Search

Abstract Introduction The 1-year PROspective sarilumab (preFILled syringe/pen) multinational, obsErvational (PROFILE) study evaluated the real-world effectiveness and safety of sarilumab in patients with moderate-to-severe rheumatoid arthritis (RA). Methods Safety endpoints included adverse events (AEs) and lab abnormalities. Effectiveness endpoints included the ACR core set. The primary endpoint was the change from baseline in Clinical Disease Activity Index (CDAI). All statistics are descriptive and p values were nominal. Results In total, 595 patients were treated, of whom 223 (37.5%) received sarilumab monotherapy and 372 (62.5%) received combination therapy. Upon initiation of sarilumab, an improvement in the mean (SD) CDAI score was observed at week 24 [11.4 (10.3)] and was maintained through week 52 [10.0 (10.5)], resulting in a mean [SD] reduction of −14.9 (12.7) and −14.4 (12.9), respectively. There were consistent improvements in disease activity that were similar for patients on monotherapy vs. combination therapy. An increase in the proportion of patients achieving remission and low disease activity was reported. By week 52, both groups had improved physical function and quality of life. There were no new safety signals. The proportions of any patients reporting a treatment-emergent adverse event (TEAE) or serious treatment-emergent AE (SAE) was 66.2% and 5.9%, respectively, and were similar between both treatment groups. Overall, 15.6% of patients discontinued sarilumab treatment due to TEAEs. The most commonly reported TEAE of interest was neutropenia (14.1%). Conclusions In this 1-year, observational real-world study, sarilumab therapy resulted in improved clinical outcomes. The safety profile was consistent with that observed in sarilumab randomized clinical trials. This study was entered on the German website (Paul Ehrlich Institute) on January 11, 2018, with NIS No.: 423.

Abstract Introduction The aim of this work is to evaluate secukinumab vs. placebo in a challenging-to-treat and smaller US patient subpopulation of the international FUTURE 2–5 studies in patients with psoriatic arthritis (PsA). Methods Data were pooled from US patients enrolled in the phase 3 FUTURE 2–5 studies (NCT01752634, NCT01989468, NCT02294227, and NCT02404350). Patients received secukinumab 300 or 150 mg with subcutaneous loading dose, secukinumab 150 mg without subcutaneous loading dose, or placebo. Categorical efficacy and health-related quality-of-life (QoL) outcomes and safety were evaluated at week 16. Subgroup analyses were performed based on tumor necrosis factor inhibitor (TNFi) status and body mass index (BMI). For hypothesis generation, odds ratios (ORs) for American College of Rheumatology (ACR) 20/50/70 and Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI) 75/90/100 responses by treatment were estimated using logistic regression without adjustment for multiple comparisons. Results Of 2148 international patients originally randomized, 279 US patients were included in this pooled analysis. Mean BMI was > 30 kg/m2 and 55.2% had prior TNFi treatment. ORs for ACR20/50/70 significantly favored patients receiving secukinumab 300 mg and 150 mg with loading dose vs. placebo (P

Abstract Introduction Long-term therapeutic options providing durable response and tolerability are needed for psoriatic arthritis (PsA). The ongoing KEEPsAKE 2 trial is evaluating risankizumab treatment in patients with active PsA who previously had inadequate response/intolerance to ≥ 1 conventional synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drug (csDMARD-IR) and/or 1–2 biologic DMARDs (bDMARD-IR). Herein, we report results through 100 weeks of treatment. Methods KEEPsAKE 2 is a global phase 3 trial. Patients with active PsA were randomized 1:1 to double-blind subcutaneous risankizumab 150 mg or placebo (weeks 0, 4, and 16). At week 24, all patients received open-label risankizumab every 12 weeks until end of study. Efficacy endpoints included achieving ≥ 20% improvement in PsA symptoms using American College of Rheumatology criteria (ACR20), attaining minimal disease activity (MDA; meeting ≥ 5/7 criteria of low disease activity and extent), and improving in other measures. Results At the cutoff date, 345/443 (77.9%) patients were ongoing in the study. ACR20 was achieved in 57.1% and 52.5% of the continuous risankizumab and placebo/risankizumab cohorts, respectively, at week 100 and in 60.0% and 55.8%, respectively, at week 52. In week 52 responders, maintenance of ACR20 at week 100 was achieved in 74.8% (continuous risankizumab) and 78.7% (placebo/risankizumab) of patients. In the continuous risankizumab and placebo/risankizumab cohorts, respectively, MDA was achieved by 33.0% and 33.3% of patients at week 100 and by 27.2% and 33.8% at week 52. Among MDA responders at week 52, maintenance of MDA response was achieved by 83.6% and 73.0% of the continuous risankizumab and placebo/risankizumab cohorts, respectively. Risankizumab was well tolerated through week 100. Conclusions Risankizumab demonstrated durable efficacy and tolerability through 100 weeks; most patients who achieved ACR20 and MDA responses at week 52 maintained this achievement through week 100. There were no new safety signals in patients who had csDMARD-IR and bDMARD-IR. Trial Registration ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03671148.

