One-Third of European Patients with Axial Spondyloarthritis Reach Pain Remission With Routine Care Tumor Necrosis Factor Inhibitor Treatment

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the distribution of patient-reported outcomes (PROs) in patients with axial spondyloarthritis (axSpA) initiating a tumor necrosis factor inhibitor (TNFi), to assess the proportion reaching PRO "remission" across registries and treatment series, and to compare patients registered to fulfill the modified New York (mNY) criteria for ankylosing spondylitis (AS) vs patients with nonradiographic axSpA (nr-axSpA).

METHODS

Fifteen European registries contributed PRO scores for pain, fatigue, patient global assessment (PtGA), Bath Ankylosing Spondylitis (AS) Disease Activity Index (BASDAI), Bath AS Functional Index (BASFI), and Health Assessment Questionnaire (HAQ) from 19,498 patients with axSpA. Changes in PROs and PRO remission rates (definitions: ≤ 20 mm for pain, fatigue, PtGA, BASDAI, and BASFI; ≤ 0.5 for HAQ) were calculated at 6, 12, and 24 months of treatment.

RESULTS

Heterogeneity in baseline characteristics and outcomes between registries were observed. In pooled data, 6 months after the start of a first TNFi, pain score was reduced by approximately 60% (median at baseline/ 6/12/24 months: 65/25/20/20 mm) in patients on treatment. Similar patterns were observed for fatigue (68/32/30/25 mm), PtGA (66/29/21/20 mm), BASDAI (58/26/21/19 mm), BASFI (46/20/16/16 mm), and HAQ (0.8/0.4/0.2/0.2). Patients with AS (n = 3281) had a slightly better response than patients with nr-axSpA (n = 993). The Lund Efficacy Index (LUNDEX)-adjusted remission rates at 6 months for pain/fatigue/PtGA/BASDAI/BASFI/HAQ were 39%/30%/38%/34%/35%/48% for the AS cohort and 30%/21%/26%/24%/33%/47% for the nr-axSpA cohort. Better PRO responses were seen with a first TNFi compared to a second and third TNFi.

CONCLUSION

Patients with axSpA starting a TNFi achieved high PRO remission rates, most pronounced in those fulfilling the mNY criteria and for the first TNFi.

The impact of a csDMARD in combination with a TNF inhibitor on drug retention and clinical remission in axial spondyloarthritis

OBJECTIVES

Many axial spondylarthritis (axSpA) patients receive a conventional synthetic DMARD (csDMARD) in combination with a TNF inhibitor (TNFi). However, the value of this co-therapy remains unclear. The objectives were to describe the characteristics of axSpA patients initiating a first TNFi as monotherapy compared with co-therapy with csDMARD, to compare one-year TNFi retention and remission rates, and to explore the impact of peripheral arthritis.

METHODS

Data was collected from 13 European registries. One-year outcomes included TNFi retention and hazard ratios (HR) for discontinuation with 95% CIs. Logistic regression was performed with adjusted odds ratios (OR) of achieving remission (Ankylosing Spondylitis Disease Activity Score (ASDAS)-CRP < 1.3 and/or BASDAI < 2) and stratified by treatment. Inter-registry heterogeneity was assessed using random-effect meta-analyses, combined results were presented when heterogeneity was not significant. Peripheral arthritis was defined as ≥1 swollen joint at baseline (=TNFi start).

RESULTS

Amongst 24 171 axSpA patients, 32% received csDMARD co-therapy (range across countries: 13.5% to 71.2%). The co-therapy group had more baseline peripheral arthritis and higher CRP than the monotherapy group. One-year TNFi-retention rates (95% CI): 79% (78, 79%) for TNFi monotherapy vs 82% (81, 83%) with co-therapy (P < 0.001). Remission was obtained in 20% on monotherapy and 22% on co-therapy (P < 0.001); adjusted OR of 1.16 (1.07, 1.25). Remission rates at 12 months were similar in patients with/without peripheral arthritis.

CONCLUSION

This large European study of axial SpA patients showed similar one-year treatment outcomes for TNFi monotherapy and csDMARD co-therapy, although considerable heterogeneity across countries limited the identification of certain subgroups (e.g. peripheral arthritis) that may benefit from co-therapy.

OP0020 SEX DIFFERENCES IN EFFECTIVENESS OF FIRST-LINE TUMOR NECROSIS FACTOR INHIBITORS IN AXIAL SPONDYLOARTHRITIS; RESULTS FROM FIFTEEN COUNTRIES IN THE EuroSpA RESEARCH COLLABORATION NETWORK

Background

Evidence reveals sex differences in physiology, disease presentation and response to treatment in axial spondyloarthritis (axSpA). Pooled data from four randomized controlled trials demonstrated reduced treatment efficacy of a tumor necrosis factor inhibitor (TNFi) in females compared to males with ankylosing spondylitis1. However, real-life evidence confirming these data in large cohorts is scarce. We sought to validate prior studies using data from a large multinational cohort based on real-life clinical practice.

Objectives

To investigate sex differences in treatment response and drug retention rates in clinical practice among patients with axSpA, treated with their first TNFi.

Methods

Data from biologic-naïve axSpA patients initiating a TNFi in the EuroSpA registries were pooled. In the primary analysis, propensity-score weighting was applied to assess the causal effect of sex on clinically important improvement (CII) according to ASDAS-CRP at 6 months. A generalized linear regression model was used to estimate the causal risk difference (RD) and relative risk (RR) of sex on CII. Possible covariates influencing the outcome were determined a priori and selected based on availability in the database (<20% missing). The final covariates included in the model were country, age and TNFi start year. In the secondary analysis, drug retention was assessed over 24 months of follow-up by Kaplan-Meier curves and log-rank test.

Results

In total, 6,451 axSpA patients with available data on ASDAS-CRP at baseline and 6 months were assessed for treatment response. Baseline characteristics are shown in the Table 1. In the adjusted analysis, the probability for females to have CII was 15% (RR, 0.85; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.82 to 0.89) lower compared to males and the difference in probability for having CII was 9.4 percentage points (RD, 0.094; 95% CI, 0.069 to 0.12). The survival analysis included 28,608 axSpA patients with available data on retention rates. The TNFi 6/12/24-month retention rates were significantly lower in females (81%/69%/58%) compared to males (89%/81%/72%), see Figure 1.

