Search

Objective: To evaluate the effect of brodalumab on psoriasis signs and symptoms assessed by the Psoriasis Symptom Inventory (PSI) in patients with psoriatic arthritis (PsA)., Methods: This prespecified analysis of a phase II study (NCT01516957) evaluated patients with active PsA and psoriasis-affected body surface area ≥ 3%, randomized to brodalumab (140 or 280 mg) or placebo every 2 weeks (Q2W) for 12 weeks with loading dose at Week 1. At Week 12, patients entering an open-label extension received brodalumab 280 mg Q2W. The PSI measures 8 psoriasis signs and symptoms: itch, redness, scaling, burning, stinging, cracking, flaking, and pain. PSI response is defined as total PSI ≤ 8 (range 0-32), each item ≤ 1 (range 0-4). PSI scores were assessed at weeks 12 and 24., Results: There were 107 eligible patients. At Week 12, mean improvement in PSI scores was 7.8, 11.2, and 1.5 in brodalumab 140 mg, 280 mg, and placebo groups, respectively; by Week 24, improvement was 10.2, 12.4, and 11.7. At Week 12, 75.0%, 81.8%, and 16.7% of patients receiving brodalumab 140 mg, 280 mg, and placebo, respectively, achieved PSI response; improvement was sustained through Week 24, when 83.9% of prior placebo recipients achieved response. At Week 12, 25.0%, 36.4%, and 2.8% of patients receiving brodalumab 140 mg, 280 mg, and placebo, respectively, achieved PSI 0. Percentages improved through Week 24: 40.0% brodalumab 140 mg, 42.9% brodalumab 280 mg, and 48.4% placebo., Conclusion: Significantly more brodalumab-treated patients with PsA achieved patient-reported improvements in psoriasis signs and symptoms than did those receiving placebo. Improvements were comparable between brodalumab groups.

Objective: To evaluate the safety and efficacy of golimumab (GOL), a human antitumor necrosis factor antibody, in patients with active rheumatoid arthritis (RA) despite methotrexate (MTX) therapy through 5 years in the GO-FORWARD trial., Methods: Patients with active RA despite MTX therapy were randomly assigned to receive placebo + MTX (Group 1), GOL 100 mg + placebo (Group 2), GOL 50 mg + MTX (Group 3), or GOL 100 mg + MTX (Group 4). Patients in groups 1, 2, and 3 with inadequate response could enter early escape at Week 16 to GOL 50 mg + MTX or GOL 100 mg + MTX, and all remaining Group 1 patients crossed over to GOL 50 mg + MTX at Week 24. The blind was maintained through the 52-week database lock, after which treatment adjustments were permitted. Adverse events (AE) were monitored through Week 268. Efficacy was evaluated using the American College of Rheumatology (ACR) 20/50/70 responses and a 28-joint Disease Activity Score using C-reactive protein (DAS28-CRP). Response rates at Week 256 were analyzed by an intent-to-treat analysis., Results: A total of 444 patients were randomized, and 313 received GOL through Week 252; 301 patients completed the safety followup through Week 268. Infections were the most common type of AE; 172 patients (39.6%) had ≥ 1 serious AE. No unexpected safety signals were observed. At Week 256, ACR20/50/70 responses were achieved by 63.1%, 40.8%, and 24.1%, respectively, of all randomized patients. About 78% of all patients achieved a good or moderate DAS28-CRP response., Conclusion: Improvements in the signs and symptoms of RA were maintained through 5 years. AE through 5 years were consistent with earlier reports of the GO-FORWARD trial; no apparent increased risk was observed over time.

Objective: To assess whether preliminary findings of associations between the HLA-DRB1*04 and HLA-DRB1* shared epitope (SE) allelic groups and response to the anti-IL-17A mAb secukinumab in RA were reproducible in an independent RA cohort., Methods: Biologic-naïve subjects (n = 100) with RA by 2010 criteria with tender/swollen joint counts (each ≥6) and high-sensitivity CRP (hsCRP) >10 mg/l were randomized 2:1 to secukinumab 10 mg/kg i.v. or placebo every 2 weeks until week 10. Potential associations with treatment response to secukinumab at week 12 (DAS28-CRP change from baseline by analysis of covariance, ACR20 response rate by logistic regression) were assessed for HLA-DRB1*04 (primary end point), HLA-DRB1*SE and HLA-DRB1 position 11 V/L (HLA-DRB1*pos11 V/L) allelic groups, and baseline levels of hsCRP, RF and anti-CCP., Results: Secukinumab was significantly more effective than placebo in reducing DAS28-CRP (-2.41 vs -0.71; P < 0.0001) and producing ACR20 responses (87.1% vs 25.0%; P < 0.0001) at week 12. The HLA-DRB1*04 allelic group was not significantly related to secukinumab response vs placebo. For change from baseline in DAS28-CRP, HLA-DRB1*SE (P = 0.003) and HLA-DRB1*pos11 V/L (P = 0.002) allelic groups were associated with positive treatment response. Higher RF levels, but not anti-CCP positivity, were significantly associated with DAS28-CRP reductions (P = 0.015) and ACR20 (P = 0.008) responses. Secukinumab was well tolerated., Conclusion: Secukinumab significantly reduced signs and symptoms of RA vs placebo. As the HLA-DRB1*SE and HLA-DRB1*pos11 V/L results were driven by lack of placebo response in carriers, the hypothesis of clinical utility for HLA-DRB1* allelic groups in RA anti-IL-17A short-term response prediction could not be corroborated., Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov; https://clinicaltrials.gov/; NCT01426789., (© The Author 2015. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the British Society for Rheumatology. All rights reserved. For Permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

Objectives: The efficacy and safety of 2 different dosing regimens of tabalumab, a monoclonal antibody that neutralizes membrane-bound and soluble B-cell-activating factor (BAFF), were evaluated in patients with rheumatoid arthritis., Methods: In this phase 3, multicenter, randomized study, 1004 patients (intention-to-treat population) received subcutaneous 120 mg tabalumab every 4 weeks (120/Q4W), 90 mg tabalumab every 2 weeks (90/Q2W), or placebo over 24 weeks. At baseline, a loading dose double the planned dose (ie, 240 mg, 180 mg, or placebo) was administered. Efficacy analyses were based on a prespecified subset of patients with 5 or more of 68 tender and 5 or more of 66 swollen joints at baseline (efficacy population, n = 849). The primary efficacy end point was ACR20 (20% improvement in American College of Rheumatology criteria) response at week 24., Results: At week 24, there were no differences in ACR20 response rates (120/Q4W = 34.4%, 90/Q2W = 33.5%, placebo = 31.5%) or any other measures of efficacy across the treatment groups. Discontinuations due to adverse events (AE) were 3.4%, 2.7%, and 4.0%; incidence of treatment-emergent AEs were 64.1%, 58.2%, and 58.8%, with 23.2%, 25.9%, and 22.0% treatment-emergent infections; and incidence rates of serious AEs were 3.7%, 2.2%, and 2.8% with 1.1%, 0.3%, and 0.7% serious infections in the 120/Q4W, 90/Q2W, and placebo groups, respectively. Three deaths were reported (120/Q4W, n = 2; 90/Q2W, n = 1). Each tabalumab group had significant decreases versus placebo in CD3-CD20 B cells (P ≤ 0.05) and in serum immunoglobulins (P ≤ 0.001)., Conclusions: Although tabalumab administration resulted in biologic activity, as demonstrated by changes in B cells and immunoglobulins, targeting BAFF-dependent pathways alone is not sufficient to significantly reduce rheumatoid arthritis disease activity.

