OP0034 IXEKIZUMAB IMPROVES SIGNS, SYMPTOMS, AND QUALITY OF LIFE IN PATIENTS WITH AXIAL SpA IRRESPECTIVE OF DISEASE DURATION: RESULTS FROM THE COAST-V, COAST-W AND COAST-X TRIALS

Background

Ixekizumab (IXE), a high-affinity monoclonal antibody selectively targeting interleukin-17A,1 has demonstrated superior efficacy to placebo (PBO) in the treatment of patients (pts) with radiographic axial spondyloarthritis (r-axSpA) (COAST-V [NCT02696785]; -W [NCT02696798]), and non-radiographic axial spondyloarthritis (nr-axSpA) (COAST-X [NCT02757352]).

Objectives

Assess treatment response to IXE categorised by disease duration since symptom onset (<5 years (yrs), ≥5yrs) in pts with r-axSpA and nr-axSpA up to 52 Weeks (Wks).

Methods

Pts fulfilled ASAS classification criteria for r-axSpA or nr-axSpA and were randomised to receive 80mg subcutaneous IXE every 2Wks or 4Wks, or PBO (16Wks COAST-V/W; 52Wks COAST-X). Data were summarized by disease duration and treatment in eligible intent-to-treat (ITT) pts. Wk16 treatment comparisons were conducted using Cochran-Haenszel-Mantel test and ANCOVA. Missing data were handled using non-responder imputation and modified baseline observation carried forward, for categorical and continuous endpoints, respectively.

Results

Table 1 presents pt demographics and baseline characteristics. Data is from pooled IXE pts. In pts with r-axSpA and <5yrs symptom duration, ASAS40 response was achieved by 51.5% at Wk16 and 60.6% at Wk52, compared to 36.9% at Wk16, significantly different to PBO (p<0.001), and 40.5% at Wk52, in pts with ≥5yrs symptom duration. In pts with nr-axSpA and <5yrs symptom duration, ASAS40 response was achieved by 42.5% at Wk16, significantly different to PBO (p=0.012), and 54.8% at Wk52, compared to 36.0% at Wk16 and 41.4% at Wk52 in pts with ≥5yrs symptom duration (Figure 1). In pts with r-axSpA and <5yrs symptom duration, ASDAS LDA <2.1 response was achieved by 39.4% at Wk16 and 48.5% at Wk52, compared to 27.5% at Wk16, significantly different to PBO (p<0.001), and 35.6% at Wk52 in pts with ≥5yrs symptom duration. In pts with nr-axSpA and <5yrs symptom duration, ASDAS LDA <2.1 response was achieved by 32.9% at Wk16, significantly different to PBO (p=0.003), and 49.3% at Wk52, compared to 23.9% at Wk16 and 36.9% at Wk52 in pts with ≥5yrs symptom duration. At Wk16, in pts with r-axSpA pts and <5yrs symptom duration, the Change from Baseline (CFB) in SF-36 Physical Component Summary (PCS) Score (LSM±SE) was 7.91 (±1.52), compared to 6.81 (±0.40) in pts with ≥5yrs symptom duration. In pts with nr-axSpA and <5yrs symptom duration, this score was 8.95 (±0.95) compared to 7.07 (±0.73) in pts with ≥5yrs symptom duration; both were significantly different to PBO (r-axSpA: p<0.001; nr-axSpA: p=0.037).

Table 1.

Patient demographics and Baseline Characteristics

Pts with r-axSpAPts with nr-axSpA<5yrs (Ns=33)≥5yrs (Ns=306)<5yrs (Ns=73)≥5yrs (Ns=111)Age (years)33.1 (8.15)45.1 (12.12)31.9 (10.07)46.4 (11.86)Male, n (%)26 (78.8)245 (80.1)40 (54.8)53 (47.7)Female, n (%)7 (21.2)61 (19.9)33 (45.2)58 (52.3)Age at axSpA onset (years)30.4 (8.29)27.0 (9.06)29.9 (10.22)29.5 (8.76)ASDAS score, mean (SD)3.87 (0.79)4.03 (0.82)3.79 (0.80)3.85 (0.78)BASDAI score, mean (SD)7.16 (1.64)7.25 (1.35)7.00 (1.33)7.30 (1.26)SF-36 PCS, mean (SD)34.02 (7.73)32.86 (7.63)32.84 (7.86)32.57 (6.97)

Abbreviations: IXE=ixekizumab, n=number of pts in specified category, Ns=number of pts in each subgroup, SD=standard deviation.

