Search

Abstract Introduction The safety and efficacy of upadacitinib 15 mg (UPA15) through week 216 was evaluated in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) from the long-term extension (LTE) of the phase 3 SELECT-CHOICE study. Methods Patients with RA refractory to biologic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (bDMARDs) were randomized to UPA15 or abatacept (ABA) for 24 weeks. During the open-label LTE, patients on ABA switched to UPA15 at week 24, and those on UPA15 continued treatment. The safety and efficacy of continuous UPA15, and ABA to UPA15, are summarized through week 216. Results The LTE was comprised of 91.4% (n = 277/303) of patients that initially received UPA15, and 89.6% (n = 277/309) that initially received ABA. Of patients on UPA15 in the LTE (n = 547), 28.3% (n = 155/547) discontinued the study drug by week 216. Relative to other adverse events of special interest, and largely consistent with previous findings at week 24, higher rates of serious infection, COVID-19, herpes zoster, and elevated creatine phosphokinase were reported, while rates of malignancy excluding nonmelanoma skin cancer (NMSC), NMSC, major adverse cardiovascular event (MACE), and venous thromboembolism (VTE) were low. Long-term safety data with UPA through week 216 aligned with previous observations and no new safety risks were identified, including in patients who switched from ABA to UPA15. Proportions of patients achieving 28-joint disease activity score based on C-reactive protein (DAS28[CRP])

Abstract Introduction This integrated analysis of the phase 2/3 and phase 3 SELECT trials describes the safety profile of upadacitinib, an oral Janus kinase inhibitor, for up to 5 years of exposure across psoriatic arthritis (PsA), ankylosing spondylitis (AS), and non-radiographic axial spondyloarthritis (nr-axSpA) (including pooled axial spondyloarthritis [axSpA]). Methods Safety data from five trials of upadacitinib in PsA (2 trials), AS (2 trials), and nr-axSpA (1 trial) were analyzed up to a data cut-off of August 15, 2022. One PsA study included adalimumab as an active comparator. Treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) were summarized for PsA (pooled upadacitinib 15 mg once daily and adalimumab 40 mg biweekly), AS (pooled upadacitinib 15 mg), nr-axSpA (upadacitinib 15 mg), and pooled axSpA (pooled upadacitinib 15 mg from axSpA trials). TEAEs were reported as exposure-adjusted event rates per 100 patient-years (E/100 PY). Results A total of 1789 patients (PsA, n = 907; AS, n = 596; nr-axSpA, n = 286) received ≥ 1 dose of upadacitinib 15 mg for 3689 PY of exposure or adalimumab (n = 429) for 1147 PY of exposure. Overall TEAEs and serious TEAEs were highest in PsA and numerically higher with upadacitinib versus adalimumab; rates were similar between AS and nr-axSpA. In PsA, higher rates of serious infection, herpes zoster (HZ), lymphopenia, and nonmelanoma skin cancer (NMSC) were observed with upadacitinib versus adalimumab. Rates of malignancy excluding NMSC, adjudicated major adverse cardiovascular events, and adjudicated venous thromboembolic events were comparable between upadacitinib and adalimumab in PsA and were similar across diseases. Conclusion Higher rates of serious infection, HZ, lymphopenia, and NMSC were observed with upadacitinib versus adalimumab in PsA; slightly elevated rates for most of these TEAEs were seen with upadacitinib in PsA versus axSpA. Upadacitinib 15 mg demonstrated a generally consistent safety profile across disease states with no new safety signals identified. Trial Registration SELECT-AXIS 1: NCT03178487; SELECT-AXIS 2: NCT04169373; SELECT-PsA 1: NCT03104400; SELECT-PsA 2: NCT03104374.