Background: We assessed the efficacy and safety of brodalumab, a human monoclonal antibody against interleukin-17 receptor A (IL17RA), in a phase 2, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study involving patients with psoriatic arthritis., Methods: We randomly assigned patients with active psoriatic arthritis to receive brodalumab (140 or 280 mg subcutaneously) or placebo on day 1 and at weeks 1, 2, 4, 6, 8, and 10. At week 12, patients who had not discontinued their participation in the study were offered open-label brodalumab (280 mg) every 2 weeks. The primary end point was 20% improvement in American College of Rheumatology response criteria (ACR 20) at week 12., Results: Of the 168 patients who underwent randomization (57 in the brodalumab 140-mg group, 56 in the brodalumab 280-mg group, and 55 in the placebo group), 159 completed the double-blind phase and 134 completed 40 weeks of the open-label extension. At week 12, the brodalumab 140-mg and 280-mg groups had higher rates of ACR 20 than the placebo group (37% [P=0.03] and 39% [P=0.02], respectively, vs. 18%); they also had higher rates of 50% improvement (ACR 50) (14% [P=0.05] and 14% [P=0.05] vs. 4%). Rates of 70% improvement were not significantly higher in the brodalumab groups. Similar degrees of improvement were noted among patients who had received previous biologic therapy and those who had not received such therapy. At week 24, ACR 20 response rates in the brodalumab 140-mg and 280-mg groups were 51% and 64%, respectively, as compared with 44% among patients who switched from placebo to open-label brodalumab; responses were sustained through week 52. At week 12, serious adverse events had occurred in 3% of patients in the brodalumab groups and in 2% of those in the placebo group., Conclusions: Brodalumab significantly improved response rates among patients with psoriatic arthritis. Larger studies of longer duration are necessary to assess adverse events. (Funded by Amgen; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01516957 .).

Objective: To evaluate the longer-term safety and efficacy of secukinumab, a fully human monoclonal antiinterleukin-17A antibody, in patients with rheumatoid arthritis., Methods: In this 52-week, double-blind, placebo-controlled (up to Week 20) study (NCT00928512), patients responding inadequately to disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARD) or biologics were randomized to receive monthly subcutaneous injections of secukinumab (25, 75, 150, or 300 mg), or placebo. The efficacy and safety results up to Week 20 have been reported previously. Here, efficacy results from Week 20 to 52 and safety results from Week 20 to 60 are presented., Results: Of 237 patients randomized, 174 (73.4%) completed the study. Patients with improved American College of Rheumatology (ACR) and 28-joint Disease Activity Score (DAS28) C-reactive protein (CRP) responses at Week 16 sustained their responses through Week 52. In patients taking 150 mg of secukinumab, responses were improved through Week 52 (ACR50: Week 16 = 45%, Week 52 = 55%; DAS28-CRP ≤ 2.6: Week 16 = 25%, Week 52 = 40%). The rate of adverse events (AE) from weeks 20 to 60 was 64.8%, with most AE being mild to moderate in severity. The overall rate of infections was 31.9%, most being mild. The most predominant infection was nasopharyngitis, and was not associated with dose or concurrent neutropenia. Serious AE were reported in 21 patients (8.9%). There were 3 reports of malignancies (ovarian, lung, basal cell), and no deaths between weeks 20 and 60., Conclusion: Patients with active RA who failed to respond to DMARD and other biologics showed an improvement after longterm treatment with 150 mg of secukinumab. The frequency of AE remained stable over time and secukinumab had a consistent safety profile over 60 weeks.

Objective: The objective of this study was to assess the effect of golimumab on carotid ultrasound measures and cardiovascular serious adverse events (SAEs) in patients with inflammatory arthritides., Methods: An exploratory carotid artery ultrasound substudy was performed in the GO-BEFORE study of methotrexate (MTX)-naive rheumatoid arthritis patients, with ultrasounds performed at weeks 0, 24, and 52 to measure common carotid artery intima-media thickness, distensibility coefficient, interadventitial diameter, and plaque count. Cardiovascular SAEs reported over 2 years of follow-up were assessed in 5 golimumab phase 3 clinical trials of patients with rheumatoid arthritis (GO-BEFORE, GO-FORWARD, and GO-AFTER), psoriatic arthritis (GO-REVEAL), and ankylosing spondylitis (GO-RAISE). In GO-BEFORE and GO-FORWARD, patients received placebo + MTX, golimumab 50 mg + MTX, or golimumab 100 mg +/- MTX at baseline and every 4 weeks; in the other 3 trials, patients received placebo or golimumab 50 or 100 mg., Results: The carotid ultrasound substudy showed inconsistent changes in common carotid artery intima-media thickness in the golimumab + MTX groups over time, and there was large variability in the measurements. Increases in interadventitial diameter were observed in the golimumab 100 mg + placebo group, but not in the golimumab + MTX groups. There were no significant differences in the distensibility coefficient and plaque count between the golimumab and placebo groups. Very few patients overall experienced a cardiovascular SAE, and the incidence of cardiovascular SAEs was not statistically different between the golimumab and placebo groups., Conclusions: The results of the carotid ultrasound substudy were inconclusive, and no increase or decrease in cardiovascular SAEs was observed following 2 years of treatment with golimumab with or without MTX.

Objectives: To assess the effect of golimumab, with or without methotrexate (MTX), on serum lipids and inflammatory markers of cardiovascular disease (CVD) in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) in two phase 3, randomised, placebo-controlled trials (GO-BEFORE and GO-FORWARD)., Methods: Patients in GO-BEFORE (n=637, MTX-naïve) and GO-FORWARD (n=444, MTX-inadequate response) were randomised to placebo+MTX, golimumab 100 mg+placebo, golimumab 50 mg+MTX, or golimumab 100 mg+MTX. Subcutaneous injections (placebo and golimumab) were given every 4 weeks. Patients with an insufficient response entered early escape at week 16 (GO-FORWARD) or 28 (GO-BEFORE). All placebo+MTX patients in GO-FORWARD crossed over to golimumab 50 mg+MTX at week 24. Changes from baseline to weeks 14 (GO-FORWARD) or 24 (GO-BEFORE), and 52 in serum lipid levels and inflammatory markers were assessed., Results: At week 14 in the GO-FORWARD trial, total cholesterol (TC), high-density lipoprotein (HDL) and low-density lipoprotein (LDL) increased in golimumab+MTX patients versus MTX-only patients (16.00 vs 2.00 (p<0.001); 3.00 vs 0.00 (p<0.05); 8.00 vs 4.00 (p<0.001); respectively); favourable changes in LDL subfractions were only observed in golimumab-treated patients. At week 24 in GO-BEFORE, TC and LDL increased, and LDL subfractions improved in the MTX-only and golimumab+MTX groups. Inflammatory markers of CVD risk improved significantly with golimumab+MTX versus placebo+MTX in both studies and were generally maintained through week 52. Atherogenic indices were generally stable., Conclusions: While TC and LDL levels increased mildly in RA patients receiving golimumab+MTX, atherogenic indices generally remained stable, favourable changes in LDL subfractions were observed, and inflammatory markers improved.

