Clinical outcomes in patients with non-small cell lung cancer harboring EGFR Exon20 in-frame insertions in the near-loop and far-loop: Results from LC-SCRUM-Asia

OBJECTIVES

In this study, we explored the clinical outcomes of non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients with EGFR Exon20 in-frame insertions (Exon20ins), and the impact of the location of Exon20ins on these clinical outcomes.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The efficacies of current systemic therapies in NSCLC patients harboring Exon20ins were investigated using a large-scale clinico-genomic database of LC-SCRUM-Asia, and compared with that of amivantamab in the CHRYSALIS trial.

RESULTS

Of the 11,397 patients enrolled in LC-SCRUM-Asia, Exon20ins were detected in 189 patients (1.7 %). Treatment with classical EGFR tyrosine-kinase inhibitors (classical TKIs) was associated with a significantly shorter progression-free survival (PFS) in NSCLC patients with Exon20ins as compared with Exon19 deletions and L858R. Post platinum-based chemotherapy, classical TKIs and immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) were associated with a shorter PFS than with docetaxel in patients with Exon20ins (HR [95 % CI]; TKIs vs docetaxel, 2.16 [1.35-3.46]; ICIs vs docetaxel, 1.49 [1.21-1.84]). Patients treated with amivantamab in the CHRYSALIS trial showed a risk reduction in PFS and overall survival as compared with LC-SCRUM-Asia patients treated with docetaxel, classical TKIs, or ICIs. Among the 189 patients, Exon20ins were classified as near-loop or far-loop insertions in 115 (61 %) and 56 (30 %) patients, respectively. Treatment with osimertinib was associated with a longer PFS in patients with Exon20ins in near-loop as compared with far-loop (median, 5.6 vs. 2.0 months; HR [95 % CI], 0.22 [0.07-0.64]).

CONCLUSIONS

After platinum-based chemotherapy, classical TKIs and ICIs are less effective in NSCLC patients with Exon20ins, and amivantamab may be a promising targeted therapy. There is a possibility that the location of Exon20ins has an impact on the efficacy of TKIs.

Amplitude Analysis of the B^{0}→K^{*0}μ^{+}μ^{-} Decay

An amplitude analysis of the B^{0}→K^{*0}μ^{+}μ^{-} decay is presented using a dataset corresponding to an integrated luminosity of 4.7  fb^{-1} of pp collision data collected with the LHCb experiment. For the first time, the coefficients associated to short-distance physics effects, sensitive to processes beyond the standard model, are extracted directly from the data through a q^{2}-unbinned amplitude analysis, where q^{2} is the μ^{+}μ^{-} invariant mass squared. Long-distance contributions, which originate from nonfactorizable QCD processes, are systematically investigated, and the most accurate assessment to date of their impact on the physical observables is obtained. The pattern of measured corrections to the short-distance couplings is found to be consistent with previous analyses of b- to s-quark transitions, with the largest discrepancy from the standard model predictions found to be at the level of 1.8 standard deviations. The global significance of the observed differences in the decay is 1.4 standard deviations.

Fraction of χ_{c} Decays in Prompt J/ψ Production Measured in pPb Collisions at sqrt[s_{NN}]=8.16 TeV

The fraction of χ_{c1} and χ_{c2} decays in the prompt J/ψ yield, F_{χ_{c}→J/ψ}=σ_{χ_{c}→J/ψ}/σ_{J/ψ}, is measured by the LHCb detector in pPb collisions at sqrt[s_{NN}]=8.16  TeV. The study covers the forward (1.5 Collapse

Key Words Collapse

MESH Headings Collapse

Grants Collapse

Affiliation(s)

