[Survey on the working, training, and research conditions of resident physicians in internistic and rheumatological continuing education-BEWUSST]

BACKGROUND

Data on the training and continuing education situation of residents in the field of internal medicine and rheumatology are not available for Germany. For this reason, the Commission for Education and Training of the German Society of Rheumatology (DGRh) initiated the BEWUSST survey on the working, training and research conditions of residents in rheumatology.

METHODS

A total of 102 questions on the topics of working conditions in everyday professional life, continuing medical education and training, compatibility of career and family, compatibility of work and research, perspectives as a rheumatologist and practical activities were included in an online questionnaire.

RESULTS

A total of 102 participants took part in the survey. Of the respondents 48.1% were satisfied with their professional situation, 40.2% of the participants were supervised by a specialist mentor and 54.9% were working as scientists during their work as a physician. A compatibility of family and career was possible for 34.7%. After completion of the residency 52.9% of the respondents aspired to a combined clinical and outpatient activity.

CONCLUSION

Half of the trainee rheumatologists are satisfied with their professional activities, although mentoring of the assistants in training should be further improved. With respect to the desired combined clinical and outpatient activity, the existing options should be expanded or new professional fields of activity should be established, so that the specialty remains attractive for the upcoming generations.

Survey on the working, training, and research conditions of resident physicians in internistic and rheumatological continuing education-BEWUSST

BACKGROUND

Data on the training and continuing education situation of residents in the field of internal medicine and rheumatology are not available for Germany. For this reason, the Commission for Education and Training of the German Society of Rheumatology (DGRh) initiated the BEWUSST survey on the working, training and research conditions of residents in rheumatology.

METHODS

A total of 102 questions on the topics of working conditions in everyday professional life, continuing medical education and training, compatibility of career and family, compatibility of work and research, perspectives as a rheumatologist and practical activities were included in an online questionnaire.

RESULTS

A total of 102 participants took part in the survey. Of the respondents 48.1% were satisfied with their professional situation, 40.2% of the participants were supervised by a specialist mentor and 54.9% were working as scientists during their work as a physician. A compatibility of family and career was possible for 34.7%. After completion of the residency 52.9% of the respondents aspired to a combined clinical and outpatient activity.

CONCLUSION

Half of the trainee rheumatologists are satisfied with their professional activities, although mentoring of the assistants in training should be further improved. With respect to the desired combined clinical and outpatient activity, the existing options should be expanded or new professional fields of activity should be established, so that the specialty remains attractive for the upcoming generations.

[Rheumatology training positions in Germany]

BACKGROUND

In the next few years many general practitioners and specialists will retire. As in other disciplines the question arises in rheumatology whether sufficient training positions are available to maintain or expand the supply of care according to demand. Therefore, the German Society of Rheumatology (DGRh) has assigned its committee for education and training to review the currently available training opportunities in Germany. The aim of this work is the quantitative survey of the training capacity to become a specialist in internal medicine and rheumatology.

METHODS

Within the framework of this study, a survey was conducted via the homepages of the 17 state medical associations to determine the postgraduate medical officers, their place of work and the duration of their postgraduate training capabilities. Based on the data, a nationwide survey of training positions was conducted.

RESULTS

Specialized rheumatology training is established at 229 training centers in Germany, whereby data from 187 training sites were available for analysis. The training locations are distributed as followed: 52.4% clinical sector and 47.6% outpatient sector. In total, 478.4 training positions are available in Germany (clinical sector: 391.4 and outpatient sector: 87) and 17.2% of the positions (clinical sector: 11.4% and outpatient sector: 43.1%) are not occupied.

CONCLUSION

Based on this study, it can be shown that most of the continuing education positions are available in the clinical sector. In contrast, half of the training positions in the outpatient area are not filled. In order to improve the training situation, it is essential to integrate outpatient colleagues into the training program. This presupposes that further training is supported or financed by the healthcare system. In this context, optimal rheumatological care must be permanently guaranteed throughout Germany in order to provide sufficient care for the approximately 2 million patients with inflammatory rheumatic diseases.

Frequency and Duration of Early Non-serious Adverse Events in Patients with Rheumatoid Arthritis and Psoriatic Arthritis Treated with Tofacitinib

INTRODUCTION

Tofacitinib is an oral Janus kinase inhibitor for the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis (RA) and psoriatic arthritis (PsA). This post hoc analysis assessed frequency or duration of early select non-serious adverse events (AEs; excluding infections), and their impact on treatment discontinuation, in patients with RA or PsA treated with tofacitinib 5 or 10 mg twice daily, or placebo.

METHODS

Data were pooled from five phase 3 and one phase 3b/4 studies in patients with moderate-to-severe RA, and two phase 3 studies in patients with active PsA. Select all-causality, non-serious AEs, reported to month 3 (placebo-controlled period), were headache, diarrhea, nausea, vomiting, and gastric discomfort (including dyspepsia, gastritis, epigastric discomfort, and abdominal discomfort or pain); incidence rates (unique patients with events per 100 patient-years of follow-up), duration of, and discontinuations due to these non-serious AEs were reported.

RESULTS

We analyzed 3871 and 710 patients with RA and PsA, respectively. Incidence of non-serious AEs to month 3 was generally similar with tofacitinib and placebo. The most frequent non-serious AEs were headache and diarrhea with tofacitinib, and dyspepsia, nausea, and headache with placebo. Most events were mild or moderate in severity, lasting ≤ 4 weeks. Permanent discontinuations due to non-serious AEs were not observed in patients with PsA, and were < 1.0% in patients with RA across treatment groups. The most frequent cause of temporary discontinuation across all groups was gastric discomfort (0.3-0.8%).

CONCLUSIONS

Non-serious AE incidence was generally similar in patients with RA or PsA receiving tofacitinib or placebo. Most events were mild or moderate and generally resolved within 4 weeks.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov identifiers: NCT00960440; NCT00847613; NCT00814307; NCT00856544; NCT00853385; NCT01877668; NCT01882439; NCT02187055.

Long-term safety of tofacitinib up to 9.5 years: a comprehensive integrated analysis of the rheumatoid arthritis clinical development programme

Objective

Tofacitinib is an oral Janus kinase (JAK) inhibitor for the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis (RA). We report the largest integrated safety analysis of tofacitinib, as of March 2017, using data from phase I, II, III, IIIb/IV and long-term extension studies in adult patients with RA.

