESULTS

At week 52, MAIC demonstrated that patients may have higher likelihood of improvement in key efficacy outcomes with bimekizumab versus secukinumab 150 mg (e.g., ASAS40: [OR (95% CI): 1.48 (1.05, 2.10); p = 0.026]; effective sample size [ESS] = 177). Differences in 52-week efficacy outcomes between bimekizumab and secukinumab 300 mg dose escalation were non-significant (ESS = 120). Bimekizumab versus ixekizumab 80 mg comparisons (COAST-V only; ESS = 84) also suggested that differences were non-significant for most key efficacy outcomes. Other ixekizumab comparisons (COAST-V/-W; ESS = 45) suggested bimekizumab may have higher comparative efficacy for many of the same efficacy outcomes, however ixekizumab analyses were limited by poor population overlap, likely due to the greater proportion of patients with previous TNFi exposure.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients treated with bimekizumab may have a higher likelihood of achieving improved longer-term efficacy versus secukinumab 150 mg, suggesting bimekizumab may be a favorable therapeutic option for r-axSpA. Differences in efficacy outcomes with bimekizumab versus ixekizumab 80 mg were mostly non-significant, depending on the populations considered.

Disease modification in axial spondyloarthritis - still a controversy?

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

This review evaluates recent advancements in disease-modifying therapies for axial spondyloarthritis (axSpA).

RECENT FINDINGS

A recent study could not demonstrate an additional effect of NSAID therapy on golimumab [Tumor Necrosis Factor-α inhibitor (TNFi)] on structural progression; however, this might be due to the fact that the study was underpowered. While DMARDs have shown promise in suppressing inflammation, their impact on structural progression remains uncertain. A well powered trial showed no difference in spinal progression between secukinumab [Interleukin17A inhibitor (IL17Ai)] and adalimumab-biosimilar (TNFi). Preliminary data on Janus kinase inhibitors (JAKi) focus on MRI findings but lack evidence on radiographic spinal progression. While some studies suggest promising outcomes, others reveal limitations and inconclusive findings.

SUMMARY

Recent studies explore the effectiveness of NSAIDs, biological disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs like TNFi and IL-17i, as well as JAK inhibitors in axSpA. Conflicting evidence surrounds these therapies' ability to impede structural progression, with challenges in study design and interpretation. Moreover, changes in demographics and treatment methods underscore the importance of examining trends over time when assessing disease outcomes. Ultimately, ongoing research could benefit from new imaging tools when evaluating therapeutic strategies for modifying disease progression in axSpA.

Improved physical functioning, sleep, work productivity and overall health-related quality of life with bimekizumab in patients with axial spondyloarthritis: results from two phase 3 studies

OBJECTIVE

To assess the impact of bimekizumab on physical functioning, sleep, work productivity and overall health-related quality of life (HRQoL) in patients with non-radiographic (nr-) and radiographic (r-) axial spondyloarthritis (axSpA) in the phase 3 studies BE MOBILE 1 and 2.

METHODS

Patients were randomised to subcutaneous bimekizumab 160 mg or placebo every 4 weeks; from Week 16, all patients received bimekizumab 160 mg every 4 weeks. We report the following outcomes to Week 52: Bath Ankylosing Spondylitis Functional Index (BASFI), Medical Outcomes Study Sleep Scale Revised (MOS-Sleep-R) Index II, Work Productivity and Activity Impairment: axSpA (WPAI:axSpA), Short Form-36 Physical and Mental Component Summary (SF-36 PCS/MCS) and Ankylosing Spondylitis Quality of Life (ASQoL).

RESULTS

At Week 16, bimekizumab-randomised patients demonstrated significantly greater improvement from baseline versus placebo in BASFI, SF-36 PCS and ASQoL (p<0.001), and numerically greater improvements in MOS-Sleep-R Index II and WPAI:axSpA scores. Higher proportions of bimekizumab-randomised versus placebo-randomised patients at Week 16 achieved increasingly stringent thresholds for improvements in BASFI (0 to ≤4), and thresholds for meaningful improvements in SF-36 PCS (≥5-point increase from baseline) and ASQoL (≥4-point decrease from baseline). Responses were sustained or further improved to Week 52, where 60%-70% of bimekizumab-treated patients achieved BASFI ≤4 and meaningful improvements in SF-36 PCS and ASQoL, regardless of whether originally randomised to bimekizumab or placebo.

CONCLUSION

Bimekizumab treatment led to early improvements in physical function, sleep, work productivity and overall HRQoL at Week 16 in patients across the full axSpA disease spectrum. Improvements were sustained to Week 52.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBERS

NCT03928704; NCT03928743.