R Aaij Nikhef National Institute for Subatomic Physics, Amsterdam, Netherlands
A S W Abdelmotteleb Department of Physics, University of Warwick, Coventry, United Kingdom
C Abellan Beteta Physik-Institut, Universität Zürich, Zürich, Switzerland
F Abudinén Department of Physics, University of Warwick, Coventry, United Kingdom
T Ackernley Oliver Lodge Laboratory, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, United Kingdom
B Adeva Instituto Galego de Física de Altas Enerxías (IGFAE), Universidade de Santiago de Compostela, Santiago de Compostela, Spain
M Adinolfi H.H. Wills Physics Laboratory, University of Bristol, Bristol, United Kingdom
P Adlarson Department of Physics and Astronomy, Uppsala University, Uppsala, Sweden (associated with School of Physics and Astronomy, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, United Kingdom)
C Agapopoulou European Organization for Nuclear Research (CERN), Geneva, Switzerland
C A Aidala University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan, USA (associated with Syracuse University, Syracuse, New York, USA)
Z Ajaltouni Université Clermont Auvergne, CNRS/IN2P3, LPC, Clermont-Ferrand, France
S Akar University of Cincinnati, Cincinnati, Ohio, USA
K Akiba Nikhef National Institute for Subatomic Physics, Amsterdam, Netherlands
P Albicocco INFN Laboratori Nazionali di Frascati, Frascati, Italy
J Albrecht Fakultät Physik, Technische Universität Dortmund, Dortmund, Germany
F Alessio European Organization for Nuclear Research (CERN), Geneva, Switzerland
M Alexander School of Physics and Astronomy, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, United Kingdom
A Alfonso Albero ICCUB, Universitat de Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain
Z Aliouche Department of Physics and Astronomy, University of Manchester, Manchester, United Kingdom
P Alvarez Cartelle Cavendish Laboratory, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, United Kingdom
R Amalric LPNHE, Sorbonne Université, Paris Diderot Sorbonne Paris Cité, CNRS/IN2P3, Paris, France
S Amato Universidade Federal do Rio de Janeiro (UFRJ), Rio de Janeiro, Brazil
J L Amey H.H. Wills Physics Laboratory, University of Bristol, Bristol, United Kingdom
Y Amhis Université Paris-Saclay, CNRS/IN2P3, IJCLab, Orsay, France European Organization for Nuclear Research (CERN), Geneva, Switzerland
L An School of Physics State Key Laboratory of Nuclear Physics and Technology, Peking University, Beijing, China
L Anderlini INFN Sezione di Firenze, Firenze, Italy
M Andersson Physik-Institut, Universität Zürich, Zürich, Switzerland
A Andreianov Affiliated with an institute covered by a cooperation agreement with CERN
P Andreola Physik-Institut, Universität Zürich, Zürich, Switzerland
M Andreotti INFN Sezione di Ferrara, Ferrara, Italy
D Andreou Syracuse University, Syracuse, New York, USA
A A Anelli INFN Sezione di Milano-Bicocca, Milano, Italy
D Ao University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing, China
F Archilli INFN Sezione di Roma Tor Vergata, Roma, Italy
M Argenton INFN Sezione di Ferrara, Ferrara, Italy
S Arguedas Cuendis Consejo Nacional de Rectores (CONARE), San Jose, Costa Rica
A Artamonov Affiliated with an institute covered by a cooperation agreement with CERN
M Artuso Syracuse University, Syracuse, New York, USA
E Aslanides Aix Marseille Univ, CNRS/IN2P3, CPPM, Marseille, France
M Atzeni Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, Massachusetts, USA
B Audurier Laboratoire Leprince-Ringuet, CNRS/IN2P3, Ecole Polytechnique, Institut Polytechnique de Paris, Palaiseau, France
D Bacher Department of Physics, University of Oxford, Oxford, United Kingdom
I Bachiller Perea Université Savoie Mont Blanc, CNRS, IN2P3-LAPP, Annecy, France
S Bachmann Physikalisches Institut, Ruprecht-Karls-Universität Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany
M Bachmayer Institute of Physics, Ecole Polytechnique Fédérale de Lausanne (EPFL), Lausanne, Switzerland
J J Back Department of Physics, University of Warwick, Coventry, United Kingdom
A Bailly-Reyre LPNHE, Sorbonne Université, Paris Diderot Sorbonne Paris Cité, CNRS/IN2P3, Paris, France
P Baladron Rodriguez Instituto Galego de Física de Altas Enerxías (IGFAE), Universidade de Santiago de Compostela, Santiago de Compostela, Spain
V Balagura Laboratoire Leprince-Ringuet, CNRS/IN2P3, Ecole Polytechnique, Institut Polytechnique de Paris, Palaiseau, France
W Baldini INFN Sezione di Ferrara, Ferrara, Italy
J Baptista de Souza Leite Centro Brasileiro de Pesquisas Físicas (CBPF), Rio de Janeiro, Brazil
M Barbetti INFN Sezione di Firenze, Firenze, Italy
I R Barbosa Pontifícia Universidade Católica do Rio de Janeiro (PUC-Rio), Rio de Janeiro, Brazil (associated with Universidade Federal do Rio de Janeiro (UFRJ), Rio de Janeiro, Brazil)
R J Barlow Department of Physics and Astronomy, University of Manchester, Manchester, United Kingdom
S Barsuk Université Paris-Saclay, CNRS/IN2P3, IJCLab, Orsay, France
W Barter School of Physics and Astronomy, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, United Kingdom
M Bartolini Cavendish Laboratory, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, United Kingdom
F Baryshnikov Affiliated with an institute covered by a cooperation agreement with CERN
J M Basels I. Physikalisches Institut, RWTH Aachen University, Aachen, Germany
G Bassi INFN Sezione di Pisa, Pisa, Italy
B Batsukh Institute Of High Energy Physics (IHEP), Beijing, China
A Battig Fakultät Physik, Technische Universität Dortmund, Dortmund, Germany
A Bay Institute of Physics, Ecole Polytechnique Fédérale de Lausanne (EPFL), Lausanne, Switzerland
A Beck Department of Physics, University of Warwick, Coventry, United Kingdom
M Becker Fakultät Physik, Technische Universität Dortmund, Dortmund, Germany
F Bedeschi INFN Sezione di Pisa, Pisa, Italy
I B Bediaga Centro Brasileiro de Pesquisas Físicas (CBPF), Rio de Janeiro, Brazil
A Beiter Syracuse University, Syracuse, New York, USA
S Belin Instituto Galego de Física de Altas Enerxías (IGFAE), Universidade de Santiago de Compostela, Santiago de Compostela, Spain
V Bellee Physik-Institut, Universität Zürich, Zürich, Switzerland
K Belous Affiliated with an institute covered by a cooperation agreement with CERN
I Belov INFN Sezione di Genova, Genova, Italy
I Belyaev Affiliated with an institute covered by a cooperation agreement with CERN
G Benane Aix Marseille Univ, CNRS/IN2P3, CPPM, Marseille, France
G Bencivenni INFN Laboratori Nazionali di Frascati, Frascati, Italy
E Ben-Haim LPNHE, Sorbonne Université, Paris Diderot Sorbonne Paris Cité, CNRS/IN2P3, Paris, France
A Berezhnoy Affiliated with an institute covered by a cooperation agreement with CERN
R Bernet Physik-Institut, Universität Zürich, Zürich, Switzerland
S Bernet Andres DS4DS, La Salle, Universitat Ramon Llull, Barcelona, Spain
H C Bernstein Syracuse University, Syracuse, New York, USA
C Bertella Department of Physics and Astronomy, University of Manchester, Manchester, United Kingdom
A Bertolin Università degli Studi di Padova, Università e INFN, Padova, Padova, Italy
C Betancourt Physik-Institut, Universität Zürich, Zürich, Switzerland
F Betti School of Physics and Astronomy, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, United Kingdom
J Bex Cavendish Laboratory, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, United Kingdom
Ia Bezshyiko Physik-Institut, Universität Zürich, Zürich, Switzerland
J Bhom Henryk Niewodniczanski Institute of Nuclear Physics Polish Academy of Sciences, Kraków, Poland
M S Bieker Fakultät Physik, Technische Universität Dortmund, Dortmund, Germany
N V Biesuz INFN Sezione di Ferrara, Ferrara, Italy
P Billoir LPNHE, Sorbonne Université, Paris Diderot Sorbonne Paris Cité, CNRS/IN2P3, Paris, France
A Biolchini Nikhef National Institute for Subatomic Physics, Amsterdam, Netherlands
M Birch Imperial College London, London, United Kingdom
F C R Bishop Université Savoie Mont Blanc, CNRS, IN2P3-LAPP, Annecy, France
A Bitadze Department of Physics and Astronomy, University of Manchester, Manchester, United Kingdom
A Bizzeti School of Physics and Astronomy, Monash University, Melbourne, Australia Centro Brasileiro de Pesquisas Físicas (CBPF), Rio de Janeiro, Brazil Universidade Federal do Rio de Janeiro (UFRJ), Rio de Janeiro, Brazil Center for High Energy Physics, Tsinghua University, Beijing, China Institute Of High Energy Physics (IHEP), Beijing, China School of Physics State Key Laboratory of Nuclear Physics and Technology, Peking University, Beijing, China University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing, China Institute of Particle Physics, Central China Normal University, Wuhan, Hubei, China Consejo Nacional de Rectores (CONARE), San Jose, Costa Rica Université Savoie Mont Blanc, CNRS, IN2P3-LAPP, Annecy, France Université Clermont Auvergne, CNRS/IN2P3, LPC, Clermont-Ferrand, France Aix Marseille Univ, CNRS/IN2P3, CPPM, Marseille, France Université Paris-Saclay, CNRS/IN2P3, IJCLab, Orsay, France Laboratoire Leprince-Ringuet, CNRS/IN2P3, Ecole Polytechnique, Institut Polytechnique de Paris, Palaiseau, France LPNHE, Sorbonne Université, Paris Diderot Sorbonne Paris Cité, CNRS/IN2P3, Paris, France I. Physikalisches Institut, RWTH Aachen University, Aachen, Germany Fakultät Physik, Technische Universität Dortmund, Dortmund, Germany Max-Planck-Institut für Kernphysik (MPIK), Heidelberg, Germany Physikalisches Institut, Ruprecht-Karls-Universität Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany School of Physics, University College Dublin, Dublin, Ireland INFN Sezione di Bari, Bari, Italy INFN Sezione di Bologna, Bologna, Italy INFN Sezione di Ferrara, Ferrara, Italy INFN Sezione di Firenze, Firenze, Italy INFN Laboratori Nazionali di Frascati, Frascati, Italy INFN Sezione di Genova, Genova, Italy INFN Sezione di Milano, Milano, Italy INFN Sezione di Milano-Bicocca, Milano, Italy INFN Sezione di Cagliari, Monserrato, Italy Università degli Studi di Padova, Università e INFN, Padova, Padova, Italy INFN Sezione di Perugia, Perugia, Italy INFN Sezione di Pisa, Pisa, Italy INFN Sezione di Roma La Sapienza, Roma, Italy INFN Sezione di Roma Tor Vergata, Roma, Italy Nikhef National Institute for Subatomic Physics, Amsterdam, Netherlands Nikhef National Institute for Subatomic Physics and VU University Amsterdam, Amsterdam, Netherlands AGH - University of Science and Technology, Faculty of Physics and Applied Computer Science, Kraków, Poland Henryk Niewodniczanski Institute of Nuclear Physics Polish Academy of Sciences, Kraków, Poland National Center for Nuclear Research (NCBJ), Warsaw, Poland Horia Hulubei National Institute of Physics and Nuclear Engineering, Bucharest-Magurele, Romania Affiliated with an institute covered by a cooperation agreement with CERN DS4DS, La Salle, Universitat Ramon Llull, Barcelona, Spain ICCUB, Universitat de Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain Instituto Galego de Física de Altas Enerxías (IGFAE), Universidade de Santiago de Compostela, Santiago de Compostela, Spain Instituto de Fisica Corpuscular, Centro Mixto Universidad de Valencia - CSIC, Valencia, Spain European Organization for Nuclear Research (CERN), Geneva, Switzerland Institute of Physics, Ecole Polytechnique Fédérale de Lausanne (EPFL), Lausanne, Switzerland Physik-Institut, Universität Zürich, Zürich, Switzerland NSC Kharkiv Institute of Physics and Technology (NSC KIPT), Kharkiv, Ukraine Institute for Nuclear Research of the National Academy of Sciences (KINR), Kyiv, Ukraine University of Birmingham, Birmingham, United Kingdom H.H. Wills Physics Laboratory, University of Bristol, Bristol, United Kingdom Cavendish Laboratory, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, United Kingdom Department of Physics, University of Warwick, Coventry, United Kingdom STFC Rutherford Appleton Laboratory, Didcot, United Kingdom School of Physics and Astronomy, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, United Kingdom School of Physics and Astronomy, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, United Kingdom Oliver Lodge Laboratory, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, United Kingdom Imperial College London, London, United Kingdom Department of Physics and Astronomy, University of Manchester, Manchester, United Kingdom Department of Physics, University of Oxford, Oxford, United Kingdom Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, Massachusetts, USA University of Cincinnati, Cincinnati, Ohio, USA University of Maryland, College Park, Maryland, USA Los Alamos National Laboratory (LANL), Los Alamos, New Mexico, USA Syracuse University, Syracuse, New York, USA Pontifícia Universidade Católica do Rio de Janeiro (PUC-Rio), Rio de Janeiro, Brazil (associated with Universidade Federal do Rio de Janeiro (UFRJ), Rio de Janeiro, Brazil) School of Physics and Electronics, Hunan University, Changsha City, China (associated with Institute of Particle Physics, Central China Normal University, Wuhan, Hubei, China) Guangdong Provincial Key Laboratory of Nuclear Science, Guangdong-Hong Kong Joint Laboratory of Quantum Matter, Institute of Quantum Matter, South China Normal University, Guangzhou, China (associated with Center for High Energy Physics, Tsinghua University, Beijing, China) Lanzhou University, Lanzhou, China (associated with Institute Of High Energy Physics (IHEP), Beijing, China) School of Physics and Technology, Wuhan University, Wuhan, China (associated with Center for High Energy Physics, Tsinghua University, Beijing, China) Departamento de Fisica, Universidad Nacional de Colombia, Bogota, Colombia (associated with LPNHE, Sorbonne Université, Paris Diderot Sorbonne Paris Cité, CNRS/IN2P3, Paris, France) Universität Bonn - Helmholtz-Institut für Strahlen und Kernphysik, Bonn, Germany (associated with Physikalisches Institut, Ruprecht-Karls-Universität Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany) Eotvos Lorand University, Budapest, Hungary (associated with European Organization for Nuclear Research (CERN), Geneva, Switzerland) Van Swinderen Institute, University of Groningen, Groningen, Netherlands (associated with Nikhef National Institute for Subatomic Physics, Amsterdam, Netherlands) Universiteit Maastricht, Maastricht, Netherlands (associated with Nikhef National Institute for Subatomic Physics, Amsterdam, Netherlands) Tadeusz Kosciuszko Cracow University of Technology, Cracow, Poland (associated with Henryk Niewodniczanski Institute of Nuclear Physics Polish Academy of Sciences, Kraków, Poland) Department of Physics and Astronomy, Uppsala University, Uppsala, Sweden (associated with School of Physics and Astronomy, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, United Kingdom) University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan, USA (associated with Syracuse University, Syracuse, New York, USA) Departement de Physique Nucleaire (SPhN), Gif-Sur-Yvette, France
M P Blago Cavendish Laboratory, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, United Kingdom
T Blake Department of Physics, University of Warwick, Coventry, United Kingdom
F Blanc Institute of Physics, Ecole Polytechnique Fédérale de Lausanne (EPFL), Lausanne, Switzerland
J E Blank Fakultät Physik, Technische Universität Dortmund, Dortmund, Germany
S Blusk Syracuse University, Syracuse, New York, USA
D Bobulska School of Physics and Astronomy, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, United Kingdom
V Bocharnikov Affiliated with an institute covered by a cooperation agreement with CERN
J A Boelhauve Fakultät Physik, Technische Universität Dortmund, Dortmund, Germany
O Boente Garcia Laboratoire Leprince-Ringuet, CNRS/IN2P3, Ecole Polytechnique, Institut Polytechnique de Paris, Palaiseau, France
T Boettcher University of Cincinnati, Cincinnati, Ohio, USA
A Bohare School of Physics and Astronomy, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, United Kingdom
A Boldyrev Affiliated with an institute covered by a cooperation agreement with CERN
C S Bolognani Universiteit Maastricht, Maastricht, Netherlands (associated with Nikhef National Institute for Subatomic Physics, Amsterdam, Netherlands)
R Bolzonella INFN Sezione di Ferrara, Ferrara, Italy
N Bondar Affiliated with an institute covered by a cooperation agreement with CERN
F Borgato Università degli Studi di Padova, Università e INFN, Padova, Padova, Italy European Organization for Nuclear Research (CERN), Geneva, Switzerland
S Borghi Department of Physics and Astronomy, University of Manchester, Manchester, United Kingdom
M Borsato INFN Sezione di Milano-Bicocca, Milano, Italy
J T Borsuk Henryk Niewodniczanski Institute of Nuclear Physics Polish Academy of Sciences, Kraków, Poland
S A Bouchiba Institute of Physics, Ecole Polytechnique Fédérale de Lausanne (EPFL), Lausanne, Switzerland
T J V Bowcock Oliver Lodge Laboratory, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, United Kingdom
A Boyer European Organization for Nuclear Research (CERN), Geneva, Switzerland
C Bozzi INFN Sezione di Ferrara, Ferrara, Italy
M J Bradley Imperial College London, London, United Kingdom
S Braun University of Maryland, College Park, Maryland, USA
A Brea Rodriguez Instituto Galego de Física de Altas Enerxías (IGFAE), Universidade de Santiago de Compostela, Santiago de Compostela, Spain
N Breer Fakultät Physik, Technische Universität Dortmund, Dortmund, Germany
J Brodzicka Henryk Niewodniczanski Institute of Nuclear Physics Polish Academy of Sciences, Kraków, Poland
A Brossa Gonzalo Instituto Galego de Física de Altas Enerxías (IGFAE), Universidade de Santiago de Compostela, Santiago de Compostela, Spain
J Brown Oliver Lodge Laboratory, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, United Kingdom
D Brundu INFN Sezione di Cagliari, Monserrato, Italy
A Buonaura Physik-Institut, Universität Zürich, Zürich, Switzerland
L Buonincontri Università degli Studi di Padova, Università e INFN, Padova, Padova, Italy
A T Burke Department of Physics and Astronomy, University of Manchester, Manchester, United Kingdom
C Burr European Organization for Nuclear Research (CERN), Geneva, Switzerland
A Bursche Guangdong Provincial Key Laboratory of Nuclear Science, Guangdong-Hong Kong Joint Laboratory of Quantum Matter, Institute of Quantum Matter, South China Normal University, Guangzhou, China (associated with Center for High Energy Physics, Tsinghua University, Beijing, China)
A Butkevich Affiliated with an institute covered by a cooperation agreement with CERN
J S Butter Cavendish Laboratory, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, United Kingdom
J Buytaert European Organization for Nuclear Research (CERN), Geneva, Switzerland
W Byczynski European Organization for Nuclear Research (CERN), Geneva, Switzerland
S Cadeddu INFN Sezione di Cagliari, Monserrato, Italy
H Cai School of Physics and Technology, Wuhan University, Wuhan, China (associated with Center for High Energy Physics, Tsinghua University, Beijing, China)
R Calabrese INFN Sezione di Ferrara, Ferrara, Italy
L Calefice Fakultät Physik, Technische Universität Dortmund, Dortmund, Germany
S Cali INFN Laboratori Nazionali di Frascati, Frascati, Italy
M Calvi INFN Sezione di Milano-Bicocca, Milano, Italy
M Calvo Gomez DS4DS, La Salle, Universitat Ramon Llull, Barcelona, Spain
J Cambon Bouzas Instituto Galego de Física de Altas Enerxías (IGFAE), Universidade de Santiago de Compostela, Santiago de Compostela, Spain
P Campana INFN Laboratori Nazionali di Frascati, Frascati, Italy
D H Campora Perez Universiteit Maastricht, Maastricht, Netherlands (associated with Nikhef National Institute for Subatomic Physics, Amsterdam, Netherlands)
A F Campoverde Quezada University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing, China
S Capelli INFN Sezione di Milano-Bicocca, Milano, Italy
L Capriotti INFN Sezione di Ferrara, Ferrara, Italy
R Caravaca-Mora Consejo Nacional de Rectores (CONARE), San Jose, Costa Rica
A Carbone INFN Sezione di Bologna, Bologna, Italy
L Carcedo Salgado Instituto Galego de Física de Altas Enerxías (IGFAE), Universidade de Santiago de Compostela, Santiago de Compostela, Spain
R Cardinale INFN Sezione di Genova, Genova, Italy
A Cardini INFN Sezione di Cagliari, Monserrato, Italy
P Carniti INFN Sezione di Milano-Bicocca, Milano, Italy
L Carus Physikalisches Institut, Ruprecht-Karls-Universität Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany
A Casais Vidal Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, Massachusetts, USA
R Caspary Physikalisches Institut, Ruprecht-Karls-Universität Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany
G Casse Oliver Lodge Laboratory, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, United Kingdom
J Castro Godinez Consejo Nacional de Rectores (CONARE), San Jose, Costa Rica
M Cattaneo European Organization for Nuclear Research (CERN), Geneva, Switzerland
G Cavallero INFN Sezione di Ferrara, Ferrara, Italy
V Cavallini INFN Sezione di Ferrara, Ferrara, Italy
S Celani Institute of Physics, Ecole Polytechnique Fédérale de Lausanne (EPFL), Lausanne, Switzerland
J Cerasoli Aix Marseille Univ, CNRS/IN2P3, CPPM, Marseille, France
D Cervenkov Department of Physics, University of Oxford, Oxford, United Kingdom
S Cesare INFN Sezione di Milano, Milano, Italy
A J Chadwick Oliver Lodge Laboratory, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, United Kingdom
I Chahrour University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan, USA (associated with Syracuse University, Syracuse, New York, USA)
M Charles LPNHE, Sorbonne Université, Paris Diderot Sorbonne Paris Cité, CNRS/IN2P3, Paris, France
Ph Charpentier European Organization for Nuclear Research (CERN), Geneva, Switzerland
C A Chavez Barajas Oliver Lodge Laboratory, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, United Kingdom
M Chefdeville Université Savoie Mont Blanc, CNRS, IN2P3-LAPP, Annecy, France
C Chen Aix Marseille Univ, CNRS/IN2P3, CPPM, Marseille, France
S Chen Institute Of High Energy Physics (IHEP), Beijing, China
A Chernov Henryk Niewodniczanski Institute of Nuclear Physics Polish Academy of Sciences, Kraków, Poland
S Chernyshenko Institute for Nuclear Research of the National Academy of Sciences (KINR), Kyiv, Ukraine
V Chobanova Instituto Galego de Física de Altas Enerxías (IGFAE), Universidade de Santiago de Compostela, Santiago de Compostela, Spain
S Cholak Institute of Physics, Ecole Polytechnique Fédérale de Lausanne (EPFL), Lausanne, Switzerland
M Chrzaszcz Henryk Niewodniczanski Institute of Nuclear Physics Polish Academy of Sciences, Kraków, Poland
A Chubykin Affiliated with an institute covered by a cooperation agreement with CERN
V Chulikov Affiliated with an institute covered by a cooperation agreement with CERN
P Ciambrone INFN Laboratori Nazionali di Frascati, Frascati, Italy
M F Cicala Department of Physics, University of Warwick, Coventry, United Kingdom
X Cid Vidal Instituto Galego de Física de Altas Enerxías (IGFAE), Universidade de Santiago de Compostela, Santiago de Compostela, Spain
G Ciezarek European Organization for Nuclear Research (CERN), Geneva, Switzerland
P Cifra European Organization for Nuclear Research (CERN), Geneva, Switzerland
P E L Clarke School of Physics and Astronomy, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, United Kingdom
M Clemencic European Organization for Nuclear Research (CERN), Geneva, Switzerland
H V Cliff Cavendish Laboratory, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, United Kingdom
J Closier European Organization for Nuclear Research (CERN), Geneva, Switzerland
J L Cobbledick Department of Physics and Astronomy, University of Manchester, Manchester, United Kingdom
C Cocha Toapaxi Physikalisches Institut, Ruprecht-Karls-Universität Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany
V Coco European Organization for Nuclear Research (CERN), Geneva, Switzerland
J Cogan Aix Marseille Univ, CNRS/IN2P3, CPPM, Marseille, France
E Cogneras Université Clermont Auvergne, CNRS/IN2P3, LPC, Clermont-Ferrand, France
L Cojocariu Horia Hulubei National Institute of Physics and Nuclear Engineering, Bucharest-Magurele, Romania
P Collins European Organization for Nuclear Research (CERN), Geneva, Switzerland
T Colombo European Organization for Nuclear Research (CERN), Geneva, Switzerland
A Comerma-Montells ICCUB, Universitat de Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain
L Congedo INFN Sezione di Bari, Bari, Italy
A Contu INFN Sezione di Cagliari, Monserrato, Italy
N Cooke School of Physics and Astronomy, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, United Kingdom
I Corredoira Instituto Galego de Física de Altas Enerxías (IGFAE), Universidade de Santiago de Compostela, Santiago de Compostela, Spain
A Correia LPNHE, Sorbonne Université, Paris Diderot Sorbonne Paris Cité, CNRS/IN2P3, Paris, France
G Corti European Organization for Nuclear Research (CERN), Geneva, Switzerland
J J Cottee Meldrum H.H. Wills Physics Laboratory, University of Bristol, Bristol, United Kingdom
B Couturier European Organization for Nuclear Research (CERN), Geneva, Switzerland
D C Craik Physik-Institut, Universität Zürich, Zürich, Switzerland
M Cruz Torres Centro Brasileiro de Pesquisas Físicas (CBPF), Rio de Janeiro, Brazil
R Currie School of Physics and Astronomy, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, United Kingdom
C L Da Silva Los Alamos National Laboratory (LANL), Los Alamos, New Mexico, USA
S Dadabaev Affiliated with an institute covered by a cooperation agreement with CERN
L Dai School of Physics and Electronics, Hunan University, Changsha City, China (associated with Institute of Particle Physics, Central China Normal University, Wuhan, Hubei, China)
X Dai School of Physics State Key Laboratory of Nuclear Physics and Technology, Peking University, Beijing, China
E Dall'Occo Fakultät Physik, Technische Universität Dortmund, Dortmund, Germany
J Dalseno Instituto Galego de Física de Altas Enerxías (IGFAE), Universidade de Santiago de Compostela, Santiago de Compostela, Spain
C D'Ambrosio European Organization for Nuclear Research (CERN), Geneva, Switzerland
J Daniel Université Clermont Auvergne, CNRS/IN2P3, LPC, Clermont-Ferrand, France
A Danilina Affiliated with an institute covered by a cooperation agreement with CERN
P d'Argent INFN Sezione di Bari, Bari, Italy
A Davidson Department of Physics, University of Warwick, Coventry, United Kingdom
J E Davies Department of Physics and Astronomy, University of Manchester, Manchester, United Kingdom
A Davis Department of Physics and Astronomy, University of Manchester, Manchester, United Kingdom
O De Aguiar Francisco Department of Physics and Astronomy, University of Manchester, Manchester, United Kingdom
C De Angelis INFN Sezione di Cagliari, Monserrato, Italy
J de Boer Nikhef National Institute for Subatomic Physics, Amsterdam, Netherlands
K De Bruyn Van Swinderen Institute, University of Groningen, Groningen, Netherlands (associated with Nikhef National Institute for Subatomic Physics, Amsterdam, Netherlands)
S De Capua Department of Physics and Astronomy, University of Manchester, Manchester, United Kingdom
M De Cian Physikalisches Institut, Ruprecht-Karls-Universität Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany European Organization for Nuclear Research (CERN), Geneva, Switzerland
U De Freitas Carneiro Da Graca Centro Brasileiro de Pesquisas Físicas (CBPF), Rio de Janeiro, Brazil
E De Lucia INFN Laboratori Nazionali di Frascati, Frascati, Italy
J M De Miranda Centro Brasileiro de Pesquisas Físicas (CBPF), Rio de Janeiro, Brazil
L De Paula Universidade Federal do Rio de Janeiro (UFRJ), Rio de Janeiro, Brazil
M De Serio INFN Sezione di Bari, Bari, Italy
D De Simone Physik-Institut, Universität Zürich, Zürich, Switzerland
P De Simone INFN Laboratori Nazionali di Frascati, Frascati, Italy
F De Vellis Fakultät Physik, Technische Universität Dortmund, Dortmund, Germany
J A de Vries Universiteit Maastricht, Maastricht, Netherlands (associated with Nikhef National Institute for Subatomic Physics, Amsterdam, Netherlands)
F Debernardis INFN Sezione di Bari, Bari, Italy
D Decamp Université Savoie Mont Blanc, CNRS, IN2P3-LAPP, Annecy, France
V Dedu Aix Marseille Univ, CNRS/IN2P3, CPPM, Marseille, France
L Del Buono LPNHE, Sorbonne Université, Paris Diderot Sorbonne Paris Cité, CNRS/IN2P3, Paris, France
B Delaney Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, Massachusetts, USA
H-P Dembinski Fakultät Physik, Technische Universität Dortmund, Dortmund, Germany
J Deng Institute of Particle Physics, Central China Normal University, Wuhan, Hubei, China
V Denysenko Physik-Institut, Universität Zürich, Zürich, Switzerland
O Deschamps Université Clermont Auvergne, CNRS/IN2P3, LPC, Clermont-Ferrand, France
F Dettori INFN Sezione di Cagliari, Monserrato, Italy
B Dey Eotvos Lorand University, Budapest, Hungary (associated with European Organization for Nuclear Research (CERN), Geneva, Switzerland)
P Di Nezza INFN Laboratori Nazionali di Frascati, Frascati, Italy
I Diachkov Affiliated with an institute covered by a cooperation agreement with CERN
S Didenko Affiliated with an institute covered by a cooperation agreement with CERN
S Ding Syracuse University, Syracuse, New York, USA
V Dobishuk Institute for Nuclear Research of the National Academy of Sciences (KINR), Kyiv, Ukraine
A D Docheva School of Physics and Astronomy, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, United Kingdom
A Dolmatov Affiliated with an institute covered by a cooperation agreement with CERN
C Dong Center for High Energy Physics, Tsinghua University, Beijing, China
A M Donohoe School of Physics, University College Dublin, Dublin, Ireland
F Dordei INFN Sezione di Cagliari, Monserrato, Italy
A C Dos Reis Centro Brasileiro de Pesquisas Físicas (CBPF), Rio de Janeiro, Brazil
L Douglas School of Physics and Astronomy, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, United Kingdom
A G Downes Université Savoie Mont Blanc, CNRS, IN2P3-LAPP, Annecy, France
W Duan Guangdong Provincial Key Laboratory of Nuclear Science, Guangdong-Hong Kong Joint Laboratory of Quantum Matter, Institute of Quantum Matter, South China Normal University, Guangzhou, China (associated with Center for High Energy Physics, Tsinghua University, Beijing, China)
P Duda Tadeusz Kosciuszko Cracow University of Technology, Cracow, Poland (associated with Henryk Niewodniczanski Institute of Nuclear Physics Polish Academy of Sciences, Kraków, Poland)
M W Dudek Henryk Niewodniczanski Institute of Nuclear Physics Polish Academy of Sciences, Kraków, Poland
L Dufour European Organization for Nuclear Research (CERN), Geneva, Switzerland
V Duk INFN Sezione di Perugia, Perugia, Italy
P Durante European Organization for Nuclear Research (CERN), Geneva, Switzerland
M M Duras Tadeusz Kosciuszko Cracow University of Technology, Cracow, Poland (associated with Henryk Niewodniczanski Institute of Nuclear Physics Polish Academy of Sciences, Kraków, Poland)
J M Durham Los Alamos National Laboratory (LANL), Los Alamos, New Mexico, USA
A Dziurda Henryk Niewodniczanski Institute of Nuclear Physics Polish Academy of Sciences, Kraków, Poland
A Dzyuba Affiliated with an institute covered by a cooperation agreement with CERN
S Easo European Organization for Nuclear Research (CERN), Geneva, Switzerland STFC Rutherford Appleton Laboratory, Didcot, United Kingdom
E Eckstein Universität Bonn - Helmholtz-Institut für Strahlen und Kernphysik, Bonn, Germany (associated with Physikalisches Institut, Ruprecht-Karls-Universität Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany)
U Egede School of Physics and Astronomy, Monash University, Melbourne, Australia
A Egorychev Affiliated with an institute covered by a cooperation agreement with CERN
V Egorychev Affiliated with an institute covered by a cooperation agreement with CERN
C Eirea Orro Instituto Galego de Física de Altas Enerxías (IGFAE), Universidade de Santiago de Compostela, Santiago de Compostela, Spain
S Eisenhardt School of Physics and Astronomy, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, United Kingdom
E Ejopu Department of Physics and Astronomy, University of Manchester, Manchester, United Kingdom
S Ek-In Institute of Physics, Ecole Polytechnique Fédérale de Lausanne (EPFL), Lausanne, Switzerland
L Eklund Department of Physics and Astronomy, Uppsala University, Uppsala, Sweden (associated with School of Physics and Astronomy, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, United Kingdom)
M Elashri University of Cincinnati, Cincinnati, Ohio, USA
J Ellbracht Fakultät Physik, Technische Universität Dortmund, Dortmund, Germany
S Ely Imperial College London, London, United Kingdom
A Ene Horia Hulubei National Institute of Physics and Nuclear Engineering, Bucharest-Magurele, Romania
E Epple University of Cincinnati, Cincinnati, Ohio, USA
S Escher I. Physikalisches Institut, RWTH Aachen University, Aachen, Germany
J Eschle Physik-Institut, Universität Zürich, Zürich, Switzerland
S Esen Physik-Institut, Universität Zürich, Zürich, Switzerland
T Evans Department of Physics and Astronomy, University of Manchester, Manchester, United Kingdom
F Fabiano INFN Sezione di Cagliari, Monserrato, Italy European Organization for Nuclear Research (CERN), Geneva, Switzerland
L N Falcao Centro Brasileiro de Pesquisas Físicas (CBPF), Rio de Janeiro, Brazil
Y Fan University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing, China
B Fang Université Paris-Saclay, CNRS/IN2P3, IJCLab, Orsay, France School of Physics and Technology, Wuhan University, Wuhan, China (associated with Center for High Energy Physics, Tsinghua University, Beijing, China)
L Fantini INFN Sezione di Perugia, Perugia, Italy
M Faria Institute of Physics, Ecole Polytechnique Fédérale de Lausanne (EPFL), Lausanne, Switzerland
K Farmer School of Physics and Astronomy, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, United Kingdom
D Fazzini INFN Sezione di Milano-Bicocca, Milano, Italy
L Felkowski Tadeusz Kosciuszko Cracow University of Technology, Cracow, Poland (associated with Henryk Niewodniczanski Institute of Nuclear Physics Polish Academy of Sciences, Kraków, Poland)
M Feng Institute Of High Energy Physics (IHEP), Beijing, China University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing, China
M Feo European Organization for Nuclear Research (CERN), Geneva, Switzerland
M Fernandez Gomez Instituto Galego de Física de Altas Enerxías (IGFAE), Universidade de Santiago de Compostela, Santiago de Compostela, Spain
A D Fernez University of Maryland, College Park, Maryland, USA
F Ferrari INFN Sezione di Bologna, Bologna, Italy
F Ferreira Rodrigues Universidade Federal do Rio de Janeiro (UFRJ), Rio de Janeiro, Brazil
S Ferreres Sole Nikhef National Institute for Subatomic Physics, Amsterdam, Netherlands
M Ferrillo Physik-Institut, Universität Zürich, Zürich, Switzerland
M Ferro-Luzzi European Organization for Nuclear Research (CERN), Geneva, Switzerland
S Filippov Affiliated with an institute covered by a cooperation agreement with CERN
R A Fini INFN Sezione di Bari, Bari, Italy
M Fiorini INFN Sezione di Ferrara, Ferrara, Italy
M Firlej AGH - University of Science and Technology, Faculty of Physics and Applied Computer Science, Kraków, Poland
K M Fischer Department of Physics, University of Oxford, Oxford, United Kingdom
D S Fitzgerald University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan, USA (associated with Syracuse University, Syracuse, New York, USA)
C Fitzpatrick Department of Physics and Astronomy, University of Manchester, Manchester, United Kingdom
T Fiutowski AGH - University of Science and Technology, Faculty of Physics and Applied Computer Science, Kraków, Poland
F Fleuret Laboratoire Leprince-Ringuet, CNRS/IN2P3, Ecole Polytechnique, Institut Polytechnique de Paris, Palaiseau, France
M Fontana INFN Sezione di Bologna, Bologna, Italy
F Fontanelli INFN Sezione di Genova, Genova, Italy
L F Foreman Department of Physics and Astronomy, University of Manchester, Manchester, United Kingdom
R Forty European Organization for Nuclear Research (CERN), Geneva, Switzerland
D Foulds-Holt Cavendish Laboratory, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, United Kingdom
M Franco Sevilla University of Maryland, College Park, Maryland, USA
M Frank European Organization for Nuclear Research (CERN), Geneva, Switzerland
E Franzoso INFN Sezione di Ferrara, Ferrara, Italy
G Frau Physikalisches Institut, Ruprecht-Karls-Universität Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany
C Frei European Organization for Nuclear Research (CERN), Geneva, Switzerland
D A Friday Department of Physics and Astronomy, University of Manchester, Manchester, United Kingdom
L Frontini INFN Sezione di Milano, Milano, Italy
J Fu University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing, China
Q Fuehring Fakultät Physik, Technische Universität Dortmund, Dortmund, Germany
Y Fujii School of Physics and Astronomy, Monash University, Melbourne, Australia
T Fulghesu LPNHE, Sorbonne Université, Paris Diderot Sorbonne Paris Cité, CNRS/IN2P3, Paris, France
E Gabriel Nikhef National Institute for Subatomic Physics, Amsterdam, Netherlands
G Galati INFN Sezione di Bari, Bari, Italy
M D Galati Nikhef National Institute for Subatomic Physics, Amsterdam, Netherlands
A Gallas Torreira Instituto Galego de Física de Altas Enerxías (IGFAE), Universidade de Santiago de Compostela, Santiago de Compostela, Spain
D Galli INFN Sezione di Bologna, Bologna, Italy
S Gambetta European Organization for Nuclear Research (CERN), Geneva, Switzerland School of Physics and Astronomy, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, United Kingdom
M Gandelman Universidade Federal do Rio de Janeiro (UFRJ), Rio de Janeiro, Brazil
P Gandini INFN Sezione di Milano, Milano, Italy
H Gao University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing, China
R Gao Department of Physics, University of Oxford, Oxford, United Kingdom
Y Gao Institute of Particle Physics, Central China Normal University, Wuhan, Hubei, China
Y Gao School of Physics State Key Laboratory of Nuclear Physics and Technology, Peking University, Beijing, China
Y Gao Institute of Particle Physics, Central China Normal University, Wuhan, Hubei, China
M Garau INFN Sezione di Cagliari, Monserrato, Italy
L M Garcia Martin Institute of Physics, Ecole Polytechnique Fédérale de Lausanne (EPFL), Lausanne, Switzerland
P Garcia Moreno ICCUB, Universitat de Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain
J García Pardiñas European Organization for Nuclear Research (CERN), Geneva, Switzerland
B Garcia Plana Instituto Galego de Física de Altas Enerxías (IGFAE), Universidade de Santiago de Compostela, Santiago de Compostela, Spain
K G Garg Institute of Particle Physics, Central China Normal University, Wuhan, Hubei, China
L Garrido ICCUB, Universitat de Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain
C Gaspar European Organization for Nuclear Research (CERN), Geneva, Switzerland
R E Geertsema Nikhef National Institute for Subatomic Physics, Amsterdam, Netherlands
L L Gerken Fakultät Physik, Technische Universität Dortmund, Dortmund, Germany
E Gersabeck Department of Physics and Astronomy, University of Manchester, Manchester, United Kingdom
M Gersabeck Department of Physics and Astronomy, University of Manchester, Manchester, United Kingdom
T Gershon Department of Physics, University of Warwick, Coventry, United Kingdom
Z Ghorbanimoghaddam H.H. Wills Physics Laboratory, University of Bristol, Bristol, United Kingdom
L Giambastiani Università degli Studi di Padova, Università e INFN, Padova, Padova, Italy
F I Giasemis LPNHE, Sorbonne Université, Paris Diderot Sorbonne Paris Cité, CNRS/IN2P3, Paris, France
V Gibson Cavendish Laboratory, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, United Kingdom
H K Giemza National Center for Nuclear Research (NCBJ), Warsaw, Poland
A L Gilman Department of Physics, University of Oxford, Oxford, United Kingdom
M Giovannetti INFN Laboratori Nazionali di Frascati, Frascati, Italy
A Gioventù ICCUB, Universitat de Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain
P Gironella Gironell ICCUB, Universitat de Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain
C Giugliano INFN Sezione di Ferrara, Ferrara, Italy
M A Giza Henryk Niewodniczanski Institute of Nuclear Physics Polish Academy of Sciences, Kraków, Poland
E L Gkougkousis Imperial College London, London, United Kingdom
