AB0888 Guselkumab Provides Sustained Improvements in Work Productivity and Daily Activity in Patients With Active Psoriatic Arthritis Through 2 Years of DISCOVER-2

Background

Psoriatic arthritis (PsA) impacts patients’ (pts) work productivity (WP) and daily activity.1 DISCOVER-2 (D2), a Phase 3 trial of the selective interleukin-23 p19-subunit inhibitor guselkumab (GUS) in biologic-naïve pts with PsA,2 demonstrated significant improvements in pt-reported WP and daily activity following 1 year (Y) of GUS treatment.3

Objectives

Assess WP and daily activity impairment in D2 pts through 2Y. Estimate indirect savings associated with GUS treatment and assess changes in employment status.

Methods

Pts with active PsA received GUS 100 mg every 4 weeks (Q4W); GUS 100 mg at W0, W4, then Q8W; or placebo (PBO). At W24, PBO pts crossed over to GUS 100 mg Q4W. WPAI-PsA assesses PsA-related work time missed (absenteeism), impairment while working (presenteeism), and impaired overall WP (absenteeism + presenteeism) for pts employed at baseline (EBL) and daily activity for all pts, including those unemployed at baseline (UBL) during the previous week. Mean changes in WPAI-PsA domains were calculated for each multiple imputation (MI) dataset using an analysis of covariance (ANCOVA); the reported LS mean is the average of all MI datasets. Significance was defined as p<0.05. Among pts EBL, potential indirect savings from improved overall WP were estimated using 2020 European Union mean yearly wage estimate (all occupations) combined with LS mean change from BL in WPAI-PsA overall work impairment.4 A shift analysis evaluated proportions of pts employed vs unemployed by treatment group using observed data over time.

Results

Pts EBL comprised 64% of the analysis cohort. Significant improvements in WP in pts EBL and in daily activity among all pts were observed with GUS Q4W/Q8W vs PBO at W24;3 mean improvements in WP and daily activity increased with continued GUS through 2Y (Table 1). Potential annual indirect savings from improved overall WP in pts EBL were €10,826 GUS Q4W, €12,712 GUS Q8W, and €10,948 PBO→ GUS Q4W at 2Y. Shift analysis showed relatively stable employment in pts EBL with GUS up to 2Y (>83% continued to work). Among pts UBL (36% of cohort), the proportion of pts employed increased by >20% through 2Y of GUS (Figure 1).

Table 1.

Model-Based Estimates of Change From BL in WPAI-PsA Domains1

GUS 100mg Q4WGUS 100mg Q8WPBO (W0-24) → GUS 100 mg Q4W (W24-100)VisitW24W100W24W100W24W100Absenteeism, N145147147149162166  LS Mean (95% CI)-3.4 (-6.5, -0.3)-1.8 (-4.5, 0.9)-3.0 (-6.0, 0.1)-4.2 (-6.8,-1.5)-3.0 (-6.0, 0.04)-4.2 (-6.8,-1.6)  Diff vs. PBO-0.4 (-4.6, 3.8)--0.01 (-4.2, 4.2)---Presenteeism, N145147147149162166  LS Mean (95% CI)-20.1 (-23.7, -16.6)-26.3 (-30.1,-22.5)-19.6 (-23.2, -16.1)-28.0 (-31.8, -24.2)-10.5 (-13.9, -7.0)-24.2 (-27.9, -20.5)  Diff vs PBO-9.7* (-14.4, -5.0)--9.2* (-13.9, -4.5)---Work productivity, N145147147149162166  LS Mean (95% CI)-20.1 (-24.1, -16.1)-23.8 (-28.0, -19.6)-19.2 (-23.1, -15.2)-28.0 (-32.1, -23.8)-10.6 (-14.4, -6.8)-24.1 (-28.1, -20.1)  Diff vs PBO-9.5* (-14.8, -4.2)--8.6* (-13.9, -3.3)---Daily Activity, N242242246246245245  LS Mean (95% CI)-20.5 (-23.3, -17.7)-29.2 (-32.2, -26.1)-21.2 (-23.9, -18.4)-28.0 (-31.0, -24.9)-9.9 (-12.6, -7.1)-26.6 (-29.6, -23.6)  Diff vs PBO-10.6* (-14.4, -6.8)--11.3* (-15.1, -7.5)-

1Mean changes in WPAI-PsA domains were calculated for each MI dataset using an ANCOVA; reported LS mean (95% confidence interval [CI]) = average of all MI datasets.

*p<0.002

Conclusion

In GUS-treated bio-naïve PsA pts, robust improvements in WP and daily activity seen at W24 were maintained and increased through 2Y of GUS. Long-term improvements in WP achieved may result in substantial indirect cost savings for GUS-treated pts. Rates of employment remained stable in pts employed and increased in those unemployed at BL.

References

[1]Tillett W et al. Rheumatol (Oxford). 2012;51:275–83.

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

[3]Curtis JR et al. EULAR, June 2–5, 2021. POS1026.

[4]OECD (2020). Average wages (indicator). https://data.oecd.org/earnwage/average-wages.htm