Association of clinical response criteria and disease activity levels with axial spondyloarthritis core domains: results from two phase 3 randomised studies, BE MOBILE 1 and 2

OBJECTIVE

To assess how achievement of increasingly stringent clinical response criteria and disease activity states at week 52 translate into changes in core domains in patients with non-radiographic (nr-) and radiographic (r-) axial spondyloarthritis (axSpA).

METHODS

Patients in BE MOBILE 1 and 2 achieving different levels of response or disease activity (Assessment of SpondyloArthritis International Society (ASAS) and Ankylosing Spondylitis Disease Activity Score (ASDAS) response criteria, Bath Ankylosing Spondylitis Disease Activity Index (BASDAI50)) at week 52 were pooled, regardless of treatment arm. Associations between achievement of these endpoints and change from baseline (CfB) in patient-reported outcomes (PROs) measuring core axSpA domains, including pain, fatigue, physical function, overall functioning and health, and work and employment, were assessed.

RESULTS

Achievement of increasingly stringent clinical efficacy endpoints at week 52 was generally associated with sequentially greater improvements from baseline in all PROs. Patients with nr-axSpA achieving ASAS40 demonstrated greater improvements (CfB) than patients who did not achieve ASAS40 but did achieve ASAS20, in total spinal pain (-5.3 vs -2.8, respectively), Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness-Fatigue subscale (12.7 vs 6.7), Bath Ankylosing Spondylitis Function Index (-3.9 vs -1.8), European Quality of Life 5-Dimension 3-Level Version (0.30 vs 0.16), Work Productivity and Activity Impairment-axSpA presenteeism (-35.4 vs -15.9), overall work impairment (-36.5 vs -12.9), activity impairment (-39.0 vs -21.0) and sleep (9.0 vs 3.9). Results were similar for ASDAS and BASDAI50. Similar amplitudes of improvement were observed between patients with nr-axSpA and r-axSpA.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients treated with bimekizumab across the full axSpA disease spectrum, who achieved increasingly stringent clinical response criteria and lower disease activity at week 52, reported larger improvements in core axSpA domains.

The cost-effectiveness of a bimekizumab versus IL-17A inhibitors treatment-pathway in patients with active axial spondyloarthritis in Scotland

OBJECTIVE

To estimate the cost-effectiveness of a treatment-pathway initiated with bimekizumab, a monoclonal IgG1 antibody that selectively inhibits interleukin (IL)-17F and IL-17A, in patients with axial spondyloarthritis (axSpA) compared with IL-17Ai's, ixekizumab, and secukinumab, from the NHS Scotland perspective.

METHODS

The axSpA treatment-pathway was modeled using a decision tree followed by a lifetime Markov model. The pathway included first- and second-line biologic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (bDMARD), followed by best supportive care (bDMARD, nonbiologic). Bimekizumab followed by any bDMARD ("BKZ") was compared with IL-17Ai's: secukinumab 150 mg followed by a blend ("SEC") of dose up-titration to secukinumab 300 mg and any bDMARD, or ixekizumab followed by any bDMARD ("IXE"). Transition to the next therapy was triggered by Bath Ankylosing Spondylitis Disease Activity Index-50% (BASDAI50) non-response or any-cause discontinuation. A published network meta-analysis provided efficacy data. EuroQoL-5-dimensions utilities were derived by mapping from Ankylosing Spondylitis Disease Activity Score. Costs included disease management (linked to functional limitations), biologics acquisition (list prices), administration and monitoring (NHS 2021/22). Discounting was 3.5%/year. Probabilistic results from patients with non-radiographic axSpA and ankylosing spondylitis were averaged to reflect the axSpA disease spectrum. Scenario and sensitivity analyses were performed.

RESULTS

The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of BKZ was £24,801/quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) vs. SEC (95% credible interval £24,163-£25,895). BKZ had similar costs (Δ -£385 [-£15,239-£14,468]) and QALYs (Δ 0.039 [-0.748-0.825]) to IXE, with £1,523 (£862-£2,222) net monetary benefit. Conclusions remained unchanged in most scenarios. Results' drivers included BASDAI50 response rate and disease management cost.

LIMITATIONS

Results were based on list prices. Data concerning up-titration to secukinumab 300 mg was scarce.

CONCLUSIONS

The bimekizumab treatment-pathway represents a cost-effective option across the axSpA disease spectrum in Scotland. Bimekizumab is cost-effective compared to a secukinumab-pathway that includes dose up-titration, and has similar costs and QALYs to an ixekizumab-pathway.