Table 1.FemaleMaleMean (SD), Median [IQR] or percentagesMean (SD), Median [IQR] or percentagesAge (years)42.0 (12.1)41.4 (12.3)Fulfilment of mNYC66%80%Disease duration (years)2.0 [1.0, 7.0]3.0 [1.0, 9.0]TNFi start year Start 1999-20097.2%9.8% Start 2010-201326%27% Start 2014-201637%36% Start 2017-202030%27%BASDAI, mm59 (20)54 (21)BASFI, mm48 (25)46 (24)ASDAS, units3.5 (0.9)3.5 (1.0)CRP (mg/L)6.7 [2.5, 16.0]11.9 [4.0, 25.0]SJC (0-28)0 [0, 0]0 [0, 0]TJC (0-28)0 [0, 2]0 [0, 1]VAS pain, mm63 (22)59 (24)VAS fatigue, mm65 (25)59 (26)

mNYC, modified New York criteria; TNFi, tumor necrosis factor inhibitor; BASDAI, Bath Ankylosing Spondylitis Disease Activity Indexf; BASFI, Bath Ankylosing Spondylitis Functional Index; ASDAS, Ankylosing Spondylitis Disease Activity Score; CRP, C-reactive protein; SJC, swollen joint count; TJC, tender joint count; VAS, visual analogue scale.

Conclusion

Treatment efficacy and retention rates are lower among female patients with axSpA initiating their first TNFi. Females presented with lower C-reactive protein levels and higher scores on patient reported outcomes at baseline, reflecting differences in disease expression. Recognizing these sex differences is of relevance for customized patient care and may improve patient education.

References

[1]van der Horst-Bruinsma et al. Ann Rheum Dis. 2013 Jul;72(7):1221-4.

Acknowledgements

Novartis Pharma AG and IQVIA for supporting the EuroSpA collaboration.

Disclosure of Interests

Pasoon Hellamand Grant/research support from: Novartis, Marleen G.H. van de Sande Speakers bureau: UCB, Consultant of: Abbvie, Eli Lily, Novartis and UCB, Grant/research support from: Novartis, Janssen, UCB and Eli Lilly, Lykke Midtbøll Ørnbjerg Grant/research support from: Novartis, Thomas Klausch: None declared, Michael Nurmohamed Speakers bureau: Abbvie, Janssen and Celgene, Consultant of: Abbvie, Grant/research support from: Abbvie, Amgen, Pfizer, Galapagos, BMS, Ronald van Vollenhoven Consultant of: AbbVie, AstraZeneca, Biogen, BMS, Galapagos, Janssen, Miltenyi, Pfizer, UCB and speaker fees from Abbvie, Galapagos, GSK, Janssen, Pfizer, R-Pharma and UCB, Grant/research support from: BMS, GSK and UCB, Dan Nordström Consultant of: Abbvie, BMS, Lilly, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche and UCB, Anna-Mari Hokkanen Grant/research support from: MSD, Maria Jose Santos Speakers bureau: Abbvie, AstraZeneca, Lilly, Novartis and Pfizer, Elsa Vieira-Sousa Speakers bureau: MSD, Celgene, Novartis, Janssen, Abbvie and Pfizer, Consultant of: MSD, Celgene, Novartis, Janssen, Abbvie and Pfizer, Grant/research support from: MSD, Celgene, Novartis, Janssen, Abbvie and Pfizer, Anne Gitte Loft Consultant of: AbbVie, Janssen, Lilly, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche and UCB, Grant/research support from: Novartis, Bente Glintborg Grant/research support from: Pfizer, Abbvie and BMS, Mikkel Østergaard Speakers bureau: Abbvie, BMS, Boehringer-Ingelheim, Celgene, Eli-Lilly, Hospira, Janssen, Merck, Novartis, Novo, Orion, Pfizer, Regeneron, Roche, Sandoz, Sanofi and UCB, Consultant of: Abbvie, BMS, Boehringer-Ingelheim, Celgene, Eli-Lilly, Hospira, Janssen, Merck, Novartis, Novo, Orion, Pfizer, Regeneron, Roche, Sandoz, Sanofi and UCB, Grant/research support from: Abbvie, BMS, Merck, Celgene and Novartis, Ulf Lindström: None declared, Johan K Wallman Consultant of: AbbVie, Amgen, Celgene, Eli Lilly and Novartis, Brigitte Michelsen Grant/research support from: Novartis, Adrian Ciurea Speakers bureau: AbbVie and Novartis, Michael J. Nissen Speakers bureau: AbbVie, Eli Lilly, Janssens, Novartis and Pfizer, Consultant of: AbbVie, Eli Lilly, Janssens, Novartis and Pfizer, Catalin Codreanu Speakers bureau: AbbVie, Amgen, Boehringer Ingelheim, Ewopharma, Lilly, Novartis and Pfizer, Consultant of: AbbVie, Amgen, Boehringer Ingelheim, Ewopharma, Lilly, Novartis and Pfizer, Corina Mogosan Speakers bureau: AbbVie, Ewopharma, Lilly, Novartis and Pfizer, Consultant of: AbbVie, Ewopharma, Lilly, Novartis and Pfizer, Gary Macfarlane Grant/research support from: GSK, Gareth T. Jones Grant/research support from: AbbVie, Pfizer, UCB, Amgen and GSK, Karin Laas Speakers bureau: Amgen, Janssen, Novartis and Abbvie, Ziga Rotar Speakers bureau: Abbvie, Novartis, MSD, Medis, Biogen, Eli Lilly, Pfizer, Sanofi, Lek and Janssen, Consultant of: Abbvie, Novartis, MSD, Medis, Biogen, Eli Lilly, Pfizer, Sanofi, Lek and Janssen, Matija Tomsic Speakers bureau: Abbvie, Amgen, Biogen, Eli Lilly, Janssen, Medis, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, Sanofi and Sandoz-Lek, Consultant of: Abbvie, Amgen, Biogen, Eli Lilly, Janssen, Medis, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, Sanofi and Sandoz-Lek, Isabel Castrejon Speakers bureau: Eli Lilly, BMS, Janssen, MSD and Abbvie, Consultant of: Eli Lilly, BMS, Janssen, MSD and Abbvie, Manuel Pombo-Suarez Consultant of: Abbvie, MSD and Roche, Björn Gudbjornsson Speakers bureau: Amgen and Novartis, Consultant of: Amgen and Novartis, Arni Jon Geirsson: None declared, Eirik kristianslund: None declared, Jiří Vencovský Speakers bureau: Abbvie, Argenx, Boehringer-Ingelheim, Eli-Lilly, Gilead, MSD, Novartis, Octapharma, Pfizer, Roche, Sanofi and UCB, Consultant of: Abbvie, Argenx, Boehringer-Ingelheim, Eli-Lilly, Gilead, MSD, Novartis, Octapharma, Pfizer, Roche, Sanofi and UCB, Lucie Nekvindova: None declared, Semih Gulle: None declared, Berrin Zengin: None declared, Merete Lund Hetland Grant/research support from: Abbvie, Biogen, BMS, Celltrion, Eli Lilly, Janssen Biologics B.V, Lundbeck Fonden, MSD, Medac, Pfizer, Roche, Samsung Biopies, Sandoz and Novartis, Irene van der Horst-Bruinsma Speakers bureau: BMS, AbbVie, Pfizer and MSD, Consultant of: Abbvie, UCB, MSD, Novartis and Lilly, Grant/research support from: MSD, Pfizer, AbbVie and UCB.