F C Glaser Université Paris-Saclay, CNRS/IN2P3, IJCLab, Orsay, France Physikalisches Institut, Ruprecht-Karls-Universität Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany
V V Gligorov LPNHE, Sorbonne Université, Paris Diderot Sorbonne Paris Cité, CNRS/IN2P3, Paris, France
C Göbel Pontifícia Universidade Católica do Rio de Janeiro (PUC-Rio), Rio de Janeiro, Brazil (associated with Universidade Federal do Rio de Janeiro (UFRJ), Rio de Janeiro, Brazil)
E Golobardes DS4DS, La Salle, Universitat Ramon Llull, Barcelona, Spain
D Golubkov Affiliated with an institute covered by a cooperation agreement with CERN
A Golutvin Affiliated with an institute covered by a cooperation agreement with CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research (CERN), Geneva, Switzerland Imperial College London, London, United Kingdom
A Gomes Centro Brasileiro de Pesquisas Físicas (CBPF), Rio de Janeiro, Brazil
S Gomez Fernandez ICCUB, Universitat de Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain
F Goncalves Abrantes Department of Physics, University of Oxford, Oxford, United Kingdom
M Goncerz Henryk Niewodniczanski Institute of Nuclear Physics Polish Academy of Sciences, Kraków, Poland
G Gong Center for High Energy Physics, Tsinghua University, Beijing, China
J A Gooding Fakultät Physik, Technische Universität Dortmund, Dortmund, Germany
I V Gorelov Affiliated with an institute covered by a cooperation agreement with CERN
C Gotti INFN Sezione di Milano-Bicocca, Milano, Italy
J P Grabowski Universität Bonn - Helmholtz-Institut für Strahlen und Kernphysik, Bonn, Germany (associated with Physikalisches Institut, Ruprecht-Karls-Universität Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany)
L A Granado Cardoso European Organization for Nuclear Research (CERN), Geneva, Switzerland
E Graugés ICCUB, Universitat de Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain
E Graverini Institute of Physics, Ecole Polytechnique Fédérale de Lausanne (EPFL), Lausanne, Switzerland
L Grazette Department of Physics, University of Warwick, Coventry, United Kingdom
G Graziani School of Physics and Astronomy, Monash University, Melbourne, Australia Centro Brasileiro de Pesquisas Físicas (CBPF), Rio de Janeiro, Brazil Universidade Federal do Rio de Janeiro (UFRJ), Rio de Janeiro, Brazil Center for High Energy Physics, Tsinghua University, Beijing, China Institute Of High Energy Physics (IHEP), Beijing, China School of Physics State Key Laboratory of Nuclear Physics and Technology, Peking University, Beijing, China University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing, China Institute of Particle Physics, Central China Normal University, Wuhan, Hubei, China Consejo Nacional de Rectores (CONARE), San Jose, Costa Rica Université Savoie Mont Blanc, CNRS, IN2P3-LAPP, Annecy, France Université Clermont Auvergne, CNRS/IN2P3, LPC, Clermont-Ferrand, France Aix Marseille Univ, CNRS/IN2P3, CPPM, Marseille, France Université Paris-Saclay, CNRS/IN2P3, IJCLab, Orsay, France Laboratoire Leprince-Ringuet, CNRS/IN2P3, Ecole Polytechnique, Institut Polytechnique de Paris, Palaiseau, France LPNHE, Sorbonne Université, Paris Diderot Sorbonne Paris Cité, CNRS/IN2P3, Paris, France I. Physikalisches Institut, RWTH Aachen University, Aachen, Germany Fakultät Physik, Technische Universität Dortmund, Dortmund, Germany Max-Planck-Institut für Kernphysik (MPIK), Heidelberg, Germany Physikalisches Institut, Ruprecht-Karls-Universität Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany School of Physics, University College Dublin, Dublin, Ireland INFN Sezione di Bari, Bari, Italy INFN Sezione di Bologna, Bologna, Italy INFN Sezione di Ferrara, Ferrara, Italy INFN Sezione di Firenze, Firenze, Italy INFN Laboratori Nazionali di Frascati, Frascati, Italy INFN Sezione di Genova, Genova, Italy INFN Sezione di Milano, Milano, Italy INFN Sezione di Milano-Bicocca, Milano, Italy INFN Sezione di Cagliari, Monserrato, Italy Università degli Studi di Padova, Università e INFN, Padova, Padova, Italy INFN Sezione di Perugia, Perugia, Italy INFN Sezione di Pisa, Pisa, Italy INFN Sezione di Roma La Sapienza, Roma, Italy INFN Sezione di Roma Tor Vergata, Roma, Italy Nikhef National Institute for Subatomic Physics, Amsterdam, Netherlands Nikhef National Institute for Subatomic Physics and VU University Amsterdam, Amsterdam, Netherlands AGH - University of Science and Technology, Faculty of Physics and Applied Computer Science, Kraków, Poland Henryk Niewodniczanski Institute of Nuclear Physics Polish Academy of Sciences, Kraków, Poland National Center for Nuclear Research (NCBJ), Warsaw, Poland Horia Hulubei National Institute of Physics and Nuclear Engineering, Bucharest-Magurele, Romania Affiliated with an institute covered by a cooperation agreement with CERN DS4DS, La Salle, Universitat Ramon Llull, Barcelona, Spain ICCUB, Universitat de Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain Instituto Galego de Física de Altas Enerxías (IGFAE), Universidade de Santiago de Compostela, Santiago de Compostela, Spain Instituto de Fisica Corpuscular, Centro Mixto Universidad de Valencia - CSIC, Valencia, Spain European Organization for Nuclear Research (CERN), Geneva, Switzerland Institute of Physics, Ecole Polytechnique Fédérale de Lausanne (EPFL), Lausanne, Switzerland Physik-Institut, Universität Zürich, Zürich, Switzerland NSC Kharkiv Institute of Physics and Technology (NSC KIPT), Kharkiv, Ukraine Institute for Nuclear Research of the National Academy of Sciences (KINR), Kyiv, Ukraine University of Birmingham, Birmingham, United Kingdom H.H. Wills Physics Laboratory, University of Bristol, Bristol, United Kingdom Cavendish Laboratory, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, United Kingdom Department of Physics, University of Warwick, Coventry, United Kingdom STFC Rutherford Appleton Laboratory, Didcot, United Kingdom School of Physics and Astronomy, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, United Kingdom School of Physics and Astronomy, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, United Kingdom Oliver Lodge Laboratory, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, United Kingdom Imperial College London, London, United Kingdom Department of Physics and Astronomy, University of Manchester, Manchester, United Kingdom Department of Physics, University of Oxford, Oxford, United Kingdom Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, Massachusetts, USA University of Cincinnati, Cincinnati, Ohio, USA University of Maryland, College Park, Maryland, USA Los Alamos National Laboratory (LANL), Los Alamos, New Mexico, USA Syracuse University, Syracuse, New York, USA Pontifícia Universidade Católica do Rio de Janeiro (PUC-Rio), Rio de Janeiro, Brazil (associated with Universidade Federal do Rio de Janeiro (UFRJ), Rio de Janeiro, Brazil) School of Physics and Electronics, Hunan University, Changsha City, China (associated with Institute of Particle Physics, Central China Normal University, Wuhan, Hubei, China) Guangdong Provincial Key Laboratory of Nuclear Science, Guangdong-Hong Kong Joint Laboratory of Quantum Matter, Institute of Quantum Matter, South China Normal University, Guangzhou, China (associated with Center for High Energy Physics, Tsinghua University, Beijing, China) Lanzhou University, Lanzhou, China (associated with Institute Of High Energy Physics (IHEP), Beijing, China) School of Physics and Technology, Wuhan University, Wuhan, China (associated with Center for High Energy Physics, Tsinghua University, Beijing, China) Departamento de Fisica, Universidad Nacional de Colombia, Bogota, Colombia (associated with LPNHE, Sorbonne Université, Paris Diderot Sorbonne Paris Cité, CNRS/IN2P3, Paris, France) Universität Bonn - Helmholtz-Institut für Strahlen und Kernphysik, Bonn, Germany (associated with Physikalisches Institut, Ruprecht-Karls-Universität Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany) Eotvos Lorand University, Budapest, Hungary (associated with European Organization for Nuclear Research (CERN), Geneva, Switzerland) Van Swinderen Institute, University of Groningen, Groningen, Netherlands (associated with Nikhef National Institute for Subatomic Physics, Amsterdam, Netherlands) Universiteit Maastricht, Maastricht, Netherlands (associated with Nikhef National Institute for Subatomic Physics, Amsterdam, Netherlands) Tadeusz Kosciuszko Cracow University of Technology, Cracow, Poland (associated with Henryk Niewodniczanski Institute of Nuclear Physics Polish Academy of Sciences, Kraków, Poland) Department of Physics and Astronomy, Uppsala University, Uppsala, Sweden (associated with School of Physics and Astronomy, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, United Kingdom) University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan, USA (associated with Syracuse University, Syracuse, New York, USA) Departement de Physique Nucleaire (SPhN), Gif-Sur-Yvette, France
A T Grecu Horia Hulubei National Institute of Physics and Nuclear Engineering, Bucharest-Magurele, Romania
L M Greeven Nikhef National Institute for Subatomic Physics, Amsterdam, Netherlands
N A Grieser University of Cincinnati, Cincinnati, Ohio, USA
L Grillo School of Physics and Astronomy, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, United Kingdom
S Gromov Affiliated with an institute covered by a cooperation agreement with CERN
C Gu Laboratoire Leprince-Ringuet, CNRS/IN2P3, Ecole Polytechnique, Institut Polytechnique de Paris, Palaiseau, France
M Guarise INFN Sezione di Ferrara, Ferrara, Italy
M Guittiere Université Paris-Saclay, CNRS/IN2P3, IJCLab, Orsay, France
V Guliaeva Affiliated with an institute covered by a cooperation agreement with CERN
P A Günther Physikalisches Institut, Ruprecht-Karls-Universität Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany
A-K Guseinov Affiliated with an institute covered by a cooperation agreement with CERN
E Gushchin Affiliated with an institute covered by a cooperation agreement with CERN
Y Guz School of Physics State Key Laboratory of Nuclear Physics and Technology, Peking University, Beijing, China Affiliated with an institute covered by a cooperation agreement with CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research (CERN), Geneva, Switzerland
T Gys European Organization for Nuclear Research (CERN), Geneva, Switzerland
T Hadavizadeh School of Physics and Astronomy, Monash University, Melbourne, Australia
C Hadjivasiliou University of Maryland, College Park, Maryland, USA
G Haefeli Institute of Physics, Ecole Polytechnique Fédérale de Lausanne (EPFL), Lausanne, Switzerland
C Haen European Organization for Nuclear Research (CERN), Geneva, Switzerland
J Haimberger European Organization for Nuclear Research (CERN), Geneva, Switzerland
M Hajheidari European Organization for Nuclear Research (CERN), Geneva, Switzerland
T Halewood-Leagas Oliver Lodge Laboratory, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, United Kingdom
M M Halvorsen European Organization for Nuclear Research (CERN), Geneva, Switzerland
P M Hamilton University of Maryland, College Park, Maryland, USA
J Hammerich Oliver Lodge Laboratory, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, United Kingdom
Q Han Institute of Particle Physics, Central China Normal University, Wuhan, Hubei, China
X Han Physikalisches Institut, Ruprecht-Karls-Universität Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany
S Hansmann-Menzemer Physikalisches Institut, Ruprecht-Karls-Universität Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany
L Hao University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing, China
N Harnew Department of Physics, University of Oxford, Oxford, United Kingdom
T Harrison Oliver Lodge Laboratory, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, United Kingdom
M Hartmann Université Paris-Saclay, CNRS/IN2P3, IJCLab, Orsay, France
C Hasse European Organization for Nuclear Research (CERN), Geneva, Switzerland
J He University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing, China
K Heijhoff Nikhef National Institute for Subatomic Physics, Amsterdam, Netherlands
F Hemmer European Organization for Nuclear Research (CERN), Geneva, Switzerland
C Henderson University of Cincinnati, Cincinnati, Ohio, USA
R D L Henderson School of Physics and Astronomy, Monash University, Melbourne, Australia Department of Physics, University of Warwick, Coventry, United Kingdom
A M Hennequin European Organization for Nuclear Research (CERN), Geneva, Switzerland
K Hennessy Oliver Lodge Laboratory, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, United Kingdom
L Henry Institute of Physics, Ecole Polytechnique Fédérale de Lausanne (EPFL), Lausanne, Switzerland
J Herd Imperial College London, London, United Kingdom
J Heuel I. Physikalisches Institut, RWTH Aachen University, Aachen, Germany
A Hicheur Universidade Federal do Rio de Janeiro (UFRJ), Rio de Janeiro, Brazil
D Hill Institute of Physics, Ecole Polytechnique Fédérale de Lausanne (EPFL), Lausanne, Switzerland
S E Hollitt Fakultät Physik, Technische Universität Dortmund, Dortmund, Germany
J Horswill Department of Physics and Astronomy, University of Manchester, Manchester, United Kingdom
R Hou Institute of Particle Physics, Central China Normal University, Wuhan, Hubei, China
Y Hou Université Savoie Mont Blanc, CNRS, IN2P3-LAPP, Annecy, France
N Howarth Oliver Lodge Laboratory, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, United Kingdom
J Hu Physikalisches Institut, Ruprecht-Karls-Universität Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany
J Hu Guangdong Provincial Key Laboratory of Nuclear Science, Guangdong-Hong Kong Joint Laboratory of Quantum Matter, Institute of Quantum Matter, South China Normal University, Guangzhou, China (associated with Center for High Energy Physics, Tsinghua University, Beijing, China)
W Hu School of Physics State Key Laboratory of Nuclear Physics and Technology, Peking University, Beijing, China
X Hu Center for High Energy Physics, Tsinghua University, Beijing, China
W Huang University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing, China
W Hulsbergen Nikhef National Institute for Subatomic Physics, Amsterdam, Netherlands
R J Hunter Department of Physics, University of Warwick, Coventry, United Kingdom
M Hushchyn Affiliated with an institute covered by a cooperation agreement with CERN
D Hutchcroft Oliver Lodge Laboratory, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, United Kingdom
M Idzik AGH - University of Science and Technology, Faculty of Physics and Applied Computer Science, Kraków, Poland
D Ilin Affiliated with an institute covered by a cooperation agreement with CERN
P Ilten University of Cincinnati, Cincinnati, Ohio, USA
A Inglessi Affiliated with an institute covered by a cooperation agreement with CERN
A Iniukhin Affiliated with an institute covered by a cooperation agreement with CERN
A Ishteev Affiliated with an institute covered by a cooperation agreement with CERN
K Ivshin Affiliated with an institute covered by a cooperation agreement with CERN
R Jacobsson European Organization for Nuclear Research (CERN), Geneva, Switzerland
H Jage I. Physikalisches Institut, RWTH Aachen University, Aachen, Germany
S J Jaimes Elles Instituto de Fisica Corpuscular, Centro Mixto Universidad de Valencia - CSIC, Valencia, Spain Departamento de Fisica, Universidad Nacional de Colombia, Bogota, Colombia (associated with LPNHE, Sorbonne Université, Paris Diderot Sorbonne Paris Cité, CNRS/IN2P3, Paris, France)
S Jakobsen European Organization for Nuclear Research (CERN), Geneva, Switzerland
E Jans Nikhef National Institute for Subatomic Physics, Amsterdam, Netherlands
B K Jashal Instituto de Fisica Corpuscular, Centro Mixto Universidad de Valencia - CSIC, Valencia, Spain
A Jawahery University of Maryland, College Park, Maryland, USA
V Jevtic Fakultät Physik, Technische Universität Dortmund, Dortmund, Germany
E Jiang University of Maryland, College Park, Maryland, USA
X Jiang Institute Of High Energy Physics (IHEP), Beijing, China University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing, China
Y Jiang University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing, China
Y J Jiang School of Physics State Key Laboratory of Nuclear Physics and Technology, Peking University, Beijing, China
M John Department of Physics, University of Oxford, Oxford, United Kingdom
D Johnson University of Birmingham, Birmingham, United Kingdom
C R Jones Cavendish Laboratory, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, United Kingdom
T P Jones Department of Physics, University of Warwick, Coventry, United Kingdom
S Joshi National Center for Nuclear Research (NCBJ), Warsaw, Poland
B Jost European Organization for Nuclear Research (CERN), Geneva, Switzerland
N Jurik European Organization for Nuclear Research (CERN), Geneva, Switzerland
I Juszczak Henryk Niewodniczanski Institute of Nuclear Physics Polish Academy of Sciences, Kraków, Poland
D Kaminaris Institute of Physics, Ecole Polytechnique Fédérale de Lausanne (EPFL), Lausanne, Switzerland
S Kandybei NSC Kharkiv Institute of Physics and Technology (NSC KIPT), Kharkiv, Ukraine
Y Kang Center for High Energy Physics, Tsinghua University, Beijing, China
M Karacson European Organization for Nuclear Research (CERN), Geneva, Switzerland
D Karpenkov Affiliated with an institute covered by a cooperation agreement with CERN
M Karpov Affiliated with an institute covered by a cooperation agreement with CERN
A M Kauniskangas Institute of Physics, Ecole Polytechnique Fédérale de Lausanne (EPFL), Lausanne, Switzerland
J W Kautz University of Cincinnati, Cincinnati, Ohio, USA
F Keizer European Organization for Nuclear Research (CERN), Geneva, Switzerland
D M Keller Syracuse University, Syracuse, New York, USA
M Kenzie Cavendish Laboratory, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, United Kingdom
T Ketel Nikhef National Institute for Subatomic Physics, Amsterdam, Netherlands
B Khanji Syracuse University, Syracuse, New York, USA
A Kharisova Affiliated with an institute covered by a cooperation agreement with CERN
S Kholodenko INFN Sezione di Pisa, Pisa, Italy
G Khreich Université Paris-Saclay, CNRS/IN2P3, IJCLab, Orsay, France
T Kirn I. Physikalisches Institut, RWTH Aachen University, Aachen, Germany
V S Kirsebom Institute of Physics, Ecole Polytechnique Fédérale de Lausanne (EPFL), Lausanne, Switzerland
O Kitouni Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, Massachusetts, USA
S Klaver Nikhef National Institute for Subatomic Physics and VU University Amsterdam, Amsterdam, Netherlands
N Kleijne INFN Sezione di Pisa, Pisa, Italy
K Klimaszewski National Center for Nuclear Research (NCBJ), Warsaw, Poland
M R Kmiec National Center for Nuclear Research (NCBJ), Warsaw, Poland
S Koliiev Institute for Nuclear Research of the National Academy of Sciences (KINR), Kyiv, Ukraine
L Kolk Fakultät Physik, Technische Universität Dortmund, Dortmund, Germany
A Konoplyannikov Affiliated with an institute covered by a cooperation agreement with CERN
P Kopciewicz AGH - University of Science and Technology, Faculty of Physics and Applied Computer Science, Kraków, Poland European Organization for Nuclear Research (CERN), Geneva, Switzerland
P Koppenburg Nikhef National Institute for Subatomic Physics, Amsterdam, Netherlands
M Korolev Affiliated with an institute covered by a cooperation agreement with CERN
I Kostiuk Nikhef National Institute for Subatomic Physics, Amsterdam, Netherlands
O Kot Institute for Nuclear Research of the National Academy of Sciences (KINR), Kyiv, Ukraine
S Kotriakhova School of Physics and Astronomy, Monash University, Melbourne, Australia Centro Brasileiro de Pesquisas Físicas (CBPF), Rio de Janeiro, Brazil Universidade Federal do Rio de Janeiro (UFRJ), Rio de Janeiro, Brazil Center for High Energy Physics, Tsinghua University, Beijing, China Institute Of High Energy Physics (IHEP), Beijing, China School of Physics State Key Laboratory of Nuclear Physics and Technology, Peking University, Beijing, China University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing, China Institute of Particle Physics, Central China Normal University, Wuhan, Hubei, China Consejo Nacional de Rectores (CONARE), San Jose, Costa Rica Université Savoie Mont Blanc, CNRS, IN2P3-LAPP, Annecy, France Université Clermont Auvergne, CNRS/IN2P3, LPC, Clermont-Ferrand, France Aix Marseille Univ, CNRS/IN2P3, CPPM, Marseille, France Université Paris-Saclay, CNRS/IN2P3, IJCLab, Orsay, France Laboratoire Leprince-Ringuet, CNRS/IN2P3, Ecole Polytechnique, Institut Polytechnique de Paris, Palaiseau, France LPNHE, Sorbonne Université, Paris Diderot Sorbonne Paris Cité, CNRS/IN2P3, Paris, France I. Physikalisches Institut, RWTH Aachen University, Aachen, Germany Fakultät Physik, Technische Universität Dortmund, Dortmund, Germany Max-Planck-Institut für Kernphysik (MPIK), Heidelberg, Germany Physikalisches Institut, Ruprecht-Karls-Universität Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany School of Physics, University College Dublin, Dublin, Ireland INFN Sezione di Bari, Bari, Italy INFN Sezione di Bologna, Bologna, Italy INFN Sezione di Ferrara, Ferrara, Italy INFN Sezione di Firenze, Firenze, Italy INFN Laboratori Nazionali di Frascati, Frascati, Italy INFN Sezione di Genova, Genova, Italy INFN Sezione di Milano, Milano, Italy INFN Sezione di Milano-Bicocca, Milano, Italy INFN Sezione di Cagliari, Monserrato, Italy Università degli Studi di Padova, Università e INFN, Padova, Padova, Italy INFN Sezione di Perugia, Perugia, Italy INFN Sezione di Pisa, Pisa, Italy INFN Sezione di Roma La Sapienza, Roma, Italy INFN Sezione di Roma Tor Vergata, Roma, Italy Nikhef National Institute for Subatomic Physics, Amsterdam, Netherlands Nikhef National Institute for Subatomic Physics and VU University Amsterdam, Amsterdam, Netherlands AGH - University of Science and Technology, Faculty of Physics and Applied Computer Science, Kraków, Poland Henryk Niewodniczanski Institute of Nuclear Physics Polish Academy of Sciences, Kraków, Poland National Center for Nuclear Research (NCBJ), Warsaw, Poland Horia Hulubei National Institute of Physics and Nuclear Engineering, Bucharest-Magurele, Romania Affiliated with an institute covered by a cooperation agreement with CERN DS4DS, La Salle, Universitat Ramon Llull, Barcelona, Spain ICCUB, Universitat de Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain Instituto Galego de Física de Altas Enerxías (IGFAE), Universidade de Santiago de Compostela, Santiago de Compostela, Spain Instituto de Fisica Corpuscular, Centro Mixto Universidad de Valencia - CSIC, Valencia, Spain European Organization for Nuclear Research (CERN), Geneva, Switzerland Institute of Physics, Ecole Polytechnique Fédérale de Lausanne (EPFL), Lausanne, Switzerland Physik-Institut, Universität Zürich, Zürich, Switzerland NSC Kharkiv Institute of Physics and Technology (NSC KIPT), Kharkiv, Ukraine Institute for Nuclear Research of the National Academy of Sciences (KINR), Kyiv, Ukraine University of Birmingham, Birmingham, United Kingdom H.H. Wills Physics Laboratory, University of Bristol, Bristol, United Kingdom Cavendish Laboratory, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, United Kingdom Department of Physics, University of Warwick, Coventry, United Kingdom STFC Rutherford Appleton Laboratory, Didcot, United Kingdom School of Physics and Astronomy, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, United Kingdom School of Physics and Astronomy, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, United Kingdom Oliver Lodge Laboratory, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, United Kingdom Imperial College London, London, United Kingdom Department of Physics and Astronomy, University of Manchester, Manchester, United Kingdom Department of Physics, University of Oxford, Oxford, United Kingdom Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, Massachusetts, USA University of Cincinnati, Cincinnati, Ohio, USA University of Maryland, College Park, Maryland, USA Los Alamos National Laboratory (LANL), Los Alamos, New Mexico, USA Syracuse University, Syracuse, New York, USA Pontifícia Universidade Católica do Rio de Janeiro (PUC-Rio), Rio de Janeiro, Brazil (associated with Universidade Federal do Rio de Janeiro (UFRJ), Rio de Janeiro, Brazil) School of Physics and Electronics, Hunan University, Changsha City, China (associated with Institute of Particle Physics, Central China Normal University, Wuhan, Hubei, China) Guangdong Provincial Key Laboratory of Nuclear Science, Guangdong-Hong Kong Joint Laboratory of Quantum Matter, Institute of Quantum Matter, South China Normal University, Guangzhou, China (associated with Center for High Energy Physics, Tsinghua University, Beijing, China) Lanzhou University, Lanzhou, China (associated with Institute Of High Energy Physics (IHEP), Beijing, China) School of Physics and Technology, Wuhan University, Wuhan, China (associated with Center for High Energy Physics, Tsinghua University, Beijing, China) Departamento de Fisica, Universidad Nacional de Colombia, Bogota, Colombia (associated with LPNHE, Sorbonne Université, Paris Diderot Sorbonne Paris Cité, CNRS/IN2P3, Paris, France) Universität Bonn - Helmholtz-Institut für Strahlen und Kernphysik, Bonn, Germany (associated with Physikalisches Institut, Ruprecht-Karls-Universität Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany) Eotvos Lorand University, Budapest, Hungary (associated with European Organization for Nuclear Research (CERN), Geneva, Switzerland) Van Swinderen Institute, University of Groningen, Groningen, Netherlands (associated with Nikhef National Institute for Subatomic Physics, Amsterdam, Netherlands) Universiteit Maastricht, Maastricht, Netherlands (associated with Nikhef National Institute for Subatomic Physics, Amsterdam, Netherlands) Tadeusz Kosciuszko Cracow University of Technology, Cracow, Poland (associated with Henryk Niewodniczanski Institute of Nuclear Physics Polish Academy of Sciences, Kraków, Poland) Department of Physics and Astronomy, Uppsala University, Uppsala, Sweden (associated with School of Physics and Astronomy, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, United Kingdom) University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan, USA (associated with Syracuse University, Syracuse, New York, USA) Departement de Physique Nucleaire (SPhN), Gif-Sur-Yvette, France
A Kozachuk Affiliated with an institute covered by a cooperation agreement with CERN
P Kravchenko Affiliated with an institute covered by a cooperation agreement with CERN
L Kravchuk Affiliated with an institute covered by a cooperation agreement with CERN
M Kreps Department of Physics, University of Warwick, Coventry, United Kingdom
S Kretzschmar I. Physikalisches Institut, RWTH Aachen University, Aachen, Germany
P Krokovny Affiliated with an institute covered by a cooperation agreement with CERN
W Krupa Syracuse University, Syracuse, New York, USA
W Krzemien National Center for Nuclear Research (NCBJ), Warsaw, Poland
J Kubat Physikalisches Institut, Ruprecht-Karls-Universität Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany
S Kubis Tadeusz Kosciuszko Cracow University of Technology, Cracow, Poland (associated with Henryk Niewodniczanski Institute of Nuclear Physics Polish Academy of Sciences, Kraków, Poland)
W Kucewicz Henryk Niewodniczanski Institute of Nuclear Physics Polish Academy of Sciences, Kraków, Poland
M Kucharczyk Henryk Niewodniczanski Institute of Nuclear Physics Polish Academy of Sciences, Kraków, Poland
V Kudryavtsev Affiliated with an institute covered by a cooperation agreement with CERN
E Kulikova Affiliated with an institute covered by a cooperation agreement with CERN
A Kupsc Department of Physics and Astronomy, Uppsala University, Uppsala, Sweden (associated with School of Physics and Astronomy, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, United Kingdom)
B K Kutsenko Aix Marseille Univ, CNRS/IN2P3, CPPM, Marseille, France
D Lacarrere European Organization for Nuclear Research (CERN), Geneva, Switzerland
A Lai INFN Sezione di Cagliari, Monserrato, Italy
A Lampis INFN Sezione di Cagliari, Monserrato, Italy
D Lancierini Physik-Institut, Universität Zürich, Zürich, Switzerland
C Landesa Gomez Instituto Galego de Física de Altas Enerxías (IGFAE), Universidade de Santiago de Compostela, Santiago de Compostela, Spain
J J Lane School of Physics and Astronomy, Monash University, Melbourne, Australia
R Lane H.H. Wills Physics Laboratory, University of Bristol, Bristol, United Kingdom
C Langenbruch Physikalisches Institut, Ruprecht-Karls-Universität Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany
J Langer Fakultät Physik, Technische Universität Dortmund, Dortmund, Germany
O Lantwin Affiliated with an institute covered by a cooperation agreement with CERN
T Latham Department of Physics, University of Warwick, Coventry, United Kingdom
F Lazzari INFN Sezione di Pisa, Pisa, Italy
C Lazzeroni University of Birmingham, Birmingham, United Kingdom
R Le Gac Aix Marseille Univ, CNRS/IN2P3, CPPM, Marseille, France
S H Lee University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan, USA (associated with Syracuse University, Syracuse, New York, USA)
R Lefèvre Université Clermont Auvergne, CNRS/IN2P3, LPC, Clermont-Ferrand, France
A Leflat Affiliated with an institute covered by a cooperation agreement with CERN
S Legotin Affiliated with an institute covered by a cooperation agreement with CERN
M Lehuraux Department of Physics, University of Warwick, Coventry, United Kingdom
O Leroy Aix Marseille Univ, CNRS/IN2P3, CPPM, Marseille, France
T Lesiak Henryk Niewodniczanski Institute of Nuclear Physics Polish Academy of Sciences, Kraków, Poland
B Leverington Physikalisches Institut, Ruprecht-Karls-Universität Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany
A Li Center for High Energy Physics, Tsinghua University, Beijing, China
H Li Guangdong Provincial Key Laboratory of Nuclear Science, Guangdong-Hong Kong Joint Laboratory of Quantum Matter, Institute of Quantum Matter, South China Normal University, Guangzhou, China (associated with Center for High Energy Physics, Tsinghua University, Beijing, China)
K Li Institute of Particle Physics, Central China Normal University, Wuhan, Hubei, China
L Li Department of Physics and Astronomy, University of Manchester, Manchester, United Kingdom
P Li European Organization for Nuclear Research (CERN), Geneva, Switzerland
P-R Li Lanzhou University, Lanzhou, China (associated with Institute Of High Energy Physics (IHEP), Beijing, China)
S Li Institute of Particle Physics, Central China Normal University, Wuhan, Hubei, China
T Li Institute Of High Energy Physics (IHEP), Beijing, China
T Li Guangdong Provincial Key Laboratory of Nuclear Science, Guangdong-Hong Kong Joint Laboratory of Quantum Matter, Institute of Quantum Matter, South China Normal University, Guangzhou, China (associated with Center for High Energy Physics, Tsinghua University, Beijing, China)
Y Li Institute of Particle Physics, Central China Normal University, Wuhan, Hubei, China
Y Li Institute Of High Energy Physics (IHEP), Beijing, China
Z Li Syracuse University, Syracuse, New York, USA
Z Lian Center for High Energy Physics, Tsinghua University, Beijing, China
X Liang Syracuse University, Syracuse, New York, USA
C Lin University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing, China
T Lin STFC Rutherford Appleton Laboratory, Didcot, United Kingdom
R Lindner European Organization for Nuclear Research (CERN), Geneva, Switzerland
V Lisovskyi Institute of Physics, Ecole Polytechnique Fédérale de Lausanne (EPFL), Lausanne, Switzerland
R Litvinov INFN Sezione di Cagliari, Monserrato, Italy
G Liu Guangdong Provincial Key Laboratory of Nuclear Science, Guangdong-Hong Kong Joint Laboratory of Quantum Matter, Institute of Quantum Matter, South China Normal University, Guangzhou, China (associated with Center for High Energy Physics, Tsinghua University, Beijing, China)
H Liu University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing, China
K Liu Lanzhou University, Lanzhou, China (associated with Institute Of High Energy Physics (IHEP), Beijing, China)
Q Liu University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing, China
S Liu Institute Of High Energy Physics (IHEP), Beijing, China University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing, China
Y Liu School of Physics and Astronomy, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, United Kingdom
Y Liu Lanzhou University, Lanzhou, China (associated with Institute Of High Energy Physics (IHEP), Beijing, China)
Y L Liu Imperial College London, London, United Kingdom
A Lobo Salvia ICCUB, Universitat de Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain
A Loi INFN Sezione di Cagliari, Monserrato, Italy
J Lomba Castro Instituto Galego de Física de Altas Enerxías (IGFAE), Universidade de Santiago de Compostela, Santiago de Compostela, Spain
T Long Cavendish Laboratory, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, United Kingdom
J H Lopes Universidade Federal do Rio de Janeiro (UFRJ), Rio de Janeiro, Brazil
A Lopez Huertas ICCUB, Universitat de Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain
S López Soliño Instituto Galego de Física de Altas Enerxías (IGFAE), Universidade de Santiago de Compostela, Santiago de Compostela, Spain
G H Lovell Cavendish Laboratory, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, United Kingdom
C Lucarelli INFN Sezione di Firenze, Firenze, Italy
D Lucchesi Università degli Studi di Padova, Università e INFN, Padova, Padova, Italy
S Luchuk Affiliated with an institute covered by a cooperation agreement with CERN
M Lucio Martinez Universiteit Maastricht, Maastricht, Netherlands (associated with Nikhef National Institute for Subatomic Physics, Amsterdam, Netherlands)
V Lukashenko Nikhef National Institute for Subatomic Physics, Amsterdam, Netherlands Institute for Nuclear Research of the National Academy of Sciences (KINR), Kyiv, Ukraine
Y Luo Center for High Energy Physics, Tsinghua University, Beijing, China
A Lupato Università degli Studi di Padova, Università e INFN, Padova, Padova, Italy
E Luppi INFN Sezione di Ferrara, Ferrara, Italy
K Lynch School of Physics, University College Dublin, Dublin, Ireland
X-R Lyu University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing, China
G M Ma Center for High Energy Physics, Tsinghua University, Beijing, China
R Ma University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing, China
S Maccolini Fakultät Physik, Technische Universität Dortmund, Dortmund, Germany
F Machefert Université Paris-Saclay, CNRS/IN2P3, IJCLab, Orsay, France
F Maciuc Horia Hulubei National Institute of Physics and Nuclear Engineering, Bucharest-Magurele, Romania
I Mackay Department of Physics, University of Oxford, Oxford, United Kingdom
L R Madhan Mohan Cavendish Laboratory, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, United Kingdom
M M Madurai University of Birmingham, Birmingham, United Kingdom
A Maevskiy Affiliated with an institute covered by a cooperation agreement with CERN
D Magdalinski Nikhef National Institute for Subatomic Physics, Amsterdam, Netherlands
D Maisuzenko Affiliated with an institute covered by a cooperation agreement with CERN
M W Majewski AGH - University of Science and Technology, Faculty of Physics and Applied Computer Science, Kraków, Poland
J J Malczewski Henryk Niewodniczanski Institute of Nuclear Physics Polish Academy of Sciences, Kraków, Poland
S Malde Department of Physics, University of Oxford, Oxford, United Kingdom
B Malecki Henryk Niewodniczanski Institute of Nuclear Physics Polish Academy of Sciences, Kraków, Poland European Organization for Nuclear Research (CERN), Geneva, Switzerland
L Malentacca European Organization for Nuclear Research (CERN), Geneva, Switzerland
A Malinin Affiliated with an institute covered by a cooperation agreement with CERN
T Maltsev Affiliated with an institute covered by a cooperation agreement with CERN
G Manca INFN Sezione di Cagliari, Monserrato, Italy
G Mancinelli Aix Marseille Univ, CNRS/IN2P3, CPPM, Marseille, France
C Mancuso Université Paris-Saclay, CNRS/IN2P3, IJCLab, Orsay, France INFN Sezione di Milano, Milano, Italy
R Manera Escalero ICCUB, Universitat de Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain
D Manuzzi INFN Sezione di Bologna, Bologna, Italy
D Marangotto INFN Sezione di Milano, Milano, Italy
J F Marchand Université Savoie Mont Blanc, CNRS, IN2P3-LAPP, Annecy, France
R Marchevski Institute of Physics, Ecole Polytechnique Fédérale de Lausanne (EPFL), Lausanne, Switzerland
U Marconi INFN Sezione di Bologna, Bologna, Italy
S Mariani European Organization for Nuclear Research (CERN), Geneva, Switzerland
C Marin Benito ICCUB, Universitat de Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain European Organization for Nuclear Research (CERN), Geneva, Switzerland
J Marks Physikalisches Institut, Ruprecht-Karls-Universität Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany
A M Marshall H.H. Wills Physics Laboratory, University of Bristol, Bristol, United Kingdom
P J Marshall Oliver Lodge Laboratory, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, United Kingdom
G Martelli INFN Sezione di Perugia, Perugia, Italy
G Martellotti INFN Sezione di Roma La Sapienza, Roma, Italy
L Martinazzoli European Organization for Nuclear Research (CERN), Geneva, Switzerland
M Martinelli INFN Sezione di Milano-Bicocca, Milano, Italy
D Martinez Santos Instituto Galego de Física de Altas Enerxías (IGFAE), Universidade de Santiago de Compostela, Santiago de Compostela, Spain
F Martinez Vidal Instituto de Fisica Corpuscular, Centro Mixto Universidad de Valencia - CSIC, Valencia, Spain
A Massafferri Centro Brasileiro de Pesquisas Físicas (CBPF), Rio de Janeiro, Brazil
M Materok I. Physikalisches Institut, RWTH Aachen University, Aachen, Germany
R Matev European Organization for Nuclear Research (CERN), Geneva, Switzerland
A Mathad Physik-Institut, Universität Zürich, Zürich, Switzerland
V Matiunin Affiliated with an institute covered by a cooperation agreement with CERN
C Matteuzzi Syracuse University, Syracuse, New York, USA
K R Mattioli Laboratoire Leprince-Ringuet, CNRS/IN2P3, Ecole Polytechnique, Institut Polytechnique de Paris, Palaiseau, France
A Mauri Imperial College London, London, United Kingdom
E Maurice Laboratoire Leprince-Ringuet, CNRS/IN2P3, Ecole Polytechnique, Institut Polytechnique de Paris, Palaiseau, France
J Mauricio ICCUB, Universitat de Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain
P Mayencourt Institute of Physics, Ecole Polytechnique Fédérale de Lausanne (EPFL), Lausanne, Switzerland
M Mazurek European Organization for Nuclear Research (CERN), Geneva, Switzerland
M McCann Imperial College London, London, United Kingdom
L Mcconnell School of Physics, University College Dublin, Dublin, Ireland
T H McGrath Department of Physics and Astronomy, University of Manchester, Manchester, United Kingdom
N T McHugh School of Physics and Astronomy, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, United Kingdom
A McNab Department of Physics and Astronomy, University of Manchester, Manchester, United Kingdom
R McNulty School of Physics, University College Dublin, Dublin, Ireland
B Meadows University of Cincinnati, Cincinnati, Ohio, USA
G Meier Fakultät Physik, Technische Universität Dortmund, Dortmund, Germany
D Melnychuk National Center for Nuclear Research (NCBJ), Warsaw, Poland
M Merk Nikhef National Institute for Subatomic Physics, Amsterdam, Netherlands Universiteit Maastricht, Maastricht, Netherlands (associated with Nikhef National Institute for Subatomic Physics, Amsterdam, Netherlands)
A Merli INFN Sezione di Milano, Milano, Italy
L Meyer Garcia Universidade Federal do Rio de Janeiro (UFRJ), Rio de Janeiro, Brazil
D Miao Institute Of High Energy Physics (IHEP), Beijing, China University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing, China
H Miao University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing, China
M Mikhasenko Universität Bonn - Helmholtz-Institut für Strahlen und Kernphysik, Bonn, Germany (associated with Physikalisches Institut, Ruprecht-Karls-Universität Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany)
D A Milanes Departamento de Fisica, Universidad Nacional de Colombia, Bogota, Colombia (associated with LPNHE, Sorbonne Université, Paris Diderot Sorbonne Paris Cité, CNRS/IN2P3, Paris, France)
