Cycling of tumor necrosis factor inhibitors versus switching to different mechanism of action therapy in rheumatoid arthritis patients with inadequate response to tumor necrosis factor inhibitors: a Bayesian network meta-analysis

Long-term sustainability of response to upadacitinib among patients with active rheumatoid arthritis refractory to biological treatments: results up to 5 years from SELECT-BEYOND

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the long-term sustainability of response to the Janus kinase inhibitor upadacitinib among patients with rheumatoid arthritis and an inadequate response or intolerance to biological disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (bDMARD-IR) in the SELECT-BEYOND phase 3 trial.

METHODS

Patients on background conventional synthetic DMARDs (csDMARDs) were treated once daily with upadacitinib 15 mg or placebo. Patients who completed the week 24 visit could enter a long-term extension of up to 5 years. The sustainability of response was assessed based on achievement of Clinical Disease Activity Index (CDAI), Simplified Disease Activity Index (SDAI) and Disease Activity Score 28-joint count using C-reactive protein (DAS28 (CRP)) targets and evaluated up to week 260 in all patients receiving the approved upadacitinib 15 mg dose, including those randomised to upadacitinib 15 mg and those who switched from placebo to upadacitinib 15 mg at week 12.

RESULTS

In this bDMARD-IR population, 45% (n=104/229) and 79% (n=172/219) of patients treated with upadacitinib 15 mg plus background csDMARD(s) achieved CDAI remission or CDAI low disease activity (LDA) at any point during the 5-year study, respectively. Of those who achieved CDAI remission/LDA, 25%/43% maintained their initial response through 240 weeks of follow-up after first achieving response. Most patients who lost remission or LDA were able to recapture that response by the cut-off date. Similar overall results were observed for SDAI and DAS28 (CRP). No strong predictors of response were identified.

CONCLUSIONS

Over three-quarters of bDMARD-IR patients achieved CDAI LDA with upadacitinib, and almost half of those maintained LDA through 240 weeks of follow-up. Remission was achieved by nearly half of all patients and maintained in approximately a quarter of those achieving remission.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT02706847.

Long-term Efficacy and Safety Following Switch Between Upadacitinib and Adalimumab in Patients with Rheumatoid Arthritis: 5-Year Data from SELECT-COMPARE

INTRODUCTION

This study aimed to describe the long-term efficacy and safety of upadacitinib and adalimumab through 228 weeks following immediate switch to the alternate therapy with a different mechanism of action (MoA) in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) not achieving treatment goals with their initial randomized therapy in the ongoing phase 3 SELECT-COMPARE study.

METHODS

Patients with non-response or incomplete response to initially prescribed upadacitinib 15 mg once daily or adalimumab 40 mg every other week were switched to the alternate therapy by week 26. Efficacy was evaluated through 228 weeks post-switch using validated outcome measures, including Clinical Disease Activity Index (CDAI) low disease activity (LDA; ≤ 10)/remission (≤ 2.8); 28-joint Disease Activity Score based on C-reactive protein ≤ 3.2/< 2.6; ≥ 20%/50%/70% improvement in American College of Rheumatology (ACR) response criteria; and change from baseline in ACR core components. Data are reported as observed. Safety was assessed by treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) through week 264.

RESULTS

Of patients initially randomized to upadacitinib and adalimumab, 38.7% and 48.6%, respectively, switched to the alternate therapy by week 26. Clinically relevant improvements in all efficacy measures were observed through 228 weeks post-switch and were generally similar between groups, with small numeric differences mostly in favor of switching to upadacitinib. CDAI remission was achieved by 32.7% and 28.6% of initial non-responders, and 27.5% and 27.3% of incomplete responders, while CDAI LDA was achieved by 76.9% and 72.9% of non-responders, and 72.5% and 72.7% of incomplete responders switching to upadacitinib and to adalimumab, respectively. TEAE rates were similar between groups, although herpes zoster infection, lymphopenia, and creatine phosphokinase elevation were more frequent when switching to upadacitinib. No new safety signals were identified.

CONCLUSION

Switching to a different MoA may provide long-term benefit to patients with RA not achieving treatment goals with their initial therapy, with acceptable safety profiles.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

NCT02629159.