Figure 1.

ASAS40 Response Rates for patients with r-axSpA (COAST-V/W) and nr-axSpA (COAST-X) Symptom Duration <5 and ≥5 years up to Week 52, ITT, NRI: Significantly greater response of IXE versus PBO at Week 16 denotated by * (p≤0.05), *** (p≤0.001). Abbreviations: PBO, placebo; IXE, Ixekizumab; NRI, nonresponder imputation; ITT, Intent-to-Treat (population), ASAS, Assessment of Spondyloarthritis International Society.

Conclusion

Efficacy response to the therapy with IXE was observed in both subgroups based on disease duration (<5 and ≥5yrs) with more robust responses in the <5 years subgroup.

References

[1]Paller AS, Br J Dermatol. 2020;183(2):231-241.

Disclosure of Interests

Victoria Navarro-Compán Speakers bureau: AbbVie, Janssen, Eli Lilly and Company, Novartis, Pfizer and UCB, Paid instructor for: AbbVie, Janssen, Eli Lilly and Company, Novartis, Pfizer and UCB, Consultant of: AbbVie, Eli Lilly and Company, Novartis, Pfizer and UCB, Grant/research support from: ASAS: Research grant 2018 and 2021.

Novartis: Research grant 2021 (Payment to institution), John D Reveille Speakers bureau: Eli Lilly and Company and UCB Pharma, Consultant of: UCB Pharma, Grant/research support from: Eli Lilly and Company, Proton Rahman Speakers bureau: Abbott, AbbVie, Amgen, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Celgene, Eli Lilly, and Company Janssen, Novartis, and Pfizer., Paid instructor for: Advisory Board: Abbott, AbbVie, Amgen, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Celgene, Eli Lilly and Company, Janssen, Novartis, and Pfizer., Grant/research support from: Janssen and Novartis, José Maldonado-Cocco Speakers bureau: Pfizer, Merck Sharp Dohme, Wyeth, Sanofi Aventis, Novartis, Bristol Myers Squibb, Roche, Shering-Plough, Abbvie, UCB, Gilead., Consultant of: Pfizer, Merck Sharp Dohme, Wyeth, Sanofi Aventis, Novartis, Bristol Myers Squibb, Roche, Shering-Plough, Abbvie, UCB, Gilead., Grant/research support from: Pfizer, Merck Sharp Dohme, Wyeth, Sanofi Aventis, Novartis, Bristol Myers Squibb, Roche, Shering-Plough, Abbvie, UCB, Gilead., Marina Magrey Speakers bureau: Novartis, Abbvie, Eli Lilly and Company., Consultant of: Novartis, Eli Lilly and Comapny, Pfizer, Janssen, UCB Pharma, Abbvie, BMS., Rebecca Bolce Shareholder of: Eli Lilly and Company, Employee of: Eli Lilly and Company, David Sandoval Shareholder of: Eli Lilly and Company, Employee of: Eli Lilly and Company, So Young Park Shareholder of: Eli Lilly and Company, Employee of: Eli Lilly and Company, Andris Kronbergs Shareholder of: Eli Lilly and Company, Employee of: Eli Lilly and Company, Martin Rudwaleit Speakers bureau: Abbvie, BMS, Boehringer Ingelheim, Chugai, Eli Lilly and Company, Novartis, Pfizer, UCB., Paid instructor for: Abbvie, Eli Lilly, Novartis, UCB., Consultant of: UCB, Grant/research support from: Galapagos, UCB, Novartis.

Identification of clinical phenotypes of peripheral involvement in patients with spondyloarthritis, including psoriatic arthritis: a cluster analysis in the worldwide ASAS-PerSpA study

Objective

To identify clusters of peripheral involvement according to the specific location of peripheral manifestations (ie, arthritis, enthesitis and dactylitis) in patients with spondyloarthritis (SpA) including psoriatic arthritis (PsA), and to evaluate whether these clusters correspond with the clinical diagnosis of a rheumatologist.