Disclosure of Interests

Jeffrey Curtis Consultant of: AbbVie, Amgen, Bristol-Myers Squibb, CorEvitas, Eli Lilly and Company, Janssen, Myriad, Novartis, Pfizer, Sanofi, and UCB, Grant/research support from: AbbVie, Amgen, Bristol-Myers Squibb, CorEvitas, Eli Lilly and Company, Janssen, Myriad, Novartis, Pfizer, Sanofi, and UCB, Iain McInnes Shareholder of: Causeway Therapeutics, and Evelo Compugen, Consultant of: Astra Zeneca, AbbVie, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Amgen, Eli Lilly and Company, Cabaletta, Compugen, GSK, Gilead, Janssen, Novartis, Pfizer, Sanofi, Roche, and UCB, Grant/research support from: Astra Zeneca, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Amgen, Eli Lilly and Company, GSK, Janssen, Novartis, Roche, and UCB, Proton Rahman Consultant of: AbbVie, Amgen, Bristol Myers Squibb, Celgene, Eli Lilly, Janssen, Merck, Novartis, Pfizer, and UCB, Grant/research support from: Janssen and Novartis, Dafna D Gladman Consultant of: Abbvie, Amgen, BMS, Eli Lilly, Galapagos, Gilead, janssen, Novartis, Pfizer and UCB., Grant/research support from: Abbvie, Amgen, Eli Lilly, Janssen, Pfizer, UCB, Feifei Yang Shareholder of: Johnson & Johnson, Employee of: Janssen Global Services, LLC, Steve Peterson Shareholder of: Johnson & Johnson, Employee of: Janssen Global Services, LLC, Alexa Kollmeier Shareholder of: Johnson & Johnson, Employee of: Janssen Research & Development, LLC, Natalie Shiff Shareholder of: Johnson & Johnson, Abbvie, Gilead, Employee of: Janssen Scientific Affairs, LLC, Chenglong Han Shareholder of: Johnson & Johnson, Employee of: Janssen Research & Development, LLC, May Shawi Shareholder of: Johnson & Johnson, Employee of: Immunology Global Medical Affairs, Janssen Pharmaceutical Companies, William Tillett Speakers bureau: Abbvie, Amgen, Eli-Lilly, Janssen, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, and UCB, Consultant of: Abbvie, Amgen, Eli-Lilly, Janssen, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, and UCB, Grant/research support from: Abbvie, Amgen, Eli-Lilly, Janssen, and UCB, Philip J Mease Speakers bureau: AbbVie, Amgen, Eli Lilly, Janssen, Novartis, Pfizer, Sun Pharma, and UCB, Consultant of: AbbVie, Aclaris, Amgen, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol Myers Squibb, Eli Lilly, Galapagos, Gilead, GlaxoSmithKline, Inmagene, Janssen, Novartis, Pfizer, Sun Pharma, and UCB, Grant/research support from: AbbVie, Amgen, Bristol Myers Squibb, Eli Lilly, Galapagos, Gilead, Janssen, Novartis, Pfizer, Sun Pharma, and UCB

POS1017 GUSELKUMAB PROVIDES CONTINUED IMPROVEMENT IN KEY DOMAINS OF PSORIATIC ARTHRITIS THROUGH 2 YEARS

Background

Recent guidelines from the Group for Research and Assessment of Psoriasis and Psoriatic Arthritis (GRAPPA) recommend that psoriatic arthritis (PsA) therapy achieve lowest possible disease activity across 6 key domains and related conditions. 1 In the DISCOVER-1&2 trials, guselkumab (GUS) significantly improved signs and symptoms of PsA at Week (W) 24.

Objectives

Evaluate GUS efficacy through W100 of DISCOVER-2 by GRAPPA-recommended PsA domains (peripheral arthritis, skin, dactylitis, enthesitis, axial disease [nails not evaluated]) and related conditions of inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) and uveitis.

Methods

Enrolled adults had active PsA, were naïve to biologics/JAK inhibitors, and had ≥5 swollen and ≥5 tender joints and CRP ≥0.6 mg/dL. Randomized (1:1:1) patients (pts) received GUS 100 mg every 4 weeks (Q4W); GUS 100 mg at W0, W4, then every 8 weeks (Q8W); or placebo (PBO) with crossover to GUS 100 mg Q4W at W24. Outcomes selected aligned with GRAPPA-recommended domains/conditions: overall disease activity (Psoriatic Arthritis Disease Activity Score [PASDAS], Minimal Disease Activity [MDA]), peripheral arthritis (changes in Disease Activity Index for Psoriatic Arthritis [DAPSA] and clinical DAPSA [cDAPSA]), skin (Psoriasis Area and Severity Index [PASI], Investigator’s Global Assessment of psoriasis [IGA]), dactylitis (Dactylitis Severity Score [DSS]), enthesitis (Leeds Enthesitis Index [LEI]), axial disease (spinal pain) and IBD/uveitis (adverse events [AEs]). Among 493 GUS-randomized pts, change from baseline (BL) through W100 in continuous outcomes were analyzed by Repeated Measures Generalized Linear Mixed Effects Models adjusting for respective BL score and GUS regimen. Achievement of therapeutic endpoints was summarized by descriptive statistics using nonresponder imputation (NRI) for missing categorical data.

Results

~90% of GUS-randomized pts completed treatment at W100. For continuous outcomes, improvements over time in key PsA domains extended through W100 of GUS (Figure 1). Therapeutic endpoint response rates also increased incrementally through W100 (Table 1). Mean improvements and response rates were consistent across key domains with no significant difference between GUS regimens. For related conditions, 1 GUS pt had IBD and 4 had uveitis at BL and none had AE of exacerbation through W100. No pt developed IBD through W100 (vs 1 PBO pt through W24); 1 GUS pt had AE of iridocyclitis through W100 (vs 1 PBO pt through W24).

Table 1.

Number (%) of GUS-randomized Pts (N=493) Achieving Therapeutic Endpoints Over Time (NRI)*

WeekQ4WQ8W81624521008162452100MDA*8 (3)33 (14)47 (19)83 (34)93 (38)9 (4)42 (17)63 (25)77 (31)100 (40)DAPSA43 (18)61 (25)88 (36)125 (51)151 (62)43 (17)79 (32)97 (39)130 (52)147 (59) ≤14’; ≤45 (2)12 (5)21 (9)39 (16)52 (21)3 (1)15 (6)23 (9)46 (19)60 (24)cDAPSA41 (17)58 (24)89 (36)125 (51)150 (61)44 (18)75 (30)95 (38)131 (53)147 (60) ≤13* ≤35 (2)13 (5)29 (12)44 (18)59 (24)4 (2)19 (8)25 (10)53 (21)65 (26)PASDAS ≤3.225 (10)44 (18)58 (24)105 (43)126 (51)28 (11)56 (23)76 (31)106 (43)122 (49) ≤1.94 (2)11 (4)22 (9)36 (15)51 (21)2 (1)16 (6)23 (9)52 (21)58 (23)Skin PASI75†-137 (74)146 (79)160 (87)152 (83)-129 (73)139 (79)151 (86)144 (82) PASI90†-100 (54)114 (62)142 (77)136 (74)-97 (55)121 (69)131 (74)123 (70) PASI100†-62 (34)83 (45)106 (58)109 (59)-48 (27)80 (46)93 (53)94 (53) IGA 0/1 Response‡-122 (66)127 (69)147 (80)140 (76)-110 (62)124 (70)131 (74)126 (72)Enthesitis resolution§45 (27)66 (40)71 (43)93 (56)102 (61)50 (32)75 (48)87 (55)97 (62)110 (70)Dactylitis resolution§39 (32)64 (53)80 (66)90 (74)87 (72)34 (31)51 (46)66 (60)86 (77)92 (83)

*Repeated Measures Generalized Linear Mixed Effects Models; excludes pts who achieved endpoint at BL.