Objectives: To assess the dose-response relationship, efficacy and safety of tabalumab, a human monoclonal antibody that neutralises membrane-bound and soluble B-cell activating factor (BAFF), in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) with inadequate response to methotrexate (MTX)., Methods: In this phase 2, 24-week, double-blind, placebo-controlled, dose-ranging study, patients with RA (N=158) on stable  MTX were randomised by Bayesian-adaptive method to receive 1, 3, 10, 30, 60, or 120 mg tabalumab or placebo subcutaneously every 4 weeks for 24 weeks. The primary objective was to test for a significant dose-response relationship using a statistical model of the proportion of patients having ≥50% improvement in American College of Rheumatology (ACR) criteria (ACR50) at week 24 (prespecified α=0.10)., Results: At week 24, a significant dose-response relationship was observed using ACR50 (p=0.059) and ACR20 (p=0.044) response rates. Using model-estimated data, only 120 mg had significantly higher ACR50 and ACR20 response rates versus placebo (p<0.05). Observed response rates were significantly higher for 120 mg versus placebo as measured by ACR50 at weeks 12 (p=0.039) and 20 (p=0.018), but not week 24, and by ACR20 at weeks 12 (p=0.011) and 24 (p=0.039). Mean DAS28 C-reactive protein  improved with 120 mg at week 24 (p=0.048). Frequency of TEAEs was similar across groups (range 50-69%, p=0.884). Ten (8.2%) tabalumab and 5 (13.9%) placebo patients reported a serious adverse event (SAE). Infections occurred more frequently in patients exposed to tabalumab (30.3% vs 19.4%). Serious infections were reported in 3 (2.5%) tabalumab-treated patients only., Conclusions: A dose-response relationship was detected with monthly subcutaneous tabalumab. A significant effect was detected with the 120 mg dose with no unexpected safety signals. CLINICAL TRIAL #: NCT00785928.

Objective: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of tabalumab, a monoclonal antibody that neutralises membrane-bound and soluble B-cell activating factor (BAFF), in patients with active rheumatoid arthritis (RA) who showed inadequate response to tumour necrosis factor (TNF) inhibitors., Methods: Patients on stable methotrexate and with inadequate response to one or more TNF inhibitors were randomised to placebo (n=35), 30 mg tabalumab (n=35) or 80 mg tabalumab (n=30) given intravenously at 0, 3 and 6 weeks. The primary outcome was the proportion of patients achieving an American College of Rheumatology 50% response (ACR50) at week 16 (all tabalumab-treated patients vs placebo)., Results: At week 16, no significant differences were observed in the combined tabalumab group versus placebo in ACR50 (12.7% vs 2.9%, p=0.101) or ACR20 response rates (27.0% vs 17.1%, p=0.198). However, significant differences between the combined tabalumab group and placebo were observed at earlier time points for ACR20, ACR50 and Disease Activity Score in 28 joints (DAS28)-C-reactive protein (CRP) reduction. Treatment-emergent adverse events (AEs) were similar with 30 mg tabalumab (65.7%), 80 mg tabalumab (76.7%) and placebo (71.4%), although certain events occurred more often with tabalumab than placebo (eg, infection, anaemia and gastrointestinal events). Serious AEs occurred in two (6.7%) patients receiving 80 mg tabalumab and three (8.6%) receiving placebo, with one serious infection in the placebo group. Initial increases in total and mature B cells were followed by progressive decreases, despite declines in serum tabalumab., Conclusions: At week 16, the primary end point was not achieved, but an indication of efficacy was observed at earlier time points. Safety findings for tabalumab were consistent with other biological RA therapies., Clinical Trial Registration Number: NCT00689728.

Objective: To assess the longterm efficacy and safety of golimumab in patients with active rheumatoid arthritis (RA) despite methotrexate (MTX) therapy., Methods: We randomized 444 RA patients with inadequate response to MTX (3:3:2:2) to placebo + MTX (Group 1), golimumab 100 mg + placebo (Group 2), golimumab 50 mg + MTX (Group 3), or golimumab 100 mg + MTX (Group 4). Subcutaneous golimumab/placebo was injected every 4 weeks. Patients could escape early (Group 1 added golimumab 50 mg, Group 2 added MTX, Group 3 increased golimumab to 100 mg, Group 4 continued 100 mg) based on Week 16 swollen and tender joint counts. From Week 24, Group 1 patients received golimumab 50 mg + MTX. After the Week 52 database lock, patients in the longterm extension received golimumab 50-100 mg ± MTX. Coprimary endpoints [Week 14 American College of Rheumatology (ACR)20, Week 24 Health Assessment Questionnaire Disability Index (HAQ-DI)] and Week 52 findings have been published; 2-year findings (observed data by randomized group, no imputation) are presented., Results: Of 444 randomized patients, 392 continued from Week 52 (Group 1: n = 116, Group 2: n = 116, Group 3: n = 84, Group 4: n = 76). Clinical improvement was maintained through Week 104; ~75% and 72% of patients randomized to golimumab 50 mg + MTX and 100 mg + MTX achieved ACR20 response, respectively. The majority [88% (105/120)] of golimumab + MTX-treated patients with Week 24 HAQ-DI improvement ≥ 0.25 maintained improved physical function through Week 104. Group 1 patients with delayed golimumab treatment exhibited more Week 104 radiographic progression (mean change score = 1.15) than golimumab + MTX-randomized patients (0.52). Incidences of serious infections were 2.24, 4.77, 5.78/100 patient-years of followup for golimumab 50 mg + MTX, 100 mg + placebo, and 100 mg + MTX, respectively., Conclusion: Clinical improvement was maintained and no new safety signals were identified with 2 years of golimumab + MTX. Golimumab efficacy and safety, including serious infections, will continue to be monitored through 5 years (Clinical Trial No. NCT00264550).