Methods

Cross-sectional study with 24 participating countries. Consecutive patients diagnosed by their rheumatologist as PsA, axial SpA or peripheral SpA were enrolled. Four different cluster analyses were conducted: one using information on the specific location from all the peripheral manifestations, and a cluster analysis for each peripheral manifestation, separately. Multiple correspondence analyses and k-means clustering methods were used. Distribution of peripheral manifestations and clinical characteristics were compared across the different clusters.

Results

The different cluster analyses performed in the 4465 patients clearly distinguished a predominantly axial phenotype (cluster 1) and a predominantly peripheral phenotype (cluster 2). In the predominantly axial phenotype, hip involvement and lower limb large joint arthritis, heel enthesitis and lack of dactylitis were more prevalent. In the predominantly peripheral phenotype, different subgroups were distinguished based on the type and location of peripheral involvement: a predominantly involvement of upper versus lower limbs joints, a predominantly axial enthesitis versus peripheral enthesitis, and predominantly finger versus toe involvement in dactylitis. A poor agreement between the clusters and the rheumatologist‘s diagnosis as well as with the classification criteria was found.

Conclusion

These results suggest the presence of two main phenotypes (predominantly axial and predominantly peripheral) based on the presence and location of the peripheral manifestations.

Prevalence and distribution of peripheral musculoskeletal manifestations in spondyloarthritis including psoriatic arthritis: results of the worldwide, cross-sectional ASAS-PerSpA study

OBJECTIVES

To characterise peripheral musculoskeletal involvement in patients with spondyloarthritis (SpA) including psoriatic arthritis (PsA), across the world.

METHODS

Cross-sectional study with 24 participating countries. Patients with a diagnosis of axial SpA (axSpA), peripheral SpA (pSpA) or PsA according to their rheumatologist were included. The investigators were asked which diagnosis out of a list of six (axSpA, PsA, pSpA, inflammatory bowel disease-associated SpA, reactive arthritis or juvenile SpA (Juv-SpA)) fitted the patient best. Peripheral manifestations (ie, peripheral joint disease, enthesitis, dactylitis and root joint disease), their localisation and treatments were evaluated.

RESULTS

A total of 4465 patients were included (61% men, mean age 44.5 years) from four geographic areas: Latin America (n=538), Europe plus North America (n=1677), Asia (n=975) and the Middle East plus North Africa (n=1275). Of those, 78% had ever suffered from at least one peripheral musculoskeletal manifestation; 57% had peripheral joint disease, 44% had enthesitis and 15% had dactylitis. Latin American had far more often peripheral joint disease (80%) than patients from other areas. Patients with PsA had predominantly upper limb and small joint involvement (52%).Hip and shoulder involvement was found in 34% of patients. The prevalence of enthesitis ranged between 41% in patients with axSpA and 65% in patients with Juv-SpA. Dactylitis was most frequent among patients with PsA (37%).

CONCLUSION

These results suggest that all peripheral features can be found in all subtypes of SpA, and that differences are quantitative rather than qualitative. In a high proportion of patients, axial and peripheral manifestations coincided. These findings reconfirm SpA clinical subtypes are descendants of the same underlying disease, called SpA.

OP0047 IDENTIFICATION OF CLINICAL PHENOTYPES IN PATIENTS WITH AXIAL SPONDYLOARTHRITIS, PERIPHERAL SPONDYLOARTHRITIS AND PSORIATIC ARTHRITIS ACCORDING TO PERIPHERAL MUSCULOSKELETAL MANIFESTATIONS: A CLUSTER ANALYSIS IN THE INTERNATIONAL ASAS-PERSPA STUDY

Background:

Patients with a diagnosis of Spondyloarthritis (SpA) and Psoriatic Arthritis (PsA) may have predominant axial or peripheral symptoms, and the frequency and distribution of these symptoms may determine the clinical diagnosis by the rheumatologist (“clinical clusters”). Clustering analysis represents an unsupervised exploratory analysis which tries to identify homogeneous groups of cases (“statistical clusters”) without prior information about the membership for any of the cases.