Methods

Data were pooled for patients with RA who received ≥1 tofacitinib dose. Incidence rates (IRs; patients with events/100 patient-years [PY]; 95% CIs) of first-time occurrences were obtained for adverse events (AEs) of interest.

Results

7061 patients received tofacitinib (total exposure: 22 875 PY; median [range] exposure: 3.1 [0 to 9.6] years). IRs (95% CI) for serious AEs, serious infections, herpes zoster (all), opportunistic infections (excluding tuberculosis [TB]) and TB were 9.0 (8.6 to 9.4), 2.5 (2.3 to 2.7), 3.6 (3.4 to 3.9), 0.4 (0.3 to 0.5) and 0.2 (0.1 to 0.2), respectively. IRs (95% CI) for malignancies (excluding non-melanoma skin cancer [NMSC]), NMSC and lymphomas were 0.8 (0.7 to 0.9), 0.6 (0.5 to 0.7) and 0.1 (0.0 to 0.1), respectively. IRs (95% CI) for gastrointestinal perforations, deep vein thrombosis, pulmonary embolism, venous thromboembolism, arterial thromboembolism and major adverse cardiovascular events were 0.1 (0.1 to 0.2), 0.2 (0.1 to 0.2), 0.1 (0.1 to 0.2), 0.3 (0.2 to 0.3), 0.4 (0.3 to 0.5) and 0.4 (0.3 to 0.5), respectively. IR (95% CI) for mortality was 0.3 (0.2 to 0.3). IRs generally remained consistent across 6-month intervals to >78 months.

Conclusion

This represents the largest clinical dataset for a JAK inhibitor in RA to date. IRs remained consistent with previous reports from the tofacitinib RA clinical development programme, and stable over time.

Trial registration numbers

NCT01262118; NCT01484561; NCT00147498; NCT00413660; NCT00550446; NCT00603512; NCT00687193; NCT01164579; NCT00976599; NCT01059864; NCT01359150; NCT02147587; NCT00960440; NCT00847613; NCT00814307; NCT00856544; NCT00853385; NCT01039688; NCT02187055; NCT00413699; NCT00661661.

For summary of phase I, phase II, phase III, phase IIIb/IV and LTE studies included in the integrated safety analysis, see online supplemental table 1.

Assessment of radiographic progression in patients with rheumatoid arthritis treated with tofacitinib in long-term studies

OBJECTIVES

Tofacitinib is an oral Janus kinase inhibitor for the treatment of RA. We evaluated radiographic progression in tofacitinib-treated patients with RA for up to 3 years in two pooled long-term extension (LTE) studies (ORAL Sequel; A3921041) (primary analysis), and for up to 5 years using data integrated from one phase (P)2 (A3921068), two P3 (ORAL Start; ORAL Scan) and two LTE studies (exploratory analysis).

METHODS

In LTE studies, patients received tofacitinib 5 mg twice daily (BID) or 10 mg BID as monotherapy or with conventional synthetic (cs)DMARDs. Radiographic outcomes up to 3 years: least squares mean (LSM) change from baseline in van der Heijde modified Total Sharp Score (ΔmTSS), erosion score (ΔES) and joint space narrowing (ΔJSN) score; proportion of patients with no radiographic progression (ΔmTSS ≤0.5); proportion of patients with no new erosions (ΔES ≤0.5). ΔmTSS was evaluated for up to 5 years in an exploratory analysis.

RESULTS

For all tofacitinib-treated patients with radiographic data available at LTE month 36 (n = 414), LSM ΔmTSS was 1.14, LSM ΔES was 0.66, LSM ΔJSN was 0.74, and 74.3% and 86.2% of patients showed no radiographic progression and no new erosions, respectively. Similar values were observed regardless of tofacitinib dose, or whether patients received tofacitinib as monotherapy or with csDMARDs. In an exploratory analysis of integrated P2/P3/LTE studies, LSM ΔmTSS was 3.34 at month 60 (n = 269).

CONCLUSION

Limited progression of structural damage was observed in tofacitinib-treated patients up to 5 years, with similar results for tofacitinib used as monotherapy or combination therapy up to 3 years.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov (http://clinicaltrials.gov): NCT01164579; NCT01039688; NCT00847613; NCT00413699; NCT00661661.

AB0247 ANALYSIS OF THE IMPACT OF TOFACITINIB TREATMENT ON WEIGHT IN PATIENTS WITH RHEUMATOID ARTHRITIS

Background:

A prior post hoc analysis of tofacitinib clinical trial data reported improvements in rheumatoid arthritis (RA) outcomes with tofacitinib vs placebo (PBO) through Month (M)6, regardless of baseline (BL) body mass index (BMI).1

Objectives:

To assess change from BL (Δ) in BMI, and disease activity by BL BMI status, in patients (pts) with moderate/severe RA receiving tofacitinib through M12.

Methods:

This post hoc analysis included data pooled from Phase 3 and 3b/4 studies of pts who were methotrexate-naïve (NCT01039688) or inadequate responders to conventional synthetic (cs) or biologic DMARDs (NCT00960440; NCT00847613; NCT00814307; NCT00856544; NCT00853385; NCT02187055; NCT02831855). Pts received ≥1 dose of tofacitinib 5 or 10 mg twice daily (BID) or 11 mg once daily (QD), ± csDMARDs, or PBO. Least squares (LS) mean ΔBMI (linear mixed model repeated measures; observed cases) was summarised for all treatment groups at M3/6/12 (M3/6 only for tofacitinib 11 mg QD and PBO). Other assessments at M3/6/12 included ΔBMI ± BL concomitant glucocorticoids (GCs) or antidepressants (descriptive statistics), LS mean ΔDAS28-4(ESR) stratified by BL BMI status (<25, ≥25–<30, ≥30), and correlations between LS mean ΔBMI and ΔDAS28-4(ESR).

Results:

In total, 2349, 1611, 694 and 681 pts received tofacitinib 5 mg BID, 10 mg BID, 11 mg QD or PBO, respectively. Demographics/baseline characteristics were generally similar across treatments, except for some numerical differences in the tofacitinib 11 mg QD group, eg fewer female pts, more White pts and fewer pts receiving concomitant GCs, compared with other treatment groups. At M3/6, LS mean BMI significantly increased from BL with all tofacitinib doses vs PBO (all p<0.05); LS mean ΔBMI was greatest with 10 mg BID and lowest with 11 mg QD (Figure 1a). LS mean ΔBMI was greater in pts receiving tofacitinib as monotherapy vs combination therapy at M3/6/12 (Figure 1b). ΔBMI was generally similar in pts receiving treatment ± concomitant GCs or antidepressants (data not shown). Improvements in DAS28-4(ESR) were observed in each BL BMI status group at M3/6/12 and were greatest with all tofacitinib doses vs PBO. LS mean ΔDAS28-4(ESR) was generally numerically highest for pts with BMI <25 and numerically lowest for pts with BMI >30, for all tofacitinib doses. LS mean ΔDAS28-4(ESR) was generally greatest with tofacitinib 10 mg BID and 11 mg QD vs 5 mg BID across BL BMI status groups (Figure 1c). Across treatments, model-adjusted associations between LS mean ΔDAS28-4(ESR) and ΔBMI were weak (correlation coefficients all <0.3; Table 1).