†Pts with BL IGA≥2 and BSA≥3%.

‡IGA skin response = score of 0 or 1 and ≥2 grade improvement from BL.

§Among pts with domain at BL.

Conclusion

In DISCOVER-2 bio-naïve PsA pts, both GUS regimens provided continued improvements in key GRAPPA-recommended domains of PsA through up to 2 years of treatment.

References

[1]Coates et al. Ann Rheum Dis 2021;80(suppl 1):139

Disclosure of Interests

Laura Coates Speakers bureau: AbbVie, Amgen, Biogen, Celgene, Eli Lilly, Galapagos, Gilead, Janssen, Medac, Novartis, Pfizer and UCB, Consultant of: AbbVie, Amgen, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol Myers Squibb, Celgene, Eli Lilly, Gilead, Galapagos, Janssen, Novartis, Pfizer, and UCB, Grant/research support from: AbbVie, Amgen, Celgene, Eli Lilly, Janssen, Novartis, Pfizer, and UCB, Laure Gossec Consultant of: AbbVie, Amgen, Bristol Myers Squibb, Eli Lilly, Galapagos, Gilead, GSK, Janssen, Novartis, Pfizer, Samsung Bioepis, Sanofi-Aventis, and UCB, Grant/research support from: Amgen, Eli Lilly, Galapagos, Pfizer, and Sandoz, Christine CONTRE Shareholder of: Johnson & Johnson, Employee of: Janssen Cilag, May Shawi Shareholder of: Johnson & Johnson, Employee of: Janssen Pharmaceutical Companies of Johnson & Johnson, Emmanouil Rampakakis Consultant of: Janssen, Employee of: JSS Medical Research, Natalie Shiff Shareholder of: Johnson & Johnson, Employee of: Janssen Scientific Affairs, LLC, Alexa Kollmeier Shareholder of: Johnson & Johnson, Employee of: Janssen Research & Development, LLC, Xie L Xu Shareholder of: Johnson & Johnson, Employee of: Janssen Research & Development, LLC, Peter Nash Grant/research support from: Janssen, Abbvie, Pfizer, Novartis, Lilly, Gilead, Roche, Sandoz, Celgene, Sun, Boehringer, and Bristol Myers Squibb, Philip J Mease Speakers bureau: AbbVie, Amgen, Eli Lilly, Janssen, Novartis, Pfizer, Sun Pharma, and UCB, Consultant of: AbbVie, Aclaris, Amgen, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol Myers Squibb, Eli Lilly, Galapagos, Gilead, GSK, Inmagene, Janssen, Novartis, Pfizer, Sun Pharma, and UCB, Grant/research support from: AbbVie, Amgen, Bristol Myers Squibb, Eli Lilly, Galapagos, Gilead, Janssen, Novartis, Pfizer, Sun Pharma, and UCB, Philip Helliwell Paid instructor for: Abbvie, Amgen, Novartis, Janssen, Consultant of: Eli Lilly

AB0881 Guselkumab Provides Sustained Improvements in Health-Related Quality of Life in Patients With Active Psoriatic Arthritis Through 2 Years of DISCOVER-2

Background

Psoriatic arthritis (PsA), a chronic inflammatory disease characterized by peripheral arthritis, axial inflammation, dactylitis, enthesitis, and skin/nail psoriasis, is associated with reduced health-related quality of life (HRQoL).

Objectives

To assess long-term effect of guselkumab (GUS), a human monoclonal antibody that selectively targets the interleukin (IL)-23p19 subunit, on HRQoL of bio-naïve PsA patients (pts) who participated in the Phase 3 2-year DISCOVER-2 trial.1

Methods

Pts with active PsA despite nonbiologic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs) and/or nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) received GUS 100 mg every 4 weeks (Q4W); GUS 100 mg at W0, W4, then Q8W; or placebo (PBO). At W24, PBO pts crossed over to GUS 100 mg Q4W. HRQoL was assessed using the pt-reported EuroQoL-5 Dimension-5 Level (EQ-5D-5L) questionnaire index and EuroQol Visual Analog Scale (EQ-VAS), widely used and complimentary tools that allow pts to provide a global assessment of their HRQoL. The EQ-5D-5L index assesses mobility, self-care, usual activities, pain/discomfort, and anxiety/depression; an index score is derived ranging from 0 (death) to 1 (perfect health).2 EQ-VAS assesses pt health state on a scale of 0-100, with higher scores indicating better health. Using mixed effects models for repeated measures (MMRM), least squares (LS) mean changes from baseline in the EQ-5D-5L index and EQ-VAS through W100 were assessed. Observed changes from baseline were evaluated; in pts who met treatment failure rules before W24 and in pts who discontinued with missing data after W24, changes from baseline were imputed as 0.

Results

GUS-treated pts achieved greater improvements in pt-reported health status than PBO at both W16 and W24 when evaluated using both the EQ-5D-5L index score and the EQ-VAS. The improvements by GUS in EQ-5D-5L index scores through W24 (0.12 for GUS Q4W/Q8W vs 0.05 for PBO; each nominal p<0.0001) were maintained with continued GUS through 2 years (0.15 for GUS Q4W/Q8W) (Table 1). PBO-treated pts who started GUS at W24 reported comparable improvements in their HRQoL by W52 (0.12), with maintenance though W100 (0.14). Similar results were observed with EQ-VAS (Figure 1). W24 improvements in EQ-VAS scores were greater following GUS treatment (18.2/18.4 GUS Q4W/Q8W) vs PBO (6.8; nominal p<0.0001). EQ-VAS scores continued to improve with GUS through 2 years (25.0/24.6 GUS Q4W/Q8W). Likewise, PBO-treated pts who crossed over to GUS at W24 experienced improvements in HRQoL by W52 (18.8), with maintenance through W100 (21.2).

