Search

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 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]

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]

Objective: To evaluate the efficacy, including capacity for inhibition of radiographic progression, and safety of upadacitinib, a JAK1‐selective inhibitor, as compared to placebo or adalimumab in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) who have experienced an inadequate response to methotrexate (MTX). Methods: In total, 1,629 RA patients with an inadequate response to MTX were randomized (2:2:1) to receive upadacitinib (15 mg once daily), placebo, or adalimumab (40 mg every other week) while continuing to take a stable background dose of MTX. The primary end points were achievement of an American College of Rheumatology 20% (ACR20) improvement response and a Disease Activity Score in 28 joints using C‐reactive protein level (DAS28‐CRP) of <2.6 in the upadacitinib group compared to the placebo group at week 12; inhibition of radiographic progression was evaluated at week 26. The study was also designed and powered to test for the noninferiority and superiority of upadacitinib compared to adalimumab, as measured both clinically and functionally. Results: At week 12, both primary end points were met in patients receiving upadacitinib compared to those receiving placebo (P ≤ 0.001). An ACR20 improvement response was achieved by 71% of patients in the upadacitinib group compared to 36% in the placebo group, and a DAS28‐CRP score of <2.6 was observed in 29% of patients receiving upadacitinib compared to 6% of patients receiving placebo. Upadacitinib was superior to adalimumab based on the ACR50 response rate, achievement of a DAS28‐CRP score of ≤3.2, change in pain severity score, and change in the Health Assessment Questionnaire disability index. At week 26, more patients receiving upadacitinib than those receiving placebo or adalimumab achieved low disease activity or remission (P ≤ 0.001). Radiographic progression was significantly inhibited in patients receiving upadacitinib and was observed in fewer upadacitinib‐treated patients than placebo‐treated patients (P ≤ 0.001). Up to week 26, adverse events (AEs), including serious infections, were comparable between the upadacitinib and adalimumab groups. The proportions of patients with serious AEs and AEs leading to discontinuation were highest in the adalimumab group; the proportions of patients with herpes zoster and those with creatine phosphokinase (CPK) elevations were highest in the upadacitinib group. Three malignancies, 5 major adverse cardiovascular events, and 4 deaths were reported among the groups, but none occurred in patients receiving upadacitinib. Six venous thromboembolic events were reported (1 in the placebo group, 2 in the upadacitinib group, and 3 in the adalimumab group). Conclusion: Upadacitinib was superior to placebo and adalimumab for improving signs, symptoms, and physical function in RA patients who were receiving background MTX. In addition, radiographic progression was significantly inhibited by upadacitinib as compared to placebo. The overall safety profile of upadacitinib was generally similar to that of adalimumab, except for higher rates of herpes zoster and CPK elevations in patients receiving upadacitinib. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: Tumor necrosis factor (TNF) and interleukin‐17A (IL‐17A) may independently contribute to the pathophysiology of rheumatoid arthritis (RA). This study sought to evaluate the safety and efficacy of ABT‐122, a novel dual variable domain immunoglobulin targeting human TNF and IL‐17A, in patients with RA who have experienced an inadequate response to methotrexate. Methods: Patients with active RA who were receiving treatment with methotrexate and had no prior exposure to biologic agents (n = 222) were enrolled in a 12‐week phase II randomized, double‐blind, active‐controlled, parallel‐group study. Patients were randomized to receive either ABT‐122 at dosages of 60 mg every other week, 120 mg every other week, or 120 mg every week or adalimumab at 40 mg every other week, administered subcutaneously. The primary efficacy end point was the proportion of patients achieving a ≥20% improvement response based on the American College of Rheumatology criteria for 20% improvement (ACR20) at week 12. Results: Treatment‐emergent adverse events were similar across all treatment groups, with no serious infections or systemic hypersensitivity reactions reported with ABT‐122. ACR20 response rates at week 12 were 62%, 75%, and 80% with ABT‐122 60 mg every other week, 120 mg every other week, and 120 mg every week, respectively, compared with an ACR20 response rate of 68% with 40 mg adalimumab every other week. The corresponding response rates for ACR50 and ACR70 improvement in the ABT‐122 dose groups and adalimumab group were 35%, 46%, 47%, and 48%, respectively, and 22%, 18%, 36%, and 21%, respectively. Conclusion: Over the 12‐week study period, dual inhibition of TNF and IL‐17A with ABT‐122 produced a safety profile consistent with that of adalimumb used for inhibition of TNF alone. The efficacy of ABT‐122 over 12 weeks at dosages of 120 mg every other week or 120 mg every week was not meaningfully differentiated from that of adalimumab at a dosage of 40 mg every other week in patients with RA receiving concomitant methotrexate. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: To investigate the safety and efficacy of ABT‐122, a tumor necrosis factor (TNF)– and interleukin‐17A (IL‐17A)–targeted dual variable domain immunoglobulin, in patients with active psoriatic arthritis (PsA) who have experienced an inadequate response to methotrexate. Methods: Patients (n = 240) were randomized to receive ABT‐122 (120 or 240 mg every week), adalimumab (40 mg every other week), or placebo in a 12‐week double‐blind, parallel‐group study. The primary efficacy end point was the proportion of patients achieving ≥20% improvement in disease activity according to the American College of Rheumatology response criteria (ACR20) at week 12. Secondary and exploratory 12‐week end points included 50% improvement (ACR50) and 70% improvement (ACR70) response rates, and proportion of patients meeting the Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI) response criteria for ≥75% (PASI75) and ≥90% (PASI90) improvement in skin scores among those with ≥3% of their body surface area affected by psoriasis. Results: In both ABT‐122 dose groups, ACR20 response rates at week 12 (64.8–75.3%) were superior to that in patients receiving placebo (25.0%) (P < 0.001) but similar to that in patients receiving adalimumab (68.1%). ACR50 and ACR70 response rates were also superior in both ABT‐122 dose groups (36.6–53.4% and 22.5–31.5%, respectively) compared to the placebo group (12.5% and 4.2%, respectively) (P < 0.05). Among eligible patients in the placebo, adalimumab, ABT‐122 120 mg every week, and ABT‐122 240 mg every week treatment groups, PASI75 responses were achieved in 27.3%, 57.6%, 74.4%, and 77.6% of patients, respectively, whereas PASI90 responses were achieved in 18.2%, 45.5%, 48.8%, and 46.9% of patients, respectively. Frequencies of treatment‐emergent adverse events, including infections, were similar across all treatment groups, causing no discontinuations. No serious infections or systemic hypersensitivity reactions were reported with ABT‐122. Conclusion: Dual neutralization of TNF and IL‐17A with ABT‐122 had efficacy and safety that was similar to, and not broadly differentiated from, that of adalimumab over a 12‐week treatment course in patients with PsA. [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]

