Health-related quality of life in patients with generalized pustular psoriasis: A systematic literature review

Generalized pustular psoriasis (GPP) is a rare, chronic, neutrophilic inflammatory skin disease characterized by episodes of widespread eruption of sterile, macroscopic pustules that can be accompanied by systemic inflammation and symptoms. A systematic literature review and narrative synthesis were conducted to determine the impact of GPP on patients' health-related quality of life (HRQoL) and patient-reported severity of symptoms and to compare its impact to patients with plaque psoriasis (plaque PsO). Searches were undertaken in Embase, MEDLINE and the Cochrane Library from 1 January 2002 to 15 September 2022. Screening was carried out by two reviewers independently. Outcome measures included generic (e.g. EQ-5D, SF-36) and dermatology-specific (e.g. DLQI) clinical outcome assessments, and other relevant patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) (e.g. severity of pain measured by a numerical rating scale). Overall, 20 studies were found to be eligible for inclusion, of which seven also had data for plaque PsO. The DLQI was the most frequently reported outcome measure (16 out of 20 studies). When reported, mean DLQI (SD) scores varied from 5.7 (1.2) to 15.8 (9.6) across the studies, indicating a moderate to very large effect on HRQoL; the wide range of scores and large SDs were explained by the small population sizes (n ≤ 12 for all studies except two). Similar ranges and large SDs were also observed for other measures within individual studies. However, in general, people with GPP reported a greater impact of their skin condition on HRQoL, when compared to people with plaque PsO (i.e. higher DLQI scores) and higher severity for itch, pain and fatigue. This systematic review highlighted the need for studies with a larger population size, a better understanding of the impact of cutaneous and extracutaneous symptoms and comorbidities on HRQoL during and between GPP flares, and outcome measures specifically tailored to the unique symptoms and the natural course/history of GPP.

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

Background

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

Objectives

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

Methods

Biologic-naïve adults with active PsA (≥5 swollen + ≥5 tender joint count; CRP ≥0.6 mg/dL) were randomized (1:1:1) to GUS 100 mg Q4W; GUS 100 mg at W0, W4, then Q8W; or PBO with crossover to GUS 100 mg Q4W (PBO→Q4W) at W24, all through W100. Radiographic Reading Session 3 included assessments at W0/24/52/100 (or at discontinuation after W52) from pts ontinuing study treatment at W52; readers were blinded to treatment group and timepoint. Observed mean changes in total PsA-modified van der Heijde-Sharp (vdH-S), joint space narrowing (JSN), and erosion scores were reported. Changes in total vdH-S scores from W0-100 were determined in pts who did and did not achieve clinical response at W100, assessed by ACR20/50/70, low disease activity (LDA) based on Disease Activity in Psoriatic Arthritis score (DAPSA; ≤14) or Psoriatic Arthritis Disease Activity Score (PASDAS; ≤3.2), minimal disease activity (MDA), and normalized Health-Assessment Questionnaire-Disability Index (HAQ-DI) score (<0.5).

Results

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

Table 1.

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

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

Data presented as mean (SD).

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

Conclusion

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

References

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

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

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

Disclosure of Interests

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

AB0887 Designing a Phase 3b, Multicenter, Randomized, Double-blind, Placebo-controlled Study to Investigate the Effect of Guselkumab Dosing Interval in Psoriatic Arthritis Patients with Inadequate Response to Tumor Necrosis Factor Inhibition

Background

Tumor necrosis factor inhibitors (TNFi) are frequently chosen as the first biologic therapy for patients (pts) with psoriatic arthritis (PsA), though a sizeable proportion of pts have an inadequate response (IR), and some may also have intolerance. Guselkumab (GUS), a human mAb that targets the IL-23 p19 subunit, provides an alternative mechanism of action to treat PsA. In the Phase 3 (Ph3) DISCOVER-1 study of GUS in active PsA, GUS every 4 weeks (Q4W) and Q8W clinical response rates were generally consistent between TNFi-naïve (263 pts) and TNFi-experienced (118 pts) cohorts. In the TNFi-experienced cohort and the limited number of DISCOVER-1 pts with IR to their prior TNFi (N=44), American College of Rheumatology 50% improvement (ACR50) and ACR70 response rates at W24 were numerically higher in GUS Q4W- than Q8W-treated pts.1

Objectives

To further investigate whether GUS Q4W could provide incremental benefit to some TNFi-IR PsA pts by analyzing the existing DISCOVER-1 dataset to facilitate the design of a new clinical trial.

Methods

Study feasibility assessments included comparison of key efficacy endpoints by treatment group at W24 among TNFi-experienced pts receiving GUS Q8W and Q4W in DISCOVER-1. Results from the DISCOVER-1 study also informed sample size power calculations for a primary endpoint of ACR20 response at W24 in a future study in a TNFi-IR PsA pt population.

Results

Comparison of several efficacy endpoints (ACR70 response, minimal disease activity, Investigator’s Global Assessment [IGA] of psoriasis 0/1 response) across treatment groups in the TNFi-experienced DISCOVER-1 cohort supports a potential dose response, with more frequent GUS administration eliciting numerically higher response rates (Table 1). A similar trend was observed for ACR20/50/70 responses in the smaller TNFi-IR population1, though these findings should be interpreted with caution due to limited sample size. ACR20 response rates at W24 of DISCOVER-1 were employed to estimate sample size requirements for a new study. Assuming comparable rates of GUS treatment effect seen in DISCOVER-1, a sample size of 150 randomized pts per group for PBO, GUS Q8W, and GUS Q4W would provide >90% power to detect a significant difference between each GUS group and PBO for ACR20 response at W24. Based on these findings, a new Ph3b, multicenter, randomized, double-blind, PBO-controlled study, SOLSTICE, was designed to further evaluate the efficacy and safety of GUS in approximately 450 pts with active PsA who had IR to one prior TNFi, and to investigate the effect of GUS dosing interval in this important cohort of pts with PsA (Figure 1).

Table 1.

Clinical efficacy at W24 among DISCOVER-1 TNFi-experienced pts

PlaceboGUS Q8WGUS Q4WACR2017.9% (7/39)56.1% (23/41)57.9% (22/38)ACR505.1% (2/39)26.8% (11/41)34.2% (13/38)ACR702.6% (1/39)2.4% (1/41)21.1% (8/38)MDA2.6% (1/39)17.1% (7/41)26.3% (10/38)IGA 0/1a7.7% (2/26)48.3% (14/29)67.9% (19/28)

aIGA score of 0 (clear) or 1 (almost clear) among pts with ≥3% body surface area of psoriatic involvement and an IGA score ≥2 (mild-to-severe psoriasis) at baseline.

ACR20/50/70, American College of Rheumatology 20%/50%/70% improvement; GUS, guselkumab; IGA, Investigator’s Global Assessment; MDA, minimal disease activity; Q4W, every 4 weeks; Q8W, every 8 weeks; TNFi, tumor necrosis factor inhibitor; W, week

Conclusion

PsA pts with TNFi-IR are typically difficult to treat. Overall data from the pivotal DISCOVER-1 study of GUS in pts with active PsA showed consistent clinical response between doses and between TNFi-naïve and TNFi-experienced pts. Analyses based on limited numbers of TNFi-experienced pts from DISCOVER-1 demonstrated potential incremental benefit for achievement of higher response criteria with more frequent dosing in some TNFi-IR pts. SOLSTICE, a Ph3b, randomized, placebo-controlled study, will test this hypothesis.

References

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

Figure 1.

Disclosure of Interests

Alexis Ogdie Shareholder of: Her husband has received royalties from Novartis, Consultant of: AbbVie, Amgen, BMS, Celgene, Corrona, Gilead, Global Health Living Foundation, Janssen, Eli Lilly, Novartis, Pfizer, and UCB Pharma, Grant/research support from: Abbvie, Pfizer and Novartis/Amgen to the University of Pennsylvania, Joseph F. Merola Paid instructor for: AbbVie, Arena, Biogen, Bristol Myers Squibb, Dermavant, Lilly, Janssen, Novartis, Pfizer, Sun Pharma, and UCB Pharma, Consultant of: AbbVie, Arena, Biogen, Bristol Myers Squibb, Dermavant, Lilly, Janssen, Novartis, Pfizer, Sun Pharma, and UCB Pharma, Philip J Mease Speakers bureau: AbbVie, Aclaris, Amgen, BMS, Celgene, Eli Lilly, Galapagos, Gilead, GlaxoSmithKline, Inmagene, Janssen, Novartis, Pfizer, SUN Pharma, and UCB, Consultant of: AbbVie, Aclaris, Amgen, BMS, Celgene, Eli Lilly, Galapagos, Gilead, GlaxoSmithKline, Inmagene, Janssen, Novartis, Pfizer, SUN Pharma, and UCB, Grant/research support from: AbbVie, Aclaris, Amgen, BMS, Celgene, Eli Lilly, Galapagos, Gilead, GlaxoSmithKline, Inmagene, Janssen, Novartis, Pfizer, SUN Pharma, and UCB, Christopher T. Ritchlin Consultant of: UCB Pharma, Amgen, AbbVie, Lilly, Pfizer, Novartis, Gilead, and Janssen, Grant/research support from: UCB Pharma, AbbVie, and Amgen, Jose U. Scher Consultant of: Janssen, Novartis, Pfizer, Abbvie, Sanofi, Kaleido and UCB Pharma, Grant/research support from: Novartis, Pfizer and Janssen (for investigator-initiated studies), Daphne Chan Employee of: Janssen Scientific Affairs, LLC, and may own stock or stock options in Johnson & Johnson, Soumya D Chakravarty Employee of: Janssen Scientific Affairs, LLC, and may own stock or stock options in Johnson & Johnson, Wayne Langholff Employee of: Janssen Research & Development, LLC, and may own stock or stock options in Johnson & Johnson, Olivia Choi Employee of: Janssen Scientific Affairs, LLC, and may own stock or stock options in Johnson & Johnson, Yevgeniy Krol Employee of: Janssen Scientific Affairs, LLC, and may own stock or stock options in Johnson & Johnson, Katelyn Rowland Employee of: Janssen Scientific Affairs, LLC, and may own stock or stock options in Johnson & Johnson, Alice B Gottlieb Consultant of: AnaptsysBio, Avotres Therapeutics, Beiersdorf, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol-Myers Squibb Co., Incyte, GSK, Janssen, LEO Pharma, Eli Lilly, Novartis, Pfizer, Sun Pharmaceutical Industries, Inc., UCB Pharma, Dermavant, and Xbiotech, Grant/research support from: Boehringer Ingelheim, Incyte, Janssen, Novartis, UCB Pharma, Xbiotech, and Sun Pharma

LB0001 BIMEKIZUMAB IN BDMARD-NAIVE PATIENTS WITH PSORIATIC ARTHRITIS: 24-WEEK EFFICACY & SAFETY FROM BE OPTIMAL, A PHASE 3, MULTICENTRE, RANDOMISED, PLACEBO-CONTROLLED, ACTIVE REFERENCE STUDY

Background

Bimekizumab (BKZ) is a monoclonal IgG1 antibody that selectively inhibits IL-17F in addition to IL-17A.

Objectives

Assess BKZ efficacy and safety vs PBO in bDMARD-naïve pts with active PsA to Wk 24 of BE OPTIMAL.

Methods

BE OPTIMAL (NCT03895203) comprises 16 wks double-blind PBO-controlled and 36 wks treatment-blind. Pts were ≥18 yrs, bDMARD-naïve, with adult-onset, active PsA, ≥3 tender and ≥3 swollen joints. Pts randomised 3:2:1, subcutaneous BKZ 160 mg Q4W:PBO:adalimumab (ADA; reference arm) 40 mg Q2W. From Wk 16, PBO pts received BKZ 160 mg Q4W. Primary endpoint: ACR50 at Wk 16.

Results

821/852 (96.4%) pts completed Wk 16 and 806 (94.6%) Wk 24. Mean age 48.7 yrs, BMI 29.2 kg/m2; since diagnosis: 5.9 yrs; 46.8% male. BL characteristics comparable across arms. Primary endpoint met (Wk 16 ACR50: 43.9% BKZ vs 10.0% PBO, p<0.001; ADA: 45.7%; Figure 1). All ranked secondary endpoints met at Wk 16 (Table 1). As early as Wk 2, ACR20 was higher in BKZ vs PBO (27.1% vs 7.8%, nominal p<0.001; ADA: 33.6%). Outcomes continued to improve at Wk 24 (Table 1). To Wk 16, pts with ≥1 TEAE, BKZ: 59.9%; PBO: 49.5%; ADA: 59.3%. SAE rate low (1.6%; 1.1%; 1.4%). Most frequent (≥5%) AEs for all arms: nasopharyngitis (9.3%; 4.6%; 5.0%), URTI (4.9%; 6.4%; 2.1%), increased ALT (0.7%; 0.7%; 5.0%). Candida infections: 2.6%, 0.7%, 0%; no systemic candidiasis. 2 malignancies (BKZ: basal cell carcinoma; PBO: breast cancer stage 1); no MACE, uveitis, IBD or deaths.

Table 1.

Wk 16 and 24 efficacy

BLWk 16Wk 24PBO N=281BKZ 160 mg Q4W N=431ADA 40 mg Q2W N=140†PBO N=281BKZ 160 mg Q4W N=431ADA 40 mg Q2W N=140†p value (BKZ vs PBO)PBO→ BKZ 160 mg Q4WaN=281BKZ 160 mg Q4W N=431ADA 40 mg Q2W N=140†Ranked endpointsbACR50 [NRI],–––28189 (43.9)64<0.00110119666n (%)-10-45.7(35.9)(45.5)-47.1HAQ-DI CfB [MI],0.890.820.86−0.09 (0.03)−0.26 (0.02)−0.33<0.001c−0.28−0.30−0.34mean (SE)-0.04-0.03-0.05(0.04)(0.03)(0.02)(0.05)PASI90d [NRI],–––4133 (61.3)f28<0.00186 (61.4)e158 (72.8)f32n (%)(2.9)e(41.2)g(47.1)gSF-36 PCS CfB [MI],36.938.137.62.36.36.8<0.001c6.27.37.3mean (SE)-0.6-0.5-0.7-0.5-0.4-0.8-0.5-0.4-0.8MDA [NRI],51413719463<0.00110620967n (%)-1.8-3.2-0.7-13.2(45.0)-45(37.7)(48.5)-47.9vdHmTSS CfB (subgroup)h [MI], mean (SE)15.67 (1.80)i15.56 (1.69)j17.39 (2.89)k0.36 (0.10)i−0.01 (0.04)j−0.06 (0.08)k<0.001c–––vdHmTSS CfB [MI],mean (SE)13.31 (1.56)l13.44 (1.47)m14.55 (2.44)n0.31 (0.09)l0(0.04)m−0.03 (0.07)n0.001c–––Other endpointsACR20 [NRI],–––6726896<0.001o17528299n (%)-23.8(62.2)-68.6(62.3)(65.4)-70.7ACR70 [NRI],–––1210539<0.001o5312642n (%)-4.3(24.4)-27.9-18.9(29.2)-30PASI100d [NRI],–––3103f14<0.001o6012226n (%)(2.1)e(47.5)(20.6)g(42.9)e (56.2)f(38.2)gTJC CfB [MI],17.116.817.5−3.2−10.0−10.9<0.001o−9.4−11.5−11.8mean (SE)-0.7-0.6-1.1(0.7) (0.5)-1(0.7)(0.5)-0.9SJC CfB [MI],9.599.6−3.0 (0.5)−6.6 (0.3)−7.5<0.001o−6.8 (0.4)−7.2 (0.3)−7.9mean (SE)-0.4-0.3-0.6-0.6-0.6

Randomised set. Interim results.

†Reference arm; study not powered for statistical comparisons of ADA to BKZ or PBO.

aPBO→BKZ pts received PBO to Wk 16, switched to BKZ 160 mg Q4W through Wk 24 (8 wks BKZ);

bResolution of enthesitis/dactylitis in pts with LEI>0/LDI>0 at BL pooled with BE COMPLETE (Wk 16 LEI=0 BKZ: 124/249 [49.8%], PBO: 37/106 [34.9%], p=0.008; LDI=0 BKZ: 68/90 [75.6%], PBO: 24/47 [51.1%], p=0.002);

cContinuous outcome p values calculated with RBMI data;

dPts with PSO and ≥3% BSA at BL;

en=140;

fn=217;

gn=68;

hPts with hs-CRP ≥6 mg/L and/or bone erosion at BL;

in=221;

jn=357;

kn=108;

ln=261;

mn=416;

nn=131;

oNominal, not powered for multiplicity.

Conclusion

Dual inhibition of IL-17A and IL-17F with BKZ in bDMARD-naïve pts with active PsA resulted in rapid, clinically relevant improvements in musculoskeletal and skin outcomes vs PBO. No new safety signals observed.1,2

References

[1]Ritchlin CT Lancet 2020;395(10222):427–40; 2. Coates LC Ann Rheum Dis 2021;80:779–80(POS1022).

Disclosure of Interests

Iain McInnes Consultant of: AbbVie, BMS, Boehringer Ingelheim, Celgene, Eli Lilly, Janssen, Novartis, and UCB Pharma, Grant/research support from: BMS, Boehringer Ingelheim, Celgene, Janssen, UCB Pharma, Laura Coates Consultant of: AbbVie, Amgen, Boehringer Ingelheim, BMS, Celgene, Domain, Eli Lilly, Gilead, Galapagos, Janssen, Moonlake, Novartis, Pfizer, and UCB Pharma, Speakers bureau: AbbVie, Amgen, Biogen, Celgene, Eli Lilly, Galapagos, Gilead, GSK, Janssen, Medac, Novartis, Pfizer, and UCB Pharma, Grant/research support from: AbbVie, Amgen, Celgene, Eli Lilly, Gilead, Janssen, Novartis, Pfizer, and UCB Pharma, Robert B.M. Landewé Consultant of: Abbott, Ablynx, Amgen, AstraZeneca, BMS, Centocor, GSK, Novartis, Merck, Pfizer, Roche, Schering-Plough, UCB Pharma, and Wyeth, Speakers bureau: Abbott, Amgen, BMS, Centocor, Merck, Pfizer, Roche, Schering-Plough, UCB Pharma, and Wyeth, Grant/research support from: Abbott, Amgen, Centocor, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, Schering-Plough, UCB Pharma, and Wyeth, Philip J Mease Consultant of: AbbVie, Amgen, BMS, Boehringer Ingelheim, Eli Lilly, Galapagos, Gilead, GSK, Janssen, Novartis, Pfizer, Sun Pharma and UCB Pharma, Speakers bureau: AbbVie, Amgen, Eli Lilly, Janssen, Novartis, Pfizer and UCB Pharma, Grant/research support from: AbbVie, Amgen, BMS, Eli Lilly, Gilead, Janssen, Novartis, Pfizer, Sun Pharma and UCB Pharma, Christopher T. Ritchlin Consultant of: AbbVie, Amgen, Eli Lilly, Gilead, Janssen, Novartis, Pfizer and UCB Pharma, Grant/research support from: AbbVie, Amgen and UCB Pharma, Yoshiya Tanaka Consultant of: AbbVie, Ayumi, Daiichi-Sankyo, Eli Lilly, GSK, Sanofi, and Taisho, Speakers bureau: AbbVie, Amgen, Astellas, AstraZeneca, BMS, Boehringer-Ingelheim, Chugai, Eisai, Eli Lilly, Gilead, Mitsubishi-Tanabe, and YL Biologics, Grant/research support from: AbbVie, Asahi-Kasei, Boehringer-Ingelheim, Chugai, Corrona, Daiichi-Sankyo, Eisai, Kowa, Mitsubishi-Tanabe, and Takeda, Akihiko Asahina Grant/research support from: AbbVie, Amgen, Eisai, Eli Lilly, Janssen, Kyowa Kirin, LEO Pharma, Maruho, Mitsubishi Tanabe Pharma, Pfizer, Sun Pharma, Taiho Pharma, Torii Pharmaceutical, and UCB Pharma, Laure Gossec Consultant of: AbbVie, Amgen, BMS, Celltrion, Galapagos, Gilead, GSK, Janssen, Lilly, Novartis, Pfizer and UCB Pharma, Grant/research support from: Amgen, Galapagos, Lilly, Pfizer, Sandoz and UCB Pharma, Alice B Gottlieb Consultant of: Amgen, AnaptsysBio, Avotres Therapeutics, Boehringer Ingelheim, BMS, Dermavant, Eli Lilly, Incyte, Janssen, Novartis, Pfizer, Sanofi, Sun Pharma, UCB Pharma, and XBiotech, Grant/research support from: Boehringer Ingelheim, Janssen, Novartis, Sun Pharma, UCB Pharma, and XBiotech: all funds go to Mount Sinai Medical School, Richard B. Warren Consultant of: AbbVie, Almirall, Amgen, Arena, Astellas, Avillion, Biogen, BMS, Boehringer Ingelheim, Celgene, Eli Lilly, GSK, Janssen, LEO Pharma, Novartis, Pfizer, Sanofi, and UCB Pharma, Paid instructor for: Astellas, DiCE, GSK, and Union, Grant/research support from: AbbVie, Almirall, Janssen, LEO Pharma, Novartis, and UCB Pharma, Barbara Ink Shareholder of: GSK, UCB Pharma, Employee of: UCB Pharma, Deepak Assudani Shareholder of: UCB Pharma, Employee of: UCB Pharma, Jason Coarse Shareholder of: UCB Pharma, Employee of: UCB Pharma, Rajan Bajracharya Shareholder of: UCB Pharma, Employee of: UCB Pharma, Joseph F. Merola Consultant of: AbbVie, Amgen, Biogen, BMS, Dermavant, Eli Lilly, Janssen, Leo Pharma, Novartis, Pfizer, Regeneron, Sanofi, Sun Pharma, and UCB Pharma, Paid instructor for: Amgen, Abbvie, Biogen, BMS, Dermavant, Eli Lilly, Janssen, Leo Pharma, Novartis, Pfizer, Regeneron, Sanofi, Sun Pharma, and UCB Pharma

POS0082 A NOVEL PSORIATIC ARTHRITIS COMPOSITE ENDPOINT COMBINING TREATMENT TARGETS FOR SKIN AND JOINTS: POOLED RESULTS FROM THE GUSELKUMAB DISCOVER-1 AND DISCOVER-2 STUDIES

Background

Psoriatic arthritis (PsA) is characterized by a range of musculoskeletal and extra-articular disease manifestations. Composite indices are valuable tools to assess the multidimensional nature of PsA. The Psoriatic Arthritis Disease Activity Score (PASDAS)1 provides robust assessment of both joint and skin domains but is cumbersome to use in clinical practice. The Disease Activity Index for Psoriatic Arthritis (DAPSA)2 is relatively easy to use but does not assess skin disease.

Objectives

Using pooled data from the phase 3 DISCOVER-1 and DISCOVER-2 studies of guselkumab (GUS) for the treatment of active PsA:3,4 (1) Describe the rate of achievement of a new composite endpoint combining DAPSA low disease activity (LDA; score ≤14, including remission) and Investigator Global Assessment (IGA) of psoriasis score ≤1 (range=0 [clear] to 4 [severe]); (2) Determine whether earlier (Week [W] 16) DAPSA LDA + IGA ≤1 is predictive of future achievement of minimal disease activity (MDA) or American College of Rheumatology (ACR) 50 response criteria; and (3) Contrast the performance of DAPSA LDA + IGA ≤1 with that of PASDAS LDA (score ≤3.2).