Modelling Treatment Sequences in Immunology: Optimizing Patient Outcomes

INTRODUCTION

For some immune-mediated disorders, despite the range of therapies available there is limited evidence on which treatment sequences are best for patients and healthcare systems. We investigated how their selection can impact outcomes in an Italian setting.

METHODS

A 3-year state-transition treatment-sequencing model calculated potential effectiveness improvements and budget reallocation considerations associated with implementing optimal sequences in ankylosing spondylitis (AS), Crohn's disease (CD), non-radiographic axial spondyloarthritis (NR-AxSpA), plaque psoriasis (PsO), psoriatic arthritis (PsA), rheumatoid arthritis (RA), and ulcerative colitis (UC). Sequences included three biological or disease-modifying treatments, followed by best supportive care. Disease-specific response measures were selected on the basis of clinical relevance, data availability, and data quality. Efficacy was differentiated between biologic-naïve and experienced populations, where possible, using published network meta-analyses and real-world data. All possible treatment sequences, based on reimbursement as of December 2022 in Italy (analyses' base country), were simulated.

RESULTS

Sequences with the best outcomes consistently employed the most efficacious therapies earlier in the treatment pathway. Improvements to prescribing practice are possible in all diseases; however, most notable was UC, where the per-patient 3-year average treatment failure was 37.3% higher than optimal. The results focused on the three most crowded and prevalent immunological sub-condition diseases in dermatology, rheumatology, and gastroenterology: PsO, RA, and UC, respectively. By prescribing from within the top 20% of the most efficacious sequences, the model found a 15.1% reduction in treatment failures, with a 1.59% increase in drug costs.

CONCLUSIONS

Prescribing more efficacious treatments earlier provides a greater opportunity to improve patient outcomes and minimizes treatment failures.

Management of patients with inflammatory rheumatic diseases after treatment failure with a first tumour necrosis factor inhibitor: A narrative review

The emergence of biologics with different modes of action (MoAs) and therapeutic targets has changed treatment patterns in patients with inflammatory rheumatic diseases. While tumour necrosis factor inhibitors (TNFis) are often utilized as the first biologic disease-modifying antirheumatic drug, some patients may not respond adequately (primary failure), fail to sustain response over time (secondary failure), or experience intolerable adverse events. Whether these patients would benefit more from cycling to a different TNFi or switching to a biologic with a different MoA is still unclear. We discuss here treatment outcomes of TNFi cycling versus MoA switching after treatment failure with a first TNFi in patients with inflammatory rheumatic diseases, focusing specifically on rheumatoid arthritis, psoriatic arthritis, axial spondyloarthritis, and juvenile idiopathic arthritis. Treatment guidelines for these patients are ambiguous and, at times, contradictory in their recommendations. However, this is due to a lack of high-quality head-to-head data to definitively support cycling between TNFis after failure to a first-line TNFi over switching to a different MoA.

Characteristics of patients with difficult-to-treat rheumatoid arthritis in a French single-centre hospital

OBJECTIVES

To compare the features of difficult-to-treat rheumatoid arthritis (D2TRA) patients using two different definitions according to the previous failure of targeted therapies.

METHODS

We stratified consecutive RA patients treated at Cochin Hospital into two groups, a D2TRA group and a non-D2TRA group, according to two definitions of D2TRA. Both definitions defined D2TRA as RAs failing at least two targeted therapies, with a different mechanism of action for the EULAR-D2TRA definition or without prejudging the mechanism of action and for the Alternative D2TRA definition.

RESULTS

We included 320 consecutive RA patients. We identified 76 EULAR-D2TRA and 244 non-DTRA patients, and 120 Alternative D2TRA and 200 non-DTRA patients. Compared with non-D2TRA, D2TRA patients from both definitions were more likely to have lower socioeconomic level, positive rheumatoid factor, interstitial lung disease, higher DAS28-CRP and were more likely to respond to rituximab and Janus kinase inhibitors. Although EULAR and Alternative D2TRA patients displayed similar clinical and biological features, they were characterized by different therapeutic profiles. We observed fewer patients receiving methotrexate in the Alternative D2TRA group (53% vs 64%, P = 0.046). Patients with Alternative D2TRA not fulfilling the EULAR definition (n = 44) had all received two successive first-line TNF inhibitors, a monoclonal antibody and a soluble receptor, and were comparable to EULAR-D2TRA patients with regards to all other characteristics.