POS0567 SELF-PERCEIVED GENERAL HEALTH AT START OF ANTI-TNF THERAPY PREDICTS THERAPEUTIC RESPONSE IN PATIENTS WITH RHEUMATOID ARTHRITIS: ANALYSIS FROM THE CZECH BIOLOGICS REGISTRY ATTRA

Background

SF-36 and its components, as well as other PROs have been shown to predict various disease outcomes. We hypothesized that positive responses to questions (Q) 11A “I seem to get sick a little easier than other people“, and 11C “I expect my health to get worse“ from the general health (GH) domain of the SF-36 v1 questionnaire may correspond to a more fragile self-perceived GH status, and thus serve as possible predictors of future disease outcomes in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA).

Objectives

We aimed to investigate whether these 2 questions could predict therapeutic response in patients with RA starting their first anti-TNF therapy.

Methods

We have used two separate datasets from the Czech biologics registry ATTRA to validate our hypothesis. Dataset D1 included RA patients with at least 1 year follow-up and all relevant data available starting their first-line anti-TNF treatment within period 01/01/2012-31/12/2017 (N=1808), and dataset D2 pts starting in in 01/01/2018–01/01/2020 (N=734). Our primary outcome was DAS28-ESR remission (REM) at 12 months. REM was defined as DAS28<2.6. Patients were grouped according their response (definitely/mostly yes vs. definitely/mostly no) to Q11A and Q11C at baseline. REM rates after 12 months of 1st-line anti-TNF treatment were compared across patients‘ groups with Pearson chi-squared test. Firstly, odds ratios (ORs) using logistic regression (univariate, and then adjusted to baseline DAS28 and HAQ) were calculated to predict REM at 12M. Secondly, ORs were calculated after matching pts with positive or negative responses by a propensity score (PS) using sex, age, disease duration, baseline DAS28, calendar year and co-medication to balance baseline differences.

Results

At baseline, 79% and 80% pts were female, mean (SD) age was 52(12) and 54(13) years, DAS28 6.3 (0.9) and 6.2 (1.1), HAQ 1.5(0.6) and 1.5(0.6), 74% and 68% were RF+, 70% and 69% ACPA+ in D1 and D2 resp. In D1 34% and 31% pts, and in D2 32% and 30% responded positively to Q11A and 11C resp. Patients with positive responses to Q11A and 11C tended to have slightly (but statistically significantly) higher DAS28, HAQ, CRP or ESR, and patient- and physician global activity assessment at baseline. At 12 months, 40% (49%), 31% (37%), and 30% (40%) patients with positive, negative and neutral response to Q 11A reached REM; p<0.001 (p=0.018) in D1 (D2) resp. At 12 months, 42% (51%), 31% (37%), and 30% (40%) patients with positive, negative and neutral response to Q 11C reached REM; p<0.001 (p=0.04) in D1 (D2) resp. Crude and adjusted ORs for reaching REM according to responses to Q11A and Q11C are shown in the Table 1.

Conclusion

We provide a robust evidence that self-perceived general health at start of anti-TNF therapy predicts reaching remission at 12 months in pts with RA.

DatasetD1 (N=1808)D2 (N=734)Baseline parameterOR (95% CI)pOR (95% CI)pAnalysis 1: Patients‘ responses and occurrence of DAS28 remission after 12 months - Univariate logistic regression models (Remission (DAS28-ESR < 2.6) after 12 months (1 – yes vs. 0 – no)Q11A: yes vs. no1.62 (1.27; 2.05)< 0.0011.74 (1.20; 2.52)0.004Q11C: yes vs. no1.48 (1.15; 1.91)0.0031.66 (1.13; 2.45)0.010Analysis 2: Patients‘ responses and occurrence of remission after 12 months - Adjusted ORs using logistic regressionQ11A: yes vs. no1.86 (1.24; 2.79)0.0032.04 (1.37; 3.03)< 0.001HAQ0.48 (0.35; 0.64)< 0.0010.45 (0.33; 0.62)< 0.001DAS28-ESR0.74 (0.61; 0.88)< 0.0010.89 (0.76; 1.05)0.165Q11C: yes vs. no1.65 (1.28; 2.13)< 0.0011.91 (1.26; 2.88)0.002HAQ0.59 (0.49; 0.71)< 0.0010.46 (0.34; 0.62)< 0.001DAS28-ESR0.73 (0.64; 0.83)< 0.0010.91 (0.77; 1.06)0.232Analysis 3: Patients‘ responses and occurrence of remission after 12 months - Univariate logistic regression models after PS matchingQ11A: yes vs. no1.45 (1.12; 1.87)0.0041.70 (1.12; 2.59)0.013Q11C: yes vs. no1.33 (1.00; 1.77)0.0501.51 (0.97; 2.34)0.066

yes vs. no = definitely yes / mostly yes vs. definitely no / mostly no

Acknowledgements

This work was supported by the project (Ministry of Health, Czech Republic) for consensual development of research organization 023728

Disclosure of Interests

Jakub Zavada Speakers bureau: Abbvie, Elli-Lilly, Sandoz, Novartis, Egis, UCB, Lucie Nekvindova: None declared.

Delayed treatment with a tumor necrosis factor alpha blocker associated with worse outcomes in patients with spondyloarthritis: data from the Czech National Registry ATTRA

Introduction:

The administration of biologic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs, including tumor necrosis factor (TNF)-α inhibitors, is observed to interfere with the disease activity and progression. In this study, we aimed to assess the effectiveness and response predictors of adalimumab (ADA), a TNF-α blocker, in patients with axial spondyloarthritis (AxSpA).

Methods:

This study was a historical prospective, registry-based observational study on patients with AxSpA treated with first-line ADA after conventional drug failure. For evaluation and comparison, patients were divided into three groups according to the number of years from AxSpA diagnosis to initiation of ADA treatment: (A) <5 years, (B) 5–10 years, and (C) >10 years. The assessment instruments ankylosing spondylitis disease activity score (ASDAS), Bath ankylosing spondylitis activity index (BASDAI), Bath ankylosing spondylitis functional index (BASFI), health assessment questionnaire (HAQ), Short Form 36 questionnaire (SF-36), and EuroQoL 5 dimension questionnaire (EQ-5D) were regularly administered for up to 24 months of follow-up.

Results:

This study included 1043 patients with AxSpA (9.2% with non-radiographic AxSpA, 68.9% men). By month 6, a significantly higher proportion of patients with ASDAS remission (<1.3) was achieved upon earlier intervention in group A (30.1%) and B (32.9%) than in the late intervention group C (22.6%) (p ⩽ 0.05). At month 6, lower age and better BASFI at treatment initiation were identified as the strongest predictors of ASDAS remission in both univariable [odds ratio (OR): 0.956, p ⩽ 0.001; OR: 0.834, p ⩽ 0.001, respectively] and multivariable analyses (OR: 0.963, p ⩽ 0.001; OR: 0.859, p ⩽ 0.001, respectively). Earlier intervention also led to improvement in most patient-reported outcomes (PROs) based on HAQ, SF-36, and EQ-5D.