Abstract Introduction This observational study evaluated response in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) who switched from an interleukin-6 receptor inhibitor (IL-6Ri) to a Janus kinase inhibitor (JAKi) and vice versa. Methods Adult patients with RA, who initiated IL-6Ri or JAKi (following discontinuation of JAKi or IL-6Ri, respectively) during/after December 2012 and had a 6-month follow-up visit were enrolled. Clinical outcomes were evaluated at baseline and the follow-up visit. Continuous outcomes included Clinical Disease Activity Index (CDAI), Health Assessment Questionnaire (HAQ), pain, fatigue, tender joint count, swollen joint count, Physician Global Assessment (MDGA), Patient Global Assessment (PtGA), and morning stiffness duration. Categorical outcomes included the proportion of patients achieving CDAI low disease activity (LDA), remission, and minimal clinically important differences (MCIDs) for HAQ, pain, fatigue, MDGA, and PtGA. Continuous outcomes were summarized as mean changes from baseline, and categorical outcomes as response rates. Differences in the outcome measures between groups were evaluated using linear and logistic regression models. Results Between IL-6Ri (n = 100) and JAKi initiators (n = 129), no significant differences were noted for continuous outcomes. Within both groups, a significant proportion of patients achieved LDA, remission, and MCIDs for other measures, although the odds of achieving LDA were higher among IL-6Ri (vs. JAKi) initiators with moderate-to-severe disease (adjusted odds ratio: 3.30 [1.01, 10.78]). Conclusions Patients with RA can achieve improvement in response when switching between IL-6Ri and JAKi. Although both therapies affect the IL-6 pathway, there are distinct mechanisms of action, which likely contribute to their clinical improvement, when reciprocally switched as follow-on treatments.

Alan Kivitz,1 Alicia M Ellis,2 Vishvesh Shende,3 Jérémy Lambert,4 Daljit Tatla2 1Altoona Center for Clinical Research, Duncansville, PA, USA; 2UCB Pharma, Raleigh, NC, USA; 3UCB Pharma, Slough, UK; 4UCB Pharma, Colombes, FranceCorrespondence: Daljit Tatla, UCB Pharma, 4000 Paramount Parkway, Morrisville, NC, USA, Tel +1 919 767-2518, Email daljit.tatla@ucb.comPurpose: Bimekizumab is a monoclonal IgG1 antibody that selectively inhibits interleukin (IL)-17F in addition to IL-17A, key drivers of chronic inflammation. Bimekizumab must be injected subcutaneously and so patients require self-injection options that meet their preferences. This study evaluated safe and effective self-injection of bimekizumab by patients with psoriatic arthritis using the 1 mL safety syringe (SSy) or the 1 mL auto-injector (AI).Patients and Methods: The DV0004 devices study (NCT04109976) was a sub-study of BE VITAL, a multicenter, open-label extension of BE OPTIMAL (NCT03895203) and BE COMPLETE (NCT03896581) in patients with active psoriatic arthritis. After receiving training, patients subcutaneously self-injected bimekizumab 160 mg at Baseline and Week 4. The primary and secondary endpoints were the proportion of patients self-injecting bimekizumab safely and effectively at Week 4 and Baseline, respectively. Patient self-injection experience was evaluated using the pain visual analog scale (VAS) and the Self-Injection Assessment Questionnaire (SIAQ).Results: Overall, 214 patients were randomized 1:1 at Baseline. All evaluable patients safely and effectively self-injected bimekizumab at Week 4 (SSy: n=105; AI: n=104) and Baseline (SSy: n=106; AI: n=106). Mean pain VAS scores were generally low at Week 4 (SSy: 11.0; AI: 11.4) and Baseline (SSy: 9.5; AI: 14.9). High mean pre- and post-injection SIAQ scores (≥ 6.7) were observed for both devices indicating a positive overall patient experience with self-injection. Self-injection was well tolerated with no reports of treatment-emergent adverse device effects (TEADEs), serious TEADEs or discontinuations due to TEADEs. Four non-device-related injection site reactions during the sub-study were reported in the parent study; all were mild, did not lead to discontinuation and resolved without treatment. All devices maintained their structural and functional integrity post-use.Conclusion: All patients self-injected subcutaneous bimekizumab safely and effectively using either device at Baseline and Week 4. Overall, patients reported a positive self-injection experience.Keywords: bimekizumab, clinical trial, patient experience, psoriatic arthritis, self-injection devices