Table 1.

LS mean change from baseline through W100 in EQ-5D-5L index

GUS 100mg Q4W(W0-100)GUS 100mg Q8W(W0-100)PBO → GUS 100 mg Q4WPBO(W0-24)GUS(W24-100)Week162410016241001624100N243244243247246248244244244LS mean change (95% CI)0.10 (0.09,0.12)0.12 (0.1,0.13)0.15 (0.13,0.16)0.11 (0.1,0.13)0.12 (0.1,0.13)0.15 (0.13,0.17)0.06 (0.04,0.07)0.05 (0.04,0.07)0.14 (0.12,0.16)  Diff vs. PBO0.04 (0.02,0.06)0.06 (0.04,0.09)--0.05 (0.03,0.07)0.06 (0.04,0.08)--------  Nominal p-value<0.0001<0.0001--<0.0001<0.0001--------

CI=Confidence interval; Diff=Difference

Conclusion

In bio-naïve pts with active PsA receiving GUS, earlier improvements (at the first timepoint assessed) in self-reported HRQoL measures were sustained through 2 years.

References

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

[2]EuroQol Group. 1990;16:199-208.

Disclosure of Interests

Jeffrey Curtis Consultant of: AbbVie, Amgen, Bristol-Myers Squibb, CorEvitas, Eli Lilly, Janssen, Myriad, Novartis, Pfizer, Sanofi, and UCB, Grant/research support from: AbbVie, Amgen, Bristol-Myers Squibb, CorEvitas, Eli Lilly, Janssen, Myriad, Novartis, Pfizer, Sanofi, and UCB, Iain McInnes Shareholder of: Causeway Therapeutics, and Evelo Compugen, Consultant of: Astra Zeneca, AbbVie, Amgen, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Cabaletta, Compugen, Eli Lilly, Gilead, GSK, Janssen, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, Sanofi, and UCB, Grant/research support from: Astra Zeneca, Amgen, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Eli Lilly, GSK, Janssen, Novartis, Roche, and UCB, Proton Rahman Consultant of: AbbVie, Amgen, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Celgene, Eli Lilly, Janssen, Merck, Novartis, Pfizer, and UCB, Grant/research support from: Janssen and Novartis, Dafna D Gladman Consultant of: AbbVie, Amgen, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Eli Lilly, Galapagos, Gilead, Janssen, Novartis, Pfizer, and UCB, Grant/research support from: AbbVie, Amgen, Eli Lilly, Janssen, Pfizer, and UCB, Feifei Yang Shareholder of: Johnson & Johnson, Employee of: Janssen Global Services, LLC (a wholly owned subsidiary of Johnson & Johnson), Steve Peterson Shareholder of: Johnson & Johnson, Employee of: Janssen Global Services, LLC (a wholly owned subsidiary of Johnson & Johnson), Alexa Kollmeier Shareholder of: Johnson & Johnson, Employee of: Janssen Research & Development, LLC (a wholly owned subsidiary of Johnson & Johnson), Natalie Shiff Shareholder of: AbbVie, Gilead, and Johnson & Johnson, Employee of: Janssen Scientific Affairs, LLC (a wholly owned subsidiary of Johnson & Johnson), Chenglong Han Shareholder of: Johnson & Johnson, Employee of: Janssen Research & Development, LLC (a wholly owned subsidiary of Johnson & Johnson), May Shawi Shareholder of: Johnson & Johnson, Employee of: Immunology Global Medical Affairs, Janssen Pharmaceutical Companies (a wholly owned subsidiary of Johnson & Johnson), William Tillett Speakers bureau: AbbVie, Amgen, Eli Lilly, Janssen, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, and UCB, Consultant of: AbbVie, Amgen, Eli Lilly, Janssen, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, and UCB, Grant/research support from: AbbVie, Amgen, Eli Lilly, Janssen, and UCB, Philip J Mease Speakers bureau: AbbVie, Amgen, Eli Lilly, Janssen, Novartis, Pfizer, SUN Pharma, and UCB, Consultant of: AbbVie, Aclaris, Amgen, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Eli Lilly, Galapagos, Gilead, GSK, Inmagene, Janssen, Novartis, Pfizer, SUN Pharma, and UCB, Grant/research support from: AbbVie, Amgen, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Eli Lilly, Galapagos, Gilead, Janssen, Novartis, Pfizer, SUN Pharma, and UCB

POS0072 CONSISTENT LONG-TERM GUSELKUMAB EFFICACY ACROSS PSORIATIC ARTHRITIS DOMAINS IRRESPECTIVE OF BASELINE PATIENT CHARACTERISTICS

Background

Psoriatic arthritis (PsA) patients (pts) with differing baseline (BL) characteristics may vary in their response to treatment. In the phase 3 DISCOVER-1 and DISCOVER-2 studies, guselkumab (GUS) significantly improved joint symptoms, skin disease, enthesitis, dactylitis, physical function, and quality of life at Week (W) 24 in pts with PsA.1,2 Clinical responses across these disease domains were maintained or increased with GUS at W52,3.4 regardless of BL pt demographics, disease characteristics, or conventional synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drug (csDMARD) use.5 Durable efficacy with GUS through W100 across multiple disease domains was observed.6

Objectives

Assess both BL predictors of, and by BL pt subgroups, GUS efficacy across PsA disease domains through W100 of DISCOVER-2.

Methods

Biologic-naïve adults with active PsA despite standard therapies were enrolled in DISCOVER-2 (swollen joint count [SJC] ≥5 & tender joint count [TJC] ≥5, C-reactive protein [CRP] ≥0.6 mg/dL). Pts were randomized 1:1:1 to GUS 100 mg every 4 weeks (Q4W); GUS 100 mg at W0, W4, then Q8W; or placebo (PBO).2 GUS effects on joint, skin, enthesitis, dactylitis, spinal pain, and disease severity endpoints (change in Disease Activity in PsA [DAPSA], SJC, and TJC scores; Psoriasis [PsO] Area Severity Index [PASI] score [among pts with BL IGA ≥2 and body surface area [BSA] with PsO ≥3%]; Leeds enthesitis index [LEI] score [among pts with enthesitis at BL]; dactylitis score [among pts with dactylitis at BL]; spinal pain score; and PsA Disease Activity Score [PASDAS], respectively) at W100 were evaluated for GUS-randomized pts, both by treatment group and by pooling pts across Q4W and Q8W treatment arms. A multivariate linear model adjusting for BL pt characteristics assessed associations between BL predictors of interest and changes in DAPSA, PASI, and LEI scores from BL to W100, and to assess least squares mean (LSM) changes and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) in all continuous endpoints from BL to W100 within subgroups of pts defined by BL sex, body mass index (BMI), PsA duration, SJC, TJC, CRP level, %BSA, PASI score, and csDMARD use.