Conclusion:

Results from the ATTRA registry concur with previous clinical trials that supported efficacy of TNF-α blockers and showed better treatment outcomes with early interventions, including reduction of disease activity and improvement in PROs. We identified age and BASFI as the main factors influencing treatment effectiveness.

Effectiveness and treatment retention of TNF inhibitors when used as monotherapy versus comedication with csDMARDs in 15 332 patients with psoriatic arthritis. Data from the EuroSpA collaboration

Background

Comedication with conventional synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (csDMARDs) during treatment with tumour necrosis factor inhibitors (TNFi) is extensively used in psoriatic arthritis (PsA), although the additive benefit remains unclear. We aimed to compare treatment outcomes in patients with PsA treated with TNFi and csDMARD comedication versus TNFi monotherapy.

Methods

Patients with PsA from 13 European countries who initiated a first TNFi in 2006–2017 were included. Country-specific comparisons of 1 year TNFi retention were performed by csDMARD comedication status, together with HRs for TNFi discontinuation (comedication vs monotherapy), adjusted for age, sex, calendar year, disease duration and Disease Activity Score with 28 joints (DAS28). Adjusted ORs of clinical remission (based on DAS28) at 12 months were calculated. Between-country heterogeneity was assessed using random-effect meta-analyses, combined results were presented when heterogeneity was not significant. Secondary analyses stratified according to TNFi subtype (adalimumab/infliximab/etanercept) and restricted to methotrexate as comedication were performed.

Results

In total, 15 332 patients were included (62% comedication, 38% monotherapy). TNFi retention varied across countries, with significant heterogeneity precluding a combined estimate. Comedication was associated with better remission rates, pooled OR 1.25 (1.12–1.41). Methotrexate comedication was associated with improved remission for adalimumab (OR 1.45 (1.23–1.72)) and infliximab (OR 1.55 (1.21–1.98)) and improved retention for infliximab. No effect of comedication was demonstrated for etanercept.

Conclusion

This large observational study suggests that, as used in clinical practice, csDMARD and TNFi comedication are associated with improved remission rates, and specifically, comedication with methotrexate increases remission rates for both adalimumab and infliximab.

POS0596 THE THERAPEUTIC TARGET IS REACHED MORE OFTEN IN RA PATIENTS STARTING TNF INHIBITORS WITH MODERATE ACTIVITY THAN WITH HIGH DISEASE ACTIVITY – AN ANALYSIS FROM THE ATTRA REGISTRY

Background:

Treat to target guidelines recommend achieving remission or low disease activity in rheumatoid arthritis (RA). In the Czech Republic, anti-TNF therapy has been reimbursed only for patients with highly active RA until 2019, when pts with LDA have been also included in the reimbursement policy.

Objectives:

The aim of the study was to compare the results of treatment in patients with rheumatoid arthritis and moderate disease activity (MDA) or high disease activity (HDA) starting the therapy with the first anti-TNF drug in routine clinical practice.

Methods:

This was a retrospective cohort study of patients treated with the first anti-TNF drug in the Czech Republic. Propensity score was used to match pts starting anti-TNF in MDA or HDA for other important predictive factors. The propensity score was obtained by logistic regression with 10 covariates (gender, age, disease duration, seropositivity, comedication with MTX, comedication with other csDMARDs, number of previosu csDMARDs, anti-TNF drug),.Within the paired groups, one-dimensional logistic models were then calculated to estimate the odds of remission / low activity after 6 and 12 months of treatment.

Results:

A total of 2416 patients were analyzed in the study. 2231 patients had high activity (DAS 28> 5.1) and 185 patients had moderate activity (3.2 <DAS28 ≤ 5.1) at baseline. After 12 months, the low activity state (DAS28 < 3.2) was achieved by patients with MDA in 74.0% and patients with HDA in 52.2%, (p <0.001) (FIG 1). The differences btw groups were significant in all evaluated intervals of 0, 3, 6, 12 months. Furthermore, a comparison of patients with MDA and HAD by propensity score matching, who no longer differ in the baseline characteristics (except for disease activity and quality of life) was performed. Patients with MDA were 2.4x more likely to achieve remission or low activity according to DAS28-ESR after 6 months and 1.7x more likely to achieve remission or low activity after 12 months of treatment compared to patients with HDA at the beginning of treatment.

Conclusion:

This analysis of the results of treatment with anti-TNF drugs in the ATTRA Registry has shown that starting anti-TNF therapy in patients with RA and MDA leads more often to the target of remission or low activity, than in pts with HDA.

Acknowledgement:

Supported by the project of the Ministry of Health Care of the Czech Republic of the conceptual development of the research organization 00023728 Institute of Rheumatology

Disclosure of Interests:

Karel Pavelka Speakers bureau: Abbvie, Pfizer, Elli-Lilly, BMS, UCB, Sanofi, Novartis, Gilead, Paid instructor for: Abbvie, Consultant of: Abbvie, Pfizer, Elli-Lilly, BMS, UCB, Sanofi, Novartis, Gilead, Lucie Nekvindova: None declared, Jakub Zavada Speakers bureau: Abbvie, Elli-Lilly, UCB, Sanofi, Consultant of: Abbvie, UCB, Sanofi, Gilead

SAT0430 SECUKINUMAB EFFECTIVENESS IN 1543 PATIENTS WITH PSORIATIC ARTHRITIS TREATED IN ROUTINE CLINICAL PRACTICE IN 13 EUROPEAN COUNTRIES IN THE EuroSpA RESEARCH COLLABORATION NETWORK

Background:

There is a lack of real-life evidence on secukinumab effectiveness in psoriatic arthritis (PsA) patients.

Objectives:

To assess the real-life 6- and 12-month secukinumab retention rates and proportions of patients in remission/low disease activity (LDA) overall, and by prior biologic disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drug (bDMARD)/targeted synthetic (ts)DMARD use.

Methods:

Data from PsA patients treated with secukinumab in routine care from 13 countries in the European Spondyloarthritis (EuroSpA) Research Collaboration Network were pooled. Patients started secukinumab ≥12 months before date of datacut. Crude and LUNDEX adjusted (crude value adjusted for drug retention) 28-joint Disease Activity index for PSoriatic Arthritis (DAPSA28) and 28-joint Disease Activity Score with CRP (DAS28CRP) remission and LDA rates were calculated. Group comparisons between b/tsDMARD naïve, 1 prior and ≥2 prior b/tsDMARD users were done with ANOVA, Kruskal-Wallis, Chi-square or Kaplan-Meier analyses with log-rank test, as appropriate.

