Effect of Filgotinib on Body Mass Index (BMI) and Effect of Baseline BMI on the Efficacy and Safety of Filgotinib in Rheumatoid Arthritis

INTRODUCTION

This post hoc analysis of the phase 3 rheumatoid arthritis (RA) filgotinib clinical trial program assessed the effect of filgotinib on body mass index (BMI) in patients with RA and the impact of BMI on the efficacy and safety of filgotinib.

METHODS

FINCH 1-3 were randomized, double-blind, active- or placebo-controlled phase 3 trials of filgotinib 100 and 200 mg in patients with RA (N = 3452). BMI assessments included the mean change from baseline in BMI and the proportion of patients whose BMI increased by incremental thresholds. Efficacy measures included American College of Rheumatology (ACR) 20/50/70 response and low disease activity/remission according to Disease Activity Score 28 using C-reactive protein. The exposure-adjusted incident rate (EAIR) of adverse events (AEs) was assessed by baseline BMI, using integrated data from the FINCH 1-4 and the phase 2 DARWIN 1-3 studies (total filgotinib exposure = 8085 patient-years).

RESULTS

Mean change from baseline in BMI over time was similar across treatment arms. In most patients, BMI increased by ≤ 1 or 2 kg/m2 at both weeks 12 and 24, regardless of treatment group or baseline BMI; few patients had increases of ≥ 4 kg/m2. For most efficacy measures, filgotinib 200 mg was more efficacious than filgotinib 100 mg or active comparators or placebo across BMI subgroups. For the higher filgotinib dose, the EAIR of serious treatment-emergent AEs, venous thrombotic and embolic events, and major adverse cardiovascular events increased with increasing BMI.

CONCLUSIONS

Filgotinib did not lead to substantial changes in BMI, and BMI did not appear to affect the efficacy of filgotinib.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov identifiers: NCT02889796, NCT02873936, NCT02886728, NCT03025308, NCT01888874, NCT01894516, NCT02065700.

POS0518 EFFECT OF FILGOTINIB (FIL) ON BODY WEIGHT (BW) AND BODY MASS INDEX (BMI) AND EFFECT OF BASELINE BMI ON THE EFFICACY AND SAFETY OF FIL IN RHEUMATOID ARTHRITIS (RA)

Background

FIL is a Janus kinase (JAK) 1 preferential inhibitor approved for the treatment (tx) of moderate to severe RA. Weight gain has been reported with other JAK inhibitors1–3; it is important to describe the effect of FIL on BW/BMI for physicians to correctly inform and appropriately treat patients.

Objectives

Our primary aim was to assess the effect of FIL on BW/BMI using data from the FINCH 1–3 studies. Secondary aims were to assess the efficacy and safety of FIL according to baseline BMI.

Methods

FINCH 1–3 (NCT02889796, NCT02873936, NCT02886728) were phase 3, randomised, double-blind, active/placebo (PBO)-controlled studies of FIL 100/200 mg (FIL100/FIL200) ± methotrexate (MTX) in patients with active RA who had an inadequate response to MTX (FINCH 1) or biologic DMARD (FINCH 2), or were MTX naïve (FINCH 3). We assessed changes from baseline (CFB) in BW and BMI by tx group and baseline BMI, and the efficacy and safety of FIL by baseline BMI (<25, 25–<30 or ≥30 kg/m2). Efficacy measures included American College of Rheumatology (ACR)20/50/70 response, Disease Activity Score 28 with C-reactive protein (DAS28-CRP) and health assessment questionnaire disability index (HAQ-DI). Safety data were from 7 RA clinical trials (FINCH 1–4, DARWIN 1–3)4.

Results

In FINCH 1–3, baseline disease characteristics such as HAQ-DI, DAS28-CRP and clinical disease activity index were similar across BMI subgroups for each tx group. There were no clinically relevant CFB in median BW or BMI in any tx group or differences between tx groups. Mean CFB in BMI (kg/m2) were 0.4 with FIL200 and FIL100 and 0.3 with adalimumab (ADA) at Week 52 in FINCH 1; 0.2, 0.6 and −0.1 with FIL200, FIL100 and PBO, respectively, at Week 24 in FINCH 2; and 0.5, 0.6, 1.1 and 0.3 with FIL200+MTX, FIL100+MTX, FIL200 and MTX, respectively, at Week 52 in FINCH 3.