Table 1.

Correlations between LS mean ΔDAS28-4(ESR) and ΔBMI through M12

Tofacitinib5 mg BIDTofacitinib10 mg BIDTofacitinib11 mg QDPBONCorrelation coefficientNCorrelation coefficientNCorrelation coefficientNCorrelation coefficientM320210.116913480.12406410.09075540.0783M619180.130512700.13976110.04381500.1556M1214550.12138740.1826----

Slopes for associations between LS mean ΔBMI and ΔDAS28-4(ESR) were significantly different from 0 at M3/6/12 with tofacitinib 5 and 10 mg BID (all p<0.05). Correlations were analysed by a general linear model method, which included BL age, gender, race and RA duration. For pts receiving tofacitinib 11 mg QD in ORAL Shift (NCT02831855), only data to M6 were included. Pts who advanced from PBO to tofacitinib were not analysed post-advancement

DAS28-4(ESR), Disease Activity Score in 28 joints, erythrocyte sedimentation rate; N, number of pts analysed

Conclusion:

LS mean ΔBMI was greater with tofacitinib (all doses) vs PBO at M3/6, and with tofacitinib monotherapy vs combination therapy at M3/6/12. Improvements in DAS28-4(ESR) were seen across all BL BMI status groups. BMI increases with tofacitinib were only weakly associated with DAS28-4(ESR) improvements. The relationship between disease activity and ΔBMI requires further investigation.

References:

[1]Dikranian et al. Arthritis Rheumatol 2018; 69 (S10): Abs 2371.

Acknowledgements:

Study sponsored by Pfizer Inc. Medical writing support was provided by Anthony G McCluskey, CMC Connect, and funded by Pfizer Inc.

Disclosure of Interests:

Jürgen Wollenhaupt Speakers bureau: Pfizer Inc, Consultant of: Pfizer Inc, Jacques Morel Consultant of: AbbVie, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Eli Lilly, Novartis, Pfizer Inc, Sanofi Genzyme, Grant/research support from: Bristol-Myers Squibb, Pfizer Inc, Claire Daien Consultant of: Abivax, Grant/research support from: AbbVie, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Chugai, Eli Lilly, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer Inc, Sandoz, Adeline Ruyssen-Witrand Consultant of: AbbVie, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Eli Lilly, Mylan, Novartis, Pfizer Inc, Sanofi Genzyme, Grant/research support from: AbbVie, Amgen, Mylan, Pfizer Inc, Cédric Lukas Consultant of: AbbVie, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Eli Lilly, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer Inc, Sanofi Genzyme, UCB, Grant/research support from: Novartis, Pfizer Inc, Christophe Richez Consultant of: AbbVie, Amgen, AstraZeneca, Biogen, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Eli Lilly, GlaxoSmithKline, Mylan, Pfizer Inc, Grant/research support from: Biogen, Eli Lilly, Glenmark, Nordic Pharma, Roche, Andrea Shapiro Shareholder of: Pfizer Inc, Employee of: Pfizer Inc, Douglass Chapman Shareholder of: Pfizer Inc, Employee of: Pfizer Inc, Magali CROS Shareholder of: Pfizer Inc, Employee of: Pfizer Inc, Jose Luis Rivas Shareholder of: Pfizer Inc, Employee of: Pfizer Inc, Gustavo Citera Consultant of: AbbVie, Amgen, Eli Lilly, Gema, Genzyme, Novartis, Pfizer Inc, Sanofi Genzyme, Grant/research support from: AbbVie, Amgen, Eli Lilly, Gema, Genzyme, Novartis, Pfizer Inc, Sanofi Genzyme

Long-Term Safety and Tolerability of Apremilast Versus Placebo in Psoriatic Arthritis: A Pooled Safety Analysis of Three Phase III, Randomized, Controlled Trials

Objective

Psoriatic arthritis (PsA) requires long‐term treatment, yet safety concerns and monitoring requirements make maintenance a challenge. This analysis of pooled Psoriatic Arthritis Long‐term Assessment of Clinical Efficacy (PALACE) 1, 2, and 3 data describes 3‐year apremilast safety and tolerability in PsA.

Methods

Patients with active PsA were randomized (1:1:1) to placebo, apremilast 30 mg twice daily, or apremilast 20 mg twice daily. Placebo patients were re‐randomized to apremilast 30 mg twice daily or 20 mg twice daily at week 16 (early escape) or 24. Double‐blind treatment continued to week 52; patients could continue apremilast during an open‐label, long‐term treatment phase.

Results

In total, 1493 patients received at least one dose of study medication and were included in the safety population (placebo: n = 495; apremilast 30 mg: n = 497; apremilast 20 mg: n = 501). Among patients receiving apremilast, 53.2% (767/1441) completed 3 years of treatment. Greater rates of adverse events (AEs) were reported with apremilast (61.1%; exposure‐adjusted incidence rate [EAIR]/100 patient‐years, 265.1) versus placebo (47.5%; EAIR/100 patient‐years, 200.7) in the placebo‐controlled period. During weeks 0 to ≤52, the most common AEs occurring in apremilast‐exposed patients were diarrhea (13.9%; EAIR/100 patient‐years, 18.6), nausea (12.3%; EAIR/100 patient‐years, 16.0), headache (9.4%; EAIR/100 patient‐years, 12.1), upper respiratory tract infection (9.1%; EAIR/100 patient‐years, 11.5), and nasopharyngitis (6.2%; EAIR/100 patient‐years, 7.7). Most AEs were mild/moderate with apremilast exposure ≤156 weeks. Rates of depression remained low (EAIR/100 patient‐years, 1.8). Major adverse cardiac events (EAIR/100 patient‐years, 0.5), malignancies (EAIR/100 patient‐years, 0.9), and serious opportunistic infections (EAIR/100 patient‐years, 0.0) were infrequent over the 3‐year exposure period. Discontinuation rates due to AEs were low (<7.5%) across all apremilast‐exposure periods. Incidences of clinically meaningful abnormalities in postbaseline laboratory values was low; most values returned to baseline levels with continued treatment and without intervention.

