Search

Objectives To evaluate enthesitis treatment response, including time to resolution and data from multiple enthesitis instruments, in patients with PsA treated with secukinumab or adalimumab for 52 weeks. Methods In this post hoc analysis of the EXCEED study, patients receiving secukinumab 300 mg or adalimumab 40 mg per the label were grouped by presence or absence of baseline enthesitis based on the Leeds Enthesitis Index (LEI) and the Spondyloarthritis Research Consortium of Canada Enthesitis Index (SPARCC). Efficacy was assessed according to several enthesitis-related instruments using non-responder imputation for the achievement of enthesitis resolution (LEI/SPARCC = 0), Kaplan–Meier analysis for time to resolution, and as-observed data for other outcomes. Results Enthesitis was present at baseline in 498 of 851 patients (58.5%) as assessed by LEI and in 632 of 853 patients (74.1%) as assessed by SPARCC. Patients with baseline enthesitis generally presented with greater disease activity. Similar proportions of patients receiving secukinumab or adalimumab achieved resolution of LEI and SPARCC at weeks 24 (secukinumab: LEI/SPARCC, 49.6%/45.8%; adalimumab: LEI/SPARCC, 43.6%/43.5%) and 52 (secukinumab: LEI/SPARCC, 60.7%/53.2%; adalimumab: LEI/SPARCC, 55.3%/51.4%), with comparable mean time to enthesitis resolution. Improvements were similar for both drugs at individual enthesitis sites. Resolution of enthesitis with secukinumab or adalimumab was associated with improvements in quality of life at week 52. Conclusion Secukinumab and adalimumab showed similar efficacy, including time to resolution, with respect to resolution of enthesitis. Inhibition of IL-17 with secukinumab reduced clinical enthesitis similarly to TNF-α inhibition. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov , NCT02745080 [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective We investigated the impact of concomitant MTX on ustekinumab (UST) levels and antidrug antibody (ADA) formation in PsA and evaluated consequences in pharmacodynamics and pharmacokinetics. Methods We conducted a post-hoc analysis on 112 PsA serum samples of subjects treated with open-label UST and either concomitant MTX (UST/MTX, n  = 58) or placebo (UST/pbo, n  = 54) obtained in a randomized (1:1), double-blind, multicentre trial. A validated antibody-binding-based multitiered testing was used to detect ADA and ADA with neutralizing capacity (nADA). The impact of MTX on UST immunogenicity was analysed by comparison of UST/pbo with UST/MTX cohorts at different time points. Patient- and disease-related predispositions for ADA formation were investigated with multiple linear regression analysis. Immunogenicity impact on pharmacokinetics, safety and efficacy was determined by cohort comparison between patients with and without ADA formation. Results Over 52 weeks, 11 UST/pbo- and 19 UST/MTX-treated patients developed ADA (P  > 0.05). In the UST/pbo cohort, the visit-dependent UST levels were in the range of 0.047 (0.05) –0.110 (0.07) µg/ml overall, and 0.037 (0.04)–0.091 (0.08) µg/ml in ADA-confirmed subjects. In UST/MTX-treated patients, the UST levels exhibited an intervisit variation in the range of 0.0502 (0.04)–0.106 (0.07) µg/ml overall and 0.029 (0.03)–0.097 (0.07) µg/ml in ADA positive subjects (P  > 0.05). At week 52, ADA-confirmed patients did not differ significantly (P  > 0.05) in safety or clinical outcomes from ADA-negative patients. Conclusion Concomitant MTX had no significant impact on UST immunogenicity. Furthermore, ADA formation was not associated with impairments in UST safety, efficacy or trough levels. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov, https://clinicaltrials.gov , NCT03148860. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective PsA is a chronic disease with heterogeneous clinical manifestations requiring treatment options with long-term efficacy and safety. In this follow-up analysis, the 52-week efficacy and safety of risankizumab 150 mg in patients with active PsA who had previous inadequate response/intolerance to one or more conventional synthetic DMARDs (csDMARD-IR) were evaluated. Methods KEEPsAKE 1 is an ongoing, global, phase 3 study with a 24-week, double-blind, placebo-controlled period (period 1) and an open-label extension period (period 2). In period 1, eligible patients were randomized 1:1 to receive subcutaneous risankizumab 150 mg or placebo at weeks 0, 4 and 16. At week 24 (period 2), all continuing patients received open-label risankizumab 150 mg every 12 weeks through week 208. Results At week 24, 57.3% of risankizumab-treated patients (n  =   483) achieved ≥20% improvement in ACR criteria (ACR20) vs 33.5% of placebo-treated patients (n  =   481; P  < 0.001). At week 52, 70.0% of patients who were randomized to receive continuous risankizumab therapy and 63.0% of patients who were randomized to receive placebo in period 1 and then receive risankizumab at week 24 achieved ACR20. Similar result trends were observed for other efficacy measures. Risankizumab was well tolerated through 52 weeks of treatment with a consistent safety profile from week 24 through week 52. Conclusion In patients with active PsA who were csDMARD-IR, continuous risankizumab treatment demonstrated robust long-term efficacy and was well tolerated through 52 weeks of treatment. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov, http://clinicaltrials.gov , KEEPsAKE1, NCT03675308. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives PsA is a heterogeneous disease that impacts many aspects of social and mental life, including quality of life. Risankizumab, an antagonist specific for IL-23, is currently under investigation for the treatment of adults with active PsA. This study evaluated the impact of risankizumab vs placebo on health-related quality of life (HRQoL) and other patient-reported outcomes (PROs) among patients with active PsA and inadequate response or intolerance to conventional synthetic DMARD (csDMARD-IR) in the KEEPsAKE 1 trial. Methods Adult patients with active PsA (n  = 964) were randomized (1:1) to receive risankizumab 150 mg or placebo. PROs assessed included the 36-Item Short-Form Health Survey (SF-36, v2), Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy–Fatigue (FACIT-Fatigue), EuroQoL-5 Dimension-5 Level (EQ-5D-5L), Patient's Assessment of Pain, Patient's Global Assessment (PtGA) of Disease Activity, and Work Productivity and Activity Impairment–PsA (WPAI-PsA) questionnaire. Least squares (LS) mean change from baseline at week 24 was compared between risankizumab and placebo. Results At week 24, differences between groups were observed using LS mean changes from baseline in SF-36 physical component summary and mental component summary; FACIT-Fatigue; EQ-5D-5L; Patient's Assessment of Pain; PtGA; all eight SF-36 domains (all nominal P  < 0.001); and the WPAI-PsA domains of impairment while working (presenteeism), overall work impairment and activity impairment (all nominal P  < 0.01). Conclusion Risankizumab treatment resulted in greater improvements in HRQoL, fatigue, pain and work productivity in patients with active PsA who have csDMARD-IR, when compared with placebo. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov, https://clinicaltrials.gov , NCT03675308 [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective ACHILLES aimed to demonstrate efficacy of secukinumab on Achilles' tendon enthesitis in spondyloarthritis (SpA) patients. Methods Patients ≥18 years (n  = 204) with active PsA or axial SpA and heel enthesitis were randomized 1:1 to secukinumab 150/300 mg or placebo up to week 24, and thereafter placebo patients were switched to secukinumab. Results At week 24, a higher, yet statistically non-significant (P  = 0.136), proportion of patients in secukinumab vs placebo reported resolution of Achilles tendon enthesitis in affected foot (42.2% vs 31.4%; odds ratio [OR] = 1.63; 95% CI: 0.87, 3.08). Proportion of patients reporting resolution of enthesitis based on Leeds Enthesitis Index was higher with secukinumab vs placebo (33.3% vs 23.5%; OR = 1.65; 95% CI: 0.85, 3.25) at week 24. Mean change from baseline in heel pain at week 24 was higher in secukinumab patients vs placebo (−2.8 [3.0] vs −1.9 [2.7]). Greater improvements with secukinumab were observed in heel enthesopathy activity and global assessment of disease activity. Imaging evaluation by local reading confirmed heel enthesitis on MRI at screening for all patients. Based on central reading, 56% presented with bone marrow oedema and/or tendinitis; according to Heel Enthesitis MRI Scoring System (HEMRIS) post hoc analysis, 76% had signs of entheseal inflammation while 86% had entheseal inflammation and/or structural changes. Conclusion A substantial proportion of patients showed no signs of inflammation on the centrally read MRIs despite a clinical diagnosis of heel enthesitis, thus highlighting that the discrepancy between the clinical and imaging assessments of enthesitis requires further investigation. Although ACHILLES did not meet the primary end point, the study reported clinically meaningful improvements in patient-related outcomes. Trial registration clinicaltrials.gov, NCT02771210 [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: To characterize treatment patterns for patients with psoriatic arthritis (PsA) currently receiving any disease-modifying