Objective To evaluate the efficacy and safety of upadacitinib over 5 years among patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) in a long-term extension (LTE) of the SELECT-BEYOND phase 3 trial.Methods Patients refractory to ≥1 biological disease-modifying antirheumatic drug (DMARD) received upadacitinib 15 mg or 30 mg once daily or placebo, in combination with background conventional synthetic DMARD(s). At week 12, patients randomised to placebo were switched to upadacitinib 15 mg or 30 mg. All patients who completed the week 24 visit could enter the LTE for up to 5 years. Efficacy was analysed as observed and by non-responder imputation through week 260. Treatment-emergent adverse events per 100 patient-years were summarised over 5 years.Results Of the 498 patients randomised, 418 (84%) completed week 24 and entered the LTE. Of those who remained in the trial (n=80, upadacitinib 15 mg; n=81, upadacitinib 30 mg), 36%/36% and 81%/77% randomised to upadacitinib 15/30 mg were in Clinical Disease Activity Index (CDAI) remission or low disease activity at week 260, respectively (as observed). Approximately 47% of all patients who began in high disease activity demonstrated a CDAI improvement >12 at week 260 with upadacitinib 15/30 mg. Functional and pain-related outcomes also showed comparable improvements with both doses. Numerically higher rates of anaemia, herpes zoster and creatine phosphokinase elevation were observed with upadacitinib 30 mg vs 15 mg. No new safety issues were identified.Conclusions Upadacitinib 15/30 mg continued to be effective in treating clinical and functional outcomes in patients with RA. The safety profile observed over 5 years was consistent with earlier study-specific and integrated assessments of upadacitinib treatment.

Abstract Introduction This article aims to describe malignancies in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA), psoriatic arthritis (PsA), ankylosing spondylitis (AS), or non-radiographic axial spondyloarthritis (nr-axSpA) treated with upadacitinib (UPA) or active comparators. Methods This integrated safety analysis includes data from 11 phase 3 UPA trials across RA (6 trials), PsA (2 trials), AS (2 trials; one phase 2b/3), and nr-axSpA (1 trial). Treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) were summarized for RA (pooled UPA 15 mg [UPA15], pooled UPA 30 mg [UPA30], adalimumab 40 mg [ADA], methotrexate monotherapy [MTX]), PsA (pooled UPA15, pooled UPA30, ADA), AS (pooled UPA15), and nr-axSpA (UPA15). TEAEs were reported as exposure-adjusted event rates (events/100 patient-years). Results Median treatment duration ranged from 1.0 to 4.0 years (with a maximum of 6.6 years in RA). Across treatments and indications, rates of malignancy excluding nonmelanoma skin cancer (NMSC) ranged from 0.2 to 1.1, while NMSC ranged from 0.0 to 1.4. In RA, rates of malignancy excluding NMSC were generally similar between UPA15, UPA30, ADA, and MTX (breast and lung cancer were the most common). In RA and PsA, Kaplan–Meier analyses revealed no differences in event onset of malignancy excluding NMSC with UPA15 versus UPA30 over time. In RA, NMSC rates were higher with UPA30 than UPA15; both UPA15 and UPA30 were higher than ADA and MTX. In PsA, rates of malignancy excluding NMSC and NMSC were generally similar between UPA15, UPA30, and ADA. In AS and nr-axSpA, malignancies were reported infrequently. Few events of lymphoma were reported across the clinical programs. Conclusion Rates of malignancy excluding NMSC were generally similar between UPA15, UPA30, ADA, and MTX and were consistent across RA, PsA, AS, and nr-axSpA. A dose-dependent increased rate of NMSC was observed with UPA in RA. Trial Registration ClinicaTrials.gov identifier: NCT02706873, NCT02675426, NCT02629159, NCT02706951, NCT02706847, NCT03086343, NCT03104400, NCT03104374, NCT03178487, and NCT04169373.

Objective To characterise the population fulfilling the Assessment of SpondyloArthritis international Society (ASAS) consensus definition of early axial spondyloarthritis (axSpA) and to determine the effectiveness of a first tumour necrosis factor inhibitor (TNFi) in early versus established axSpA in a large observational registry.Methods A total of 3064 patients with axSpA in the Swiss Clinical Quality Management registry with data on duration of axial symptoms were included (≤2 years=early axSpA, N=658; >2 years=established axSpA, N=2406). Drug retention was analysed in patients starting a first TNFi in early axSpA (N=250) versus established axSpA (N=874) with multiple-adjusted Cox proportional hazards models. Adjusted logistic regression analyses were used to determine the achievement of the ASAS criteria for 40% improvement (ASAS40) at 1 year.Results Sex distribution, disease activity, impairments of function and health-related quality of life were comparable between patients with early and established axSpA. Patients with established disease were older, had more prevalent axial radiographical damage and had a higher impairment of mobility. A comparable TNFi retention was found in early versus established disease after adjustment for age, sex, human leucocyte antigen-B27 status, education, body mass index, smoking, elevated C reactive protein and sacroiliac inflammation on MRI (HR 1.05, 95% CI 0.78 to 1.42). The adjusted ASAS40 response was similar in the two groups (OR 1.09, 95% CI 0.67 to 1.78). Results were confirmed in the population fulfilling the ASAS classification criteria.Conclusion Considering the recent ASAS definition of early axSpA, TNFi effectiveness seems comparable in early versus established disease.