Conclusion

Apremilast demonstrated a favorable safety profile and was well tolerated up to 156 weeks.

FRI0365 REAL-WORLD EFFECTIVENESS AND SAFETY OF APREMILAST IN A LARGE COHORT OF GERMAN PATIENTS WITH PSORIATIC ARTHRITIS: 1-YEAR ANALYSIS OF AN ONGOING MULTICENTER, PROSPECTIVE, NON-INTERVENTIONAL STUDY

Background:

Apremilast (APR) has been studied extensively in phase III randomized, controlled trials. However, real-world information is limited on the effectiveness and safety of APR in patients with psoriatic arthritis (PsA).

Objectives:

To assess the effectiveness and safety of APR in a large cohort of patients with active PsA from routine clinical practice settings in Germany.

Methods:

In this multicenter, prospective, non-interventional study, the primary endpoint was the proportion of patients reaching ≥1 point (≥20%) improvement from baseline (BL) in the Physician’s Global Assessment of Disease Activity (PhGA) score. Other endpoints included effects on swollen and tender joint counts (SJC/TJC), psoriasis-involved body surface area (BSA), enthesitis, dactylitis, Patient’s Global Assessment of Disease Activity score (PtGA), Psoriatic Arthritis Impact of Disease (PsAID) tool, pain, and pruritus. The current analysis is based on observed data through 1 year of study duration.

Results:

A total of 545 German patients were enrolled and followed up to 12 months of APR treatment; 488 patients were included in the safety analysis and 418 in the full analysis set. The mean age was 55 years, mean body mass index was 29.5 kg/m2, and 60% were female. The mean duration of psoriasis and PsA was 26 years and 18 years, respectively. At BL, 46.7% of patients had enthesitis based on the Leeds Enthesitis Index (LEI; mean [SD]: 2.9 [1.72]) and 23% had dactylitis (mean [SD]: 2.2±2.03); 74% of patients were biologic-naive. Effectiveness is shown after ~1 month (Visit 1 [V1]) and ~4 months (Visit 2 [V2]) and for up to 225 patients after 12 months (Visit 5 [V5]) of treatment (Table).

Improvements were also seen in PtGA, overall pain, and pruritus. A subanalysis suggests APR was associated with greater benefits in biologic-naive patients compared with patients who previously received biologic therapy. Observed safety and tolerability through V5 were consistent with the known overall safety profile of APR. Common adverse events in clinical trials were similar, with a lower incidence of diarrhea (11.1%), nausea (7.0%), headache (3.9%), and respiratory tract infection (0.8%).

Conclusion:

Data from this large, real-world cohort of patients with PsA show the effectiveness of APR. In patients with up to 12 months of follow-up, APR was associated with rapid and maintained improvements in physician-assessed and patient-reported outcomes. Safety and tolerability were consistent with the known profile of APR.

Table.

Disclosure of Interests:

Jürgen Wollenhaupt Grant/research support from: Abbott, BMS, MSD, Pfizer, UCB – grant/research support, Consultant of: Abbott, BMS, MSD, Pfizer, UCB – consultant, Harald Strothmeyer: None declared, Michael Fiene: None declared, Stephan Morys Employee of: Amgen Inc. – employment; Celgene GmbH – employment at the time of study conduct, Christian Bach Employee of: Amgen Inc. – employment; Celgene GmbH – employment at the time of study conduct, Josefine Roemmler-Zehrer Employee of: Amgen Inc. – employment; Celgene GmbH – employment at the time of study conduct

AB1289-HPR PERCEPTION OF THE VALUE OF DRUGS ON DIFFERENT MANIFESTATIONS OF PSORIATIC ARTHRITIS BASED ON A MULTI-STAGE EXPERT OPINION SURVEY

Background:

Patients with psoriatic arthritis (PsA) present with heterogeneous clinical phenotypes, which includes different clinical manifestations such as peripheral arthritis, axial disease, dactylitis, enthesitis, and skin and nail psoriasis. Many drugs for treatment of PsA are available for individualised treatment strategies but robust evidence is available for peripheral arthritis only as primary endpoint of RCTs.

Objectives:

To evaluate perception of German physicians on the value of current PsA treatments on different clinical PsA manifestations.

Methods:

In a face-to-face meeting, 8 German physicians (dermatology, rheumatology), specialised in PsA research/patient care, proposed initial scores for the effect size of current PsA drugs on different PsA manifestations based on knowledge of study data and personal experience in use of the drugs. The ability to achieve a consensus of the proposed efficacy scores was explored by applying an online survey among a cohort of PsA experienced physicians. Finally, a second online survey evaluated how a larger group of physicians personally estimate the drug effect sizes on different PsA manifestations.

Results:

Table 1 summarises the efficacy scores proposed by the initial expert group. In the first online survey 25 treating physicians were invited to participate, 14 (56%) of whom completed the survey. An agreement rate of over 65% of the participants was archived for 49 (68%) of the 72 proposed efficacy scores (Table 1). The consensus was especially high for the group of biological disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (bDMARDs), except for etanercept and abatacept. However, the second survey (16 (39%) participants out of 41 invited physicians) revealed that the experience with the treatment using abatacept was low (4 / 16 (25%)) or non-existing (3 /16 (18.8%)) and several manifestations could not be estimated (Figure 1). Distribution of answers were broad for etanercept in general and for particular drug-manifestation combinations (e.g. effect of ustekinumab on axial disease).

Table 1.

Efficacy scores proposed by a PsA expert group and consensus achieved by an online survey among PsA treating physicians Efficacy scores for different drugs and manifestations range from 0 (no effect) to 5 (maximal effect). Green fields indicate, that at least 65% of the survey participants agreed on the proposed efficacy score.

Peripheral arthritisAxial diseaseEnthesitisDactylitisSkin diseaseNail diseaseMethotrexat2.50012.51.5Sulfasalazin100000Leflunomid2.500111Apremilast3132.533Etanercept4443.533.5Infliximab444444Adalimumab444444.5Golimumab444433Certolizumab pegol444444Ustekinumab3.52.54.534.54Secukinumab444454.5Abatacept3.50001.50Figure 1.