CFB in BMI did not appear dependent on baseline BMI. FIL200±MTX was efficacious vs controls regardless of baseline BMI for most measures at each timepoint. In FINCH 1, in the <25, 25–<30 and ≥30 kg/m2 BMI subgroups, DAS28-CRP <2.6 was achieved by 38%, 29% and 33% of the FIL200 group, 29%, 19% and 21% of the ADA group, and 7%, 10% and 11% of the PBO group at Week 12, respectively. Figure 1 shows ACR20 responders by baseline BMI in FINCH 1–3. Integrated safety data across baseline BMI subgroups are summarised in Table 1. VTE rate was numerically higher with FIL200 in the ≥30 than 25–<30 or <25 kg/m2 BMI subgroups; serious infection rate was numerically higher with FIL100 in the <25 mg/m2 subgroup vs other BMI subgroups.

Table 1.

Exposure-adjusted incidence rate (95% CI) of AEs per 100 PYE by baseline BMI

FIL dose (mg)BMI (kg/m2)<2525–<30≥30PYE 3062.8PYE 2640.1PYE 2382.2TEAEs20034.5 (32.0, 37.1)35.7 (33.0, 38.6)36.6 (33.7, 39.8)10044.3 (40.4, 48.6)43.0 (38.9, 47.5)45.3 (41.1, 50.0)Serious TEAEs2005.3 (4.4, 6.4)5.8 (4.8, 7.1)7.1 (5.8, 8.5)1007.6 (6.0, 9.4)6.5 (5.0, 8.4)8.1 (6.4, 10.2)Deaths2000.3 (0.2, 0.7)0.5 (0.3, 1.0)0.5 (0.2, 1.0)1000.4 (0.1, 1.0)0.3 (0.1, 1.0)0.2 (0.1, 0.9)Venous thrombotic and embolic events2000.1 (0.0, 0.4)0.1 (0.0, 0.5)0.5 (0.2, 1.0)1000.1 (0.0, 0.7)0.1 (0.0, 0.8)0.2 (0.1, 0.9)Major adverse cardiovascular events2000.3 (0.2, 0.7)0.3 (0.1, 0.7)0.5 (0.2, 1.0)1000.6 (0.3, 1.3)0.3 (0.1, 1.0)0.6 (0.2, 1.4)Serious infections2001.1 (0.7, 1.7)1.7 (1.2, 2.5)1.8 (1.2, 2.6)1002.6 (1.8, 3.9)1.2 (0.7, 2.2)2.2 (1.4, 3.4)Herpes zoster2001.6 (1.1, 2.2)1.4 (1.0, 2.1)1.8 (1.2, 2.6)1001.0 (0.5, 1.8)1.2 (0.7, 2.2)1.0 (0.5, 2.0)Malignancy excluding nonmelanoma skin cancer2000.5 (0.3, 1.0)0.7 (0.4, 1.3)0.5 (0.3, 1.1)1000.6 (0.3, 1.3)0.4 (0.2, 1.2)0.8 (0.4, 1.7)

BMI, body mass index; FIL, filgotinib; PYE, patient years of exposure; (TE)AE, (treatment-emergent) adverse event

Conclusion

FIL did not substantially affect CFB in BW or BMI. FIL200±MTX was generally more efficacious vs controls regardless of baseline BMI, and the rate of TEAEs was similar across baseline BMI subgroups.

References

[1]Tofacitinib SmPC

[2]Baracitinib SmPC

[3]Upadacitinib SmPC

[4]Winthrop K, et al. ACR 2021. Abstract 1698

Acknowledgements

The FINCH studies were funded by Gilead Sciences (Foster City, CA, United States).

We thank the physicians and patients who participated in the studies.