Objectives:

To identify “statistical clusters” of peripheral involvement according to the specific location of these symptoms in the whole spectrum of SpA and PsA (without prior information about the diagnosis of the patients), and to evaluate whether these “statistical clusters” are in agreement with the “clinical clusters”.

Methods:

Cross-sectional and multicentre study with 24 participating countries. Consecutive patients considered by their treating rheumatologist as suffering from either PsA, axial SpA (axSpA) or peripheral SpA (pSpA) were enrolled. Four different cluster analyses were conducted: the first one using information about the specific location from all the peripheral musculoskeletal manifestations (i.e., peripheral arthritis, enthesitis and dactylitis), and thereafter a cluster analysis for each peripheral manifestation individually. Multiple correspondence analyses and k-means clustering methods were used. Distribution of peripheral manifestations and clinical characteristics were compared across the different clusters.

Results:

4465 patients were included in the analysis. Two clusters were found with regard to the location of all the peripheral manifestations (Fig. 1). Cluster 1 showed a low prevalence of peripheral manifestations in comparison with cluster 2; however, when peripheral involvement appeared in cluster 1, this was mostly represented by arthritis of hip, knee and ankle, as well as enthesitis of the heel. Patients from cluster 1 showed a higher prevalence of males (63% vs 44%), HLA-B27 positivity (69% vs 38%) and axial involvement (80% vs 52%), as well as more frequent diagnosis of axSpA (66% vs 21%) and more frequently fulfilling the ASAS axSpA criteria (69% vs. 41%). Patients from cluster 2 showed a higher prevalence of psoriasis (63% vs 25%), a more frequent diagnosis of PsA (61% vs 19%), and they fulfilled more frequently the peripheral ASAS (26% vs 11%) and the CASPAR criteria (57% vs 19%).

Figure 1.

Distribution of the peripheral involvement across clusters

Three clusters were found with regard to the location of the peripheral arthritis. Clusters 2 and 3 showed a high prevalence of peripheral joint disease, although this was located more predominantly in the lower limbs in cluster 2, and in the upper limbs in cluster 3. Cluster 1 showed a higher prevalence of males, HLA-B27 positivity, axial involvement, a lower presence of psoriasis, a more frequent diagnosis of axSpA and fulfilling the ASAS axSpA criteria in comparison with clusters 2 and 3, respectively. Clusters 2 and 3 showed a higher prevalence of enthesitis and dactylitis in comparison with cluster 1, a more frequent diagnosis of PsA and fulfillment of the CASPAR criteria.

Information about the location of enthesitis exhibited three groups: cluster 1 showed a very low prevalence of enthesitis, while cluster 2 and 3 showed a high prevalence of enthesitis, with a predominant involvement of axial enthesis in cluster 2 and peripheral enthesitis in cluster 3.

Finally, the analysis of dactylitis also exhibited three clusters that showed a very low prevalence of dactylitis, predominantly toes and predominantly fingers involvement, respectively.

Conclusion:

These results suggest the presence of heterogeneous patterns of peripheral involvement in SpA and PsA patients without clearly defined groups, confirming the clear overlap of these peripheral manifestations across the different underlying diagnoses.

Acknowledgements:

This study was conducted under the umbrella of ASAS with unrestricted grant of Abbvie, Pfizer, Lilly, Novartis, UCB, Janssen and Merck.

Disclosure of Interests:

None declared

Prevalence of Comorbidities and Risk Factors for Comorbidities in Patients with Spondyloarthritis in Latin America: A Comparative Study with the General Population and Data from the ASAS-COMOSPA Study

Objective.

Increased risk of comorbidities has been reported in spondyloarthritis (SpA). The objective of this study was to determine the prevalence and risk of developing comorbidities in patients with SpA in 3 Latin American (LA) countries, and to compare that prevalence with the general population.

Methods.