Background The influence of sex on treatment outcomes during interleukin-12/23 therapy in patients with psoriatic arthritis (PsA) has not been explored.Objective To conduct exploratory post hoc analyses of sex-stratified data from the MUST trial, an investigator-initiated, multicentre, phase 3b study in which patients with active PsA initiating treatment with open-label ustekinumab were randomised to treatment with placebo or methotrexate (MTX).Methods We evaluated baseline characteristics, key treatment outcomes and adverse events stratified by sex, with a focus on outcomes that did not include erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR) as a component due to the known elevation of ESR in females.Results A total of 166 patients were treated with ustekinumab+MTX (37 female, 50 male) or ustekinumab+placebo (32 female, 47 male). At baseline, females had a significantly longer time since PsA diagnosis and greater impairment in physical function, but similar joint counts. At week 24, both females and males showed marked improvements to ustekinumab with or without MTX. Females generally had numerically reduced treatment responses compared with males, although differences did not achieve statistical significance. MTX did not show an overall effect on treatment outcomes, but was associated with faster enthesitis responses in males only. Adverse events were generally comparable, but females in the ustekinumab+MTX group had higher levels of gastrointestinal disorders.Conclusion Females and males with PsA had differences in baseline characteristics, treatment responses and adverse events during therapy. A better understanding of sex-based differences in PsA may help optimise treatment.

Plain Language Summary Baricitinib is an oral agent widely approved for the treatment of moderately to severely active rheumatoid arthritis). Although baricitinib (and other agents) have demonstrated efficacy at the population level, treatment responses vary considerably between individual patients. This study assessed four baricitinib phase 3 clinical studies and categorized patient responses into response groups based on the Clinical Disease Activity Index (CDAI) using a growth mixture model. We then evaluated baseline characteristics and corresponding disease measures within the response groups. In patients with no prior treatment with biological disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs (bDMARDs), 65–71% of patients had rapid responses to treatment, while smaller groups had gradual (10–17%) or partial (18–22%) responses. In patients with prior bDMARD experience, rapid and partial responders each comprised 42% of patients while 15% had limited response. Gradual responders generally had higher baseline CDAI versus rapid responders, but achieved low disease activity (LDA) by 24, versus 12 weeks for rapid responders. Across response groups, patients who continued treatment generally maintained their response up to 52 weeks, and where joint erosion was assessed (in bDMARD-naïve patients), generally saw maintenance of joints during continued therapy. The identification of a gradual responder group, which demonstrated good response but required more time to achieve LDA, is relatively novel and should be considered when setting treatment expectations, particularly in patients with high baseline disease activity. In addition, in bDMARD-experienced patients, many patients did not achieve LDA but maintained a substantial partial response with continued therapy.