Methods

Patients (pts) with active PsA despite standard therapies (DISCOVER-1: ≥3 swollen + ≥3 tender joints; CRP ≥0.3 mg/dL; ~30% had prior use of up to 2 TNF inhibitors; DISCOVER-2: ≥5 swollen + ≥5 tender joints; CRP ≥0.6 mg/dL; all pts were biologic-naïve) were randomized 1:1:1 to GUS 100 mg at W0, W4, then Q4W or Q8W; or placebo (PBO) with crossover to GUS Q4W at W24. In both studies, efficacy of GUS vs PBO was compared at W24 (primary endpoint). The number (%) of pts with DAPSA LDA + IGA ≤1 was determined at W24 for pts randomized to GUS or PBO. For all GUS-randomized pts, baseline variables associated with DAPSA LDA + IGA ≤1 and PASDAS LDA at W16 and the predictive value of W16 DAPSA LDA + IGA ≤1 or PASDAS LDA for achieving ACR50, MDA, and DAPSA LDA at W52 were assessed using logistic regression models.

Results

At W24, DAPSA LDA + IGA ≤1 was met by 37% (277/748) of GUS-treated pts vs 13% (48/372) in the PBO group. At W16, 27% (203/748) of GUS-randomized pts had DAPSA LDA + IGA ≤1, and 22% (164/748) had PASDAS LDA. Among the 73% (545/748) of pts who did not have DAPSA LDA + IGA ≤1 at W16, most (77% [418/545]) had IGA ≤1 but not DAPSA LDA; 4% (23/545) had DAPSA LDA but not IGA ≤1, and 19% (104/545) had neither component. Baseline predictors of DAPSA LDA + IGA ≤1 at W16 were male gender, lower dactylitis score, lower Health Assessment Questionnaire-Disability Index (HAQ-DI) score, lower tender joint count (TJC), and higher Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI) score. Baseline predictors of PASDAS LDA at W16 were younger age, lower dactylitis score, lower HAQ-DI score, lower TJC, and higher PASI score. As shown (Figure 1), pts who had DAPSA LDA + IGA ≤1 and PASDAS LDA at W16 were significantly more likely to achieve ACR50, MDA, and DAPSA LDA at W52 than pts without W16 responses; odds ratios (ORs) for achievement of ACR50, MDA, and DAPSA LDA responses at W52 were similar for pts who had DAPSA LDA + IGA ≤1 and for pts who had PASDAS LDA at W16. ORs for achievement of ACR50 and MDA at W52 were higher for pts who had both DAPSA LDA and IGA ≤1 at W16 (9.5 and 10.7) than for pts who had DAPSA LDA but not IGA ≤1 (6.5 and 3.5) or IGA ≤1 but not DAPSA LDA (1.6 and 1.5).

Conclusion

DAPSA LDA at W16 predicted future (W52) achievement of the stringent treatment targets of ACR50 and MDA; associations with W52 response were greater when W16 IGA ≤1 was added to DAPSA LDA. DAPSA LDA + IGA ≤1 at W16 as a predictor of W52 ACR50 and MDA response performed similarly to PASDAS LDA. The novel composite of DAPSA LDA + IGA ≤1 may be a reliable predictor of long-term PsA skin and joint response that is more practical to implement than the PASDAS.

References

[1]Helliwell PS et al. Ann Rheum Dis. 2013;72:986-91.

[2]Schoels M et al. Ann Rheum Dis 2010;69:1441-47.

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

[4]Mease PJ et al. Lancet 2020;395:1126-36.

Disclosure of Interests

Wolf-Henning Boehncke Speakers bureau: AbbVie, Almirall, Janssen, Leo, Lilly, Novartis, and UCB, Consultant of: AbbVie, Almirall, Janssen, Leo, Lilly, Novartis, and UCB, Alice B Gottlieb Consultant of: AnaptsysBio, Avotres Therapeutics, Beiersdorf, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol-Myers Squibb Co., Incyte, GSK, Janssen, LEO Pharma, Eli Lilly, Novartis, Pfizer, Sun Pharmaceutical Industries, Inc., UCB, and Dermavant, Grant/research support from: Boehringer Ingelheim, Incyte, Janssen, Novartis, UCB, Xbiotech, and Sun Pharma, Enrique Soriano Speakers bureau: AbbVie, Amgen, Bristol Myers Squibb, Eli Lilly, Janssen, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, and UCB, Consultant of: AbbVie, Janssen, Novartis, and Roche, Grant/research support from: AbbVie, Janssen, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, and UCB, Alexis Ogdie Consultant of: Abbvie, Amgen, BMS, Celgene, CorEvitas, Gilead, Happify Health, Janssen, Lilly, Novartis, Pfizer, and UCB, Grant/research support from: Abbvie, Pfizer and Novartis and to Forward from Amgen, Olga Ziouzina Consultant of: AbbVie, Amgen, Janssen, Novartis, Eli Lilly, Pfizer, UCB, Celltrion, and Fresenius-Kabi, Emmanouil Rampakakis Consultant of: Janssen, Employee of: JSS Medical Research, Xie L Xu Shareholder of: Johnson & Johnson, Employee of: Janssen Research & Development, LLC, Soumya D Chakravarty Shareholder of: Johnson & Johnson, Employee of: Janssen Scientific Affairs, LLC, May Shawi Shareholder of: Johnson & Johnson, Employee of: Janssen Pharmaceutical Companies of Johnson & Johnson, Marilise Marrache Shareholder of: Johnson & Johnson, Employee of: Janssen Inc, Alexa Kollmeier Shareholder of: Johnson & Johnson, Employee of: Janssen Research & Development, LLC, Atul Deodhar Speakers bureau: AbbVie, Eli Lilly, Janssen, Novartis, Pfizer, and UCB, Consultant of: AbbVie, Amgen, Aurinia, Bristol Myers Squibb, Celgene, Eli Lilly, GlaxoSmithKline, Janssen, MoonLake, Novartis, Pfizer, and UCB, Grant/research support from: AbbVie, Eli Lilly, GlaxoSmithKline, Novartis, Pfizer, and UCB

POS1077 LARGE JOINT INVOLVEMENT AND SUBSTANTIAL DISEASE BURDEN IN PATIENTS WITH OLIGOARTICULAR AND POLYARTICULAR PSORIATIC ARTHRITIS IN THE MULTINATIONAL UPLIFT SURVEY

Background

Patients (pts) with oligoarticular psoriatic arthritis (PsA) report quality-of-life impairment similar to polyarticular PsA pts despite less joint involvement. In the 2020 Understanding Psoriatic Disease Leveraging Insights for Treatment (UPLIFT) survey, we evaluated other aspects of disease burden in pts with oligoarticular (≤4 joints) and polyarticular (>4 joints) PsA.

Objectives

To explore joint involvement distribution and relative disease burden in pts with self-reported healthcare provider (HCP)–diagnosed PsA who self-identified with oligoarticular vs polyarticular joint involvement.

Methods

UPLIFT was a multinational Web-based survey in adults who reported an HCP diagnosis of PsA and/or psoriasis. This analysis evaluated demographics, disease characteristics, joint distribution, and quality-of-life measures in pts with PsA with or without psoriasis with self-identified oligoarticular vs polyarticular joint involvement. Small joint classification includes foot/toes, hands/fingers, and thumbs; intermediate joints includes wrists, elbows, and ankles; and large joints includes shoulders, hips, and knees.

Results

Of the 1256 pts with PsA completing the survey, 44% had oligoarticular PsA and 56% polyarticular PsA. The polyarticular PsA group had higher mean age, fewer males, and more pts with body mass index ≥25 kg/m2 (Table 1). Prevalence of depression, hypertension, and diabetes was generally similar between groups (Table 1). In pts with oligoarticular and polyarticular PsA, respectively, involvement of large joints was most prevalent (63%, 91%), followed by intermediate (46%, 87%) and small (20%, 76%) joints. Axial involvement was less prevalent in pts with oligoarticular (30%) vs polyarticular (67%) PsA. Common areas of joint involvement were the knees, elbows, and shoulders for oligoarticular PsA pts and the knees, hands, and elbows for polyarticular PsA pts (Figure 1). Involvement in the hands, wrists, thumbs, feet, and ankles was proportionately greater in polyarticular pts vs oligoarticular pts. Dactylitis, enthesitis, and nail disease, respectively, were each present in approximately one third of oligoarticular PsA pts and more than half of polyarticular PsA pts. Mean Patient Assessment of PsA Severity, Health Assessment Questionnaire (HAQ)-8, and Psoriatic Arthritis Impact of Disease 12-item (PSAID-12) scores indicated similar disease burden between the two groups (Table 1). In both groups, >70% reported an unacceptable PsA symptom state (PSAID >4), and >60% had Patient Health Questionnaire 2-item (PHQ-2) score ≥3, consistent with positive screening for depression (Table 1).

Table 1.

Demographics and Patient Characteristics

Oligoarticular PsA (n=550)Polyarticular PsA (n=706)Age, mean (SD), y39.5 (15.23)45.6 (14.89)Male sex, n (%)327 (60)347 (49)Body mass index ≥25 kg/m2 (overweight/obese), n (%)164 (30)292 (41)PsA duration, mean (SD), y11.1 (10.44)13.8 (11.40)PsA treatment use, n (%)*Prior oral prescription231 (44)217 (31)Prior injectable/intravenous177 (34)169 (24)Current oral prescription185 (35)364 (53)Current injectable/ intravenous154 (29)246 (36)Comorbidities, n (%)Hypertension230 (42)302 (43)Depression214 (39)291 (41)Diabetes201 (37)236 (33)Skin or non-skin cancer200 (36)168 (24)Heart disease149 (27)123 (17)Inflammatory bowel disease156 (28)142 (20)Liver disease149 (27)98 (14)Patient Assessment of PsA Severity, mean, (SD)5.0 (2.92)5.7 (2.53)HAQ-8, mean, (SD)0.9 (0.65)0.8 (0.64)PSAID-12, mean, (SD)5.3 (2.54)5.6 (2.42)PSAID >4, n (%)389 (71)533 (76)PHQ-2 ≥3, n (%)383 (70)452 (64)

*n=525 with oligoarticular PsA; n=691 with polyarticular PsA.

Conclusion

In the UPLIFT survey, almost half of pts with PsA self-identified with oligoarticular PsA. Both oligoarticular and polyarticular PsA groups experienced similar levels of disease burden, including a high prevalence of an unacceptable PsA symptom state and a PHQ-2 score ≥3, indicative of a positive screen for depression.

Acknowledgements

The authors gratefully acknowledge Hsiuan Lin Wu for data analysis. This study was funded by Amgen Inc. Writing support was funded by Amgen Inc. and provided by Kristin Carlin, BSPharm, MBA, of Peloton Advantage, LLC, an OPEN Health company, and Cathryn M. Carter, MS, employee of and stockholder in Amgen Inc.

Disclosure of Interests

William Tillett Speakers bureau: AbbVie, Amgen Inc., Celgene, Eli Lilly, Janssen, Novartis, Pfizer, and UCB, Consultant of: AbbVie, Amgen Inc., Celgene, Eli Lilly, Merck Sharp & Dohme, Novartis, Pfizer, and UCB, Grant/research support from: AbbVie, Celgene, Eli Lilly, and Janssen, Alexis Ogdie Consultant of: AbbVie, Amgen Inc., Bristol Myers Squibb, Celgene, CorEvitas’ Psoriatic Arthritis/Spondyloarthritis Registry (formerly Corrona), Eli Lilly, Gilead, Janssen, Novartis, Pfizer, and UCB, Grant/research support from: AbbVie, Amgen Inc., Novartis, and Pfizer, Pascal Richette Speakers bureau: AbbVie, Amgen Inc., Bristol Myers Squibb, Janssen, Lilly, Novartis, Pfizer, and UCB, Alice B Gottlieb Consultant of: Anaptyps Bio, Avotres Therapeutics, Beiersdorf, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Janssen, LEO Pharma, Eli Lilly, Novartis, Sun, UCB, and Xbiotech, Grant/research support from: Boehringer Ingelheim, Janssen, Novartis, Sun, UCB, and Xbiotech, Shauna Jardon Shareholder of: Stock ownership in Amgen Inc, Employee of: Employee of Amgen Inc, Sven Richter Shareholder of: Stock ownership in Amgen at time of study, Employee of: Employment by Amgen at time of study, Andrea Flower Employee of: Employment by ProUnlimited, under contract for Amgen Inc., Joseph Merola Consultant of: AbbVie, Arena, Avotres, Biogen, Bristol Myers Squibb, Dermavant, Eli Lilly, EMD, Janssen, LEO Pharma, Merck, Novartis, Pfizer, Regeneron, Sanofi, Serono, Sun, and UCB

POS1031 EARLIER CLINICAL RESPONSE PREDICT LOW RATES OF RADIOGRAPHIC PROGRESSION IN BIO-NAIVE ACTIVE PSORIATIC ARTHRITIS PATIENTS RECEIVING GUSELKUMAB TREATMENT

Background

Guselkumab (GUS), an IL-23p19-subunit inhibitor, demonstrated efficacy and a favorable safety profile in patients (pts) with psoriasis (PsO) and psoriatic arthritis (PsA). In the Phase 3, double-blind, placebo (PBO)-controlled DISCOVER-2 study, GUS 100 mg every 4 or 8 weeks (Q4W or Q8W) significantly improved joint and skin symptoms; GUS-treated pts had smaller mean changes in radiographic progression vs. PBO at W24.1 Low rates of radiographic progression were observed through 2 years among GUS-treated pts, regardless of dosing regimen.2,3

Objectives

Determine whether earlier clinical improvement predicts long-term radiographic progression through 2 years in DISCOVER-2.

Methods

DISCOVER-2 included biologic-naïve pts with active PsA (≥5 swollen and ≥5 tender joint counts [SJC/TJC]; CRP ≥0.6 mg/dL) randomized (1:1:1) to GUS 100 mg Q4W; GUS 100 mg at W0, W4, then Q8W; or PBO with crossover to GUS 100 mg Q4W (PBO→Q4W) at W24. For pts randomized to GUS Q4W or Q8W, predictive models (mixed linear) were developed post-hoc to assess the associations of earlier (at W16) improvement in disease activity (DAPSA remission, DAPSA Improvement, DAPSA Improvement more than the median of 20.7 [>20.7]) or skin improvement (PASI90, PASI≤1) with changes in total PsA modified van der Heijde-Sharp [vdH-S] score through W100, after adjusting for known baseline (BL) determinants of radiographic progression (vdH-S score, age, gender, and CRP).

Results

PsA duration, CRP, and SJC at BL weakly correlated with BL vdH-S score. No correlation was seen between BL PASI and BL vdH-S score (Table 1). Greater improvement in DAPSA score (β [95%CI]: -0.03 [-0.04, -0.01]) and improvement >20.7 in DAPSA from BL to W16 was associated with significantly less radiographic progression through W100 after adjusting for BL DAPSA score, vdH-S score, age, gender, and CRP level. Achievement of PASI90, PASI≤1, and DAPSA remission at W16 was associated with numerically less radiographic progression through W100 after adjusting for BL PASI, vdH-S score, age, gender, and CRP (Figure).

Table 1.

Correlation of Select BL Disease Characteristics with BL vdH-S Score Among GUS Randomized Pts

BL DeterminantsSpearman’s correlation coefficientp-valueAge0.27335<.0001CRP0.28181<.0001PASI Score0.030780.5153PsA Duration0.37070<.0001PsO Duration0.20509<.0001SJC (66)0.26321<.0001

Conclusion

In GUS-treated biologic-naïve pts with active PsA, following adjustment for known BL determinants of radiographic progression, earlier (W16) DAPSA improvement was a significant predictor of less radiographic progression through W100; DAPSA remission and skin improvement at W16 each showed a numerical trend toward less radiographic progression through W100.

References

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

[2]McInnes IB, et al. Arthritis Rheumatol. 2021;73:604-16.

[3]McInnes IB, et al. Arthritis Rheumatol. 2021 Nov 1. doi: 10.1002/art.42010. Online ahead of print.

Disclosure of Interests

Philip J Mease Speakers bureau: AbbVie, Amgen, Eli Lilly, Janssen, Novartis, Pfizer, Sun Pharma, and UCB, Consultant of: AbbVie, Aclaris, Amgen, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol Myers Squibb, Eli Lilly, Galapagos, Gilead, GlaxoSmithKline, Inmagene, Janssen, Novartis, Pfizer, Sun Pharma, and UCB, Grant/research support from: AbbVie, Amgen, Bristol Myers Squibb, Eli Lilly, Galapagos, Gilead, Janssen, Novartis, Pfizer, Sun Pharma, and UCB, Alice B Gottlieb Speakers bureau: AnaptsysBio, Avotres Therapeutics, Beiersdorf, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Incyte, GSK, Janssen, LEO Pharma, Eli Lilly, Novartis, Pfizer, Sun Pharmaceutical Industries, Inc., UCB, and Dermavant, Consultant of: AnaptsysBio, Avotres Therapeutics, Beiersdorf, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Incyte, GSK, Janssen, LEO Pharma, Eli Lilly, Novartis, Pfizer, Sun Pharmaceutical Industries, Inc., UCB, and Dermavant, Grant/research support from: Boehringer Ingelheim, Incyte, Janssen, Novartis, UCB, Xbiotech, and Sun Pharma, Alexis Ogdie Consultant of: Abbvie, Amgen, BMS, Celgene, CorEvitas, Gilead, Happify Health, Janssen, Lilly, Novartis, Pfizer, and UCB, Grant/research support from: University of Pennsylvania from Abbvie, Pfizer and Novartis and to Forward from Amgen, Iain McInnes Shareholder of: Causeway Therapeutics, and Evelo Compugen, Consultant of: Astra Zeneca, AbbVie, Amgen, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Eli Lilly, Cabaletta, Compugen, GSK, Gilead, Janssen, Novartis, Pfizer, Sanofi, Roche, and UCB, Grant/research support from: Astra Zeneca, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Amgen, Eli Lilly, GSK, Janssen, Novartis, Roche, and UCB, Soumya D Chakravarty Shareholder of: Johnson & Johnson, Employee of: Janssen Scientific Affairs, LLC and Drexel University College of Medicine, Emmanouil Rampakakis Consultant of: Janssen, Employee of: JSS Medical Research, Alexa Kollmeier Shareholder of: Johnson & Johnson, Employee of: Janssen Research & Development, LLC, Xie L Xu Shareholder of: Johnson & Johnson, Employee of: Janssen Research & Development, LLC, May Shawi Shareholder of: Johnson & Johnson, Employee of: Janssen Pharmaceutical Companies of Johnson & Johnson, Frederic Lavie Shareholder of: Johnson & Johnson, Employee of: Janssen Cilag Global Medial Affairs, Mitsumasa Kishimoto Speakers bureau: AbbVie, Amgen-Astellas BioPharma, Asahi-Kasei Pharma, Astellas, Ayumi Pharma, BMS, Chugai, Daiichi-Sankyo, Eisai, Eli Lilly, Gilead, Janssen, Kyowa Kirin, Novartis, Pfizer, Tanabe-Mitsubishi, Teijin Pharma, and UCB, Consultant of: AbbVie, Amgen-Astellas BioPharma, Asahi-Kasei Pharma, Astellas, Ayumi Pharma, BMS, Chugai, Daiichi-Sankyo, Eisai, Eli Lilly, Gilead, Janssen, Kyowa Kirin, Novartis, Pfizer, Tanabe-Mitsubishi, Teijin Pharma, and UCB, Proton Rahman Speakers bureau: Janssen, Consultant of: AbbVie, Amgen, Bristol Myers Squibb, Celgene, Eli Lilly, Janssen, Merck, Novartis, Pfizer, and UCB, Grant/research support from: Janssen and Novartis

POS0309 ARE PATIENTS’ AND RHEUMATOLOGISTS’ PERCEPTIONS OF THE BURDEN AND TREATMENT OF PSORIATIC ARTHRITIS ALIGNED? RESULTS FROM THE UPLIFT SURVEY

Background

Alignment of patient and clinician goals and perceptions of psoriatic arthritis (PsA) burden and treatment are important to improving disease management.

Objectives

To describe patient and rheumatologist perceptions on factors contributing to PsA severity, treatment goals, and attributes of ideal therapy.

Methods

Understanding Psoriatic Disease Leveraging Insights for Treatment (UPLIFT) was a multinational Web-based survey that included adults who reported a healthcare provider (HCP) diagnosis of PsA and/or psoriasis, as well as rheumatologists and dermatologists. This analysis focused on survey responses from patients with PsA and rheumatologists. Respondents ranked their top 3 contributing factors for PsA severity, treatment goals, and ideal attributes for therapy. Results were analyzed using the sum of scores.

Results

In all, 1256 patients with PsA and 450 rheumatologists completed the respective surveys between March and June 2020. An oligoarticular (≤4 joints involved) pattern of involvement was prevalent in 43.8% of patients (Table 1). Involvement of large joints (78.8%) was most common, followed by intermediate (69.3%) and small (51.8%) joints. Only half of patients reported seeing an HCP for PsA in the last year (Table 1). Patients and rheumatologists agreed that joint pain is a top factor contributing to disease severity; patients also ranked the impact on quality of life and type of symptoms as top factors whereas rheumatologists placed greater importance on the number of joints involved and joint erosion or deformity (Figure 1). Top treatment goals for patients were reducing joint pain and stiffness and stopping the progression of joint damage or erosion (Figure 1). Rheumatologists agreed that inhibiting progression of joint damage or erosion and reducing joint pain were among the top treatment goals, and they rated disease remission or low disease activity (LDA) as the most important goal (Figure 1). Rheumatologists identified consistent treatment goals for patients regardless of degree of joint involvement (oligoarthritis vs polyarthritis). Patients and rheumatologists agreed that long-term safety and efficacy are key attributes of an ideal PsA therapy. The top attribute for patients was joint pain reduction, whereas achievement of remission or LDA was the top attribute identified by rheumatologists (Figure 1). Despite general alignment between patient and rheumatologist responses across metrics, 87.1% of patients reported they did not feel that their treatment goals matched those of their current HCP.

Table 1.CharacteristicUPLIFT Global PsA Patient Subgroup N=1256Age, mean (SD), years42.9 (15.3)Men, n (%)674 (53.7)Joint count, n (%)>4 joints (polyarthritis)706 (56.2)≤4 joints (oligoarthritis)550 (43.8)Seen an HCP in the past year, n (%)*626 (49.8)Type and location of practice, n (%)UPLIFT Rheumatologists N=450Single or solo specialty267 (59.3)Multi-specialty183 (40.7)Canada41 (9.1)France53 (11.8)Germany50 (11.1)Italy54 (12.0)Japan50 (11.1)Spain51 (11.3)United Kingdom50 (11.1)United States101 (22.4)

The N represents the total sample. The number of patients with data available may vary. *COVID-19 restrictions may have impacted a patient’s ability to have an HCP visit from March 2 to June 3.

Conclusion

In the UPLIFT survey, patients with PsA and their rheumatologists generally agreed on the top factors contributing to disease severity, treatment goals, and attributes of ideal PsA therapy. However, the majority of patients with PsA did not feel aligned with their current HCP regarding treatment goals. Development of methods for treatment goal discussion and alignment are important to improving patient outcomes.

Acknowledgements

The authors gratefully acknowledge Hsiuan Lin Wu for data analysis.

This study was funded by Amgen Inc. Writing support was funded by Amgen Inc. and provided by Kristin Carlin, BSPharm, MBA, of Peloton Advantage, LLC, an OPEN Health company, and Cathryn M. Carter, MS, employee of and stockholder in Amgen Inc.

