Search

Objectives Effective steroid-sparing therapies for the treatment of sarcoidosis are lacking; IL-6 antagonists may reduce sarcoidosis disease activity. This study assessed the safety and efficacy of the IL-6 receptor antagonist, sarilumab, in subjects with glucocorticoid-dependent sarcoidosis. Methods This phase II, double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomized withdrawal trial enrolled 15 subjects with biopsy-proven sarcoidosis at Stanford University from November 2019 to September 2022. In period 1, subjects were treated with open-label s.c. sarilumab 200 mg every 2 weeks for 16 weeks, with predefined tapering of prednisone. Subjects who completed period 1 without a sarcoidosis flare entered period 2 and were randomized to continue sarilumab or to receive matching placebo for 12 weeks. The end points included flare-free survival, as well as changes in pulmonary function tests, chest imaging, patient-reported outcomes, and laboratory values. Results Fifteen subjects were enrolled in the study (median age 57 years, 80% male, 73.3% White), and 10 subjects successfully completed period 1. During period 1, 4 of the 15 subjects (26.7%) discontinued due to worsening of their sarcoidosis, and CT chest imaging worsened in 5 of the 15 subjects (35.7%). During period 2, 0 of 2 subjects in the sarilumab group and 1 of 8 subjects (12.5%) in the placebo group had a flare. Treatment with sarilumab 200 mg was generally well tolerated in subjects with sarcoidosis. Conclusion In this double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomized withdrawal trial, a meaningful signal of improvement in subjects with sarcoidosis treated with sarilumab was not observed. Given the small numbers in this study, no definitive conclusions can be drawn. Trial Registration ClinicalTrials.gov, http://clinicaltrials.gov , NCT04008069. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: Preliminary evidence suggests that vagus nerve stimulation (VNS) may have some benefit in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA); however, prior studies have been small and/or uncontrolled; this study aimed to address that gap. Methods: This randomized, double‐blind, sham‐controlled trial enrolled patients aged 18 to 75 years with active RA who had failed conventional synthetic disease‐modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs) and were naïve to biologic and/or targeted synthetic DMARDs. All patients received an auricular vagus nerve stimulator and were randomized 1:1 to active stimulation or sham. The primary endpoint was the proportion of patients achieving 20% improvement in American College of Rheumatology criteria (ACR20) at week 12. Secondary endpoints included mean changes in disease activity score of 28 joints with C‐reactive protein (DAS28‐CRP) and Health Assessment Questionnaire‐Disability Index (HAQ‐DI). Results: A total of 113 patients (mean age 54 years; 82% female) enrolled, and 101 patients (89.4%) completed week 12. ACR20 response at week 12 was 25.0% for active stimulation versus 26.9% for sham (difference vs. sham, −1.9; 95% CI, −18.8, 14.9, P = 0.823). The least square mean ± SE change in DAS28‐CRP was −0.95 ± 0.16 for active stimulation and −0.66 ± 0.16 for sham (P = 0.201); in HAQ‐DI it was −0.19 ± 0.06 for active stimulation and −0.02 ± 0.06 for sham (P = 0.044). Adverse events occurred in 17 patients (15%); all were mild or moderate. Conclusion: Auricular VNS did not meaningfully improve RA disease activity. If VNS with other modalities is pursued in the future for the treatment of RA, larger, controlled studies will be needed to understand its utility. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of olokizumab (OKZ) in patients with active rheumatoid arthritis despite treatment with methotrexate (MTX).Methods: In this 24-week multicentre, placebo-controlled, double-blind study, patients were randomised 1:1:1 to receive subcutaneously administered OKZ 64 mg once every 2 weeks, OKZ 64 mg once every 4 weeks, or placebo plus MTX. The primary efficacy endpoint was the proportion of patients achieving an American College of Rheumatology 20% (ACR20) response at week 12. The secondary efficacy endpoints included percentage of subjects achieving Disease Activity Score 28-joint count based on C reactive protein <3.2, Health Assessment Questionnaire Disability Index at week 12, ACR50 response and Clinical Disease Activity Index ≤2.8 at week 24. Safety and immunogenicity were assessed throughout the study.Results: A total of 428 patients were randomised. ACR20 responses were more frequent with OKZ every 2 weeks (63.6%) and OKZ every 4 weeks (70.4%) than placebo (25.9%) (p<0.0001 for both comparisons). There were significant differences in all secondary efficacy endpoints between OKZ-treated arms and placebo. Treatment-emergent serious adverse events (TESAEs) were reported by more patients in the OKZ groups compared with placebo. Infections were the most common TESAEs. No subjects developed neutralising antidrug antibodies.Conclusions: Treatment with OKZ was associated with significant improvement in signs, symptoms and physical function of rheumatoid arthritis without discernible differences between the two regimens. Safety was as expected for this class of agents. Low immunogenicity was observed. Trial registration number NCT02760368. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: The long-term safety and efficacy of filgotinib (from phase II studies), with or without methotrexate (MTX), for the treatment of patients with rheumatoid arthritis was assessed in DARWIN 3, a long-term, open-label extension study (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT02065700).Methods: Eligible patients completing the 24-week DARWIN 1 (filgotinib + MTX) and DARWIN 2 (filgotinib monotherapy) studies entered DARWIN 3, where they received filgotinib 200 mg/day, except for 15 men who received filgotinib 100 mg/day. Safety analyses were performed using the safety analysis set and the exposure-adjusted incidence rate (EAIR) of treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) was calculated. Efficacy was assessed from baseline in the parent studies.Results: Of 790 patients completing the phase II parent studies, 739 enrolled in the study. Through April 2019, 59.5% of patients had received ≥ 4 years of the study drug. Mean (SD) exposure to filgotinib was 3.55 (1.57) years in the filgotinib + MTX group and 3.38 (1.59) years in the filgotinib monotherapy group. EAIR per 100 patient-years of exposure for TEAEs was 24.6 in the filgotinib + MTX group and 25.8 in the filgotinib monotherapy group, and for serious TEAEs, the EAIR was 3.1 and 4.3, respectively. American College of Rheumatology 20/50/70 responses among patients remaining in the study could be maintained through 4 years, with 89.3%/69.6%/49.1% of the filgotinib + MTX group and 91.8%/69.4%/44.4% of the monotherapy group maintaining ACR20/50/70 responses, respectively, based on