Abstract Introduction Upadacitinib (UPA) is an oral, selective Janus kinase inhibitor that has demonstrated favorable efficacy with an acceptable safety profile across a global, phase 3 program in rheumatoid arthritis (RA). This phase 2 open-label extension investigated the efficacy and safety of UPA through 6 years of treatment. Methods Patients from two phase 2b trials (BALANCE-1 and -2) enrolled in BALANCE-EXTEND (NCT02049138) and received open-label UPA 6 mg twice daily (BID). Dose increases to 12 mg BID were required for patients with

Abstract Introduction SEL-212 is a developmental treatment for uncontrolled gout characterized by serum uric acid (sUA) levels ≥ 6 mg/dl despite treatment. It comprises a novel PEGylated uricase (SEL-037; also called pegadricase) co-administered with tolerogenic nanoparticles containing sirolimus (rapamycin) (SEL-110; also called ImmTOR®), which mitigates the formation of anti-drug antibodies (ADAs) against uricase and SEL-037 (PEGylated uricase), thereby enabling sustained sUA control (sUA

Abstract Background Biologic therapies are often prescribed for patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) who have inadequate responses to or are intolerant of methotrexate (MTX) and patients with poor prognostic indicators. This post hoc analysis evaluated effectiveness and safety of intravenous golimumab + MTX vs golimumab without MTX in RA patients. Methods AWARE, a real-world, prospective and pragmatic, Phase 4 study, compared effectiveness and safety of golimumab and infliximab in biologic-naïve and biologic-experienced patients. All treatment decisions were at the discretion of the treating rheumatologist. Effectiveness was evaluated by mean change in CDAI scores at Months 6 and 12. Safety was monitored through approximately 1 year. Results Among 685 golimumab-treated patients, 420 (61%) received concomitant MTX during the study and 265 (39%) did not receive MTX after enrollment; 63% and 72%, respectively, discontinued the study. Relative to golimumab without MTX, golimumab + MTX patients had shorter mean disease duration (8.7 vs 10.0 years) and a lower proportion received prior biologics (60% vs 72%); mean ± standard deviation (SD) baseline CDAI scores were similar (30.8 ± 15.1 and 32.6 ± 15.4). Mean ± SD changes from baseline in CDAI scores at Months 6 and 12, respectively, were similar with golimumab + MTX (− 10.2 ± 14.2 and − 10.8 ± 13.8) and golimumab without MTX (− 9.6 ± 12.9 and − 9.9 ± 13.1). The incidence of adverse events/100 patient-years (PY) (95% confidence interval [CI]) was 155.6 (145.6, 166.1) for golimumab + MTX and 191.2 (176.2, 207.1) for golimumab without MTX; infections were the most common type. The incidence of infusion reactions/100PY (95% CI) was 2.1 (1.1, 3.6) for golimumab + MTX versus 5.1 (2.9, 8.3) for golimumab without MTX; none were considered serious. For golimumab + MTX versus golimumab without MTX, rates/100PY (95% CI) of serious infections, opportunistic infections, and malignancies were 2.6 (1.5, 4.3) versus 7.0 (4.4, 10.6), 0.9 (0.3, 2.0) versus 2.6 (1.1, 5.0), and 3.0 (1.7, 4.7) versus 1.0 (0.2, 2.8), respectively. Conclusions Mean change in CDAI score in the golimumab without MTX group was generally similar to that of the golimumab + MTX group through 1 year, regardless of prior biologic therapy. Adverse events were consistent with the known IV golimumab safety profile. These results provide real world evidential data that may assist healthcare providers and patients with RA in making informed treatment decisions. Trial registration: clinicaltrials.gov NCT02728934 05/04/2016.