A Minotti INFN Sezione di Milano-Bicocca, Milano, Italy
E Minucci Syracuse University, Syracuse, New York, USA
T Miralles Université Clermont Auvergne, CNRS/IN2P3, LPC, Clermont-Ferrand, France
S E Mitchell School of Physics and Astronomy, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, United Kingdom
B Mitreska Fakultät Physik, Technische Universität Dortmund, Dortmund, Germany
D S Mitzel Fakultät Physik, Technische Universität Dortmund, Dortmund, Germany
A Modak STFC Rutherford Appleton Laboratory, Didcot, United Kingdom
A Mödden Fakultät Physik, Technische Universität Dortmund, Dortmund, Germany
R A Mohammed Department of Physics, University of Oxford, Oxford, United Kingdom
R D Moise I. Physikalisches Institut, RWTH Aachen University, Aachen, Germany
S Mokhnenko Affiliated with an institute covered by a cooperation agreement with CERN
T Mombächer European Organization for Nuclear Research (CERN), Geneva, Switzerland
M Monk School of Physics and Astronomy, Monash University, Melbourne, Australia Department of Physics, University of Warwick, Coventry, United Kingdom
I A Monroy Departamento de Fisica, Universidad Nacional de Colombia, Bogota, Colombia (associated with LPNHE, Sorbonne Université, Paris Diderot Sorbonne Paris Cité, CNRS/IN2P3, Paris, France)
S Monteil Université Clermont Auvergne, CNRS/IN2P3, LPC, Clermont-Ferrand, France
A Morcillo Gomez Instituto Galego de Física de Altas Enerxías (IGFAE), Universidade de Santiago de Compostela, Santiago de Compostela, Spain
G Morello INFN Laboratori Nazionali di Frascati, Frascati, Italy
M J Morello INFN Sezione di Pisa, Pisa, Italy
M P Morgenthaler Physikalisches Institut, Ruprecht-Karls-Universität Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany
J Moron AGH - University of Science and Technology, Faculty of Physics and Applied Computer Science, Kraków, Poland
A B Morris European Organization for Nuclear Research (CERN), Geneva, Switzerland
A G Morris Aix Marseille Univ, CNRS/IN2P3, CPPM, Marseille, France
R Mountain Syracuse University, Syracuse, New York, USA
H Mu Center for High Energy Physics, Tsinghua University, Beijing, China
Z M Mu School of Physics State Key Laboratory of Nuclear Physics and Technology, Peking University, Beijing, China
E Muhammad Department of Physics, University of Warwick, Coventry, United Kingdom
F Muheim School of Physics and Astronomy, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, United Kingdom
M Mulder Van Swinderen Institute, University of Groningen, Groningen, Netherlands (associated with Nikhef National Institute for Subatomic Physics, Amsterdam, Netherlands)
K Müller Physik-Institut, Universität Zürich, Zürich, Switzerland
F Mũnoz-Rojas Consejo Nacional de Rectores (CONARE), San Jose, Costa Rica
R Murta Imperial College London, London, United Kingdom
P Naik Oliver Lodge Laboratory, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, United Kingdom
T Nakada Institute of Physics, Ecole Polytechnique Fédérale de Lausanne (EPFL), Lausanne, Switzerland
R Nandakumar STFC Rutherford Appleton Laboratory, Didcot, United Kingdom
T Nanut European Organization for Nuclear Research (CERN), Geneva, Switzerland
I Nasteva Universidade Federal do Rio de Janeiro (UFRJ), Rio de Janeiro, Brazil
M Needham School of Physics and Astronomy, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, United Kingdom
N Neri INFN Sezione di Milano, Milano, Italy
S Neubert Universität Bonn - Helmholtz-Institut für Strahlen und Kernphysik, Bonn, Germany (associated with Physikalisches Institut, Ruprecht-Karls-Universität Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany)
N Neufeld European Organization for Nuclear Research (CERN), Geneva, Switzerland
P Neustroev Affiliated with an institute covered by a cooperation agreement with CERN
R Newcombe Imperial College London, London, United Kingdom
J Nicolini Université Paris-Saclay, CNRS/IN2P3, IJCLab, Orsay, France Fakultät Physik, Technische Universität Dortmund, Dortmund, Germany
D Nicotra Universiteit Maastricht, Maastricht, Netherlands (associated with Nikhef National Institute for Subatomic Physics, Amsterdam, Netherlands)
E M Niel Institute of Physics, Ecole Polytechnique Fédérale de Lausanne (EPFL), Lausanne, Switzerland
N Nikitin Affiliated with an institute covered by a cooperation agreement with CERN
P Nogga Universität Bonn - Helmholtz-Institut für Strahlen und Kernphysik, Bonn, Germany (associated with Physikalisches Institut, Ruprecht-Karls-Universität Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany)
N S Nolte Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, Massachusetts, USA
C Normand Université Savoie Mont Blanc, CNRS, IN2P3-LAPP, Annecy, France INFN Sezione di Cagliari, Monserrato, Italy
J Novoa Fernandez Instituto Galego de Física de Altas Enerxías (IGFAE), Universidade de Santiago de Compostela, Santiago de Compostela, Spain
G Nowak University of Cincinnati, Cincinnati, Ohio, USA
C Nunez University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan, USA (associated with Syracuse University, Syracuse, New York, USA)
H N Nur School of Physics and Astronomy, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, United Kingdom
A Oblakowska-Mucha AGH - University of Science and Technology, Faculty of Physics and Applied Computer Science, Kraków, Poland
V Obraztsov Affiliated with an institute covered by a cooperation agreement with CERN
T Oeser I. Physikalisches Institut, RWTH Aachen University, Aachen, Germany
S Okamura INFN Sezione di Ferrara, Ferrara, Italy European Organization for Nuclear Research (CERN), Geneva, Switzerland
R Oldeman INFN Sezione di Cagliari, Monserrato, Italy
F Oliva School of Physics and Astronomy, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, United Kingdom
M Olocco Fakultät Physik, Technische Universität Dortmund, Dortmund, Germany
C J G Onderwater Universiteit Maastricht, Maastricht, Netherlands (associated with Nikhef National Institute for Subatomic Physics, Amsterdam, Netherlands)
R H O'Neil School of Physics and Astronomy, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, United Kingdom
J M Otalora Goicochea Universidade Federal do Rio de Janeiro (UFRJ), Rio de Janeiro, Brazil
T Ovsiannikova Affiliated with an institute covered by a cooperation agreement with CERN
P Owen Physik-Institut, Universität Zürich, Zürich, Switzerland
A Oyanguren Instituto de Fisica Corpuscular, Centro Mixto Universidad de Valencia - CSIC, Valencia, Spain
O Ozcelik School of Physics and Astronomy, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, United Kingdom
K O Padeken Universität Bonn - Helmholtz-Institut für Strahlen und Kernphysik, Bonn, Germany (associated with Physikalisches Institut, Ruprecht-Karls-Universität Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany)
B Pagare Department of Physics, University of Warwick, Coventry, United Kingdom
P R Pais Physikalisches Institut, Ruprecht-Karls-Universität Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany
T Pajero Department of Physics, University of Oxford, Oxford, United Kingdom
A Palano INFN Sezione di Bari, Bari, Italy
M Palutan INFN Laboratori Nazionali di Frascati, Frascati, Italy
G Panshin Affiliated with an institute covered by a cooperation agreement with CERN
L Paolucci Department of Physics, University of Warwick, Coventry, United Kingdom
A Papanestis STFC Rutherford Appleton Laboratory, Didcot, United Kingdom
M Pappagallo INFN Sezione di Bari, Bari, Italy
L L Pappalardo INFN Sezione di Ferrara, Ferrara, Italy
C Pappenheimer University of Cincinnati, Cincinnati, Ohio, USA
C Parkes Department of Physics and Astronomy, University of Manchester, Manchester, United Kingdom
B Passalacqua INFN Sezione di Ferrara, Ferrara, Italy
G Passaleva INFN Sezione di Firenze, Firenze, Italy
D Passaro INFN Sezione di Pisa, Pisa, Italy
A Pastore INFN Sezione di Bari, Bari, Italy
M Patel Imperial College London, London, United Kingdom
J Patoc Department of Physics, University of Oxford, Oxford, United Kingdom
C Patrignani INFN Sezione di Bologna, Bologna, Italy
C J Pawley Universiteit Maastricht, Maastricht, Netherlands (associated with Nikhef National Institute for Subatomic Physics, Amsterdam, Netherlands)
A Pellegrino Nikhef National Institute for Subatomic Physics, Amsterdam, Netherlands
M Pepe Altarelli INFN Laboratori Nazionali di Frascati, Frascati, Italy
S Perazzini INFN Sezione di Bologna, Bologna, Italy
D Pereima Affiliated with an institute covered by a cooperation agreement with CERN
A Pereiro Castro Instituto Galego de Física de Altas Enerxías (IGFAE), Universidade de Santiago de Compostela, Santiago de Compostela, Spain
P Perret Université Clermont Auvergne, CNRS/IN2P3, LPC, Clermont-Ferrand, France
A Perro European Organization for Nuclear Research (CERN), Geneva, Switzerland
K Petridis H.H. Wills Physics Laboratory, University of Bristol, Bristol, United Kingdom
A Petrolini INFN Sezione di Genova, Genova, Italy
S Petrucci School of Physics and Astronomy, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, United Kingdom
H Pham Syracuse University, Syracuse, New York, USA
L Pica INFN Sezione di Pisa, Pisa, Italy
M Piccini INFN Sezione di Perugia, Perugia, Italy
B Pietrzyk Université Savoie Mont Blanc, CNRS, IN2P3-LAPP, Annecy, France
G Pietrzyk Université Paris-Saclay, CNRS/IN2P3, IJCLab, Orsay, France
D Pinci INFN Sezione di Roma La Sapienza, Roma, Italy
F Pisani European Organization for Nuclear Research (CERN), Geneva, Switzerland
M Pizzichemi INFN Sezione di Milano-Bicocca, Milano, Italy
V Placinta Horia Hulubei National Institute of Physics and Nuclear Engineering, Bucharest-Magurele, Romania
M Plo Casasus Instituto Galego de Física de Altas Enerxías (IGFAE), Universidade de Santiago de Compostela, Santiago de Compostela, Spain
F Polci LPNHE, Sorbonne Université, Paris Diderot Sorbonne Paris Cité, CNRS/IN2P3, Paris, France European Organization for Nuclear Research (CERN), Geneva, Switzerland
M Poli Lener INFN Laboratori Nazionali di Frascati, Frascati, Italy
A Poluektov Aix Marseille Univ, CNRS/IN2P3, CPPM, Marseille, France
N Polukhina Affiliated with an institute covered by a cooperation agreement with CERN
I Polyakov European Organization for Nuclear Research (CERN), Geneva, Switzerland
E Polycarpo Universidade Federal do Rio de Janeiro (UFRJ), Rio de Janeiro, Brazil
S Ponce European Organization for Nuclear Research (CERN), Geneva, Switzerland
D Popov University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing, China
S Poslavskii Affiliated with an institute covered by a cooperation agreement with CERN
K Prasanth Henryk Niewodniczanski Institute of Nuclear Physics Polish Academy of Sciences, Kraków, Poland
C Prouve Instituto Galego de Física de Altas Enerxías (IGFAE), Universidade de Santiago de Compostela, Santiago de Compostela, Spain
V Pugatch Institute for Nuclear Research of the National Academy of Sciences (KINR), Kyiv, Ukraine
V Puill Université Paris-Saclay, CNRS/IN2P3, IJCLab, Orsay, France
G Punzi INFN Sezione di Pisa, Pisa, Italy
H R Qi Center for High Energy Physics, Tsinghua University, Beijing, China
W Qian University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing, China
N Qin Center for High Energy Physics, Tsinghua University, Beijing, China
S Qu Center for High Energy Physics, Tsinghua University, Beijing, China
R Quagliani Institute of Physics, Ecole Polytechnique Fédérale de Lausanne (EPFL), Lausanne, Switzerland
R I Rabadan Trejo Department of Physics, University of Warwick, Coventry, United Kingdom
B Rachwal AGH - University of Science and Technology, Faculty of Physics and Applied Computer Science, Kraków, Poland
J H Rademacker H.H. Wills Physics Laboratory, University of Bristol, Bristol, United Kingdom
M Rama INFN Sezione di Pisa, Pisa, Italy
M Ramírez García University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan, USA (associated with Syracuse University, Syracuse, New York, USA)
M Ramos Pernas Department of Physics, University of Warwick, Coventry, United Kingdom
M S Rangel Universidade Federal do Rio de Janeiro (UFRJ), Rio de Janeiro, Brazil
F Ratnikov Affiliated with an institute covered by a cooperation agreement with CERN
G Raven Nikhef National Institute for Subatomic Physics and VU University Amsterdam, Amsterdam, Netherlands
M Rebollo De Miguel Instituto de Fisica Corpuscular, Centro Mixto Universidad de Valencia - CSIC, Valencia, Spain
F Redi European Organization for Nuclear Research (CERN), Geneva, Switzerland
J Reich H.H. Wills Physics Laboratory, University of Bristol, Bristol, United Kingdom
F Reiss Department of Physics and Astronomy, University of Manchester, Manchester, United Kingdom
Z Ren University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing, China
P K Resmi Department of Physics, University of Oxford, Oxford, United Kingdom
R Ribatti INFN Sezione di Pisa, Pisa, Italy
G R Ricart Laboratoire Leprince-Ringuet, CNRS/IN2P3, Ecole Polytechnique, Institut Polytechnique de Paris, Palaiseau, France Departement de Physique Nucleaire (SPhN), Gif-Sur-Yvette, France
D Riccardi INFN Sezione di Pisa, Pisa, Italy
S Ricciardi STFC Rutherford Appleton Laboratory, Didcot, United Kingdom
K Richardson Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, Massachusetts, USA
M Richardson-Slipper School of Physics and Astronomy, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, United Kingdom
K Rinnert Oliver Lodge Laboratory, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, United Kingdom
P Robbe Université Paris-Saclay, CNRS/IN2P3, IJCLab, Orsay, France
G Robertson School of Physics and Astronomy, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, United Kingdom
E Rodrigues European Organization for Nuclear Research (CERN), Geneva, Switzerland Oliver Lodge Laboratory, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, United Kingdom
E Rodriguez Fernandez Instituto Galego de Física de Altas Enerxías (IGFAE), Universidade de Santiago de Compostela, Santiago de Compostela, Spain
J A Rodriguez Lopez Departamento de Fisica, Universidad Nacional de Colombia, Bogota, Colombia (associated with LPNHE, Sorbonne Université, Paris Diderot Sorbonne Paris Cité, CNRS/IN2P3, Paris, France)
E Rodriguez Rodriguez Instituto Galego de Física de Altas Enerxías (IGFAE), Universidade de Santiago de Compostela, Santiago de Compostela, Spain
A Rogovskiy STFC Rutherford Appleton Laboratory, Didcot, United Kingdom
D L Rolf European Organization for Nuclear Research (CERN), Geneva, Switzerland
A Rollings Department of Physics, University of Oxford, Oxford, United Kingdom
P Roloff European Organization for Nuclear Research (CERN), Geneva, Switzerland
V Romanovskiy Affiliated with an institute covered by a cooperation agreement with CERN
M Romero Lamas Instituto Galego de Física de Altas Enerxías (IGFAE), Universidade de Santiago de Compostela, Santiago de Compostela, Spain
A Romero Vidal Instituto Galego de Física de Altas Enerxías (IGFAE), Universidade de Santiago de Compostela, Santiago de Compostela, Spain
G Romolini INFN Sezione di Ferrara, Ferrara, Italy
F Ronchetti Institute of Physics, Ecole Polytechnique Fédérale de Lausanne (EPFL), Lausanne, Switzerland
M Rotondo INFN Laboratori Nazionali di Frascati, Frascati, Italy
S R Roy Physikalisches Institut, Ruprecht-Karls-Universität Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany
M S Rudolph Syracuse University, Syracuse, New York, USA
T Ruf European Organization for Nuclear Research (CERN), Geneva, Switzerland
M Ruiz Diaz Physikalisches Institut, Ruprecht-Karls-Universität Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany
R A Ruiz Fernandez Instituto Galego de Física de Altas Enerxías (IGFAE), Universidade de Santiago de Compostela, Santiago de Compostela, Spain
J Ruiz Vidal Department of Physics and Astronomy, Uppsala University, Uppsala, Sweden (associated with School of Physics and Astronomy, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, United Kingdom)
A Ryzhikov Affiliated with an institute covered by a cooperation agreement with CERN
J Ryzka AGH - University of Science and Technology, Faculty of Physics and Applied Computer Science, Kraków, Poland
J J Saborido Silva Instituto Galego de Física de Altas Enerxías (IGFAE), Universidade de Santiago de Compostela, Santiago de Compostela, Spain
R Sadek Laboratoire Leprince-Ringuet, CNRS/IN2P3, Ecole Polytechnique, Institut Polytechnique de Paris, Palaiseau, France
N Sagidova Affiliated with an institute covered by a cooperation agreement with CERN
N Sahoo University of Birmingham, Birmingham, United Kingdom
B Saitta INFN Sezione di Cagliari, Monserrato, Italy
M Salomoni INFN Sezione di Milano-Bicocca, Milano, Italy
C Sanchez Gras Nikhef National Institute for Subatomic Physics, Amsterdam, Netherlands
I Sanderswood Instituto de Fisica Corpuscular, Centro Mixto Universidad de Valencia - CSIC, Valencia, Spain
R Santacesaria INFN Sezione di Roma La Sapienza, Roma, Italy
C Santamarina Rios Instituto Galego de Física de Altas Enerxías (IGFAE), Universidade de Santiago de Compostela, Santiago de Compostela, Spain
M Santimaria INFN Laboratori Nazionali di Frascati, Frascati, Italy
L Santoro Centro Brasileiro de Pesquisas Físicas (CBPF), Rio de Janeiro, Brazil
E Santovetti INFN Sezione di Roma Tor Vergata, Roma, Italy
A Saputi INFN Sezione di Ferrara, Ferrara, Italy European Organization for Nuclear Research (CERN), Geneva, Switzerland
D Saranin Affiliated with an institute covered by a cooperation agreement with CERN
G Sarpis School of Physics and Astronomy, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, United Kingdom
M Sarpis Universität Bonn - Helmholtz-Institut für Strahlen und Kernphysik, Bonn, Germany (associated with Physikalisches Institut, Ruprecht-Karls-Universität Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany)
A Sarti INFN Sezione di Roma La Sapienza, Roma, Italy
C Satriano INFN Sezione di Roma La Sapienza, Roma, Italy
A Satta INFN Sezione di Roma Tor Vergata, Roma, Italy
M Saur School of Physics State Key Laboratory of Nuclear Physics and Technology, Peking University, Beijing, China
D Savrina Affiliated with an institute covered by a cooperation agreement with CERN
H Sazak Université Clermont Auvergne, CNRS/IN2P3, LPC, Clermont-Ferrand, France
L G Scantlebury Smead Department of Physics, University of Oxford, Oxford, United Kingdom
A Scarabotto LPNHE, Sorbonne Université, Paris Diderot Sorbonne Paris Cité, CNRS/IN2P3, Paris, France
S Schael I. Physikalisches Institut, RWTH Aachen University, Aachen, Germany
S Scherl Oliver Lodge Laboratory, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, United Kingdom
A M Schertz Eotvos Lorand University, Budapest, Hungary (associated with European Organization for Nuclear Research (CERN), Geneva, Switzerland)
M Schiller School of Physics and Astronomy, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, United Kingdom
H Schindler European Organization for Nuclear Research (CERN), Geneva, Switzerland
M Schmelling Max-Planck-Institut für Kernphysik (MPIK), Heidelberg, Germany
B Schmidt European Organization for Nuclear Research (CERN), Geneva, Switzerland
S Schmitt I. Physikalisches Institut, RWTH Aachen University, Aachen, Germany
H Schmitz Universität Bonn - Helmholtz-Institut für Strahlen und Kernphysik, Bonn, Germany (associated with Physikalisches Institut, Ruprecht-Karls-Universität Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany)
O Schneider Institute of Physics, Ecole Polytechnique Fédérale de Lausanne (EPFL), Lausanne, Switzerland
A Schopper European Organization for Nuclear Research (CERN), Geneva, Switzerland
N Schulte Fakultät Physik, Technische Universität Dortmund, Dortmund, Germany
S Schulte Institute of Physics, Ecole Polytechnique Fédérale de Lausanne (EPFL), Lausanne, Switzerland
M H Schune Université Paris-Saclay, CNRS/IN2P3, IJCLab, Orsay, France
R Schwemmer European Organization for Nuclear Research (CERN), Geneva, Switzerland
G Schwering I. Physikalisches Institut, RWTH Aachen University, Aachen, Germany
B Sciascia INFN Laboratori Nazionali di Frascati, Frascati, Italy
A Sciuccati European Organization for Nuclear Research (CERN), Geneva, Switzerland
S Sellam Instituto Galego de Física de Altas Enerxías (IGFAE), Universidade de Santiago de Compostela, Santiago de Compostela, Spain
A Semennikov Affiliated with an institute covered by a cooperation agreement with CERN
M Senghi Soares Nikhef National Institute for Subatomic Physics and VU University Amsterdam, Amsterdam, Netherlands
A Sergi INFN Sezione di Genova, Genova, Italy
N Serra European Organization for Nuclear Research (CERN), Geneva, Switzerland Physik-Institut, Universität Zürich, Zürich, Switzerland
L Sestini Università degli Studi di Padova, Università e INFN, Padova, Padova, Italy
A Seuthe Fakultät Physik, Technische Universität Dortmund, Dortmund, Germany
Y Shang School of Physics State Key Laboratory of Nuclear Physics and Technology, Peking University, Beijing, China
D M Shangase University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan, USA (associated with Syracuse University, Syracuse, New York, USA)
M Shapkin Affiliated with an institute covered by a cooperation agreement with CERN
I Shchemerov Affiliated with an institute covered by a cooperation agreement with CERN
L Shchutska Institute of Physics, Ecole Polytechnique Fédérale de Lausanne (EPFL), Lausanne, Switzerland
T Shears Oliver Lodge Laboratory, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, United Kingdom
L Shekhtman Affiliated with an institute covered by a cooperation agreement with CERN
Z Shen School of Physics State Key Laboratory of Nuclear Physics and Technology, Peking University, Beijing, China
S Sheng Institute Of High Energy Physics (IHEP), Beijing, China University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing, China
V Shevchenko Affiliated with an institute covered by a cooperation agreement with CERN
B Shi University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing, China
E B Shields INFN Sezione di Milano-Bicocca, Milano, Italy
Y Shimizu Université Paris-Saclay, CNRS/IN2P3, IJCLab, Orsay, France
E Shmanin Affiliated with an institute covered by a cooperation agreement with CERN
R Shorkin Affiliated with an institute covered by a cooperation agreement with CERN
J D Shupperd Syracuse University, Syracuse, New York, USA
R Silva Coutinho Syracuse University, Syracuse, New York, USA
G Simi Università degli Studi di Padova, Università e INFN, Padova, Padova, Italy
S Simone INFN Sezione di Bari, Bari, Italy
N Skidmore Department of Physics and Astronomy, University of Manchester, Manchester, United Kingdom
R Skuza Physikalisches Institut, Ruprecht-Karls-Universität Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany
T Skwarnicki Syracuse University, Syracuse, New York, USA
M W Slater University of Birmingham, Birmingham, United Kingdom
J C Smallwood Department of Physics, University of Oxford, Oxford, United Kingdom
E Smith Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, Massachusetts, USA
K Smith Los Alamos National Laboratory (LANL), Los Alamos, New Mexico, USA
M Smith Imperial College London, London, United Kingdom
A Snoch Nikhef National Institute for Subatomic Physics, Amsterdam, Netherlands
L Soares Lavra School of Physics and Astronomy, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, United Kingdom
M D Sokoloff University of Cincinnati, Cincinnati, Ohio, USA
F J P Soler School of Physics and Astronomy, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, United Kingdom
A Solomin Affiliated with an institute covered by a cooperation agreement with CERN H.H. Wills Physics Laboratory, University of Bristol, Bristol, United Kingdom
A Solovev Affiliated with an institute covered by a cooperation agreement with CERN
I Solovyev Affiliated with an institute covered by a cooperation agreement with CERN
R Song School of Physics and Astronomy, Monash University, Melbourne, Australia
Y Song Institute of Physics, Ecole Polytechnique Fédérale de Lausanne (EPFL), Lausanne, Switzerland
Y Song Center for High Energy Physics, Tsinghua University, Beijing, China
Y S Song School of Physics State Key Laboratory of Nuclear Physics and Technology, Peking University, Beijing, China
F L Souza De Almeida Syracuse University, Syracuse, New York, USA
B Souza De Paula Universidade Federal do Rio de Janeiro (UFRJ), Rio de Janeiro, Brazil
E Spadaro Norella INFN Sezione di Milano, Milano, Italy
E Spedicato INFN Sezione di Bologna, Bologna, Italy
J G Speer Fakultät Physik, Technische Universität Dortmund, Dortmund, Germany
E Spiridenkov Affiliated with an institute covered by a cooperation agreement with CERN
P Spradlin School of Physics and Astronomy, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, United Kingdom
V Sriskaran European Organization for Nuclear Research (CERN), Geneva, Switzerland
F Stagni European Organization for Nuclear Research (CERN), Geneva, Switzerland
M Stahl European Organization for Nuclear Research (CERN), Geneva, Switzerland
S Stahl European Organization for Nuclear Research (CERN), Geneva, Switzerland
S Stanislaus Department of Physics, University of Oxford, Oxford, United Kingdom
E N Stein European Organization for Nuclear Research (CERN), Geneva, Switzerland
O Steinkamp Physik-Institut, Universität Zürich, Zürich, Switzerland
O Stenyakin Affiliated with an institute covered by a cooperation agreement with CERN
H Stevens Fakultät Physik, Technische Universität Dortmund, Dortmund, Germany
D Strekalina Affiliated with an institute covered by a cooperation agreement with CERN
Y Su University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing, China
F Suljik Department of Physics, University of Oxford, Oxford, United Kingdom
J Sun INFN Sezione di Cagliari, Monserrato, Italy
L Sun School of Physics and Technology, Wuhan University, Wuhan, China (associated with Center for High Energy Physics, Tsinghua University, Beijing, China)
Y Sun University of Maryland, College Park, Maryland, USA
P N Swallow University of Birmingham, Birmingham, United Kingdom
K Swientek AGH - University of Science and Technology, Faculty of Physics and Applied Computer Science, Kraków, Poland
F Swystun Department of Physics, University of Warwick, Coventry, United Kingdom
A Szabelski National Center for Nuclear Research (NCBJ), Warsaw, Poland
T Szumlak AGH - University of Science and Technology, Faculty of Physics and Applied Computer Science, Kraków, Poland
M Szymanski European Organization for Nuclear Research (CERN), Geneva, Switzerland
Y Tan Center for High Energy Physics, Tsinghua University, Beijing, China
S Taneja Department of Physics and Astronomy, University of Manchester, Manchester, United Kingdom
M D Tat Department of Physics, University of Oxford, Oxford, United Kingdom
A Terentev Physik-Institut, Universität Zürich, Zürich, Switzerland
F Terzuoli INFN Sezione di Pisa, Pisa, Italy
F Teubert European Organization for Nuclear Research (CERN), Geneva, Switzerland
E Thomas European Organization for Nuclear Research (CERN), Geneva, Switzerland
D J D Thompson University of Birmingham, Birmingham, United Kingdom
H Tilquin Imperial College London, London, United Kingdom
V Tisserand Université Clermont Auvergne, CNRS/IN2P3, LPC, Clermont-Ferrand, France
S T'Jampens Université Savoie Mont Blanc, CNRS, IN2P3-LAPP, Annecy, France
M Tobin Institute Of High Energy Physics (IHEP), Beijing, China
L Tomassetti INFN Sezione di Ferrara, Ferrara, Italy
G Tonani INFN Sezione di Milano, Milano, Italy
X Tong School of Physics State Key Laboratory of Nuclear Physics and Technology, Peking University, Beijing, China
D Torres Machado Centro Brasileiro de Pesquisas Físicas (CBPF), Rio de Janeiro, Brazil
L Toscano Fakultät Physik, Technische Universität Dortmund, Dortmund, Germany
D Y Tou Center for High Energy Physics, Tsinghua University, Beijing, China
C Trippl DS4DS, La Salle, Universitat Ramon Llull, Barcelona, Spain
G Tuci Physikalisches Institut, Ruprecht-Karls-Universität Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany
N Tuning Nikhef National Institute for Subatomic Physics, Amsterdam, Netherlands
L H Uecker Physikalisches Institut, Ruprecht-Karls-Universität Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany
A Ukleja AGH - University of Science and Technology, Faculty of Physics and Applied Computer Science, Kraków, Poland
D J Unverzagt Physikalisches Institut, Ruprecht-Karls-Universität Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany
E Ursov Affiliated with an institute covered by a cooperation agreement with CERN
A Usachov Nikhef National Institute for Subatomic Physics and VU University Amsterdam, Amsterdam, Netherlands
A Ustyuzhanin Affiliated with an institute covered by a cooperation agreement with CERN
U Uwer Physikalisches Institut, Ruprecht-Karls-Universität Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany
V Vagnoni INFN Sezione di Bologna, Bologna, Italy
A Valassi European Organization for Nuclear Research (CERN), Geneva, Switzerland
G Valenti INFN Sezione di Bologna, Bologna, Italy
N Valls Canudas DS4DS, La Salle, Universitat Ramon Llull, Barcelona, Spain
H Van Hecke Los Alamos National Laboratory (LANL), Los Alamos, New Mexico, USA
E van Herwijnen Imperial College London, London, United Kingdom
C B Van Hulse Instituto Galego de Física de Altas Enerxías (IGFAE), Universidade de Santiago de Compostela, Santiago de Compostela, Spain
R Van Laak Institute of Physics, Ecole Polytechnique Fédérale de Lausanne (EPFL), Lausanne, Switzerland
M van Veghel Nikhef National Institute for Subatomic Physics, Amsterdam, Netherlands
R Vazquez Gomez ICCUB, Universitat de Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain
P Vazquez Regueiro Instituto Galego de Física de Altas Enerxías (IGFAE), Universidade de Santiago de Compostela, Santiago de Compostela, Spain
C Vázquez Sierra Instituto Galego de Física de Altas Enerxías (IGFAE), Universidade de Santiago de Compostela, Santiago de Compostela, Spain
S Vecchi INFN Sezione di Ferrara, Ferrara, Italy
J J Velthuis H.H. Wills Physics Laboratory, University of Bristol, Bristol, United Kingdom
M Veltri INFN Sezione di Firenze, Firenze, Italy
A Venkateswaran Institute of Physics, Ecole Polytechnique Fédérale de Lausanne (EPFL), Lausanne, Switzerland
M Vesterinen Department of Physics, University of Warwick, Coventry, United Kingdom
D Vieira University of Cincinnati, Cincinnati, Ohio, USA
M Vieites Diaz European Organization for Nuclear Research (CERN), Geneva, Switzerland
X Vilasis-Cardona DS4DS, La Salle, Universitat Ramon Llull, Barcelona, Spain
E Vilella Figueras Oliver Lodge Laboratory, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, United Kingdom
A Villa INFN Sezione di Bologna, Bologna, Italy
P Vincent LPNHE, Sorbonne Université, Paris Diderot Sorbonne Paris Cité, CNRS/IN2P3, Paris, France
F C Volle Université Paris-Saclay, CNRS/IN2P3, IJCLab, Orsay, France
D Vom Bruch Aix Marseille Univ, CNRS/IN2P3, CPPM, Marseille, France
V Vorobyev Affiliated with an institute covered by a cooperation agreement with CERN
N Voropaev Affiliated with an institute covered by a cooperation agreement with CERN
K Vos Universiteit Maastricht, Maastricht, Netherlands (associated with Nikhef National Institute for Subatomic Physics, Amsterdam, Netherlands)
G Vouters Université Savoie Mont Blanc, CNRS, IN2P3-LAPP, Annecy, France
C Vrahas School of Physics and Astronomy, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, United Kingdom
J Walsh INFN Sezione di Pisa, Pisa, Italy
E J Walton School of Physics and Astronomy, Monash University, Melbourne, Australia
G Wan School of Physics State Key Laboratory of Nuclear Physics and Technology, Peking University, Beijing, China
C Wang Physikalisches Institut, Ruprecht-Karls-Universität Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany
G Wang Institute of Particle Physics, Central China Normal University, Wuhan, Hubei, China
J Wang School of Physics State Key Laboratory of Nuclear Physics and Technology, Peking University, Beijing, China
J Wang Institute Of High Energy Physics (IHEP), Beijing, China
J Wang Center for High Energy Physics, Tsinghua University, Beijing, China
J Wang School of Physics and Technology, Wuhan University, Wuhan, China (associated with Center for High Energy Physics, Tsinghua University, Beijing, China)
M Wang INFN Sezione di Milano, Milano, Italy
N W Wang University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing, China
R Wang H.H. Wills Physics Laboratory, University of Bristol, Bristol, United Kingdom
X Wang Guangdong Provincial Key Laboratory of Nuclear Science, Guangdong-Hong Kong Joint Laboratory of Quantum Matter, Institute of Quantum Matter, South China Normal University, Guangzhou, China (associated with Center for High Energy Physics, Tsinghua University, Beijing, China)
X W Wang Imperial College London, London, United Kingdom
Y Wang Institute of Particle Physics, Central China Normal University, Wuhan, Hubei, China
Z Wang Université Paris-Saclay, CNRS/IN2P3, IJCLab, Orsay, France
Z Wang Center for High Energy Physics, Tsinghua University, Beijing, China
Z Wang University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing, China
J A Ward School of Physics and Astronomy, Monash University, Melbourne, Australia Department of Physics, University of Warwick, Coventry, United Kingdom
N K Watson University of Birmingham, Birmingham, United Kingdom
D Websdale Imperial College London, London, United Kingdom
Y Wei School of Physics State Key Laboratory of Nuclear Physics and Technology, Peking University, Beijing, China
B D C Westhenry H.H. Wills Physics Laboratory, University of Bristol, Bristol, United Kingdom
D J White Department of Physics and Astronomy, University of Manchester, Manchester, United Kingdom
M Whitehead School of Physics and Astronomy, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, United Kingdom
A R Wiederhold Department of Physics, University of Warwick, Coventry, United Kingdom
D Wiedner Fakultät Physik, Technische Universität Dortmund, Dortmund, Germany
G Wilkinson Department of Physics, University of Oxford, Oxford, United Kingdom
M K Wilkinson University of Cincinnati, Cincinnati, Ohio, USA
M Williams Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, Massachusetts, USA
M R J Williams School of Physics and Astronomy, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, United Kingdom
R Williams Cavendish Laboratory, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, United Kingdom
F F Wilson STFC Rutherford Appleton Laboratory, Didcot, United Kingdom
W Wislicki National Center for Nuclear Research (NCBJ), Warsaw, Poland
M Witek Henryk Niewodniczanski Institute of Nuclear Physics Polish Academy of Sciences, Kraków, Poland
L Witola Physikalisches Institut, Ruprecht-Karls-Universität Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany
C P Wong Los Alamos National Laboratory (LANL), Los Alamos, New Mexico, USA
G Wormser Université Paris-Saclay, CNRS/IN2P3, IJCLab, Orsay, France
S A Wotton Cavendish Laboratory, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, United Kingdom
H Wu Syracuse University, Syracuse, New York, USA
J Wu Institute of Particle Physics, Central China Normal University, Wuhan, Hubei, China
Y Wu School of Physics State Key Laboratory of Nuclear Physics and Technology, Peking University, Beijing, China
K Wyllie European Organization for Nuclear Research (CERN), Geneva, Switzerland
S Xian Guangdong Provincial Key Laboratory of Nuclear Science, Guangdong-Hong Kong Joint Laboratory of Quantum Matter, Institute of Quantum Matter, South China Normal University, Guangzhou, China (associated with Center for High Energy Physics, Tsinghua University, Beijing, China)
Z Xiang Institute Of High Energy Physics (IHEP), Beijing, China
Y Xie Institute of Particle Physics, Central China Normal University, Wuhan, Hubei, China
A Xu INFN Sezione di Pisa, Pisa, Italy
J Xu University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing, China
L Xu Center for High Energy Physics, Tsinghua University, Beijing, China
L Xu Center for High Energy Physics, Tsinghua University, Beijing, China
M Xu Department of Physics, University of Warwick, Coventry, United Kingdom
Z Xu Université Clermont Auvergne, CNRS/IN2P3, LPC, Clermont-Ferrand, France
Z Xu University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing, China
Z Xu Institute Of High Energy Physics (IHEP), Beijing, China
D Yang Center for High Energy Physics, Tsinghua University, Beijing, China
S Yang University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing, China
X Yang School of Physics State Key Laboratory of Nuclear Physics and Technology, Peking University, Beijing, China
Y Yang INFN Sezione di Genova, Genova, Italy
Z Yang School of Physics State Key Laboratory of Nuclear Physics and Technology, Peking University, Beijing, China
Z Yang University of Maryland, College Park, Maryland, USA
V Yeroshenko Université Paris-Saclay, CNRS/IN2P3, IJCLab, Orsay, France
H Yeung Department of Physics and Astronomy, University of Manchester, Manchester, United Kingdom
H Yin Institute of Particle Physics, Central China Normal University, Wuhan, Hubei, China
C Y Yu School of Physics State Key Laboratory of Nuclear Physics and Technology, Peking University, Beijing, China
J Yu School of Physics and Electronics, Hunan University, Changsha City, China (associated with Institute of Particle Physics, Central China Normal University, Wuhan, Hubei, China)
X Yuan Institute Of High Energy Physics (IHEP), Beijing, China
E Zaffaroni Institute of Physics, Ecole Polytechnique Fédérale de Lausanne (EPFL), Lausanne, Switzerland
M Zavertyaev Max-Planck-Institut für Kernphysik (MPIK), Heidelberg, Germany
M Zdybal Henryk Niewodniczanski Institute of Nuclear Physics Polish Academy of Sciences, Kraków, Poland
M Zeng Center for High Energy Physics, Tsinghua University, Beijing, China
C Zhang School of Physics State Key Laboratory of Nuclear Physics and Technology, Peking University, Beijing, China
D Zhang Institute of Particle Physics, Central China Normal University, Wuhan, Hubei, China
J Zhang University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing, China
L Zhang Center for High Energy Physics, Tsinghua University, Beijing, China
S Zhang School of Physics and Electronics, Hunan University, Changsha City, China (associated with Institute of Particle Physics, Central China Normal University, Wuhan, Hubei, China)
S Zhang School of Physics State Key Laboratory of Nuclear Physics and Technology, Peking University, Beijing, China
Y Zhang School of Physics State Key Laboratory of Nuclear Physics and Technology, Peking University, Beijing, China
Y Zhang Department of Physics, University of Oxford, Oxford, United Kingdom
Y Z Zhang Center for High Energy Physics, Tsinghua University, Beijing, China
Y Zhao Physikalisches Institut, Ruprecht-Karls-Universität Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany
A Zharkova Affiliated with an institute covered by a cooperation agreement with CERN
A Zhelezov Physikalisches Institut, Ruprecht-Karls-Universität Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany
X Z Zheng Center for High Energy Physics, Tsinghua University, Beijing, China
Y Zheng University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing, China
T Zhou School of Physics State Key Laboratory of Nuclear Physics and Technology, Peking University, Beijing, China
X Zhou Institute of Particle Physics, Central China Normal University, Wuhan, Hubei, China
Y Zhou University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing, China
V Zhovkovska Department of Physics, University of Warwick, Coventry, United Kingdom
L Z Zhu University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing, China
X Zhu Center for High Energy Physics, Tsinghua University, Beijing, China
X Zhu Institute of Particle Physics, Central China Normal University, Wuhan, Hubei, China
Z Zhu University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing, China
V Zhukov I. Physikalisches Institut, RWTH Aachen University, Aachen, Germany Affiliated with an institute covered by a cooperation agreement with CERN
J Zhuo Instituto de Fisica Corpuscular, Centro Mixto Universidad de Valencia - CSIC, Valencia, Spain
Q Zou Institute Of High Energy Physics (IHEP), Beijing, China University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing, China
D Zuliani Università degli Studi di Padova, Università e INFN, Padova, Padova, Italy
G Zunica Department of Physics and Astronomy, University of Manchester, Manchester, United Kingdom