Results from an online survey among physicians querying their perception of efficacies of PsA drugs on different manifestations. Therapeutic effectiveness is estimated by the participants on a scale from 0 (no effect) to 5 (maximal effectiveness); NA = no answer. The size of the dots relates to the number of answers given. Red stars indicate the scores proposed by the initial expert group.

Conclusion:

Many treatments are available to be used in PsA. The usage of treatment classes seems to depend on experience level and mode of action. Higher agreement on efficacy in specific diseases manifestation was achieved in the class of biologics whereas the opinion on efficacy of csDMARDs in general is divergent. Strategies are needed to guide physicians with lower level of experience in the use of specific drugs to achieve an optimised patient care level using personalized treatment strategies.

Disclosure of Interests:

Timm Oberwahrenbrock Grant/research support from: BMS, Hannah Tian: None declared, Diamant Thaçi Grant/research support from: Janssen Research & Development, LLC, Klaus Krueger Consultant of: Celgene, Jürgen Wollenhaupt Consultant of: Celgene, Michaela Köhm Grant/research support from: Pfizer, Janssen, BMS, LEO, Consultant of: BMS, Pfizer, Speakers bureau: Pfizer, BMS, Janssen, Novartis, Frank Behrens Grant/research support from: Pfizer, Janssen, Chugai, Celgene, Lilly and Roche, Consultant of: Pfizer, AbbVie, Sanofi, Lilly, Novartis, Genzyme, Boehringer, Janssen, MSD, Celgene, Roche and Chugai

Safety and efficacy of tofacitinib for up to 9.5 years in the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis: final results of a global, open-label, long-term extension study

BACKGROUND

Final data are presented for the ORAL Sequel long-term extension (LTE) study evaluating the safety and efficacy of tofacitinib 5 mg and 10 mg twice daily (BID) for up to 9.5 years in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA).

METHODS

Eligible patients had previously completed a phase 1, 2, or 3 qualifying index study of tofacitinib and received open-label tofacitinib 5 mg or 10 mg BID. Stable background therapy, including csDMARDs, was continued; adjustments to tofacitinib or background therapy were permitted at investigators' discretion. Assignment to dose groups (5 mg or 10 mg BID) was based on patients' average total daily dose. The primary objective was to determine the long-term safety and tolerability of tofacitinib 5 mg and 10 mg BID; the key secondary objective was to evaluate the long-term persistence of efficacy.

RESULTS

Between February 5, 2007, and November 30, 2016, 4481 patients were enrolled. Total tofacitinib exposure was 16,291 patient-years. Safety data are reported up to month 114 for all tofacitinib; efficacy data are reported up to month 96 for tofacitinib 5 mg BID and month 72 for 10 mg BID (with low patient numbers limiting interpretation beyond these time points). Overall, 52% of patients discontinued (24% due to adverse events [AEs] and 4% due to insufficient clinical response); the safety profile remained consistent with that observed in prior phase 1, 2, 3, or LTE studies. The incidence rate (IR; number of patients with events per 100 patient-years) for AEs leading to discontinuation was 6.8. For all-cause AEs of special interest, IRs were 3.4 for herpes zoster, 2.4 for serious infections, 0.8 for malignancies excluding non-melanoma skin cancer, 0.4 for major adverse cardiovascular events, and 0.3 for all-cause mortality. Clinically meaningful improvements in the signs and symptoms of RA and physical functioning, which were observed in the index studies, were maintained.

CONCLUSIONS

Tofacitinib 5 mg and 10 mg BID demonstrated a consistent safety profile (as monotherapy or combination therapy) and sustained efficacy in this open-label LTE study of patients with RA. Safety data are reported up to 9.5 years, and efficacy data up to 8 years, based on adequate patient numbers to support conclusions.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

NCT00413699 , funded by Pfizer Inc (date of trial registration: December 20, 2006).

Therapeutic benefit of apremilast on enthesitis and dactylitis in patients with psoriatic arthritis: a pooled analysis of the PALACE 1-3 studies

Objective

The Psoriatic Arthritis Long-term Assessment of Clinical Efficacy (PALACE) clinical trial programme findings demonstrated that apremilast, an oral phosphodiesterase 4 inhibitor, is effective for treating psoriatic arthritis (PsA). Enthesitis and dactylitis are difficult-to-treat features of PsA leading to disability and affecting quality of life. PALACE 1, 2 and 3 data were pooled to assess the efficacy of apremilast on enthesitis and dactylitis outcomes in patients with these conditions at baseline.

Methods

Patients with enthesitis (n=945) or dactylitis (n=633) at baseline were analysed after receiving double-blind treatment with placebo, apremilast 30 mg two times per day or apremilast 20 mg two times per day up to 52 weeks and continuing up to 5 years. Data were analysed through 156 weeks. Enthesitis was evaluated by Maastricht Ankylosing Spondylitis Enthesitis Score (MASES) and dactylitis via dactylitis count.

Results

At week 24, patients receiving apremilast 30 mg two times per day demonstrated a significantly greater mean change in enthesitis (−1.3 vs −0.9; p<0.05) and dactylitis (−1.8 vs −1.3; p<0.01) vs placebo. Patients in the 30 mg dose group showed significantly greater mean (−23.6% vs −7.0%; p<0.05) and median (−50.0% vs −21.1%; p<0.05) per cent changes in MASES; mean and median per cent changes in dactylitis count were numerically, but not significantly, different for either apremilast dose in patients with dactylitis. In the patient population remaining on apremilast, observed mean and median improvements in both conditions were sustained through 156 weeks.

Conclusion

Apremilast is effective for the treatment of active PsA, including improvements in enthesitis and dactylitis up to 3 years.

Trial registration numbers

NCT01172938, NCT01212757 and NCT01212770.

4-year results from the RAPID-PsA phase 3 randomised placebo-controlled trial of certolizumab pegol in psoriatic arthritis

Objective

To report the efficacy, patient-reported, radiographic and safety outcomes of 4 years’ certolizumab pegol (CZP) treatment in patients with psoriatic arthritis (PsA).

Methods

RAPID-PsA (NCT01087788) was double-blind and placebo-controlled to Week 24, dose-blind to Week 48 and open-label (OL) to Week 216. Patients were randomised 1:1:1 to either placebo or CZP 200 mg every 2 weeks (Q2W) or 400 mg every 4 weeks (Q4W) (following 400 mg at Weeks 0/2/4). Patients randomised to CZP continued their assigned dose in the OL period. Patients randomised to placebo were re-randomised to CZP 200 mg Q2W or 400 mg Q4W (post-loading dose) at Week 16 (early escape) or after the double-blind phase. We present observed and imputed data; missing values were imputed using non-responder imputation (NRI) for categorical and last observation carried forward (LOCF) for continuous measures.