Results

442 (90%) GUS-randomized pts completed study treatment through W100.6 Among the BL predictors of long-term GUS efficacy assessed (see above), only PsA duration (p=0.032), SJC (p<0.001), and TJC (p<0.001) were significant predictors of long-term (BL to W100) DAPSA score change; %BSA (p=0.002), PASI score (<0.001), SJC (p=0.008), and csDMARD use (p=0.014) were significant predictors of long-term PASI score change; and none significantly predicted long-term LEI score change among pooled GUS pts (Figure 1). However, statistically significant improvements from BL to W100 in DAPSA, PASI, and LEI scores were observed across all BL strata, including those indicating more extensive or severe disease, in pooled GUS Q4W+Q8W pts (Figure 1, all p<0.001) and within each dosing group. Similar improvements were observed for other continuous endpoints assessed (change in Psoriatic Arthritis Disease Activity Score [PASDAS], SJC, TJC, spinal pain, and dactylitis score).

Conclusion

GUS significantly improved PsA signs and symptoms through W100 across all BL pt subgroups evaluated, including pts with highly active disease, and regardless of dosing regimen.

References

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

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

[3]Ritchlin CT et al. RMD Open 2021;7(1):e001457.

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

[5]Ritchlin CT et al. Ann Rheum Dis 2021;80:1291-2.

[6]McInnes IB et al. Arthritis Rheumatol 2021;doi: 10.1002/art.42010.

Disclosure of Interests

Iain McInnes Shareholder of: Causeway Therapeutics, and Evelo Compugen, Consultant of: AbbVie, Amgen, AstraZeneca, Bristol Myers Squibb, Eli Lilly, Cabaletta, Compugen, GSK, Gilead, Janssen, Novartis, Pfizer, Sanofi, Roche, and UCB, Grant/research support from: Amgen, AstraZeneca, Bristol Myers Squibb, Eli Lilly, GSK, Janssen, Novartis, Roche, and UCB, John Tesser Speakers bureau: AbbVie, Amgen, BMS, Eli Lilly, Janssen and Pfizer, Consultant of: AbbVie, Eli Lilly, Gilead, Janssen, Novartis, and Pfizer, Grant/research support from: AbbVie, Amgen, BMS, Celgene, CoreVitas, Eli Lilly, Gilead, Janssen, Pfizer, and Sun Pharma, Elena Schiopu Consultant of: Janssen, Grant/research support from: Janssen, Joseph F. Merola Consultant of: AbbVie, Arena, Biogen, Bristol Myers Squibb, Dermavant, Eli Lilly, Janssen, Novartis, Pfizer, Sun Pharma, and UCB, Grant/research support from: AbbVie, Arena, Biogen, Bristol Myers Squibb, Dermavant, Eli Lilly, Janssen, Novartis, Pfizer, Sun Pharma, and UCB, Soumya D Chakravarty Shareholder of: Johnson & Johnson, Employee of: Janssen Scientific Affairs, LLC (a wholly owned subsidiary of Johnson & Johnson), Emmanouil Rampakakis Consultant of: Janssen, Employee of: JSS Medical Research, Natalie Shiff Shareholder of: AbbVie, Gilead, Johnson & Johnson, Employee of: Janssen Scientific Affairs, LLC (a wholly owned subsidiary of Johnson & Johnson), Alexa Kollmeier Shareholder of: Johnson & Johnson, Employee of: Janssen Research & Development, LLC (a wholly owned subsidiary of Johnson & Johnson), Xie L Xu Shareholder of: Johnson & Johnson, Employee of: Janssen Research & Development, LLC (a wholly owned subsidiary of Johnson & Johnson), May Shawi Shareholder of: Johnson & Johnson, Employee of: Janssen Pharmaceutical Companies of Johnson & Johnson, Frederic Lavie Shareholder of: Johnson & Johnson, Employee of: Janssen Pharmaceutical Companies of Johnson & Johnson, Paul Bird Speakers bureau: AbbVie, Eli Lilly, Gilead, Janssen, MSD, Pfizer, and UCB, Consultant of: Eli Lilly, Gilead, Janssen, Novartis, and Pfizer, Philip J Mease Speakers bureau: AbbVie, Amgen, Eli Lilly, Janssen, Novartis, Pfizer, Sun Pharma, and UCB, Consultant of: AbbVie, Aclaris, Amgen, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol Myers Squibb, Eli Lilly, Galapagos, Gilead, GSK, Inmagene, Janssen, Novartis, Pfizer, Sun Pharma, and UCB, Grant/research support from: AbbVie, Amgen, Bristol Myers Squibb, Eli Lilly, Galapagos, Gilead, Janssen, Novartis, Pfizer, Sun Pharma, and UCB

A new Canadian inception cohort for juvenile idiopathic arthritis: The Canadian Alliance of Pediatric Rheumatology Investigators Registry

Objectives

The aim was to describe the design, methods and initial findings of a new Canadian inception cohort of children with JIA, The Canadian Alliance of Pediatric Rheumatology Investigators (CAPRI) JIA Registry.

Methods

The CAPRI JIA Registry was started in 2017 to collect information prospectively on children enrolled within 3 months of JIA diagnosis across Canada. The registry has a non-traditional modular design, with no artificially set times for registry visits to occur, streamlined multi-method data collection that requires 2–4 min per visit, and reports cumulative incidence of treatments, outcomes and adverse events calculated by Kaplan–Meier survival methods.