Collapse

Observation of Cabibbo-Suppressed Two-Body Hadronic Decays and Precision Mass Measurement of the Ω_{c}^{0} Baryon

The first observation of the singly Cabibbo-suppressed Ω_{c}^{0}→Ω^{-}K^{+} and Ω_{c}^{0}→Ξ^{-}π^{+} decays is reported, using proton-proton collision data at a center-of-mass energy of 13 TeV, corresponding to an integrated luminosity of 5.4  fb^{-1}, collected with the LHCb detector between 2016 and 2018. The branching fraction ratios are measured to be B(Ω_{c}^{0}→Ω^{-}K^{+})/B(Ω_{c}^{0}→Ω^{-}π^{+})=[6.08±0.51(stat)±0.40(syst)]%,B(Ω_{c}^{0}→Ξ^{-}π^{+})/B(Ω_{c}^{0}→Ω^{-}π^{+})=[15.81±0.87(stat)±0.44(syst)±0.16(ext)]%. In addition, using the Ω_{c}^{0}→Ω^{-}π^{+} decay channel, the Ω_{c}^{0} baryon mass is measured to be M(Ω_{c}^{0})=2695.28±0.07(stat)±0.27(syst)±0.30(ext)  MeV, improving the precision of the previous world average by a factor of 4.

Enhanced Production of Λ_{b}^{0} Baryons in High-Multiplicity pp Collisions at sqrt[s]=13 TeV

The production rate of Λ_{b}^{0} baryons relative to B^{0} mesons in pp collisions at a center-of-mass energy sqrt[s]=13  TeV is measured by the LHCb experiment. The ratio of Λ_{b}^{0} to B^{0} production cross sections shows a significant dependence on both the transverse momentum and the measured charged-particle multiplicity. At low multiplicity, the ratio measured at LHCb is consistent with the value measured in e^{+}e^{-} collisions, and increases by a factor of ∼2 with increasing multiplicity. At relatively low transverse momentum, the ratio of Λ_{b}^{0} to B^{0} cross sections is higher than what is measured in e^{+}e^{-} collisions, but converges with the e^{+}e^{-} ratio as the momentum increases. These results imply that the evolution of heavy b quarks into final-state hadrons is influenced by the density of the hadronic environment produced in the collision. Comparisons with several models and implications for the mechanisms enforcing quark confinement are discussed.

Improved Measurement of CP Violation Parameters in B_{s}^{0}→J/ψK^{+}K^{-} Decays in the Vicinity of the ϕ(1020) Resonance

The decay-time-dependent CP asymmetry in B_{s}^{0}→J/ψ(→μ^{+}μ^{-})K^{+}K^{-} decays is measured using proton-proton collision data, corresponding to an integrated luminosity of 6  fb^{-1}, collected with the LHCb detector at a center-of-mass energy of 13 TeV. Using a sample of approximately 349 000 B_{s}^{0} signal decays with an invariant K^{+}K^{-} mass in the vicinity of the ϕ(1020) resonance, the CP-violating phase ϕ_{s} is measured, along with the difference in decay widths of the light and heavy mass eigenstates of the B_{s}^{0}-B[over ¯]_{s}^{0} system, ΔΓ_{s}, and the difference of the average B_{s}^{0} and B^{0} meson decay widths, Γ_{s}-Γ_{d}. The values obtained are ϕ_{s}=-0.039±0.022±0.006  rad, ΔΓ_{s}=0.0845±0.0044±0.0024  ps^{-1}, and Γ_{s}-Γ_{d}=-0.0056_{-0.0015}^{+0.0013}±0.0014  ps^{-1}, where the first uncertainty is statistical and the second systematic. These are the most precise single measurements to date and are consistent with expectations based on the Standard Model and with the previous LHCb analyses of this decay. These results are combined with previous independent LHCb measurements. The phase ϕ_{s} is also measured independently for each polarization state of the K^{+}K^{-} system and shows no evidence for polarization dependence.

Measurement of CP Violation in B^{0}→ψ(→ℓ^{+}ℓ^{-})K_{S}^{0}(→π^{+}π^{-}) Decays

A measurement of time-dependent CP violation in the decays of B^{0} and B[over ¯]^{0} mesons to the final states J/ψ(→μ^{+}μ^{-})K_{S}^{0}, ψ(2S)(→μ^{+}μ^{-})K_{S}^{0} and J/ψ(→e^{+}e^{-})K_{S}^{0} with K_{S}^{0}→π^{+}π^{-} is presented. The data correspond to an integrated luminosity of 6  fb^{-1} collected at a center-of-mass energy of sqrt[s]=13  TeV with the LHCb detector. The CP-violation parameters are measured to be S_{ψK_{S}^{0}}=0.717±0.013(stat)±0.008(syst) and C_{ψK_{S}^{0}}=0.008±0.012(stat)±0.003(syst). This measurement of S_{ψK_{S}^{0}} represents the most precise single measurement of the CKM angle β to date and is more precise than the current world average. In addition, measurements of the CP-violation parameters of the individual channels are reported and a combination with the LHCb Run 1 measurements is performed.

Amivantamab compared with real-world therapies in patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer EGFR Exon 20 insertion mutations after platinum-based chemotherapy

BACKGROUND

In the single-arm CHRYSALIS trial, advanced non-small cell lung cancer patients harboring epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) exon 20 insertion (Exon 20ins) showed durable responses to amivantamab, an EGFR-MET bispecific antibody targeting tumors with EGFR Exon 20ins. This study compared the effectiveness of amivantamab to real-world systemic anti-cancer therapies in Japan.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

External control patients were selected by applying CHRYSALIS eligibility to Japanese patients from LC-SCRUM-Asia. External control patients were included for every qualifying line of therapy after platinum-based chemotherapy. Propensity score weighting was applied to external control patients to adjust for differences in baseline characteristics. Outcomes were compared between external control patients, and all and Asian-only CHRYSALIS patients using weighted Cox proportional hazards regression models for progression-free survival (PFS), time to next therapy (TTNT), and overall survival (OS), and generalized estimating equations with repeated measurements for overall response rate (ORR).

RESULTS

One hundred fifteen CHRYSALIS and 94 external control patients were identified. Compared to external control patients, amivantamab-treated patients had significantly longer OS (median OS 19.88 vs 14.09 months, HR [95% CI] 0.59 [0.40-0.88]), PFS (median PFS 6.74 vs 4.73 months, HR 0.59 [0.45-0.78]), TTNT (median TTNT 12.16 vs 5.09 months, HR 0.39 [0.29-0.53]), and significantly higher ORR (41.7% vs 14.1%). Analyses of amivantamab-treated Asian patients (n = 61) showed similar clinical benefits.

CONCLUSION

In the absence of clinical evidence from randomized clinical trials, this study reflects the benefit of amivantamab after platinum-based chemotherapy for advanced non-small cell lung cancer patients harboring EGFR Exon 20ins, compared to current real-world therapies.

Efficacy and safety of esketamine nasal spray in addition to standard of care in patients with major depressive disorder who have active suicidal ideation with intent: A subgroup analysis of the Asian cohort of ASPIRE I (a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study)

This post-hoc analysis evaluated the efficacy and safety of intranasal esketamine in the Asian subgroup from ASPIRE I. Patients with major depressive disorder and suicidal ideation with intent received intranasal esketamine (n = 26) or placebo (n = 27), plus standard of care for 25 days. The primary endpoint was the change in Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) total score from baseline to Day 2. The MADRS score improved in favor of esketamine (least squares mean difference: -3.8). No unexpected safety concerns were noted. The Asian subgroup showed a similar efficacy and safety profile as the total ASPIRE I cohort.

Observation of New Baryons in the Ξ_{b}^{-}π^{+}π^{-} and Ξ_{b}^{0}π^{+}π^{-} Systems

The first observation and study of two new baryonic structures in the final state Ξ_{b}^{0}π^{+}π^{-} and the confirmation of the Ξ_{b}(6100)^{-} state in the Ξ_{b}^{-}π^{+}π^{-} decay mode are reported using proton-proton collision data collected by the LHCb experiment, corresponding to an integrated luminosity of 9  fb^{-1}. In addition, the properties of the known Ξ_{b}^{*0}, Ξ_{b}^{'-} and Ξ_{b}^{*-} resonances are measured with improved precision. The new decay mode of the Ξ_{b}^{0} baryon to the Ξ_{c}^{+} π^{-} π^{+} π^{-} final state is observed and exploited for the first time in these measurements.

Precision Measurement of CP Violation in the Penguin-Mediated Decay B_{s}^{0}→ϕϕ

A flavor-tagged time-dependent angular analysis of the decay B_{s}^{0}→ϕϕ is performed using pp collision data collected by the LHCb experiment at the center-of-mass energy of 13 TeV, corresponding to an integrated luminosity of 6  fb^{-1}. The CP-violating phase and direct CP-violation parameter are measured to be ϕ_{s}^{ss[over ¯]s}=-0.042±0.075±0.009  rad and |λ|=1.004±0.030±0.009, respectively, assuming the same values for all polarization states of the ϕϕ system. In these results, the first uncertainties are statistical and the second systematic. These parameters are also determined separately for each polarization state, showing no evidence for polarization dependence. The results are combined with previous LHCb measurements using pp collisions at center-of-mass energies of 7 and 8 TeV, yielding ϕ_{s}^{ss[over ¯]s}=-0.074±0.069  rad and |λ|=1.009±0.030. This is the most precise study of time-dependent CP violation in a penguin-dominated B meson decay. The results are consistent with CP symmetry and with the standard model predictions.

Impacts of early therapy response, interval to therapy interruption, and cumulative therapy interruption duration on outcome of ibrutinib therapy in relapsed/refractory chronic lymphocytic leukemia

To investigate the impact of early response and treatment interruption on the survival of patients with relapsed/refractory chronic lymphocytic leukemia or small lymphocytic lymphoma (r/r CLL/SLL) treated with ibrutinib. This post hoc analysis used data of patients received ibrutinib treatment from an open-label, multicenter phase 3 study comparing ibrutinib with rituximab in patients with r/r CLL/SLL. The association of complete or partial response at 6 months, interruption within the first 6 months, cumulative interruption durations during the ibrutinib-treated period with progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were evaluated using the adjusted Cox hazard proportional model. The study included 87 patients treated with ibrutinib, of which 74 patients had at least 6 months of ibrutinib treatment and were analyzed. The response at 6 months did not affect PFS (HR = 0.58, 95%CI: 0.22-1.49) or OS (HR = 0.86, 95%CI: 0.22-3.31). The onset of interruption before or after 6 months was not associated with PFS (HR = 0.88, 95%CI: 0.34-2.30) or OS (HR = 0.75, 95%CI: 0.23-2.52). However, a cumulative interruption of more than 35 days was independently associated with worse PFS (HR = 2.4, 95%CI: 0.99-5.74) and OS (HR = 2.6, 95%CI: 0.88-7.44). Continuous interruption for more than 14 days was associated with a numerically lower 3-year PFS rate (> 14 vs. ≤ 14 days: 42% vs. 73%) and 3-year OS rate (> 14 vs. ≤ 14 days: 58% vs. 84%, both P > 0.05). Response status at 6 months or early therapy interruptions did not affect survival in patients with r/r CLL/SLL treated with ibrutinib. However, a cumulative temporary interruption of more than 35 days could potentially impact patient outcomes.

Low education predicts large increase in COVID-19 mortality: the role of collective culture and individual literacy

BACKGROUND

Although many studies have found a high correlation between socio-economic inequalities and risk of COVID-19 deaths, there is a reason to believe that much of this association is the product of differing levels of education.

STUDY DESIGN

We use a multi-level negative binomial regression model for analyzing COVID-19 mortality.

METHODS

We present multivariate models of fortnightly (n = 60) COVID-19 deaths in 3108 US counties for the period January 20, 2020, to May 10, 2022. We model the direct (unmediated) effect of education, controlling for economy, race, geography, lack of vaccination, political orientation (vote Republican), poor health, and lack of preventative health behavior.

RESULTS

After controlling for correlated risk factors and indirect mechanisms that mediate education's impact on COVID-19 mortality, we find a strong direct (unmediated) correlation between low education and COVID-19 mortality (incidence rate ratio = 1.17; 95% confidence interval: 1.15, 1.20). We theorize that this correlation reflects education's relationship with (1) collective cultures, such as norms of mask wearing, and (2) individual literacy, such as ability to engage with scientific communication.

CONCLUSIONS

Low education is strongly correlated with COVID-19 deaths, with an effect size of a university degree comparable to that of being aged >65 years. If this correlation is indeed causal, then it would imply that low education accounts for between 1 in 10 and 1 in 7 deaths in low-education counties. Education should be conceptualized as a potential high-risk factor for COVID-19 death and be taken into account when attempting to combat COVID-19 in disadvantaged communities. The effect of education cannot be reduced to its impact on vaccination or correlation with poor health or economic status, but it seems likely that low-education communities have collective cultures that expose individuals to greater risks and lack of individual literacy that limits engagement with public health messaging.

Validation of an algorithm to identify incident interstitial lung disease in patients with rheumatoid arthritis

Background/purpose

Interstitial lung disease (ILD) is an important problem for patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA). However, current approaches to ILD case finding in real-world data have been evaluated only in limited settings and identify only prevalent ILD and not new-onset disease. Our objective was to develop, refine, and validate a claims-based algorithm to identify both prevalent and incident ILD in RA patients compared to the gold standard of medical record review.

Methods

We used administrative claims data 2006–2015 from Medicare to derive a cohort of RA patients. We then identified suspected ILD using variations of ILD algorithms to classify both prevalent and incident ILD based on features of the data that included hospitalization vs. outpatient setting, physician specialty, pulmonary-related diagnosis codes, and exclusions for potentially mimicking pulmonary conditions. Positive predictive values (PPV) of several ILD algorithm variants for both prevalent and incident ILD were evaluated.

Results

We identified 234 linkable RA patients with sufficient data to evaluate for ILD. Overall, 108 (46.2%) of suspected cases were confirmed as ILD. Most cases (64%) were diagnosed in the outpatient setting. The best performing algorithm for prevalent ILD had a PPV of 77% (95% CI 67–84%) and for incident ILD was 96% (95% CI 85–100%).

Conclusion

Case finding in administrative data for both prevalent and incident interstitial lung disease in RA patients is feasible and has reasonable accuracy to support population-based research and real-world evidence generation.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s13075-021-02655-z.

OP0099 EPIDEMIOLOGY AND MORTALITY OF RA-ASSOCIATED INTERSTITIAL LUNG DISEASE: DATA FROM A FRENCH ADMINISTRATIVE HEALTHCARE DATABASE

Background:

Interstitial lung disease (ILD) is a common extra-articular manifestation of RA and is associated with increased morbidity and mortality.1-3 Studies have shown variability in the prevalence and mortality rate of patients with RA-associated ILD (RA-ILD).4 Further studies are needed to better characterise the epidemiology of RA-ILD.

Objectives:

To estimate the prevalence and incidence of clinical RA-ILD in France and to compare mortality rates between patients with RA-ILD and patients with RA without clinical ILD (RA-noILD).

Methods:

A historical cohort study was conducted using data from the French national claims database (SNDS) between 1 January 2013 and 31 December 2018. Adults with an RA diagnosis (International Classification of Diseases, Tenth revision [ICD-10] codes M05, M06.0, M06.8 and M06.9) and ≥2 distinct dates of DMARD delivery were included. Onset of RA was defined as the first date of occurrence between RA codes and the first known DMARD reimbursement. ILD diagnosis was defined as having ICD-10 code J84 and ≥1 computed tomography scan after, but within 1 year of, the first date of ILD occurrence. All patients had ≥6 months’ reimbursement after RA-ILD onset. The prevalence and incidence (2014–2018) of RA-ILD were estimated. The mortality rate was calculated, comparing patients with RA-ILD and patients with RA-noILD, matched 1:1 for age, sex, age at RA-ILD onset, duration of RA and presence of diabetes, arterial disease, dyslipidaemia and cardiac disease. Mortality was compared between patients with RA with and without clinical ILD in the matched population using Cox proportional hazards regression.

Results:

The prevalence of RA-ILD was 6.52 per 100,000 inhabitants (incidence=1.04 per 100,000 person-years). Of the 173,138 patients with RA included in the overall population, 4330 (2.5%) had clinical ILD. Patients with RA-ILD were older at RA diagnosis (mean [SD] age: 63.3 [13.7] vs 56.9 [15.2] years) and were more likely to be male (39.8% vs 27.0%) compared with patients with RA-noILD. Patients with RA-ILD were more likely to have cardiac disease (84.9% vs 63.1%), arterial disease (38.0% vs 19.3%), diabetes (21.4% vs 12.5%) and dyslipidaemia (44.7% vs 32.9%) compared with those with RA-noILD. The mortality rate in patients with clinical RA-ILD was 1.71 per 100,000 inhabitants. The mortality rate increased according to age (0.28 per 100,000 inhabitants for patients aged <65 years, 4.60 per 100,000 inhabitants for patients aged 65–74 years and 11.4 per 100,000 inhabitants for patients aged ≥75 years). After matching, the adjusted mortality risk was three times higher (HR [95% CI]: 3.1 [3.1, 3.9]) in patients with RA-ILD than in those with RA-noILD (Figure 1).

Conclusion:

This is the largest epidemiological study of RA-ILD in France. The prevalence of clinical RA-ILD in this population was towards the lower end of previous estimates (1–58%),3 possibly due to under-reporting of claims data. However, the occurrence of clinical ILD was associated with a strong increase in mortality compared with patients with RA-noILD.

References:

[1]Bodolay E, et al. Rheumatology (Oxford) 2005;44:656–661.

[2]Duarte AC, et al. Rheumatology (Oxford) 2019;58:2031–2038.

[3]Hyldgaard C, et al. Ann Rheum Dis 2017;76:1700–1706.

[4]Spagnolo P, et al. Arthritis Rheumatol 2018;70:1544–1554.

Acknowledgements:

This study was funded by Bristol Myers Squibb. Claire Line, PhD of Caudex provided medical writing support, funded by Bristol Myers Squibb.

Disclosure of Interests:

Pierre-Antoine Juge Consultant of: Bristol Myers Squibb, Lidwine Wemeau Stervinou Consultant of: Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol Myers Squibb, Roche, Sanofi, Sebastien Ottaviani Consultant of: AbbVie, Bristol Myers Squibb, Lilly, Merck Sharp & Dohme, Novartis, Roche-Chugai, SOBI, UCB, Guillaume Desjeux: None declared, Joe Zhuo Shareholder of: Bristol Myers Squibb, Employee of: Bristol Myers Squibb, Bruno Bregman Shareholder of: Bristol Myers Squibb, Employee of: Bristol Myers Squibb, Virginie Vannier-Moreau Shareholder of: Bristol Myers Squibb, Employee of: Bristol Myers Squibb, Rene-Marc Flipo Speakers bureau: AbbVie, Bristol Myers Squibb, Janssen, Lilly, Medac, Merck Sharp & Dohme, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche-Chugai, Grant/research support from: Amgen, Janssen, Novartis, Pfizer, Bruno Crestani: None declared, Philippe Dieudé Consultant of: Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol Myers Squibb, Chugaï, Lilly, Medac, Novartis, Pfizer, Sanofi, Grant/research support from: Bristol Myers Squibb, GlaxoSmithKline, Pfizer

POS0024 ESTIMATED PREVALENCE, INCIDENCE AND HEALTHCARE COSTS OF SJÖGREN’S SYNDROME IN FRANCE: A NATIONAL CLAIMS-BASED STUDY

Background:

Sjögren’s syndrome (SS) is a chronic, systemic autoimmune disorder characterised by oral and ocular dryness related to lymphocytic infiltration of exocrine glands.1–3 Extra-glandular manifestations may include fatigue, musculoskeletal pain and glomerulonephritis.1,3 SS can present as primary SS (pSS) or as SS associated with another autoimmune disorder (SS+AID).1 Reported prevalence of pSS in the French general population is 1.02–1.52 cases/10,000 people.3

Objectives:

To estimate prevalence, incidence and healthcare costs of SS in France using national health insurance claims data.

Methods:

Claims from 2011–2018 from the Système National des Données de Santé (SNDS), comprised of data from 99% of the French population, were analysed. Patients (pts) with SS were identified using an algorithm.4 Inclusion criteria: International Classification of Diseases, Tenth Revision code M35.0 (Sicca syndrome [Sjögren]) or M35 (other systemic involvement of connective tissue), and ≥2 drug reimbursements for SS-related treatments. Key exclusion criteria: amyloidosis, sarcoidosis, HIV, and head and neck radiotherapy. Denominators for estimated prevalence rates were derived from French population census data. Healthcare costs were based on Assurance Maladie rates.