Results

409 patients were randomised; 20% (54/273) of Week 0 patients randomised to CZP had prior anti-tumour necrosis factor (TNF) exposure; 67% (183/273) completed 216 weeks. By Week 48, 60.4% of patients achieved Disease Activity Index for Psoriatic Arthritis low disease activity or remission, which was maintained; 66.3% achieved these outcomes at Week 216 (NRI). At Weeks 48 and 216, 39.2% of patients achieved minimal disease activity (NRI). 75% reduction in Psoriasis Area and Severity Index responses were 65% and 52% at Weeks 48 and 216 (NRI). Total resolution rates for enthesitis, dactylitis and nail psoriasis, at 4 years, were 71%, 81% and 65%, respectively (LOCF). Structural damage progression was low over 4 years’ treatment. No new safety signals were identified after Week 96.

Conclusions

CZP efficacy in treating PsA was maintained over 4 years, in patients both with and without prior anti-TNF exposure, with no new safety signals identified.

Safety and maintenance of response for tofacitinib monotherapy and combination therapy in rheumatoid arthritis: an analysis of pooled data from open-label long-term extension studies

Objective

Tofacitinib is an oral Janus kinase inhibitor for the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis. This post hoc analysis evaluated patients receiving tofacitinib monotherapy or combination therapy, as well as those who switched from monotherapy to combination therapy (mono→combo) or vice versa (combo→mono) in long-term extension (LTE) studies.

Methods

Data were pooled from open-label LTE studies (ORAL Sequel (NCT00413699; ongoing; data collected 14 January 2016) and NCT00661661) involving patients who participated in qualifying index studies. Efficacy outcomes included American College of Rheumatology 20/50/70 rates, change from baseline in Disease Activity Score in 28 joints, erythrocyte sedimentation rate (DAS28-4(ESR)), Clinical Disease Activity Index (CDAI) and Health Assessment Questionnaire-Disability Index and DAS28-4(ESR) and CDAI low disease activity and remission. Safety was evaluated over 96 months.

Results

Of the 4967 patients treated, 35.4% initiated tofacitinib monotherapy, 64.6% initiated combination therapy, 2.6% were mono→combo switchers and 7.1% were combo→mono switchers. Patients who switched multiple times were excluded. Of those who initiated monotherapy and combination therapy, 87.8% (1543/1757) and 82.0% (2631/3210), respectively, remained on the same regimen throughout the study; efficacy was maintained. Incidence rates (IRs) for serious adverse events with tofacitinib 5 mg and 10 mg twice daily, respectively, were 9.42 and 8.41 with monotherapy and 8.36 and 10.75 with combination therapy; IRs for discontinuations due to AEs were 7.13 and 6.06 with monotherapy and 7.82 and 8.06 with combination therapy (overlapping CIs). For mono→combo and combo→mono switchers, discontinuations due to AEs were experienced by 0.8% and 0.9%, respectively, within 30 days of switching.

Conclusion

Tofacitinib efficacy as monotherapy or combination therapy was maintained through month 48 and sustained to month 72, with minimal switching of treatment regimens. Safety was consistent over 96 months.

Clinical trial registration

NCT00413699 (Pre-results) and NCT00661661 (Results).

Long-term safety of tofacitinib for the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis up to 8.5 years: integrated analysis of data from the global clinical trials

OBJECTIVES

Tofacitinib is an oral Janus kinase inhibitor for the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis (RA). We report an integrated safety summary of tofacitinib from two phase I, nine phase II, six phase III and two long-term extension studies in adult patients with active RA.

METHODS

Data were pooled for all tofacitinib-treated patients (data cut-off: 31 March 2015). Incidence rates (IRs; patients with event/100 patient-years) and 95% CIs are reported for adverse events (AEs) of interest.

RESULTS

6194 patients received tofacitinib for a total 19 406 patient-years' exposure; median exposure was 3.4 patient-years. IR (95% CI) for serious AEs was 9.4 (9.0 to 9.9); IR for serious infections was 2.7 (2.5 to 3.0). IR for (all) herpes zoster was 3.9 (3.6 to 4.2); IR for disseminated or multidermatomal herpes zoster was 0.3 (0.2 to 0.4). IR for opportunistic infections (excluding tuberculosis) was 0.3 (0.2 to 0.4) and was 0.2 (0.1 to 0.3) for tuberculosis. IR for malignancies (excluding non-melanoma skin cancer (NMSC)) was 0.9 (0.8 to 1.0); NMSC IR was 0.6 (0.5 to 0.7). IR for gastrointestinal perforations was 0.1 (0.1 to 0.2). Analysis of IR for serious infections, herpes zoster and malignancies by 6-month intervals did not reveal any notable increase in IR with longer-duration tofacitinib exposure.

CONCLUSION

This analysis of tofacitinib exposure up to 8.5 years allowed estimation of safety events with improved precision versus previous tofacitinib reports. AEs were generally stable over time; no new safety signals were observed compared with previous tofacitinib reports.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBERS

NCT01262118, NCT01484561, NCT00147498, NCT00413660, NCT00550446, NCT00603512, NCT00687193, NCT01164579, NCT00976599, NCT01059864, NCT01359150, NCT00960440, NCT00847613, NCT00814307, NCT00856544, NCT00853385, NCT01039688, NCT00413699, NCT00661661; Results.

[Psoriatic arthritis : Overview of drug therapy options and administration characteristics]

Psoriatic arthritis is a chronic inflammatory disease of the musculoskeletal system with association to skin psoriasis and is characterized by variable clinical symptoms with very heterogeneous degrees of disease suffering for patients. Clinical manifestations essentially include alterations to the skin and nails, peripheral arthritis, enthesitis, dactylitis and/or spinal involvement. This variability necessitates an individualized therapy of patients with different therapy targets. Apart from international guidelines no therapy recommendations are available in Germany for treatment of psoriatic arthritis. For this reason this article summarizes the established points, characteristics and aspects to be considered in the therapy of psoriatic arthritis in Germany, taking the various main forms of the disease into consideration.

Prediction of remission and low disease activity in disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drug-refractory patients with rheumatoid arthritis treated with golimumab

Objective. To create a tool to predict probability of remission and low disease activity (LDA) in patients with RA being considered for anti-TNF treatment in clinical practice.