Abstract Background Anemia is common in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA). Higher hemoglobin (Hb) levels may be associated with better clinical outcomes and patient-reported outcomes (PROs). To assess this hypothesis, we conducted two post hoc analyses in three sarilumab phase III studies: TARGET, MOBILITY, and MONARCH. Methods Pooled data from combination therapy from placebo-controlled MOBILITY (sarilumab + methotrexate) and TARGET (sarilumab + conventional synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs [csDMARDs]) and monotherapy data from active-controlled MONARCH (sarilumab vs. adalimumab) studies were included. Associations between Hb levels and clinical measures and PROs were assessed over 24 weeks. The mean changes from baseline in clinical outcomes and PROs (to week 24) and radiographic outcomes (to week 52) were evaluated between low and normal Hb levels (based on the World Health Organization [WHO] criteria). Results From TARGET, MOBILITY, and MONARCH, 546, 1197, and 369 patients, respectively, were stratified according to Hb levels (low vs. normal). Over 24 weeks, higher Hb levels were found to be consistently associated with better clinical outcomes and PROs in combination therapy and monotherapy groups and were more pronounced among the patients treated with sarilumab than those treated with placebo and adalimumab. The mean change from baseline to week 24 in clinical efficacy measures and PROs was similar in patients with low vs. normal Hb at baseline. Differences between sarilumab and/or adalimumab, for all outcomes, were larger for low Hb subgroups. In MOBILITY, by week 52, the inhibition of progression of structural damage (assessed via Modified Total Sharp Score [mTSS]) was 84% (sarilumab 200 mg) and 68% (sarilumab 150 mg) vs. placebo in patients with low Hb and 97% (sarilumab 200 mg) and 68% (sarilumab 150 mg) vs. placebo in patients with normal Hb. Similar results were observed for other radiographic outcomes. Conclusions In these post hoc analyses, a consistent relationship was observed between higher Hb levels and better clinical outcomes and PROs in patients with RA. Irrespective of the baseline Hb levels, sarilumab treatment was associated with improvements in clinical measures and PROs over 24 weeks (improvements were more pronounced than those with adalimumab treatment) and mitigation of joint damage progression over 52 weeks. Trial registration ClinTrials.gov NCT01061736, NCT01709578, and NCT02332590

Patients with inflammatory rheumatic diseases (IRD) are at increased risk for worse COVID-19 outcomes. Identifying whether mRNA vaccines differ in immunogenicity and examining the effects of immunomodulatory treatments may support COVID-19 vaccination strategies. We aimed to conduct a long-term, model-based comparison of the humoral immunogenicity following BNT162b2 and mRNA-1273 vaccination in a cohort of IRD patients. Patients from the Swiss IRD cohort (SCQM), who assented to mRNA COVID-19 vaccination were recruited between 3/2021-9/2021. Blood samples at baseline, 4, 12, and 24 weeks post second vaccine dose were tested for anti-SARS-CoV-2 spike IgG (anti-S1). We examined differences in antibody levels depending on the vaccine and treatment at baseline while adjusting for age, disease, and past SARS-CoV-2 infection. 565 IRD patients provided eligible samples. Among monotherapies, rituximab, abatacept, JAKi, and TNFi had the highest odds of reduced anti-S1 responses compared to no medication. Patients on specific combination therapies showed significantly lower antibody responses than those on monotherapy. Irrespective of the disease, treatment, and past SARS-CoV-2 infection, the odds of higher antibody levels at 4, 12, and 24 weeks post second vaccine dose were, respectively, 3.4, 3.8, and 3.8 times higher with mRNA-1273 versus BNT162b2 (p < 0.0001). With every year of age, the odds ratio of higher peak humoral immunogenicity following mRNA-1273 versus BNT162b2 increased by 5% (p < 0.001), indicating a particular benefit for elderly patients. Our results suggest that in IRD patients, two-dose vaccination with mRNA-1273 versus BNT162b2 results in higher anti-S1 levels, even more so in elderly patients.

Objectives To correlate immune responses following a two-dose regimen of mRNA anti-SARS-CoV-2 vaccines in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) to the development of a potent neutralising antiviral activity.Methods The RECOVER study was a prospective, monocentric study including patients with RA and healthy controls (HCs). Assessments were performed before, and 3, 6, 12 and 24 weeks, after the first vaccine dose, respectively, and included IgG, IgA and IgM responses (against receptor binding domain, S1, S2, N), IFN-γ ELISpots as well as neutralisation assays.Results In patients with RA, IgG responses developed slower with lower peak titres compared with HC. Potent neutralising activity assessed by a SARS-CoV-2 pseudovirus neutralisation assay after 12 weeks was observed in all 21 HCs, and in 60.3% of 73 patients with RA. A significant correlation between peak anti-S IgG levels 2 weeks after the second vaccine dose and potent neutralising activity against SARS-CoV-2 was observed at weeks 12 and 24. The analysis of IgG, IgA and IgM isotype responses to different viral proteins demonstrated a delay in IgG but not in IgA and IgM responses. T cell responses were comparable in HC and patients with RA but declined earlier in patients with RA.Conclusion In patients with RA, vaccine-induced IgG antibody levels were diminished, while IgA and IgM responses persisted, indicating a delayed isotype switch. Anti-S IgG levels 2 weeks after the second vaccine dose correlate with the development of a potent neutralising activity after 12 and 24 weeks and may allow to identify patients who might benefit from additional vaccine doses or prophylactic regimen.