Objective: To assess the safety and efficacy of secukinumab, a fully human monoclonal anti-interleukin-17A antibody, in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA)., Methods: Patients (n=237) with inadequate response to methotrexate were randomly assigned to receive monthly subcutaneous injections of secukinumab 25 mg, 75 mg, 150 mg, 300 mg or placebo. The primary endpoint was the American College of Rheumatology 20% response (ACR20) at week 16., Results: Demographics and baseline characteristics were comparable across all treatment groups. The primary efficacy endpoint was not achieved: the proportion of ACR20 responders at week 16 with secukinumab 25-300 mg was 36.0-53.7% versus placebo (34%). Disease activity score in 28 joints (DAS28)-C-reactive protein (CRP) was a secondary endpoint and clinically relevant decreases with secukinumab 75-300 mg were reported versus placebo. Serum high sensitivity CRP levels at week 16 were significantly reduced with secukinumab 75 mg, 150 mg and 300 mg doses versus placebo. The safety profile of secukinumab was consistent with that seen with other biological agents. Most adverse events (AE) were mild to moderate in severity. Infections were slightly more frequent with secukinumab than placebo. Six serious AE were reported: secukinumab 75 mg (one), secukinumab 300 mg (four) and placebo (one)., Conclusions: ACR20 response rates differed between secukinumab 75 mg, 150 mg and 300 mg doses and placebo; however, the primary efficacy endpoint was not achieved. Greater decreases in DAS28 were observed with secukinumab 75 mg, 150 mg and 300 mg than placebo. There were no unexpected safety signals and no specific organ-related toxicities. Further trials with secukinumab in the treatment of RA are warranted.

Objective: Tabalumab, a fully human IgG4 monoclonal antibody, neutralizes soluble and membrane-bound BAFF. The aim of this study was to examine the tolerability and efficacy of tabalumab in patients with active rheumatoid arthritis receiving methotrexate., Methods: In this randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel, multiple-dose study, patients who were naive to biologic therapy received infusions of tabalumab (30, 60, or 160 mg) or placebo at weeks 0, 3, and 6 in combination with methotrexate and were evaluated for 24 weeks. The primary efficacy end point was the percentage of patients meeting American College of Rheumatology 20% improvement criteria (achieving an ACR20 response) at week 16., Results: At week 16, the percentages of patients achieving an ACR20 response in the 30-mg (57.6%), 60-mg (67.6%), and 160-mg (51.5%) groups were significantly greater than the percentage of patients achieving an ACR20 response in the placebo group (29.4%; P<0.05). There were initial transient increases from baseline in the frequency of CD20+ and IgD+/CD27- B cells, followed by reductions, although B cells were not completely depleted. Also, the frequency of IgD-/CD27+ B cells increased in all tabalumab groups compared with the placebo group and returned toward baseline levels by the end of the study. The incidence of adverse events was similar across all treatment groups; no deaths occurred. Serum IgM levels decreased significantly in all tabalumab groups combined compared with the placebo group. There were no significant decreases in serum IgG or IgA levels in the tabalumab groups compared with the placebo group., Conclusion: Tabalumab treatment significantly reduces the signs and symptoms of rheumatoid arthritis and has a safety profile similar to that seen with placebo treatment., (Copyright © 2013 by the American College of Rheumatology.)

Sclerostin is a glycoprotein secreted by osteocytes and inhibits osteoblastogenesis via inhibition of Wnt signaling. We hypothesized that sclerostin antibody (Scl-AbIII) would accelerate the healing of a murine femoral non-critical size bone defect model. A unilateral and unicortical 0.8 mm-sized drill hole was made in the proximal femoral shaft of adult female nude mice. One group of mice received subcutaneous injections of Scl-AbIII and a second group received vehicle only. Reporter MC3T3 osteoprogenitor cells were injected via the tail vein 3 days after surgery to monitor systemic trafficking of exogenous osteoprogenitors. Bioluminescence imaging (BLI), microcomputed tomography (microCT), micropositron emission tomography (microPET) and histological analysis were used to compare the bone healing responses to Scl-AbIII treatment. Bone mineral density (BMD) significantly increased at the defect site after week 1, and was significantly higher in the treatment compared with the control group at all time points. This finding was also confirmed on histological analysis by increased deposition of new woven bone. MicroPET scanning showed a trend for greater activity in the control group at day 21 compared with the Scl-AbIII group, indicating early bone maturation following treatment with Scl-AbIII. Whereas the BLI signals derived from the injected osteoprogenitor cells showed no differences between vehicle and Scl-AbIII treated groups, systemic migration of MC3T3 cells to the bone defect was clearly identified in both groups using immunohistochemistry. Systemic administration of Scl-AbIII resulted in earlier healing and maturation of a non-critical size bone defect. These findings underscore the potential use of Scl-AbIII for treatment of complicated fractures, non-unions, and other clinical scenarios., (Copyright © 2012 Orthopaedic Research Society.)

Objective: To evaluate the effect of golimumab on physical function, general health, and fatigue in patients with active rheumatoid arthritis (RA) despite methotrexate (MTX) therapy., Methods: In the multicenter, randomized, placebo-controlled GO-FORWARD study, 444 adults with active RA despite MTX received subcutaneous placebo + MTX (crossover to golimumab 50 mg at Week 24), golimumab 100 mg + placebo, golimumab 50 mg + MTX, or golimumab 100 mg + MTX every 4 weeks. Physical function and general health were assessed using the Health Assessment Questionnaire-Disability Index (HAQ-DI) and Physical and Mental Component Summary (PCS, MCS) scores of the Medical Outcomes Study Short Form-36 questionnaire (SF-36), respectively, through Week 52. Fatigue was measured through Week 24 using the Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy-Fatigue (FACIT-Fatigue) questionnaire., Results: Mean improvements from baseline in HAQ-DI, SF-36 PCS, and FACIT-Fatigue scores (Weeks 14 and 24) were significantly greater for golimumab 50 mg + MTX and 100 mg + MTX versus placebo + MTX. Significantly greater proportions of patients treated with golimumab + MTX achieved clinically meaningful improvements from baseline to Weeks 14 and 24 in HAQ-DI, PCS, and FACIT-Fatigue scores. Mean improvements in SF-36 PCS (Week 14), MCS (Week 24), and FACIT-Fatigue (Weeks 14 and 24) scores were significantly greater for golimumab 100 mg + placebo versus placebo + MTX. Mean improvements from baseline in HAQ-DI, SF-36 PCS, and MCS scores through Week 24 were sustained through Week 52., Conclusion: Patients with active RA despite MTX had significant improvement in physical function, general health, and fatigue following golimumab + MTX therapy; improvements in physical function and general health were maintained through Week 52. (Clinical Trials Registration NCT00264550).