Disclosure of Interests

Pascal Richette Speakers bureau: AbbVie, Amgen Inc., Bristol Myers Squibb, Janssen, Lilly, Novartis, Pfizer, and UCB – speaker bureau fees., William Tillett Speakers bureau: AbbVie, Amgen Inc., Celgene, Eli Lilly, Janssen, Novartis, Pfizer, and UCB – speaker bureau fees., Consultant of: AbbVie, Amgen Inc., Celgene, Eli Lilly, Merck Sharp & Dohme, Novartis, Pfizer, and UCB – consultant, Grant/research support from: AbbVie, Celgene, Eli Lilly, and Janssen – grant/research support, Alexis Ogdie Consultant of: AbbVie, Amgen Inc., Bristol Myers Squibb, Celgene, CorEvitas’ Psoriatic Arthritis/Spondyloarthritis Registry (formerly Corrona), Eli Lilly, Gilead, Janssen, Novartis, Pfizer, and UCB – consultant, Grant/research support from: AbbVie, Amgen Inc., Novartis, and Pfizer – grant/research support, Alice B Gottlieb Consultant of: AnaptysBio, Avotres, Beiersdorf, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol Myers Squibb, Janssen, LEO Pharma, Eli Lilly, Novartis, Sun, UCB, and Xbiotech – advisory board member and consultant, Grant/research support from: Boehringer Ingelheim, Janssen, Novartis, Sun, UCB, and Xbiotech – grant/research support, Shauna Jardon Shareholder of: Stock ownership in Amgen Inc., Employee of: Employment by Amgen Inc., Sven Richter Shareholder of: Stock ownership in Amgen Inc., Employee of: Employment by Amgen Inc., Andrea Flower Employee of: Employment by ProUnlimited, under contract for Amgen Inc., Joseph Merola Consultant of: AbbVie, Arena, Avotres, Biogen, Bristol Myers Squibb, Dermavant, Eli Lilly, EMD, Janssen, LEO Pharma, Merck, Novartis, Pfizer, Regeneron, Sanofi, Serono, Sun, and UCB – consultant and/or investigator.

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

Background

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

Objectives

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

Methods

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

Results

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

Table 1.

Overall Treatment-emergent AEs

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

MedDRA Version 23.1.

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

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

c Includes PBO to GUS cross-over at W24.

Conclusion

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

References

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

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

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

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

Disclosure of Interests

Proton Rahman Consultant of: AbbVie, Amgen, Bristol Myers Squibb, Celgene, Eli Lilly, Janssen, Merck, Novartis, Pfizer, and UCB, Grant/research support from: Janssen and Novartis, Wolf-Henning Boehncke Speakers bureau: AbbVie, Almirall, Janssen, Leo, Lilly, Novartis, and UCB, Consultant of: AbbVie, Almirall, Janssen, Leo, Lilly, Novartis, and UCB, Philip J Mease Speakers bureau: AbbVie, Amgen, Eli Lilly, Janssen, Novartis, Pfizer, Sun Pharma, and UCB, Consultant of: AbbVie, Aclaris, Amgen, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol Myers Squibb, Eli Lilly, Galapagos, Gilead, GlaxoSmithKline, Inmagene, Janssen, Novartis, Pfizer, Sun Pharma, and UCB, Grant/research support from: AbbVie, Amgen, Bristol Myers Squibb, Eli Lilly, Galapagos, Gilead, Janssen, Novartis, Pfizer, Sun Pharma, and UCB, Alice B Gottlieb Consultant of: AnaptsysBio, Avotres Therapeutics, Beiersdorf, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Incyte, GSK, Janssen, LEO Pharma, Eli Lilly, Novartis, Pfizer, Sun Pharmaceutical Industries, Inc., UCB, and Dermavant, Grant/research support from: Boehringer Ingelheim, Incyte, Janssen, Novartis, UCB, Xbiotech, and Sun Pharma, Iain McInnes Shareholder of: Causeway Therapeutics and Evelo Compugen, Consultant of: Astra Zeneca, AbbVie, Amgen, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Eli Lilly, Cabaletta, Compugen, GSK, Gilead, Janssen, Novartis, Pfizer, Sanofi, Roche, and UCB, Grant/research support from: Astra Zeneca, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Amgen, Eli Lilly, GSK, Janssen, Novartis, Roche, and UCB, Marlies Neuhold Shareholder of: Johnson & Johnson, Employee of: Janssen Scientific Affairs, LLC, May Shawi Shareholder of: Johnson & Johnson, Employee of: Janssen Pharmaceutical Companies of Johnson & Johnson, Yanli Wang Consultant of: Janssen, Employee of: IQVIA, Shihong Sheng Shareholder of: Johnson & Johnson, Employee of: Janssen Research & Development, LLC, Paul Bergmans Shareholder of: Johnson & Johnson, Employee of: Janssen Biostatistics, Alexa Kollmeier Shareholder of: Johnson & Johnson, Employee of: Janssen Research & Development, LLC, Elke Theander Employee of: Janssen Scientific Affairs, LLC, Jenny Yu Shareholder of: Johnson & Johnson, Employee of: Janssen Research & Development, LLC, Evan Leibowitz Shareholder of: Johnson & Johnson, Employee of: Janssen Scientific Affairs, LLC, Marilise Marrache Shareholder of: Johnson & Johnson, Employee of: Medical Affairs, Janssen Inc., Laura Coates Speakers bureau: AbbVie, Amgen, Biogen, Celgene, Eli Lilly, Galapagos, Gilead, Janssen, Medac, Novartis, Pfizer and UCB, Consultant of: AbbVie, Amgen, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol Myers Squibb, Celgene, Eli Lilly, Gilead, Galapagos, Janssen, Novartis, Pfizer, and UCB, Grant/research support from: AbbVie, Amgen, Celgene, Eli Lilly, Janssen, Novartis, Pfizer, and UCB

POS1027 EFFICACY AND SAFETY OF GUSELKUMAB, A MONOCLONAL ANTIBODY SPECIFIC TO THE p19-SUBUNIT OF INTERLEUKIN-23, THROUGH 2 YEARS: RESULTS FROM A PHASE 3, RANDOMIZED, DOUBLE-BLIND, PLACEBO-CONTROLLED STUDY CONDUCTED IN BIOLOGIC-NAÏVE PATIENTS WITH ACTIVE PSORIATIC ARTHRITIS

Background:

Guselkumab (GUS), a selective IL-23 inhibitor dosed every 4 or 8 weeks (Q4W or Q8W), demonstrated efficacy for joint and skin symptoms, inhibition of structural damage progression (Q4W), and safety vs. placebo (PBO) through Week 24 (W24) of the Ph3, double-blind, PBO-controlled trial in biologic-naïve pts with PsA (DISCOVER-2).1 Favorable benefit-risk was also seen through 1 year.2

Objectives:

To assess GUS efficacy and safety through 2 years.

Methods:

Biologic-naïve adults with active PsA (≥5 swollen joint count [SJC] + ≥5 tender joint count [TJC]; CRP ≥0.6 mg/dL) were randomized (1:1:1) to GUS 100 mg Q4W; GUS 100 mg at W0, W4, Q8W; or PBO with crossover to GUS 100 mg Q4W (PBO→Q4W) at W24. Clinical efficacy (ACR/PASI/IGA/HAQ-DI) was assessed in the modified intention to treat (mITT) population through W100 with missing data imputation (nonresponse for categorical endpoints; no change/multiple imputation for continuous endpoints). Observed PsA-modified van der Heijde Sharp (vdH-S) scores derived from blinded radiographic images collected at W0, W24, W52, W100 (or at discontinuation [d/c]) and adverse events (AEs) through W112 were collected.

Results:

712/739 (96%) randomized pts continued study agent at W24; 687/739 (93%) continued at W52; 652/739 (88%) completed W100. ACR20 response rates in the mITT population continued to increase after W24, and at W100 were 76% for Q4W and 74% for Q8W (Figure 1). Similar response patterns were seen for ACR50/70, HAQ-DI and PASI90/100 (Table 1), and IGA0/1 and PASI75 response rates were consistent through W100 in pts randomized to Q4W and Q8W; W100 data for PBO→Q4W pts were consistent with pts treated with Q4W and Q8W (Table 1). GUS improvements in SF-36 PCS/MCS at W52 also persisted through W100 (data not shown). Low rates of radiographic progression (as measured by PsA-modified vdH-S scores) were observed during W52-100 for Q4W (n=227; 0.75) and Q8W (n=232; 0.46). In the PBO→Q4W group (n=228), radiographic progression was 1.12 during W0-24 (while on PBO), 0.51 during W24-100 (while on Q4W), and 0.13 during W52-100. Through W112, the incidences of AEs, serious AEs (SAEs), AEs leading to d/c, infections, serious infections, and injection site reactions were generally consistent with the PBO-controlled period and through 1 year. Of the pts in the Q4W (n=245), Q8W (n=248), and PBO→Q4W (n=238) groups, 9%, 9% and 7% had ≥1 SAE; 2%, 3% and 3% had ≥1 serious infection; 2 Q8W pts (fungal esophagitis, disseminated herpes zoster) and 1 PBO→Q4W pt (listeria meningitis) had opportunistic infections; 1 PBO→Q4W pt died (road traffic accident); 1 PBO-randomized pt had IBD; no pt had anaphylactic or serum sickness reaction, or active TB.

Conclusion:

In biologic-naïve PsA pts, GUS improvements in joint and skin symptoms, physical function, and low rates of radiographic progression persisted through 2 years. GUS safety in PsA through 2 years was comparable with safety at 6 months and 1 year, similar between Q4W and Q8W, and consistent with GUS safety in psoriasis.

References:

[1]Mease PJ. Lancet. 2020 Apr 4;395(10230):1126-1136. [2] McInnes IB. Arthritis Rheumatol. 2020 Oct 11. doi: 10.1002/art.41553.

Table 1.

Efficacy Through W100 (NRI)

Data are %GUS Q4WGUS Q8WPBO→GUS Q4WW24W52W100W24W52W100W24W52W100Analysis set, n245248246 ACR 50334656324855144148 ACR 7013263519283641830BL HAQ-DI ≥0.35, n228228236Improvement ≥0.35a565963505864314856BL ≥3% BSA psoriasis + IGA ≥2, n184176183 IGA0/1696362715855196367 PASI75788783798682238380PASI90617774697470107277PASI10045585945535335261

BL, Baseline; BSA, Body surface area; HAQ-DI, Health assessment questionnaire disability index; IGA, Investigator global assessment; NRI, nonresponder imputation; PASI, Psoriasis area and severity index. a≥0.35 improvement among pts with HAQ-DI ≥0.35 at BL.

Disclosure of Interests:

Iain McInnes Consultant of: AbbVie, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Celgene, Eli Lilly and Company, Gilead, Janssen, Novartis, Pfizer, and UCB, Grant/research support from: Bristol-Myers Squibb, Celgene, Eli Lilly and Company, Janssen, and UCB, Proton Rahman Speakers bureau: AbbVie, Eli Lilly, Janssen, Novartis, Pfizer, and UCB, Consultant of: AbbVie, Amgen, Bristol Myers Squibb, Celgene, Eli Lilly, Janssen, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, and UCB, Grant/research support from: Janssen and Novartis, Alice B Gottlieb Consultant of: Avotres Therapeutics, Beiersdorf, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol-Myers Squibb Co, Incyte, Janssen, LEO Pharma, Eli Lilly, Novartis, Sun Pharmaceutical Industries Inc, UCB, and Xbiotech, Grant/research support from: Boehringer Ingelheim, Incyte, Janssen, Novartis, Sun Pharmaceuticals Industries Inc, UCB, and Xbiotech, Elizabeth C Hsia Shareholder of: Johnson & Johnson, Employee of: Janssen Research and Development, LLC, Alexa Kollmeier Shareholder of: Johnson & Johnson, Employee of: Janssen Research & Development, LLC, Xie L Xu Shareholder of: Johnson & Johnson, Employee of: Janssen Research & Development, LLC, Shihong Sheng Shareholder of: Johnson & Johnson, Employee of: Janssen Research & Development, LLC, Yusang Jiang Employee of: Cytel, Inc. providing statistical support (funded by Janssen), May Shawi Shareholder of: Johnson & Johnson, Employee of: Janssen Scientific Affairs, LLC, Soumya D Chakravarty Shareholder of: Johnson & Johnson, Employee of: Janssen Scientific Affairs, LLC, Désirée van der Heijde Paid instructor for: Director of Imaging and Rheumatology BV, Consultant of: AbbVie, Amgen, Astellas, AstraZeneca, Bayer, BMS, Boehringer Ingelheim, Celgene, Cyxone, Daiichi, Eisai, Eli Lilly, Galapagos, Gilead, GlaxoSmithKline, Janssen, Merck, Novartis, Pfizer, Regeneron, Roche, Sanofi, Takeda, and UCB, Philip J Mease Speakers bureau: Boehringer Ingelheim and GlaxoSmithKline, Grant/research support from: AbbVie, Amgen, Bristol Myers Squibb, Eli Lilly, Galapagos, Gilead, Janssen, Novartis, Pfizer, SUN, and UCB.

AB0528 COMPARABLE SAFETY PROFILE OF GUSELKUMAB IN PSORIATIC ARTHRITIS AND PSORIASIS: RESULTS FROM PHASE 3 TRIALS THROUGH 1 YEAR

Background:

DISCOVER 1&2 (PsA) and VOYAGE 1&2 (PsO) are Phase 3 trials of guselkumab (GUS).

Objectives:

Compare safety results through up to 1yr of GUS in PsA and PsO pts.

Methods:

In DISCOVER, 1120 pts with active PsA despite standard therapy were treated. Most pts were biologic-naïve; ~30% in DISCOVER 1 had previous exposure to 1-2 TNFi. Concomitant MTX (57%), oral corticosteroids (17%), and NSAIDs (64%) were permitted. Pts were randomized to SC GUS 100mg at W0, W4, then Q8W; GUS 100mg Q4W; or PBO. At W24, PBO patients were switched to GUS 100mg Q4W. In VOYAGE, in which concomitant MTX use was prohibited, 1245 pts with moderate to severe PsO were treated and randomized to SC GUS 100 mg at W0, W4, W12, then Q8W; or PBO at W0, W4, W12, with crossover to GUS at W16, W20, then Q8W. AEs and laboratory parameters, analyzed by National Cancer Institute-Common Terminology Criteria for AEs [NCI-CTCAE] toxicity grades, were summarized through the PBO-controlled periods and 1yr.

Results:

Safety profiles were generally consistent across the GUS PsO and PsA clinical programs (Table 1). Time-adjusted incidence rates for numbers of AEs, serious AEs, serious infections, malignancy, MACE and AEs leading to d/c were generally similar between PsO and PsA. No cases of anaphylaxis or opportunistic infections were reported. Proportions of pts with decreased neutrophil counts and elevations in hepatic transaminases were slightly higher in PsA vs PsO. These abnormalities were mostly of NCI-CTCAE Grade 1 or 2 (<LLN-1000/mm3 for neutrophils; <5.0 x ULN for AST/ ALT), generally transient, required no medical interventions, resolved spontaneously, and did not lead to interruption or d/c of treatment. Through 1yr, proportions of pts with ALT/AST elevations in PsA trials were slightly higher for GUS Q4W than Q8W and in pts with vs without baseline MTX use.

Conclusion:

The GUS safety profile was generally consistent in PsA and PsO GUS-treated pts through 1yr of the DISCOVER and VOYAGE trials.

Table 1.

Treatment-Emergent AEs During PBO-controlled Period and Through 1Yr: VOYAGE & DISCOVER Trials

Pooled VOYAGE 1&2Pooled DISCOVER 1&2Time PeriodW0-16Through 1YrW0-24bThrough 1Yr(N=)PBO(422)GUS Q8W(823)Combined GUSa(1221)PBOc(372)GUS Q8W(375)GUS Q4W (373)GUS Q8W(375)GUS Q4W (373)Combined GUS† (1100)Total pt-yrs of follow-up128255974173173172384385973Incidence/100 pt-yrs (95% CI)dAEs317 (287,349)330 (308,353)259 (249, 270)219 (198,243)256 (232,281)221 (200, 245)218 (203,233)177 (164,191)191 (182, 199)SAEs5 (2, 10)6 (4, 10)6 (5, 8)9 (5, 15)4 (2, 8)5 (2, 10)6 (4, 9)4 (2, 7)6 (4, 7)AEs leading to study agent d/c3 (0.9, 8)4 (2, 8)2 (2, 4)4 (2, 8)3 (1, 7)7 (4, 12)2 (1, 4)4 (2, 6)3 (2, 5)Infections86 (71, 104)98 (86, 111)98 (92, 104)58 (48, 71)58 (47, 71)63 (51, 76)58 (50, 66)53 (46, 61)55 (50, 60)Serious Infections0. 8 (0, 4)0.4 (0, 2)1 (0.5, 2)4 (2, 8)0.6 (0, 3)2 (0.4, 5)2 (0.6, 3)1 (0, 2)2 (0.9, 3)All Malignancy0 (0, 2)0.4 (0, 2)1 (0.4, 2)0.6 (0, 3)1 (0, 4)0 (0, 2)0.5 (0, 2)0 (0, 0. 8)0 (0, 1)MACE0 (0, 2)0.4 (0, 2)0.4 (0, 1)0.6 (0, 3)0 (0, 2)0.6 (0, 3)0 (0, 0.8)0.3 (0, 1.4)0.1 (0, 0.6)% pts with ≥1 injection site rxn3.14.55.00.31.31.11.62.41.7

aPlacebo crossover pts were included in the combined GUS column after crossover to GUS

bFor all pts who d/c study treatment early with the last dose of PBO/GUS prior to W24 and who did not receive any PBO/GUS at or after Wk24, all data including the final safety follow-up visit collected through 1yr were included

cFor pts in PBO group who switched to GUS due to cross-over or inadvertently, only data prior to first administration of GUS were included.

dCI based on an exact method assuming observed number of events follows a Poisson distribution

Disclosure of Interests:

Alice B Gottlieb Consultant of: Anaptyps Bio, Avotres Therapeutics, Beiersdorf, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol-Myers-Squibb, Eli Lilly, Janssen, LEO Pharma, Novartis, Sun Pharmaceuticals, UCB, and Xbiotech, Grant/research support from: Boehringer Ingelheim, Janssen, Novartis, Sun Pharmaceuticals, UCB, and Xbiotech, Joseph F. Merola Consultant of: AbbVie, Arena, Biogen, BMS, Dermavant, Eli Lilly, Janssen, Novartis, Pfizer, Sun Pharma, UCB, April Armstrong Consultant of: AbbVie, Janssen, Lilly, Leo, Novartis, UCB, Ortho Dermatologics, Dermira, KHK, Sanofi, Regeneron, Sun Pharma, BMS, Dermavant, and Modernizing Medicine, Richard Langley Speakers bureau: AbbVie, Amgen, Boehringer Ingelheim, Celgene, Eli Lilly, Janssen, LEO Pharma, Merck, Novartis, Pizer, Sun Pharmaceutical, and UCB Pharma, Consultant of: AbbVie, Amgen, Boehringer Ingelheim, Celgene, Eli Lilly, Janssen, LEO Pharma, Merck, Novartis, Pizer, Sun Pharmaceutical, and UCB Pharma, Mark Lebwohl Consultant of: Aditum Bio, Allergan, Almirall, Arcutis, Inc., Avotres Therapeutics, BirchBioMed Inc., BMD skincare, Boehringer-Ingelheim, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Cara Therapeutics, Castle Biosciences, Corrona, Dermavant Sciences, Evelo, Evommune, Facilitate International Dermatologic Education, Foundation for Research and Education in Dermatology, Inozyme Pharma, Kyowa Kirin, LEO Pharma, Meiji Seika Pharma, Menlo, Mitsubishi, Neuroderm, Pfizer, Promius/Dr. Reddy’s Laboratories, Serono, Theravance, and Verrica., Grant/research support from: Abbvie, Amgen, Arcutis, Boehringer Ingelheim, Dermavant, Eli Lilly, Evommune, Incyte, Janssen, Leo Pharmaceutucals, Ortho Dermatologics, Pfizer, and UCB, Christopher E.M. Griffiths Speakers bureau: AbbVie, Amgen, Almirall, BMS, Boehringer Ingelheim Celgene, Janssen, LEO Pharma, Lilly, Novartis, Pfizer, Sun Pharma, UCB Pharma., Consultant of: AbbVie, Amgen, Almirall, BMS, Boehringer Ingelheim Celgene, Janssen, LEO Pharma, Lilly, Novartis, Pfizer, Sun Pharma, UCB Pharma., Grant/research support from: AbbVie, Amgen, Almirall, BMS, Boehringer Ingelheim Celgene, Janssen, LEO Pharma, Lilly, Novartis, Pfizer, Sun Pharma, UCB Pharma., May Shawi Shareholder of: Johnson & Johnson, Employee of: Janssen Global Services, LLC, Ya-Wen Yang Shareholder of: Johnson & Johnson, Employee of: Janssen Global Services, LLC, Elizabeth C Hsia Shareholder of: Johnson & Johnson, Employee of: Janssen Research & Development, LLC, Alexa Kollmeier Shareholder of: Johnson & Johnson, Employee of: Janssen Research & Development, LLC, Xie L Xu Shareholder of: Johnson & Johnson, Employee of: Janssen Research & Development, LLC, Miwa Izutsu Shareholder of: Johnson & Johnson, Employee of: Janssen Research & Development, LLC, Paraneedharan Ramachandran Shareholder of: Johnson & Johnson, Employee of: Janssen Research & Development, LLC, Shihong Sheng Shareholder of: Johnson & Johnson, Employee of: Janssen Research & Development, LLC, Yin You Shareholder of: Johnson & Johnson, Employee of: Janssen Research & Development, LLC, Megan Miller Shareholder of: Johnson & Johnson, Employee of: Janssen Research & Development, LLC, Christopher T. Ritchlin Consultant of: AbbVie, Amgen, Gilead, Janssen, Lilly, Novartis, Pfizer, and UCB Pharma, Grant/research support from: AbbVie, Amgen, and UCB Pharma, Iain McInnes Consultant of: AbbVie, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Celgene, Eli Lilly and Company, Gilead, and Janssen, Novartis, Pfizer, and UCB, Grant/research support from: Bristol-Myers Squibb, Celgene, Eli Lilly and Company, Janssen, and UCB, Proton Rahman Speakers bureau: AbbVie, Eli Lilly, Janssen, Novartis, Pfizer, and UCB, Consultant of: AbbVie, Amgen, Bristol Myers Squibb, Celgene, Eli Lilly, Janssen, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, and UCB, Grant/research support from: Janssen and Novartis.

AB0544 EFFICACY AND SAFETY OF TILDRAKIZUMAB IN PATIENTS WITH AND WITHOUT METABOLIC SYNDROME: 5-YEAR POOLED DATA FROM reSURFACE 1 AND reSURFACE 2

Background:

Patients with psoriasis and metabolic syndrome (MetS) may have reduced absolute Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI) response and long-term drug survival. Tildrakizumab is approved for the treatment of moderate to severe plaque psoriasis in the US, EU, Australia, and Japan. Efficacy and safety of tildrakizumab were previously shown to be comparable in patients with vs without MetS after 1 and 3 years of treatment.1

Objectives:

This post hoc analysis of pooled data from reSURFACE 1 and reSURFACE 2 (NCT01722331/NCT01729754) assessed tildrakizumab efficacy and safety through up to 5 years of treatment in patients with psoriasis with and without MetS.