Results

A total of 166 patients, enrolled a median of 6 weeks after JIA diagnosis at 10 centres, were included. The median age at diagnosis was 9 years [interquartile range (IQR) 3, 13], 61% were female and 51% had oligoarticular JIA. The median three-variable clinical Juvenile Arthritis Disease Activity Score was 6.5 (IQR 4, 10) at enrolment, and the median time to first attainment of clinically inactive disease (CID) was 24 weeks (by 1 year, 81%). Within 1 year of diagnosis, 70% of patients had started a DMARD and 35% a biologic agent. The rates of adverse events and serious adverse events were 60 and 5.8 per 100 patient-years, respectively.

Conclusion

This streamlined and flexible registry minimizes the burden of data collection and interference with clinic operations. Initial findings suggest that treatments for newly diagnosed patients with JIA in Canada have intensified, and now 81% of patients attain CID within 1 year of diagnosis.

Proceedings of the 2016 Childhood Arthritis and Rheumatology Research Alliance (CARRA) Scientific Meeting : Toronto, Canada. 14-17 April 2016

P1 Serologic evidence of gut-driven systemic inflammation in juvenile idiopathic arthritis Lampros Fotis, Nur Shaikh, Kevin Baszis, Anthony French, Phillip Tarr P2 Oral health and anti-citrullinated peptide antibodies (ACPA) in juvenile idiopathic arthritis Sriharsha Grevich, Peggy Lee, Sarah Ringold, Brian Leroux, Hannah Leahey, Megan Yuasa, Jessica Foster, Jeremy Sokolove, Lauren Lahey, William Robinson, Joshua Newsom, Anne Stevens P3 Novel autoantigens for endothelial cell antibodies in pediatric rheumatic diseases identified by proteomics Rie Karasawa, Mayumi Tamaki, Megumi Tanaka, Toshiko Sato, Kazuo Yudoh, James N. Jarvis P4 Transcriptional profiling reveals monocyte signature associated with JIA patient poor response to methotrexate Halima Moncrieffe, Mark F. Bennett, Monica Tsoras, Lorie Luyrink, Huan Xu, Sampath Prahalad, Paula Morris, Jason Dare, Peter A. Nigrovic, Margalit Rosenkranz, Mara Becker, Kathleen M. O’Neil, Thomas Griffin, Daniel J. Lovell, Alexei A. Grom, Mario Medvedovic, Susan D. Thompson P5 A multi-dimensional genomic map for polyarticular juvenile idiopathic arthritis Lisha Zhu, Kaiyu Jiang, Laiping Wong, Michael J Buck, Yanmin Chen, Halima Moncrieffe, Laura Brungs, Tao Liu, Ting Wang, James N Jarvis P6 Tocilizumab for treatment of children with refractory JIA Khaled Alsaeid, Jasim Alfailakawi, Hamid Alenezi, Hazim Alsaeed P7 Clinical characteristics of the initial patients enrolled in the Childhood Arthritis and Rheumatology Research Alliance (CARRA) Registry Tim Beukelman, Marc Natter, Norm Ilowite, Kelly Mieszkalski, Grendel Burrell, Brian Best, Helen Bristow, Shannon Carr, Anne Dennos, Rachel Kaufmann, Yukiko Kimura, Laura Schanberg P8 Comparative performance of small and large clinical centers in a comprehensive pediatric rheumatology disease registry Peter R Blier P9 Clinical characteristics of children with membranous lupus nephritis: The Childhood Arthritis and Rheumatology Research Alliance Legacy Registry Alexis Boneparth, Scott E. Wenderfer, L. Nandini Moorthy, Suhas M. Radhakrishna, Anna Carmela P. Sagcal-Gironella, Emily von Scheven P10 Rituximab use in pediatric lupus anticoagulant hypoprothrombinemia syndrome - a two center experience Kader Cetin Gedik, Salma Siddique, Cassyanne L. Aguiar, Doruk Erkan P11 Predictors of complementary and alternative medicine use and response in children with musculoskeletal conditions Ezra Cohen, Yvonne Lee, Michelle Dossett, Darshan Mehta, Roger Davis P12 Comparison of pediatric rheumatology and nephrology survey results for the treatment of refractory proliferative lupus nephritis and renal flare in juvenile SLE Mileka Gilbert, Beatrice Goilav, Esra Meidan, Joyce Hsu, Alexis Boneparth, Anabelle Chua, Stacy Ardoin, Scott E. Wenderfer, Emily Von Scheven, Natasha M. Ruth P13 Transitioning lupus patients from pediatric to adult rheumatology Joyce Hui-Yuen, Kader Cetin Gedik, Liza Bermudez, Ashlea Cook, Lisa Imundo, Amy Starr, Andrew Eichenfield, Anca Askanase P14 The systemic juvenile idiopathic arthritis cohort of the Childhood Arthritis & Rheumatology Research Alliance Registry Ginger Janow, Laura E. Schanberg, Soko Setoguchi, Victor Hasselblad, Elizabeth D. Mellins, Rayfel Schneider, Yukiko Kimura, The CARRA Legacy Registry Investigators P15 Results of the pilot study of the Childhood Arthritis and Rheumatology Research Alliance (CARRA) consensus treatment plans for new-onset systemic juvenile idiopathic arthritis Yukiko Kimura, Sriharsha Grevich, Timothy Beukelman, Esi Morgan, T Brent Graham, Maria Ibarra, Yonit Sterba Ruas, Marisa Klein-Gitelman, Karen Onel, Sampath Prahalad, Marilynn Punaro, Sarah Ringold, Dana Toib, Heather Van Mater, Jennifer E. Weiss, Pamela F. Weiss, Kelly Mieszkalski, Laura E. Schanberg P16 A systemic review of pain relief modalities in juvenile idiopathic arthritis: First step in developing a novel decision support intervention Timothy S. H. Kwok, Jacinthe Bisaillon, Christine Smith, Lucie Brosseau, Jennifer Stinson, Adam M. Huber, Ciaran M. Duffy, Karine Toupin April P17 Barriers and facilitators to care retention for pediatric systemic lupus erythematous patients in South Africa: A qualitative study Laura B Lewandowski, Christiaan Scott P18 Evaluating the feasibility of conducting comparative effectiveness studies in juvenile Localized Scleroderma (jLS) Suzanne C. Li, Kathryn S. Torok, C. Egla Rabinovich, Sandy D. Hong, Mara L Becker, Fatma Dedeoglu, Maria F. Ibarra, Polly J Ferguson, Rob C. Fuhbrigge, Katie G. Stewart, Elena Pope, Ronald M. Laxer, Thomas G. Mason, Gloria C. Higgins, Xiaohu Li, Marilynn G. Punaro, George Tomlinson, Eleanor Pullenayegum, John Matelski, Laura Schanberg, Brian M. Feldman P19 Tonsillar histology in patients with periodic fever, aphthous stomatitis, pharyngitis, adenitis (PFAPA) syndrome Kalpana Manthiram, Hernan Correa, Kathryn Edwards P20 Clinical course of juvenile dermatomyositis presenting as skin predominant disease Edward J. Oberle, Michelle Bayer, Dominic O. Co, Hatice Ezgi Baris, Yvonne Chiu, Adam Huber, Susan Kim P21 A Survey of musculoskeletal ultrasound practices of pediatric rheumatologists in North America Edward J Oberle, Timothy Beukelman P22 Assessment, classification and treatment of calcinosis as a complication of juvenile dermatomyositis: A survey of pediatric rheumatologists by the Childhood Arthritis and Rheumatology Research Alliance Amir B. Orandi, Kevin W. Baszis, Vikas Dharnidharka, Mark F. Hoeltzel, for the CARRA JDM Committee P23 CARRA dermatomyositis CTP pilot study Ann Reed, Adam Huber, George Tomlinson, Eleanor Pullenayegum, John Matelski, Y. Ingrid Goh, Laura Schanberg, Brian M. Feldman P24 Unexpectedly high incidences and prolonged disease activity in children with chronic non-bacterial osteomyelitis (CNO) as compared to bacterial osteomyelitis Anja Schnabel, Ursula Range, Gabriele Hahn, Timo Siepmann, Reinhard Berner, Christian Michael Hedrich P25 Juvenile systemic sclerosis cohort within the Childhood Arthritis and Rheumatology Research Alliance (CARRA) Legacy Registry: Follow up characteristics Brandi Stevens, Kathryn S. Torok, Suzanne Li, Nicole Hershey, Megan Curran, Gloria Higgins, Katharine Moore, Egla Rabinovich, Anne M. Stevens, for the CARRA Registry Investigators P26 Development and usability testing of an iPad and desktop psycho-educational game for children with Juvenile Idiopathic Arthritis and their parents Jennifer Stinson, Mark Connelly, Adam Huber, Nadia Luca, Lynn Spiegel, Argerie Tsimicalis, Stephanie Luca, Naweed Tajuddin, Roberta Berard, Julia Barsalou, Sarah Campillo, Paul Dancey, Ciaran Duffy, Brian Feldman, Nicole Johnson, Patrick McGrath, Natalie Shiff, Shirley Tse, Lori Tucker, Charles Victor P27 iCanCope^TM: User-centred design and development of a smartphone app to support self-management for youth with arthritis pain Jennifer Stinson, Chitra Lalloo, Lauren Harris, Joseph Cafazzo, Lynn Spiegel, Brian Feldman, Nadia Luca, Ronald Laxer P28 Accessing pediatric rheumatology care: Despite barriers, few parents prefer telemedicine Danielle R. Bullock, Richard K. Vehe, Lei Zhang, Colleen K. Correll¹ P29 Exploration of factors contributing to time to achieve clinically inactive disease (CID) in juvenile idiopathic arthritis (JIA): A preliminary report Suhas Ganguli, Max Shenberger, Ritesh Korumilli, Beth Gottlieb P30 Pediatric rheumatology referral patterns: Presenting complaints of new patients at a large, urban academic center Martha Rodriguez, Deirdre de Ranieri, Karen Onel, Linda Wagner-Weiner, Melissa Tesher P31 Quality improvement (QI) initiatives in childhood systemic lupus erythematosus (cSLE) Elizabeth Roth Wojcicki, Kristyn L. Maletta, Dominic O. Co, Marsha Malloy, Sarah Thomson, Judyann C. Olson P32 Proliferative lupus nephritis in juvenile SLE: Support from the pediatric nephrology community for the definitions of responsiveness and flare in the 2012 consensus treatment plans Scott E. Wenderfer, Mileka Gilbert, Joyce Hsu, Sangeeta Sule, Tamar B. Rubinstein, Beatrice Goilav, Daryl M. Okamura, Annabelle Chua, Laurence A. Greenbaum, Jerome C. Lane, Emily von Scheven, Stacy P. Ardoin, Natasha M. Ruth P33 The steroid taper app: Making of a mobile app Jennifer M. P. Woo, Marsha M. Malloy, James A. Jegers, Dustin J. Hahn, Mary K. Hintermeyer, Stacey M. Martinetti, Gretchen R. Heckel, Elizabeth L. Roth-Wojcicki, Dominic O. Co