Results:

A total of 1543 PsA patients were included (Table 1). b/tsDMARD naïve patients had shorter time since diagnosis, higher baseline disease activity, a higher proportion were men and a higher proportion achieved remission. Overall 6/12-month secukinumab retention rates were 86%/74% and significantly higher in b/tsDMARD naïve patients at 12, but not 6 months (Table 2, Figure). Overall, crude 6- and 12-month DAPSA28≤4/DAS28CRP<2.6 were achieved by 13%/34% and 11%/39% of the patients, respectively.

Table 1.All patients (n=1543)b/tsDMARD naïve (n=287)1 prior b/tsDMARD (n=333)≥2 prior b/tsDMARDs (n=923)p *Age (years), mean (SD)52 (11)49 (12.3)51 (11)53 (11)<0.001Male, %42%49%46%39%0.003Years since diagnosis, mean (SD)9 (8)7 (8)8 (7)10 (8)<0.001Current smokers, %19%21%22%18%0.23CRP (mg/L), median (IQR)5 (2-12)7 (2-19)4 (2-8)5 (2-11)<0.001DAPSA28, median (IQR)26 (18-37)28 (19-38)22 (13-32)27 (19-38)<0.001DAS28CRP, median (IQR)4.2 (3.3-5.0)4.4 (3.5-5.2)3.8 (2.6-4.5)4.2 (3.4-5.0)<0.001

*Comparisons across number of prior b/tsDMARD were done with ANOVA, Kruskal-Wallis or Chi-square test, as appropriate

Table 2.MonthsAll patients (n=1543)b/tsDMARD naïve (n=287)1 prior b/tsDMARD (n=333)≥2 prior b/tsDMARDs (n=923)p *Secukinumab retention rate, % (95%CI)686% (84-87%)89% (86-93%)85% (81-89%)85% (82-87%)0.111274% (72-76%)81% (76-86%)76% (71-80%)72% (69-75%)0.006DAPSA28≤4 Crude613%25%11%11%<0.001 LUNDEX11%22%9%9%<0.001 Crude1211%22%11%8%<0.001 LUNDEX7%17%7%5%0.001DAS28CRP<2.6 Crude634%51%33%30%<0.001 LUNDEX29%45%27%24%<0.001 Crude1239%55%41%34%<0.001 LUNDEX26%41%27%21%<0.001DAPSA28 >4 and ≤14 Crude633%42%32%30%0.04 LUNDEX27%37%27%25%0.02 Crude1235%48%36%32%0.009 LUNDEX24%36%24%20%0.004DAS28CRP ≤3.2 Crude652%69%53%47%<0.001 LUNDEX43%61%45%38%<0.001 Crude1255%72%55%50%<0.001 LUNDEX37%54%37%32%<0.001

*Comparisons across number of prior b/tsDMARDs were done with Kaplan-Meier with log-rank test or Chi-Square test, as appropriate

Conclusion:

In this real-life study of 1543 patients with PsA in 13 European countries 12-month secukinumab retention was high, and significantly higher for b/tsDMARD naïve patients. Overall, a higher proportion of bionaïve than previous b/tsDMARD users achieved remission, regardless of remission criteria.

Acknowledgments:

Novartis and IQVIA for supporting the EuroSpA RCN

Disclosure of Interests:

Brigitte Michelsen Grant/research support from: Research support from Novartis, Consultant of: Consulting fees Novartis, Stylianos Georgiadis Grant/research support from: Novartis, Daniela Di Giuseppe: None declared, Anne Gitte Loft Grant/research support from: Novartis, Consultant of: AbbVie, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer and UCB, Speakers bureau: AbbVie, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer and UCB, Michael Nissen Grant/research support from: Abbvie, Consultant of: Novartis, Lilly, Abbvie, Celgene and Pfizer, Speakers bureau: Novartis, Lilly, Abbvie, Celgene and Pfizer, Florenzo Iannone Consultant of: Speaker and consulting fees from AbbVie, Eli Lilly, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, Sanofi, UCB, MSD, Speakers bureau: Speaker and consulting fees from AbbVie, Eli Lilly, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, Sanofi, UCB, MSD, Manuel Pombo-Suarez Consultant of: Janssen, Lilly, MSD and Sanofi., Speakers bureau: Janssen, Lilly, MSD and Sanofi., Heřman Mann: None declared, Ziga Rotar Consultant of: Speaker and consulting fees from Abbvie, Amgen, Biogen, Eli Lilly, Medis, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, Sanofi., Speakers bureau: Speaker and consulting fees from Abbvie, Amgen, Biogen, Eli Lilly, Medis, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, Sanofi., Kari Eklund Consultant of: Celgene, Lilly, Speakers bureau: Pfizer, Roche, Tore K. Kvien Grant/research support from: Received grants from Abbvie, Hospira/Pfizer, MSD and Roche (not relevant for this abstract)., Consultant of: Have received personal fees from Abbvie, Biogen, BMS, Celltrion, Eli Lily, Hospira/Pfizer, MSD, Novartis, Orion Pharma, Roche, Sandoz, UCB, Sanofi and Mylan (not relevant for this abstract)., Paid instructor for: Have received personal fees from Abbvie, Biogen, BMS, Celltrion, Eli Lily, Hospira/Pfizer, MSD, Novartis, Orion Pharma, Roche, Sandoz, UCB, Sanofi and Mylan (not relevant for this abstract)., Speakers bureau: Have received personal fees from Abbvie, Biogen, BMS, Celltrion, Eli Lily, Hospira/Pfizer, MSD, Novartis, Orion Pharma, Roche, Sandoz, UCB, Sanofi and Mylan (not relevant for this abstract)., Maria Jose Santos Speakers bureau: Novartis and Pfizer, Björn Gudbjornsson Speakers bureau: Novartis and Amgen, Catalin Codreanu Consultant of: Speaker and consulting fees from AbbVie, Accord Healthcare, Alfasigma, Egis, Eli Lilly, Ewopharma, Genesis, Mylan, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, Sandoz, UCB, Speakers bureau: Speaker and consulting fees from AbbVie, Accord Healthcare, Alfasigma, Egis, Eli Lilly, Ewopharma, Genesis, Mylan, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, Sandoz, UCB, Sema Yilmaz: None declared, Johan K Wallman Consultant of: AbbVie, Celgene, Eli Lilly, Novartis and UCB Pharma, Cecilie Heegaard Brahe Grant/research support from: Novartis, Burkhard Moeller: None declared, Ennio Giulio Favalli Consultant of: Consultant and/or speaker for BMS, Eli-Lilly, MSD, UCB, Pfizer, Sanofi-Genzyme, Novartis, and Abbvie, Speakers bureau: Consultant and/or speaker for BMS, Eli-Lilly, MSD, UCB, Pfizer, Sanofi-Genzyme, Novartis, and Abbvie, Carlos Sánchez-Piedra: None declared, Lucie Nekvindova: None declared, Matija Tomsic: None declared, Nina Trokovic: None declared, Eirik kristianslund: None declared, Helena Santos Speakers bureau: AbbVie, Eli-Lilly, Janssen, Pfizer, Novartis, Thorvardur Love: None declared, Ruxandra Ionescu Consultant of: Consulting fees from Abbvie, Eli-Lilly, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, Sandoz, Speakers bureau: Consulting and speaker fees from Abbvie, Eli-Lilly, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, Sandoz, Yavuz Pehlivan: None declared, Gareth T. Jones Grant/research support from: Pfizer, AbbVie, UCB, Celgene and GSK., Irene van der Horst-Bruinsma Grant/research support from: AbbVie, Novartis, Eli Lilly, Bristol-Myers Squibb, MSD, Pfizer, UCB Pharma, Consultant of: AbbVie, Novartis, Eli Lilly, Bristol-Myers Squibb, MSD, Pfizer, UCB Pharma, Lykke Midtbøll Ørnbjerg Grant/research support from: Novartis, Mikkel Ǿstergaard Grant/research support from: AbbVie, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Celgene, Merck, and Novartis, Consultant of: AbbVie, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Boehringer Ingelheim, Celgene, Eli Lilly, Hospira, Janssen, Merck, Novartis, Novo Nordisk, Orion, Pfizer, Regeneron, Roche, Sandoz, Sanofi, and UCB, Speakers bureau: AbbVie, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Boehringer Ingelheim, Celgene, Eli Lilly, Hospira, Janssen, Merck, Novartis, Novo Nordisk, Orion, Pfizer, Regeneron, Roche, Sandoz, Sanofi, and UCB, Merete L. Hetland Grant/research support from: BMS, MSD, AbbVie, Roche, Novartis, Biogen and Pfizer, Consultant of: Eli Lilly, Speakers bureau: Orion Pharma, Biogen, Pfizer, CellTrion, Merck and Samsung Bioepis