CONCLUSION

Low socioeconomic status, diabetes, interstitial lung disease and absence of combination with methotrexate allow identification of D2TRA. In addition, the inclusion as 'early-D2TRA' of patients failing two TNF inhibitors in the EULAR definition of D2TRA would facilitate the rapid identification of D2TRA patients.

Clinical Outcomes in Patients with Rheumatoid Arthritis After Switching Between Interleukin-6-Receptor Inhibitors and Janus Kinase Inhibitors: Findings from an Observational Study

INTRODUCTION

This observational study evaluated response in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) who switched from an interleukin-6 receptor inhibitor (IL-6Ri) to a Janus kinase inhibitor (JAKi) and vice versa.

METHODS

Adult patients with RA, who initiated IL-6Ri or JAKi (following discontinuation of JAKi or IL-6Ri, respectively) during/after December 2012 and had a 6-month follow-up visit were enrolled. Clinical outcomes were evaluated at baseline and the follow-up visit. Continuous outcomes included Clinical Disease Activity Index (CDAI), Health Assessment Questionnaire (HAQ), pain, fatigue, tender joint count, swollen joint count, Physician Global Assessment (MDGA), Patient Global Assessment (PtGA), and morning stiffness duration. Categorical outcomes included the proportion of patients achieving CDAI low disease activity (LDA), remission, and minimal clinically important differences (MCIDs) for HAQ, pain, fatigue, MDGA, and PtGA. Continuous outcomes were summarized as mean changes from baseline, and categorical outcomes as response rates. Differences in the outcome measures between groups were evaluated using linear and logistic regression models.

RESULTS

Between IL-6Ri (n = 100) and JAKi initiators (n = 129), no significant differences were noted for continuous outcomes. Within both groups, a significant proportion of patients achieved LDA, remission, and MCIDs for other measures, although the odds of achieving LDA were higher among IL-6Ri (vs. JAKi) initiators with moderate-to-severe disease (adjusted odds ratio: 3.30 [1.01, 10.78]).

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with RA can achieve improvement in response when switching between IL-6Ri and JAKi. Although both therapies affect the IL-6 pathway, there are distinct mechanisms of action, which likely contribute to their clinical improvement, when reciprocally switched as follow-on treatments.

One-Year Medication Adherence and Persistence in Rheumatoid Arthritis in Clinical Practice: A Retrospective Analysis of Upadacitinib, Adalimumab, Baricitinib, and Tofacitinib

INTRODUCTION

This study evaluated 12 months adherence and persistence among Janus kinase inhibitors (upadacitinib, baricitinib, tofacitinib) and adalimumab, a tumor necrosis factor inhibitor (TNFi), in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA).

METHODS

This retrospective analysis used administrative claims data from the Merative™ MarketScan® Research Databases (2018-2022). Eligible adults had ≥ 1 RA diagnosis before the index date, ≥ 1 pharmacy claim for index medication, and ≥ 12 months of continuous insurance enrollment pre- and post-index. Adherence to treatment [defined as proportion of days covered (PDC) ≥ 80%], risk of treatment discontinuation, and mean time to discontinuation were assessed during the 12 months follow-up. Adjusted odds ratios (aOR), adjusted hazard ratios (aHR), and 95% confidence intervals (CI) were reported.

RESULTS

In total, 6317 patients were included (683 upadacitinib, 3732 adalimumab, 132 baricitinib, 1770 tofacitinib). Compared with upadacitinib, patients initiating adalimumab [aOR (95% CI): 0.82 (0.69, 0.96)], baricitinib [0.46 (0.31, 0.68)], and tofacitinib [0.74 (0.62, 0.88)] were significantly less likely to achieve PDC ≥ 80%. Risk of treatment discontinuation was significantly higher in patients treated with adalimumab [aHR (95% CI): 1.14 (1.01, 1.29)], baricitinib [1.48 (1.16, 1.90)], and tofacitinib [1.22 (1.07, 1.38)] compared with upadacitinib. Mean time to discontinuation was 256 (upadacitinib), 249 (adalimumab), 221 (baricitinib), and 239 (tofacitinib) days. Similar results were observed in patients with prior TNFi use.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with RA, regardless of recent TNFi experience, initiating upadacitinib were significantly more likely to be adherent and less likely to discontinue therapy compared to adalimumab, baricitinib, and tofacitinib in the first 12 months of treatment.