Methods:

reSURFACE 1 and 2 were 3-part, double-blind, randomized controlled phase 3 trials with long-term extensions evaluating tildrakizumab 100 or 200 mg monotherapy at Weeks 0, 4, and every 12 weeks thereafter in adults with moderate to severe plaque psoriasis.2 Patients who achieved ≥50% improvement from baseline PASI score (PASI 50 response) at both week 28 and at the end of the phase 3 studies could enter the long-term extension studies continuing the same dose of tildrakizumab.1 This post hoc analysis reports results from a pooled data analysis through up to 5 years of tildrakizumab exposure from patients with and without MetS by National Cholesterol Education Program-Adult Treatment Panel III criteria who continuously received the same dose of tildrakizumab throughout the base studies and entered the long-term extensions. Efficacy was assessed as change from baseline PASI score; missing data were handled using multiple imputation. Safety was assessed from exposure adjusted incidence rates of serious adverse events (SAEs) and treatment-emergent AEs of special interest.

Results:

Analyses included 70/265 patients with/without MetS receiving tildrakizumab 100 mg and 64/241 patients with/without MetS receiving tildrakizumab 200 mg. Median percentage change from baseline PASI score is shown in Figure 1. Among patients with/without MetS receiving tildrakizumab 100 mg, 78.6%/87.9% achieved PASI 75, 57.1%/63.8% achieved PASI 90, and 25.7%/32.5% achieved PASI 100 response at week 244; the PASI 75, PASI 90, and PASI 100 response rates at week 244 in patients with/without MetS receiving tildrakizumab 200 mg were 76.6%/85.1%, 46.9%/61.4%, and 26.6%/36.5%, respectively. Safety outcomes over the 5-year extension period were consistent with the known safety profile of tildrakizumab. Rates of SAEs were <8.5 per 100 patient-years among all patients, and there were no new safety signals in patients with vs without MetS (Table 1).

Table 1.

SAEs and TEAEs of special interest by MetS status through up to 5 years of tildrakizumab exposure

TIL 100 mgTIL 200 mgWithout MetSWithMetSWithout MetSWithMetSn = 265n = 70n = 241n = 64n (EAIR per 100 PY)1149.1 PY304.1 PY1057.1 PY287.6 PYSAEs53 (4.61)22 (7.23)52 (4.92)24 (8.35)TEAEs of special interest24 (2.09)6 (1.97)27 (2.55)15 (5.22)Infections and infestations10 (0.87)2 (0.66)13 (1.23)6 (2.09)Malignanciesa5 (0.44)1 (0.33)4 (0.38)3 (1.04)Nonmelanoma skin cancer3 (0.26)1 (0.33)6 (0.57)1 (0.35)Confirmed extended MACE3 (0.26)1 (0.33)3 (0.28)3 (1.04)Drug hypersensitivity2 (0.17)1 (0.33)1 (0.09)2 (0.70)Melanoma skin cancer2 (0.17)000Injection site reactionsb1 (0.09)000

Incidence rates reported as events per 100 PY.

aExcluding nonmelanoma and melanoma skin cancer.

bNot considered of special interest in the extension study.

AE, adverse event; EAIR, exposure adjusted incidence rate; MACE, major adverse cardiovascular events; MetS, metabolic syndrome; PY, patient-years; SAE, serious AE; TEAE, treatment-emergent AE; TIL, tildrakizumab.

Conclusion:

The efficacy and safety of tildrakizumab were maintained in patients with and without MetS following 5 years of treatment.

References:

[1]Lebwohl, M et al. JAAD. 2020;S0190-9622(20)32637-2.

[2]Reich K, et al. Lancet. 2017;390:276–88.

Disclosure of Interests:

Alice B Gottlieb Shareholder of: Xbiotech (only stock options, which she has not used)., Consultant of: Anaptyps Bio, Avotres Therapeutics; Beiersdorf; Boehringer Ingelheim; Bristol-Myers Squibb Co.; Eli Lilly; Janssen; LEO Pharma; Novartis; Sun Pharmaceutical Industries, Inc.; UCB; and Xbiotech, Grant/research support from: Boehringer Ingelheim; Janssen; Novartis; Sun Pharmaceutical Industries, Inc.; UCB; and Xbiotech., Nehal Mehta Grant/research support from: Grants to the NIH from AbbVie, Celgene, Janssen, and Novartis., Employee of: Full-time employee of the US government., Alan Menter Speakers bureau: AbbVie, Abbott Labs, Amgen, Anacor, Boehringer Ingelheim, Celgene, Eli Lilly, Janssen Biotech, LEO Pharma, Merck & Co., Novartis, Sienna, and UCB., Consultant of: AbbVie, Abbott Labs, Amgen, Anacor, Boehringer Ingelheim, Celgene, Eli Lilly, Janssen Biotech, LEO Pharma, Merck & Co., Novartis, Sienna, and UCB., Grant/research support from: AbbVie, Abbott Labs, Amgen, Anacor, Boehringer Ingelheim, Celgene, Eli Lilly, Janssen Biotech, LEO Pharma, Merck & Co., Novartis, Sienna, and UCB., Alan M Mendelsohn Shareholder of: Has individual shares in Johnson and Johnson, and as part of retirement account/mutual funds, Employee of: Sun Pharmaceutical Industries, Inc., Stephen Rozzo Employee of: Sun Pharmaceutical Industries, Inc., Mark Lebwohl Consultant of: Aditum Bio; Allergan; Almirall; Arcutis; Avotres Therapeutics; BirchBioMed, Inc.; BMD Skincare; Boehringer Ingelheim; Bristol-Myers Squibb; Cara Therapeutics; Castle Biosciences; Corrona; Dermavant Sciences; Evelo; Facilitate International Dermatologic Education; Foundation for Research and Education in Dermatology; Inozyme Pharma; Kyowa Kirin; LEO Pharma; Meiji Seika Pharma; Menlo; Mitsubishi; Neuroderm; Pfizer; Promius/Dr. Reddy’s Laboratories; Serono; Theravance; and Verrica., Grant/research support from: AbbVie; Amgen; Arcutis; Boehringer Ingelheim; Dermavant; Eli Lilly; Incyte; Janssen Research & Development, LLC; LEO Pharma; Ortho Dermatologics; Pfizer; and UCB.

AB0849 ONLINE EDUCATION YIELDS SIGNIFICANT GAINS IN RHEUMATOLOGISTS’ KNOWLEDGE OF PSORIATIC DISEASE

Background:

Physicians face challenges staying up-to-date with the latest research and accessing the ever-growing field of knowledge is time-consuming. Online education can make these clinician’s tasks more efficient and less time-consuming.

Objectives:

As part of a larger curriculum, we developed an online CME activity titled: “Optimizing Treatment in Patients With Moderate to Severe Psoriasis”. The goal of this study was to assess whether this online CME accredited video discussion improves physicians’ understanding of the prevalence and impact of the various manifestations of psoriatic disease, and how these might impact the choice of treatment in patients with psoriasis and/or psoriatic arthritis.

Methods:

Rheumatologists participated in an online CME activity (https://www.medscape.org/viewarticle/931595) consisting of a 30-minute video discussion between 2 experts with synchronized slides. Educational effect was assessed using a 4-question repeated pairs, pre-/post-assessment. A chi-square test determined if a statistically significant improvement (P <.05 significance level) existed in the number of correct responses from the pretest and posttest scores. Cramer’s V was used to estimate the level of impact of the education (Modest [.0]; Extensive [>.26]). The CME activity launched on Jul 6, 2020, and the data were collected through Aug 31, 2020.

Results:

A total of 54 rheumatologists completed the pre- and post activity assessments during the study period. Overall the activity had a signficiant impact (P =.0002) on rheumatologists’ knowledge and competence related to optimisation of treatment in psoriatic disease, with a Cramer’s V value of 0.210 indicating a considerable educational impact. The average percentage of correct responses rose from 67% pre-activity to 85% post-activity. A repeated pairs analysis showed that 21% of rheumatologists improved their knowledge and 64% reinforced their knowledge, respectively. The changes in percentage of correct responses from pre- to post-assessment for all questions are shown in Table 1. More than 60% of rheumatologists had a measurable improvement in confidence in their ability to identify patients with psoriatic disease who are candidates for first-line therapy with biologics.

Table 1.

Impact of education on rheumatologists’ knowledge of psoriatic disease

Question #Question topicAggregated dataLinked Learner ResultsaAverage % of correct responses Pre- vs. Post-educationP-value% ImprovedblearnersPre- vs. Post-education% Reinforcedc learnersPre- vs. Post-education1.Prevalence of the various manifestations of psoriatic disease46% vs 80%.000235%44%2.Clinical data with biologic therapies in psoriatic disease69% vs 78%NS17%61%3.Competence related to identification of patients who may benefit from biologic therapy87% vs 98%.02711%87%

aEach individual learner tracked pre and post-education

bIncorrect answer pre-education, Correct answer post-education

cCorrect answer pre-education, Correct answer post-education

Conclusion:

This online CME activity significantly improved rheumatologists’ knowledge and competence related to the optimization of treatment in psoriatic disease. However, there is room for further improving physicians’ knowledge of clinical trial outcomes with biologics in patients with PsA, since 22% of rheumatologists provided incorrect answers to question 3 post-education. This topic can be addressed in future educational programs.

Disclosure of Interests:

None declared

AB0538 POOLED SAFETY RESULTS FROM TWO PHASE-3 TRIALS OF GUSELKUMAB IN PATIENTS WITH PSORIATIC ARTHRITIS THROUGH 1 YEAR

Background:

DISCOVER 1 & 2, two double-blind, phase-3, psoriatic arthritis (PsA) trials of guselkumab (GUS, an IL-23 inhibitor), demonstrated significant improvement with GUS vs placebo (PBO) in signs and symptoms of PsA, with good tolerability, at week (w) 24 during the PBO-controlled period.1,2 Beyond w24, all patients (pts) switched to GUS. Continued treatment maintained efficacy through w52.3,4

Objectives:

To describe pooled safety results from the DISCOVER 1 & 2 trials through 1-year of GUS treatment.

Methods:

Adults with active PsA (DISCOVER 1: ≥3 tender/swollen joints and C-Reactive protein [CRP] ≥0.3 mg/dL; DISCOVER 2: ≥5 tender/swollen joints and CRP ≥0.6 mg/dL) were randomized to subcutaneous GUS 100 mg at w0, w4, then every 8 w (q8w); GUS 100 mg q4w; or PBO. At w24, PBO pts switched to GUS 100 mg q4w. Pts were biologic naive except ~30% pts in DISCOVER 1. Safety was reported through w60 in DISCOVER 1 and through w52 in DISCOVER 2.

Results:

Baseline characteristics were similar between treatment groups in the pooled studies. Through w24 and 1 year, numbers of pts per 100 patient years with ≥1 event were similar among treatment groups for adverse events (AEs), serious AEs, infections, serious infections, and discontinuations due to AE (Table 1). At 1 year, there were no cases of active tuberculosis, opportunistic infections (including candida), or inflammatory bowel disease in GUS-treated pts; 2 deaths in PBO pts; and low incidences that were similar across treatment groups for malignancy, major adverse cardiac events, and injection-site reactions. Incidence of anti-GUS antibodies was 4.5%, and most were not neutralizing. Mild elevations in serum hepatic transaminases and decreases in neutrophil counts were consistent at 1 year with the results at w24 (Table 1).

Conclusion:

GUS regimens of q8w and q4w were well tolerated in PsA pts through 1 year of treatment in the phase-3 DISCOVER trials, consistent with the w24 results. No meaningful differences between incidences of AEs were reported in the q8w and q4w groups. The safety profile of GUS in PsA pts is generally comparable with the previously established safety profile of GUS.

References:

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

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

[3]Ritchlin C et al. EULAR 2020 # SAT0397

[4]McInnes I et al. EULAR 2020 # SAT0402

Table 1.

Number of Patients with AEs per 100 PY and Incidence of AEs of Interest

Time Period24 Weeks1 Year*Treatment GroupPBOGUS SC 100 mgPBO to GUS‡GUS SC 100 mgDosing ScheduleMatchingq8wq4wGUSCombined†q4wq8wq4wGUSCombined‡ N3723753737483523753731100Total PY Follow-Up173173172346204384385589Patients with AEs per 100 PY, n (95% CI)≥1 AE143 (123, 166)148 (127, 171)154 (132, 178)151 (136, 167)92 (77, 108)114 (100, 130)115 (101, 131)109 (100, 117)≥1 Serious AE7.1 (3.7, 12)4.1 (1.6, 8.4)4.7 (2.0, 9.3)4.4 (2.5, 7.3)7.0 (3.8, 11.8)4.8 (2.9, 7.6)4.0 (2.2, 6.6)4.9 (3.6, 6.6)≥1 Infection50 (39, 62)47 (37, 59)52 (42, 65)49 (42, 58)39 (31, 49)41 (34, 48)38 (31, 45)39 (35, 44)≥1 Serious Infection1.7 (0.4, 5.1)0.6 (0.0, 3.2)1.8 (0.4, 5.1)1.2 (0.3, 3.0)2.5 (0.8, 5.8)1.3 (0.4, 3.1)0.8 (0.2, 2.3)1.3 (0.7, 2.3)Discontinued due to AE4.1 (1.6, 8.4)2.9 (1.0, 6.8)4.7 (2.0, 9.3)3.8 (2.0, 6.5)3.5 (1.4, 7.1)2.1 (0.9, 4.1)2.6 (1.3, 4.8)2.6 (1.7, 3.8)AEs of Interest§, n (%)Death2 (0.5)0000000Malignancy1 (0.3)2 (0.5)02 (0.3)1 (0.3)2 (0.5)03 (0.3)Major Adverse Cardiac Events1 (0.3)01 (0.3)1 (0.1)001 (0.3)1 (0.1)Opportunistic Infections00000000Tuberculosis00000000Inflammatory Bowel Disease1 (0.3)0000000Injection-Site Reaction1 (0.3)5 (1.3)4 (1.1)9 (1.2)4 (1.1)6 (1.6)9 (2.4)19 (1.7)Anti-GUS Antibody+-6/373 (1.6)9/371 (2.4)15/744 (2.0)14/350 (4.0)18/373 (4.8)17/371 (4.6)49/1094 (4.5)

*Through w60 for DISCOVER 1 and w52 for DISCOVER 2; †Combined GUS q8w and q4w; ‡For patients who switched from PBO to GUS, only data on and after first GUS administration were included in this group; §PBO N=370.

AE, adverse event; CI, confidence interval; GUS, guselkumab; PBO, placebo; PY, patient year; q4w, every 4 weeks; q8w, every 8 weeks; SC, subcutaneous; w, week

Disclosure of Interests:

Christopher T. Ritchlin Grant/research support from: Received grant/research support from UCB Pharma, AbbVie, Amgen, consultation fees from UCB Pharma, Amgen, AbbVie, Lilly, Pfizer, Novartis, Gilead, Janssen, Proton Rahman Speakers bureau: Received speakers fees from Abbott, AbbVie, Amgen, BMS, Celgene, Lilly, Janssen, Novartis, Pfizer, Grant/research support from: Received grant/research support from Janssen and Novartis, consultation fees from Abbott, AbbVie, Amgen, BMS, Celgene, Lilly, Janssen, Novartis, and Pfizer., Philip Helliwell Consultant of: Consultation fees paid to charity (AbbVie, Amgen, Pfizer, UCB) or himself (Celgene, Galapagos), Grant/research support from: Received grants/research support paid to charity (AbbVie, Janssen, Novartis), Wolf-Henning Boehncke Consultant of: Received consultation fees from Janssen, Grant/research support from: Received grant/research support from Janssen Research & Development, LLC, Iain McInnes Consultant of: Received consultation fees from AbbVie, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Celgene, Eli Lilly and Company, Gilead, Janssen, Novartis, Pfizer, and UCB, Grant/research support from: Received grant/research support from Bristol-Myers Squibb, Celgene, Eli Lilly and Company, Janssen, and UCB, Alice B Gottlieb Speakers bureau: Received speakers fees from Pfizer, AbbVie, BMS, Lilly, MSD, Novartis, Roche, Sanofi, Sandoz, Nordic, Celltrion and UCB, Consultant of: Received consultation fees from Pfizer, AbbVie, BMS, Lilly, MSD, Novartis, Roche, Sanofi, Sandoz, Nordic, Celltrion and UCB, Grant/research support from: Received grant/research support from Pfizer, AbbVie, BMS, Lilly, MSD, Novartis, Roche, Sanofi, Sandoz, Nordic, Celltrion and UCB, Shelly Kafka Shareholder of: Shareholder of Johnson & Johnson, Employee of: Employee of Janssen Research & Development, LLC, Alexa Kollmeier Shareholder of: Shareholder of Johnson & Johnson, Employee of: Employee of Janssen Research & Development, LLC, Elizabeth C Hsia Shareholder of: Shareholder of Johnson & Johnson, Employee of: Employee of Janssen Research & Development, LLC, Xie L Xu Shareholder of: Shareholder of Johnson & Johnson, Employee of: Employee of Janssen Research & Development, LLC, May Shawi Shareholder of: Shareholder of Johnson & Johnson, Employee of: Employee of Janssen Research & Development, LLC, Shihong Sheng Shareholder of: Shareholder of Johnson & Johnson, Employee of: Employee of Janssen Research & Development, LLC, Prasheen Agarwal Shareholder of: Shareholder of Johnson & Johnson, Employee of: Employee of Janssen Research & Development, LLC, Bei Zhou Shareholder of: Shareholder of Johnson & Johnson, Employee of: Employee of Janssen Research & Development, LLC, Paraneedharan Ramachandran Shareholder of: Shareholder of Johnson & Johnson, Employee of: Employee of Janssen Research & Development, LLC, Philip J Mease Speakers bureau: Received speakers fees from Abbott, Amgen, Biogen Idec, BMS, Eli Lilly, Genentech, Janssen, Pfizer, UCB – speakers bureau, Consultant of: Received consultation fees from Abbott, Amgen, Biogen Idec, BMS, Celgene Corporation, Eli Lilly, Novartis, Pfizer, Sun Pharmaceutical, UCB, Grant/research support from: Received grant/research support from Abbott, Amgen, Biogen Idec, BMS, Celgene Corporation, Eli Lilly, Novartis, Pfizer, Sun Pharmaceutical, UCB.

Efficacy of secukinumab and adalimumab in patients with psoriatic arthritis and concomitant moderate-to-severe plaque psoriasis: results from EXCEED, a randomized, double-blind head-to-head monotherapy study

Background

Secukinumab [an interleukin (IL)‐17A inhibitor] has demonstrated significantly higher efficacy vs. etanercept (a tumour necrosis factor inhibitor) and ustekinumab (an IL‐12/23 inhibitor) in patients with moderate‐to‐severe plaque psoriasis.

Objectives

To report 52‐week results from a prespecified analysis of patients with active psoriatic arthritis (PsA) having concomitant moderate‐to‐severe plaque psoriasis from the head‐to‐head EXCEED monotherapy study comparing secukinumab with adalimumab.

Methods

Patients were randomized to receive secukinumab 300 mg via subcutaneous injection at baseline, week 1–4, and then every 4 weeks until week 48 or adalimumab 40 mg via subcutaneous injection every 2 weeks from baseline until week 50. Assessments in patients with concomitant moderate‐to‐severe psoriasis, defined as having affected body surface area > 10% or Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI) ≥ 10 at baseline, included musculoskeletal, skin and quality‐of‐life outcomes. Missing data were handled using multiple imputation.

Results

Of the 853 patients [secukinumab (N = 426), adalimumab (N = 427)], 211 (24·7%) had concomitant moderate‐to‐severe psoriasis [secukinumab (N = 110, 25·8%), adalimumab (N = 101, 23·7%)]. Up to week 50, 5·5% of patients discontinued secukinumab vs.17·8% in the adalimumab group. The proportion of patients who achieved American College of Rheumatology (ACR) 20 response was 76·4% with secukinumab vs. 68·3% with adalimumab (P = 0·175), PASI 100 response was 39·1% vs. 23·8% (P = 0·013), and simultaneous improvement in ACR 50 and PASI 100 response at week 52 was 28·2% vs. 17·7%, respectively (P = 0·06). Secukinumab demonstrated consistently higher responses vs. adalimumab across skin endpoints.

Conclusions

This prespecified analysis in PsA patients with concomitant moderate‐to‐severe plaque psoriasis in the EXCEED study provides further evidence that IL‐17 inhibitors offer a comprehensive biological treatment to manage the concomitant features of psoriasis and PsA.

What is already known about this topic?

Secukinumab, an interleukin‐17A inhibitor, has previously been reported to have significantly higher efficacy in head‐to‐head trials vs. etanercept and ustekinumab in patients with moderate‐to‐severe plaque psoriasis.

What does this study add?

The results of the study provide valuable head‐to‐head data on the efficacy of two biologics with different mechanisms of action (secukinumab and adalimumab) as first‐line biological monotherapy for patients with psoriatic arthritis and concomitant moderate‐to‐severe plaque psoriasis.

The findings of this study can further help physicians to make informed and evidence‐based decisions for the treatment of patients with active psoriatic arthritis who have concomitant moderate‐to‐severe plaque psoriasis.

Linked Comment: E. Sbidian and L. Pina‐Vegas. Br J Dermatol 2021; 185:1085.

Long-term efficacy of certolizumab pegol for the treatment of plaque psoriasis: 3-year results from two randomized phase III trials (CIMPASI-1 and CIMPASI-2)

Background

Certolizumab pegol (CZP) is an Fc‐free, PEGylated anti‐tumour necrosis factor biologic.

Objectives

To report the 3‐year efficacy of CZP in plaque psoriasis, pooled from the CIMPASI‐1 (NCT02326298) and CIMPASI‐2 (NCT02326272) phase III trials.

Methods

Adults with moderate‐to‐severe psoriasis for ≥ 6 months were randomized 2 : 2 : 1 to CZP 200 mg, CZP 400 mg or placebo, every 2 weeks (Q2W) for up to 48 weeks. Patients entering the open‐label period (weeks 48–144) from double‐blinded CZP initially received CZP 200 mg Q2W. Patients not achieving ≥ 50% improvement in Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI 50) at week 16 entered an open‐label CZP 400 mg Q2W escape arm (weeks 16–144). Dose adjustments based on PASI response were permitted during open‐label treatment. Outcomes included PASI 75, PASI 90 and Physician’s Global Assessment (PGA) 0/1 responder rates, based on a logistic regression model (missing data imputed using Markov Chain Monte Carlo methodology).

Results

In total, 186 patients were randomized to CZP 200 mg Q2W and 175 to CZP 400 mg Q2W. At week 48, PASI 75/90 was achieved by 72·7%/51·3% of patients randomized to CZP 200 mg and 84·4%/62·7% randomized to CZP 400 mg. Patients entering the open‐label period at week 48, from blinded treatment, received CZP 200 mg Q2W. At week 144, PASI 75/90 was achieved by 70·6%/48·7% patients randomized to CZP 200 mg and 72·9%/42·7% randomized to CZP 400 mg. At week 16, 72 placebo‐randomized patients entered the CZP 400 mg Q2W escape arm; 75.7%/58.5% achieved PASI 75/90 at week 144.

Conclusions

Both CZP 200 mg and 400 mg Q2W demonstrated sustained, durable efficacy, with numerically higher responses for some outcomes with 400 mg Q2W.

What is already known about this topic?

Certolizumab pegol is an Fc‐free, PEGylated, anti‐tumour necrosis factor biologic approved for adults with moderate‐to‐severe plaque psoriasis.

Efficacy data from the first 48 weeks of phase III trials have shown significant improvements in the signs and symptoms of psoriasis with certolizumab pegol dosed at either 400 mg or 200 mg every 2 weeks.

Numerically greater improvements were observed for patients treated with the higher dose.

What does this study add?

Plaque psoriasis is a chronic, systemic disease that requires long‐term management and sustained efficacy of therapies.

Three‐year efficacy data pooled from the CIMPASI‐1 and CIMPASI‐2 phase III trials demonstrate a sustained and durable response to certolizumab pegol dosed at either 400 mg or 200 mg every 2 weeks.