Objective The study objective was to evaluate the safety, tolerability, pharmacodynamics, and preliminary efficacy of ATI‐450 with methotrexate in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA). Methods A parallel‐assignment, placebo‐controlled, investigator‐blinded/patient‐blinded multicenter study evaluated patients with moderate‐to‐severe RA aged 18 to 70 years. Eligible patients were randomized (1:1) to ATI‐450 50‐mg oral tablets twice daily or placebo with a stable weekly dose of methotrexate for 12 weeks. The primary objective was to assess ATI‐450 safety and tolerability. The secondary objectives were to assess the median percentage change from baseline high‐sensitivity C‐reactive protein (hs‐CRP) levels, the mean change from baseline in Disease Activity Score in 28 joints based on CRP level (DAS28‐CRP) and Rheumatoid Arthritis Magnetic Resonance Imaging Score hand‐wrist assessments of synovitis or bone erosion at week 12, and the proportion of patients with American College of Rheumatology 20/50/70 (ACR 20/50/70) and with DAS28‐CRP scores of less than 2.6. The exploratory outcomes were change from baseline in endogenous and ex vivo–stimulated cytokine levels. Results ATI‐450 was well tolerated with no severe adverse events reported. ATI‐450 reduced median hs‐CRP levels by 42% or more at all posttreatment timepoints. In the ATI‐450 group, a mean (median) decrease in DAS28‐CRP score of 2.0 (2.1) was observed at week 12; proportions of patients with an ACR 20/50/70 response in the per‐protocol population were 60%, 33%, and 20%, respectively, at week 12. Endogenous plasma levels of key inflammatory cytokines (tumor necrosis factor α, macrophage inflammatory protein 1β, interleukin 6, interleukin 8) were reduced across the 12 treatment weeks. Conclusion This is the first clinical study demonstrating that selective mitogen‐activated protein kinase (MAPK)–activated protein kinase 2 (MK2) pathway blockade leads to a sustained antiinflammatory effect. This suggests that targeting the MK2 pathway mitigates the tachyphylaxis observed with p38 MAPK inhibitors in RA and supports further exploration.

Abstract Introduction This exploratory analysis of FINCH 1 (NCT02889796) examined filgotinib (FIL) efficacy and safety in a subgroup of patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) and inadequate response to methotrexate (MTX; MTX-IR) who had four poor prognostic factors (PPFs). Methods Patients with MTX-IR received placebo up to week (W)24 or FIL200 mg, FIL100 mg, or adalimumab up to W52; all received MTX. Efficacy and safety data were stratified by four PPFs versus fewer than four PPFs: seropositivity, high-sensitivity C-reactive protein (CRP) ≥ 6 mg/L, Disease Activity Score in 28 joints with CRP > 5.1, and erosions on X-rays. Results At baseline, 687/1755 patients had four PPFs. At W12, whether with four PPFs or fewer than four PPFs, response rates on all American College of Rheumatology (ACR) measures were significantly greater with FIL200 and FIL100 versus placebo. At W52, FIL200 ACR20/50/70 response rates remained at least numerically higher versus adalimumab in both subgroups. At W52, FIL200 reduced modified total Sharp score (mTSS) change versus adalimumab in patients with four or fewer than four PPFs. Conclusions In high-risk (four PPFs) patients with MTX-IR RA, FIL200 and FIL100 showed similar reductions in disease activity versus placebo at W12 as in patients with fewer than four PPFs. mTSS in patients receiving FIL200 changed little from W24 to W52, while that in patients receiving FIL100 progressed comparably to patients who received adalimumab. Tolerability was comparable across treatment arms and subgroups.