observed data.Conclusion: Filgotinib was well tolerated with a 4-year safety profile comparable to that of the parent trials, both in patients receiving combination therapy with MTX or as monotherapy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of poseltinib (formerly LY3337641/HM71224), an irreversible covalent inhibitor of Bruton's tyrosine kinase in a 2-part, phase II trial (RAjuvenate; ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT02628028) in adults with active rheumatoid arthritis (RA).Methods: In Part A, 36 patients with mildly active RA were randomized 1:1:1:1 to oral poseltinib 5, 10, or 30 mg or placebo once daily for 4 weeks to assess safety and tolerability. No safety signals precluded moving to Part B, where 250 patients with moderate-to-severe RA were randomized 1:1:1:1 to oral poseltinib 5 mg (n = 63), 10 mg (n = 62), or 30 mg (n = 63), or placebo (n = 62) once daily for 12 weeks. Parts A and B permitted stable doses of background disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs. The primary endpoint in Part B was proportion of patients achieving 20% improvement in American College of Rheumatology criteria (ACR20) at Week 12. Logistic regression compared each poseltinib dose to placebo for primary and secondary endpoints. Nonresponder imputation was used for missing data.Results: After interim analysis showed low likelihood of demonstrating significant efficacy, the sponsor discontinued Part B of the study. One hundred and eighty-nine (76%) patients completed 12 weeks in Part B; 61 discontinued study treatment (27 [44%] due to study termination by sponsor). There was no statistically significant difference in ACR20 response between any dose of poseltinib and placebo at Week 12 (P > 0.05 for all comparisons). Five serious adverse events occurred (n = 2, placebo; n = 3, 30 mg); there was 1 death due to a fall.Conclusion: While no safety findings precluded continuation, the study was terminated after interim data demonstrated low likelihood of benefit in RA. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: To evaluate the incidence of infection in patients with active rheumatoid arthritis (RA) treated with baricitinib, an oral selective Janus kinase (JAK)1 and JAK2 inhibitor.Methods: Infections are summarised from an integrated database (8 phase 3/2/1b clinical trials and 1 long-term extension (LTE)) with data to 1 April 2017. The 'all-bari-RA' analysis set included patients who received any baricitinib dose. Placebo comparison was based on six studies with 4 mg and placebo to week 24, including four trials with 2 mg (placebo-controlled set). Dose-response assessment was based on four studies with 2 mg and 4 mg, including LTE data (2-4 mg extended set).Results: There were 3492 patients who received baricitinib for 7860 patient-years (PY) of exposure (median 2.6 years, maximum 6.1 years). Treatment-emergent infections were higher for baricitinib versus placebo (exposure-adjusted incidence rate (IR)/100 PY: placebo 75.9, 2 mg 84.0 (p not significant), 4 mg 88.4 (p≤0.001)). The IR of serious infection was similar for baricitinib versus placebo and stable over time (all-bari-RA IR 3.0/100 PY). There were 11 cases of tuberculosis (all-bari-RA IR 0.1/100 PY); all occurred with 4 mg in endemic regions. Herpes zoster (HZ) IR/100 PY was higher for baricitinib versus placebo (placebo 1.0, 2 mg 3.1 (p not significant), 4 mg 4.3 (p≤0.01)); rates remained elevated and stable over time (all-bari-RA 3.3). Opportunistic infections, including multidermatomal HZ, were infrequent in the baricitinib programme (all-bari-RA IR 0.5/100 PY).Conclusions: Increased rates of treatment-emergent infections including HZ were observed in patients with RA treated with baricitinib, consistent with baricitinib's immunomodulatory mode of action. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: To evaluate fenebrutinib, an oral and highly selective noncovalent inhibitor of Bruton's tyrosine kinase (BTK), in patients with active rheumatoid arthritis (RA). Methods: Patients with RA and an inadequate response to methotrexate (MTX) (cohort 1; n = 480) were randomized to receive fenebrutinib (50 mg once daily, 150 mg once daily, or 200 mg twice daily), adalimumab (40 mg every other week), or placebo. Patients with RA and an inadequate response to tumor necrosis factor inhibitors (cohort 2; n = 98) received fenebrutinib (200 mg twice daily) or placebo. Both cohorts continued MTX therapy. Results: In cohort 1, the percentages of patients in whom American College of Rheumatology 50% improvement criteria (ACR50) was achieved at week 12 were similar in the fenebrutinib 50 mg once daily and placebo groups, and were higher in the fenebrutinib 150 mg once daily group (28%) and 200 mg twice daily group (35%) than in the placebo group (15%) (P = 0.016 and P = 0.0003, respectively). Fenebrutinib 200 mg twice daily and adalimumab (36%) were comparable (P = 0.81). In cohort 2, ACR50 was achieved in more patients receiving fenebrutinib 200 mg twice daily (25%) than placebo (12%) (P = 0.072). The most common adverse events in the fenebrutinib groups included nausea, headache, anemia, and upper respiratory tract infections. Fenebrutinib had significant effects on myeloid and B cell biomarkers (CCL4 and rheumatoid factor). Fenebrutinib and adalimumab caused overlapping as well as distinct changes in B cell and myeloid biomarkers. Conclusion: Fenebrutinib demonstrates efficacy comparable to adalimumab in patients with an inadequate response to MTX, and safety consistent with existing immunomodulatory therapies for RA. These data support targeting both B and myeloid cells via this novel mechanism for potential efficacy in the treatment of RA. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: In SELECT-COMPARE, a randomised double-blind study, upadacitinib 15 mg once daily was superior to placebo or adalimumab on background methotrexate (MTX) for treating rheumatoid arthritis signs and symptoms and inhibited radiographical progression versus placebo at 26 weeks. Here we report 48-week safety and efficacy in patients who continued their original medication or were rescued to the alternative medication for insufficient response.Methods: Patients on MTX received upadacitinib 15 mg, placebo or adalimumab for 48 weeks. Rescue without washout, from placebo or adalimumab to upadacitinib or upadacitinib to adalimumab occurred if patients had <20% improvement in tender joint count (TJC) or swollen joint count (SJC) (weeks 14/18/22) or Clinical Disease Activity Index (CDAI) >10 (week 26); remaining placebo patients were switched to upadacitinib at week 26. Efficacy was analysed by randomised group (non-responder imputation), as well as separately for rescued patients (as observed). Treatment-emergent adverse events per 100 patient-years were summarised.Results: Consistent with responses through week 26, from weeks 26 to 48, responses by randomised group including low disease activity, clinical remission and improvements in pain and function remained superior for upadacitinib versus adalimumab; radiographical progression remained lower for upadacitinib versus placebo (linear extrapolation). Although both switch groups responded, a higher proportion of patients rescued to upadacitinib from adalimumab achieved CDAI ≤10 at 6 months postswitch versus patients rescued from upadacitinib to adalimumab. Safety at week 48 was comparable to week 26.Conclusion: Upadacitinib+MTX demonstrated superior clinical and functional responses versus adalimumab+MTX and maintained inhibition of structural damage versus placebo+MTX through week 48. Patients with an insufficient response to adalimumab or upadacitinib safely achieved clinically meaningful responses after switching to the alternative medication without washout. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: This study investigated the effects of dose step-down in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) who achieved sustained disease control with baricitinib 4 mg once a day.Methods: Patients who completed a baricitinib phase 3 study could enter a long-term extension (LTE). In the LTE, patients who received baricitinib 4 mg for ≥15 months and maintained CDAI low disease activity (LDA) or remission (REM) were blindly randomised to continue 4 mg or taper to 2 mg. Patients could rescue (to 4 mg) if needed. Efficacy and safety were assessed through 48 weeks.Results: Patients in both groups maintained LDA (80% 4 mg; 67% 2 mg) or REM (40% 4 mg; 33% 2 mg) over 48 weeks. However, dose reduction resulted in small, statistically significant increases in disease activity at 12, 24 and 48 weeks. Dose reduction also produced earlier and more frequent relapse (loss of step-down criteria) over 48 weeks compared with 4 mg maintenance (23% 4 mg vs 37% 2 mg, p=0.001). Rescue rates were 10% for baricitinib 4 mg and 18% for baricitinib 2 mg. Dose reduction was associated with a numerically lower rate of non-serious infections (30.6 for baricitinib 4 mg vs 24.9 for 2 mg). Rates of serious adverse events and adverse events leading to discontinuation were similar across groups.Conclusions: In a large randomised, blinded phase 3 study, maintenance of RA control following induction of sustained LDA/REM with baricitinib 4 mg was greater with continued 4 mg than after taper to 2 mg. Nonetheless, most patients tapered to 2 mg could maintain LDA/REM or recapture with return to 4 mg if needed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives To assess the long-term safety and efficacy of ixekizumab, an IL-17A antagonist, in patients with active PsA. Methods In SPIRIT-P2 (NCT02349295), patients (n = 363) with previous inadequate response to TNF inhibitors entered the double-blind period (weeks 0–24) and received placebo or ixekizumab 80 mg every 4 weeks (IXEQ4W) or every 2 weeks (IXEQ2W) following a 160-mg starting dose at week 0. During the extension period (weeks 24–156), patients maintained their original ixekizumab dose, and placebo patients received IXEQ4W or IXEQ2W (1:1). We present the accumulated safety findings (week 24 up to 156) at the time of this analysis for patients who entered the extension period (n = 310). Exposure-adjusted incidence rates (IRs) per 100 patient years are presented. ACR responses are presented on an intent-to-treat basis using non-responder imputation up to week 52. Results From week 24 up to 156 (with 228 patient years of ixekizumab exposure), 140 [61.3 IR] and 15 (6.6 IR) patients reported infections and serious adverse events, respectively. Serious adverse events included one death and four serious infections. In all patients initially treated with IXEQ4W and IXEQ2W at week 0 (non-responder imputation), ACR20 (61 and 51%), ACR50 (42 and 33%) and ACR70 (26 and 18%) responses persisted out to week 52. Placebo patients re-randomized to ixekizumab demonstrated efficacy as measured by ACR responses at week 52. Conclusion During the extension period, the overall safety profile of ixekizumab remained consistent with that observed with the double-blind period, and clinical improvements persisted up to 1 year. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives To evaluate the safety and maintenance of efficacy with ABT-122, a bi-specific monoclonal antibody targeting TNF and IL-17A, in patients with RA or PsA in open-label, 24-week extensions [open-label extensions (OLEs)] of 12-week, randomized, double-blind studies. Methods All patients received ABT-122 (RA, 120 mg; PsA, 240 mg) subcutaneously every other week on background MTX. Safety assessments included adverse events (AEs) and laboratory parameters. Efficacy was evaluated with ACR responses, 28-joint DAS using high-sensitivity CRP [DAS28 (hsCRP)], and Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PsA study). Results The RA OLE study enrolled 158 patients; the PsA OLE study enrolled 168 patients. In the RA OLE study, the incidence of treatment emergent AEs (TEAEs; 41%) appeared similar to the double-blind study (36–43%). In the PsA OLE study, 57% of patients reported ⩾1 TEAE (double-blind study, 42–53%). Most TEAEs were mild or moderate in severity. There were no neutrophil abnormalities greater than grade 2. Grade 3 and/or 4 laboratory abnormalities were reported for lymphocytes, alanine aminotransferase, aspartate aminotransferase, bilirubin and haemoglobin; the number of these severe laboratory values was low (0.6–3.0%), except grade 3 lymphocyte count decreased (11.5%) in the RA study. In both OLE studies, efficacy assessed by ACR responses and other disease activity scores was maintained over the 24 weeks. Conclusion ABT-122 demonstrated acceptable tolerability and maintenance of efficacy for up to 36 weeks in patients with RA or PsA receiving background MTX. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov, http://clinicaltrials.gov, NCT02433340 and NCT02429895 [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: To evaluate the clinical efficacy and safety of baminercept, a lymphotoxin β receptor IgG fusion protein (LTβR‐Ig), for the treatment of primary Sjögren's syndrome (SS), and to explore the possible mechanisms of action of this treatment. Methods: In this multicenter trial, 52 patients with primary SS were randomized in a 2:1 ratio to receive subcutaneous injections of 100 mg of baminercept every week for 24 weeks or matching placebo. The primary end point was the change between screening and week 24 in the stimulated whole salivary flow (SWSF) rate. Secondary end points included the European League Against Rheumatism Sjögren's Syndrome Disease Activity Index (ESSDAI), as well as measurements of select chemokines and cytokines and enumeration of peripheral blood B and T cell subsets. Results: The change from baseline to week 24 in the SWSF rate was not significantly different between the baminercept and placebo treatment groups (baseline‐adjusted mean change −0.01 versus 0.07 ml/minute; P = 0.332). The change in the ESSDAI during treatment was also not significantly different between the treatment groups (baseline‐adjusted mean change −1.23 versus −0.15; P = 0.104). Although the incidence of adverse events was similar between the treatment groups, baminercept therapy was associated with a higher incidence of liver toxicity, including 2 serious adverse events. Baminercept also produced a significant decrease in plasma levels of CXCL13 and significant changes in the number of circulating B and T cells, consistent with its known inhibitory effects on LTβR signaling. Conclusion: In this trial, treatment with baminercept failed to significantly improve glandular and extraglandular disease in patients with primary SS, despite evidence from mechanistic studies showing that it blocks LTβR signaling. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Phase 2 studies with upadacitinib, a selective Janus kinase 1 (JAK1) inhibitor, have shown safety and efficacy in the treatment of patients with active rheumatoid arthritis. We did this study to further assess the safety and efficacy of upadacitinib in patients with an inadequate response to biologic disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs (bDMARDs).Methods: We did this double-blind, randomised controlled phase 3 trial at 153 sites in 26 countries. Patients were aged 18 years or older, had active rheumatoid arthritis and previous inadequate response or intolerance to bDMARDs, and were receiving concomitant background conventional synthetic DMARDS (csDMARDs). We randomly assigned patients (2:2:1:1) by interactive response technology to receive once-daily oral extended-release upadacitinib 15 mg or 30 mg or placebo for 12 weeks, followed by upadacitinib 15 mg or 30 mg from week 12 onwards. The two separate primary endpoints were the proportions of patients achieving a 20% improvement in American College of Rheumatology criteria (ACR20) at week 12 and the proportion of patients achieving a 28-joint disease activity score using C-reactive protein (DAS28[CRP]) of 3·2 or less at week 12. Efficacy and safety analyses were done in the modified intention-to-treat population of all patients who received at least one dose of study drug. Data are presented up to week 24 of this ongoing study. The trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT02706847).Findings: Between March 15, 2016, and Jan 10, 2017, 499 patients were randomly assigned (n=165 upadacitinib 15 mg; n=165 upadacitinib 30 mg; n=85 placebo then upadacitinib 15 mg; and n=84 placebo then upadacitinib 30 mg) and one patient was withdrawn from the 15 mg upadacitinib group before the start of study treatment. Mean disease duration was 13·2 years (SD 9·5); 235 (47%) of 498 patients had received one previous bDMARD, 137 (28%) had received two, and 125 (25%) had received at least three; 451 (91%) patients completed treatment up to week 12 and 419 (84%) patients completed treatment up to week 24. At week 12, ACR20 was achieved by 106 (65%; 95% CI 57-72) of 164 patients receiving upadacitinib 15 mg and 93 (56%; 49-64) of 165 patients receiving upadacitinib 30 mg compared with 48 (28%; 22-35) of 169 patients receiving placebo (p<0·0001 for each dose vs placebo). DAS28(CRP) of 3·2 or less was achieved by 71 (43%; 95% CI 36-51) of 164 patients receiving upadacitinib 15 mg and 70 (42%; 35-50) of 165 patients receiving upadacitinib 30 mg versus 24 (14%; 9-20) of 169 patients receiving placebo (p<0·0001 for each dose vs placebo). Up to week 12, overall numbers of patients with adverse events were similar for the placebo group (95 [56%] of 169) and the upadacitinib 15 mg group (91 [55%] of 164), but higher in the upadacitinib 30 mg group (111 [67%] of 165). At week 12, the most common adverse events occurring in at least 5% of patients in any treatment group were upper respiratory tract infection (13 [8%] of 169 in the placebo group; 13 [8%] of 164 in the upadacitinib 15 mg group; ten [6%] of 165 in the upadacitinib 30 mg group), nasopharyngitis (11 [7%]; seven [4%]; nine [5%]), urinary tract infection (ten [6%]; 15 [9%]; nine [5%]), and worsening of rheumatoid arthritis (ten [6%]; four [2%]; six [4%]). The number of patients with serious adverse events was higher in the upadacitinib 30 mg group (12 [7%]) than in the upadacitinib 15 mg group (eight [5%]); no serious adverse events were reported in patients receiving placebo. More patients in the upadacitinib 30 mg group had serious infections, herpes zoster, and adverse events leading to discontinuation than in the upadacitinib 15 mg and placebo groups. During the placebo-controlled phase of the study, one case of pulmonary embolism, three malignancies, one major adverse cardiovascular event, and one death were reported in patients receiving upadacitinib; none were reported in patients receiving placebo.Interpretation: Both doses of upadacitinib led to rapid and significant improvements compared with placebo over 12 weeks in patients with refractory rheumatoid arthritis.Funding: AbbVie Inc. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: ABP 501 is a Food and Drug Administration-approved biosimilar to adalimumab; structural, functional and pharmacokinetic evaluations have shown that the two are highly similar. We report results from a phase III study comparing efficacy, safety and immunogenicity between ABP 501 and adalimumab.Methods: In this randomised, double-blind, active comparator-controlled, 26-week equivalence study, patients with moderate to severe active rheumatoid arthritis (RA) despite methotrexate were randomised (1:1) to ABP 501 or adalimumab (40 mg) every 2 weeks. Primary endpoint was risk ratio (RR) of ACR20 between groups at week 24. Primary hypothesis that the treatments were equivalent would be confirmed if the 90% CI for RR of ACR20 at week 24 fell between 0.738 and 1.355, demonstrating that ABP 501 is similar to adalimumab. Secondary endpoints included Disease Activity Score 28-joint count-C reactive protein (DAS28-CRP). Safety was assessed via adverse events (AEs) and laboratory evaluations. Antidrug antibodies were assessed to determine immunogenicity.Results: A total of 526 patients were randomised (n=264, ABP 501; n=262 adalimumab) and 494 completed the study. ACR20 response at week 24 was 74.6% (ABP 501) and 72.4% (adalimumab). At week 24, the RR of ACR20 (90% CI) between groups was 1.039 (0.954, 1.133), confirming the primary hypothesis. Changes from baseline in DAS28-CRP, ACR50 and ACR70 were similar. There were no clinically meaningful differences in AEs and laboratory abnormalities. A total of 38.3% (ABP 501) and 38.2% (adalimumab) of patients tested positive for binding antidrug antibodies.Conclusions: Results from this study demonstrate that ABP 501 is similar to adalimumab in clinical efficacy, safety and immunogenicity in patients with moderate to severe RA.Trial Registration Number: NCT01970475; Results. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective To evaluate the efficacy and safety of orally administered once-daily peficitinib in combination with limited conventional synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (csDMARDs) in patients with moderate-to-severe rheumatoid arthritis (RA). Methods In this randomized, double-blind, phase IIb trial, patients with RA (n = 289) were treated with peficitinib 25 mg, 50 mg, 100 mg, or 150 mg or matching placebo once daily for 12 weeks. The primary end point was the percentage of patients who met the American College of Rheumatology 20% improvement criteria (achieved an ACR20 response) at week 12. Results ACR20 response rates at week 12 were 22.0%, 36.8%, 48.3% ( P < 0.05), 56.3% ( P < 0.01), and 29.4% in the peficitinib 25 mg, 50 mg, 100 mg, 150 mg, and placebo groups, respectively. Patients in the peficitinib 100 mg and 150 mg groups achieved a rapid and statistically significant ACR20 response compared with those in the placebo group ( P < 0.05), reaching statistical significance by week 2. Overall, the incidence of adverse events (AEs) was similar between patients receiving peficitinib and those receiving placebo. The most common AEs were upper respiratory tract infection (5% [n = 15]), nausea (4% [n = 12]), and urinary tract infection (4% [n = 10]). There was 1 case of herpes zoster in the placebo group, and 1 serious infection (limb abscess) in the peficitinib 25 mg group. There were no incidences of grade 2 or higher neutropenia or lymphopenia. Conclusion In patients with moderate-to-severe RA, orally administered once-daily peficitinib in combination with limited csDMARDs resulted in a dose-dependent ACR20 response rate over 12 weeks with satisfactory tolerability. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective To evaluate the efficacy and safety of ABT-494, a selective JAK-1 inhibitor, in patients with moderate-to-severe rheumatoid arthritis (RA) and an inadequate response to methotrexate (MTX). Methods Three hundred RA patients receiving stable doses of MTX were randomly assigned equally to receive immediate-release ABT-494 at 3, 6, 12, or 18 mg twice daily, 24 mg once daily, or placebo for 12 weeks. The primary efficacy end point was the proportion of patients meeting the American College of Rheumatology 20% improvement criteria (achieving an ACR20 response) at week 12, as determined using the last observation carried forward method. Results At week 12, the proportion of ACR20 responses was higher with ABT-494 (62%, 68%, 80%, 64%, and 76% for the 3, 6, 12, 18, and 24 mg doses, respectively) than with placebo (46%) (using nonresponder imputation) ( P < 0.05 for the 6, 12, and 24 mg doses). There was a significant dose-response relationship among all ABT-494 doses ( P < 0.001). The proportions of patients achieving ACR50 and ACR70 responses were significantly higher for all ABT-494 doses (except the 12 mg dose for the ACR70 response) than for placebo, as were changes in the Disease Activity Score in 28 joints using the C-reactive protein level (DAS28-CRP). Rapid improvement was demonstrated by significant differences in ACR20 response rates and changes in the DAS28-CRP for all doses compared with placebo at week 2 (the first postbaseline visit). The incidence of adverse events was similar across groups; most were mild, and infections were the most frequent. One serious infection (community-acquired pneumonia) occurred with ABT-494 at 12 mg. There were dose-dependent increases in high-density lipoprotein (HDL) and low-density lipoprotein (LDL) cholesterol, but the LDL cholesterol:HDL cholesterol ratios were unchanged through week 12. Mean hemoglobin levels remained stable at lower doses, but decreases were observed at higher doses. Conclusion This study evaluated a broad range of doses of ABT-494 in RA patients with an inadequate response to MTX. ABT-494 demonstrated efficacy, with a safety and tolerability profile similar to that of other JAK inhibitors. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: To assess early effects on joint structures of VX-509 in combination with stable disease-modifying antirheumatic drug (DMARD) therapy using MRI in adults with rheumatoid arthritis (RA).Methods: This phase II, placebo-controlled, double-blind, dose-ranging study randomised patients with RA and inadequate DMARD response to VX-509 100 mg (n=11), 200 mg (n=10) or 300 mg (n=10) or placebo (n=12) once daily for 12 weeks. Outcome measures included American College of Rheumatology score (ACR20; improvement of ≥20%) and disease activity score (DAS28) using C reactive protein (CRP), and the RA MRI scoring (RAMRIS) system.Results: ACR20 response at week 12 was 63.6%, 60.0% and 60.0% in the VX-509 100-mg, 200-mg and 300-mg groups, respectively, compared with 25.0% in the placebo group. DAS28-CRP scores decreased in a dose-dependent manner with increasing VX-509 doses. Decreases in RAMRIS synovitis scores were significantly different from placebo for all VX-509 doses (p<0.01) and for RAMRIS osteitis scores (p<0.01) for VX-509 300 mg. Treatment was generally well tolerated.Conclusions: VX-509 plus a DMARD reduced the signs and symptoms of RA in patients with an inadequate response to a DMARD alone. MRI responses were detected at week 12. Treatment was generally well tolerated.Trial Registration Number: NCT01754935; results. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: To assess baricitinib on patient-reported outcomes (PROs) in patients with moderately to severely active rheumatoid arthritis, who had insufficient response or intolerance to ≥1 tumour necrosis factor inhibitors (TNFis) or other biological disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (bDMARDs).Methods: In this double-blind phase III study, patients were randomised to once-daily placebo or baricitinib 2 or 4 mg for 24 weeks. PROs included the Short Form-36, EuroQol 5-D, Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy-Fatigue (FACIT-F), Health Assessment Questionnaire-Disability Index (HAQ-DI), Patient's Global Assessment of Disease Activity (PtGA), patient's assessment of pain, duration of morning joint stiffness (MJS) and Work Productivity and Activity Impairment Questionnaire-Rheumatoid Arthritis. Treatment comparisons were performed with logistic regression for categorical measures or analysis of covariance for continuous variables.Results: 527 patients were randomised (placebo, 176; baricitinib 2 mg, 174; baricitinib 4 mg, 177). Both baricitinib-treated groups showed statistically significant improvements versus placebo in most PROs. Improvements were generally more rapid and of greater magnitude for patients receiving baricitinib 4 mg than 2 mg and were maintained to week 24. At week 24, more baricitinib-treated patients versus placebo-treated patients reported normal physical functioning (HAQ-DI <0.5; p≤0.001), reductions in fatigue (FACIT-F ≥3.56; p≤0.05), improvements in PtGA (p≤0.001) and pain (p≤0.001) and reductions in duration of MJS (p<0.01).Conclusions: Baricitinib improved most PROs through 24 weeks compared with placebo in this study of treatment-refractory patients with previously inadequate responses to bDMARDs, including at least one TNFi. PRO results aligned with clinical efficacy data for baricitinib.Trial Registration Number: NCT01721044; Results. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective To assess the efficacy and safety of decernotinib (VX-509), an oral selective inhibitor of JAK-3, in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) in whom the response to methotrexate treatment was inadequate. Methods In this 24-week, double-blind, randomized phase IIb study, 358 patients with active RA received either placebo (n = 71) or VX-509 at dosages of 100 mg/day (n = 71), 150 mg/day (n = 72), 200 mg/day (n = 72), or 100 mg twice daily (n = 72). Primary measures of efficacy at week 12 were the response rate according to the American College of Rheumatology 20% improvement criteria (ACR20) and change from baseline in the Disease Activity Score in 28 joints using the C-reactive protein level (DAS28-CRP). Results At week 12, the ACR20 response rates were 46.5%, 66.7%, 56.9%, and 68.1% in the groups receiving VX-509 at dosages of 100 mg/day, 150 mg/day, 200 mg/day, and 100 mg twice daily, respectively, and 18.3% in the placebo group ( P < 0.001 for all comparisons). At week 12, the mean change from baseline in the DAS28-CRP was significantly greater in each VX-509 group compared with the placebo group ( P < 0.001). Improvements were maintained at week 24, as shown by the ACR20, ACR50, and ACR70 response rates and mean change from baseline in the DAS28-CRP. The most common adverse event in the VX-509 group was headache (8.7%), and elevated levels of transaminases, lipoproteins, and creatinine were observed. Conclusion VX-509 significantly improved the signs and symptoms of RA at weeks 12 and 24 compared with the placebo group when it was administered in combination with methotrexate. Safety signals included infection and increases in liver transaminase and lipid levels. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

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 56) and high-sensitivity CRP (hsCRP) >10mg/l were randomized 2:1 to secukinumab 10mg/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 vs0.71; 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. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: OSKIRA-4 evaluated the efficacy of fostamatinib monotherapy versus placebo on the signs and symptoms of rheumatoid arthritis over 6 weeks by Disease Activity Score C reactive protein (DAS-28(CRP)) and assessed non-inferiority to adalimumab monotherapy at Week 24 by DAS-28(CRP).Methods: Overall, 279 patients not currently taking disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs were randomised to: (A) fostamatinib 100 mg twice daily for 24 weeks plus placebo injection every 2 weeks (PBOI); (B) fostamatinib 100 mg twice daily for 4 weeks, then 150 mg once daily up to Week 24, plus PBOI; (C) fostamatinib 100 mg twice daily for 4 weeks, then 100 mg once daily up to Week 24, plus PBOI; (D) adalimumab 40 mg every 2 weeks for 24 weeks, plus oral placebo twice daily; or (E) oral placebo twice daily for 6 weeks, plus PBOI, then a switch to arm A or B.Results: Fostamatinib demonstrated a significant improvement in DAS-28(CRP) score from baseline versus placebo at Week 6 for arms A and B, but not C. Fostamatinib was significantly less effective than adalimumab at Week 24 based on DAS-28(CRP). Adverse events observed with fostamatinib treatment were consistent with those reported in previous studies, including hypertension and diarrhoea.Conclusions: Fostamatinib demonstrated efficacy as monotherapy, showing superior DAS-28(CRP) score changes between baseline and 6 weeks when compared with placebo in treatment arms A and B. However, all fostamatinib regimens demonstrated inferior responses compared with adalimumab at Week 24.Trial Registration Number: Clinicaltrials.gov: NCT01264770. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective To study the efficacy/safety of apremilast, an oral phosphodiesterase 4 inhibitor, compared with placebo in patients with active rheumatoid arthritis (RA) who had an inadequate response to methotrexate (MTX). Methods Patients were randomized 1:1:1 to receive placebo, apremilast 20 mg twice a day, or apremilast 30 mg twice a day. Patients whose swollen and tender joint counts had not improved by ≥20% were considered nonresponders at week 16 and were required to enter the protocol-defined early escape. At week 24, patients were transitioned in a blinded manner to receive apremilast 20 mg twice a day if they were initially randomized to receive placebo. Patients who were not initially randomized to receive placebo continued to receive their target apremilast dose. Patients were required to take a stable dose of MTX (7.5-25 mg/week) throughout the study. Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) was performed in a subset of patients. Results A total of 237 patients who were receiving MTX therapy were randomized and received ≥1 dose of study medication. At week 16, similar proportions of patients receiving placebo (35%), apremilast 20 mg twice a day (28%), and apremilast 30 mg twice a day (34%) met the American College of Rheumatology criteria for 20% improvement in disease activity (the primary efficacy end point). In the MRI substudy, mean change from baseline in total joint damage scores according to the Rheumatoid Arthritis Magnetic Resonance Imaging Scoring system was generally similar with either apremilast dose at week 16. At week 52, no trends were noted for clinical end points by treatment group. Both apremilast doses were generally well tolerated. Conclusion Apremilast efficacy was not demonstrated in patients who had active RA despite stable MTX therapy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective To evaluate the efficacy and safety of sarilumab in combination with methotrexate (MTX) for the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis (RA). Methods Adults with moderate-to-severe RA and an inadequate response to MTX were randomized (1:1:1) to receive sarilumab (doses of 150 mg or 200 mg) or placebo every 2 weeks in conjunction with weekly MTX for 52 weeks. Co-primary end points were the proportion of patients achieving American College of Rheumatology 20% (ACR20) improvement responses at week 24, change from baseline in the Health Assessment Questionnaire (HAQ) disability index (DI) at week 16, and change from baseline in the modified Sharp/van der Heijde score (SHS) of radiographic damage at week 52. Results Baseline characteristics were similar among the groups. For all 3 co-primary end points, the sarilumab 150 mg and 200 mg groups demonstrated statistically significant improvements as compared with the placebo group (ACR20 response rate at week 24, 58.0%, 66.4%, and 33.4%, respectively [ P < 0.0001]; least squares mean change in HAQ DI