Results:

23,152 pts with pSS and 15,462 with SS+AID were identified during the study period. Estimated prevalence of SS (2011–2018) per 100,000 persons ranged from 22–32 (pSS) and 17–22 (SS+AID) and was stable over time; proportion of female pts was 90–91% (pSS) and 92–93% (SS+AID); mean age ranged from 63–66 (pSS) and 58–63 (SS+AID) years. Estimated incidence of SS (2012–2018) per 100,000 persons ranged from 4.1–0.3 (pSS) and 2.1–0.1 (SS+AID); proportion of female pts was 76–87% (pSS) and 74–90% (SS+AID); mean age ranged from 53–64 (pSS) and 50–62 (SS+AID) years. RA was the most frequently associated autoimmune disorder (32%) in pts with SS+AID. In the first year, artificial tears was the most frequently reimbursed drug (66% [pSS], 55% [SS+AID]), followed by hydroxychloroquine (19% [pSS], 35% [SS+AID]). From 2014–2018, ~30% of men and ~22% of women with pSS reported no drug reimbursement; ~20% of men and ~15% of women with SS+AID reported no drug reimbursement during the same time frame. From 2013–2018, ~50% of all pts had consultations with a dentist or an ophthalmologist. Mean healthcare costs increased over the study period: from €5836 to €9618 (pSS) and €8905 to €13,271 (SS+AID). Pt characteristics and healthcare consumption data are presented (Table 1).

Conclusion:

Prevalence of pSS in this French claims data study was stable over time and consistent with previous reports.3 Based on these results, SS may be considered an orphan disease. Overall costs for pts with SS were higher than previously estimated.5 Results may help inform and optimise specialist care for pts with SS in France.

References:

[1]Patel R, Shahane A. Clin Epidemiol 2014;6:247–255.

[2]Mariette X, Criswell LA. N Engl J Med 2018;378:931–939.

[3]Maldini C, et al. Arthritis Care Res (Hoboken) 2014;66:454–463.

[4]Devauchelle Pensec V, et al. Arthritis Rheumatol 2019;71(suppl 10):abstract 1101.

[5]l’Assurance Maladie. Améliorer la qualité du système de santé et maîtriser les dépenses. July 2019.

Table 1.

Characteristics and healthcare consumption data for pts with SS in the SNDS (2011–2018)

pSSSS+AIDAge at disease onset, overall and by sexM (n=2515)F (n=20,637)All (n=23,152)M (n=1350)F (n=14,112)All (n=15,462)Mean (SD)62 (15)60 (15)60 (15)59 (14)56 (15)56 (15)Age, yrs, n (%)<50480 (19)4948 (24)5428 (23)328 (24)4507 (32)4835 (31)50–741471 (59)11,567 (56)13,038 (56)852 (63)7887 (56)8739 (57)≥75564 (22)4122 (20)4686 (20)170 (13)1718 (12)1888 (12)Healthcare consumptionMean (IQR) no. prescriptions for treatment of interest37 (9–58)52 (20–78)≥1 Schirmer’s test, n (%)2409 (10)1303 (8)Reimbursement for antinuclear antibody test, n (%)13,312 (58)9587 (62)Mean no. dental reimbursements/yr21Mean no. ophthalmologist reimbursements/yr11

F=female; IQR=interquartile range; M=male; yr=year.

Acknowledgements:

This study was sponsored by Bristol Myers Squibb. Professional medical writing assistance was provided by Lindsay Craik at Caudex and was funded by Bristol Myers Squibb.

Disclosure of Interests:

Raphaèle Seror Consultant of: Amgen, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol Myers Squibb, Fresenius Kabi, GlaxoSmithKline, Janssen, Pfizer, Roche, Laurent Chiche: None declared, Guillaume Desjeux: None declared, Joe Zhuo Shareholder of: Bristol Myers Squibb, Employee of: Bristol Myers Squibb, Bruno Bregman Shareholder of: Bristol Myers Squibb, Employee of: Bristol Myers Squibb, Virginie Vannier-Moreau Shareholder of: Bristol Myers Squibb, Employee of: Bristol Myers Squibb, Valerie Devauchelle-Pensec Consultant of: AbbVie, Bristol Myers Squibb, Novartis, Grant/research support from: Bristol Myers Squibb, Lilly, Roche-Chugai.

AB0560 EFFECT OF DEUCRAVACITINIB ON THE PSORIATIC ARTHRITIS IMPACT OF DISEASE (PsAID) QUESTIONNAIRES 12 AND 9: ANALYSIS OF A PHASE 2 STUDY OF ACTIVE PSORIATIC ARTHRITIS

Background:

Tyrosine kinase 2 (TYK2) is an intracellular kinase that mediates IL-23, IL-12, and IFNα/β signaling. Deucravacitinib is a novel, oral selective inhibitor of TYK2 via the TYK2 regulatory domain. Phase 2 results showed deucravacitinib was efficacious and well tolerated versus placebo (PBO) in patients (pts) with active psoriatic arthritis (PsA). The Psoriatic Arthritis Impact of Disease (PsAID) questionnaire is a EULAR-developed, validated instrument designed to specifically assess the impact of PsA on health-related quality of life (HRQoL) from the pt’s perspective and is available as separate versions for clinical practice (PsAID-12) and clinical trials (PsAID-9).1

Objectives:

To compare the effect of deucravacitinib vs PBO on PsAID-12 and PsAID-9 responses and to assess relationships between PsAID scores and clinical and pt-reported outcome (PRO) measures.

Methods:

This is an ongoing, 1-year, double-blind, Phase 2 trial (NCT03881059). Pts with active PsA were randomized 1:1:1 to deucravacitinib 6 mg or 12 mg once daily, or PBO for 16 weeks (wk). PsAID-12 and PsAID-9, other PROs, and clinical response outcomes were assessed at baseline (BL) and Wk 16. Mean changes from BL in PsAID-12 and PsAID-9 total scores at Wk 16 were determined for each treatment group as well as by response outcomes (ie, achievement of response at Wk 16 for PROs and select clinical response outcomes; Table 1). Spearman correlations between PsAID-12 and PsAID-9 scores and clinical and PRO measures were also assessed.

Results:

203 pts were randomized and BL characteristics were similar across groups. Adjusted mean changes from BL in PsAID-12 and PsAID-9 scores at Wk 16 were significantly greater in the deucravacitinib groups vs PBO (Figure 1). Adjusted mean changes from BL in PsAID-12 and PsAID-9 scores at Wk 16 were significantly improved with deucravacitinib vs PBO in pts who achieved response for PROs, as well as PASDAS low disease activity and PASI 75 response (Table 1). Adjusted mean changes from BL were generally similar with deucravacitinib vs PBO in nonresponders. Spearman correlation analysis revealed significant correlations at BL and Wk 16 between PsAID-12 and PsAID-9 scores and clinical and PRO measures (P<0.0001).

Conclusion:

With deucravacitinib vs PBO, PsAID-12 and PsAID-9 scores were significantly improved vs BL at Wk 16. PsAID detected additional improvements among pts achieving response for multiple other PROs and select clinical outcome measures.

References:

[1]Gossec L et al. Ann Rheum Dis. 2014;73:1012-9.

Table 1.

Adjusted mean change from BL in PsAID-12 total scores at Wk 16 in patients who achieved PRO or clinical response

Mean change from BL in PsAID-12 total scoreResponse DefinitionPBOn=66Deucravacitinib6 mg QDn=70P valuevs PBODeucravacitinib12 mg QDn=67P valuevs PBOPROsPatient global VAS(≤ -10.0)-1.6 (n=40)-2.8 (n=54)0.0008-2.9 (n=48)0.0003Patient pain VAS(≤ -10.0)-2.3 (n=32)-3.4 (n=44)0.004-3.3 (n=45)0.004HAQ-DI(≤ -0.35)-2.8 (n=10)-3.8 (n=27)0.09-3.8 (n=27)0.11FACIT-Fatigue(≥ 4.0)-2.4 (n=27)-3.3 (n=36)0.02-3.6 (n=41)0.002SF-36 PCS(≥ 2.5)-1.7 (n=35)-2.7 (n=44)0.02-3.1 (n=43)0.001SF-36 MCS(≥ 2.5)-2.1 (n=21)-3.5 (n=33)0.005-3.8 (n=31)0.0009Clinician assessmentsPASDAS(≤ 3.2)-3.1 (n=6)-4.2 (n=14)0.004-4.5 (n=15)0.0006PASI 75(≥75% improvementfrom BL)-2.4 (n=11)-3.7 (n=25)0.05-3.9 (n=31)0.02

PsAID-9 results were generally consistent with PsAID-12 (data not shown).

Response definitions based on published literature.

Higher FACIT-Fatigue scores indicate less fatigue.

Higher SF-36 PCS and SF-36 MCS scores indicate less disability.

BL, baseline: FACIT, Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy; HAQ-DI, Health Assessment Questionnaire-Disability Index; MCS, Mental Component Summary; NA, not applicable; PASDAS, Psoriatic Arthritis Disease Activity Score; PASI, Psoriasis Area and Severity Index; PCS, Physical Component Summary; PRO, patient-reported outcome; QD, once daily; SF-36, 36-item Short Form Health Survey; VAS, visual analog scale.

Acknowledgements:

This study was sponsored by Bristol Myers Squibb. Professional medical writing assistance was provided by Peloton Advantage, LLC, an OPEN Health company, and funded by Bristol Myers Squibb.

Disclosure of Interests:

Laure Gossec Consultant of: AbbVie, Amgen, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Celgene, Eli Lilly, Gilead, Janssen, Novartis, Pfizer, and UCB, Grant/research support from: Amgen, Galapagos, Janssen, Lilly, Pfizer, Sandoz, Sanofi, Laura C Coates Speakers bureau: AbbVie, Amgen, Biogen, Celgene, Gilead, Eli Lilly, Janssen, Medac, Novartis, Pfizer, and UCB, Consultant of: AbbVie, Amgen, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Celgene, Eli Lilly, Gilead, Janssen, Novartis, Pfizer, and UCB, Grant/research support from: AbbVie, Amgen, Celgene, Eli Lilly, Pfizer, and Novartis, Alexis Ogdie Consultant of: Abbvie, Amgen, BMS, Celgene, Corrona, Gilead, Janssen, Lilly, Novartis, Pfizer, UCB; Grants: Pfizer to Penn, Novartis to Penn, Amgen to Forward/NDB; Royalties: Novartis to husband, Philip J Mease Consultant of: AbbVie, Amgen, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol Myers Squibb, Eli Lilly, Galapagos, Gilead, GlaxoSmithKline, Janssen, Novartis, Pfizer, SUN Pharma, UCB, Grant/research support from: AbbVie, Amgen, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol Myers Squibb, Eli Lilly, Galapagos, Gilead, GlaxoSmithKline, Janssen, Novartis, Pfizer, SUN Pharma, UCB, Thomas Lehman Shareholder of: Bristol Myers Squibb, Employee of: Bristol Myers Squibb, Miroslawa Nowak Shareholder of: Bristol Myers Squibb, Employee of: Bristol Myers Squibb, Lan Wei Shareholder of: Bristol Myers Squibb, Employee of: Bristol Myers Squibb, June Ye Shareholder of: Bristol Myers Squibb, Employee of: Bristol Myers Squibb, Jiyoon Choi Shareholder of: Bristol Myers Squibb, Employee of: Bristol Myers Squibb, Joe Zhuo Shareholder of: Bristol Myers Squibb, Employee of: Bristol Myers Squibb, Brandon Becker Shareholder of: Bristol Myers Squibb, Employee of: Bristol Myers Squibb.

Transcranial MR Imaging-Guided Focused Ultrasound Interventions Using Deep Learning Synthesized CT

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

Transcranial MR imaging-guided focused ultrasound is a promising novel technique to treat multiple disorders and diseases. Planning for transcranial MR imaging-guided focused ultrasound requires both a CT scan for skull density estimation and treatment-planning simulation and an MR imaging for target identification. It is desirable to simplify the clinical workflow of transcranial MR imaging-guided focused ultrasound treatment planning. The purpose of this study was to examine the feasibility of deep learning techniques to convert MR imaging ultrashort TE images directly to synthetic CT of the skull images for use in transcranial MR imaging-guided focused ultrasound treatment planning.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The U-Net neural network was trained and tested on data obtained from 41 subjects (mean age, 66.4 ± 11.0 years; 15 women). The derived neural network model was evaluated using a k-fold cross-validation method. Derived acoustic properties were verified by comparing the whole skull-density ratio from deep learning synthesized CT of the skull with the reference CT of the skull. In addition, acoustic and temperature simulations were performed using the deep learning CT to predict the target temperature rise during transcranial MR imaging-guided focused ultrasound.

RESULTS

The derived deep learning model generates synthetic CT of the skull images that are highly comparable with the true CT of the skull images. Their intensities in Hounsfield units have a spatial correlation coefficient of 0.80 ± 0.08, a mean absolute error of 104.57 ± 21.33 HU, and a subject-wise correlation coefficient of 0.91. Furthermore, deep learning CT of the skull is reliable in the skull-density ratio estimation (r = 0.96). A simulation study showed that both the peak target temperatures and temperature distribution from deep learning CT are comparable with those of the reference CT.

CONCLUSIONS

The deep learning method can be used to simplify workflow associated with transcranial MR imaging-guided focused ultrasound.

SAT0219 PATIENT CHARACTERISTICS, TREATMENT PATTERNS, AND RESOURCE UTILIZATION OF SJOGREN’S SYNDROME PATIENTS IN A LARGE US HEALTH NETWORK

Background:

Sjogren’s syndrome (SS) is a chronic progressive autoimmune disorder which occurs as primary (pSS) or secondary SS (sSS). With no approved disease modifying therapy, there is limited information on the treatment patterns and resource utilization among these patients (pts).

Objectives:

To describe pts characteristics, treatment patterns and healthcare resource utilization (HCRU) using electronic health records (EHR) of pts with pSS and sSS treated at the Providence St. Josephs Health system (PSJH).

Methods:

Pts ≥18 years of age with at least one clinical encounter with ICD-9-CM or ICD-10-CM diagnosis of SS, between Jan 2013 and Mar 2019 were included. Date of first encounter with SS diagnosis (index date) was used to assess pts demographics. Pt baseline comorbidities were evaluated during the 24 months pre-index period. Treatment patterns and HCRU were assessed during the 12 months post-index follow-up. Descriptive statistics were used to describe pts’ demographic and clinical characteristics, and medications use in the baseline and follow up.

Results:

Study cohort included 9,108 SS pts of which 76.5% had sSS diagnosis on index date. Majority of SS pts were women, Caucasian, with mean age of 58.3 yrs, and from western states in the US (Table 1). Endocrine conditions including hypo- and hyperthyroidism, and diabetes was the most common (45.5%) comorbidity at baseline, followed by rheumatologic disorders (25.6%) and neurological conditions (22.2%). Among patients with treatment information (4088, 44.88%), 42.95% were using symptomatic treatments for dry eye and mouth at baseline (Table 1). In the follow-up, SS pts had average 5.8 healthcare visits per patient per year (PPPY), including 0.6 inpatient and 3.4 outpatient visit respectively. About 40% of the SS pts (53.8% pSS and 35.8% sSS) were diagnosed by rheumatologists. Majority of the SS pts initiated treatment with cDMARDs (82%) and remained on the same treatment during 1 year follow-up (Fig 2).

Table 1.

Baseline Demographic and Clinical Pts Characteristics

SS Pts (n=9,108)DemographicsAge (years) on index date, mean (SD)58.3 (15.1)Female, n (%)8,338 (91.6)Caucasian, n (%)6.936 (76.2)Western Region, n (%)8,998 (98.8)Married, n (%)5,164 (56.7)Never Smoked, n (%)4,847 (53.2)Primary diagnosis, n (%)2,137 (23.5)Comorbidities, n (%)Cardiovascular1,408 (17.2)Endocrine3,733 (45.5)Oncology800 (9.8)Blood disorders1,221 (14.9)Pulmonary1,802 (22.0)Neurological1,821 (22.2)Liver/Kidney1,782 (21.7)Rheumatologic disorders2,096 (25.6)Autoimmune/ Immune related1,527 (18.6)Baseline Medications, n (%)Symptomatic11,756 (43.0)NSAIDs21,578 (38.6)cDMARDs31,435 (35.1)Corticosteroid41,393 (34.1)bDMARDs5266 (6.5)

1cevimeline, pilocarpine hydrochloride, ophthalmic insert etc;2aspirin, ibuprofen, naproxen;3methotrexate, hydroxychloroquine, sulfasalazine, leflunomide, myophenolate mofetil, azathioprine;4prednisone;5sarilumab, belimumab, ustekinumab, infliximab, adalimumab, certolizumab pegol, golimumab, etanercept, abatacept, tocilizumab, rituximab, tofacitinib, baricitinib

Figure 1.

HCRU for pSS and sSS Pts

Figure 2.

Treatment Sequencing for pSS and sSS Pts. Note: Discontinued: pts who discontinued and didn’t advance to any therapy; same treatment: pts continued on index treatment till we have information.

Conclusion:

Observation of higher comorbidities suggests substantial burden of SS pts on healthcare system, with majority of pts being diagnosed outside of rheumatology offices.

Acknowledgments: :

We acknowledge the contributions of Manasi Suryavanshi towards drafting and reviewing the abstract.

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, Joe Zhuo Shareholder of: Bristol-Myers Squibb, Employee of: Bristol-Myers Squibb, Roshanthi Weerasinghe Grant/research support from:., Qian Xia Shareholder of: I own shares of Bristol-Myers Squibb Company, Employee of: I am a paid employee of Bristol-Myers Squibb Company, Chidananda Samal Consultant of: I work as a consultant for Bristol-Myers Squibb Company, Niyati Sharma Consultant of: I work as a consultant for Bristol-Myers Squibb Company

OP0035 EXAMINATION OF INTERSTITIAL LUNG DISEASE IN PATIENTS WITH RHEUMATOID ARTHRITIS – PREVALENCE, TIME TO ONSET, AND CLINICAL CHARACTERISTICS

Background:

Interstitial lung disease (ILD) is a known extraarticular manifestation of rheumatoid arthritis (RA). Previous studies have shown variability in the prevalence of RA-ILD, as well as clinical characteristics and risk factors of RA-ILD.

Objectives:

To evaluate the prevalence and time to onset of ILD and compare the clinical characteristics between RA patients (pts) with or without ILD using a large US electronic medical record (EMR)-based dataset.

Methods:

Pts with an initial RA diagnosis (ICD-9-CM code: 714.0; ICD-10-CM codes: M05 & M06) during the study period (01JAN2009-20SEP2019) were included from the Discus Analytics JointMan database. The initial RA diagnosis date was defined as the index date. Pts with ILD were identified by ICD diagnosis codes or by provider indication in the JointMan record. Pts who developed ILD before RA were excluded from this analysis. The prevalence and time to onset of ILD were reported. Pt demographics, comorbidities, RA characteristics and disease activity scores were compared for 6 months prior to or on the index date (baseline period) for selected adult RA pts with available information.

Results:

Among 8,963 identified RA pts, 337 (3.8%) were diagnosed with ILD on or after RA diagnosis. The median time to ILD onset post-RA was 2.3 years, and 47% had ILD within 2 years after RA diagnosis. RA-ILD pts were significantly older than those without ILD (65.8 years vs. 59.1 years; p<0.001; Table 1). At baseline, a higher percentage of RA-ILD pts had history of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, positive rheumatoid factor, rheumatoid nodules, erosive joint disease, positive anti-cyclic citrullinated peptide antibody, and joint swelling compared to RA-only pts (Table 2). The mean ESR and RA disease activity scores were also significantly higher for RA-ILD pts.

Table 1.

Patient Demographics

Patient demographicsRA-ONLY COhort(N = 5,612)RA-ild coHORT(N = 205)P-valueAge, Mean ± SD, years59.1 ± 14.265.8 ± 11.8<.001Male, N (%)1,375 (24.5%)72 (35.1%)0.001Race, N (%) White4,014 (71.5%)165 (80.5%)0.005 African American365 (6.5%)9 (4.4%)0.226 Other/Missing1,233 (22.0%)31 (15.1%)0.020Table 2.

Baseline Clinical Characteristics

Clinical CharacteristicsRA-ONLY COhort(N = 3,846)RA-ild coHORT(N = 115)P-valueHistory of Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease, N (%)102 (2.7%)8 (7.0%)0.006Hypertension, N (%)900 (23.4%)23 (20.0%)0.395Serious Infection, N (%)38 (1.0%)3 (2.6%)0.091Rheumatoid Factor Positive, N (%)1,388 (36.1%)69 (60.0%)<.001Joint Stiffness, N (%)1,092 (28.4%)39 (33.9%)0.197Rheumatoid Nodules, N (%)153 (4.0%)17 (14.8%)<.001Erosive Joint Disease, N (%)459 (11.9%)23 (20.0%)0.009Anti-CCP Antibody Positive, N (%)858 (22.3%)45 (39.1%)<.001Joint Swelling*, N (%)2,861 (58.0%)123 (68.0%)0.008Joint Tenderness*, N (%)3,728 (75.6%)138 (76.2%)0.851ESR**, Mean ± SD, mm/hr22.0 ± 22.630.1 ± 25.5<.001CRP**, Mean ± SD, mg/L22.5 ± 13.060.6 ± 25.00.086CDAI, Mean ± SD16.4 ± 12.318.9 ± 15.70.044DAS28-CRP, Mean ± SD2.6 ± 1.23.1 ± 1.4<.001DAS28-ESR, Mean ± SD3.3 ± 1.43.9 ± 1.5<.001SDAI, Mean ± SD20.2 ± 29.328.6 ± 40.20.048

* A total of 4,929 non-ILD and 181 ILD patients had joint swelling and tenderness data.

** Variables were calculated among patients who had available information.

Conclusion:

This large real-world RA population provides insight into the burden of ILD in RA pts. Pts with ILD had a higher proportion of comorbidities and RA-related conditions and higher RA activity. Further analysis is warranted to assess the risk factors of ILD and its prognosis.

Disclosure of Interests:

Joe Zhuo Shareholder of: Bristol-Myers Squibb, Employee of: Bristol-Myers Squibb, Qisu Zhang Consultant of: I am a paid employee of STATinMED Research which is a paid consultant to Bristol-Myers Squibb Company., Keith Knapp Consultant of: In the last year, I was a paid consultant to Bristol Myers-Squibb Company., Employee of: I am a paid employee of Discus Analytics., Yuexi Wang Consultant of: I am a paid employee of STATinMED Research which is a paid consultant to Bristol-Myers Squibb Company., Cynthia Gutierrez Consultant of: I am a paid employee of STATinMED Research which is a paid consultant to Bristol-Myers Squibb Company., Ding He Consultant of: I am a paid employee of STATinMED Research which is a paid consultant to Bristol-Myers Squibb Company., Lin Xie Consultant of: I am a paid employee of STATinMED Research which is a paid consultant to Bristol-Myers Squibb Company., Sonie Lama Shareholder of: I own shares of Bristol-Myers Squibb Company., Employee of: I am a paid employee of Bristol-Myers Squibb Company., Gary Craig Consultant of: I have served as a consultant to Bristol-Myers Squibb Company., Employee of: I am a paid employee of Arthritis Northwest and VP of Discus Analytics., Speakers bureau: I am a member of the speakers bureau for Bristol-Myers Squibb Company.

SAT0129 ROLE OF SHARED EPITOPE ON THE EFFECTIVENESS OF TNFI TREATMENT FOR PATIENTS WITH RHEUMATOID ARTHRITIS

Background:

Rheumatoid arthritis (RA) has been shown a strong genetic association with particularHLA–DRB1alleles containing shared epitope (SE). However, whether SE is clinically useful in treatment choices is insufficiently investigated1and previous studies have presented mixed findings in the role of SE in the response of TNFi therapies2,3.

Objectives:

To assess the role of SE in response to TNFi treatment in real-world RA patients (pts).

Methods:

Pts enrolled in a large RA registry, Brigham and Women’s Hospital RA Sequential Study, with known SE and received TNFi therapies were included for the analysis. TNFi pts were identified by the first-time use of the drugs between March 2003 to June 2018. For this analysis, all pts were followed up to 1 year. Summary statistics are reported for demographics, serostatus and disease activity (DA) at baseline and follow-up, stratified by SE status. Given the strong association of SE and anti-citrullinated protein antibody (ACPA), the analysis was further stratified by ACPA status. The effect of SE on change in DA was assessed using linear regression model with age, gender, RA disease duration, baseline DA, smoking status, SE, ACPA and ACPA-SE interaction as covariates.

Results:

Of the 484 TNFi pts included in the study, 68.8% were SE+. SE+ pts (vs SE-) were more likely to be rheumatoid factor positive, have erosive disease and a higher disease duration, irrespective of ACPA status. No difference in the change of DA was observed by SE. In SE- pts, ACPA+ pts had a greater reduction of DA than ACPA- pts (Table 1). After accounting for baseline differences, there was no significant effect of SE status on the mean change from baseline in any of the 3 DA measures.(Figure 1) The change in DA was not associated with ACPA but was significantly affected by disease duration and baseline DA.

Table 1.

Disease Activity in TNFi Patients, Stratified by SE and ACPA Status

ParameterSE+ (1 & 2 alleles, n=333)SE- (n=151)ACPA+ACPA–OverallACPA+ACPA-Overall(n=264)(n=69)(n=333)(n=90)(n=61)(n=151)Baseline, Mean (SD)DAS28 CRP3.94 (1.69)3.57 (1.61)3.86 (1.67)3.85 (1.49)3.45 (1.65)3.69 (1.57)CDAI23.06 (18.13)18.95 (15.96)22.25 (17.78)21.91 (15.96)17.72 (17.06)20.26 (16.48)SDAI24.08 (18.82)19.96 (16.59)23.27 (18.45)22.58 (16.34)18.55 (17.87)20.99 (17.01)Follow-up, Mean (SD)DAS28 CRP3.42 (1.55)2.69 (1.32)3.27 (1.53)3.19 (1.43)3.11 (1.53)3.16 (1.47)CDAI17.61 (15.53)12.11 (12.65)16.51 (15.14)15.15 (13.35)14.94 (14.73)15.07 (13.84)SDAI18.35 (15.73)12.45 (12.78)17.15 (15.34)15.31 (13.81)15.71 (15.45)15.46 (14.38)Change, Mean (SD)DAS28 CRP-0.48 (1.31)-0.65 (1.53)-0.52 (1.36)-0.52 (1.50)-0.24 (0.93)-0.42 (1.34)CDAI-4.29 (13.16)-4.79 (13.13)-4.39 (13.12)-6.45 (13.56)-2.63 (9.58)-4.99 (12.28)SDAI-4.74 (14.13)-5.07 (13.90)-4.80 (14.05)-6.87 (14.21)-2.97 (10.32)-5.41 (12.98)Figure 1.

Linear Regression Model for Change in Disease Activity*Estimates, p-values are shown as data labels on the graphs; The above model is adjusted for age, gender, RA duration, smoking status, SE status, baseline DA, ACPA and ACPA*SE status

Conclusion:

This real-world study validates the finding from previous studies conducted in clinical settings that SE does not differentiate treatment response for TNFi therapies.

References:

[1]Saruhan-Direskeneli G, et al.Rheumatology (Oxford) 2007;46(12):1842-44

[2]Skapenko A, et al.Clin Exp Rheumatol2019;37(5):783-790

[3]Rigby W, et al.Annals of the Rheumatic Diseases2019;78(2):263-264

Disclosure of Interests:

Joe Zhuo Shareholder of: Bristol-Myers Squibb, Employee of: Bristol-Myers Squibb, Joshua Bryson Shareholder of: I own shares of Bristol-Myers Squibb Company, Employee of: I am a paid employee of Bristol-Myers Squibb Company, Qian Xia Shareholder of: I own shares of Bristol-Myers Squibb Company, Employee of: I am a paid employee of Bristol-Myers Squibb Company, Niyati Sharma Consultant of: I work as a consultant for Bristol-Myers Squibb Company, Chidananda Samal Consultant of: I work as a consultant for Bristol-Myers Squibb Company, Sonie Lama Shareholder of: I own shares of Bristol-Myers Squibb Company., Employee of: I am a paid employee of Bristol-Myers Squibb Company., Michael E. Weinblatt Grant/research support from: BMS, Amgen, Lilly, Crescendo and Sonofi-Regeneron, Consultant of: Horizon Therapeutics, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Amgen, Abbvie, Crescendo, Lilly, Pfizer, Roche, Gilead, Nancy Shadick Grant/research support from: Mallinckrodt, BMS, Lilly, Amgen, Crescendo Biosciences, and Sanofi-Regeneron, Consultant of: BMS

SAT0104 MAINTENANCE OF SDAI REMISSION AND PATIENT-REPORTED OUTCOMES (PROS) FOLLOWING DOSE DE-ESCALATION OF ABATACEPT IN MTX-NAÏVE, ANTI-CITRULLINATED PROTEIN ANTIBODY (ACPA)+ PATIENTS WITH EARLY RA: RESULTS FROM AVERT-2, A RANDOMISED PHASE IIIB STUDY

Background:

The Phase IIIbAssessingVeryEarlyRATreatment (AVERT)-2 trial (NCT02504268) evaluated SC abatacept (ABA) + MTX vs ABA placebo (PBO) + MTX in ACPA+ patients (pts) with early, active RA.1Results from the 56-wk induction period (IP) showed a significantly greater proportion of pts treated with ABA + MTX (vs MTX alone) reported clinically meaningful improvements in HAQ-DI, global disease activity and pain, which were sustained at 52 wks.2

Objectives:

To report maintenance of SDAI remission and PROs from the AVERT-2 de-escalation (D-E) period.