AB1233 GENDER DIFFERENCE IN DISEASE SEVERITY AND TREATMENT OUTCOMES AMONG PATIENTS WITH RHEUMATOID ARTHRITIS (RA), AXIAL SPONDYLOARTHRITIS (AXSPA) AND PSORIATIC ARTHRITIS (PSA) STARTING TREATMENT WITH TARGETED THERAPY IN THE CZECH REPUBLIC

Background:

The ATTRA registry captures more than 95% of patients with RA, AxSpA, or PSA treated with biologics in the Czech Republic (CZ). In CZ, anti-TNF therapy is reimbursed for RA if DAS28>5.1 despite therapy with csDMARDs, for PSA if disease is not “adequately controlled” with csDMARDs and for AS if BASDAI>4 and CRP/ESR elevated above normal.

Objectives:

We aimed to investigate gender-related differences in baseline characteristics and treatment effectiveness among patients with RA, AxSpa, and PsA starting first targeted therapy (TT) in CZ.

Methods:

In this observational cohort study, the ATTRA register provided prospectively collected data on RA, AxSpA and PsA patients who initiated their first TT (mostly by TNFi) in 2012–6/2018. Treatment effectiveness and adherence was assessed at 12 months by a change in patient-reported outcomes (PROs), CRP and % drug survival. Differences in categorical and continuous data btw males and females were assessed using the Pearson X2test (of Fisher exact test, as appropriate), or Mann-Whitney test resp. This study was largely descriptive, and no statistical adjustments have been made.

Results:

A total of 1602 RA, 1306 AxSpa, and 493 PsA patients were included. The difference in baseline characteristics btw women and men starting TT are shown in table 1. Their response and adherence to TT after one year is shown in table 2.

Conclusion:

When starting their first TT, males tended to have higher levels of CRP, while females were more often (ex)smokers and reported worse parameters of quality of life across the diagnostic groups. The improvement of PROs was similar in males and females, while males with axSpA and PsA showed larger improvements in CRP. Survival on drug at one year was similar, save for AxSpA, where males showed better survival.

References:

Acknowledgments:

Supported by project 00023728 of Ministry of Health, CZ

Disclosure of Interests:

Jakub Zavada Speakers bureau: Abbvie, UCB, Sanofi, Elli-Lilly, Novartis, Zentiva, Accord, Lucie Nekvindova: None declared, Karel Pavelka Consultant of: Abbvie, MSD, BMS, Egis, Roche, UCB, Medac, Pfizer, Biogen, Speakers bureau: Abbvie, MSD, BMS, Egis, Roche, UCB, Medac, Pfizer, Biogen, Pavel Horak Speakers bureau: Pfizer, Abbvie, Eli lilly. Novartis, Roche, Sanofi, Jiří Vencovský: None declared

OP0109 CO-MEDICATION WITH A CONVENTIONAL SYNTHETIC DMARD IN PATIENTS WITH AXIAL SPONDYLOARTHRITIS IS ASSOCIATED WITH IMPROVED RETENTION OF TNF INHIBITORS: RESULTS FROM THE EUROSPA COLLABORATION

Background:

Axial spondylarthritis (axSpA) patients treated with a tumour necrosis factor inhibitor (TNFi) may receive a concomitant conventional synthetic disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drug (csDMARD), although the value of combination therapy remains unclear.

Objectives:

Describe the proportion and phenotype of patients with axSpA initiating their first TNFi as monotherapy compared to TNFi+csDMARD combination therapy, and to compare the 1-year TNFi retention between the two groups.

Methods:

Data from 13 European registries was collected. Two exposure treatment groups were defined: TNFi monotherapy at baseline (=TNFi start date) and TNFi+csDMARD combination therapy. TNFi retention rates were assessed with Kaplan-Meier curves for each country and combined. Hazard ratios (HR, 95% CI) for discontinuing the TNFi were obtained with Cox models: (i) crude; adjusted for (ii) country, and (iii) country, sex, age, calendar year, disease duration and BASDAI. Participating countries were dichotomized into two strata, depending on their 1-year retention rate being above (stratum A) or below (stratum B) the average retention rate across all countries.

Results:

22,196 axSpA patients were included with 34% on TNFi+csDMARD combination therapy. Baseline characteristics are presented in table 1. Overall, the crude TNFi retention rate was marginally longer in the combination therapy group (80% (79-81%)) compared to the monotherapy group (78% (77-79%)) and was primarily driven by differences in stratum B (fig. 1). TNFi retention rates varied significantly across countries (range:-11.0% to +11.3%), with a clear distinction between the 2 strata. The HRs for discontinuation over 1-year (reference=TNFi monotherapy) in the 3 models were: (i) 0.88 (0.82-0.93), (ii) 0.87 (0.82-0.92), (iii) 0.88 (0.82-0.93).

