Search

Objective To assess the long-term safety, tolerability, and efficacy of bimekizumab in patients with active ankylosing spondylitis (AS). Methods Patients with active AS who completed the dose-ranging, 48-week BE AGILE randomized controlled trial were eligible to participate in an open-label extension (OLE) study, in which patients received 160 mg of bimekizumab every 4 weeks. We present the safety and efficacy results through 156 weeks. Missing efficacy data were imputed using nonresponder imputation analysis for binary outcomes and multiple imputation for continuous outcomes. Results From weeks 0-156, 280 of 303 patients (exposure-adjusted incidence rate 141.0 per 100 patient-years) experienced >= 1 treatment-emergent adverse event; the most frequent adverse events were nasopharyngitis (8.1 per 100 patient-years) and upper respiratory tract infection (5.0 per 100 patient-years). Additionally, 67 of 303 patients (9.8 per 100 patient-years) had mild to moderate localized fungal infections (28 of 303 patients had Candida infections [3.7 per 100 patient-years] and 23 of 303 patients had oral candidiasis [3.0 per 100 patient-years]), 10 patients had serious infections (1.3 per 100 patient-years), and no cases of active tuberculosis were reported. Active inflammatory bowel disease (1.1 per 100 patient-years), anterior uveitis (0.7 per 100 patient-years), and adjudicated major adverse cardiovascular events (0.3 per 100 patient-years) were infrequent. The efficacy of bimekizumab treatment demonstrated at week 48 was sustained in the OLE study. At week 156, nonresponder imputation analysis showed that 53.7% of patients (72.6% of observed cases) met the Assessment of SpondyloArthritis international Society criteria for 40% improvement and 28.0% of patients (37.9% of observed cases) achieved partial remission; Ankylosing Spondylitis Disease Activity Scores were reduced from baseline (mean +/- SEM 3.9 +/- 0.1) to week 48 (2.1 +/- 0.1) and week 156 (1.9 +/- 0.1) (multiple imputation). Patients showed sustained improvements in pain, fatigue, physical function, and health-related quality of life. Conclusion The safety profile of bimekizumab was found to be consistent with previously demonstrated findings, and no new safety signals were identified. The efficacy of bimekizumab in patients with AS was sustained through 3 years of treatment.

Objective To identify clusters of peripheral involvement according to the specific location of peripheral manifestations (ie, arthritis, enthesitis and dactylitis) in patients with spondyloarthritis (SpA) including psoriatic arthritis (PsA), and to evaluate whether these clusters correspond with the clinical diagnosis of a rheumatologist. Methods Cross-sectional study with 24 participating countries. Consecutive patients diagnosed by their rheumatologist as PsA, axial SpA or peripheral SpA were enrolled. Four different cluster analyses were conducted: one using information on the specific location from all the peripheral manifestations, and a cluster analysis for each peripheral manifestation, separately. Multiple correspondence analyses and k-means clustering methods were used. Distribution of peripheral manifestations and clinical characteristics were compared across the different clusters. Results The different cluster analyses performed in the 4465 patients clearly distinguished a predominantly axial phenotype (cluster 1) and a predominantly peripheral phenotype (cluster 2). In the predominantly axial phenotype, hip involvement and lower limb large joint arthritis, heel enthesitis and lack of dactylitis were more prevalent. In the predominantly peripheral phenotype, different subgroups were distinguished based on the type and location of peripheral involvement: a predominantly involvement of upper versus lower limbs joints, a predominantly axial enthesitis versus peripheral enthesitis, and predominantly finger versus toe involvement in dactylitis. A poor agreement between the clusters and the rheumatologist € s diagnosis as well as with the classification criteria was found. Conclusion These results suggest the presence of two main phenotypes (predominantly axial and predominantly peripheral) based on the presence and location of the peripheral manifestations.