antirheumatic drug (DMARD). Methods: The Strategy for Psoriatic Arthritis In Germany (SPAIG) study was a retrospective observational study conducted from May to November 2017 at 46 rheumatology centers. Current and previous treatment data were collected at a single visit from adult patients with PsA and psoriasis who received DMARD treatment for ≥6 of the previous 12 months. The primary outcome was the proportion of patients receiving a biologic DMARD (bDMARD). Multinomial logistic regression analysis was used to evaluate associations between current characteristics and initial choice of therapy. Results: Mean age of the 316 patients was 55.1 years and mean PsA disease duration was 9.9 years. PsA activity was generally comparable across treatment groups. In this cohort, 57.3% of patients were currently treated with bDMARDs, 37.7% with conventional synthetic DMARDs, and 4.4% with targeted synthetic DMARDs. Almost half (48.4%) of patients reported DMARD modifications in the previous 12 months. Specific comorbidities and patient/disease characteristics were associated with initial therapy. Conclusion: DMARD treatment of PsA is frequently modified, suggesting the need for more effective therapies and assessment tools. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective To investigate the efficacy and safety of rituximab + LEF in patients with RA. Methods In this investigator-initiated, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled phase 3 trial, patients with an inadequate response to LEF who had failed one or more DMARD were randomly assigned 2:1 to i.v. rituximab 1000 mg or placebo on day 1 and 15 plus ongoing oral LEF. The primary efficacy outcome was the difference between ≥50% improvement in ACR criteria (ACR50 response) rates at week 24 (P  ≤ 0.025). Secondary endpoints included ACR20/70 responses, ACR50 responses at earlier timepoints and adverse event (AE) rates. The planned sample size was not achieved due to events beyond the investigators' control. Results Between 13 August 2010 and 28 January 2015, 140 patients received rituximab (n  = 93) or placebo (n  = 47) plus ongoing LEF. Rituximab + LEF resulted in an increase in the ACR50 response rate that was significant at week 16 (32 vs 15%; P  = 0.020), but not week 24 (27 vs 15%; P  = 0.081), the primary endpoint. Significant differences favouring the rituximab + LEF arm were observed in some secondary endpoints, including ACR20 rates from weeks 12 to 24. The rituximab and placebo arms had similar AE rates (71 vs 70%), but the rituximab arm had a higher rate of serious AEs (SAEs 20 vs 2%), primarily infections and musculoskeletal disorders. Conclusion The primary endpoint was not reached, but rituximab + LEF demonstrated clinical benefits vs LEF in secondary endpoints. Although generally well tolerated, the combination was associated with additional SAEs and requires monitoring. Trial registration EudraCT: 2009-015950-39; ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT01244958. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective The aim of this study was to evaluate minimal disease activity (MDA) assessments in patients with PsA during routine clinical care. Methods We used data from a multicentre observational study of patients with active PsA who initiated treatment with adalimumab during routine clinical practice and continued treatment for at least 6 months to evaluate achievement of MDA, individual MDA criteria (modified to conform to study assessments) and ACR responses during 24 months of therapy. Pearson correlation coefficients were used to evaluate the association between MDA and individual criteria at month 6; regression models were used to determine the influence of baseline MDA criteria on achievement of MDA at month 6. Results A total of 1684 patients were included in these analyses; most had long-standing disease. MDA was achieved by 597 patients (35.5%) at month 6. This proportion increased to 45.5% at month 24 in patients remaining on therapy. MDA status was stable over time; >75% of patients with MDA at month 6 recorded MDA at subsequent visits. Pain was the most difficult individual criterion to achieve, and enthesitis was the least difficult. Higher functional status and fewer tender joints at baseline predicted achievement of MDA at month 6. About half of patients (51.5%) with an ACR20 response at month 6 achieved MDA. Conclusion In this observational cohort of patients with long-standing disease, MDA provided a stable and valid assessment of clinical status over 24 months. Trial registration Clinicaltrials.gov, https://clinicaltrials.gov, NCT01111240 [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]