Table 1Baseline characteristicsAll patients(n=22196)Country stratum ACountry stratum BTNFi mono(n=4940)csDMARD + TNFi(n=2547)TNFi mono(n=9693)csDMARD + TNFi(n=5016)Age (years), mean (SD)42.6 (12.5)43.4 (12.0)42.8 (12.2)41.6 (12.7)43.7 (12.7)Females, %41.137.738.242.044.2Disease duration (yrs), mean (SD)5.7 (8.0)6.2 (7.7)6.7 (7.4)4.9 (8.2)6.1 (8.2)Enthesitis, %50.316.733.957.859.7SJC-28, median (IQR)0 (0-1)0 (0-0)0 (0-2)0 (0-0)0 (0-2)VAS pain (0-100), mean (SD)60.9 (24.5)63.3 (26.5)67.8 (23.3)60.2 (23.4)57.2 (24.3)CRP (mg/L), median (IQR)8 (3-20)7.8 (2-20)18 (6.7-32.6)6.0 (2.7-15)8.0 (3-22)BASDAI (0-10), mean (SD)5.7 (2.1)5.7 (2.2)6.2 (2.1)5.6 (2.0)5.4 (2.2)BASFI (0-10), mean (SD)4.4 (2.5)4.4 (2.6)4.9 (2.5)4.3 (2.4)4.2 (2.9)ASDAS, mean (SD)3.5 (1.1)3.7 (1.0)4.0 (1.0)3.3 (1.0)3.3 (1.1)On Infliximab, %25.721222436Baseline csDMARD use, %-Methotrexate045063-Sulfasalazine068033-Leflunomide0801

Conclusion:

Considerable differences were observed across countries in the use of combination therapy and TNFi retention in axSpA patients. The overall 1-year TNFi retention was higher with csDMARD co-therapy compared to TNFi monotherapy. TNFi monotherapy had a 12-13% higher risk of treatment discontinuation.

Acknowledgments:

Novartis Pharma AG and IQVIA

MN and BD participated equally

Disclosure of Interests:

Michael Nissen Grant/research support from: Abbvie, Consultant of: Novartis, Lilly, Abbvie, Celgene and Pfizer, Speakers bureau: Novartis, Lilly, Abbvie, Celgene and Pfizer, Bénédicte Delcoigne: None declared, Daniela Di Giuseppe: None declared, Lennart T.H. Jacobsson Consultant of: AbbVie, Eli Lilly, Janssen, Novartis and Pfizer, Karen Fagerli: None declared, Anne Gitte Loft Grant/research support from: Novartis, Consultant of: AbbVie, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer and UCB, Speakers bureau: AbbVie, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer and UCB, Adrian Ciurea Consultant of: Consulting and/or speaking fees from AbbVie, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Celgene, Eli Lilly, Merck Sharp & Dohme, Novartis and Pfizer., Dan Nordström Consultant of: Abbvie, Celgene, Lilly, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche and UCB., Speakers bureau: Abbvie, Celgene, Lilly, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche and UCB., Ziga Rotar Consultant of: Speaker and consulting fees from Abbvie, Amgen, Biogen, Eli Lilly, Medis, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, Sanofi., Speakers bureau: Speaker and consulting fees from Abbvie, Amgen, Biogen, Eli Lilly, Medis, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, Sanofi., Florenzo Iannone Consultant of: Speaker and consulting fees from AbbVie, Eli Lilly, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, Sanofi, UCB, MSD, Speakers bureau: Speaker and consulting fees from AbbVie, Eli Lilly, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, Sanofi, UCB, MSD, Maria Jose Santos Speakers bureau: Novartis and Pfizer, Manuel Pombo-Suarez Consultant of: Janssen, Lilly, MSD and Sanofi., Speakers bureau: Janssen, Lilly, MSD and Sanofi., Björn Gudbjornsson Speakers bureau: Novartis and Amgen, Heřman Mann: None declared, Nurullah Akkoc: None declared, Catalin Codreanu Consultant of: Speaker and consulting fees from AbbVie, Accord Healthcare, Alfasigma, Egis, Eli Lilly, Ewopharma, Genesis, Mylan, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, Sandoz, UCB, Speakers bureau: Speaker and consulting fees from AbbVie, Accord Healthcare, Alfasigma, Egis, Eli Lilly, Ewopharma, Genesis, Mylan, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, Sandoz, UCB, Irene van der Horst-Bruinsma Grant/research support from: AbbVie, Novartis, Eli Lilly, Bristol-Myers Squibb, MSD, Pfizer, UCB Pharma, Consultant of: AbbVie, Novartis, Eli Lilly, Bristol-Myers Squibb, MSD, Pfizer, UCB Pharma, Brigitte Michelsen: None declared, Gary Macfarlane: None declared, Merete L. Hetland Grant/research support from: BMS, MSD, AbbVie, Roche, Novartis, Biogen and Pfizer, Consultant of: Eli Lilly, Speakers bureau: Orion Pharma, Biogen, Pfizer, CellTrion, Merck and Samsung Bioepis, Matija Tomsic: None declared, Burkhard Moeller: None declared, Pedro Ávila-Ribeiro Grant/research support from: Novartis, Carlos Sánchez-Piedra: None declared, Heikki Relas Grant/research support from: Abbvie., Consultant of: Abbvie, Celgene, and Pfizer., Speakers bureau: Abbvie, Celgene, and Pfizer., Arni Jon Geirsson: None declared, Lucie Nekvindova: None declared, Gozde Yildirim Cetin Speakers bureau: AbbVie, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, UCB, MSD, Ruxandra Ionescu Consultant of: Consulting fees from Abbvie, Eli-Lilly, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, Sandoz, Speakers bureau: Consulting and speaker fees from Abbvie, Eli-Lilly, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, Sandoz, Niels Steen Krogh: None declared, Johan Askling Grant/research support from: JA acts or has acted as PI for agreements between Karolinska Institutet and the following entities, mainly in the context of the ARTIS national safety monitoring programme of immunomodulators in rheumatology: Abbvie, BMS, Eli Lilly, Merck, MSD, Pfizer, Roche, Samsung Bioepis, Sanofi, and UCB Pharma, Bente Glintborg Grant/research support from: Grants from Pfizer, Biogen and Abbvie, Ulf Lindström: None declared

FRI0283 CO-MEDICATION WITH CSDMARD HAS LITTLE EFFECT ON THE RETENTION OF TNF INHIBITORS IN PSORIATIC ARTHRITIS, RESULTS FROM THE EUROSPA COLLABORATION

Background:

Previous studies have suggested similar effectiveness, but longer treatment retention, for tumor necrosis factor inhibitors (TNFi), when used in combination with a conventional synthetic disease modifying anti-rheumatic drug (csDMARD) in psoriatic arthritis (PsA).

Objectives:

To describe patients with PsA initiating a first TNFi as monotherapy compared to combination therapy, and to explore 1-year treatment retention of TNFi in the two groups.

Methods:

Patients with PsA starting a first TNFi (2006-2017) were identified in biologics registers of 13 European countries, and data were pooled for analysis. Co-medication with csDMARD was determined at TNFi start.

Because of large inter-country variation in TNFi retention, countries were split into two strata, depending on each country’s 1-year retention rate for TNFi being above (stratum A) or below (stratum B) the average 1-year retention rate.