Objectives To examine 2-year safety, efficacy and radiographic outcomes of sarilumab in adults with RA and inadequate response to MTX (MTX-IR). Methods In the randomized, placebo-controlled MOBILITY trial, MTX-IR patients received subcutaneous sarilumab (150 or 200 mg) or placebo every 2 weeks (q2w) plus MTX for up to 1 year. Upon study completion, patients could enrol in the open-label, long-term extension study (EXTEND, NCT011046652), in which all patients received sarilumab 200 mg q2w plus MTX. Dose reduction to 150 mg q2w was allowed for abnormal laboratory findings and per investigator’s discretion. Results Of 1197 patients participating in MOBILITY, 901 entered EXTEND. Over the 2-year period, treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) and serious AEs occurred at rates of 279.6 events per 100 patient-years and 16.6 events per 100 patient-years, respectively. The most common TEAEs were neutropenia, injection site erythema, increased alanine aminotransferase and upper respiratory tract infections. After 1 year in the open-label, long-term extension, disease activity reached similar levels regardless of initial treatment. Modified total Sharp scores at year 1 were maintained through year 2. Best radiographic outcomes were observed in patients initially randomized to sarilumab 200 mg q2w. After dose reduction, 89.4% of patients continued the study through 2 years. Conclusion Sarilumab safety through year 2 was consistent with IL-6 receptor blockade. Clinical response was similar irrespective of initial treatment, and radiographic progression stabilized. Patients initiated on sarilumab 200 mg q2w had the best radiographic outcomes. Dose reduction allowed most patients to continue with the study. [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 assess the effects of baricitinib on lipid profiles in patients with moderate-to-severe rheumatoid arthritis. Methods Treatment with once-daily doses of baricitinib (1, 2, 4, or 8 mg) or placebo was studied in 301 randomized patients. Changes in lipid profile and lipoprotein particle size and particle number were assessed at weeks 12 and 24, and associations with clinical efficacy were evaluated. Apolipoproteins were assessed at weeks 4 and 12 in the placebo group and the 4-mg and 8-mg baricitinib groups. Results Treatment with baricitinib resulted in dose-dependent increases in serum lipid levels from baseline to week 12 (low-density lipoprotein [LDL] cholesterol increases of 3.4 mg/dl and 11.8 mg/dl in the 1 mg and 8 mg treatment groups, respectively; high-density lipoprotein [HDL] cholesterol increases of 3.3 mg/dl and 8.1 mg/dl, respectively; triglycerides increases of 6.4 mg/dl and 15.4 mg/dl, respectively). Group-wise mean increases in LDL cholesterol were coincident with mean increases in large LDL particles and mean reductions in small dense LDL particles. Increases from baseline to week 12 in apolipoprotein A-I, apolipoprotein B, and apolipoprotein CIII were observed with 4-mg doses of baricitinib (9.5%, 6.8%, and 23.0%, respectively) and with 8-mg doses (12.2%, 7.1%, and 19.7%, respectively), with no increase in LDL-associated apolipoprotein CIII (-4.5% with 4-mg baricitinib; -9.0% with 8-mg baricitinib). Baricitinib reduced HDL-associated serum amyloid A when administered at 4 mg (−36.0%) and 8 mg (−32.0%); a significant reduction in lipoprotein (a) was observed only with 8-mg doses (−16.6%). Increased HDL cholesterol at week 12 correlated with improved Disease Activity Scores and Simplified Disease Activity Index; changes in total cholesterol, LDL cholesterol, and triglycerides did not reveal a similar relationship. Conclusion Baricitinib-associated increases in serum lipid levels were observed in this study. Increases in levels of HDL cholesterol correlated with improved clinical outcomes. [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]