BackgroundDespite treatment according to the current management recommendations, a significant proportion of patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) remain symptomatic. These patients can be considered to have ‘difficult-to-treat RA’. However, uniform terminology and an appropriate definition are lacking.ObjectiveThe Task Force in charge of the “Development of EULAR recommendations for the comprehensive management of difficult-to-treat rheumatoid arthritis” aims to create recommendations for this underserved patient group. Herein, we present the definition of difficult-to-treat RA, as the first step.MethodsThe Steering Committee drafted a definition with suggested terminology based on an international survey among rheumatologists. This was discussed and amended by the Task Force, including rheumatologists, nurses, health professionals and patients, at a face-to-face meeting until sufficient agreement was reached (assessed through voting).ResultsThe following three criteria were agreed by all Task Force members as mandatory elements of the definition of difficult-to-treat RA: (1) Treatment according to European League Against Rheumatism (EULAR) recommendation and failure of ≥2 biological disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs)/targeted synthetic DMARDs (with different mechanisms of action) after failing conventional synthetic DMARD therapy (unless contraindicated); (2) presence of at least one of the following: at least moderate disease activity; signs and/or symptoms suggestive of active disease; inability to taper glucocorticoid treatment; rapid radiographic progression; RA symptoms that are causing a reduction in quality of life; and (3) the management of signs and/or symptoms is perceived as problematic by the rheumatologist and/or the patient.ConclusionsThe proposed EULAR definition for difficult-to-treat RA can be used in clinical practice, clinical trials and can form a basis for future research.

ObjectivesTo investigate the efficacy and safety of ixekizumab for up to 52 weeks in two phase 3 studies of patients with active radiographic axial spondyloarthritis (r-axSpA) who were biological disease-modifying antirheumatic drug (bDMARD)-naive (COAST-V) or tumour necrosis factor inhibitor (TNFi)-experienced (COAST-W).MethodsAdults with active r-axSpA were randomised 1:1:1:1 (n=341) to 80 mg ixekizumab every 2 (IXE Q2W) or 4 weeks (IXE Q4W), placebo (PBO) or 40 mg adalimumab Q2W (ADA) in COAST-V and 1:1:1 (n=316) to IXE Q2W, IXE Q4W or PBO in COAST-W. At week 16, patients receiving ixekizumab continued their assigned treatment; patients receiving PBO or ADA were rerandomised 1:1 to IXE Q2W or IXE Q4W (PBO/IXE, ADA/IXE) through week 52.ResultsIn COAST-V, Assessment of SpondyloArthritis international Society 40 (ASAS40) responses rates (intent-to-treat population, non-responder imputation) at weeks 16 and 52 were 48% and 53% (IXE Q4W); 52% and 51% (IXE Q2W); 36% and 51% (ADA/IXE); 19% and 47% (PBO/IXE). Corresponding ASAS40 response rates in COAST-W were 25% and 34% (IXE Q4W); 31% and 31% (IXE Q2W); 14% and 39% (PBO/IXE). Both ixekizumab regimens sustained improvements in disease activity, physical function, objective markers of inflammation, QoL, health status and overall function up to 52 weeks. Safety through 52 weeks of ixekizumab was consistent with safety through 16 weeks.ConclusionThe significant efficacy demonstrated with ixekizumab at week 16 was sustained for up to 52 weeks in bDMARD-naive and TNFi-experienced patients. bDMARD-naive patients initially treated with ADA demonstrated further numerical improvements after switching to ixekizumab. Safety findings were consistent with the known safety profile of ixekizumab.Trial registration numberNCT02696785/NCT02696798.

This report presents examples of good practice interventions that aim to improve the quality of life for patients with RA and associated comorbidities in Europe. The KPMG team interviewed rheumatologists and other healthcare professionals in a number of centres involved in RA patient care. In collaboration with a multidisciplinary steering committee, comprised of rheumatologists, comorbidity specialists, a rheumatology nurse and a patient representative, features of good practice were identified across the patient pathway and documented in the report. It outlines practices that promote early diagnosis and support the effective management of RA and associated comorbidities to improve outcomes for patients.