Additional long‐term clinical benefits may be obtained from the higher dose.

Linked Comment: Johnson et al. Br J Dermatol 2021; 184:588–589.

Long-term safety of certolizumab pegol in plaque psoriasis: pooled analysis over 3 years from three phase III, randomized, placebo-controlled studies

Background

Certolizumab pegol (CZP) is an Fc‐free, PEGylated anti‐tumour necrosis factor biologic.

Objectives

To report 3‐year safety data from three phase III trials of CZP in adults with plaque psoriasis.

Methods

Data were pooled from CIMPASI‐1 (NCT02326298), CIMPASI‐2 (NCT02326272) and CIMPACT (NCT02346240). Included patients had moderate‐to‐severe plaque psoriasis of ≥ 6 months’ duration; had been randomized to CZP 200 mg every 2 weeks (Q2W) (400 mg at weeks 0, 2 and 4) or CZP 400 mg Q2W; and had received at least one dose of CZP with up to 144 weeks of exposure. Treatment‐emergent adverse events (TEAEs) were classified using MedDRA v18·1. Reported incidence rates (IRs) are incidence of new cases per 100 patient‐years (PY).

Results

Over 144 weeks, 995 patients received at least one dose of CZP (exposure: 2231·3 PY); 731 and 728 received at least one dose of CZP 200 mg Q2W (1211·4 PY) and/or 400 mg Q2W (1019·9 PY), respectively. The IR [95% confidence interval (CI)] of TEAEs was 144·9 (135·3–155·0) for all patients, 134·1 (123·2–145·7) for CZP 200 mg Q2W and 158·3 (145·5–171·9) for CZP 400 mg Q2W. The IR (95% CI) of serious TEAEs for all patients was 7·5 (6·4–8·8); the IRs were 6·7 (5·2–8·3) and 8·7 (6·9–10·8) for CZP 200 mg and 400 mg Q2W, respectively. Overall, 3·2% of patients reported serious infections (2·2% within each of the CZP 200 and 400 mg Q2W groups). Overall, there was one case of active tuberculosis, 16 malignancies in 14 patients and seven deaths (two considered treatment‐related). The cumulative IR of TEAEs did not increase over time.

Conclusions

No new safety signals were identified compared with previously reported data. Risk did not increase with longer or higher CZP exposure.

What is already known about this topic?

Certolizumab pegol is an Fc‐free, PEGylated, anti‐tumour necrosis factor biologic approved for adults with moderate‐to‐severe plaque psoriasis.

Safety data from phase III trials in plaque psoriasis have found the incidence of adverse events to be generally similar over 16 weeks of treatment between the evaluated certolizumab pegol doses 200 mg and 400 mg every 2 weeks and placebo.

Additionally, the safety profile was in line with the class over 48 weeks.

What does this study add?

Plaque psoriasis is a chronic disease for which patients require lifetime management; long‐term safety data are important to understand the benefits and risks of prolonged treatment.

Here, 3‐year data from a pooled analysis of three phase III trials of certolizumab pegol in plaque psoriasis are presented, representing 2231·3 patient‐years of exposure.

No new safety signals were identified and the risk of treatment‐emergent adverse events did not increase with longer or higher certolizumab pegol exposure.

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

Background:

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

Objectives:

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

Methods:

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

Results:

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

Conclusion:

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

References:

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

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

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

Figure.

ACR20 Response through Wk 52

Table.

Efficacy Outcomes at Wk 52

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

*Unadjusted P-valuesvsADA

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

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

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

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

Disclosure of Interests:

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

OP0230 EFFICACY AND SAFETY OF TILDRAKIZUMAB, A HIGH-AFFINITY ANTI–INTERLEUKIN-23P19 MONOCLONAL ANTIBODY, IN PATIENTS WITH ACTIVE PSORIATIC ARTHRITIS IN A RANDOMISED, DOUBLE-BLIND, PLACEBO-CONTROLLED, MULTIPLE-DOSE, PHASE 2B STUDY

Background:

Tildrakizumab (TIL), a high-affinity anti–interleukin-23p19 monoclonal antibody, is approved to treat moderate to severe plaque psoriasis and is under investigation for treatment of psoriatic arthritis (PsA).1

Objectives:

To evaluate efficacy and safety of TIL up to week (W)52 in a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, multiple-dose, phase 2b study in PsA (NCT02980692).

Methods:

Patients (pts) ≥18 years with active PsA2were randomised 1:1:1:1:1 to TIL 200 mg every 4 weeks (Q4W) to W52, TIL 200 mg Q12W to W52, TIL 100 mg Q12W to W52, TIL 20 mg Q12W until W24 then TIL 200 mg Q12W to W52, or placebo (PBO) Q4W until W24 then TIL 200 mg Q12W to W52. Efficacy assessments included ACR20/50/70, 75%/90%/100% improvement in Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI), proportion of pts with residual minimal disease activity (MDA) response; and mean change from baseline (BL) in HAQ-DI, Leeds Dactylitis Index (LDI, pts with BL LDI ≥1), and Leeds Enthesitis Index (LEI, pts with BL LEI ≥1) to W52. Treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) were monitored.

Results:

Of 500 pts screened, 391 were randomised and received ≥1 dose of drug. Proportions of ACR20/50/70 responders were superior with TIL vs PBO through W24; after W24 rates of responses further increased for TIL 20→200 mg Q12W and PBO→200 mg Q12W through W52 (Figure 1, 2). Other efficacy results are shown in Table. Overall from BL→W24/W25→W52, 50.4%/39.9% and 2.3%/1.0% of pts experienced a TEAE and serious AE, respectively. From BL→W24, 1 case of pyelonephritis and urinary tract infection was reported in the TIL 100 mg Q12W arm and 1 case of chronic tonsillitis was reported in the TIL 20 mg→200 mg Q12W arm. During W25→W52, 1 malignancy (intraductal proliferative breast lesion) was reported with TIL 20 mg→200 mg Q12W. No deaths or major adverse cardiac events occurred.

Table.

W52 clinical efficacy

TIL 200 mg Q4Wn=78TIL 200 mg Q12Wn=79TIL 100 mg Q12Wn=77TIL 20→200 mg Q12Wn=78PBO→TIL 200 mg Q12Wn=79HAQ-DI, BLa1.0 ± 0.61.0 ±0.61.0 ± 0.71.1 ± 0.61.2 ± 0.6 W52b−0.5 ± 0.5−0.5 ± 0.6−0.5 ± 0.6−0.5 ± 0.5−0.5 ± 0.5LEI, BLa,c1.9 ± 2.01.5 ± 1.92.2 ± 2.12.2 ± 2.01.5 ± 1.9 W52b−1.3 ± 1.9−1.0 ± 1.6−1.7 ± 2.1−1.2 ± 1.8−1.2 ± 1.8LDI, BLa,d32.8 ± 32.961.3 ± 73.593.8 ± 146.571.4 ± 118.599.6 ± 170.7 W52b,d−21.4 ± 37.1−42.1 ± 76.7−41.6 ± 89.3−56.5 ± 123.4−81.5 ± 173.0 BL, W52 mediand21.8, 7.428.3, 3.232.1, 20.028.6, 034.0, 5.6MDAe56.964.445.047.142.0PASI 100e54.044.443.947.535.0PASI 90e72.080.658.555.050.0PASI 75e82.094.482.975.067.5

aBL mean ± SD.bMean change from BL ± SD.cPts with BL LEI ≥1 will be presented at EULAR.dPts with BL LDI ≥1 (n = 27, 21, 21, 19, 25) using nonresponder imputation.e% at W52

Missing data not imputed.

SD, standard deviation.

Conclusion:

TIL was well tolerated and improved joint and skin manifestations of PsA through W52.

References:

[1]Reich, et al.Lancet2017;390:276−88.

[2]Taylor, et al.Arthritis Rheum2006;54:2665–73.

Disclosure of Interests:

Philip J Mease Grant/research support from: Abbott, Amgen, Biogen Idec, BMS, Celgene Corporation, Eli Lilly, Novartis, Pfizer, Sun Pharmaceutical, UCB – grant/research support, Consultant of: Abbott, Amgen, Biogen Idec, BMS, Celgene Corporation, Eli Lilly, Novartis, Pfizer, Sun Pharmaceutical, UCB – consultant, Speakers bureau: Abbott, Amgen, Biogen Idec, BMS, Eli Lilly, Genentech, Janssen, Pfizer, UCB – speakers bureau, Saima Chohan Employee of: Partner/physician at Arizona Arthritis and Rheumatology Associates, Ferran J García Fructuoso Grant/research support from: AbbVie, Eli Lilly, Gedeon Richter, MedImmune, Nichi-Iko, Pfizer, Sanofi-Aventis, Takeda, and UCB, Consultant of: AbbVie, Eli Lilly, Gedeon Richter, MedImmune, Nichi-Iko, Pfizer, Sanofi-Aventis, Takeda, and UCB, Speakers bureau: AbbVie, Eli Lilly, Gedeon Richter, MedImmune, Nichi-Iko, Pfizer, Sanofi-Aventis, Takeda, and UCB, Alice B Gottlieb Grant/research support from:: Research grants, consultation fees, or speaker honoraria for lectures from: Pfizer, AbbVie, BMS, Lilly, MSD, Novartis, Roche, Sanofi, Sandoz, Nordic, Celltrion and UCB., Consultant of:: Research grants, consultation fees, or speaker honoraria for lectures from: Pfizer, AbbVie, BMS, Lilly, MSD, Novartis, Roche, Sanofi, Sandoz, Nordic, Celltrion and UCB., Speakers bureau:: Research grants, consultation fees, or speaker honoraria for lectures from: Pfizer, AbbVie, BMS, Lilly, MSD, Novartis, Roche, Sanofi, Sandoz, Nordic, Celltrion and UCB., Michael E Luggen Grant/research support from: AbbVie; Amgen; Eli Lilly; Genentech; Nichi-Iko; Novartis; Pfizer; R-Pharm; and Sun Pharmaceutical Industries, Inc., Consultant of: AbbVie; Amgen; Eli Lilly; Genentech; Nichi-Iko; Novartis; Pfizer; R-Pharm; and Sun Pharmaceutical Industries, Inc., Speakers bureau: AbbVie; Amgen; Eli Lilly; Genentech; Nichi-Iko; Novartis; Pfizer; R-Pharm; and Sun Pharmaceutical Industries, Inc., Proton Rahman Grant/research support from: Janssen and Novartis, Consultant of: Abbott, AbbVie, Amgen, BMS, Celgene, Lilly, Janssen, Novartis, and Pfizer., Speakers bureau: Abbott, AbbVie, Amgen, BMS, Celgene, Lilly, Janssen, Novartis, Pfizer, Siba P Raychaudhuri Grant/research support from: AbbVie; Janssen; Novartis, Pfizer; Sun Pharmaceutical Industries, Inc, Consultant of: Amgen; Eli Lilly; Janssen; Novartis and Pfizer, Richard C Chou Consultant of: Sun Pharmaceutical Industries, Inc, Alan M Mendelsohn Shareholder of: Johnson and Johnson, Employee of: Sun Pharmaceutical Industries, Inc, Stephen Rozzo Employee of: Sun Pharmaceutical Industries, Inc, Ana-Maria Orbai Grant/research support from: Abbvie, Eli Lilly and Company, Celgene, Novartis, Janssen, Horizon, Consultant of: Eli Lilly; Janssen; Novartis; Pfizer; UCB. Ana-Maria Orbai was a private consultant or advisor for Sun Pharmaceutical Industries, Inc, not in her capacity as a Johns Hopkins faculty member and was not compensated for this service.

FRI0272 SECUKINUMAB DEMONSTRATES A CONSISTENT SAFETY PROFILE IN PATIENTS WITH PSORIASIS, PSORIATIC ARTHRITIS AND ANKYLOSING SPONDYLITIS OVER LONG TERM: UPDATED POOLED SAFETY ANALYSES

Background:

Pooled safety data has been reported with secukinumab (SEC) in patients (pts) with Psoriatic arthritis (PsA), Ankylosing Spondylitis (AS) and Psoriasis (PsO).1

Objectives:

To report longer-term safety data of SEC treatment in PsA, AS, PsO pts up to 5 years.

Methods:

The integrated clinical trial safety dataset included data pooled from 28 randomised controlled clinical trials of SEC 300 or 150 or 75 mg in PsO (11 Phase 3 and 8 Phase 4 trials), PsA (5 Phase 3 trials), and AS (4 Phase 3 trials), along with post-marketing safety surveillance data with a cut-off date of 25 December 2018. Adverse events (AEs) were reported as exposure-adjusted incident rates (EAIRs) per 100 pt-years. Analyses included all pts who received ≥1 dose of SEC.

Results:

A total of 12637 pts (8819, 2678 and 1140 pts with PsO, PsA and AS, with an exposure of 15063.1, 5984.6 and 3527.2 pt-years, respectively) were included. The most frequent AE was upper respiratory tract infection and EAIR per 100 pt-years for IBD, malignancies and MACE remained low. The EAIR per 100 pt-years for adverse events (AEs) of special interest are reported in Table 1. The cumulative post-marketing exposure to SEC was estimated to be ~285,811 pt-years across the approved indications. Safety data from post-marketing surveillance are reported in Table 2.

Table 1.

Selected AEs of interest with SEC across pooled clinical trials

VariablePsOPsAASSECN=8819SECN=2678SECN=1140Exposure (Days), Mean (SD)623.9 (567.7)816.2 (580.7)1130.1 (583.0)Death, n (%)15 (0.2)13 (0.5)10 (0.9)Selected AE’s of interest, EAIR (95% CI)Serious infections11.4 (1.2, 1.6)1.8 (1.5, 2.2)1.2 (0.9, 1.6)Candidainfections22.9 (2.7, 3.2)1.5 (1.2, 1.9)0.7 (0.5, 1.1)IBD3Crohn’s disease3Ulcerative colitis30.01 (0.0, 0.05)0.1 (0.05, 0.2)0.1 (0.08, 0.2)0.03 (0.0, 0.1)0.1 (0.04, 0.2)0.1 (0.04, 0.2)0.03 (0.0, 0.2)0.4 (0.24, 0.7)0.2 (0.1, 0.5)MACE40.4 (0.31, 0.5)0.4 (0.3, 0.6)0.7 (0.4, 1.0)Uveitis30.01 (0.0, 0.05)0.1 (0.04, 0.2)1.2 (0.9, 1.7)Malignancy50.9 (0.7, 1.0)1.0 (0.77, 1.3)0.5 (0.3, 0.8)

1Rates for system organ class;2Rates for high level term;3Rates for preferred term (PT; IBD for unspecified IBD);4Rates for Novartis MedDRA Query term;5Rates for standardized MedDRA query term – ‘malignancies and unspecified tumour’; EAIR, exposure adjusted incidence rate per 100 pt-years; N, number of pts in the analysis

Table 2.

Summary of SEC post-marketing safety

Exposure (PTY)PSUR126Dec14 -25Jun15PSUR226 Jun - 25Dec15PSUR326Dec15 -25Jun16PSUR426Jun -25Dec16PSUR526Dec16 -25Dec17PSUR626Dec17 -25Dec18Cumulative18387450168712854993744137325285811                    n (Reporting rate PTY)Serious infections89 (4.8)149 (2.0)232 (1.4)475 (1.7)649 (0.7)1841 (1.3)3980 (1.4)Malignancy2 (0.1)15 (0.2)21 (0.1)50 (0.2)225 (0.2)422 (0.3)788 (0.3)Total IBD4 (0.2)12 (0.2)37(0.2)46 (0.2)185 (0.2)340 (0.3)693 (0.2)MACE6 (0.3)15 (0.2)16 (0.1)39 (0.1)151 (0.2)238 (0.2)504 (0.2)

PSUR, periodic safety update report; PTY, pt-treatment years

Conclusion:

In this long-term analysis across clinical trials and post-marketing surveillance, of pts with PsO, PsA and AS, SEC was well tolerated, with a safety profile consistent with previous reports.1

Reference:

[1]Deodhar et al. Arthritis Research & Therapy (2019) 21:111.

Disclosure of Interests:

Atul Deodhar Grant/research support from: AbbVie, Eli Lilly, GSK, Novartis, Pfizer, UCB, Consultant of: AbbVie, Amgen, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol Myer Squibb (BMS), Eli Lilly, GSK, Janssen, Novartis, Pfizer, UCB, Speakers bureau: AbbVie, Amgen, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol Myer Squibb (BMS), Eli Lilly, GSK, Janssen, Novartis, Pfizer, UCB, Iain McInnes Grant/research support from: Bristol-Myers Squibb, Celgene, Eli Lilly and Company, Janssen, and UCB, Consultant of: AbbVie, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Celgene, Eli Lilly and Company, Gilead, Janssen, Novartis, Pfizer, and UCB, Xenofon Baraliakos Grant/research support from: Grant/research support from: AbbVie, BMS, Celgene, Chugai, Merck, Novartis, Pfizer, UCB and Werfen, Consultant of: AbbVie, BMS, Celgene, Chugai, Merck, Novartis, Pfizer, UCB and Werfen, Speakers bureau: AbbVie, BMS, Celgene, Chugai, Merck, Novartis, Pfizer, UCB and Werfen, Kristian Reich Grant/research support from: Affibody; Almirall; Amgen; Biogen; Boehringer Ingelheim; Celgene; Centocor; Covagen; Eli Lilly; Forward Pharma; Fresenius Medical Care; GlaxoSmithKline; Janssen; Kyowa Kirin; LEO Pharma; Medac; Merck; Novartis; Miltenyi Biotec; Ocean Pharma; Pfizer; Regeneron; Samsung Bioepis; Sanofi Genzyme; Takeda; UCB; Valeant and Xenoport., Consultant of: Affibody; Almirall; Amgen; Biogen; Boehringer Ingelheim; Celgene; Centocor; Covagen; Eli Lilly; Forward Pharma; Fresenius Medical Care; GlaxoSmithKline; Janssen; Kyowa Kirin; LEO Pharma; Medac; Merck; Novartis; Miltenyi Biotec; Ocean Pharma; Pfizer; Regeneron; Samsung Bioepis; Sanofi Genzyme; Takeda; UCB; Valeant and Xenoport., Speakers bureau: Affibody; Almirall; Amgen; Biogen; Boehringer Ingelheim; Celgene; Centocor; Covagen; Eli Lilly; Forward Pharma; Fresenius Medical Care; GlaxoSmithKline; Janssen; Kyowa Kirin; LEO Pharma; Medac; Merck; Novartis; Miltenyi Biotec; Ocean Pharma; Pfizer; Regeneron; Samsung Bioepis; Sanofi Genzyme; Takeda; UCB; Valeant and Xenoport., Alice B Gottlieb Grant/research support from:: Research grants, consultation fees, or speaker honoraria for lectures from: Pfizer, AbbVie, BMS, Lilly, MSD, Novartis, Roche, Sanofi, Sandoz, Nordic, Celltrion and UCB., Consultant of:: Research grants, consultation fees, or speaker honoraria for lectures from: Pfizer, AbbVie, BMS, Lilly, MSD, Novartis, Roche, Sanofi, Sandoz, Nordic, Celltrion and UCB., Speakers bureau:: Research grants, consultation fees, or speaker honoraria for lectures from: Pfizer, AbbVie, BMS, Lilly, MSD, Novartis, Roche, Sanofi, Sandoz, Nordic, Celltrion and UCB., Mark Lebwohl Grant/research support from: AbbVie, Amgen, Arcutis, AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, Celgene, Clinuvel, Eli Lilly, Incyte, Janssen Research & Development, LLC, Kadmon Corp., LLC, Leo Pharmaceutucals, Medimmune, Novartis, Ortho Dermatologics, Pfizer, Sciderm, UCB, Inc., and ViDac, Consultant of: Allergan, Almirall, Arcutis, Inc., Avotres Therapeutics, BirchBioMed Inc., Boehringer-Ingelheim, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Cara Therapeutics, Castle Biosciences, Corrona, Dermavant Sciences, Evelo, Foundation for Research and Education in Dermatology, Inozyme Pharma, LEO Pharma, Meiji Seika Pharma, Menlo, Mitsubishi, Neuroderm, Pfizer, Promius/Dr. Reddy’s Laboratories, Theravance, and Verrica, Stefan Schreiber Consultant of: AbbVie, Arena, BMS, Biogen, Celltrion, Celgene, IMAB, Gilead, MSD, Mylan, Pfizer, Fresenius, Janssen, Takeda, Theravance, provention Bio, Protagonist and Falk, Weibin Bao Shareholder of: Novartis, Employee of: Novartis, Kwaku Marfo Shareholder of: Novartis, Employee of: Novartis, Hanno Richards Shareholder of: Novartis, Employee of: Novartis, Luminita Pricop Shareholder of: Novartis, Employee of: Novartis, Abhijit Shete Shareholder of: Novartis, Employee of: Novartis, Jorge Safi Shareholder of: Novartis, Employee of: Novartis, Philip J Mease Grant/research support from: Abbott, Amgen, Biogen Idec, BMS, Celgene Corporation, Eli Lilly, Novartis, Pfizer, Sun Pharmaceutical, UCB – grant/research support, Consultant of: Abbott, Amgen, Biogen Idec, BMS, Celgene Corporation, Eli Lilly, Novartis, Pfizer, Sun Pharmaceutical, UCB – consultant, Speakers bureau: Abbott, Amgen, Biogen Idec, BMS, Eli Lilly, Genentech, Janssen, Pfizer, UCB – speakers bureau

FRI0359 INTEGRATED SAFETY RESULTS OF TWO PHASE-3 TRIALS OF GUSELKUMAB IN PATIENTS WITH PSORIATIC ARTHRITIS THROUGH THE PLACEBO-CONTROLLED PERIODS

Background:

DISCOVER 1 & 2 are phase 3 psoriatic arthritis (PsA) trials investigating guselkumab (GUS), an IL-23 inhibitor that specifically binds the IL-23p19 subunit. In both studies, GUS showed significant improvement vs placebo (PBO) through week (W) 24 in the PBO-controlled period.1,2

Objectives:

To present integrated safety results of DISC 1 & 2 through the PBO-controlled periods.

Methods:

Adult patients (pts) with active PsA despite standard therapy were enrolled. All pts were biologic-naïve, except ~30% in DISC 1 with previous exposure to 1-2 TNF inhibitors. Pts were randomized to SC GUS 100 mg Q4W; GUS 100 mg at W0, W4, then Q8W; or PBO. Adverse events (AEs) and lab results were analyzed from pooled data.

Results:

The rates of pts experiencing ≥1 AE, serious AE, infection, serious infection, and discontinuation due to an AE were similar between GUS and PBO (Table 1). There were 2 deaths, 3 malignancies, 2 Major Adverse Cardiac Events (MACE), and no opportunistic infections (treatment group not shown to prevent unblinding). Among the AEs reported by ≥5% pts in any group (Table 1), nasopharyngitis and elevated serum hepatic aminotransferases were more common with GUS vs PBO. Laboratory ALT and AST elevations were mostly mild, transient, and not associated with significant bilirubin elevation. There was a trend to decreased neutrophil count (mostly Grade 1, transient, and not associated with infection) with GUS vs PBO (Table 2). Low rates of injection-site reactions were seen with GUS vs PBO. Anti-drug antibody development was also low (Table 1).

Table 1.