Background: In phase 2 studies, baricitinib, an oral Janus kinase 1 and 2 inhibitor, reduced disease activity in patients with rheumatoid arthritis who had not previously received treatment with biologic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs).Methods: In this phase 3 study involving 527 patients with an inadequate response to or unacceptable side effects associated with one or more tumor necrosis factor inhibitors, other biologic DMARDs, or both, we randomly assigned the patients in a 1:1:1 ratio to baricitinib at a dose of 2 or 4 mg daily or placebo for 24 weeks. End points, tested hierarchically at week 12 to control type 1 error, were the American College of Rheumatology 20% (ACR20) response (primary end point), the Health Assessment Questionnaire-Disability Index (HAQ-DI) score, the 28-joint Disease Activity Score based on C-reactive protein level (DAS28-CRP), and a Simplified Disease Activity Index (SDAI) score of 3.3 or less (on a scale of 0.1 to 86.0, with a score of 3.3 or less indicating remission). Comparisons with placebo were made first with the 4-mg dose of baricitinib and then with the 2-mg dose.Results: Significantly more patients receiving baricitinib at the 4-mg dose than those receiving placebo had an ACR20 response at week 12 (55% vs. 27%, P<0.001). Differences between the higher-dose baricitinib group and the placebo group were also significant for the HAQ-DI score and the DAS28-CRP but not for an SDAI score of 3.3 or less. Adverse-event rates through 24 weeks were higher for patients receiving the 2-mg dose of baricitinib and those receiving the 4-mg dose than for patients receiving placebo (71% and 77%, respectively, vs. 64%), including infections (44% and 40%, vs. 31%). The rates of serious adverse events were 4%, 10%, and 7% in the three groups, respectively. Two nonmelanoma skin cancers and two major adverse cardiovascular events, including a fatal stroke, occurred in the higher-dose group. Baricitinib was associated with a small reduction in neutrophil levels and increases in serum creatinine and low-density lipoprotein cholesterol levels.Conclusions: In patients with rheumatoid arthritis and an inadequate response to biologic DMARDs, baricitinib at a daily dose of 4 mg was associated with clinical improvement at 12 weeks. (Funded by Eli Lilly and Incyte; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01721044.). [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 This phase III, 52-week study compared fostamatinib with placebo (for 24 weeks) in patients with active rheumatoid arthritis (RA) and an inadequate response to methotrexate (MTX) therapy. Methods Patients taking MTX were randomized (1:1:1) to receive fostamatinib 100 mg twice daily for 52 weeks (group A), fostamatinib 100 mg twice daily for 4 weeks and then 150 mg once daily (group B), or placebo for 24 weeks and then fostamatinib 100 mg twice daily (group C). At week 24, the co-primary end points were change from baseline in the American College of Rheumatology 20% (ACR20) improvement response rates and change in the modified total Sharp/van der Heijde score of radiographic damage (SHS). Results In this study, 918 patients were randomized and received ≥1 dose of study drug (fostamatinib or placebo); the demographic and baseline clinical characteristics were well balanced. Following treatment with both fostamatinib regimens, a statistically significant difference in the ACR20 improvement response was achieved at week 24 as compared with that in patients receiving placebo (49.0% [group A] and 44.4%, [group B] versus 34.2%; P < 0.001 and P = 0.006, respectively), but there was no statistically significant difference in the SHS between either fostamatinib group and placebo ( P = 0.25 and P = 0.17, respectively). The most common adverse events in patients in groups A, B, and C were hypertension (15.8%, 15.1%, and 3.9%, respectively) and diarrhea (13.9%, 15.1%, and 3.9%, respectively). Elevated blood pressure (≥140/90 mm Hg) occurred at ≥1 visit in 44.2%, 41.6%, and 19.3% of patients in each respective group. Conclusion With the use of either fostamatinib regimen in patients with RA, statistically significant, but not clinically significant, improvements in the ACR20 improvement response over placebo were achieved at 24 weeks, whereas a significant difference in the SHS was not seen. The overall level of response to treatment with fostamatinib was lower than had been observed in the phase II program, but similar adverse events were reported. [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.