Objective To assess the safety and biological activity of rozibafusp alfa, a first‐in‐class bispecific antibody–peptide conjugate targeting inducible costimulator ligand (ICOSL) and B cell activating factor (BAFF), in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA). Methods This phase 1b, double‐blind, placebo‐controlled, multiple ascending dose study included 34 patients (18–75 years; 82.4% female) with active RA (Disease Activity Score of 28 joints–C‐reactive protein [DAS28‐CRP] >2.6, on stable methotrexate) randomized 3:1 to receive rozibafusp alfa (n = 26, in four ascending dose cohorts of 70, 140, 210, and 420 mg) or a placebo (n = 8) subcutaneously once every 2 weeks for 10 weeks (six total doses), with 24 weeks of follow‐up. The primary end point was the incidence of treatment‐emergent adverse events (TEAEs). Additional assessments included serum pharmacokinetics (PK), pharmacodynamics (PD), immunogenicity, and RA disease activity measures (DAS28‐CRP, Patient Global Assessment of Disease, and Physician Global Assessment of Disease). Results TEAEs occurred in 96.2% and 87.5% of patients receiving rozibafusp alfa and the placebo, respectively; most were mild or moderate in severity. Two (7.7%) patients treated with rozibafusp alfa reported serious TEAEs; none were considered treatment related. Multiple doses of rozibafusp alfa showed nonlinear PK (mean t1/2 = 4.6–9.5 days) and dose‐related, reversible PD (>90% ICOSL receptor occupancy in 210‐ and 420‐mg cohorts; reduction in naïve B cells and increase in memory B cells in all cohorts). Five (20%) patients developed anti–rozibafusp alfa antibodies, with no apparent impact on safety. RA disease activity showed greater numerical improvement from baseline with rozibafusp alfa versus the placebo in the 210‐ and 420‐mg cohorts. Conclusion Multiple ascending doses of rozibafusp alfa were well tolerated, with PK and PD reflecting dual ICOSL and BAFF blockade. Findings support further clinical evaluation of rozibafusp alfa in autoimmune disease.

Objective Methods Results Conclusion The aim of this study was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of intravenous (IV) secukinumab in patients with active psoriatic arthritis (PsA).INVIGORATE‐2 (NCT04209205) was a randomized, placebo‐controlled, phase 3 trial. Patients with active PsA were randomized 1:1 to receive IV secukinumab (6 mg/kg at baseline followed by 3 mg/kg every four weeks [q4w]) or placebo. At week 16, patients randomized to placebo were switched to IV secukinumab (3 mg/kg q4w), and patients who received IV secukinumab continued treatment through week 52. The primary efficacy endpoint was achievement of 50% improvement in American College of Rheumatology response criteria (ACR50) at week 16. Efficacy and safety were evaluated through weeks 52 and 60, respectively.Among 191 patients randomized to IV secukinumab and 190 to placebo/IV secukinumab, 177 (92.7%) and 170 (89.5%) completed the entire study period, respectively. A significantly higher proportion of patients who received IV secukinumab versus placebo achieved ACR50 at week 16 (31.4% vs 6.3%; adjusted P < 0.0001). All secondary efficacy endpoints were met at week 16 (all adjusted P < 0.05 using the predefined hypothesis‐testing hierarchy). Patients who switched from placebo to secukinumab at week 16 showed rapid improvements in ACR50 rates; by week 52, both treatment arms experienced similar improvements in efficacy outcomes. No new or unexpected safety signals were observed with receiving IV secukinumab. One death was reported in the placebo group before week 16.IV secukinumab led to rapid and sustained improvements in clinical measures of PsA, and the safety profile was consistent with that of secukinumab administered subcutaneously. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Anti-drug antibodies (ADA) induced by biologic drugs may hamper the efficacy of treatment, so inhibiting ADA induction is desirable. Here, in two clinical trials, the authors show that ImmTOR, previously reported to reduce drug immunogenicity in animal studies, helps mitigate ADA induced by pegylated uricase for treating patients with hyperuricemia.

Objectives Determine the impact of 24-week risankizumab (RZB) versus placebo (PBO) on patient-reported outcomes (PROs) in patients with psoriatic arthritis (PsA) and inadequate response to one or two biologics (Bio-IR) and/or ≥1 conventional synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drug (csDMARD-IR).Methods Patients in the Phase 3 trial, KEEPsAKE 2, were randomised (1:1) to RZB 150 mg or PBO by subcutaneous injection. PROs assessed: 36-Item Short-Form Health Survey (SF-36), Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy—Fatigue (FACIT-Fatigue), Patient’s Assessment of Pain by visual analogue scale (VAS), Patient’s global assessment of disease activity (PtGA), EuroQoL-5 Dimension-5 Level (EQ-5D-5L) and Work Productivity and Activity Impairment—PsA (WPAI-PsA). Least squares mean change from baseline at week 24 was compared between RZB versus PBO by mixed-effects repeated regression modelling.Results At week 24, RZB versus PBO treatment resulted in significant differences (95% CIs) in mean change from baseline in ranked secondary endpoints SF-36 physical component summary score (3.9 (2.4 to 5.3); p