Objective: To evaluate golimumab's effect on MRI-detected inflammation and structural damage in patients with active rheumatoid arthritis (RA) despite methotrexate (MTX)., Methods: Patients (n=444) were randomly assigned to placebo plus MTX, golimumab 100 mg plus placebo, golimumab 50 mg plus MTX, or golimumab 100 mg plus MTX (subcutaneous injections every 4 weeks). A subset of 240 patients participated in an MRI substudy. MRIs (1.5T+contrast enhancement) of the dominant wrist and metacarpophalangeal (MCP) joints were obtained at baseline and weeks 12 and 24. Images were scored by two independent, blinded readers for synovitis (0-9 wrist only (n=240), 0-21 wrist+MCP (n=223)), bone oedema (osteitis) (0-69) and bone erosions (0-230) using the OMERACT Rheumatoid Arthritis MRI Scoring system., Results: Significant improvements in synovitis and bone oedema (osteitis) were observed in the combined golimumab plus MTX groups versus placebo plus MTX at week 12 (-1.77 vs -0.15, p<0.001 wrist+MCP and -2.00 vs 0.19, p=0.003, respectively) and week 24 (-1.91 vs -0.38, p<0.001 wrist+MCP and -1.74 vs 0.71, p=0.004, respectively). Fewer than 10% of patients had a substantial degree of erosive progression (most showed no progression) across all treatment groups (including the control group), precluding adequate evaluation of golimumab's effect on bone erosions., Conclusion: Golimumab plus MTX significantly improved MRI-detected synovitis and osteitis (prognosticators of future structural damage) versus placebo plus MTX at weeks 12 and 24. The effect of golimumab on bone erosions could not be determined by semi-quantitative scoring in these RA patients with minimal progression of bone erosions.

Objective: To evaluate the effects of golimumab on radiographic progression in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA)., Methods: Methotrexate (MTX)-naive patients (in the Golimumab Before Employing Methotrexate as theFirst-Line Option in the Treatment of Rheumatoid Arthritis of Early Onset [GO-BEFORE] study; n = 637)and patients with active RA despite MTX therapy (in the Golimumab in Active Rheumatoid Arthritis Despite Methotrexate Therapy [GO-FORWARD] study; n =444) were randomly assigned to receive placebo plus MTX (group 1), golimumab 100 mg plus placebo (group 2), golimumab 50 mg plus MTX (group 3), or golimumab 100 mg plus MTX (group 4). Golimumab orplacebo was administered subcutaneously every 4 weeks. Radiographs of the hands and feet were taken at baseline, week 28, and week 52 in the GO-BEFORE study and at baseline, week 24 (week 16 for patients who entered early escape), and week 52 in the GO-FORWARD study. Radiographs were scored by 2 independent readers in each study using the van der Heijde modification of the Sharp score., Results: In the GO-BEFORE study, the mean ± SD changes in the modified Sharp score from base line to week 52 (control period) were 1.4 ± 4.6 in group 1, 1.3 ± 6.2 in group 2 (P = 0.266), 0.7 ± 5.2 in group 3 (P = 0.015), and 0.1 ± 1.8 in group 4 (P = 0.025). In the GO-FORWARD study, changes from baseline to week 24 (control period) were 0.6 ± 2.4 in group 1, 0.3 ± 1.6 in group 2 (P = 0.361), 0.6 ± 2.7 in group 3 (P = 0.953), and 0.2 ± 1.3 in group 4 (P = 0.293)., Conclusion: Golimumab in combination with MTX inhibited radiographic progression significantly better than did MTX alone in the GO-BEFORE study. Radiographic progression in the GO-FORWARD study was minimal in all treatment arms, precluding an adequate assessment of the effect of golimumab on radiographic progression in this study.

Objective: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of golimumab to 52 weeks in patients with active rheumatoid arthritis despite methotrexate., Methods: Patients were randomly assigned to receive placebo plus methotrexate (group 1), golimumab 100 mg plus placebo (group 2), golimumab 50 mg plus methotrexate (group 3) and golimumab 100 mg plus methotrexate (group 4). At week 16, patients in groups 1, 2 and 3 who had less than 20% improvement in tender and swollen joints entered early escape. At week 24, patients in group 1 who had not entered early escape crossed over to 50 mg golimumab plus methotrexate., Results: At week 16, 31%, 27% and 17% of patients in groups 1, 2 and 3, respectively, entered early escape. At week 52, 44%, 45%, 64% and 58% of patients in groups 1, 2, 3 and 4, respectively, achieved 20% improvement in the American College of Rheumatology criteria; and 34%, 31%, 42% and 53%, respectively, achieved low disease activity (< or = 3.2) according to the 28-joint disease activity score. Patients in group 4 appeared to have an increased risk of serious adverse events and serious infections., Conclusion: The results of various outcome measures showed that the response rates achieved by patients receiving golimumab to 24 weeks were sustained to 52 weeks. The safety profile appeared to be consistent with the known safety profile of tumour necrosis factor inhibitors.

Background: Rituximab inhibited structural damage at 1 year in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) who had had a previous inadequate response to tumour necrosis factor (TNF) inhibitors., Objective: To assess structural damage progression through 2 years., Methods: Intention-to-treat patients with one post-baseline radiograph (rituximab n=281; placebo n=187) received background methotrexate (MTX) and were randomised to rituximab (2 x 1000 mg infusions, 2 weeks apart) or placebo; patients were eligible for rituximab re-treatment every 6 months. By week 104, 82% of the placebo population had received > or = 1 dose of rituximab. Radiographic end points included the change in total Sharp score (TSS), erosion and joint space narrowing scores at week 104., Results: At week 104, significantly lower changes in TSS (1.14 vs 2.81; p<0.0001), erosion score (0.72 vs 1.80; p<0.0001) and joint space narrowing scores (0.42 vs 1.00; p<0.0009) were observed with rituximab plus MTX vs placebo plus MTX. Within the rituximab group, 87% who had no progression of joint damage at 1 year remained non-progressive at 2 years., Conclusions: Rituximab plus MTX demonstrated significant and sustained effects on joint damage progression in patients with RA and a previously inadequate response to TNF inhibitors.

Objective: We undertook this study to evaluate safety, tolerability, pharmacokinetics, pharmacodynamics, and efficacy of LY2439821, a humanized anti-interleukin-17 (anti-IL-17) monoclonal antibody, in a first in-human trial in rheumatoid arthritis (RA) patients taking oral disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs)., Methods: This randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study consisted of 2 parts. In part A, 20 patients received 1 intravenous (IV) dose of LY2439821 (0.06, 0.2, 0.6, or 2.0 mg/kg, escalating) or placebo followed by 8 weeks of evaluation. End points included safety, tolerability, and pharmacokinetics. In part B, 77 patients received 1 IV dose of LY2439821 (0.2, 0.6, or 2.0 mg/kg) or placebo every 2 weeks for a total of 5 doses, with a total evaluation period of 16 weeks. End points included safety, tolerability, pharmacokinetics/pharmacodynamics, and efficacy (Disease Activity Score in 28 joints [DAS28] and percentages of patients meeting American College of Rheumatology 20%, 50%, or 70% improvement criteria [achieving an ACR20, ACR50, or ACR70 response]). The primary efficacy end point was the DAS28 at week 10., Results: Baseline characteristics were similar across all groups. Changes in the DAS28 were significantly greater in the 0.2 mg/kg, 2.0 mg/kg, and all-LY2439821-combined groups (-2.3, -2.4, and -2.3, respectively) than in the placebo group (-1.7) at week 10 (P < or = 0.05), and these differences were significant as early as week 1. Percentages of ACR20, ACR50, and ACR70 responses as well as improvements in the ACR core set of measures were greater in LY2439821-treated patients than in placebo-treated patients at multiple time points. There was no apparent dose-response relationship in treatment-emergent adverse events., Conclusion: LY2439821 added to oral DMARDs improved signs and symptoms of RA, with no strong adverse safety signal noted. This first evaluation of LY2439821 supports neutralization of IL-17 as a potential novel goal for the treatment of RA.