Methods. We analysed data from GO-MORE, an open-label, multinational, prospective study in biologic-naïve patients with active RA (DAS28-ESR ⩾3.2) despite DMARD therapy. Patients received 50 mg s.c. golimumab (GLM) once monthly for 6 months. In secondary analyses, regression models were used to determine the best set of baseline factors to predict remission (DAS28-ESR <2.6) at month 6 and LDA (DAS28-ESR ⩽3.2) at month 1.

Results. In 3280 efficacy-evaluable patients, of 12 factors included in initial regression models predicting remission or LDA, six were retained in final multivariable models. Greater likelihood of LDA and remission was associated with being male; younger age; lower HAQ, ESR (or CRP) and tender joint count (or swollen joint count) scores; and absence of comorbidities. In models predicting 1-, 3- and 6-month LDA or remission, area under the receiver operating curve was 0.648–0.809 (R² = 0.0397–0.1078). The models also predicted 6-month HAQ and EuroQoL-5-dimension scores. A series of matrices were developed to easily show predicted rates of remission and LDA.

Conclusion. A matrix tool was developed to show predicted GLM treatment outcomes in patients with RA, based on a combination of six baseline characteristics. The tool could help provide practical guidance in selection of candidates for anti-TNF therapy.

European League Against Rheumatism (EULAR) recommendations for the management of psoriatic arthritis with pharmacological therapies: 2015 update

BACKGROUND

Since the publication of the European League Against Rheumatism recommendations for the pharmacological treatment of psoriatic arthritis (PsA) in 2012, new evidence and new therapeutic agents have emerged. The objective was to update these recommendations.

METHODS

A systematic literature review was performed regarding pharmacological treatment in PsA. Subsequently, recommendations were formulated based on the evidence and the expert opinion of the 34 Task Force members. Levels of evidence and strengths of recommendations were allocated.

RESULTS

The updated recommendations comprise 5 overarching principles and 10 recommendations, covering pharmacological therapies for PsA from non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), to conventional synthetic (csDMARD) and biological (bDMARD) disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs, whatever their mode of action, taking articular and extra-articular manifestations of PsA into account, but focusing on musculoskeletal involvement. The overarching principles address the need for shared decision-making and treatment objectives. The recommendations address csDMARDs as an initial therapy after failure of NSAIDs and local therapy for active disease, followed, if necessary, by a bDMARD or a targeted synthetic DMARD (tsDMARD). The first bDMARD would usually be a tumour necrosis factor (TNF) inhibitor. bDMARDs targeting interleukin (IL)12/23 (ustekinumab) or IL-17 pathways (secukinumab) may be used in patients for whom TNF inhibitors are inappropriate and a tsDMARD such as a phosphodiesterase 4-inhibitor (apremilast) if bDMARDs are inappropriate. If the first bDMARD strategy fails, any other bDMARD or tsDMARD may be used.

CONCLUSIONS

These recommendations provide stakeholders with an updated consensus on the pharmacological treatment of PsA and strategies to reach optimal outcomes in PsA, based on a combination of evidence and expert opinion.

Impact of certolizumab pegol on patient-reported outcomes in rheumatoid arthritis and correlation with clinical measures of disease activity

INTRODUCTION

The effect of certolizumab pegol (CZP) on patient-reported outcomes (PROs) was investigated in 1063 patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) from the REALISTIC trial (double-blind, placebo-controlled to week 12, open-label to week 28; randomized 4:1 [CZP:placebo]). Correlations between PROs and RA signs and symptoms, and the relative efficacy of these measures, were examined.

METHODS

Adults with RA and an inadequate response to at least one disease-modifying antirheumatic drug were enrolled. PROs assessed included physical function (using the Health Assessment Questionnaire-Disability Index), pain, fatigue, sleep disturbance, Patient Global Assessment of Disease Activity (PtGA), Routine Assessment of Patient Index Data 3 (RAPID3), and Rheumatoid Arthritis Disease Activity Index (RADAI).

RESULTS

Early significant and clinically meaningful improvements in all PROs were observed to week 12 with CZP vs. placebo and were maintained to the end of the trial (week 28). At week 12, up to one-third more CZP patients showed improvements compared with placebo that were greater than or equal to the minimal clinically important difference (MCID) in fatigue, sleep problems, pain, PtGA, RADAI, and RAPID3. The changes in PROs were correlated with clinical measures of disease activity, including the Disease Activity Score in 28 joints using C-reactive protein as well as tender and swollen joint counts.

CONCLUSIONS

Rapid improvements in PROs were seen in patients with RA treated with CZP. The magnitude of improvement exceeded the MCID in multiple domains and demonstrated that CZP improves aspects of health-related quality of life that are meaningful to patients and superior to placebo. PROs provide information complementary to clinical outcomes in assessment of treatment benefits.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT00717236 . Registered on 15 July 2008.

Effect of certolizumab pegol over 96 weeks in patients with psoriatic arthritis with and without prior antitumour necrosis factor exposure

Objective

Previous reports of RAPID-PsA (NCT01087788) demonstrated efficacy and safety of certolizumab pegol (CZP) over 24 weeks in patients with psoriatic arthritis (PsA), including patients with prior antitumour necrosis factor (TNF) therapy. We report efficacy and safety data from a 96-week data cut of RAPID-PsA.

Methods

RAPID-PsA was placebo-controlled to week 24, dose-blind to week 48 and open-label to week 216. We present efficacy data including American College of Rheumatology (ACR)/Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI) responses, HAQ-DI, pain, minimal disease activity (MDA), modified total Sharp score (mTSS) and ACR responses in patients with/without prior anti-TNF exposure, in addition to safety data.

Results

Of 409 patients randomised, 273 received CZP from week 0. 54 (19.8%) CZP patients had prior anti-TNF exposure. Of patients randomised to CZP, 91% completed week 24, 87% week 48 and 80% week 96. ACR responses were maintained to week 96: 60% of patients achieved ACR20 at week 24, and 64% at week 96. Improvements were observed with both CZP dose regimens. ACR20 responses were similar in patients with (week 24: 59%; week 96: 63%) and without (week 24: 60%; week 96: 64%) prior anti-TNF exposure. Placebo patients switching to CZP displayed rapid clinical improvements, maintained to week 96. In patients with ≥3% baseline skin involvement (60.8% week 0 CZP patients), PASI responses were maintained to week 96. No progression of structural damage was observed over the 96-week period. In the Safety Set (n=393), adverse events occurred in 345 patients (87.8%) and serious adverse events in 67 (17.0%), including 6 fatal events.