Methods:

Pts received blinded SC ABA (125 mg once wkly [QW]) + MTX or ABA PBO + MTX induction treatment for 56 wks. In this analysis, pts who completed induction with ABA + MTX and had sustained SDAI remission (≤3.3 at Wks 40 and 52) were re-randomised 1:1:1 to ABA QW + MTX, stepwise D-E (ABA every other wk + MTX for 24 wks then ABA PBO + MTX for 24 wks), or ABA QW + MTX PBO for 48 wks in the D-E period. PROs included physical function (HAQ-DI [0–3; decrease=improvement] and Short-Form 36 [SF-36] v2.0 Physical Functioning Scale [PFS]; 0–100; increase=improvement), and fatigue (Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy-Fatigue [FACIT-F] score; 0–52; decrease=improvement). Endpoints included: proportion of pts in SDAI remission and pts with HAQ-DI response (decrease from IP Day [D]1 in HAQ-DI ≥0.30); adjusted mean change (adMC) from D-E D1 in HAQ-DI, SF-36 PFS or FACIT-F to D-E Wk 48. adMCs were estimated using a mixed effect model with repeated measures.

Results:

147 ABA + MTX-treated pts were re-randomised in the D-E period. Across re-randomised arms, the range of mean scores was 1.87–2.52 for SDAI and 0.18–0.30 for HAQ-DI at entry into D-E period (D-E D1). 74% of pts receiving ABA QW + MTX maintained SDAI remission at D-E Wk 48 (Fig 1); this proportion was higher than in the ABA withdrawal and ABA QW + MTX PBO arms. Pts continuing ABA QW + MTX maintained HAQ-DI response during D-E (Fig 1), but by D-E Wk 48 the proportion of pts with HAQ-DI response in the ABA withdrawal arm declined by 30%. At D-E Wk 48, a small numerical decrease (adMC –0.04) in HAQ-DI was observed in the ABA QW + MTX arm; increases were seen in the withdrawal (adMC 0.26) and ABA QW + MTX PBO arms (adMC 0.16). By D-E Wk 48, SF-36 PFS increased (adMC 1.68) in the ABA QW + MTX arm but decreased in the withdrawal (adMC –3.34) and ABA QW + MTX PBO (adMC –1.45) arms. FACIT-F score increased during D-E in all arms, but the increase at D-E Wk 48 was lower in the ABA QW + MTX arm (adMC 0.79) vs the withdrawal (adMC 4.12) and ABA QW + MTX PBO (adMC 2.41) arms. Similar trends were seen for other PROs including Work Productivity and Activity Impairment-RA; while activity impairment remained stable in the ABA QW + MTX arm, there was a trend for worsening in the withdrawal arm.

Conclusion:

In the AVERT-2 D-E period, continued combination therapy (abatacept + MTX) resulted in maintenance of benefits on PROs, particularly physical functioning, in seropositive pts with early RA. D-E of abatacept followed by complete withdrawal was associated with the greatest loss of remission as well as worsening of PROs. The PRO results corresponded well to the maintenance of clinical (SDAI) remission.

References:

[1]Emery P, et al. ACR 2018; San Diego, USA: Poster 563.

[2]Emery P, et al. ACR 2019; Atlanta, USA: Poster 1423.

Acknowledgments:

Joanna Wright (medical writing, Caudex; funding: Bristol-Myers Squibb)

Disclosure of Interests:

Paul Emery Grant/research support from: AbbVie, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Merck Sharp & Dohme, Pfizer, Roche (all paid to employer), Consultant of: AbbVie (consultant, clinical trials, advisor), Bristol-Myers Squibb (consultant, clinical trials, advisor), Lilly (clinical trials, advisor), Merck Sharp & Dohme (consultant, clinical trials, advisor), Novartis (consultant, clinical trials, advisor), Pfizer (consultant, clinical trials, advisor), Roche (consultant, clinical trials, advisor), Samsung (clinical trials, advisor), Sandoz (clinical trials, advisor), UCB (consultant, clinical trials, advisor), 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, Vivian Bykerk: None declared, Thomas Huizinga Grant/research support from: Ablynx, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Roche, Sanofi, Consultant of: Ablynx, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Roche, Sanofi, Gustavo Citera Grant/research support from: AbbVie, Amgen, Eli Lilly, Gema, Genzyme, Novartis and Pfizer Inc, Consultant of: AbbVie, Amgen, Eli Lilly, Gema, Genzyme, Novartis and Pfizer Inc, Clifton Bingham Grant/research support from: Bristol-Myers Squibb, Consultant of: Bristol-Myers Squibb, Subhashis Banerjee Shareholder of: AbbVie, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Lily, Pfizer, Employee of: Bristol-Myers Squibb (current); AbbVie, Lily, Pfizer (past), Sean Connolly Shareholder of: Bristol-Myers Squibb, Employee of: Bristol-Myers Squibb, Joe Zhuo Shareholder of: Bristol-Myers Squibb, Employee of: Bristol-Myers Squibb, Robert Wong Shareholder of: Bristol-Myers Squibb, Employee of: Bristol-Myers Squibb, Kuan-Hsiang Gary Huang Shareholder of: Bristol-Myers Squibb, Employee of: Bristol-Myers Squibb, Karissa Lozenski Employee of: Bristol-Myers Squibb, Yedid Elbez Consultant of: Bristol-Myers Squibb, Roy Fleischmann Grant/research support from: AbbVie, Akros, Amgen, AstraZeneca, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Boehringer, IngelhCentrexion, Eli Lilly, EMD Serono, Genentech, Gilead, Janssen, Merck, Nektar, Novartis, Pfizer, Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Roche, Samsung, Sandoz, Sanofi Genzyme, Selecta, Taiho, UCB, Consultant of: AbbVie, ACEA, Amgen, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Eli Lilly, Gilead, GlaxoSmithKline, Novartis, Pfizer, Sanofi Genzyme, UCB

AB1204 COST-EFFECTIVENESS OF ABATACEPT IN SPAIN IN SEROPOSITIVE BIOLOGIC-NAÏVE EARLY RHEUMATOID ARTHRITIS PATIENTS WITH SHARED EPITOPE

Background:

The HLA class II Shared Epitope (SE) is a known Rheumatoid Arthritis (RA) risk allele linked to autoantibody production and disease progression. The recent Early AMPLE study suggests an enhanced treatment benefit of abatacept (ABA) over adalimumab (ADA) in SE positive patients with early seropositive RA.1Economic implications beyond the trial follow-up duration are unknown.

Objectives:

To estimate the cost-effectiveness of ABA vs ADA in biologic-naive RA patients seropositive for anti-citrullinated protein antibody and rheumatoid factor based on the Early AMPLE study.

Methods:

We developed a microsimulation model to estimate clinical response, medical cost, quality of life and survival from a Spanish payer perspective. The model captures the patient’s disease and treatment journey using response outcomes and the Health Assessment Questionnaire (HAQ) score. Patients who fail to respond switch to the next treatment line. Six treatment lines are included to capture a lifetime horizon. Responding patients (ACR50 and EULAR response) achieve an improvement in their HAQ score. Patient mortality was modelled as a function of HAQ. For both the overall Early AMPLE population and SE+ patients, incremental monthly cost per response over 2 years and incremental cost per QALY over a lifetime were estimated. Costs were based on local tariffs in Spain.

Results:

Baseline characteristics for the Early AMPLE (n=80) and the SE+ (n=61) patients were well balanced between the treatment groups.2Compared to ADA, the ABA cohort had a lower cost per response and the difference was more pronounced in the SE+ population, compared to the entire Early AMPLE population for both the response criteria (Table 1). Compared with ADA, the ABA cohort showed greater quality adjusted life years (QALYs) gains, and a modest increase in cost due to a prolonged time on treatment (Table 2). The incremental cost per QALY over a lifetime fell below commonly used thresholds in Spain (25-60 thousand Euros per QALY).3

Table 1.

Cost per response results

Full Early AMPLEACR50EULARABAADAABAADACost per response (€) – 2 years25,86040,65426,99340,643Incremental monthly cost per response (€)-616-569SE positiveACR 50EULARABAADAABAADACost per response (€) – 2 years24,27240,24925,33741,425Incremental monthly cost per response (€)-666-670

All incremental results are for ABA – ADA

Table 2.

Cost-effectiveness results (discounted)

Full Early AMPLEACR50EULARABAADAABAADALYs*30.1430.0630.1130.03QALYs8.327.817.577.12Time on treatment (years)4.172.035.143.06Costs (€)75,54768,15785,12280,933Incremental LYs*0.080.08Incremental QALYs0.520.45Incremental Costs (€)7,3904,189Incremental cost per QALY (€)14,3089,275SE positiveACR50EULARABAADAABAADALYs*30.3830.2230.1630.09QALYs8.207.597.406.90Time on treatment (years)4.482.025.383.02Costs (€)78,11368,65187,58681,321Incremental LYs*0.150.06Incremental QALYs0.610.50Incremental Costs (€)9,4626,265Incremental cost per QALY (€)15,41012,503

*LY results are presented undiscounted. All incremental results are for ABA – ADA

Conclusion:

Compared with ADA, ABA is a cost-effective alternative and is associated with a lower 2 years cost per response for both populations. The economic benefit and quality of life gain is greater in a SE+ patient population.

References:

[1]Rigby W, et al. EULAR Annual Meeting, June 2019; Poster LB0008

[2]Buckner J, et al. ACR/ARP Annual Meeting, Nov 2019; Poster 1424

[3]Sacristán JA, et al.Gaceta Sanitaria2019

Disclosure of Interests:

José M. Rodríguez-Heredia: None declared, Lisanne Verburg-Baltussen Consultant of: Consultant for Bristol-Myers Squibb, Paid instructor for: Training sessions for Pharmaceutical companies, Dhanda Devender Shareholder of: BMS, Employee of: BMS, Nicholas Durno Consultant of: Consultant for Bristol-Myers Squibb, Paid instructor for: Training sessions for Pharmaceutical companies, Carlos Sanchez Shareholder of: Shareholder of Bristol-Myers Squibb, Employee of: Bristol Myers-Squibb, Neelanjana Ray Shareholder of: Bristol-Myers Squibb, Employee of: Bristol-Myers Squibb, Maarten Treur Consultant of: Consultant for Bristol-Myers Squibb, Paid instructor for: Training sessions for Pharmaceutical companies, Joe Zhuo Shareholder of: Bristol-Myers Squibb, Employee of: Bristol-Myers Squibb

OP0039 HOSPITALIZATION AND MORTALITY OUTCOMES IN RHEUMATOID ARTHRITIS PATIENTS WITH LUNG DISEASE

Background:

Pulmonary manifestations such as interstitial lung disease (ILD) and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) are frequent extra-articular features that carry a poor prognosis in rheumatoid arthritis (RA). Prior studies have demonstrated that respiratory-related mortality is the most overrepresented cause of death in RA.

Objectives:

To assess the risk of all-cause and respiratory-related hospitalization and mortality in RA patients with comorbid lung disease (LD) in comparison to those without and the differential risks associated with DMARD treatments.

Methods:

Eligible RA patients included those enrolled in the Forward Databank with ≥1 year observation after 2000 and had initiated a DMARD. Forward is a large longitudinal rheumatic disease registry in the US. RA patients’ diagnoses were rheumatologist-confirmed, and every 6 months participants completed comprehensive questionnaires regarding symptoms, disease outcomes, medications, and clinical events. LD was defined as one of the following: emphysema, asthma, bronchitis, COPD, pleural effusion, fibrosis of the lung, “RA lung“, or ILD (England 2019). DMARDs were categorized hierarchically into four groups: csDMARDs, TNFi and NTNFi (bDMARDs), and tsDMARDs. Patients were followed from DMARD initiation until event (death and/or hospitalization) or end of follow-up, whatever came first. Events were validated using medical records and the US National Death Index. Respiratory hospitalizations and deaths were identified with ICD9 (460-519). Events were analyzed using incidence rates (IR) and Cox regression models. Models were adjusted for LD, DMARDs, age, sex, education, HAQ disability, Rheumatic Disease comorbidity index, smoking, pain, glucocorticoids, year of entry, prior bDMARDs and csDMARDs counts and MRC breath scale.

Results:

Of the 21,525 eligible RA patients, 13.8% had LD at the time of DMARD initiation. Patients had 59 years old in both groups and 15% were male for LD+ vs 21% for LD-. Patients with LD+ showed worse disease outcomes (HAQ: 1.3 (0.7) vs 1.0 (0.7)) and comorbidities (2.9 (1.9) vs 1.5 (1.4)) overall and for all treatment groups, especially for NTNFi and tsDMARDi. The overall IR of any all-cause or respiratory-related events were higher in LD+ than LD- RA patients and across any DMARD treatments, with NTNFi having higher IR (Figure). In survival analyses, LD+ was associated with an increased risk for all-cause hospitalizations/deaths (HR 1.3; 95% CI 1.1-1.4) and a 3.95-fold increased risk of respiratory-related events (HR 4.0; 3.2-4.9) (Table). These risks did not differ significantly across DMARD treatment groups. Increased age, HAQ disability, comorbidities, glucocorticoids, prior bDMARDs and worse MRC breath scales were associated with an increased risk in both outcomes and smoking in respiratory-specific events.

Conclusion:

An increased risk of hospitalizations and/or deaths was demonstrated for RA patients with lung disease, most notably a 4-fold increased risk for respiratory-related events. No differences were found between incident DMARD groups. Additional studies accounting for channeling of treatments by baseline health status are needed.

References:

[1]England BR, et alArth Care Res. doi:10.1002/acr.24043.

Figure.

 IR (95% CI): all-cause and respiratory-related events by LD+/LD- and DMARDs

Table.

HR (95% CI) for Cox models.

VariablesAll causeAll respiratory specificLD+ vs LD-1.34.0(1.1 - 1.4)(3.2 - 4.9)Tnf vs csDMARD1.01.1(0.8 - 1.1)(0.8 - 1.5)NTNF vs csDMARD1.00.9(0.8 - 1.2)(0.6 - 1.5)tsDMARD vs csDMARD0.81.8(0.4 - 1.4)(0.7 - 4.7)

Disclosure of Interests:

Sofia Pedro: None declared, Ted Mikuls Grant/research support from: Horizon Therapeutics, BMS, Consultant of: Pfizer, Joe Zhuo Shareholder of: Bristol-Myers Squibb, Employee of: Bristol-Myers Squibb, Kaleb Michaud Grant/research support from: Janssen

THU0497 MAINTENANCE OF MINIMAL DISEASE ACTIVITY OR INACTIVE DISEASE STATUS AND PATIENT-REPORTED OUTCOMES IN INDIVIDUAL PAEDIATRIC PATIENTS WITH JUVENILE IDIOPATHIC ARTHRITIS TREATED WITH SUBCUTANEOUS ABATACEPT

Background:

Maintenance of clinical response over time has been shown in individual patients (pts) with polyarticular-course juvenile idiopathic arthritis (pJIA) treated with SC abatacept (ABA).1It is unknown whether each individual pt with sustained efficacy also consistently maintains the previously reported shorter-term benefits on patient-reported outcomes (PROs)2,3over time.

Objectives:

Investigate whether combined efficacy and stringent, optimal PRO responses to ABA treatment are maintained by individual pts with pJIA over time.

Methods:

In this analysis of the intent-to-treat population, pts in two age cohorts (2–5 and 6–17 yrs) who achieved clinical response to weekly SC ABA (10–<25 kg [50 mg], 25–<50 kg [87.5 mg], ≥50 kg [125 mg]) at Mo 4 (time point of primary pharmacokinetic endpoint4) were followed for 2 yrs. Stringent efficacy outcomes (Juvenile Arthritis Disease Activity Score 27 [JADAS27] minimal disease activity [MDA; ≤3.8] and inactive disease [ID; ≤1] status) were combined with optimal PRO endpoints (childhood [C]HAQ-DI=0, Parental Global Assessment [PaGA] ≤1 and Pain visual analogue scale [VAS] <35). Combined efficacy and PRO responses were analysed at Mos 4, 13 and 21.

Results:

219 pts entered the study (46 [21.0%] 2–5 yrs; 173 [79.0%] 6–17 yrs); a subgroup of these pts achieved a clinical response at Mo 4 (Table 1). Many pts who achieved JADAS27 MDA or JADAS27 ID combined with optimal PROs at Mo 4 sustained their response at Mo 13, and at both Mo 13 and Mo 21 in the 2–5-yr and 6–17-yr cohorts (Table 1). Across the cohorts, 33–88% of pts maintained a combined JADAS27 MDA with optimal PRO responses through Mo 21. Where estimable, median times to combined efficacy and specific optimal PRO responses were consistent across the cohorts (Table 2; Figs 1, 2).

Table 1.

Proportion of pts with combined efficacy and optimal PRO responses at Mos 4, 13 and 21

EndpointResponders at Mo 4Responders at Mos 4 and 13*Responders at Mos 4, 13 and 21*2–5 yrs (n=46)6–17 yrs (n=173)2–5 yrs6–17 yrs2–5 yrs6–17 yrsJADAS27 MDA and CHAQ-DI=09 (20)34 (20)5/9 (56)25/34 (74)3/9 (33)16/34 (47)JADAS27 MDA and PaGA ≤18 (17)14 (8)8/8 (100)7/14 (50)7/8 (88)5/14 (36)JADAS27 MDA and Pain VAS <35 mm28 (61)70 (41)25/28 (89)58/70 (83)21/28 (75)43/70 (61)JADAS27 ID and CHAQ-DI=07 (15)20 (12)2/7 (29)13/20 (65)1/7 (14)9/20 (45)JADAS27 ID and PaGA ≤16 (13)10 (6)4/6 (67)4/10 (40)4/6 (67)4/10 (40)JADAS27 ID and Pain VAS <35 mm17 (37)31 (18)10/17 (59)22/31 (71)8/17 (47)17/31 (55)

Data are n (%) or n/N (%). *% based on n of pts who achieved response at Mo 4 (denominator)

Table 2.

Kaplan–Meier estimates for median (95% CI) times (mos) to achieving combined efficacy and optimal PRO responses

Endpoint2–5 yrs6–17 yrsJADAS27 MDA and CHAQ-DI=021.5 (6.8, NE)21.5 (13.1, 24.4)JADAS27 MDA and PaGA ≤1NE (15.9, NE)24.6 (24.3, NE)JADAS27 MDA and Pain VAS <35 mm2.8 (1.9, 2.9)3.8 (3.7, 6.6)JADAS27 ID and CHAQ-DI=0NE (18.4, NE)24.4 (18.7, NE)JADAS27 ID and PaGA ≤1NE (21.3, NE)24.6 (24.3, NE)JADAS27 ID and Pain VAS <35 mm3.8 (3.8, 10.3)13.2 (10.3, 15.9)

NE=not estimable

Conclusion:

Many individuals with pJIA who achieved stringent efficacy and PRO measures with weekly SC abatacept by Mo 4 sustained them over 2 years. Time to achieve combined efficacy and Pain VAS <35 response was shorter than that for PaGA ≤1 and CHAQ-DI=0.

References:

[1]Ruperto N, et al.Ann Rheum Dis2019;78:99–100 (abstr OP0056)

[2]Brunner H, et al.Arthritis Rheumatol2019;71(suppl 10):abstr 2707

[3]Ruperto N, et al.Ann Rheum Dis2017;76:75 (abstr OP0058)

[4]Brunner HI, et al.Arthritis Rheumatol2018;70:1144–54

Acknowledgments:

Katerina Kumpan, PhD, Caudex; funding: Bristol-Myers Squibb

Disclosure of Interests: :

Hermine Brunner Consultant of: Hoffman-La Roche, Novartis, Pfizer, Sanofi Aventis, Merck Serono, AbbVie, Amgen, Alter, AstraZeneca, Baxalta Biosimilars, Biogen Idec, Boehringer, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Celgene, EMD Serono, Janssen, MedImmune, Novartis, Pfizer, and UCB Biosciences, Speakers bureau: GSK, Roche, and Novartis, Nikolay Tzaribachev: None declared, Ingrid Louw Consultant of: Amgen, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche (advisory boards), Inmaculada Calvo Grant/research support from: Bristol-Myers Squibb, Clementia, GlaxoSmithKline, Hoffman-La Roche, Merck Sharpe & Dohme, Novartis, Pfizer, Sanofi, Speakers bureau: AbbVie, GlaxoSmithKline, Hoffman-La Roche, Novartis, Francisco Zapata: None declared, Gerd Horneff Grant/research support from: AbbVie, Chugai, Merck Sharp & Dohme, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, Speakers bureau: AbbVie, Bayer, Chugai, Merck Sharp & Dohme, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, Ivan Foeldvari Consultant of: AbbVie, Amgen, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Chugai, Eli Lilly, Novartis, Pfizer, Daniel Kingsbury: None declared, Maria Gastanaga Grant/research support from: Amgen, Bristol-Myers Squibb, GlaxoSmithKline, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, Speakers bureau: AbbVie, Roche, Carine Wouters Grant/research support from: GlaxoSmithKline, Pfizer, Roche, Johannes Breedt: None declared, Robert Wong Shareholder of: Bristol-Myers Squibb, Employee of: Bristol-Myers Squibb, Marleen Nys Shareholder of: Bristol-Myers Squibb, Employee of: Bristol-Myers Squibb, Margarita Askelson Consultant of: Bristol-Myers Squibb, Joe Zhuo Shareholder of: Bristol-Myers Squibb, Employee of: Bristol-Myers Squibb, Alberto Martini Consultant of: AbbVie, Eli Lily, EMD Serono, Janssen, Novartis, Pfizer, UCB, Daniel J Lovell Consultant of: Abbott (consulting and PI), AbbVie (PI), Amgen (consultant and DSMC Chairperson), AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol-Myers Squibb (PI), Celgene, Forest Research (DSMB Chairman), GlaxoSmithKline, Hoffman-La Roche, Janssen (co-PI), Novartis (consultant and PI), Pfizer (consultant and PI), Roche (PI), Takeda, UBC (consultant and PI), Wyeth, Employee of: Cincinnati Children’s Hospital Medical Center, Speakers bureau: Wyeth, Nicolino Ruperto Grant/research support from: Bristol-Myers Squibb, Eli Lily, F Hoffmann-La Roche, GlaxoSmithKline, Janssen, Novartis, Pfizer, Sobi (paid to institution), Consultant of: Ablynx, AbbVie, AstraZeneca-Medimmune, Biogen, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Eli Lily, EMD Serono, GlaxoSmithKline, Hoffmann-La Roche, Janssen, Merck, Novartis, Pfizer, R-Pharma, Sanofi, Servier, Sinergie, Sobi, Takeda, Speakers bureau: Ablynx, AbbVie, AstraZeneca-Medimmune, Biogen, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Eli Lily, EMD Serono, GlaxoSmithKline, Hoffmann-La Roche, Janssen, Merck, Novartis, Pfizer, R-Pharma, Sanofi, Servier, Sinergie, Sobi, Takeda

SAT0061 ROLE OF SHARED EPITOPE IN THE PROGNOSIS OF RHEUMATOID ARTHRITIS IN RELATION TO ACPA POSITIVITY

Background:

The mechanistic association ofHLA-DRB1alleles that code a “shared epitope” (SE) with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) is not yet clear. Previous data has suggested the carriage of SE is associated with the production of cyclic citrullinated peptide antibodies (anti-CCP)1and severe RA2-4. The interrelationship among SE, anti-citrullinated protein antibody (ACPA) positivity and disease outcomes is not fully understood.

Objectives:

To assess the RA prognosis associated with the carriage of SE, in relation to ACPA positivity.

Methods:

Pts enrolled in a large RA registry, Brigham and Women’s Hospital RA Sequential Study between March 2003 to June 2018, with known SE and ACPA status were included in the analysis. HLA-DRB1 SE status was determined by allele-specific polymerase chain reaction and DNA sequencing for most of the subjects and by GWAS-based imputation for the rest. Disease activity (DA) was measured at baseline (BL) and 1-year follow-up by DAS28(CRP), CDAI and SDAI. Pts were stratified by SE+ (1 or 2 SE alleles) and SE- (0 alleles) and ACPA status. We analyzed the relationship of SE with ACPA positivity and change in DA by a linear regression model separately. A mediation analysis was used to examine the mediating effect of ACPA on association between SE and change in DA.

Results:

Out of 926 pts included in the analysis, 65.1% were SE+, of whom 75.6% were ACPA+. In comparison, 51.7% were ACPA+ in SE- pts. SE+ pts were similar with SE- pts in age, gender, BMI and smoking status, but had longer disease duration, were more likely to be rheumatoid factor positive, have erosive disease and higher comorbidity burden irrespective of ACPA status. The differences were more pronounced if the pts were also ACPA+. Adjusting for BL differences, pts with SE 1 and 2 alleles (vs 0) had an odd ratio of 1.97 (95% CI:1.36-2.84; p=0.0003) and 3.82 (95% CI: 2.44-5.98; p<.0001) to be ACPA +, respectively. The regression analysis suggests that SE+ (vs SE-) pts had an average increase in DAS28 (CRP) of 0.22 (p=0.033), CDAI of 2.07 (p=0.045) and SDAI of 2.43 (p=0.029) over a year (Fig 1). Using a mediation analysis, the direct effect of SE+ account for 78.8% to 81.0% of total effect in the increase in DAS28 (CRP), CDAI and SDAI, and the indirect effect mediated by ACPA account for 19.0% to 21.2% (Table 1).

Table 1.

Mediation Analysis for SE and ACPA Association with Change in DA

ParameterChange in DAS28 CRP (N=666)Change in CDAI (N=653)Change in SDAI (N=629)EstimateP-valueEstimateP-valueEstimateP-valueTotal Effect of SE on DA change0.220.0342.050.0472.400.030Direct effect of SE on DA change excluding mediation of ACPA0.170.1011.570.1401.890.098Indirect effect of SE on DA change due to ACPA mediation and interaction0.040.1830.480.1330.510.143

The model is adjusted with other covariates: Age, Gender, Charlson comorbidity score; baseline biologic use, Smoking status, baseline DA, Interaction term (ACPA*SE)

Figure 1.

Linear Regression Model for SE Association with Change in Disease Activity *Estimates, p-values are shown as data labels on the graphs; Change in disease activity (DA) = (follow-up DA- baseline DA); The above model is adjusted for age, gender, CCI, baseline DA, baseline biologic use, SE status and smoking status

Conclusion:

SE is strongly related to ACPA and a greater burden of disease in RA pts. In pts receiving standard treatments including biologics, SE is predictive of a greater increase in DA, which is partially mediated by the presence of ACPA.

References:

[1] Dayan I, et al.,Arch of Rheumatology, 2010;25:012-018.

[2] Gregerson PK, et al,Arthritis Rheum. 1987;30:1205-1213.

[3] Turesson C, et al.Arthritis Res Ther. 2005;7:R1386-1393.

[4] Moreno I, et al.J Rheumatol. 1996;23:6-9.

Disclosure of Interests:

Joe Zhuo Shareholder of: Bristol-Myers Squibb, Employee of: Bristol-Myers Squibb, Joshua Bryson Shareholder of: I own shares of Bristol-Myers Squibb Company, Employee of: I am a paid employee of Bristol-Myers Squibb Company, Qian Xia Shareholder of: I own shares of Bristol-Myers Squibb Company, Employee of: I am a paid employee of Bristol-Myers Squibb Company, Niyati Sharma Consultant of: I work as a consultant for Bristol-Myers Squibb Company, Sheng Gao Shareholder of: Bristol-Myers Squibb, Employee of: Bristol-Myers Squibb, Sonie Lama Shareholder of: I own shares of Bristol-Myers Squibb Company., Employee of: I am a paid employee of Bristol-Myers Squibb Company., Michael E. Weinblatt Grant/research support from: BMS, Amgen, Lilly, Crescendo and Sonofi-Regeneron, Consultant of: Horizon Therapeutics, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Amgen, Abbvie, Crescendo, Lilly, Pfizer, Roche, Gilead, Nancy Shadick Grant/research support from: Mallinckrodt, BMS, Lilly, Amgen, Crescendo Biosciences, and Sanofi-Regeneron, Consultant of: BMS

FRI0072 DISCONTINUATION OF DMARD USE IN RHEUMATOID ARTHRITIS PATIENTS WITH LUNG DISEASE

Background:

Pulmonary manifestations such as interstitial lung disease (ILD) and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) are frequent extra-articular features that carry a poor prognosis in Rheumatoid Arthritis (RA). Little data is available on how RA patients (pts) with pulmonary disease are managed in real-world settings.

Objectives:

To assess treatment patterns and DMARD discontinuation in RA patients with comorbid lung disease in comparison with other RA patients.