Background: The anti-interleukin (IL) 6 receptor antibody tocilizumab inhibits signalling of IL6, a key cytokine in rheumatoid arthritis (RA) pathogenesis., Objective: To evaluate through the AMBITION study the efficacy and safety of tocilizumab monotherapy versus methotrexate in patients with active RA for whom previous treatment with methotrexate/biological agents had not failed., Methods: This 24-week, double-blind, double-dummy, parallel-group study, randomised 673 patients to either tocilizumab 8 mg/kg every 4 weeks, or methotrexate, starting at 7.5 mg/week and titrated to 20 mg/week within 8 weeks, or placebo for 8 weeks followed by tocilizumab 8 mg/kg. The primary end point was the proportion of patients achieving American College of Rheumatology (ACR) 20 response at week 24., Results: The intention-to-treat analysis demonstrated that tocilizumab was better than methotrexate treatment with a higher ACR20 response (69.9 vs 52.5%; p<0.001), and 28-joint Disease Activity Score (DAS28) <2.6 rate (33.6 vs 12.1%) at week 24. Mean high-sensitivity C-reactive protein was within the normal range from week 12 with tocilizumab, whereas levels remained elevated with methotrexate. The incidence of serious adverse events with tocilizumab was 3.8% versus 2.8% with methotrexate (p = 0.50), and of serious infections, 1.4% versus 0.7%, respectively. There was a higher incidence of reversible grade 3 neutropenia (3.1% vs 0.4%) and increased total cholesterol > or =240 mg/dl (13.2% vs 0.4%), and a lower incidence of alanine aminotransferase elevations >3x-<5x upper limit of normal (1.0% vs 2.5%), respectively., Conclusion: Tocilizumab monotherapy is better than methotrexate monotherapy, with rapid improvement in RA signs and symptoms, and a favourable benefit-risk, in patients for whom treatment with methotrexate or biological agents has not previously failed.

Objective: To assess the safety of biological disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARD) in rheumatoid arthritis (RA) patients following rituximab., Methods: RA patients who participated in an international rituximab clinical trial programme were included. Patients who had received one or more rituximab courses and entered safety follow-up (SFU) were permitted additional biological DMARD. Serious infection events (SIE) were collected., Results: Of 185 of 2578 patients who entered SFU and received another biological DMARD, 88.6% had peripheral B-cell depletion at the time of initiation of another biological agent. Thirteen SIE (6.99 events/100 patient-years) occurred following rituximab but before another biological DMARD and 10 SIE (5.49 events/100 patient-years) occurred following another biological DMARD. SIE were of typical type and severity for RA patients. 153 had received one or more tumour necrosis factor inhibitor(s). No fatal or opportunistic infections occurred., Conclusions: In this analysis, treatment with biological DMARD after rituximab was not associated with an increased serious infection rate. Sample size with limited follow-up restricts definitive conclusions.

Objective: To determine the relationship between radiographic progression and clinical response for adalimumab plus methotrexate (MTX) versus either monotherapy in patients with early rheumatoid arthritis (RA) in the PREMIER study., Methods: Patients with early RA who received adalimumab plus MTX (n = 240), adalimumab (n = 222), or MTX (n = 216) were grouped by American College of Rheumatology (ACR) response, 28-joint Disease Activity Score (DAS28), or remission-like state [tender joint count (TJC) = 0; DAS28 < 2.6; swollen joint count = 0; ACR100] at 26 and 104 weeks. Radiographic progression was assessed by cumulative probability plots, mean changes in total Sharp score (DeltaTSS), and percentages of progressors (DeltaTSS > 0.5)., Results: Across the spectrum of clinical outcomes, including ACR20 nonresponses and remission-like responses, therapy with adalimumab plus MTX permitted less radiographic progression at Weeks 26 and 104 than MTX monotherapy. Adalimumab monotherapy was generally intermediate. A strong, proportional relationship was observed between clinical response and radiographic efficacy only for MTX monotherapy. The monotherapies approximated the radiographic efficacy of adalimumab plus MTX only among remission-like responders, although progression was significantly greater with MTX monotherapy versus adalimumab plus MTX for patients with TJC = 0. Concurrent clinical (DAS28 < 2.6) and radiographic (DeltaTSS

Objective: The phase III GO-FORWARD study examined the efficacy and safety of golimumab in patients with active rheumatoid arthritis (RA) despite methotrexate therapy., Methods: Patients were randomly assigned in a 3 : 3 : 2 : 2 ratio to receive placebo injections plus methotrexate capsules (group 1, n = 133), golimumab 100 mg injections plus placebo capsules (group 2, n = 133), golimumab 50 mg injections plus methotrexate capsules (group 3, n = 89), or golimumab 100 mg injections plus methotrexate capsules (group 4, n = 89). Injections were administered subcutaneously every 4 weeks. The co-primary endpoints were the proportion of patients with 20% or greater improvement in the American College of Rheumatology criteria (ACR20) at week 14 and the change from baseline in the health assessment questionnaire-disability index (HAQ-DI) score at week 24., Results: The proportion of patients who achieved an ACR20 response at week 14 was 33.1% in the placebo plus methotrexate group, 44.4% (p = 0.059) in the golimumab 100 mg plus placebo group, 55.1% (p = 0.001) in the golimumab 50 mg plus methotrexate group and 56.2% (p<0.001) in the golimumab 100 mg plus methotrexate group. At week 24, median improvements from baseline in HAQ-DI scores were 0.13, 0.13 (p = 0.240), 0.38 (p<0.001) and 0.50 (p<0.001), respectively. During the placebo-controlled portion of the study (to week 16), serious adverse events occurred in 2.3%, 3.8%, 5.6% and 9.0% of patients and serious infections occurred in 0.8%, 0.8%, 2.2% and 5.6%, respectively., Conclusion: The addition of golimumab to methotrexate in patients with active RA despite methotrexate therapy significantly reduced the signs and symptoms of RA and improved physical function.