Patient Reported AEs, n (%)

GUS100 mgQ8WGUS100 mgQ4WPBON375373372≥1 AE182 (48.5)182 (48.8)176 (47.3)≥1 Serious AE7 (1.9)8 (2.1)12 (3.2)Discontinuation due to AE5 (1.3)8 (2.1)7 (1.9)≥1 Infection73 (19.5)80 (21.4)77 (20.7)≥1 Serious infection1 (0.3)3 (0.8)3 (0.8)≥1 Opportunistic Infection (including Candida)000Active Tuberculosis000≥1 Injection-site reaction5 (1.3)4 (1.1)1 (0.3)Anti-GUS antibody +, n/N (%)6/373 (1.6)9/371 (2.4)--AEs* reported by ≥5% of patients in any treatment groupNasopharyngitis26 (6.9)19 (5.1)17 (4.6)Upper respiratory tract infection13 (3.5)23 (6.2)17 (4.6)Increased ALT23 (6.1)28 (7.5)14 (3.8)Increased AST23 (6.1)14 (3.8)9 (2.4)

*Medical Dictionary for Regulatory Activities (MedDRA) preferred term

Table 2.

Lab Results*

GUS100 mgQ8WGUS100 mgQ4WPBON373371370ALT Increased (%)Grade 128.235.030.121.12.71.43-40.81.10.8Neutrophil Count Decreased (%)Grade 15.65.93.221.61.60.83-400.30.3

*NCI toxicity grade

ALT=Alanine aminotransferase

Conclusion:

GUS was safe and well tolerated through the PBO-controlled period in 2 randomized, phase 3 trials of patients with active PsA. There were no meaningful safety differences between the Q8W and Q4W groups, no significant safety issues identified when comparing GUS to PBO, and no safety signals with regards to infections, malignancy, and MACE. The safety profile of GUS Q4W and Q8W in PsA pts was generally consistent with that in the Phase 3 trials of GUS Q8W for psoriasis.3,4

References:

[1]Deodhar et al. ACR 2019 (#807). Arth Rheum 2019;71 S10:1386

[2]Mease et al. ACR 2019 (#L13). Arth Rheum 2019;71 S10:5247

[3]Blauvelt et al. J Am Acad Derm 2017;76:405

[4]Reich et al. J Am Acad Derm 2017;76:418

Acknowledgments:

None

Disclosure of Interests:

Proton Rahman Grant/research support from: Janssen and Novartis, Consultant of: Abbott, AbbVie, Amgen, BMS, Celgene, Lilly, Janssen, Novartis, and Pfizer., Speakers bureau: Abbott, AbbVie, Amgen, BMS, Celgene, Lilly, Janssen, Novartis, Pfizer, Christopher T. Ritchlin Grant/research support from: UCB Pharma, AbbVie, Amgen, Consultant of: UCB Pharma, Amgen, AbbVie, Lilly, Pfizer, Novartis, Gilead, Janssen, Philip Helliwell: None declared, Wolf-Henning Boehncke Grant/research support from: Janssen Research & Development, LLC, Consultant of: Janssen, Philip J Mease Grant/research support from: Abbott, Amgen, Biogen Idec, BMS, Celgene Corporation, Eli Lilly, Novartis, Pfizer, Sun Pharmaceutical, UCB – grant/research support, Consultant of: Abbott, Amgen, Biogen Idec, BMS, Celgene Corporation, Eli Lilly, Novartis, Pfizer, Sun Pharmaceutical, UCB – consultant, Speakers bureau: Abbott, Amgen, Biogen Idec, BMS, Eli Lilly, Genentech, Janssen, Pfizer, UCB – speakers bureau, Alice B Gottlieb Grant/research support from:: Research grants, consultation fees, or speaker honoraria for lectures from: Pfizer, AbbVie, BMS, Lilly, MSD, Novartis, Roche, Sanofi, Sandoz, Nordic, Celltrion and UCB., Consultant of:: Research grants, consultation fees, or speaker honoraria for lectures from: Pfizer, AbbVie, BMS, Lilly, MSD, Novartis, Roche, Sanofi, Sandoz, Nordic, Celltrion and UCB., Speakers bureau:: Research grants, consultation fees, or speaker honoraria for lectures from: Pfizer, AbbVie, BMS, Lilly, MSD, Novartis, Roche, Sanofi, Sandoz, Nordic, Celltrion and UCB., Shelly Kafka Employee of: Janssen Scientific Affairs, LLC, Alexa Kollmeier Shareholder of: Johnson & Johnson, Employee of: Janssen Research & Development, LLC, Elizabeth C Hsia Shareholder of: Johnson & Johnson, Employee of: Janssen Research & Development, LLC, Xie L Xu Shareholder of: Johnson & Johnson, Employee of: Janssen Research & Development, LLC, May Shawi Shareholder of: Johnson & Johnson, Employee of: Janssen Research & Development, LLC, Shihong Sheng Shareholder of: Johnson & Johnson, Employee of: Janssen Research & Development, LLC, Prasheen Agarwal Shareholder of: Johnson & Johnson, Employee of: Janssen Research & Development, LLC, Bei Zhou Shareholder of: Johnson & Johnson, Employee of: Janssen Research & Development, LLC, Paraneedharan Ramachandran Employee of: Janssen Research & Development, LLC, Iain McInnes Grant/research support from: Bristol-Myers Squibb, Celgene, Eli Lilly and Company, Janssen, and UCB, Consultant of: AbbVie, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Celgene, Eli Lilly and Company, Gilead, Janssen, Novartis, Pfizer, and UCB

FRI0340 COMPARISON OF SECUKINUMAB VERSUS ADALIMUMAB EFFICACY ON SKIN OUTCOMES IN PSORIATIC ARTHRITIS: 52-WEEK RESULTS FROM THE EXCEED STUDY

Background:

Psoriatic arthritis (PsA) is a heterogeneous disease comprising musculoskeletal and dermatological manifestations, especially plaque psoriasis.1Secukinumab (SEC), an IL-17A inhibitor, provided significantly greater PASI 75/100 responses in a head-to-head trialversus (vs.) etanercept, a TNF inhibitor, in patients (pts) with moderate-to-severe plaque psoriasis.2The objective of the EXCEED study (NCT02745080) was to investigate whether SEC is superior to adalimumab (ADA), a TNF inhibitor, as monotherapy in biologic-naive active PsA pts with active plaque psoriasis (defined as having at least one psoriatic plaque of ≥2 cm diameter or nail changes consistent with psoriasis or documented history of plaque psoriasis).

Objectives:

To report the pre-specified skin outcomes from the EXCEED study in the subset of pts with at least 3% body surface area (BSA) affected with psoriasis at baseline.

Methods:

Head-to-head, phase-3b, randomised, double-blind, active-controlled, multicentre, parallel-group trial: pts were randomised to receive SEC 300 mg subcutaneous at baseline, Week 1-4, followed by dosing every 4 weeks (q4w) until Week 48 or ADA 40 mg subcutaneous at baseline followed by same dosing q2w until Week 50. The primary endpoint was superiority of SECvs.ADA on ACR20 response at Week 52. Pre-specified outcomes included the proportion of pts achieving a combined ACR50 and PASI 100 response, PASI 100 response, and absolute PASI score ≤3. Missing data was handled using multiple imputation.

Results:

853 pts were randomised to receive SEC (n=426) or ADA (n=427). At baseline, there were 215 and 202 pts having at least 3% BSA affected with psoriasis in the SEC and ADA groups, respectively. A higher proportion of patients achieved simultaneous improvement in ACR50 and PASI 100 response with SECvs.ADA (30·7%vs.19·2%; P=0·0087 [Figure]). Higher efficacy was demonstrated for SECvs.ADA for PASI 100 responses and for the proportion of pts achieving absolute PASI score ≤3 (Table).

Conclusion:

In this pre-specified analysis, SEC provided higher responses compared to ADA in achievement of simultaneous improvement of joint and skin disease (combined ACR50 and PASI 100 response) and in skin specific endpoints (PASI 100 and PASI score ≤3) at Week 52.

References:

[1]Coates LC and Helliwell PS.Clinical Med.2017;17:65–70.

[2]Langley RG et al.N Engl J Med.2014;371:326–38.

Figure.

Combined ACR50 and PASI 100 Response through Week 52

Table.

Skin Specific Outcomes at Week 52

Endpoints, data is presented as % responseSEC 300 mg(N = 215)ADA 40 mg(N = 202)P-value (unadjusted)PASI 10046·029·70·0007Absolute PASI score ≤379·265·00·0015

P value vs. adalimumab; Unadjusted P values are presented

N, number of patients in psoriasis subset

Multiple imputation was used for handling missing data

ADA, adalimumab; BSA, body surface area; PASI, psoriasis area severity index; SEC, secukinumab

Acknowledgments:

Suchita Dubey (Novartis) provided medical writing support.

Disclosure of Interests:

Alice B Gottlieb Grant/research support from:: Research grants, consultation fees, or speaker honoraria for lectures from: Pfizer, AbbVie, BMS, Lilly, MSD, Novartis, Roche, Sanofi, Sandoz, Nordic, Celltrion and UCB., Consultant of:: Research grants, consultation fees, or speaker honoraria for lectures from: Pfizer, AbbVie, BMS, Lilly, MSD, Novartis, Roche, Sanofi, Sandoz, Nordic, Celltrion and UCB., Speakers bureau:: Research grants, consultation fees, or speaker honoraria for lectures from: Pfizer, AbbVie, BMS, Lilly, MSD, Novartis, Roche, Sanofi, Sandoz, Nordic, Celltrion and UCB., Frank Behrens Grant/research support from: Pfizer, Janssen, Chugai, Celgene, Lilly and Roche, Consultant of: Pfizer, AbbVie, Sanofi, Lilly, Novartis, Genzyme, Boehringer, Janssen, MSD, Celgene, Roche and Chugai, Peter Nash Grant/research support from: AbbVie, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Celgene, Eli Lilly and Company, Gilead, Janssen, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer Inc, Roche, Sanofi, UCB, Consultant of: AbbVie, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Celgene, Eli Lilly, Gilead, Janssen, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer Inc, Roche, Sanofi, UCB, Speakers bureau: AbbVie, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Celgene, Eli Lilly, Gilead, Janssen, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer Inc, Roche, Sanofi, UCB, Joseph F. Merola Consultant of: Merck, AbbVie, Dermavant, Eli Lilly, Novartis, Janssen, UCB Pharma, Celgene, Sanofi, Regeneron, Arena, Sun Pharma, Biogen, Pfizer, EMD Sorono, Avotres and LEO Pharma, Kevin Ding Employee of: Novartis, Pascale Pellet Shareholder of: Novartis, Employee of: Novartis, Luminita Pricop Shareholder of: Novartis, Employee of: Novartis, Iain McInnes Grant/research support from: Bristol-Myers Squibb, Celgene, Eli Lilly and Company, Janssen, and UCB, Consultant of: AbbVie, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Celgene, Eli Lilly and Company, Gilead, Janssen, Novartis, Pfizer, and UCB

THU0578 ONLINE CME IMPROVES CLINICAL DECISION-MAKING IN THE MANAGEMENT OF PATIENTS WITH PSORIATIC DISEASE

Background:

Psoriatic arthritis can be a challenging condition for rheumatologists to manage.

Objectives:

We assessed whether an online, virtual patient simulation (VPS) activity could improve the performance of rheumatologists in ordering appropriate tests, tailoring treatment options and selecting an evidence-based treatment for patients with PsA.

Methods:

This CME-certified VPS consisted of 2 patient cases presented in a platform that allowed physicians to assess the patients and complete open-field entries, choosing from an extensive database of diagnostic and treatment options reflecting the scope and depth of actual practice. After each decision, learners received clinical guidance (CG) based on current evidence and faculty recommendations. Clinical decisions were compared pre- and post-CG using a 2-tailed paired t-test to determinePvalues (P<.05 is significant). Rationales for clinical decisions were collected in real time. Data were collected between 28 February 2019 and 16 May 2019 and reported here as % relative improvement,Pvalue.

Results:

Case 1 (n=48 rheumatologists):

45 yr old female patient diagnosed with PSO 5 years ago. Current treatment with MTX 15mg & folic acid once weekly plus ibuprofen. Experiencing nausea and increasing skin lesions. Recently showing signs and symptoms of PsA.

Statistically significant changes were observed for:

•Ordering appropriate tests to evaluate the patient (chemistry panel, 11%,P=.04; full blood count [FBC], 10%,P=.04; IFNƴ release assay for TB, 22%,P=.01; liver function tests [LFTs],13%,P=.02; rheumatology consult, 19%,P=.01 and viral hepatitis panel, 52%,P<.001)

•Tailoring treatment options based on individual patient characteristics and available evidence (discontinue MTX [46%]and folic acid [140%], bothP<.001; order patient education, 24%,P=.006; guidance on lifestyle changes, 20%,P=.01; preventative vaccines prior to ant-TNF therapy, 38%,P=.002 and a followup appointment at an appropriate timescale, 26%,P=.006)

•Selecting an evidence-based therapy for a patient newly diagnosed with PsA while on MTX therapy (adalimumab, 138%,P<.001)

Case 2 (n=116 rheumatologists):

55 yr old male who has had PSO for 9 years. Developed joint symptoms 1 year ago. Diagnosed with PsA & treated with MTX/folic acid. Elevated liver enzymes noted after 9 months; treatment switched to adalimumab. Skin lesions much improved but ongoing issues with pain and stiffness in hands. Current medications are citalopram, adalimumab, simvastatin and triamcinolone for skin flares.

Statistically significant changes were observed for:

•Ordering appropriate tests to evaluate the patient (C-reactive protein [9%], erythrocyte sedimentation rate [9%] and FBC [17%], all P<.01; Beck depression inventory [51%], BSAxPGA [21%], chemistry panel [15%], Global QoL 13%], Leeds enthesitis index [25%], LFTs [32%], PGA [21%], RAPID3 [63%], total BSA [137%]and X-ray of hands and feet [27%], allP<.001)

•Tailoring treatment options based on individual patient characteristics and available evidence (discontinue biologic DMARD [67%], order patient education [22%], physical therapy [31%] and occupational therapy 27%], preventative vaccines [35%], psychosocial counselling [31%] and a follow-up appointment at an appropriate timescale [32%], allP<.001)

•Selecting an evidence-based therapy for a patient with inadequate control of PsA on adalimumab (secukinumab, 152%,P<.001; ixekizumab, 167%,P=.01)

Conclusion:

These results demonstrate the success of immersive, online VPS education that engages physicians in a practical learning experience in improving their performance in managing patients with PsA.

References:

[1]https://www.medscape.org/viewarticle/902369

Disclosure of Interests:

Elaine Bell: None declared, Alice B Gottlieb Grant/research support from:: Research grants, consultation fees, or speaker honoraria for lectures from: Pfizer, AbbVie, BMS, Lilly, MSD, Novartis, Roche, Sanofi, Sandoz, Nordic, Celltrion and UCB., Consultant of:: Research grants, consultation fees, or speaker honoraria for lectures from: Pfizer, AbbVie, BMS, Lilly, MSD, Novartis, Roche, Sanofi, Sandoz, Nordic, Celltrion and UCB., Speakers bureau:: Research grants, consultation fees, or speaker honoraria for lectures from: Pfizer, AbbVie, BMS, Lilly, MSD, Novartis, Roche, Sanofi, Sandoz, Nordic, Celltrion and UCB., Philip J Mease Grant/research support from: Abbott, Amgen, Biogen Idec, BMS, Celgene Corporation, Eli Lilly, Novartis, Pfizer, Sun Pharmaceutical, UCB – grant/research support, Consultant of: Abbott, Amgen, Biogen Idec, BMS, Celgene Corporation, Eli Lilly, Novartis, Pfizer, Sun Pharmaceutical, UCB – consultant, Speakers bureau: Abbott, Amgen, Biogen Idec, BMS, Eli Lilly, Genentech, Janssen, Pfizer, UCB – speakers bureau, Gwen Littman: None declared, Mark Via: None declared

FRI0087 DURABILITY OF CERTOLIZUMAB PEGOL IN PATIENTS WITH RHEUMATOID ARTHRITIS OR PSORIASIS OVER THREE YEARS: AN ANALYSIS OF POOLED CLINICAL TRIAL DATA

Background:

Durability over time varies according to the safety, tolerability and efficacy of a drug.1However, durability may vary between patient (pt) subgroups,1,2and physicians should consider pt characteristics when making treatment decisions. Certolizumab pegol (CZP) is an anti-tumour necrosis factor (anti-TNF) agent approved for the treatment of chronic inflammatory diseases, including rheumatoid arthritis (RA) and plaque psoriasis (PSO).3However, little is known about the impact of pt baseline characteristics on long-term CZP durability.

Objectives:

To investigate the durability of CZP and reasons for discontinuation over 3 years (yrs) in subgroups of pts with RA or PSO using pooled clinical trial data.

Methods:

27 RA and 3 PSO clinical trials were pooled for indication-specific analyses. Kaplan-Meier curves were calculated to estimate CZP durability for pt subgroups by age, gender, disease duration, prior anti-TNF use and geographic region. Reasons for CZP discontinuation were investigated.

Results:

6927 RA and 1112 PSO pts were included; mean ages were 53.0 yrs (standard deviation [SD]: 12.2 yrs) and 45.4 (13.0) yrs, respectively. 79.3% RA pts were female (of all patients, 19.4% were women of childbearing age [18–<45 yrs; WoCBA]) compared with 33.5% (15.2% WoCBA) in PSO. Mean disease durations were 6.4 (6.9) yrs for RA and 18.4 (12.3) yrs for PSO. 18.5% RA and 13.3% PSO pts had prior anti-TNF use. Maximum CZP exposure was ~8 yrs for RA and ~3 yrs for PSO. At 1 yr, 63.4% of RA pts remained on CZP vs 80.3% PSO pts, decreasing to 49.2% RA pts and 70.1% PSO pts at 3 yrs (Table 1). Reasons for discontinuation, at any time during the trials, included lack of efficacy (RA 13.5%; PSO 1.8%), adverse events (RA 11.9%; PSO 8.1%), consent withdrawn (RA 6.7%; PSO 6.7%), lost to follow-up (RA 1.8%; PSO 4.3%), protocol violation (RA 1.7%; PSO 0.3%) and other (RA 9.2%; PSO 8.7%). In RA pts, CZP durability was lower in the elderly and in pts with disease duration <1 yr. In PSO, durability was lower in pts with disease duration <1 yr or prior anti-TNF use. Durability was lower in WoCBA pts than male pts aged 18–<45 yrs for both indications. CZP durability was lower in Western Europe and North America compared to other regions.

Table 1.

CZP durability at 3 years,[a] by patient subgroup

% patientsRAPSOAll49.270.1Age, yrs 18–<4552.166.3 45–<6549.468.3 ≥6543.369.4Gender Female49.364.1 Male48.269.2 WoCBA51.162.0 Male aged 18–<45 yrs56.568.3Prior anti-TNF use Yes49.360.1 No49.668.5Disease duration, yrs <143.239.6 1–<552.663.6 5–<1051.464.4 ≥1048.769.7Region Asia-Pacific58.5 Central Europe61.578.8 Eastern Europe54.2 Latin America57.1 N America36.653.9 W Europe33.867.7 Rest of the world66.3

[a] For PSO, the 3 year analysis was calculated with Week 144 data. CZP: certolizumab pegol; N: North; PSO: psoriasis; RA: rheumatoid arthritis; TNF: tumour necrosis factor; W: Western; yrs: years.

Conclusion:

Overall, CZP durability was similar to that reported for other anti-TNFs with some differences between indication and subgroups.1Factors influencing durability included age, disease duration and geographic region. Gender differences were observed in the 18–45 yrs age group, however, both male and female CZP durability was higher than in older RA pts.

References:

[1]Neovius M. Ann Rheum Dis 2015;74:354–60;2.Lie E. Ann Rheum Dis 2015;74:970–8;3.EMA. CIMZIA SmPC 2019. Available at:https://www.ema.europa.eu[Last accessed 09/01/20].

Acknowledgments:

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

Disclosure of Interests:

Vivian Bykerk: None declared, Alice B Gottlieb Grant/research support from:: Research grants, consultation fees, or speaker honoraria for lectures from: Pfizer, AbbVie, BMS, Lilly, MSD, Novartis, Roche, Sanofi, Sandoz, Nordic, Celltrion and UCB., Consultant of:: Research grants, consultation fees, or speaker honoraria for lectures from: Pfizer, AbbVie, BMS, Lilly, MSD, Novartis, Roche, Sanofi, Sandoz, Nordic, Celltrion and UCB., Speakers bureau:: Research grants, consultation fees, or speaker honoraria for lectures from: Pfizer, AbbVie, BMS, Lilly, MSD, Novartis, Roche, Sanofi, Sandoz, Nordic, Celltrion and UCB., Kristian Reich Grant/research support from: Affibody; Almirall; Amgen; Biogen; Boehringer Ingelheim; Celgene; Centocor; Covagen; Eli Lilly; Forward Pharma; Fresenius Medical Care; GlaxoSmithKline; Janssen; Kyowa Kirin; LEO Pharma; Medac; Merck; Novartis; Miltenyi Biotec; Ocean Pharma; Pfizer; Regeneron; Samsung Bioepis; Sanofi Genzyme; Takeda; UCB; Valeant and Xenoport., Consultant of: Affibody; Almirall; Amgen; Biogen; Boehringer Ingelheim; Celgene; Centocor; Covagen; Eli Lilly; Forward Pharma; Fresenius Medical Care; GlaxoSmithKline; Janssen; Kyowa Kirin; LEO Pharma; Medac; Merck; Novartis; Miltenyi Biotec; Ocean Pharma; Pfizer; Regeneron; Samsung Bioepis; Sanofi Genzyme; Takeda; UCB; Valeant and Xenoport., Speakers bureau: Affibody; Almirall; Amgen; Biogen; Boehringer Ingelheim; Celgene; Centocor; Covagen; Eli Lilly; Forward Pharma; Fresenius Medical Care; GlaxoSmithKline; Janssen; Kyowa Kirin; LEO Pharma; Medac; Merck; Novartis; Miltenyi Biotec; Ocean Pharma; Pfizer; Regeneron; Samsung Bioepis; Sanofi Genzyme; Takeda; UCB; Valeant and Xenoport., Yoshiya Tanaka Grant/research support from: Asahi-kasei, Astellas, Mitsubishi-Tanabe, Chugai, Takeda, Sanofi, Bristol-Myers, UCB, Daiichi-Sankyo, Eisai, Pfizer, and Ono, Consultant of: Abbvie, Astellas, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Eli Lilly, Pfizer, Speakers bureau: Daiichi-Sankyo, Astellas, Chugai, Eli Lilly, Pfizer, AbbVie, YL Biologics, Bristol-Myers, Takeda, Mitsubishi-Tanabe, Novartis, Eisai, Janssen, Sanofi, UCB, and Teijin, Kevin Winthrop Grant/research support from: Bristol-Myers Squibb, Consultant of: AbbVie, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Eli Lilly, Galapagos, Gilead, GSK, Pfizer Inc, Roche, UCB, Christina Popova Employee of: UCB Pharma, Nicola Tilt Employee of: UCB Pharma, Andrew Blauvelt Consultant of: AbbVie, Aclaris, Almirall, Arena, Athenex, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Dermavant, Dermira, Eli Lilly, FLX Bio, Forte, Galderma, Janssen, Leo, Novartis, Ortho, Pfizer, Regeneron, Sandoz, Sanofi Genzyme, Sun Pharma, and UCB Pharma, Speakers bureau: AbbVie

SAT0417 TILDRAKIZUMAB EFFICACY ON PSORIASIS IN PATIENTS WITH PSORIATIC ARTHRITIS—A 52-WEEK ANALYSIS FROM A PHASE 2 STUDY

Background:

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

Objectives:

To evaluate the proportion with 75%/90%/100% improvement in Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI 75/90/100) among patients (pts) with PsA and measurable psoriasis (≥3% of the body surface area [BSA] affected at baseline) over 52 weeks of treatment.