Methods:

The study included RA Patients enrolled in the Forward Databank with ≥1 year observation after 2000 initiating a DMARD. Forward is a large longitudinal rheumatic disease registry in the US. RA patients’ diagnoses were rheumatologist-confirmed, and every 6 months participants completed comprehensive questionnaires regarding symptoms, disease outcomes, medications, and clinical events. Lung disease (LD+) was defined as at least one of the following: emphysema, asthma, bronchitis, COPD, pleural effusion, fibrosis of the lung, “RA lung”, or ILD, the later classified by ICD9 codes (England 2019). DMARDs were categorized hierarchically into four groups: csDMARDs, TNFi and NTNFi (bDMARDs), and tsDMARDs. Percentage of patients who initiated different DMARDs were reported for pts with LD+/LD-. Discontinuation was analyzed by Kaplan Meier (KM) curves, log-ranks tests, and Cox regression models using time-varying covariates. Best models were created using backward selection models (10% probability of removal) and pre-defined clinical models.

Results:

Of the 21,525 eligible RA patients, 13.8% had LD+ at the time they initiated a DMARD (follow-up: 69,597 pt-yrs (median 1.9 yrs/pt)). LD+ patients tended to have more severe RA outcomes and comorbidities. MTX-monotherapy (48% vs 44%, p<0.001) and NTNFi were initiated more frequently in LD+ pts with lower use of TNFi (Figure). DMARD discontinuation rates were higher among LD+ patients for all DMARD groups, but KM curves were only significantly different for csDMARDs and TNFi. Different HRs for LD+ were found depending on the model used ranging from 1.18 to 1.28, and all models revealed an increased risk of discontinuation for LD+ patients. Compared to csDMARDs, TNFi were more often discontinued (Table). Other variables associated with an increased risk of discontinuation included: HAQ, Rheumatoid Disease (RD) comorbidity index, pain, prior bDMARDs, and csDMARDs.

Conclusion:

Different DMARD treatment patterns were found for LD+ patients, who tended to initiate more csDMARD and NTNFi and less likely to initiate a TNFi. LD+ patients were at a higher risk of discontinuation irrespectively of the DMARD treatment, but with greater risk for TNF users.

References:

[1]England BR, et al. Arth Care Res. doi:10.1002/acr.24043.

Figure.

DMARD treatment initiators by disease group

Table .

Cox models for DMARD discontinuation by stepwise (removal probability 10%) and clinical models including DMARD treatment.

Model of DMARD persistence*Model 1- Stepwise-Without drugsModel 2 – StepwiseModel 3 - ClinicalLD+ vs LD–1.181.281.20(1.08 - 1.29)(1.13 - 1.45)(1.08 - 1.34)TNF vs csDmard1.321.22(1.08 - 1.63)(1.04 - 1.44)NTNF vs csDmard1.131.13(0.83 - 1.52)(0.90 - 1.41)tsDmard vs csDmard1.301.02(0.65 - 2.60)(0.64 - 1.62)

*Best models searched/Clinical adjusted for LD+/LD-, DMARDs, age, sex, education, HAQ disability, RD comorbidity index, smoking, pain, glucocorticoids, year of entry, prior bDMARDs and csDMARDs counts and MRC breath scale.

Disclosure of Interests:

Sofia Pedro: None declared, Ted Mikuls Grant/research support from: Horizon Therapeutics, BMS, Consultant of: Pfizer, Joe Zhuo Shareholder of: Bristol-Myers Squibb, Employee of: Bristol-Myers Squibb, Kaleb Michaud: None declared

Long-term efficacy and safety of paliperidone palmitate once-monthly in Chinese patients with recent-onset schizophrenia

Background: The subgroup analysis of a primary study (NCT01051531) evaluated the effect of long-term paliperidone palmitate once-monthly (PP1M) therapy in Chinese patients with recent-onset schizophrenia responding unsatisfactorily to previous oral antipsychotics. Patients and methods: This 18-month, open-label study consisted of 3 phases - screening (7 days), treatment (18 months) and end-of-study/withdrawal visit. All enrolled patients (18-50 years) received PP1M: 150 mg eq. (day 1), 100 mg eq. (day 8) followed by a once-monthly flexible dose (50, 75, 100 or 150 mg eq.). Efficacy and safety were assessed. Results: Among the 118 enrolled Chinese patients, 68 completed the treatment (mean age: 25.6 years; male: 54.7%). A clinically meaningful change from baseline to day 548 was observed in Positive and Negative Syndrome scale (primary endpoint, mean [SD]: -15.3 [20.76]), Personal and Social Performance scale (15.9 [19.65]), Clinician Global Impression-schizophrenia score (-1.2 [1.54]) and Medication Satisfaction Questionnaire score (0.9 [1.73]). Commonly reported treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) included insomnia (13.9%), injection-site pain (13.9%), upper respiratory tract infection (13.0%), restlessness (13.0%) and akathisia (13.0%). Serious TEAEs were reported in 9.3% patients with schizophrenia being most common (6.5%) and one death (suicide) was observed. Conclusion: Efficacy of PP1M corroborate findings from earlier studies and no new safety concerns emerged in this Chinese subgroup of patients with schizophrenia.

Impact of paliperidone palmitate one-month formulation on relapse prevention in patients with schizophrenia: A post-hoc analysis of a one-year, open-label study stratified by medication adherence

BACKGROUND

Limited data are available to help identify patients with schizophrenia who are most likely to benefit from long-acting injectable antipsychotics.

AIM

To investigate the efficacy of long-acting injectable antipsychotic paliperidone palmitate one-month formulation for preventing relapses, factors influencing time to first relapse, and the effect of different antipsychotic adherence levels on time to first relapse in Chinese patients with schizophrenia.

METHODS

This was a post-hoc analysis from an open-label, single-arm study of stable patients (Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale total score <70; n=367) receiving paliperidone palmitate one-month formulation at the end of an acute 13-week treatment phase, who entered a naturalistic one-year follow-up period, either continuing with flexibly dosed paliperidone palmitate one-month formulation (75-150 mg eq.) or switching to another antipsychotic(s).

RESULTS

There were 362/367 patients (age=31.4±10.75 years) included in the analysis of time to first relapse (primary outcome) and 327/362 patients (39/327, poor antipsychotic adherence (<80%)) willing to receive antipsychotics were included in the exposure/adherence analysis. Overall, 84.6% (95% confidence interval=79.2-88.7) patients remained relapse-free. Poor adherence during follow-up (hazard ratio=2.97, 95% confidence interval=1.48-5.98, p=0.002) and frequent hospitalizations in the previous year (hazard ratio=1.29, 95% confidence interval=1.02-1.62, p=0.03) were associated with a significant risk of shorter time to first relapse in the univariate analysis. In patients with poor adherence, 'no use' (hazard ratio=13.13, 95% confidence interval=1.33-129.96, p=0.03) and 'interrupted use' (hazard ratio=11.04, 95% confidence interval=1.03-118.60, p=0.047) of paliperidone palmitate one-month formulation (vs continued use) showed a significantly higher risk of relapse; this was not observed in patients with good (≥80%) antipsychotic adherence. No new safety concerns were identified.

CONCLUSION

Continued use of paliperidone palmitate one-month formulation/long-acting injectable antipsychotic was effective in preventing schizophrenia relapses, especially in patients with suboptimal antipsychotic adherence.

Factors related to improvement of symptoms, function, and caregiver burden in Chinese patients with schizophrenia after switching to paliperidone palmitate once-monthly from oral antipsychotics

BACKGROUND

Paliperidone palmitate once-monthly (PP1M) demonstrated symptomatic and functional remission in patients with schizophrenia. This post hoc analysis aimed to identify factors associated with improved clinical outcomes in patients switching to PP1M (75-150 mg eq.).

METHODS

The improved patient outcomes were observed as Positive and Negative Symptom Scale (PANSS, symptoms) score <70:66.7% (407/610), Personal and Social Performance (PSP, function) score >70:34.3% (199/581), and Involvement Evaluation Questionnaire (IEQ, caregiver burden) reduction ≥6:50.2% (270/538). Independent variables including demographics, disease duration, employment status, and clinical scores were screened individually using a univariate analysis and subsequently, variables (cutoff p<0.15) were analyzed using a multivariate regression analysis for association with better clinical outcomes at week 13.

RESULTS

The factors significantly associated with favorable clinical outcomes were reduction in PANSS at week 5 (odds ratio [OR]=1.14, 95% CI=1.11-1.17) with symptom reduction; baseline PSP total score (OR=1.07, 95% CI=1.05-1.10), PSP change at week 5 (OR=1.07, 95% CI=1.05-1.10), PANSS reduction at week 5 (OR=1.06, 95% CI=1.03-1.08) with functional improvement, reduction in PANSS at week 5 (OR=1.02, 95% CI=1.01-1.03), and total IEQ score at baseline (OR=1.09, 95% CI=1.07-1.11) with caregiver burden reduction.

CONCLUSION

Thus, symptom and functional improvements with caregiver burden reduction were observed in patients, and PANSS reduction at week 5 was commonly associated with favorable outcomes.

Impact of time of initiation of once-monthly paliperidone palmitate in hospitalized Asian patients with acute exacerbation of schizophrenia: a post hoc analysis from the PREVAIL study

PURPOSE

To evaluate the differences in efficacy and safety outcomes in acute exacerbating schizophrenia patients between 2 subgroups (≤1 week and >1 week), differing in time interval from hospitalization to time of initiation of once-monthly paliperidone palmitate.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

PREVAIL was a multicenter, single-arm, open-label, prospective Phase IV study in hospitalized Asian patients (either sex, aged 18-65 years) diagnosed with schizophrenia (Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fourth Edition). Change from baseline to week 13 in primary (Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale [PANSS] total score), secondary endpoints (PANSS responder rate, PANSS subscale, PANSS Marder factor, Clinical Global Impression-Severity, and Personal and Social Performance scale scores, readiness for hospital discharge questionnaire) and safety were assessed in this post hoc analysis.

RESULTS

Significant mean reduction from baseline to week 13 in the PANSS total score, 30% PANSS responder rates (P≤0.01), PANSS subscales (positive and general psychopathology; all P≤0.01), PANSS Marder factor (positive symptoms, uncontrolled hostility, and excitement and anxiety/depression; all P≤0.01), Personal and Social Performance scale scores (P≤0.05) and Clinical Global Impression-Severity categorical summary (P≤0.05) were significantly greater in the ≤1 week subgroup versus >1 week subgroup (P≤0.05). The readiness for hospital discharge questionnaire improved over time for the overall study population, but remained similar between subgroups at all-time points. Treatment-emergent adverse events were similar between the subgroups.

CONCLUSION

Early initiation of once-monthly paliperidone palmitate in hospitalized patients with acute exacerbation of schizophrenia led to greater improvements in psychotic symptoms with comparable safety than treatment initiation following 1 week of hospitalization.

Safety and effectiveness of escitalopram in an 8-week open study in Chinese patients with depression and anxiety

BACKGROUND

Anxiety symptoms usually worsen depression and functional impairment. The present study was aimed to evaluate the impact of escitalopram on social function and quality of life in major depressive disorder (MDD) patients with anxiety symptoms.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Adult MDD patients with functional impairment (Sheehan Disability Scale [SDS] score ≥9) and anxiety symptoms (Hamilton Anxiety Rating Scale [HAM-A] score ≥14) received escitalopram (10-20 mg/day) for 8 weeks. Symptom status was assessed by SDS, Quality of Life Enjoyment and Satisfaction Questionnaire-Short Form, Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS), HAM-A, and Quick Inventory of Depressive Symptomatology-Self Report scales. Safety was evaluated by treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs).

RESULTS

Overall, 208 (79.7%) of 261 enrolled patients completed the 8-week treatment. Mean (SD) SDS and Quality of Life Enjoyment and Satisfaction Questionnaire-Short Form total scores were 17.4 (5.87) and 39.3 (14.43) at baseline, which improved to 7.6 (6.71) and 61.6 (15.80), respectively, at week 8. Totally, 59.2% of patients achieved functional remission (SDS≤6) and 61.7% of patients achieved depression remission (MADRS≤10) at week 8; 48.1% of patients achieved both functional and depression remission (SDS≤6 and MADRS≤10). The change in SDS total score was positively correlated with the change in MADRS and HAM-A total scores at each visit. Patient's baseline SDS score was related with depression score (regression coefficient=0.40582, p=0.0005); remission of SDS was statistically related to a reduction of week 2 and week 6 HAM-A score (p<0.0001) and reduction of MADRS score (p<0.0001). Overall, 25.7% of patients reported ≥1 TEAEs. Most frequently reported TEAEs were nausea (5.8%), diarrhea (2.3%), and dizziness (2.7%). Most TEAEs were mild to moderate in severity. Four patients reported serious TEAEs, two patients reported suicide attempts, and one patient completed suicide.

CONCLUSION

Escitalopram (10-20 mg/day) treatment was efficacious in reducing depression, improving social function, and quality of life in MDD patients with anxiety symptoms. No new safety signals were identified.

Once-monthly injection of paliperidone palmitate in patients with recently diagnosed and chronic schizophrenia: a post-hoc comparison of efficacy and safety

BACKGROUND

The use of long-acting injectable antipsychotics in recently diagnosed schizophrenia remains less explored. We evaluated the efficacy and safety of paliperidone palmitate once-monthly (PP1M) treatment in adult patients with recently diagnosed vs. chronic schizophrenia.

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

These post-hoc analyses included two multicenter studies. Study 1 (NCT01527305) enrolled recently diagnosed (≤5 years) and chronic (>5 years) patients; Study 2 (NCT01051531) enrolled recently diagnosed patients only. Recently diagnosed patients were further sub-grouped into ≤2 years or 2-5 years. The primary efficacy endpoint was the change from baseline in Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS) total score.

RESULTS

In Study 1, 41.5% patients had recent diagnosis (≤2 years: 56.8%; 2-5 years: 43.2%); 58.5% had chronic schizophrenia. In Study 2, 52.8% and 47.2% patients were grouped into ≤2 years and 2-5 years, respectively. PANSS total score showed significantly greater improvement in patients with recently diagnosed vs. chronic schizophrenia. Similar results were obtained for PANSS responder rate, improvements in PANSS, and CGI-S scores.

CONCLUSION

PP1M was efficacious in both recently diagnosed and chronic schizophrenia, with the benefits being more pronounced in patients with recently diagnosed schizophrenia. This adds to growing evidence recommending long-acting antipsychotic interventions at early stages of schizophrenia.

Carotid Bulb Webs as a Cause of "Cryptogenic" Ischemic Stroke

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

Carotid webs are intraluminal shelf-like filling defects at the carotid bulb with recently recognized implications in patients with recurrent ischemic stroke. We sought to determine whether carotid webs are an under-recognized cause of "cryptogenic" ischemic stroke and to estimate their prevalence in the general population.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A retrospective review of neck CTA studies in young patients with cryptogenic stroke over the past 6 years (n = 33) was performed to determine the prevalence of carotid webs compared with a control group of patients who received neck CTA studies for reasons other than ischemic stroke (n = 63).

RESULTS

The prevalence of carotid webs in the cryptogenic stroke population was 21.2% (95% CI, 8.9%-38.9%). Patients with symptomatic carotid webs had a mean age of 38.9 years (range, 30-48 years) and were mostly African American (86%) and women (86%). In contrast, only 1.6% (95% CI, 0%-8.5%) of patients in the control group demonstrated a web. Our findings demonstrate a statistically significant association between carotid webs and ischemic stroke (OR = 16.7; 95% CI, 2.78-320.3; P = .01).

CONCLUSIONS

Carotid webs exhibit a strong association with ischemic stroke, and their presence should be suspected in patients lacking other risk factors, particularly African American women.

Efficacy and safety of escitalopram in treatment of severe depression in Chinese population

Severe depression accounts for one-third of depressed patients. Increasing severity of depression usually hinders patients from achieving remission. This study evaluated the efficacy and safety of escitalopram in acute-phase treatment of severe major depressive disorder (MDD). A total of 225 participants with severe MDD (Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, 4th Edition criteria), with a current depressive episode and Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) score of ≥30 were enrolled. Participants received flexible dose escitalopram (10-20 mg/d) treatment for 8 weeks. Symptoms status was assessed by MADRS, Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HAM-D-17), and Hamilton Anxiety Rating Scale (HAM-A). Quality of life was assessed by Short Form-12 (SF-12) and safety by adverse events, laboratory investigations, vital signs and physical findings. The remission (MADRS total score ≤ 10) rate in the intent-to-treat set (n = 207) was 72.9% at week 8. Significant improvement in symptoms compared to baseline, as evaluated by MADRS, HAMD-17 and HAMA scores at baseline, week 1, week 2, week 4, and week 8 (p < 0.0001 for all), was noted. Mean (SD) reduction from baseline in MADRS total score was 26.6 (11.38). Improvements in SF-12 score were significant (p = 0.000) and positively related to symptom improvement and negatively related to treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs). TEAEs were reported in 28.38% of participants. Most common TEAEs (>4%) were somnolence (9.0%), nausea (7.7%), hyperhidrosis (4.5%), dry mouth and dizziness (4.1% each). No serious TEAEs were reported. Escitalopram was effective and well-tolerated for acute-phase treatment of severe depression in Chinese population.

The Efficacy of Shielding Systems for Reducing Operator Exposure during Neurointerventional Procedures: A Real-World Prospective Study

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

Neurointerventional surgery may expose patients and physician operators to substantial amounts of ionizing radiation. Although strategies for reducing patient exposure have been explored in the medical literature, there has been relatively little published in regards to decreasing operator exposure. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the efficacy of shielding systems in reducing physician exposure in a modern neurointerventional practice.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Informed consent was obtained from operators for this Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act-compliant, institutional review board-approved study. Operator radiation exposure was prospectively measured during 60 consecutive neurointerventional procedures from October to November 2013 using a 3-part lead shielding system. Exposure was then evaluated without lead shielding in a second 60-procedure block from April to May 2014. A radiation protection drape was randomly selected for use in half of the cases in each block. Two-way analysis of covariance was performed to test the effect of shielding systems on operator exposure while controlling for other covariates, including procedure dose-area product.

RESULTS

Mean operator procedure dose was 20.6 μSv for the entire cohort and 17.7 μSv when using some type of shielding. Operator exposure significantly correlated with procedure dose-area product, but not with other covariates. After we adjusted for procedure dose-area product, the use of lead shielding or a radiation protection drape significantly reduced operator exposure by 45% (F = 12.54, P < .0001) and 29% (F = 7.02, P = .009), respectively. The difference in protection afforded by these systems was not statistically significant (P = .46), and their adjunctive use did not provide additional protection.

CONCLUSIONS

Extensive lead shielding should be used as much as possible in neurointerventional surgery to reduce operator radiation exposure to acceptable levels. A radiation protection drape is a reasonable alternative when standard lead shielding is unavailable or impractical to use without neglecting strategies to minimize the dose.

Safety and efficacy of paliperidone palmitate 1-month formulation in Chinese patients with schizophrenia: a 25-week, open-label, multicenter, Phase IV study

RATIONALE

Long-acting injectable (LAI) paliperidone palmitate 1-month formulation (PP1M) has demonstrated acceptable tolerability and favorable clinical outcomes in Western and Asian patients with schizophrenia. Hence, analysis of the outcomes of long-term PP1M treatment specifically in Chinese patients is of interest.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study is to evaluate the long-term safety and efficacy of PP1M treatment in Chinese patients with schizophrenia.

METHODS

In this 25-week, open-label, Phase IV study, patients (18-65 years) diagnosed with schizophrenia and having a baseline Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS) total score of 60-120 (inclusive) were enrolled. All patients received injections of PP1M 150 mg eq. (day 1) and 100 mg eq. (day 8), followed by a flexible once-monthly maintenance dosing (75, 100, or 150 mg eq.).

RESULTS

Of the 353 patients, 234 (66.3%) completed the study treatment (mean age, 31.1 years; 52.7% men). The PANSS total score (primary end point) improved significantly over the 6-month treatment period (mean [standard deviation] change from baseline to end of treatment, -27.2 [18.30]; P<0.0001). The Clinical Global Impressions-Severity and Personal and Social Performance scores (secondary end points) also improved significantly (P<0.0001). At 6 months, PP1M had a positive impact on medication satisfaction, adherence, and increased preference for LAIs. Treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) were reported by 181 (51.3%) patients (TEAEs ≥5%: extrapyramidal disorder [15.3%], akathisia [10.5%], blood prolactin increase [8.8%], insomnia [5.4%]). A total of 8 deaths were reported, including 4 completed suicides.

CONCLUSION

Long-term treatment with PP1M was efficacious, and no new safety concerns were identified in Chinese patients with schizophrenia. Overall, the results were comparable with observations from previous studies.

Suboptimal maternal diets alter mu opioid receptor and dopamine type 1 receptor binding but exert no effect on dopamine transporters in the offspring brain

Birthweight is a marker for suboptimal fetal growth and development in utero. Offspring can be born large for gestational age (LGA), which is linked to maternal obesity or excessive gestational weight gain, as well as small for gestational age (SGA), arising from nutrient or calorie deficiency, placental dysfunction, or other maternal conditions (hypertension, infection). In humans, LGA and SGA babies are at an increased risk for certain neurodevelopmental disorders, including Attention Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder, schizophrenia, and social and mood disorders. Using mouse models of LGA (maternal high fat (HF) diet) and SGA (maternal low protein (LP) diet) offspring, our lab has previously shown that these offspring display alterations in the expression of mesocorticolimbic genes that regulate dopamine and opioid function, thus indicating that these brain regions and neurotransmitter systems are vulnerable to gestational insults. Interestingly, these two maternal diets affected dopamine and opioid systems in somewhat opposing directions (e.g., LP offspring are generally hyperdopaminergic with reduced opioid expression, and the reverse is found for the HF offspring). These data largely involved evaluation at the transcriptional level, so the present experiment was designed to extend these analyses through an assessment of receptor binding. In this study, control, SGA and LGA offspring were generated from dams fed control, low protein or high fat diet, respectively, throughout pregnancy and lactation. At weaning, mice were placed on the control diet and sacrificed at 12 weeks of age. In vitro autoradiography was used to measure mu-opioid receptor (MOR), dopamine type 1 receptor (D1R), and dopamine transporter (DAT) binding level in mesolimbic brain regions. Results showed that the LP offspring (males and females) had significantly higher MOR and D1R binding than the control animals in the regions associated with reward. In HF offspring there were no differences in MOR binding, and limited increases in D1R binding, seen only in females in the nucleus accumbens core and the dorsomedial caudate/putamen. DAT binding revealed no differences in either models. In conclusion, LP but not HF offspring show significantly elevated MOR and D1R binding in the brain thus affecting DA and opioid signaling. These findings advance the current understanding of how suboptimal gestational diets can adversely impact neurodevelopment and increase the risk for disorders such as ADHD, obesity and addiction.

Postnatal growth of the human optic nerve

PurposeAlthough the length of the average human adult optic nerve (ON) is known, the average length of the normal full-term, newborn ON has never been adequately evaluated, nor has the in vivo growth rate of the human ON been determined. We wanted to identify both the average length of the newborn human ON and its rate of anteroposterior growth.Patients and methodsUsing MRIs from a newly generated set of normal newborn infants rescanned at 1 year, and from different aged groups, we calculated average newborn ON length and growth rate.ResultsThe newborn human ON is 25.3±0.3 mm in length from globe to chiasm, and grows by 80% in length after birth, with maximum speed of elongation occurring in the first 3 years of life, attaining full length by 15 years of age.ConclusionThe human ON grows dramatically in the first 3 years of life, and continues to grow for the first two decades. These data are relevant for pediatric treatments that may impede or alter orbital growth in infants, and maximal susceptibility to oncological procedures in early childhood.

A Subgroup Analysis of Chinese Patients Switched to Paliperidone Palmitate One-Month Injectable by Prior Oral Antipsychotic Treatment

INTRODUCTION

Safely tapering current antipsychotic medication, while balancing efficacy and tolerability, is an important consideration when switching patients from their antipsychotic therapy to a new treatment. The efficacy and tolerability of paliperidone palmitate one-month (PP1M) in Chinese patients switched from previous antipsychotic treatments were examined in order to develop effective switching and dosing strategies.

METHODS

A 13-week open-label, single arm, prospective, interventional study was conducted in Chinese patients (n = 610) with acute schizophrenia to examine their response, by previous treatment group, when switched to PP1M (75-150 mg eq).

RESULTS

Among 610 patients with ≥ 30% reduction in PANSS total score were 191/263 (72.6%) risperidone/paliperidone extended-release patients, 36/52 (69.2%) olanzapine patients, and 214/293 (73.0%) other antipsychotic patients. Patient functioning and adherence were significantly (p ≤ 0.05) improved for all subgroups.

DISCUSSION

Patients on higher doses of prior antipsychotics generally took longer to withdraw from their current medication. Most patients were administered the 100 mg eq dose, and all subgroups received a similar mean dose (114-119 mg eq) of PP1M. Recommendations for transitioning patients to PP1M from each subgroup are discussed.

Efficacy and safety of flexibly dosed paliperidone palmitate in Chinese patients with acute schizophrenia: an open-label, single-arm, prospective, interventional study

This open-label, single-arm, multicenter, 13-week, prospective study explored the efficacy, safety, and tolerability of paliperidone palmitate (150 milligram equivalents [mg eq] [day 1], 100 mg eq [day 8], both deltoid injections; 75-150 mg eq, deltoid/gluteal injection) in Chinese patients with acute schizophrenia (Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale [PANSS] total score ≥70), who previously had unsatisfactory therapeutic effect following oral antipsychotic treatment (without washout period). Primary efficacy endpoint was percentage of patients with ≥30% improvement in the PANSS total score at the end of 13 weeks. Secondary efficacy endpoints included change from baseline to end of week 13 in PANSS total score, PANSS subscale scores, Marder factor scores, Clinical Global Impressions-Severity score, and Personal and Social Performance Scale scores. Overall, 477/610 enrolled patients (full analysis set, 78.2%) completed the study (men: 55.1%; women: 44.9%; mean age: 31.5 years). Total, 443/610 (72.6%, full analysis set) patients achieved primary endpoint (mean [standard deviation] change from baseline: -30.9 [19.51]). All secondary endpoints demonstrated significant improvement at the end of 13 weeks. One death occurred during this acute phase. The most common (>5%) treatment-emergent adverse events were extrapyramidal disorders (8.4%). The efficacy and safety data are consistent with other short-term, placebo-controlled studies of paliperidone palmitate conducted in similar populations.

Correlation of contrast-enhanced ultrasound with two distinct types of blood vessels for the assessment of angiogenesis in lewis lung carcinoma

OBJECTIVE

The aim of our study was to evaluate tumor angiogenesis in Lewis lung carcinoma (LLC) of mice using a contrast-enhanced ultrasound (CEUS) examination, and to determine the correlation of contrast-enhanced ultrasonographic parameters with different blood vessel markers of microvessel density (MVD).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Subcutaneous Lewis lung carcinomas were established in 25 mice, which were evaluated by contrast-enhanced US using SonoVue (a second-generation US contrast agent). The results were recorded as digital video images and the time-intensity curves and hemodynamic parameters were analyzed. Pathological tumor specimens were obtained just after US examination. Tumor specimens were stained with hematoxylin and eosin (H & E) and expression of CD31 and CD34, the different endothelial cell markers, was determined by immunohistochemical straining. Then the relationship between the CEUS parameters and the level of MVD was analyzed.

RESULTS

Two distinct types of microvessels were identified in Lewis lung carcinoma: differentiated (CD34 +) and undifferentiated (CD31 +) vessels. A significant correlation was found between CEUS parameters and undifferentiated MVD (CD31 + vessels) in LLC (P < 0.05). There was a reverse correlation between the different MVDs.

CONCLUSION

The study showed that among the distinct types of vasculature (CD31 + and CD34 +) in Lewis lung carcinoma, the former correlated with the CEUS parameters. Therefore, CEUS using a second-generation US contrast agent may be useful for the evaluation of tumor angiogenesis of LLC of mice.

Differentiation of benign from malignant thyroid nodules with acoustic radiation force impulse technique

OBJECTIVE

The aim of our study was to assess the performance of acoustic radiation force impulse (ARFI) imaging to differentiate benign from malignant thyroid nodules.

METHODS

182 patients who needed thyroid surgery were examined. All patients and 50 healthy volunteers underwent ARFI sonoelastography, which quantitatively analysed the elasticity and hardness of the nodule's centre and periphery.

RESULTS

ARFI values showed a statistical significance between malignant nodules and benign nodules and common thyroid parenchyma, in both the centre and periphery of nodules (p < 0.01). There was no significant difference between benign nodules and common thyroid parenchyma in either the nodule's centre or periphery (p > 0.05). There was no significant difference between the nodule's centre and periphery of the elastic parameters in both the benign and malignant nodules. There was a statistically significant difference among the two areas (the central group and the peripheral group) under the receiver operating characteristic curve, and the optimal model was the peripheral group. For differentiation of malignant from benign nodules, the sensitivity and specificity were 96.3% and 96.2%, respectively, when 2.545 m s(-1) was chosen as a cut-off value in the peripheral group.

CONCLUSION

ARFI imaging may be helpful to differentiate benign nodules from malignant thyroid nodules. The selecting measurement position is important in ARFI imaging, and it has good diagnostic value in clinical applications.

ADVANCES IN KNOWLEDGE

This study shows the diagnostic contribution of ARFI imaging in thyroid lesions.