Objective: To determine if treatment with a B cell-targeted therapy can inhibit the progression of structural joint damage in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA), exhibiting an inadequate response to tumour necrosis factor (TNF) inhibitors., Methods: In this phase III study, patients with an inadequate response to a TNF inhibitor and receiving methotrexate were randomised to rituximab or placebo. Radiographs were obtained at baseline, week 24 and week 56 after randomisation. Patients with an inadequate response to their randomised therapy could receive rescue medication from week 16. From week 24, eligible patients from both treatment arms could receive open-label rituximab. Patients were analysed according to their original treatment group. Radiographs were scored using the Genant-modified Sharp method. The primary radiographic endpoint was change in total Genant-modified Sharp score at week 56., Results: Rituximab treatment caused significant reduction in joint damage progression compared with placebo. The mean change from baseline in the total Genant-modified Sharp score at week 56 was significantly lower for patients treated with rituximab than for patients treated with placebo (1.00 vs 2.31; p = 0.005), and was supported by changes in erosion score (0.59 and 1.32 for rituximab plus methotrexate vs placebo plus methotrexate, respectively; p = 0.011) and joint space narrowing score (0.41 and 0.99, respectively; p<0.001)., Conclusions: This study provides the first evidence that a B cell-targeted therapy-rituximab-can significantly inhibit the progression of structural joint damage in patients with RA with long-standing, active and treatment-resistant disease.

Objective: To examine the efficacy and safety of the humanized anti-interleukin-6 receptor antibody tocilizumab combined with conventional disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs) in patients with active rheumatoid arthritis (RA)., Methods: A total of 1,220 patients were randomized (2:1 ratio) in the phase III, double-blind, placebo-controlled, multicenter TOWARD (Tocilizumab in Combination With Traditional DMARD Therapy) study. Patients remained on stable doses of DMARDs and received tocilizumab 8 mg/kg or placebo (control group) every 4 weeks for 24 weeks., Results: At week 24, the proportion of patients achieving a response according to the American College of Rheumatology criteria for 20% improvement (ACR20) was significantly greater in the tocilizumab plus DMARD group than in the control group (61% versus 25%; P<0.0001). Secondary end points including 50% or 70% improvement (ACR50/70), the Disease Activity Score in 28 joints (DAS28), DAS28 remission responses (DAS28<2.6), European League Against Rheumatism responses, and systemic markers such as the C-reactive protein and hemoglobin levels showed superiority of tocilizumab plus DMARDs over DMARDs alone. Seventy-three percent of patients in the tocilizumab group had >or=1 adverse event (AE), compared with 61% of patients in the control group. AEs leading to withdrawal from the study were infrequent (4% of patients in the tocilizumab group and 2% of those in the control group). Serious AEs occurred in 6.7% and 4.3% of patients in the tocilizumab and control groups, respectively, and serious infections occurred in 2.7% and 1.9%, respectively. Elevations in the alanine aminotransferase level, from normal at baseline to >3-fold the upper limit of normal, occurred in 4% of patients in the tocilizumab group and 1% of those in the control group, and elevated total cholesterol levels were observed in 23% and 6% of patients, respectively. Sixteen patients started lipid-lowering therapy during the study. Grade 3 neutropenia occurred in 3.7% of patients receiving tocilizumab and none of the patients in the control group, and no grade 4 neutropenia was reported., Conclusion: Tocilizumab combined with any of the DMARDs evaluated was safe and effective in reducing articular and systemic symptoms in patients with an inadequate response to these agents.

Objective: Ocrelizumab, a humanized anti-CD20 monoclonal antibody, was studied in a first-in-human trial in rheumatoid arthritis (RA) patients receiving concomitant methotrexate (MTX)., Methods: The ACTION trial was a combined phase I/II study of placebo plus MTX versus ocrelizumab plus MTX in 237 RA patients (intent-to-treat population). During phase I, 45 patients were treated with 1 of 5 escalating doses of study drug (infusions on days 1 and 15, 10-1,000 mg per each infusion). An additional 192 patients were randomized during phase II. Eligible patients had active disease, an inadequate response to treatment with at least MTX, rheumatoid factor positivity, and elevated levels of acute-phase reactants. The total study duration was 72 weeks. B cell pharmacodynamics over time was investigated., Results: Baseline demographics were similar among the treatment groups. Based on the entire 72-week data set, the incidence of serious adverse events in the ocrelizumab-treated patients was 17.9%, as compared with 14.6% in placebo-treated patients. The incidence of serious infections was 2.0% in all ocrelizumab-treated patients and 4.9% in placebo-treated patients. Infusion-associated adverse events were mostly grade 1 or grade 2 and were more frequent around the time of the first infusion. No serious infusion-associated adverse events were reported in the ocrelizumab group. Evidence of clinical activity was observed at all doses evaluated. Peripheral B cell depletion after infusion was rapid at all doses, with earlier repletion of B cells at doses of 10 mg and 50 mg. Human anti-human antibodies were detected in 19% and 10%, respectively, of those receiving 10 mg and 50 mg of ocrelizumab, compared with 0-5% of those receiving 200, 500, and 1,000 mg., Conclusion: Ocrelizumab therapy in combination with MTX was well tolerated. Doses of 200 mg (2 infusions) and higher showed better clinical responses, better reduction of C-reactive protein levels, and very low immunogenicity.

Background: Dermatomyositis is an autoimmune disease that is associated with muscle and skin inflammation. Using quantitative scales, we sought to evaluate the effects of rituximab therapy on muscle strength and skin disease in patients with dermatomyositis., Observations: An open-label trial of rituximab therapy was conducted in 8 adult patients with dermatomyositis. Patients received 2 infusions of rituximab (1 g each) 2 weeks apart without peri-infusional steroids. The primary outcome was partial remission at week 24 (prespecified reduction in elevated creatine phosphokinase levels, muscle strength deficit (Manual Muscle Test), or skin disease (Dermatomyositis Skin Severity Index). After the first infusion of rituximab, all patients achieved sustained depletion of peripheral B cells. One patient withdrew at week 16 owing to a lack of treatment efficacy. Three patients (38%) achieved partial remission at week 24, in each case by improvement in muscle strength. Muscle enzyme levels and skin scores at week 24 were not significantly changed from those at baseline. Rituximab infusions were well tolerated, with no serious infectious complications. One patient died of metastatic cancer 9 months after his last infusion., Conclusion: Depletion of peripheral B cells had modest effects on muscle disease and limited effects on skin disease in our cohort of patients with dermatomyositis.

Objective: To determine if anti-tumor necrosis factor (TNF) therapy (adalimumab) can safely improve symptoms of erosive/inflammatory osteoarthritis (EOA)., Methods: This was an open-label pilot trial in 12 patients with EOA. Patients > 45 years old with EOA of the hands defined by > or = 2 tender and > or = 2 swollen joints (distal interphalangeal, proximal interphalangeal, first carpometacarpal) despite nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drug therapy were eligible. Patients were excluded for autoimmune arthritis, recent disease modifying antirheumatic drug use, prior use of anti-TNF therapy, infection, malignancy, or poorly controlled medical conditions. All patients received adalimumab 40 mg every other week for 12 weeks. Safety was assessed 4 weeks after the final dose. Primary endpoints included safety and American College of Rheumatology (ACR) response., Results: Patients were predominantly female with a mean age of 60 years and 12 years of arthritis. All patients completed the study and safety followup. Adverse events were mild without necessitating discontinuation of study drug. After 12 weeks, there was a statistically significant improvement in the number of swollen joints compared to baseline (p < 0.01). One patient achieved an ACR20 response and 42% achieved an OMERACT-OARSI response. Although we detected no statistically significant improvement in the number of tender joints, grip strength, disability, pain, or global disease assessments, trends suggested modest improvement in all efficacy measures., Conclusion: This small open-label study of patients with EOA demonstrated that adalimumab was well tolerated. Treatment with adalimumab for 3 months did not significantly improve the signs and symptoms of EOA and most patients did not achieve an ACR20. Trends suggested improvement and individual patients had some benefit. Factors limiting interpretation of this study include the lack of a control group, outcomes chosen, number of patients treated, and the duration of treatment.