at week 16, −0.53, −0.55, and −0.29, respectively [ P < 0.0001]; and mean change in SHS at week 52, 0.90, 0.25, and 2.78, respectively [ P < 0.0001]). The most common treatment-emergent adverse event was infection. In the sarilumab 150 mg, sarilumab 200 mg, and placebo groups, the incidence of serious infections was 2.6%, 4.0%, and 2.3%, respectively. Elevations in alanine aminotransferase levels >3-fold the upper limit of normal occurred in 9.5%, 8.0%, and 2.1% of patients, respectively; in 24 patients, this led to discontinuation of treatment. Elevated total cholesterol levels were observed in 36.8%, 43.0%, and 18.3% of patients, respectively. In patients receiving 150 mg and 200 mg sarilumab, neutrophil counts of 0.5 to <1.0 × 109/liter were observed in 5.1% and 7.8% of patients, respectively, while neutrophil counts of <0.5 × 109/liter were observed in 0.9% and 0.7% of patients, respectively; none of the patients receiving placebo experienced changes in neutrophil counts. Conclusion In RA patients treated with sarilumab (150 mg or 200 mg every 2 weeks) in combination with MTX, both doses provided sustained clinical efficacy, as shown by significant improvements in symptomatic, functional, and radiographic outcomes. Sarilumab was generally well tolerated. The adverse events observed in this study were consistent with the effects of interleukin-6 signaling blockade. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective To investigate the safety of long-term subcutaneous (SC) abatacept treatment using integrated clinical trial data obtained in patients with rheumatoid arthritis refractory to traditional disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs. Methods Data from the double-blind and open-label phases of 5 clinical trials of SC abatacept were pooled. The overall and 6-month incidence rates were calculated as events per 100 patient-years of exposure. Results This analysis included 1,879 patients with 4,214.6 patient-years of exposure to SC abatacept. The mean ± SD length of exposure was 27.3 ± 9.1 months. The reported incidence rate of serious infections was 1.79 (95% confidence interval [95% CI] 1.42-2.24); the most frequent infections were pneumonia (incidence rate 0.36 [95% CI 0.22-0.59]), urinary tract infection (incidence rate 0.14 [95% CI 0.06-0.32]), and gastroenteritis (incidence rate 0.10 [95% CI 0.04-0.25]). Tuberculosis occurred rarely (incidence rate 0.09 [95% CI 0.04-0.25]). The reported incidence rate of malignancies was 1.32 (95% CI 1.01-1.72), and the most common was solid organ malignancy (incidence rate 0.69 [95% CI 0.48-0.99]). The incidence rate of autoimmune events was 1.37 (95% CI 1.06-1.78), and the most frequent events were psoriasis (incidence rate 0.33 [95% CI 0.20-0.56]) and Sjögren's syndrome (incidence rate 0.24 [95% CI 0.13-0.44]). The reported incidence rate of local injection site reactions was 1.72 (95% CI 1.36-2.17); these events occurred primarily during the first 6 months of treatment, and almost all were of mild or moderate intensity. The incidence rates of serious infections, malignancies, autoimmune events, and injection site reactions did not increase over time. Conclusion Long-term treatment with SC abatacept was associated with low incidence rates of serious infections, malignancies, and autoimmune events and was well tolerated, with infrequent injection site reactions. These findings are consistent with those related to treatment with intravenous abatacept. Long-term treatment with SC abatacept did not lead to new safety signals over time. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective. To evaluate ixekizumab, an anti-interleukin-17A (anti-IL-17A) monoclonal antibody, in 2 populations of rheumatoid arthritis (RA) patients: biologics-naive patients and patients with an inadequate response to tumor necrosis factor (TNF) inhibitors. Methods. In this phase II, randomized, doubleblind study, placebo or ixekizumab was administered subcutaneously to 260 biologics-naive patients and 188 patients with an inadequate response to TNF inhibitors at weeks 0, 1, 2, 4, 6, 8, and 10 with concomitant disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs. The primary objective was to determine the dose-response relationship of ixekizumab as measured by the proportion of biologics-naive patients meeting the American College of Rheumatology 20% improvement criteria (ACR20) at week 12. Results. Using a logistic regression model defined a priori, a statistically significant dose-response relationship as measured by ACR20 response rates at week 12 was detected in biologics-naive patients (P = 0.031). For patients with an inadequate response to TNF inhibitors, ACR20 responses at week 12 were significantly better with ixekizumab than placebo (P < 0.05). Decreases in the Disease Activity Score in 28 joints using the C-reactive protein level (DAS28-CRP), Clinical Disease Activity Index (CDAI), and CRP level from baseline were observed at week 12 in the ixekizumab groups in both populations (P < 0.05 versus placebo). Onset of action was rapid in some dose groups in both populations, with improvements in the ACR20, DAS28-CRP, CRP levels, and CDAI observed by day 3 (P < 0.05). Adverse events occurred with similar frequencies overall in the ixekizumab and placebo groups. Infections were more frequent with ixekizumab than placebo (biologicsnaive 25% versus 19%; inadequate responders to TNF inhibitors 27% versus 25%). No mycobacterial or invasive fungal infections were reported. Conclusion. Ixekizumab improved RA signs and symptoms in RA patients who were either naive to biologics treatment or had an inadequate response to TNF inhibitors. The safety profile was similar to that of other biologic agents, with no unexpected safety concerns. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Chinese translation BACKGROUND: Many patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) do not achieve adequate and safe responses with disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs). Tofacitinib is a novel, oral, Janus kinase inhibitor that treats RA. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of tofacitinib in combination with nonbiologic DMARDs. DESIGN: 1-year, double-blind, randomized trial (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT00856544). SETTING: 114 centers in 19 countries. PATIENTS: 792 patients with active RA despite nonbiologic DMARD therapy. INTERVENTION: Patients were randomly assigned 4:4:1:1 to oral tofacitinib, 5 mg or 10 mg twice daily, or placebo advanced to tofacitinib, 5 mg or 10 mg twice daily. MEASUREMENTS: Primary end points were 20% improvement in American College of Rheumatology (ACR20) criteria; Disease Activity Score for 28-joint counts based on the erythrocyte sedimentation rate (DAS28-4[ESR]) of less than 2.6; DAS28-4(ESR)-defined remission, change in Health Assessment Questionnaire Disability Index (HAQ-DI) score, and safety assessments. RESULTS: Mean treatment differences for ACR20 response rates (month 6) for the 5-mg and 10-mg tofacitinib groups compared with the combined placebo groups were 21.2% (95% CI, 12.2% to 30.3%; P 0.001) and 25.8% (CI, 16.8% to 34.8%; P 0.001), respectively. The HAQ-DI scores (month 3) and DAS28-4(ESR) less than 2.6 response rates (month 6) were also superior in the tofacitinib groups versus placebo. The incidence rates of serious adverse events for patients receiving 5-mg tofacitinib, 10-mg tofacitinib, or placebo were 6.9, 7.3, or 10.9 events per 100 patient-years of exposure, respectively. In the tofacitinib groups, 2 cases of tuberculosis, 2 cases of other opportunistic infections, 3 cardiovascular events, and 4 deaths occurred. Neutrophil counts decreased, hemoglobin and low- and high-density lipoprotein cholesterol levels increased, and serum creatinine levels had small increases in the tofacitinib groups. LIMITATIONS: Placebo groups were smaller and of shorter duration. Patients received primarily methotrexate. The ability to assess drug combinations other than tofacitinib plus methotrexate was limited. CONCLUSION: Tofacitinib improved disease control in patients with active RA despite treatment with nonbiologic DMARDs, primarily methotrexate. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE: Pfizer. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective To compare the efficacy, safety, and tolerability of 5 doses of oral tofacitinib (CP-690,550) or adalimumab monotherapy with placebo for the treatment of active rheumatoid arthritis (RA) in patients with an inadequate response to disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs. Methods In this 24-week, double-blind, phase IIb study, patients with RA (n = 384) were randomized to receive placebo, tofacitinib at 1, 3, 5, 10, or 15 mg administered orally twice a day, or adalimumab at 40 mg injected subcutaneously every 2 weeks (total of 6 injections) followed by oral tofacitinib at 5 mg twice a day for 12 weeks. The primary end point was the responder rate according to the American College of Rheumatology 20% improvement criteria (ACR20) at week 12. Results Treatment with tofacitinib at a dose of ≥3 mg twice a day resulted in a rapid response with significant efficacy when compared to placebo, as indicated by the primary end point (ACR20 response at week 12), achieved in 39.2% (3 mg; P ≤ 0.05), 59.2% (5 mg; P < 0.0001), 70.5% (10 mg; P < 0.0001), and 71.9% (15 mg; P < 0.0001) in the tofacitinib group and 35.9% of patients in the adalimumab group ( P = 0.105), compared with 22.0% of patients receiving placebo. Improvements were sustained at week 24, according to the ACR20, ACR50, and ACR70 response rates as well as classifications of remission according to the 3-variable Disease Activity Score in 28 joints (DAS28) using C-reactive protein and the 4-variable DAS28 using the erythrocyte sedimentation rate. The most common treatment-emergent adverse events (AEs) in patients across all tofacitinib treatment arms (n = 272) were urinary tract infection (7.7%), diarrhea (4.8%), headache (4.8%), and bronchitis (4.8%). Conclusion Tofacitinib monotherapy at ≥3 mg twice a day was efficacious in the treatment of patients with active RA over 24 weeks and demonstrated a manageable safety profile. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article discusses a randomized controlled study to evaluate the effects of golimumab on radiographic progression in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA). Findings reveal that in the GO-BEFORE study golimumab in combination with methotrexate (MTX) significantly inhibited radiographic progression. It is concluded that radiographic progression in the GO-FORWARD study was minimal in all treatment arms.

The article evaluates efficacy and safety of R788 (fostamatinib disodium), an inhibitor of spleen tyrosine kinase (Syk), in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) who were not responsive to biological therapies. A total of 219 patients were enrolled in a 3-month placebo-controlled trial of R788. At month 3, the ACR20 response in R788 100 mg twice daily group was 38 percent, against 37 percent in the placebo group. The studies indicate difference between the R788 and placebo groups in the secondary end points.

Background: Patients who have had inadequate response to tumour necrosis factor inhibitors have fewer treatment options and are generally more treatment refractory to subsequent therapeutic interventions than previously untreated patients. We report the efficacy and safety of ixekizumab, a monoclonal antibody that selectively targets interleukin-17A, in patients with active psoriatic arthritis and previous inadequate response to tumour necrosis factor inhibitors.Methods: In this double-blind, multicentre, randomised, placebo-controlled, phase 3 study (SPIRIT-P2), patients were recruited from 109 centres across ten countries in Asia, Australia, Europe, and North America. Patients were aged 18 years or older, had a confirmed diagnosis of psoriatic arthritis for at least 6 months, and had a previous inadequate response, distinguished by being refractory to therapy or had loss of efficacy, or were intolerant to tumour necrosis factor inhibitors. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1:1) by a computer-generated random sequence to receive a subcutaneous injection of 80 mg ixekizumab every 4 weeks or every 2 weeks after a 160 mg starting dose or placebo. The primary endpoint was the proportion of patients who attained at least 20% improvement in the American College of Rheumatology response criteria (ACR-20) at week 24. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT02349295.Findings: Between March 3, 2015, to March 22, 2016, 363 patients were randomly assigned to placebo (n=118), ixekizumab every 4 weeks (n=122), or ixekizumab every 2 weeks (n=123). At week 24, a higher proportion of patients attained ACR-20 with ixekizumab every 4 weeks (65 [53%] patients; effect size vs placebo 33·8% [95% CI 22·4-45·2]; p<0·0001) and ixekizumab every 2 weeks (59 [48%] patients; 28.5% [17·1-39.8]; p<0·0001) than did patients with placebo (23 [20%] patients). Up to week 24, serious adverse events were reported in three (3%) patients with ixekizumab every 4 weeks, eight (7%) with ixekizumab every 2 weeks, and four (3%) with placebo; no deaths were reported. Infections were reported in 47 (39%) patients with ixekizumab every 4 weeks, 47 (38%) with ixekizumab every 2 weeks, and 35 (30%) with placebo. Three (2%) serious infections, all in patients in the ixekizumab every 2 weeks group, were reported.Interpretation: Both the 2-week and 4-week ixekizumab dosing regimens improved the signs and symptoms of patients with active psoriatic arthritis and who had previously inadequate response to tumour necrosis factor inhibitors, with a safety profile consistent with previous studies investigating ixekizumab.Funding: Eli Lilly and Company. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]