TNFi treatment retention was compared through Kaplan-Meier curves; the proportion remaining on the TNFi at one year; and hazard ratios (HR) during the first year: (i) crude; adjusted for (ii) country-strata, and (iii) country-strata, sex, age, calendar year, DAS28 and disease duration. In model (iii) only registers contributing >1000 patients or <33% missing data for DAS28 were included.

Results:

A total of 14778 patients with PsA starting a first TNFi were included. Baseline disease activity was similar within stratum B, but higher for the combination treatment group in stratum A (table 1).

Table 1.

Baseline characteristics

Country strataStratum AStratum BTNFimonotherapyN=2120TNFi/csDMARDcombinationN=2128TNFimonotherapyN=3369TNFi/csDMARDcombinationN=7161Females52%51%53%51%Age, years49.7 (12.2)48.7 (11.8)48.8 (13.0)48.9 (12.2)Disease duration, yrs6.4 (7.0)6.8 (6.8)5.9 (7.5)5.9 (7.1)Tender joints 285.5 (6.3)8.0 (6.3)5.6 (6.0)5.6 (5.7)Swollen joints 282.8 (4.3)5.6 (5.0)3.0 (3.8)3.3 (3.8)VAS pain54 (29)62 (24)59 (23)56 (24)DAPSA-2824.6 (18.6)36.2 (17.6)27.3 (15.6)27.2 (15.2)DAS28 (CRP)3.5 (1.4)4.7 (1.3)4.0 (1.2)4.0 (1.1)Concomitant csDMARDMethotrexate-76%-79%Sulfasalazine-15%-15%Other csDMARD-49%-25%

Numbers are means (sd) unless otherwise stated.

The Kaplan-Meier curves for the treatment groups were similar within each stratum (fig 1), as were the proportions remaining on TNFi after one year, stratum A: monotherapy 86% (95%CI: 85-88) vs. combination 86% (84-87), stratum B: 71% (69-72) vs. 73% (72-74). The HRs for TNFi discontinuation (ref=TNFi monotherapy) were: (i) 1.06 (0.98-1.13), (ii) 0.94 (0.87-1.01), (iii) 0.89 (0.83-0.96), including 13078 patients (9 countries) for model (iii).

Conclusion:

In this exploratory study no benefit in TNFi retention was observed for csDMARD combination therapy in crude analyses, while in adjusted analyses an 11% lower risk of TNFi discontinuation was found. These preliminary results offer limited support for use of combination therapy in PsA. Further analyses will explore to what extent the results are affected by inter-country heterogeneity and differences between TNFi.

Acknowledgments:

UL and DDG contributed equally.

Novartis Pharma AG and IQVIA support the EuroSpA collaboration.

Disclosure of Interests:

Ulf Lindström: None declared, Daniela Di Giuseppe: None declared, Bénédicte Delcoigne: None declared, Bente Glintborg Grant/research support from: Grants from Pfizer, Biogen and Abbvie, Burkhard Moeller: None declared, Manuel Pombo-Suarez Consultant of: Janssen, Lilly, MSD and Sanofi., Speakers bureau: Janssen, Lilly, MSD and Sanofi., Carlos Sánchez-Piedra: None declared, Kari Eklund Consultant of: Celgene, Lilly, Speakers bureau: Pfizer, Roche, Heikki Relas Grant/research support from: Abbvie., Consultant of: Abbvie, Celgene, and Pfizer., Speakers bureau: Abbvie, Celgene, and Pfizer., Björn Gudbjornsson Speakers bureau: Novartis and Amgen, Thorvardur Love: None declared, Gareth T. Jones Grant/research support from: Pfizer, AbbVie, UCB, Celgene and GSK., Adrian Ciurea Consultant of: Consulting and/or speaking fees from AbbVie, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Celgene, Eli Lilly, Merck Sharp & Dohme, Novartis and Pfizer., Catalin Codreanu Consultant of: Speaker and consulting fees from AbbVie, Accord Healthcare, Alfasigma, Egis, Eli Lilly, Ewopharma, Genesis, Mylan, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, Sandoz, UCB, Speakers bureau: Speaker and consulting fees from AbbVie, Accord Healthcare, Alfasigma, Egis, Eli Lilly, Ewopharma, Genesis, Mylan, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, Sandoz, UCB, Ruxandra Ionescu Consultant of: Consulting fees from Abbvie, Eli-Lilly, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, Sandoz, Speakers bureau: Consulting and speaker fees from Abbvie, Eli-Lilly, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, Sandoz, Lucie Nekvindova: None declared, Jakub Zavada Speakers bureau: Abbvie, UCB, Sanofi, Elli-Lilly, Novartis, Zentiva, Accord, Nuh Atas: None declared, Servet Yolbaş: None declared, Karen Fagerli: None declared, Brigitte Michelsen Grant/research support from: Research support from Novartis, Consultant of: Consulting fees Novartis, Ziga Rotar Consultant of: Speaker and consulting fees from Abbvie, Amgen, Biogen, Eli Lilly, Medis, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, Sanofi., Speakers bureau: Speaker and consulting fees from Abbvie, Amgen, Biogen, Eli Lilly, Medis, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, Sanofi., Matija Tomsic: None declared, Florenzo Iannone Consultant of: Speaker and consulting fees from AbbVie, Eli Lilly, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, Sanofi, UCB, MSD, Speakers bureau: Speaker and consulting fees from AbbVie, Eli Lilly, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, Sanofi, UCB, MSD, Maria Jose Santos Speakers bureau: Novartis and Pfizer, Pedro Ávila-Ribeiro Grant/research support from: Novartis, Lykke Midtbøll Ørnbjerg Grant/research support from: Novartis, Mikkel Ǿstergaard Grant/research support from: AbbVie, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Celgene, Merck, and Novartis, Consultant of: AbbVie, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Boehringer Ingelheim, Celgene, Eli Lilly, Hospira, Janssen, Merck, Novartis, Novo Nordisk, Orion, Pfizer, Regeneron, Roche, Sandoz, Sanofi, and UCB, Speakers bureau: AbbVie, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Boehringer Ingelheim, Celgene, Eli Lilly, Hospira, Janssen, Merck, Novartis, Novo Nordisk, Orion, Pfizer, Regeneron, Roche, Sandoz, Sanofi, and UCB, Lennart T.H. Jacobsson Consultant of: AbbVie, Eli Lilly, Janssen, Novartis and Pfizer, Johan Askling Grant/research support from: JA acts or has acted as PI for agreements between Karolinska Institutet and the following entities, mainly in the context of the ARTIS national safety monitoring programme of immunomodulators in rheumatology: Abbvie, BMS, Eli Lilly, Merck, MSD, Pfizer, Roche, Samsung Bioepis, Sanofi, and UCB Pharma, Michael Nissen Grant/research support from: Abbvie, Consultant of: Novartis, Lilly, Abbvie, Celgene and Pfizer, Speakers bureau: Novartis, Lilly, Abbvie, Celgene and Pfizer