Comparative effectiveness of treatments for rheumatoid arthritis in clinical practice: A systematic review

OBJECTIVE

To assess real-world comparative effectiveness studies of biologic (b) and targeted synthetic (ts) disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs) in adults with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) through a systematic review.

METHODS

We searched Medline for journal articles (2001-2021) and Embase® for abstracts presented at the European Alliance of Associations for Rheumatology and American College of Rheumatology (ACR) 2020 and 2021 annual meetings on non-randomized studies comparing the effectiveness of b/tsDMARDs using ACR-recommended disease activity measures, measures of functional status, and patient-reported outcomes (HAQ, PROMIS PF, patient pain, Patient and Physician Global Assessment of disease activity). Methodological heterogeneity between studies precluded meta-analyses. Risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane Risk Of Bias In Non-randomized Studies of Interventions-I tool.

RESULTS

Of 1283 records screened, 68 were selected for data extraction, of which 1 was excluded due to critical risk of bias. Most studies were multicenter observational cohort/registry studies (n = 60) and were published between 2011 and 2021 (n = 60). Mean or median reported RA duration was between 6 and 15 years. Disease Activity Score in 28 joints (46 studies), Clinical Disease Activity Index (37 studies), and Health Assessment Questionnaire-Disability Index (32 studies) were the most common outcomes used in clinical practice, with regional differences identified. The most common comparison was between tumor necrosis factor inhibitors (TNFis) and non-TNFi bDMARDs (35 studies). There were no evident differences between b/tsDMARDs in clinical effectiveness.

CONCLUSION

This systematic review summarizing real-world evidence from a very large number of global studies found there are many effective options for the treatment of RA, but relatively less evidence to support the use of any one b/tsDMARD or drug class over another. Treatment for patients with RA should be tailored to suit individual clinical profiles. Further research is needed to identify whether specific patient subgroups may benefit from specific drug classes.

A JAK Inhibitor for Treatment of Rheumatoid Arthritis: The Baricitinib Experience

Baricitinib, an oral selective Janus kinase (JAK)1/JAK2 inhibitor, is approved as monotherapy or in combination with methotrexate for treating adults with moderate-to-severe active rheumatoid arthritis (RA) and provides improvements in clinical signs, symptoms and patient-reported outcomes. Currently, baricitinib is approved for treating RA in more than 75 countries. In several pivotal Phase II and III RA trials (RA-BALANCE, RA-BEGIN, RA-BEAM, RA-BUILD, RA-BEACON, RA-BEYOND), up to seven years of baricitinib treatment was well tolerated and provided rapid and sustained efficacy, which was confirmed in real-world settings. Safety signals for another JAK inhibitor, tofacitinib, have emerged, as observed in the post-marketing Phase IIIb/IV trial Oral Rheumatoid Arthritis Trial (ORAL) Surveillance; safety signals were subsequently highlighted in a retrospective study of baricitinib and consequently new recommendations and warnings and precautions for all JAK inhibitors have been issued. Ongoing studies to further characterise and clarify the benefit:risk of JAK inhibitors include registries and controlled trials. This capstone review summarises clinical and real-world data outlining the benefit:risk profile of baricitinib, confirming that the improved disease activity and physical function of patients with RA treated with this JAK inhibitor observed in clinical trials is translated into effectiveness in clinical practice, with a low rate of discontinuations.

Four-years retention rate of golimumab administered after discontinuation of non-TNF inhibitors in patients with inflammatory rheumatic diseases

BACKGROUND

In patients with rheumatic diseases, the use of biological (b) or targeted synthetic (ts) disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs) after discontinuation of tumor necrosis factor inhibitors (TNFi) is known to be effective. However, data on the use of TNFi after discontinuation of non-TNFi bDMARDs or tsDMARDs (non-TNFi) are scarce. This study assessed the 4-years golimumab retention in patients with rheumatic diseases when used after discontinuation of non-TNFi.