ObjectiveTo assess the safety, pharmacokinetics, and exploratory efficacy of SM04690, a novel Wnt pathway inhibitor, as a potential disease modifying treatment for knee osteoarthritis (OA).DesignSubjects with Kellgren-Lawrence grade 2-3 knee OA were randomized in successive dose-escalation cohorts to receive a knee intra-articular (IA) injection with 0.03, 0.07, or 0.23 mg SM04690, or placebo (PBO) (4:1 ratio). Safety, pharmacokinetics, efficacy (WOMAC Total/Function/Pain, Pain VAS, Physician Global Assessment [MDGA], and OMERACT-OARSI Response), OA-related biomarker (P1NP, ß-CTX, and cartilage oligomeric matrix protein [COMP]), and radiographic/imaging data were collected at baseline and during 24-week follow-up.Results61 subjects (SM04690 n = 50; PBO n = 11) enrolled. Two dose limiting toxicities (DLTs), increased pain following injection and paroxysmal tachycardia (also the single serious AE), were reported in the 0.07 mg cohort. A total of 72 AEs were reported; Sixteen (occurring in eight subjects) were considered related to study medication. There were three discontinuations; one due to an AE (0.03 mg cohort). Bone marrow edema (BME) remained constant for most subjects. No doses were excluded from further study due to DLT criteria. Plasma levels of SM04690 were below the limit of detection at all time points. At Week 24, improvements from baseline were seen in all cohorts for the exploratory measures WOMAC Total, WOMAC Function, WOMAC Pain, MDGA, Pain VAS, and OMERACT-OARSI response. Joint space width (JSW) improvement was observed in the 0.07 mg cohort (P = 0.02 vs PBO).ConclusionSM04690 appeared safe and well tolerated, with no evidence of systemic exposure. Exploratory efficacy analyses suggested positive trends for measurements of OA pain, function and disease-modifying osteoarthritis drug (DMOAD) properties. CLINICALTRIALS.Gov registrationNCT02095548.

ObjectiveEpratuzumab, a monoclonal antibody that targets CD22, modulates B cell signaling without substantial reductions in the number of B cells. The aim of this study was to report the results of 2 phase III multicenter randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trials, the EMBODY 1 and EMBODY 2 trials, assessing the efficacy and safety of epratuzumab in patients with moderately to severely active systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE).MethodsPatients met ≥4 of the American College of Rheumatology revised classification criteria for SLE, were positive for antinuclear antibodies and/or anti-double-stranded DNA antibodies, had an SLE Disease Activity Index 2000 (SLEDAI-2K) score of ≥6 (increased disease activity), had British Isles Lupus Assessment Group 2004 index (BILAG-2004) scores of grade A (severe disease activity) in ≥1 body system or grade B (moderate disease activity) in ≥2 body systems (in the mucocutaneous, musculoskeletal, or cardiorespiratory domains), and were receiving standard therapy, including mandatory treatment with corticosteroids (5-60 mg/day). BILAG-2004 grade A scores in the renal and central nervous system domains were excluded. Patients were randomized 1:1:1 to receive either placebo, epratuzumab 600 mg every week, or epratuzumab 1,200 mg every other week, with infusions delivered for the first 4 weeks of each 12-week dosing cycle, for 4 cycles. Patients across all 3 treatment groups also continued with their standard therapy. The primary end point was the response rate at week 48 according to the BILAG-based Combined Lupus Assessment (BICLA) definition, requiring improvement in the BILAG-2004 score, no worsening in the BILAG-2004 score, SLEDAI-2K score, or physician's global assessment of disease activity, and no disallowed changes in concomitant medications. Patients who discontinued the study medication were classified as nonresponders.ResultsIn the EMBODY 1 and EMBODY 2 trials of epratuzumab, 793 patients and 791 patients, respectively, were randomized, 786 (99.1%) and 788 (99.6%), respectively, received study medication, and 528 (66.6%) and 533 (67.4%), respectively, completed the study. There was no statistically significant difference in the primary end point between the groups, with the week 48 BICLA response rates being similar between the epratuzumab groups and the placebo group (response rates ranging from 33.5% to 39.8%). No new safety signals were identified.ConclusionIn patients with moderate or severely active SLE, treatment with epratuzumab + standard therapy did not result in improvements in response rates over that observed in the placebo + standard therapy group.