Conclusions

CZP efficacy was maintained to week 96 with both dose regimens and in patients with/without prior anti-TNF exposure. The safety profile was in line with that previously reported from RAPID-PsA, with no new safety signals observed with increased exposure.

Trial registration number

NCT01087788.

Attainment and characteristics of clinical remission according to the new ACR-EULAR criteria in abatacept-treated patients with early rheumatoid arthritis: new analyses from the Abatacept study to Gauge Remission and joint damage progression in methotrexate (MTX)-naive patients with Early Erosive rheumatoid arthritis (AGREE)

INTRODUCTION

This study evaluated various remission criteria in abatacept plus methotrexate (MTX)-treated patients with early rheumatoid arthritis (RA). We aimed to investigate the time to, and sustainability of, remission, and to evaluate the relationship between remission, function and structure.

METHODS

Post hoc analyses were performed from the 12-month, double-blind period of the Abatacept study to Gauge Remission and joint damage progression in methotrexate (MTX)-naive patients with Early Erosive rheumatoid arthritis (AGREE) in patients with early RA (≤2 years) and poor prognostic factors, comparing abatacept plus MTX (n = 210) versus MTX alone (n = 209).

RESULTS

At month 12, Disease Activity Score 28, Simplified Disease Activity Index (SDAI), Clinical Disease Activity Index and Boolean remission rates were, for abatacept plus MTX versus MTX alone: 47.6 % versus 27.3 %, 33.3 % versus 12.4 %, 34.3 % versus 16.3 %, and 23.8 % versus 5.7 %, respectively. Cumulative probability demonstrated higher proportions achieving first remission and first sustained remission for abatacept plus MTX versus MTX alone (e.g., 23.3 % [95 % confidence interval (CI): 17.6, 29.1] vs 12.9 % [8.4, 17.5] for first SDAI remission over 0-6 months). For patients in SDAI remission at month 3, mean Health Assessment Questionnaire-Disability Index at month 12 was 0.20 versus 0.50 for abatacept plus MTX versus MTX alone. Mean changes in radiographic score from baseline to month 12 were minimal for patients in SDAI remission at month 3 in both groups, while less structural damage progression was seen, 0.75 versus 1.35, respectively, for abatacept plus MTX versus MTX alone for patients with moderate/high disease activity at month 3 (adjusted mean treatment difference: -0.60 [95 % CI: -1.11, -0.09; P < 0.05]).

CONCLUSIONS

High proportions of abatacept plus MTX-treated patients achieved stringent remission criteria. Remission was associated with long-term functional benefit; dissociation was seen between clinical and structural outcomes for abatacept. These findings highlight the impact of reaching stringent remission targets early, on physical function and structural damage, in MTX-naïve biologic-treated patients.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov identifier NCT00122382. Registered 19 July 2005.

Golimumab in patients with active rheumatoid arthritis after treatment with tumor necrosis factor α inhibitors: findings with up to five years of treatment in the multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3 GO-AFTER study

Introduction

The aim of this study was to assess long-term golimumab therapy in rheumatoid arthritis (RA) patients who discontinued previous tumor necrosis factor-α (TNF)-inhibitor(s).

Methods

Patients enrolled into this multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study of active RA (≥4 tender, ≥4 swollen joints) received placebo (Group 1) or golimumab 50 mg (Group 2) or 100 mg (Group 3) injections every 4 weeks. Patients in Groups 1 and 2 with inadequate response at week 16 escaped to golimumab 50 and 100 mg, respectively. At week 24, Group 1 patients crossed-over to golimumab 50 mg, Group 2 continued golimumab 50/100 mg per escape status, and Group 3 maintained dosing. During the long-term-extension (LTE), golimumab 50 mg could be increased to 100 mg, and 100 mg could be decreased to 50 mg. Data through 5 years are reported for all patients (safety) and patients using methotrexate (efficacy, intention-to-treat (ITT) analysis with last-observation-carried-forward for missing data and non-responder imputation for unsatisfactory efficacy discontinuations).

Results

In total, 459 of 461 randomized patients received the study agent, 304 of whom were methotrexate-treated and included in efficacy analyses. Through week 256, the proportions of methotrexate-treated patients achieving American-College-of-Rheumatology (ACR) responses were 37.6% to 47.0% for ACR20, 21.4% to 35.0% for ACR50, and 7.8% to 17.0% for ACR70 response across randomized groups. Golimumab safety through week 268 was generally consistent with that at week 24 and week 160 and other anti-TNF agents.

Conclusions

In some patients with active RA discontinuing previous TNF-antagonist therapy, golimumab safety and efficacy, assessed conservatively with ITT analyses, was confirmed through 5 years.

Trial registration

Clinicaltrials.gov NCT00299546. Registered 03 March 2006.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s13075-015-0516-6) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Longterm (52-week) results of a phase III randomized, controlled trial of apremilast in patients with psoriatic arthritis

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the efficacy and safety of apremilast, an oral phosphodiesterase 4 inhibitor, over 52 weeks in patients with active psoriatic arthritis (PsA) despite prior treatment.

METHODS

Patients were randomized to placebo (n = 168), apremilast 20 mg BID (n = 168), or apremilast 30 mg BID (n = 168). Patients whose swollen and tender joint counts had not improved by ≥ 20% at Week 16 were considered nonresponders and were required to be re-randomized (1:1) to apremilast 20 mg BID or 30 mg BID if they were initially randomized to placebo, or continued their initial treatment of apremilast dose. At Week 24, all remaining patients treated with placebo were re-randomized to apremilast 20 mg BID or 30 mg BID.

RESULTS

An American College of Rheumatology 20 (ACR20) response at Week 16 was attained by significantly more patients receiving apremilast 20 mg BID (30.4%, p = 0.0166) or 30 mg BID (38.1%, p = 0.0001) than placebo (19.0%). Among patients receiving apremilast continuously for 52 weeks (n = 254), ACR20 response at Week 52 was observed in 63.0% (75/119, 20 mg BID) and 54.6% (71/130, 30 mg BID) of patients. Response was also maintained across secondary outcomes, including measures of PsA signs and symptoms, skin psoriasis severity, and physical function. The nature, incidence, and severity of adverse events were comparable over the 24-week and 52-week periods. The most common adverse events, diarrhea and nausea, generally occurred early and were self-limited.

CONCLUSION

Continuous apremilast treatment resulted in sustained improvements in PsA for up to 52 weeks. Apremilast had an acceptable safety profile and was generally well tolerated.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION

NCT01172938.