Hashimoto Encephalopathy Presenting With Stroke-Like Episodes in an Adolescent Female: A Case Report and Literature Review

BACKGROUND

Hashimoto encephalopathy is a rare form of encephalopathy thought to be of autoimmune etiology. Cognitive changes and seizures are the most commonly reported presenting manifestation. Stroke-like episodes have also been documented in these individuals. We describe a rare adolescent with Hashimoto encephalopathy who presented with stroke-like symptoms.

PATIENT DESCRIPTION

A previously well 15-year-old girl experienced sudden-onset language disturbance and right hemiparesis. Her symptoms resolved, but weeks later, she began experiencing refractory seizures, episodes of status epilepticus, and cognitive decline. An extensive evaluation was unremarkable, but thyroid peroxidase antibodies were elevated, and a diagnosis of Hashimoto encephalitis was made. Steroid therapy was initiated, and her symptoms resolved with return to baseline cognitive function.

CONCLUSION

Hashimoto encephalopathy is a highly treatable condition that may be considered in the differential diagnosis of children and adolescents presenting with stroke-like symptoms.

A recurring rollercoaster ride: a qualitative study of the emotional experiences of parents of children with juvenile idiopathic arthritis

BACKGROUND

Despite the wealth of clinical research carried out in children with juvenile idiopathic arthritis (JIA), little is known about the emotional experiences of their parents. This article describes the predominant emotional experiences reported by parents of children with JIA in two Canadian cities.