Data were analyzed from 390 patients with SpA enrolled in the Assessment of SpondyloArthritis international Society of Comorbidities in SpA study from Argentina, Colombia, and Mexico. Age- and sex-standardized prevalence (95% CI) was estimated for arterial hypertension (AHT), tuberculosis (TB), and malignancies. Age- and sex-specific data from the general population were obtained from the Cardiovascular Risk Factor Multiple Evaluation in Latin America (CARMELA) study for AHT, the Global TB report, and the GLOBOCAN project for malignancies. Data analyzed for AHT were confined to Colombia and Mexico. The prevalence in patients with SpA was compared with the prevalence in the general population per age- and sex-specific stratum, resulting in standardized risk ratios (SRR).

Results.

In total, 64% of the patients with SpA were male, with a mean age of 45 years (SD 14.7). The most common comorbidities in the 3 LA countries were AHT (25.3%, 95% CI 21.2–30.0), hypercholesterolemia (21.5%, 95% CI 17.6–26.0), and osteoporosis (9.4%, 95% CI 6.8–12.9). AHT prevalence in Colombia and Mexico was 21.4% (95% CI 15.4–28.9) and was higher than the general population (12.5%, 95% CI 11.4–13.7), resulting in an SRR of 1.5. TB prevalence in the 3 LA countries was 3.3% (95% CI 1.8–5.7), which was significantly higher than in the general population (0.32%), leading to an SRR of 10.3. The prevalence of malignancies was not increased.

Conclusion.

Patients with SpA in LA are at increased risk of AHT and TB in comparison to the general population. While this sample of patients may not be entirely representative of the patient population in each country, a systematic evaluation of these comorbidities in all patients with SpA still may help to monitor these conditions better.

Prevalence of comorbidities and evaluation of their screening in spondyloarthritis: results of the international cross-sectional ASAS-COMOSPA study

BACKGROUND

Increased risk of some comorbidities has been reported in spondyloarthritis (SpA). Recommendations for detection/management of some of these comorbidities have been proposed, and it is known that a gap exists between these and their implementation in practice.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate (1) the prevalence of comorbidities and risk factors in different countries worldwide, (2) the gap between available recommendations and daily practice for management of these comorbidities and (3) the prevalence of previously unknown risk factors detected as a result of the present initiative.

METHODS

Cross-sectional international study with 22 participating countries (from four continents), including 3984 patients with SpA according to the rheumatologist.

STATISTICAL ANALYSIS

The prevalence of comorbidities (cardiovascular, infection, cancer, osteoporosis and gastrointestinal) and risk factors; percentage of patients optimally monitored for comorbidities according to available recommendations and percentage of patients for whom a risk factor was detected due to this study.

RESULTS

The most frequent comorbidities were osteoporosis (13%) and gastroduodenal ulcer (11%). The most frequent risk factors were hypertension (34%), smoking (29%) and hypercholesterolaemia (27%). Substantial intercountry variability was observed for screening of comorbidities (eg, for LDL cholesterol measurement: from 8% (Taiwan) to 98% (Germany)). Systematic evaluation (eg, blood pressure (BP), cholesterol) during this study unveiled previously unknown risk factors (eg, elevated BP (14%)), emphasising the suboptimal monitoring of comorbidities.

CONCLUSIONS

A high prevalence of comorbidities in SpA has been shown. Rigorous application of systematic evaluation of comorbidities may permit earlier detection, which may ultimately result in an improved outcome of patients with SpA.

Lumiracoxib is effective in the treatment of osteoarthritis of the knee: a prospective randomized 13-week study versus placebo and celecoxib

The objective of this study was to evaluate the efficacy, safety and tolerability of lumiracoxib compared with placebo and celecoxib in patients with osteoarthritis (OA). Following a 3- to 7-day washout period for previous non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, 1,600 patients aged >or=18 years with primary knee OA were randomized to receive lumiracoxib 200 or 400 mg once daily (o.d.), celecoxib 200 mg o.d. or placebo for 13 weeks. Primary efficacy variables were OA pain intensity in the target knee, patient's global assessment of disease activity and the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) pain subscale and total scores at week 13. Secondary variables included OA pain intensity in the target knee and physician's and patient's global assessments of disease activity by visit. Exploratory analysis of responder rates using the Outcomes Measures in Rheumatology Clinical Trials-Osteoarthritis Research Society International (OMERACT-OARSI) criteria was performed. Safety and tolerability were assessed. Lumiracoxib was superior to placebo in all primary and secondary variables and was generally similar to celecoxib. There were no statistically significant differences between the two doses of lumiracoxib. All active treatments were significantly more effective than placebo at weeks 2 and 13 in terms of response to treatment assessed using OMERACT-OARSI criteria. The incidence of adverse events was similar across the groups. Lumiracoxib 200 mg o.d. is a well-tolerated and effective treatment option for OA of the knee, providing pain relief and improved functional status with efficacy superior to placebo and similar to celecoxib. Lumiracoxib demonstrated a tolerability profile similar to placebo and celecoxib.