Purpose Rheumatoid arthritis (RA) is an insidious autoimmune disease, with an immunological onset years before diagnosis. Early interventions in preclinical stages could prevent or minimise the progression towards irreversible joint damage. The SCREEN-RA cohort (Evaluation of a SCREENing strategy for Rheumatoid Arthritis) aims to characterise the preclinical stages of the disease, to identify environmental risk factors, and to discover or validate novel biomarkers predictive for RA development.Participants SCREEN-RA includes an at-risk population for RA, namely first-degree relatives of patients with established RA.Findings to date The cohort started in 2009 is composed of mostly asymptomatic healthy individuals (total n=1458, 7262 person-years), with a mean age of 44 years at enrolment, 74% female and 91% Caucasian ethnicity. During the study period, 16 participants have developed RA. All participants provide baseline serum, DNA and RNA samples, and in a subset, stool samples and oral examination are performed for microbiota assessment. At enrolment, 10% of participants had asymptomatic autoimmunity associated with RA (n=147), 10% presented ‘clinically suspect arthralgias’ (n=143) and 3% reported arthralgias in conjunction with autoimmunity or high genetic risk (n=51). Studies with this cohort have uncovered risk factors for RA development, such as female hormonal factors, poor oral health or intestinal dysbiosis.Future plans Future directions include immunological and ‘multiomics’ approaches to discover new biological markers of progression towards RA, as well as testing preventive interventions in ‘high-risk’ population.

Abstract Background Methotrexate (MTX) remains the anchor drug in rheumatoid arthritis (RA) treatment, but is poorly tolerated or contraindicated in some patients. There is a wealth of data supporting the use of abatacept in combination with MTX, but data on alternative conventional synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drug (csDMARD) combinations with abatacept are scarce. Methods In this post-hoc exploratory analysis, efficacy and safety data were extracted from abatacept RA studies in which combination with csDMARDs other than MTX was permitted: three interventional trials (ATTAIN, ASSURE, and ARRIVE) and one real-world study (ACTION). Patients with moderate-to-severe RA received abatacept in combination with MTX, hydroxychloroquine, sulfasalazine, azathioprine, or leflunomide for 6 months to 2 years according to the study design. Change from baseline in physical function (Health Assessment Questionnaire—Disability Index (HAQ-DI); all studies) and 28-joint Disease Activity Score (C-reactive protein) (DAS28 (CRP); ATTAIN, ARRIVE, and ACTION), American College of Rheumatology response rates (ATTAIN), and safety were assessed for individual and pooled csDMARD combinations for each trial. A meta-analysis was also performed on pooled data for HAQ-DI and DAS28 (CRP) across interventional trials. Results Across all four studies, 731 patients received abatacept plus one non-MTX csDMARD (hydroxychloroquine n = 152; sulfasalazine n = 123; azathioprine n = 59; and leflunomide n = 397) and 2382 patients received abatacept plus MTX. Mean changes from baseline in HAQ-DI scores for abatacept plus MTX (all csDMARDs pooled) vs abatacept plus a non-MTX csDMARD were –0.54 vs –0.44 (ATTAIN), –0.43 vs –0.43 (ASSURE), and –0.39 vs –0.36 (ARRIVE). Mean changes from baseline in DAS28 (CRP) and ACR response rates were also similar with abatacept plus MTX or non-MTX csDMARDs. Data for individual non-MTX csDMARDs (pooled across studies) and real-world data were consistent with these findings. Rates of treatment-related adverse events and serious adverse events, respectively, for abatacept plus one non-MTX csDMARD vs abatacept plus MTX were 35.7% vs 41.7% and 2.4% vs 2.3% (ATTAIN), 58.0% vs 55.9% and 4.2% vs 1.7% (ASSURE), and 38.1% vs 44.3% and 0.6% vs 2.9% (ARRIVE). Conclusions Abatacept in combination with non-MTX csDMARDs is clinically effective and well tolerated in patients with moderate-to-severe RA, providing similar benefits to those seen with abatacept plus MTX. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov NCT00048581 . Registered 2 November 2002. ClinicalTrials.gov NCT00048932 . Registered 11 November 2002. ClinicalTrials.gov NCT00124982 . Registered 30 June 2005. ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02109666 . Registered 8 April 2014.