Medical writing support was provided by Debbie Sherwood, BSc (Aspire Scientific Ltd, Bollington, UK) and funded by Galapagos NV (Mechelen, Belgium).

Disclosure of Interests

Alejandro Balsa Speakers bureau: AbbVie, Galapagos, Gilead, Lilly, Nordic, Pfizer, Sandoz, and UCB, Consultant of: AbbVie, Galapagos, Lilly, Nordic, Pfizer, and UCB, Grant/research support from: AbbVie, Pfizer, UCB, Siegfried Wassenberg Speakers bureau: AbbVie, MSD, Pfizer, and Sanofi, Consultant of: AbbVie, Gilead, Lilly, Nichi-Iko, Pfizer, and UCB, Grant/research support from: Pfizer, Anne Tournadre Speakers bureau: Fresenius-Kabi and Sanofi, Paid instructor for: Fresenius-Kabi, Consultant of: AbbVie, Fresenius-Kabi, Lilly, Novartis, and Sanofi, Grant/research support from: Novartis, Pfizer, and UCB, Hans-Dieter Orzechowski Employee of: Galapagos, Katrien Van Beneden Shareholder of: Galapagos, Employee of: Galapagos, Vijay Rajendran Employee of: Galapagos, Udo Lendl Employee of: Galapagos, Pieter-Jan Stiers Shareholder of: Galapagos, Employee of: Galapagos, Chris Watson Shareholder of: Galapagos, Employee of: Galapagos, Roberto Caporali Speakers bureau: AbbVie, Accord, BMS, Celltrion, Fresenius-Kabi, Galapagos, Lilly, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, Sandoz, and UCB, Consultant of: AbbVie, Accord, BMS, Celltrion, Fresenius-Kabi, Galapagos, Lilly, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, Sandoz, and UCB, Patrick Verschueren Speakers bureau: Eli Lilly, Galapagos, MSD, and Roularta, Consultant of: AbbVie, BMS, Celltrion, Eli Lilly, Galapagos, Gilead, Nordic Pharma, Pfizer, Sidekick Health, and UCB, Grant/research support from: Pfizer Chair Management of Early Rheumatoid Arthritis at KU Leuven Belgium.

Effectiveness and safety of anti-tumour necrosis factor therapy with certolizumab pegol observed in real-life rheumatoid arthritis patients in Germany: results from the non-interventional FαsT study

OBJECTIVES

To report the tolerability and effectiveness of certolizumab pegol (CZP) for the treatment of patients with active rheumatoid arthritis (RA) in a routine clinical practice setting.

METHODS

FαsT (NCT01069419) was a non-interventional, observational 104-week (wk) study performed at 163 sites in Germany. RA patients were treated according to the treating physician's discretion. Clinical remission (DAS28-CRP<2.6) at wk 104 was the primary endpoint of the study. Remission data based on ESR (DAS28-ESR<2.6) were also assessed. Secondary endpoints included the effect of CZP treatment on pain, physical function and disease activity. Safety data were collected at all study visits.

RESULTS

1,117 patients were enrolled in the FαsT study (78% female, mean age: 55 years). Rapid responses were observed at wk 6 (18.7% and 12.9% patients in DAS28-CRP and DAS28-ESR remission, respectively) with improvements sustained over 2 years (20.0% and 13.9% patients achieved DAS28-CRP and DAS28-ESR remission, respectively at wk 104). Anti-TNF naïve patients exhibited greater improvements than anti-TNF experienced patients (mean DAS28-ESR change from baseline [CfB] -1.3, -1.5 and -1.7 for patients with ≥2, 1 and no anti-TNFs, respectively at wk104). Improvements were reported in all secondary endpoint measures. 1,111 patients were exposed to CZP for a total of 1,538 patient-years during the study. 2,000 treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) were reported in 745 patients (67.1%); 9 (0.8%) experienced TEAEs with fatal outcome.

CONCLUSIONS

CZP demonstrated efficacy and safety outcomes reflective of those observed in trial settings. Rapid reductions in disease activity and improvements in physical function were maintained up to wk 104.