Comparison of the effect of rofecoxib (a cyclooxygenase 2 inhibitor), ibuprofen, and placebo on the gastroduodenal mucosa of patients with osteoarthritis: a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial. The Rofecoxib Osteoarthritis Endoscopy Multinational Study Group

OBJECTIVE

This randomized, double-blind study tested the hypothesis that rofecoxib, a drug that specifically inhibits cyclooxygenase 2, would cause fewer gastroduodenal ulcers than ibuprofen (in a multicenter trial), and its side effects would be equivalent to those of placebo (in a prespecified analysis combining the results with another trial of identical design).

METHODS

Seven hundred seventy-five patients with osteoarthritis were randomized to receive rofecoxib at a dosage of 25 mg or 50 mg once daily, ibuprofen 800 mg 3 times daily, or placebo. Gastroduodenal ulceration was assessed by endoscopy at 6, 12, and (for active treatment) 24 weeks. The primary and secondary end points were the incidence of gastroduodenal ulcers at 12 and 24 weeks, respectively.

RESULTS

Ulcers were significantly less common (P < 0.001) following treatment with rofecoxib (25 mg or 50 mg) than with ibuprofen after 12 weeks (5.3% and 8.8% versus 29.2%, respectively) or 24 weeks (9.9% and 12.4% versus 46.8%, respectively). In the combined analysis, the 12-week ulcer incidence with 25 mg rofecoxib (4.7%) and with placebo (7.3%) satisfied prespecified criteria for equivalence.

CONCLUSION

At 2-4 times the therapeutically effective dose, rofecoxib caused fewer endoscopically detected ulcers than did ibuprofen. Rofecoxib at a dose of 25 mg (the highest dose recommended for osteoarthritis) satisfied prespecified criteria for equivalence to placebo.

Comparison of the effect of rofecoxib (a cyclooxygenase 2 inhibitor), ibuprofen, and placebo on the gastroduodenal mucosa of patients with osteoarthritis: a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial. The Rofecoxib Osteoarthritis Endoscopy Multinational Study Group

OBJECTIVE

This randomized, double-blind study tested the hypothesis that rofecoxib, a drug that specifically inhibits cyclooxygenase 2, would cause fewer gastroduodenal ulcers than ibuprofen (in a multicenter trial), and its side effects would be equivalent to those of placebo (in a prespecified analysis combining the results with another trial of identical design).

METHODS

Seven hundred seventy-five patients with osteoarthritis were randomized to receive rofecoxib at a dosage of 25 mg or 50 mg once daily, ibuprofen 800 mg 3 times daily, or placebo. Gastroduodenal ulceration was assessed by endoscopy at 6, 12, and (for active treatment) 24 weeks. The primary and secondary end points were the incidence of gastroduodenal ulcers at 12 and 24 weeks, respectively.

RESULTS

Ulcers were significantly less common (P < 0.001) following treatment with rofecoxib (25 mg or 50 mg) than with ibuprofen after 12 weeks (5.3% and 8.8% versus 29.2%, respectively) or 24 weeks (9.9% and 12.4% versus 46.8%, respectively). In the combined analysis, the 12-week ulcer incidence with 25 mg rofecoxib (4.7%) and with placebo (7.3%) satisfied prespecified criteria for equivalence.

CONCLUSION

At 2-4 times the therapeutically effective dose, rofecoxib caused fewer endoscopically detected ulcers than did ibuprofen. Rofecoxib at a dose of 25 mg (the highest dose recommended for osteoarthritis) satisfied prespecified criteria for equivalence to placebo.