METHODS

Research participants included 15 experienced parents and 8 novice parents (<6 months since children's JIA diagnosis). Their children were 2 to 16 years old with various JIA categories. A qualitative dataset including audio recordings and verbatim transcripts of three focus groups, and written reports of 59 reciprocal interviews (parents interviewing each other) were examined by a multidisciplinary research team following a four-step qualitative analytical process.

RESULTS

Parents of children with JIA experienced recurrent mixed negative and positive emotions that varied over time. Between disease onset and diagnosis, mounting anxiety, fear and confusion were the predominant emotions. Shortly after diagnosis there were shock, disbelief, and fear, with a sense of having being blindsided by the disease. At times of disease quiescence there was hope and gratitude, but also fatigue and frustration with ongoing treatment and fear of flares. During periods of increasing or ongoing symptoms there was admiration and sympathy for the courageous way children coped with JIA, as well as sorrow and frustration for ongoing pain and limitations. There were at times, frustration and indignation with peers and teachers unable to understand the child's fluctuations in physical activity and schoolwork. Throughout the disease, parents felt an underlying anxiety and powerlessness.

CONCLUSIONS

Parents of children with JIA described complex emotional journeys akin to the recurring ups and downs of rollercoaster rides, instead of ordered emotional phases ending in resolution. This has implications for healthcare providers who need to be aware of the complexity of these emotional journeys to support parents more effectively, thereby helping improve patient outcomes.

The risk and nature of flares in juvenile idiopathic arthritis: results from the ReACCh-Out cohort

OBJECTIVE

To describe probabilities and characteristics of disease flares in children with juvenile idiopathic arthritis (JIA) and to identify clinical features associated with an increased risk of flare.

METHODS

We studied children in the Research in Arthritis in Canadian Children emphasizing Outcomes (ReACCh-Out) prospective inception cohort. A flare was defined as a recurrence of disease manifestations after attaining inactive disease and was called significant if it required intensification of treatment. Probability of first flare was calculated with Kaplan-Meier methods, and associated features were identified using Cox regression.

RESULTS

1146 children were followed up a median of 24 months after attaining inactive disease. We observed 627 first flares (54.7% of patients) with median active joint count of 1, physician global assessment (PGA) of 12 mm and duration of 27 weeks. Within a year after attaining inactive disease, the probability of flare was 42.5% (95% CI 39% to 46%) for any flare and 26.6% (24% to 30%) for a significant flare. Within a year after stopping treatment, it was 31.7% (28% to 36%) and 25.0% (21% to 29%), respectively. A maximum PGA >30 mm, maximum active joint count >4, rheumatoid factor (RF)-positive polyarthritis, antinuclear antibodies (ANA) and receiving disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs) or biological agents before attaining inactive disease were associated with increased risk of flare. Systemic JIA was associated with the lowest risk of flare.

CONCLUSIONS

In this real-practice JIA cohort, flares were frequent, usually involved a few swollen joints for an average of 6 months and 60% led to treatment intensification. Children with a severe disease course had an increased risk of flare.

The outcomes of juvenile idiopathic arthritis in children managed with contemporary treatments: results from the ReACCh-Out cohort

OBJECTIVE

To describe clinical outcomes of juvenile idiopathic arthritis (JIA) in a prospective inception cohort of children managed with contemporary treatments.

METHODS

Children newly diagnosed with JIA at 16 Canadian paediatric rheumatology centres from 2005 to 2010 were included. Kaplan-Meier survival curves for each JIA category were used to estimate probability of ever attaining an active joint count of 0, inactive disease (no active joints, no extraarticular manifestations and a physician global assessment of disease activity <10 mm), disease remission (inactive disease >12 months after discontinuing treatment) and of receiving specific treatments.

RESULTS

In a cohort of 1104 children, the probabilities of attaining an active joint count of 0 exceeded 78% within 2 years in all JIA categories. The probability of attaining inactive disease exceeded 70% within 2 years in all categories, except for RF-positive polyarthritis (48%). The probability of discontinuing treatment at least once was 67% within 5 years. The probability of attaining remission within 5 years was 46-57% across JIA categories except for polyarthritis (0% RF-positive, 14% RF-negative). Initial treatment included joint injections and non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs for oligoarthritis, disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs) for polyarthritis and systemic corticosteroids for systemic JIA.

CONCLUSIONS

Most children with JIA managed with contemporary treatments attain inactive disease within 2 years of diagnosis and many are able to discontinue treatment. The probability of attaining remission within 5 years of diagnosis is about 50%, except for children with polyarthritis.

Spectroscopic assessment of dermal melanin using blue vitiligo as an in vivo model

BACKGROUND

Spectroscopic methods have been used to analyze in vivo melanin in the past but the specific effect of melanin depth on autofluorescence and reflectance spectroscopy has not been determined. In patients with blue vitiligo, three distinctive clinicopathologic patterns are present: (1) normal skin with normal epidermal melanin pigmentation (2), skin of blue vitiligo with dermal melanin pigmentation, and (3) tissue of regular vitiligo with no melanin pigmentation. Blue vitiligo may thus serve as an in vivo model to assess dermal pigment using spectroscopic techniques.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the reflectance and autofluorescence spectra of a patient with blue vitiligo in order to assess the effect of melanin pigmentation and its localization on the optical properties of the skin.

METHODS

The blue-gray, normal and depigmented lesions of a patient with blue vitiligo were analyzed using reflectance and fluorescent spectroscopy. The condition was likely induced by a phototoxic reaction in a patient with pre-existing vitiligo. These data were then correlated to the histologic and electron microscopic findings present in the various types of lesions.

RESULTS

Reflectance spectroscopy detected little difference in spectral shape between skin sites affected by blue vitiligo vs. vitiligo. Autofluorescence spectroscopy detected an apparent difference between the two types of lesions, with the blue-gray lesions (blue vitiligo) showing lower fluorescence intensity and spectral maximum position red-shifted compared with regular vitiligo, whereas regular vitiligo showed more intense hemoglobin absorption than the blue vitiligo.

CONCLUSIONS

Dermal melanin present in blue vitiligo can be well characterized by autofluorescence spectroscopy, while little difference in reflectance spectral shape exists between vitiligo and blue vitiligo. Thus, autofluorescence spectroscopy may better identify deeper structures in skin tissue, such as melanin, than reflectance spectroscopy.