Methods:

Pts ≥18 years old with PsA2and ≥3 tender and ≥3 swollen joints, stratified by prior anti-TNF use and baseline body weight (≤90 kg and >90 kg), were randomised 1:1:1:1:1 to receive TIL 200 mg every 4 weeks (Q4W) to week 52 (W52), TIL 200 mg every 12 weeks (Q12W) to W52, TIL 100 mg Q12W to W52, TIL 20 mg Q12W to W24→TIL 200 mg Q12W to W52, or placebo (PBO) Q4W to W24→TIL 200 mg Q12W to W52. PASI 75/90/100 were prespecified endpoints and were assessed by an independent assessor. Pts who received ≥1 dose of study drug were analysed. Safety assessments included treatment-emergent adverse event (TEAE) monitoring.

Results:

Overall, 391/500 pts screened met inclusion criteria; 235 (60.1%) had ≥3% BSA involvement at baseline (41–55/treatment arm). Demographics and baseline disease characteristics were generally consistent across treatment arms. Mean (standard deviation [SD]) age was 48.8 (12.6) years, average body mass index was 29.7, 96.7% of pts were White, and 23.3% were anti–tumour necrosis factor (TNF)-experienced. At baseline, the mean (SD) PASI score was 6.8 (8.2) and mean (SD) BSA affected was 10.5% (14.3%) overall. Among pts with baseline BSA ≥3%, TIL treatment significantly increased the proportion of PASI 75/90/100 responders vs PBO at W24; the proportion of responders continued to increase thereafter and was sustained through W52 (Figure). Similarly, in pts switching from PBO→TIL 200 mg Q12W or escalating from TIL 20→200 mg Q12W after W24, PASI 75/90/100 response rates increased through W36 and remained stable through W52. From W0→W24/W25→W52, 50.4%/39.9% pts experienced a TEAE. The most frequent TEAEs were nasopharyngitis (pooled TIL arms 5.4%/4.2% vs PBO 6.3%/3.8%) and upper respiratory tract infection (pooled TIL arms 3.8%/4.2% vs PBO 1.3%/0.0%). One pt (0.3%) discontinued before 24 weeks due to hypertension. There were no deaths or major adverse cardiac events during W0→W24 or W25→W52.

Conclusion:

PASI75/90/100 response rates progressively improved with treatment; PASI 75 responses were significantly improved vs placebo as early as W4 (TIL 200 mg Q12W), and all response rates were significantly improved vs placebo at W24. Response rates continued to improve through W36 and were sustained through W52. These results demonstrate TIL significantly reduced psoriasis disease activity and was generally well tolerated in a mixed population of anti–TNF-naïve and -experienced patients with PsA and BSA ≥3% through W52.

References:

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

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

Disclosure of Interests:

Alice B Gottlieb Grant/research support from:: Research grants, consultation fees, or speaker honoraria for lectures from: Pfizer, AbbVie, BMS, Lilly, MSD, Novartis, Roche, Sanofi, Sandoz, Nordic, Celltrion and UCB., Consultant of:: Research grants, consultation fees, or speaker honoraria for lectures from: Pfizer, AbbVie, BMS, Lilly, MSD, Novartis, Roche, Sanofi, Sandoz, Nordic, Celltrion and UCB., Speakers bureau:: Research grants, consultation fees, or speaker honoraria for lectures from: Pfizer, AbbVie, BMS, Lilly, MSD, Novartis, Roche, Sanofi, Sandoz, Nordic, Celltrion and UCB., Christopher T. Ritchlin Grant/research support from: UCB Pharma, AbbVie, Amgen, Consultant of: UCB Pharma, Amgen, AbbVie, Lilly, Pfizer, Novartis, Gilead, Janssen, Richard C Chou Consultant of: Sun Pharmaceutical Industries, Inc, Alan M Mendelsohn Shareholder of: Johnson and Johnson, Employee of: Sun Pharmaceutical Industries, Inc, Stephen Rozzo Employee of: Sun Pharmaceutical Industries, Inc, Luis Espinoza: None declared

AB0778 ASSOCIATION BETWEEN PATIENT-REPORTED OUTCOMES AND DISEASE ACTIVITY IN BIMEKIZUMAB-TREATED PATIENTS WITH PSORIATIC ARTHRITIS

Background:

Bimekizumab (BKZ) is a humanised IgG1 monoclonal antibody, which selectively neutralises interleukin (IL)-17A and IL-17F. There is support for the BKZ mechanism of action as a novel therapeutic approach for psoriatic arthritis (PsA).1-3The phase 2b dose-ranging BE ACTIVE study assessed the efficacy and safety of BKZ in patients (pts) with PsA; data are reported elsewhere.4Patient-reported outcomes (PROs) are increasingly recognised as important endpoints in clinical trials.5The Psoriatic Arthritis Impact of Disease-9 (PsAID-9) questionnaire was specifically developed to assess health-related quality of life (QoL) in pts with PsA5and its validity in clinical practice has been demonstrated.5-6

Objectives:

To report the association between PsAID-9 score (a PRO) and disease activity response (very low disease activity [VLDA], minimal disease activity [MDA] or Disease Activity Index for Psoriatic Arthritis [DAPSA] remission) during 48 weeks’ (wks’) BKZ treatment.

Methods:

Details of the study design (NCT02969525) are reported elsewhere.4Here, we report the proportion of pts who achieved a PsAID-9 score ≤3, and the association between PsAID-9 score at Wk 48 (range 0–10, where 10 corresponds to worst QoL) and VLDA/MDA (binary states of disease control) or DAPSA (range 0–>28 where 0–4 is remission, 5–14 is low, 15–28 is moderate, and >28 is high disease activity) at Wk 12.

Results:

Across 206 randomised pts at baseline, 66.5% had psoriasis body surface area (BSA) ≥3%, 18.9% had prior tumour necrosis factor inhibitor (TNFi) exposure, and 63.6% received concomitant methotrexate. A substantial proportion of pts achieved MDA and/or DAPSA remission by Wk 12, which generally increased through to Wk 24 and 48 (Table 1). The 160 mg BKZ group saw the highest Wk 48 rates of MDA response (60.0%) and DAPSA remission (45.0%) (Table 1). The proportion of pts achieving a PsAID-9 score ≤3 was consistently high across all active treatment arms (Figure 1). PsAID-9 score was consistently lower (indicating better QoL) for pts with VLDA or MDA, and those in DAPSA remission (Figure 2), indicating that low disease activity was associated with improved PROs.

Conclusion:

In BKZ-treated pts, improvements in PsAID-9 were associated with achievement of VLDA/MDA response and DAPSA remission. These results suggest that pts achieving higher disease control have improved QoL.

References:

[1]Glatt S. Ann Rheum Dis 2018;77:523–32;2.Glatt S. Br J Clin Pharmacol 2017;83:991–1001;3.Papp KA. J Am Acad Dermatol 2018;79:277–86;4.Ritchlin CT. Ann Rheum Dis 2019;78:127–8;5.Gossec L. Ann Rheum Dis 2014;73:1012–19;6.Johnson K. Semin Arthritis Rheum 2019;49:241–45.

Table 1.

MDA and DAPSA responder rates

Treatment armMDA (%) [a]DAPSA remission (%) [b]Wk 12Wk 24Wk 48Wk 12Wk 24Wk 48BKZ 160 mg (n=40)47.550.060.020.035.045.0BKZ 160 mg LD (n=37) [c]43.259.554.129.748.637.8BKZ 320 mg (n=41)29.336.646.312.219.534.1

[a] DBS, pts with missing data were counted as non-responders; [b] DBS, missing data are imputed using last observation carried forward; [c] 160 mg with 320 mg LD at baseline. BKZ: bimekizumab; DAPSA: Disease Activity Index for Psoriatic Arthritis; DBS: dose-blind set; LD: loading dose; MDA: minimal disease activity.

Acknowledgments:

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

Disclosure of Interests:

Laure Gossec Grant/research support from: Lilly, Mylan, Pfizer, Sandoz, Consultant of: AbbVie, Amgen, Biogen, Celgene, Janssen, Lilly, Novartis, Pfizer, Sandoz, Sanofi-Aventis, UCB, Philip J Mease Grant/research support from: Abbott, Amgen, Biogen Idec, BMS, Celgene Corporation, Eli Lilly, Novartis, Pfizer, Sun Pharmaceutical, UCB – grant/research support, Consultant of: Abbott, Amgen, Biogen Idec, BMS, Celgene Corporation, Eli Lilly, Novartis, Pfizer, Sun Pharmaceutical, UCB – consultant, Speakers bureau: Abbott, Amgen, Biogen Idec, BMS, Eli Lilly, Genentech, Janssen, Pfizer, UCB – speakers bureau, Alice B Gottlieb Grant/research support from:: Research grants, consultation fees, or speaker honoraria for lectures from: Pfizer, AbbVie, BMS, Lilly, MSD, Novartis, Roche, Sanofi, Sandoz, Nordic, Celltrion and UCB., Consultant of:: Research grants, consultation fees, or speaker honoraria for lectures from: Pfizer, AbbVie, BMS, Lilly, MSD, Novartis, Roche, Sanofi, Sandoz, Nordic, Celltrion and UCB., Speakers bureau:: Research grants, consultation fees, or speaker honoraria for lectures from: Pfizer, AbbVie, BMS, Lilly, MSD, Novartis, Roche, Sanofi, Sandoz, Nordic, Celltrion and UCB., Alexis Ogdie Grant/research support from: Pfizer to Penn, Novartis to Penn, Amgen to Forward/NDB, Consultant of: Abbvie, Amgen, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Celgene, Corrona, Janssen, Eli Lilly, Novartis, Pfizer, Deepak Assudani Employee of: UCB Pharma, Jason Coarse Employee of: UCB Pharma, Barbara Ink Shareholder of: GlaxoSmithKline and UCB Pharma, Employee of: UCB Pharma, Laura C Coates: None declared

SAT0402 EFFICACY AND SAFETY OF GUSELKUMAB, A MONOCLONAL ANTIBODY SPECIFIC TO THE P19-SUBUNIT OF INTERLEUKIN-23, THROUGH WEEK 52 OF A PHASE 3, RANDOMIZED, DOUBLE-BLIND, PLACEBO-CONTROLLED STUDY CONDUCTED IN BIOLOGIC-NAÏVE PATIENTS WITH ACTIVE PSORIATIC ARTHRITIS

Background:

Guselkumab (GUS), a monoclonal antibody that specifically binds to the p19-subunit of IL-23, is approved to treat psoriasis. Through Week24 (W24) of the Ph3, double-blind, placebo (PBO)-controlled trial in biologic-naïve pts with active PsA (DISCOVER-2), GUS every 4 or 8 weeks (Q4W or Q8W) demonstrated efficacy for joint & skin symptoms and inhibition of structural damage progression (Q4W), and was well tolerated.

Objectives:

Assess GUS efficacy and safety through W52.

Methods:

Biologic-naïve adults with active PsA (≥5 swollen+≥5 tender joints; CRP ≥0.6mg/dL) were randomized (1:1:1) to GUS 100 mg Q4W; GUS 100 mg at W0, W4, Q8W; or PBO. At W24, PBO pts crossed over to GUS 100 mg Q4W (PBO X Q4W). ACR response rates at W52, based on nonresponder imputation (NRI) for missing data and as observed in pts who continued study agent at W24, are shown. Observed data for additional endpoints, including PsA-modified van der Heijde Sharp (vdH-S) scores derived from blinded radiographic images collected at W0, W24, W52 (or at d/c) and scored in a new Read Campaign, are shown.

Results:

712/739 (96.3%) randomized & treated pts continued study agent at W24; 689/739 (93.2%) completed Wk52. NRI ACR20 response rates continued to increase after W24, and at W52 were 70.6% for GUS Q4W and 74.6% for GUS Q8W (Fig 1A). Similar response patterns were observed for the more stringent ACR50/70 criteria (Fig 1C,E). Observed ACR (Fig, 1B,D,F), IGA, PASI & MDA/VLDA responses; dactylitis & enthesitis resolution; and mean improvements in HAQ-DI and SF-36 PCS/MCS scores were also sustained through W52 in pts receiving Q4W & Q8W; W52 data for PBO X Q4W pts were generally consistent with other GUS-treated pts (Fig 1, Table 1). Changes in vdH-S scores were similar for W24-52 (0.62) and W0-24 (0.46) for Q4W; less radiographic progression occurred from W24-52 v W0-24 for Q8W (0.23 v 0.73) & PBO X Q4W (0.25 v 1.00). In 731 GUS-treated pts, 4.2% had SAEs; 1.2% had serious infections; no pt died; and no pt had IBD, opportunistic infections or active TB, or anaphylactic or serum sickness-like reactions.

Table 1.

Observed Efficacy1

GUSQ4WGUSQ8WPBO X(W0-24)GUS Q4W(W24-52)Data are % unless otherwise statedW24W52W24W52W24W52Dactylitis at W0,n1161111071059593Resolution68.181.160.781.941.178.5Enthesitis at W0,n165160151148172168Resolution45.560.057.665.532.667.3≥3% BSA psoriasis, IGA ≥2 at W0,n176173172170176172IGA 0/1 + ≥2-grade decrease71.084.472.177.119.984.3PASI7581.891.980.888.823.388.4PASI9063.681.570.377.110.276.7PASI10046.661.346.554.72.855.2HAQ-DI,n234229238234237230Mean change-0.4-0.5-0.4-0.5-0.2-0.4SF-36 scores,n (mean change)234229238234237230Physical Component - PCS7.29.07.89.53.88.1Mental Component - MCS4.14.14.54.52.24.3MDA/VLDA, n234228238234238231MDA19.736.826.532.96.331.6VLDA5.112.224.6317.11.36.9

1Randomized pts still on study agent at W24;2N=229;3N=237

Conclusion:

In biologic-naïve pts with active PsA, GUS elicited sustained improvements in joint & skin symptoms; inhibition of radiographic progression & improvements in physical function, quality of life & composite indices through W52. GUS safety in PsA was similar at W241& W52 and consistent with GUS safety in psoriasis.

References:

[1]Mease P (A#L13), Arthritis Rheumatol 2019;71(suppl 10)

Acknowledgments:

None

Disclosure of Interests:

Iain McInnes Grant/research support from: Bristol-Myers Squibb, Celgene, Eli Lilly and Company, Janssen, and UCB, Consultant of: AbbVie, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Celgene, Eli Lilly and Company, Gilead, Janssen, Novartis, Pfizer, and UCB, Proton Rahman Grant/research support from: Janssen and Novartis, Consultant of: Abbott, AbbVie, Amgen, BMS, Celgene, Lilly, Janssen, Novartis, and Pfizer., Speakers bureau: Abbott, AbbVie, Amgen, BMS, Celgene, Lilly, Janssen, Novartis, Pfizer, Alice B Gottlieb Grant/research support from:: Research grants, consultation fees, or speaker honoraria for lectures from: Pfizer, AbbVie, BMS, Lilly, MSD, Novartis, Roche, Sanofi, Sandoz, Nordic, Celltrion and UCB., Consultant of:: Research grants, consultation fees, or speaker honoraria for lectures from: Pfizer, AbbVie, BMS, Lilly, MSD, Novartis, Roche, Sanofi, Sandoz, Nordic, Celltrion and UCB., Speakers bureau:: Research grants, consultation fees, or speaker honoraria for lectures from: Pfizer, AbbVie, BMS, Lilly, MSD, Novartis, Roche, Sanofi, Sandoz, Nordic, Celltrion and UCB., Elizabeth C Hsia Shareholder of: Johnson & Johnson, Employee of: Janssen Research & Development, LLC, Alexa Kollmeier Shareholder of: Johnson & Johnson, Employee of: Janssen Research & Development, LLC, Xie L Xu Shareholder of: Johnson & Johnson, Employee of: Janssen Research & Development, LLC, Ramanand A Subramanian Employee of: Janssen Research & Development, LLC, Prasheen Agarwal Shareholder of: Johnson & Johnson, Employee of: Janssen Research & Development, LLC, Shihong Sheng Shareholder of: Johnson & Johnson, Employee of: Janssen Research & Development, LLC, Yusang Jiang: None declared, Bei Zhou Shareholder of: Johnson & Johnson, Employee of: Janssen Research & Development, LLC, Désirée van der Heijde Consultant of: AbbVie, Amgen, Astellas, AstraZeneca, BMS, Boehringer Ingelheim, Celgene, Cyxone, Daiichi, Eisai, Eli-Lilly, Galapagos, Gilead Sciences, Inc., Glaxo-Smith-Kline, Janssen, Merck, Novartis, Pfizer, Regeneron, Roche, Sanofi, Takeda, UCB Pharma; Director of Imaging Rheumatology BV, Philip J Mease Grant/research support from: Abbott, Amgen, Biogen Idec, BMS, Celgene Corporation, Eli Lilly, Novartis, Pfizer, Sun Pharmaceutical, UCB – grant/research support, Consultant of: Abbott, Amgen, Biogen Idec, BMS, Celgene Corporation, Eli Lilly, Novartis, Pfizer, Sun Pharmaceutical, UCB – consultant, Speakers bureau: Abbott, Amgen, Biogen Idec, BMS, Eli Lilly, Genentech, Janssen, Pfizer, UCB – speakers bureau

Certolizumab pegol for the treatment of patients with moderate-to-severe chronic plaque psoriasis: pooled analysis of week 16 data from three randomized controlled trials

BACKGROUND

Certolizumab pegol, an Fc-free, PEGylated, anti-tumour necrosis factor (TNF) biologic, has demonstrated favourable results in three ongoing, phase 3, randomized, double-blinded, placebo-controlled trials in adults with psoriasis.

OBJECTIVE

Data were pooled from the ongoing trials to investigate efficacy in selected subgroups and add precision to estimates of treatment effects during the initial 16 weeks of treatment.

METHODS

In each trial, patients ≥18 years with moderate-to-severe chronic plaque psoriasis for ≥6 months were randomized to receive certolizumab 400 mg, certolizumab 200 mg or placebo every 2 weeks for 16 weeks. Coprimary endpoints for the pooled analysis were responder rates at Week 16, defined as ≥75% reduction in psoriasis area and severity index (PASI 75) and physician global assessment (PGA) of 0/1 ('clear'/'almost clear' with ≥2-category improvement). Safety was assessed by treatment-emergent adverse events.

RESULTS

A total of 850 patients treated with certolizumab 400 mg (N = 342), certolizumab 200 mg (N = 351) or placebo (N = 157) were included in the pooled analysis. At Week 16, PASI 75 and PGA 0/1 responder rates were 80.1% and 63.7% in the certolizumab 400 mg group, 74.5% and 54.6% in the certolizumab 200 mg group, and 7.5% and 2.8% in the placebo group (P < 0.0001 for each dose versus placebo). In patients with and without prior biologic therapy, both doses of certolizumab resulted in substantially higher responder rates versus placebo. The incidence of adverse events was generally similar between the 400 mg and placebo groups, and somewhat lower in the 200 mg group versus placebo. No new safety signals were identified.

CONCLUSION

Certolizumab pegol 400 mg or 200 mg every 2 weeks for 16 weeks was associated with statistically significant and clinically meaningful improvements in signs and symptoms of psoriasis in patients with and without prior biologic therapy, and a safety profile consistent with the anti-TNF class in psoriasis.

Benefit-risk profile of tofacitinib in patients with moderate-to-severe chronic plaque psoriasis: pooled analysis across six clinical trials

Background

Although existing psoriasis treatments are effective and well tolerated in many patients, there is still a need for new effective targeted treatment options. Tofacitinib is an oral Janus kinase inhibitor that has been investigated in patients with moderate‐to‐severe chronic plaque psoriasis.

Objectives

To consider the benefits and risks of tofacitinib in patients with moderate‐to‐severe psoriasis.

Methods

Data were pooled from one phase II, four phase III and one long‐term extension study comprising 5204 patient‐years of tofacitinib treatment. Efficacy end points included patients achieving Physician's Global Assessments of ‘clear’ or ‘almost clear’, ≥ 75% and ≥ 90% reduction in Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (coprimary end points) and improvements in Dermatology Life Quality Index score, Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale depression score and Itch Severity Item score, at weeks 16 and 52. Safety data were summarized for 3 years of tofacitinib exposure.

Results

Tofacitinib 5 and 10 mg twice daily (BID) showed superiority over placebo for all efficacy end points at week 16, with response maintained for 52 weeks of continued treatment. Tofacitinib improved patients’ quality of life and was well tolerated. Rates of safety events of interest (except herpes zoster) were similar to those in the published literature and healthcare databases for other systemic psoriasis therapies. Tofacitinib 10 mg BID demonstrated greater efficacy than 5 mg BID.

Conclusions

Tofacitinib has a benefit–risk profile in moderate‐to‐severe psoriasis consistent with that of other systemic treatments.

What's already known about this topic?

Psoriasis is a chronic, systemic inflammatory disease, which has a significant impact on patients’ health‐related quality of life.

Although several existing psoriasis treatments are efficacious and well tolerated in many patients, some patients require treatment switching, and a proportion of patients remain untreated or undertreated.

Potential challenges to the use of existing therapies include safety issues and limited efficacy in some patients with conventional oral psoriasis treatments, inconvenience of topical treatments and the requirement for parenteral administration of biologics.

What does this study add?

Consistent efficacy and a safety profile consistent with that seen in rheumatoid arthritis, psoriatic arthritis and ulcerative colitis were demonstrated for oral tofacitinib in patients with moderate‐to‐severe psoriasis.

Tofacitinib has a benefit–risk profile in patients with moderate‐to‐severe psoriasis that is consistent with that of other systemic psoriasis treatments.

Linked Comment: Fleming. Br J Dermatol 2019; 180:13–14.

Plain language summary available online

Respond to this article

A core domain set for hidradenitis suppurativa trial outcomes: an international Delphi process

BACKGROUND

There is no consensus on core outcome domains for hidradenitis suppurativa (HS). Heterogeneous outcome measure instruments in clinical trials likely leads to outcome-reporting bias and limits the ability to synthesize evidence.

OBJECTIVES

To achieve global multistakeholder consensus on a core outcome set (COS) of domains regarding what to measure in clinical trials for HS.

METHODS

Six stakeholder groups participated in a Delphi process that included five anonymous e-Delphi rounds and four face-to-face consensus meetings to reach consensus on the final COS. The aim was for a 1 : 1 ratio of patients to healthcare professionals (HCPs).

RESULTS

A total of 41 patients and 52 HCPs from 19 countries in four continents participated in the consensus process, which yielded a final COS that included five domains: pain, physical signs, HS-specific quality of life, global assessment and progression of course. A sixth domain, symptoms, was highly supported by patients and not by HCPs but is recommended for the core domain set.

CONCLUSIONS

Routine adoption of the COS in future HS trials should ensure that core outcomes of importance to both patients and HCPs are collected.

Impact of previous biologic use on the efficacy and safety of brodalumab and ustekinumab in patients with moderate-to-severe plaque psoriasis: integrated analysis of the randomized controlled trials AMAGINE-2 and AMAGINE-3

BACKGROUND

Biologics are being used increasingly to treat moderate-to-severe psoriasis. Efficacy may differ in patients with previous exposure to biologics.

OBJECTIVES

To investigate the impact of previous biologic exposure on the efficacy and safety of brodalumab and ustekinumab in patients with moderate-to-severe plaque psoriasis.

METHODS

Two placebo- and ustekinumab-controlled phase III clinical trials. There was an initial 12-week induction phase where patients were treated with brodalumab [210 mg or 140 mg every 2 weeks (Q2W)], ustekinumab or placebo. Efficacy end points included ≥ 75% improvement in Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI 75) and static Physician's Global Assessment (score of 0 or 1) vs. placebo, PASI 100 vs. ustekinumab, Dermatology Life Quality Index and Psoriasis Symptom Inventory. Adverse events were monitored throughout.