Background: A substantial number of patients with rheumatoid arthritis have an inadequate or unsustained response to tumor necrosis factor α (TNF-α) inhibitors. We conducted a randomized, double-blind, phase 3 trial to evaluate the efficacy and safety of abatacept, a selective costimulation modulator, in patients with active rheumatoid arthritis and an inadequate response to at least three months of anti–TNF-α therapy. Methods: Patients with active rheumatoid arthritis and an inadequate response to anti–TNF-α therapy were randomly assigned in a 2:1 ratio to receive abatacept or placebo on days 1, 15, and 29 and every 28 days thereafter for 6 months, in addition to at least one disease-modifying antirheumatic drug. Patients discontinued anti–TNF-α therapy before randomization. The rates of American College of Rheumatology (ACR) 20 responses (indicating a clinical improvement of 20 percent or greater) and improvement in functional disability, as reflected by scores for the Health Assessment Questionnaire (HAQ) disability index, were assessed. Results: After six months, the rates of ACR 20 responses were 50.4 percent in the abatacept group and 19.5 percent in the placebo group (P<0.001); the respective rates of ACR 50 and ACR 70 responses were also significantly higher in the abatacept group than in the placebo group (20.3 percent vs. 3.8 percent, P<0.001; and 10.2 percent vs. 1.5 percent, P=0.003). At six months, significantly more patients in the abatacept group than in the placebo group had a clinically meaningful improvement in physical function, as reflected by an improvement from baseline of at least 0.3 in the HAQ disability index (47.3 percent vs. 23.3 percent, P<0.001). The incidence of adverse events and peri-infusional adverse events was 79.5 percent and 5.0 percent, respectively, in the abatacept group and 71.4 percent and 3.0 percent, respectively, in the placebo group. The incidence of serious infections was 2.3 percent in each group. Conclusions: Abatacept produced significant clinical and functional benefits in patients who had had an inadequate response to anti–TNF-α therapy. N Engl J Med 2005;353:1114-23. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

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]