METHODS

Adults with rheumatoid arthritis (RA; n = 72), psoriatic arthritis (PsA; n = 30) or axial spondyloarthritis (axSpA; n = 23) who initiated golimumab after discontinuation of non-TNFi from the Spanish registry of biological drugs (BIOBADASER) were analyzed retrospectively. The retention rate (drug survival or persistence) of golimumab up to 4 years was evaluated.

RESULTS

The golimumab retention rate was 60.7% (51.4-68.8) at year 1, 45.9% (36.0-55.2) at year 2, 39.9% (29.8-49.7) at year 3 and 33.4% (23.0-44.2) at year 4. Retention rates did not differ significantly whether golimumab was used as second, third, or fourth/subsequent line of therapy (p log-rank = 0.462). Golimumab retention rates were higher in axSpA or PsA patients than in RA patients (p log-rank = 0.002). When golimumab was administered as third or fourth/subsequent line, the 4-years retention rate after discontinuation of non-TNFi was similar to that after discontinuation of TNFi.

CONCLUSION

In patients who discontinued non-TNFi, most of whom received golimumab as third/subsequent line of therapy, one-third of patients remained on golimumab at year 4. Retention rates were higher in patients with axSpA and PsA than in those with RA.

Comparative effectiveness of TNF inhibitor vs IL-6 receptor inhibitor as monotherapy or combination therapy with methotrexate in biologic-experienced patients with rheumatoid arthritis: An analysis from the CorEvitas RA Registry

OBJECTIVE

Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in biologic-naïve rheumatoid arthritis (RA) patients with high disease activity and inadequate response/intolerance to methotrexate have shown interleukin-6 (IL-6) receptor inhibitors (IL-6Ri) to be superior to tumor necrosis factor inhibitors (TNFi) as monotherapy. This observational study aimed to compare the effectiveness of TNFi vs IL-6Ri as mono- or combination therapy in biologic/targeted synthetic (b/ts) -experienced RA patients with moderate/high disease activity.

METHODS

Eligible b/ts-experienced patients from the CorEvitas RA registry were categorized as TNFi and IL-6Ri initiators, with subgroups initiating as mono- or combination therapy. Mixed-effects regression models evaluated the impact of treatment on Clinical Disease Activity Index (CDAI), patient-reported outcomes, and disproportionate pain (DP). Unadjusted and covariate-adjusted effects were reported.

RESULTS

Patients initiating IL-6Ri (n = 286) vs TNFi monotherapy (n = 737) were older, had a longer RA history and higher baseline CDAI, and were more likely to initiate as third-line therapy; IL-6Ri (n = 401) vs TNFi (n = 1315) combination therapy initiators had higher baseline CDAI and were more likely to initiate as third-line therapy. No significant differences were noted in the outcomes between TNFi and IL-6Ri initiators (as mono- or combination therapy).

CONCLUSION

This observational study showed no significant differences in outcomes among b/ts-experienced TNFi vs IL-6Ri initiators, as either mono- or combination therapy. These findings were in contrast with the previous RCTs in biologic-naïve patients and could be explained by the differences in the patient characteristics included in this study. Further studies are needed to help understand the reasons for this discrepancy in the real-world b/ts-experienced population.

The RA-BE-REAL Multinational, Prospective, Observational Study in Patients with Rheumatoid Arthritis Receiving Baricitinib, Targeted Synthetic, or Biologic Disease-Modifying Therapies: a 6-Month Interim Analysis

INTRODUCTION

RA-BE-REAL has the overall aim of defining a profile of patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) starting baricitinib or any other targeted synthetic (ts) or any biologic (b) disease-modifying antirheumatic drug (DMARD) for the first time, and the primary objective of estimating time until discontinuation from any cause (excluding sustained response) of the initial treatment.

METHODS

RA-BE-REAL is an ongoing, prospective, observational, 36-month study in patients with RA initiating treatment with baricitinib (cohort A) or any other tsDMARD or any bDMARD (cohort B) for the first time. The primary objective is to assess the time until treatment discontinuation from any cause (excluding sustained response) at 24 months, (i.e., the rate of discontinuation of initial baricitinib or ts/bDMARD). Patient profiles of each cohort are described and compared. Post-baseline data are descriptively analyzed. This manuscript presents baseline and interim (6-month) outcomes for European patients with RA participating in the global RA-BE-REAL study.