RESULTS

In total, 493 patients [334 (27%) brodalumab 210 mg Q2W and 159 (26%) ustekinumab] had received prior biologics; 150 (12%) and 62 (10%), respectively, reported previously failed treatment with a biologic. Brodalumab efficacy in patients with or without previous exposure to biologics was statistically equivalent: 40·9% and 39·5% of biologic-naive and -experienced patients achieved PASI 100 at week 12, compared with 21·1% and 17·0% with ustekinumab (both P < 0·001). In patients where prior biologics had been successful or failed, 41·7% and 32·0% achieved PASI 100, compared with 21·1% and 11·3% with ustekinumab. Tolerability was similar, and did not appear to be influenced by previous treatment with biologics.

CONCLUSIONS

The efficacy of brodalumab 210 mg Q2W was similar regardless of prior biological therapy (P = 0·31, 0·32 and 0·64 for PASI 75, 90 and 100, respectively). Almost twice as many patients achieved PASI 100 or complete clearance with brodalumab at week 12 compared with ustekinumab; the differences were most noticeable where previous biologics had failed. Both treatments were well tolerated.

Improvement in itch and other psoriasis symptoms with brodalumab in phase 3 randomized controlled trials

BACKGROUND

Patients with psoriasis have lesional symptoms, including itch, which can reduce quality of life. The efficacy and safety of brodalumab, an interleukin-17 receptor A antagonist, in treating moderate-to-severe psoriasis have been reported in three randomized, controlled, phase 3 trials (AMAGINE-1/-2/-3).

OBJECTIVE

The effect of brodalumab on lesional symptoms was assessed using the psoriasis symptom inventory (PSI), a validated patient-reported instrument.

METHODS

Patients were randomized to receive brodalumab (140 or 210 mg every 2 weeks [Q2W]), placebo (AMAGINE-1/-2/-3), or ustekinumab (AMAGINE-2/-3) during a 12-week induction phase, followed by a maintenance phase through week 52. Patients electronically rated the severity of PSI items (itch, burning, stinging, pain, redness, scaling, cracking and flaking) during the previous 24 h on a scale of 0 (not at all severe) to 4 (very severe). At each visit, the PSI total score responder status was assessed, with responders defined as having an average weekly total inventory score ≤8 with no item score >1 at week 12.

RESULTS

Across AMAGINE-1/-2/-3, brodalumab was associated with improvements in PSI total scores and itch scores vs. placebo from week 2 through week 12 (P < 0.001 in both domains). In AMAGINE-2/-3, brodalumab 210 mg Q2W demonstrated faster onset of PSI total score and itch responses (week 2, 22.1% and 36.4%, respectively) vs. ustekinumab (week 2, 6.9% and 17.1%, respectively) and was associated with improved itch responses vs. ustekinumab after 52 weeks of constant treatment.

CONCLUSION

Brodalumab demonstrated rapid, robust improvements in symptoms assessed by the PSI, including itch, vs. placebo and ustekinumab.

Towards global consensus on core outcomes for hidradenitis suppurativa research: an update from the HISTORIC consensus meetings I and II

BACKGROUND

A core outcomes set (COS) is an agreed minimum set of outcomes that should be measured and reported in all clinical trials for a specific condition. Hidradenitis suppurativa (HS) has no agreed-upon COS. A central aspect in the COS development process is to identify a set of candidate outcome domains from a long list of items. Our long list had been developed from patient interviews, a systematic review of the literature and a healthcare professional survey, and initial votes had been cast in two e-Delphi surveys. In this manuscript, we describe two in-person consensus meetings of Delphi participants designed to ensure an inclusive approach to generation of domains from related items.

OBJECTIVES

To consider which items from a long list of candidate items to exclude and which to cluster into outcome domains.

METHODS

The study used an international and multistakeholder approach, involving patients, dermatologists, surgeons, the pharmaceutical industry and medical regulators. The study format was a combination of formal presentations, small group work based on nominal group theory and a subsequent online confirmation survey.

RESULTS

Forty-one individuals from 13 countries and four continents participated. Nine items were excluded and there was consensus to propose seven domains: disease course, physical signs, HS-specific quality of life, satisfaction, symptoms, pain and global assessments.

CONCLUSIONS

The HISTORIC consensus meetings I and II will be followed by further e-Delphi rounds to finalize the core domain set, building on the work of the in-person consensus meetings.

Ixekizumab treatment improves fingernail psoriasis in patients with moderate-to-severe psoriasis: results from the randomized, controlled and open-label phases of UNCOVER-3

BACKGROUND

Fingernail psoriasis is difficult to treat.

OBJECTIVE

The objective was to evaluate the effect of ixekizumab, a monoclonal antibody selectively targeting IL-17A, on fingernail psoriasis.

METHODS

This Phase 3, double-blind trial (UNCOVER-3) randomized patients to placebo, etanercept (50-mg twice weekly), or 80 mg ixekizumab as one injection every 4 (IXE Q4W) or 2 weeks (IXE Q2W) after a 160-mg starting dose. At Week 12, ixekizumab patients received open-label IXE Q4W through Week 60; placebo patients received a 160-mg starting ixekizumab dose and etanercept patients a 4-week placebo washout before starting IXE Q4W. Efficacy was assessed by mean per cent Nail Psoriasis Severity Index (NAPSI) improvement at Weeks 12 and 60.

RESULTS

Of 1346 patients in the UNCOVER-3 trial, this subgroup analysis included only patients with baseline fingernail psoriasis: 116 (60.1%) placebo, 236 (61.8%) etanercept, 228 (59.1%) IXE Q4W and 229 (59.5%) IXE Q2W. At Week 12, greater mean per cent NAPSI improvements were achieved in IXE Q4W (36.7%) and IXE Q2W (35.2%) vs. placebo (-34.3%, P < 0.001 each comparison) and etanercept (20.0%, P = 0.048 vs. Q4W, P = 0.072 vs. Q2W). At Week 60, mean per cent NAPSI improvement was >80% regardless of initial treatment. At Week 12 (nonresponder imputation), complete resolution (NAPSI = 0) was achieved in 19.7% (IXE Q4W), 17.5% (IXE Q2W), 4.3% (placebo, P < 0.001 each comparison) and 10.2% (etanercept, P < 0.05 each comparison) of patients. By Week 60, >50% of patients achieved complete resolution.

CONCLUSIONS

At Week 12, significant improvements in fingernail psoriasis were achieved with ixekizumab therapy. With IXE Q4W maintenance dosing, additional improvement was demonstrated through 60 weeks, and >50% of patients achieved complete resolution. Registered at clinicaltrials.gov: NCT01646177.

Treatment outcomes with ixekizumab in patients with moderate-to-severe psoriasis who have or have not received prior biological therapies: an integrated analysis of two Phase III randomized studies

Background

Biologics are effective for the treatment of psoriasis. However, treatment outcomes may differ among biologic‐naive patients and those switched from previous biological therapies.

Objectives

The study's objective was to investigate efficacy and safety of ixekizumab, a high‐affinity anti‐interleukin‐17A antibody, in patients with psoriasis with and without previous exposure to biologics.

Methods

Data were integrated from the 12‐week induction phase of two etanercept‐controlled Phase III trials. Patients received 80 mg ixekizumab every 2 weeks (IXE Q2W; N = 736) or every 4 weeks (IXE Q4W; N = 733) following a 160‐mg starting dose, or placebo (N = 361). Etanercept (50 mg twice weekly; N = 740) was administered as active control. Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI) 75, PASI 90 and PASI 100 response rates at week 12 were evaluated in patients with or without previous exposure to biologics. Treatment effects were analysed with the Cochran–Mantel–Haenszel test stratified by study; missing values were imputed as non‐response.

Results

Overall, 497 (19.3%) patients had prior exposure to biologics and 2073 (80.7%) were naive to biologic therapy. PASI 75 was achieved by 91.5% of biologic‐experienced patients and 87.7% of biologic‐naive patients for IXE Q2W, 76.2% and 82.2% for IXE Q4W, respectively, and 34.6% and 50.7%, respectively, for etanercept. Higher response rates favouring each ixekizumab dose over etanercept within subgroups were also seen regarding PASI 90 and PASI 100.

Conclusions

Contrary to etanercept, the efficacy of ixekizumab was similarly high in patients with and without previous exposure to biologics when administered 80 mg every 2 weeks.

A prospective phase III, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study of brodalumab in patients with moderate-to-severe plaque psoriasis

BACKGROUND

The interleukin-17 cytokine family plays a central role in psoriasis pathogenesis.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the efficacy and safety of brodalumab, a human anti-interleukin-17 receptor antibody, in treating patients with moderate-to-severe plaque psoriasis.

METHODS

In this phase III, double-blind, placebo-controlled study (NCT01708590; AMAGINE-1), adult patients in the U.S.A., Canada and Europe were randomized to brodalumab (140 or 210 mg) or placebo every 2 weeks (Q2W), with an additional dose at week 1, for a 12-week induction phase. At week 12, patients receiving brodalumab who achieved static Physician's Global Assessment 0 or 1 (sPGA success) were rerandomized to the placebo or induction dose. After week 16, patients with sPGA ≥ 3 were re-treated with the induction dose. After ≥ 12 weeks of retreatment, patients with sPGA 2 for ≥ 4 weeks or sPGA ≥ 3 were rescued with brodalumab 210 mg Q2W. At week 12, patients randomized to brodalumab with sPGA ≥ 2 or placebo received brodalumab 210 mg Q2W. Coprimary end points were the percentage of patients with ≥ 75% improvement in Psoriasis Area and Severity Index score (PASI 75) and sPGA success at week 12.

RESULTS

There were 661 patients randomized: 220 placebo, 219 brodalumab 140 mg and 222 brodalumab 210 mg. At week 12, 60% (140 mg) and 83% (210 mg) vs. 3% (placebo) achieved PASI 75, and 54% (140 mg) and 76% (210 mg) vs. 1% (placebo) achieved sPGA success. The safety profile was considered acceptable.

CONCLUSIONS

Brodalumab therapy resulted in significant clinical benefit and an acceptable safety profile in patients with moderate-to-severe plaque psoriasis.

Tildrakizumab (MK-3222), an anti-interleukin-23p19 monoclonal antibody, improves psoriasis in a phase IIb randomized placebo-controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Tildrakizumab is a high-affinity, humanized, IgG1/κ, anti-interleukin (IL)-23p19 monoclonal antibody that does not bind human IL-12 or p40 is being developed for the treatment of chronic plaque psoriasis.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the safety and efficacy of subcutaneous tildrakizumab in patients with moderate-to-severe chronic plaque psoriasis.

METHODS

A three-part, randomized, double-blind, phase IIb trial was conducted in 355 adults with chronic plaque psoriasis. Participants were randomized to receive subcutaneous tildrakizumab (5, 25, 100, 200 mg) or placebo at weeks 0 and 4 (part I) and every 12 weeks thereafter until week 52 (part II). Study drug was discontinued at week 52 and participants were followed through week 72 (part III). Primary efficacy end point was Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI) 75 response at week 16. Adverse events (AEs) and vital signs were monitored throughout the study.

RESULTS

At week 16, PASI 75 responses were 33·3% (n = 14), 64·4% (n = 58), 66·3% (n = 59), 74·4% (n = 64) and 4·4% (n = 2) in the 5-, 25-, 100- and 200-mg tildrakizumab and placebo groups, respectively (P ≤ 0·001 for each tildrakizumab dose vs. placebo). PASI 75 response was generally maintained through week 52; only eight of 222 participants who achieved PASI 75 response at week 52 and continued to part III relapsed following discontinuation up to week 72. Possible drug-related serious AEs included bacterial arthritis and lymphoedema (part I), and melanoma, stroke, epiglottitis and knee infection (part II).

CONCLUSIONS

Tildrakizumab had treatment effects that were superior to placebo, maintained for 52 weeks of treatment, and persisted for 20 weeks after cessation. Tildrakizumab was generally safe and well tolerated. These results suggest that IL-23p19 is a key target for suppressing psoriasis.

Downmodulation of key inflammatory cell markers with a topical Janus kinase 1/2 inhibitor

BACKGROUND

INCB018424 is a novel, potent Janus kinase (JAK)1/JAK2 inhibitor that blocks signal transduction of multiple proinflammatory cytokines.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the safety, tolerability, pharmacokinetics, pharmacodynamics and preliminary efficacy of topical INCB018424 phosphate cream in patients with plaque psoriasis.

METHODS

Topical INCB018424 phosphate 1·0% or 1·5% cream was applied once daily (QD) or twice daily (BID) for 4 weeks to 2-20% body surface area in five sequential cohorts of five patients aged 18-65 years. Target lesions were scored on a scale of 0-4 for erythema, scaling and thickness. Additionally, the overall disease activity in each patient was measured using Physician's Global Assessment. INCB018424 concentrations were measured in plasma, and cytokine stimulated phosphorylated signal transducer and activator of transcription 3 phosphorylation (pSTAT3) levels in peripheral blood cells were evaluated. Pretreatment and post-treatment skin biopsies were compared with healthy skin, including evaluation of histopathology, immunohistochemistry and mRNA expression.

RESULTS

Treatment with INCB018424 phosphate cream either 1·0% QD or 1·5% BID resulted in improvements in lesion scores. No significant inhibition of pSTAT3 in peripheral blood cells was observed following topical application, consistent with the generally low steady-state plasma concentrations of INCB018424 measured. Transcriptional markers of immune cell lineage/activation in lesional skin were reduced by topical INCB018424, with correlations observed between clinical improvement and decreases in markers of T helper 17 lymphocyte activation, dendritic-cell activation and epidermal hyperplasia. INCB018424 treatment reduced epidermal hyperplasia and dermal inflammation in most patient samples, with reductions in CD3, CD11c, Ki67 and keratin 16 observed by immunohistochemical analysis.

CONCLUSIONS

Topical INCB018424 dosed for 28 days QD or BID is pharmacologically active in patients with active psoriasis and modulates proinflammatory cytokines in the pathogenesis of psoriatic lesions.

Tumour necrosis factor-α inhibition can stabilize disease in progressive vitiligo

Tumour necrosis factor (TNF)-α, a proinflammatory cytokine central to many autoimmune diseases, has been implicated in the depigmentation process in vitiligo. We review its role in vitiligo by exploring its pro- and anti-inflammatory properties and examine the effects of blocking its actions with TNF-α antagonist therapeutics in reports available in the literature. We found that TNF-α inhibition halts disease progression in patients with progressive vitiligo but that, paradoxically, treatment can be associated with de novo vitiligo development in some patients when used for other autoimmune conditions, particularly when using adalimumab and infliximab. These studies reinforce the importance of stating appropriate outcomes measures, as most pilot trials propose to measure repigmentation, whereas halting depigmentation is commonly overlooked as a measure of success. We conclude that TNF-α inhibition has proven useful for patients with progressive vitiligo, where TNF-α inhibition is able to quash cytotoxic T-cell-mediated melanocyte destruction. However, a lingering concern for initiating de novo disease will likely prevent more widespread application of TNF inhibitors to treat vitiligo.

Diagnosing and treating psoriatic arthritis: an update

Psoriatic arthritis (PsA) is an inflammatory arthritis of uncertain pathogenesis, affecting approximately one in four patients with psoriasis. Onset of psoriasis typically precedes the development of PsA. Therefore, the dermatologist is ideally positioned to recognize the early signs and symptoms of PsA for diagnosis and subsequent treatment. The role of the dermatologist in early diagnosis and treatment is essential for preventing pain and functional disabilities, as well as the joint deterioration that accompanies progressive forms of PsA. Diagnosis of PsA is a key aspect of the clinical decision process for the dermatologist, as psoriasis plus PsA requires a different therapeutic approach from that required for psoriasis alone. Furthermore, PsA is associated with an increased risk of cardiovascular comorbidities that present significant health concerns. In this review, the pathogenesis and comorbidities of PsA are discussed. In addition, screening and imaging tools that aid in the diagnosis of PsA, as well as tools used for efficacy assessment, are reviewed. Available therapies are presented, with a focus on targeted biologics and emerging treatments.

Secukinumab administration by pre-filled syringe: efficacy, safety and usability results from a randomized controlled trial in psoriasis (FEATURE)

BACKGROUND

Secukinumab, a fully human anti-interleukin-17A monoclonal antibody, demonstrated efficacy and safety in moderate-to-severe plaque psoriasis when administered via subcutaneous injection. Self-administration by pre-filled syringe (PFS) can offer patients clinical benefits of a drug, with increased convenience.

OBJECTIVES

To assess efficacy, safety and usability of secukinumab administration via PFS in subjects with moderate-to-severe plaque psoriasis.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Subjects in this phase 3 trial were randomized 1 : 1 : 1 to secukinumab 300 or 150 mg or matching placebo. Results to week 12 are presented here. Each treatment was delivered using a PFS once weekly to week 4, and again at week 8. Co-primary endpoints were secukinumab superiority over placebo for week 12 PASI 75 (≥ 75% reduction in Psoriasis Area and Severity Index) and IGA mod 2011 (2011 modified Investigator's Global Assessment) 0/1 response rates. Secondary endpoints included PFS usability, determined by observer rating of successful, hazard-free self-injection and subject rating of acceptability by the Self-Injection Assessment Questionnaire (SIAQ).

RESULTS

Co-primary endpoints were met, with demonstration of superiority for each secukinumab dose vs. placebo at week 12 (PASI 75: 75·9%, 69·5% and 0% for secukinumab 300 mg, 150 mg and placebo; IGA mod 2011 0/1: 69·0%, 52·5% and 0%, respectively; P < 0·0001 for all comparisons vs. placebo). PFS usability was high: 100% of subjects successfully self-administered treatment at week 1, and subjects reported high SIAQ-assessed acceptability of the PFS throughout the trial. No new/unexpected safety signals were observed.

CONCLUSIONS

Secukinumab administration by PFS was effective, with an acceptable safety profile and high usability. The PFS provides a reliable, convenient form of secukinumab administration in subjects with moderate-to-severe plaque psoriasis.

Secukinumab improves hand, foot and nail lesions in moderate-to-severe plaque psoriasis: subanalysis of a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, regimen-finding phase 2 trial

BACKGROUND

Psoriasis affecting sites such as the hands, feet and nails can be particularly difficult to treat. There are limited data on the efficacy of biological agents to treat these specific localizations.

OBJECTIVE

This analysis of a phase 2 regimen-finding study evaluated the efficacy of secukinumab in subjects with moderate-to-severe psoriasis and non-pustular involvement of the hands, feet and/or nails.

METHODS

Subjects were randomized (1 : 2 : 2 : 1) to one of three subcutaneous secukinumab 150-mg induction regimens [Single (Week 0), Monthly (Weeks 0, 4, 8), Early (Weeks 0, 1, 2, 4)] or placebo. In the subgroup (n = 131) with hand and/or foot psoriasis [baseline 5-point hand/foot Investigator's Global Assessment (IGA) score ≥2], efficacy was assessed as percentage of subjects achieving an IGA response [a score of 0 (clear) or 1 (minimal) and an improvement of ≥2 points on the 5-point hand/foot scale vs. baseline] at Week 12. In the subgroup (n = 304) with fingernail psoriasis (baseline composite score ≥1), efficacy was assessed as mean percentage change from baseline to Week 12 in a composite score.

RESULTS

At Week 12, a markedly higher percentage of subjects with hand and/or foot psoriasis achieved an IGA response with the Early regimen vs. placebo (54.3% vs. 19.2%, P = 0.005). The composite fingernail score improved with the Early and Monthly regimens, but worsened with placebo [percentage mean change from baseline (SE): -19.1% (6.12) and -10.6% (7.06) vs. 14.4% (11.92); P = 0.010 vs. placebo for Early, P = 0.027 for Monthly). Secukinumab was well tolerated.

CONCLUSION

Secukinumab demonstrated a beneficial effect on psoriasis of the hands/feet/nails in this short-term assessment.

A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study to evaluate the addition of methotrexate to etanercept in patients with moderate to severe plaque psoriasis

BACKGROUND

Etanercept plus methotrexate combination therapy has not been adequately investigated in psoriasis.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate etanercept plus methotrexate vs. etanercept monotherapy in patients with moderate to severe plaque psoriasis who had not failed prior methotrexate or tumour necrosis factor-inhibitor therapy.

METHODS

Patients received etanercept 50 mg twice weekly for 12 weeks followed by 50 mg once weekly for 12 weeks and were randomized 1 : 1 to receive methotrexate (7·5-15 mg weekly) or placebo. The primary endpoint was the proportion of patients achieving ≥75% improvement in Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI 75) at week 24.

RESULTS

In total, 239 patients were enrolled in each arm. PASI 75 was significantly higher at week 24 for the combination therapy group compared with the monotherapy group (77·3% vs. 60·3%; P < 0·0001). Other PASI improvement scores at week 12 [PASI 75, 70·2% vs. 54·3% (P = 0·01); PASI 50, 92·4% vs. 83·8% (P = 0·01); and PASI 90, 34·0% vs. 23·1% (P = 0·03)] showed similar results as did week 24 PASI 50 (91·6% vs. 84·6%; P = 0·01) and PASI 90 (53·8% vs. 34·2%; P = 0·01). Significantly more patients receiving combination therapy than monotherapy had static Physician's Global Assessment of clear/almost clear at week 12 (65·5% vs. 47·0%; P = 0·01) and week 24 (71·8% vs. 54·3%; P = 0·01). Adverse events (AEs) were reported in 74·9% and 59·8% of combination therapy and monotherapy groups, respectively; three serious AEs were reported in each arm.

CONCLUSIONS

Combination therapy with etanercept plus methotrexate had acceptable tolerability and increased efficacy compared with etanercept monotherapy in patients with moderate to severe psoriasis.

Safety results from a pooled analysis of randomized, controlled phase II and III clinical trials and interim data from an open-label extension trial of the interleukin-12/23 monoclonal antibody, briakinumab, in moderate to severe psoriasis

BACKGROUND

Anti-interleukin-12/23 treatment (anti-IL-12/23) has recently demonstrated significant efficacy for moderate to severe psoriasis, yet potential safety signals warrant further investigation.

OBJECTIVES

Expand safety findings for the anti-IL-12/23, briakinumab, beyond individual phase II and III clinical trials.

METHODS

Safety data pooled from five phase II and III clinical trials (parent studies) and an open-label extension study (OLE), through 22 October 2010; patients with ≥ 1 dose of briakinumab in a parent study or the OLE are included. All parent study briakinumab treatment groups were combined with the OLE population, which received 100-mg briakinumab every 4 weeks. Adverse events (AEs) were collected from the first dose of briakinumab, whether in a parent study or the OLE, through 45 days post-last dose.

RESULTS

Two thousand five hundred and twenty patients (4704 patient-years drug exposure) received ≥ 1 dose of briakinumab during the interim period: 5.6% withdrew due to AEs. Serious infections occurred in 1.3% and malignancies in 2.6% (including 1.0% basal cell carcinoma, 0.8% squamous cell carcinoma). Twenty-seven major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) occurred, seven in one parent study and 20 in the OLE (incidence = 0.57 events/100 PY). Four cardiovascular risk factors were retrospectively found to be significant predictors for MACE during briakinumab exposure: history of cardiovascular disease, diabetes, body mass index (≥ 30) and baseline blood pressure (systolic ≥ 140 or diastolic ≥ 90).

CONCLUSIONS

Pooled briakinumab safety results from five parent studies and an OLE suggest increased rates of infections, malignancies and MACE, and that patients receiving anti-IL-12/23 treatment for moderate to severe psoriasis should be monitored for these potential safety signals.