Objective: To demonstrate the safety and efficacy of adalimumab for the treatment of active psoriatic arthritis (PsA) in patients with an inadequate response to disease modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARD)., Methods: In a placebo controlled, double-blind, randomized, multicenter study, patients were treated for 12 weeks with subcutaneous injections of adalimumab 40 mg every other week (eow) or placebo, followed by a period of open-label treatment with adalimumab 40 mg eow. The primary efficacy endpoint was the percentage of patients who met the American College of Rheumatology (ACR20) core criteria at Week 12. Secondary efficacy measures included the modified Psoriatic Arthritis Response Criteria (PsARC) and assessments of disability, psoriatic lesions, and quality of life. For missing data, nonresponder imputation was used for ACR and PsARC scores and last observation carried forward for other measures., Results: A total of 100 patients received study drug (51 adalimumab, 49 placebo). At Week 12, an ACR20 response was achieved by 39% of adalimumab patients versus 16% of placebo patients (p = 0.012), and a PsARC response was achieved by 51% with adalimumab versus 24% with placebo (p = 0.007). At Week 12, measures of skin lesions and disability were statistically significantly improved with adalimumab. After Week 12, open-label adalimumab provided continued improvement for adalimumab patients and initiated rapid improvement for placebo patients, with ACR20 response rates of 65% and 57%, respectively, observed at Week 24. Serious adverse events had similar frequencies during therapy with placebo (4.1%), blinded adalimumab (2.0%), and open-label adalimumab (3.1%). No serious infections occurred during adalimumab therapy., Conclusion: In this study of patients who had active PsA and a previous, inadequate response to DMARD therapy, adalimumab was well tolerated and significantly reduced the signs, symptoms, and disability of PsA during 12 weeks of blinded and 12 weeks of open-label therapy. Adalimumab also improved psoriasis in these patients.

Objective: To determine the efficacy and safety of treatment with rituximab plus methotrexate (MTX) in patients with active rheumatoid arthritis (RA) who had an inadequate response to anti-tumor necrosis factor (anti-TNF) therapies and to explore the pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of rituximab in this population., Methods: We evaluated primary efficacy and safety at 24 weeks in patients enrolled in the Randomized Evaluation of Long-Term Efficacy of Rituximab in RA (REFLEX) Trial, a 2-year, multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase III study of rituximab therapy. Patients with active RA and an inadequate response to 1 or more anti-TNF agents were randomized to receive intravenous rituximab (1 course, consisting of 2 infusions of 1,000 mg each) or placebo, both with background MTX. The primary efficacy end point was a response on the American College of Rheumatology 20% improvement criteria (ACR20) at 24 weeks. Secondary end points were responses on the ACR50 and ACR70 improvement criteria, the Disease Activity Score in 28 joints, and the European League against Rheumatism (EULAR) response criteria at 24 weeks. Additional end points included scores on the Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy-Fatigue (FACIT-F), Health Assessment Questionnaire (HAQ) Disability Index (DI), and Short Form 36 (SF-36) instruments, as well as Genant-modified Sharp radiographic scores at 24 weeks., Results: Patients assigned to placebo (n = 209) and rituximab (n = 311) had active, longstanding RA. At week 24, significantly more (P < 0.0001) rituximab-treated patients than placebo-treated patients demonstrated ACR20 (51% versus 18%), ACR50 (27% versus 5%), and ACR70 (12% versus 1%) responses and moderate-to-good EULAR responses (65% versus 22%). All ACR response parameters were significantly improved in rituximab-treated patients, who also had clinically meaningful improvements in fatigue, disability, and health-related quality of life (demonstrated by FACIT-F, HAQ DI, and SF-36 scores, respectively) and showed a trend toward less progression in radiographic end points. Rituximab depleted peripheral CD20+ B cells, but the mean immunoglobulin levels (IgG, IgM, and IgA) remained within normal ranges. Most adverse events occurred with the first rituximab infusion and were of mild-to-moderate severity. The rate of serious infections was 5.2 per 100 patient-years in the rituximab group and 3.7 per 100 patient-years in the placebo group., Conclusion: At 24 weeks, a single course of rituximab with concomitant MTX therapy provided significant and clinically meaningful improvements in disease activity in patients with active, longstanding RA who had an inadequate response to 1 or more anti-TNF therapies.

The development of tumor necrosis factor alpha (TNFalpha) inhibitor therapy is arguably the most significant achievement in the treatment of rheumatic diseases to date. One serious potential side effect associated with these agents is the onset of neurologic signs and symptoms. In this paper we will examine the relationship of TNFalpha antagonism and demyelinating disease. Reviewing early laboratory and animal models, we discuss the mechanism of TNFalpha in central nervous system (CNS) injury and repair. Two negative studies of TNFa inhibitor therapy in the treatment of refractory multiple sclerosis (MS) are considered. From the manufacturers' clinical development programs and post-marketing adverse event reporting data, we report the current incidence of demyelinating symptoms associated with each of the commercially available anti-TNFa agents. Comparing these reports to the incidence of MS in society as a whole, we find the rate of new cases of neurologic disease in exposed patients is not different from the rate of expected cases. Finally we explore arguments that support and refute a potential biologic relationship between TNFa neutralization and demyelinating disease.

Objective: To describe the degree of clinical benefit in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) who receive infliximab therapy after lack of efficacy with etanercept., Methods: In a retrospective study among 6 centers primarily designed to assess the safety of infliximab in combination with leflunomide, a standardized chart review form was used to collect data on 93 patients with RA. During that study, it was noted that some of these patients had switched from etanercept to infliximab. In this study, we compared the response of subjects switching from etanercept to infliximab (n = 20) to that of subjects receiving infliximab with no prior tumor necrosis factor (TNF) therapy (n = 73)., Results: The swollen and tender joint count, patient and physician global assessments, morning stiffness, and C-reactive protein all improved substantially in both groups, with no statistical difference in the degree of benefit between the groups. At the time of chart review, switchers had received a statistically higher dose of infliximab than controls (4.4 vs 3.19 mg/kg; p = 0.006) with a total of 5.7 and 5 infusions, respectively., Conclusion: In this retrospective study, previous lack of efficacy with etanercept did not predict lack of efficacy with infliximab. Indeed, the degree of clinical improvement was similar in both groups, although switchers were receiving a higher dose of infliximab at the time of chart review. Our findings suggest that clinical response may differ between anti-TNF agents, and lack of response to one agent may not predict a lack of response to another.