RESULTS

Data from 1074 patients (cohort A: 509; cohort B: 565) were analyzed. For cohorts A and B, respectively, the 6-month cumulative incidence (95% confidence interval) of treatment discontinuation was 16.5 (12.9-21.1) and 23.3 (19.1-28.2), and the proportions of patients achieving remission were 25.6% and 18.5%. At baseline, mean patient age was 59.1 and 57.0 years (p = 0.010) and mean disease duration was 10.0 and 8.9 years (p = 0.047), respectively. The proportions of patients exposed to ts/bDMARDs at any time before study entry were 51.9% and 39.1%, and the proportions of patients initiated on monotherapy were 50.9% and 31.2%, respectively.

CONCLUSION

In real-world settings, patients with RA initiating treatment with baricitinib were older and had longer disease duration than those initiating treatment with any other tsDMARD or any bDMARD. Initial descriptive data regarding treatment discontinuation (including reasons for discontinuation), effectiveness, and treatment patterns will be enriched as the study progresses.

Macrophages and glial cells: Innate immune drivers of inflammatory arthritic pain perception from peripheral joints to the central nervous system

Millions of people suffer from arthritis worldwide, consistently struggling with daily activities due to debilitating pain evoked by this disease. Perhaps the most intensively investigated type of inflammatory arthritis is rheumatoid arthritis (RA), where, despite considerable advances in research and clinical management, gaps regarding the neuroimmune interactions that guide inflammation and chronic pain in this disease remain to be clarified. The pain and inflammation associated with arthritis are not isolated to the joints, and inflammatory mechanisms induced by different immune and glial cells in other tissues may affect the development of chronic pain that results from the disease. This review aims to provide an overview of the state-of-the-art research on the roles that innate immune, and glial cells play in the onset and maintenance of arthritis-associated pain, reviewing nociceptive pathways from the joint through the dorsal root ganglion, spinal circuits, and different structures in the brain. We will focus on the cellular mechanisms related to neuroinflammation and pain, and treatments targeting these mechanisms from the periphery and the CNS. A comprehensive understanding of the role these cells play in peripheral inflammation and initiation of pain and the central pathways in the spinal cord and brain will facilitate identifying new targets and pathways to aide in developing therapeutic strategies to treat joint pain associated with RA.

Successful IL-17A inhibitor cycling in psoriatic arthritis patient: a case report and a literature review

Psoriatic arthritis is an inflammatory arthritis with heterogeneous disease presentation. The most affected clinical domain of the disease determines the therapeutic approach. We report the case of a 34-year-old man with all six crucial domains of psoriatic arthritis (psoriasis, peripheral arthritis, axial skeletal manifestations, dactylitis, nail changes, and enthesitis) treated unsuccessfully with conventional synthetic DMARDs, NSAID's, and steroids as well as topical treatment and phototherapy. With golimumab as the first line of bDMARD partial remission was achieved. After 24 months the treatment was switched to secukinumab due to secondary inefficacy. The psoriasis and psoriatic arthritis relapsed after 21 months of treatment with secukinumab. The patient was cycled to ixekizumab with an excellent result. IL-17A inhibitor cycling may be a successful treatment option in some difficult to treat psoriatic arthritis patients.

Successful IL-17A inhibitor cycling in psoriatic arthritis patient: a case report and a literature review

Psoriatic arthritis is an inflammatory arthritis with heterogeneous disease presentation. The most affected clinical domain of the disease determines the therapeutic approach. We report the case of a 34-year-old man with all six crucial domains of psoriatic arthritis (psoriasis, peripheral arthritis, axial skeletal manifestations, dactylitis, nail changes, and enthesitis) treated unsuccessfully with conventional synthetic DMARDs, NSAID's, and steroids as well as topical treatment and phototherapy. With golimumab as the first line of bDMARD partial remission was achieved. After 24 months the treatment was switched to secukinumab due to secondary inefficacy. The psoriasis and psoriatic arthritis relapsed after 21 months of treatment with secukinumab. The patient was cycled to ixekizumab with an excellent result. IL-17A inhibitor cycling may be a successful treatment option in some difficult to treat psoriatic arthritis patients.