Current EULAR guidelines state that biologic DMARD (bDMARD) therapy should be administered in combination with MTX or other conventional synthetic (cs) DMARD in RA. Nonetheless, a third of patients for whom a bDMARD agent is prescribed take it in the absence of concurrent csDMARD therapy. While the reasons underlying the low uptake of bDMARD-csDMARD combination therapy in clinical practice have not been well delineated, they may include poor adherence, contraindication to csDMARD therapy and adverse effects, as well as csDMARD withdrawal following remission. The challenges surrounding bDMARD therapy and the benefit/risk ratio of biologic monotherapy when compared with combination with a csDMARD will be discussed. We will provide insights into these important issues, as well as reviewing the evidence base differentiating biologic agents and exploring therapeutic options for patients with rheumatoid arthritis for whom csDMARD therapy is contraindicated or discontinued. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective. ACPAs are associated with bone destruction in RA. The aim of this study was to evaluate the association between ACPA and bone destruction in patients with a distinct inflammatory disorder, PsA. Methods. We used baseline data from a large observational study of PsA patients preparing to initiate treatment with adalimumab to analyse demographic and disease characteristics by ACPA status. To ensure a homogeneous PsA study population, only patients with active psoriatic skin manifestations who met Classification of Psoriatic Arthritis criteria for PsA were included in the analyses, thereby minimizing the risk of including misdiagnosed RA patients. Multiple logistic regression analyses were used to explore potential associations between ACPA seropositivity and bone destruction. Results. Of 1996 PsA patients who met the strict inclusion criteria, 105 (5.3%) were positive for ACPA. ACPA-positive patients had significantly higher swollen joint counts and 28-joint DAS values than ACPA-negative patients and significantly higher rates of erosive changes and dactylitis. Multiple logistic regression analysis confirmed the association of ACPA seropositivity with a 2.8-fold increase in the risk of erosive disease. Conclusion. As has been previously shown for RA, ACPA is associated with bone destruction in PsA, suggesting that the osteocatabolic effect of ACPA is not confined to RA but is also detectable in the different pathogenetic context of a distinct disease entity. Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT01111240 [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article discusses a study which showed the absence of evidence for associating psoriatic arthritis (PsA) and psoriasis vulgaris (PsV) in a combined analysis. It states that neither NCF1 reduced copy numbers nor missense variants leading to decreased oxidative burst are linked to PsA or PsV. Also noted is an indicated difference in contributing genetic factors between autoimmune diseases.

Objectives. The aim of this study was to review the available evidence on TNF inhibitor monotherapy vs combination therapy with MTX in PsA. Methods. A literature search was conducted up to and including October 2013 for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and observational studies comparing TNF inhibitor monotherapy vs combination therapy with MTX in patients with PsA. Key information was extracted from the abstracts and/or full text of the articles retrieved. Results. Eleven published articles and three conference abstracts were retrieved, reporting on six RCTs of four TNF inhibitors. Most RCTs found no differences in efficacy for peripheral arthritis between patients treated with or without MTX. However, the studies were not powered to answer this question. Some data suggest that concomitant MTX may reduce the progression of structural damage. No significant differences in other outcomes have been reported. Data on TNF inhibitor monotherapy vs MTX combination therapy were reported from six registries. Three registries reported that the use of concomitant MTX did not affect the efficacy of TNF inhibitor therapy. Data from three European Union registries suggest that TNF inhibitor (especially mAbs) drug survival is superior in patients taking concomitant MTX, while one Canadian registry reported no difference. Conclusion. Available evidence on the efficacy and safety of TNF inhibitor monotherapy vs add-on MTX therapy shows little or no improvement with combination therapy, although the use of concomitant MTX appears to prolong TNF inhibitor drug survival of mAb TNF inhibitors. Registries and observational studies have the potential to fill some of the knowledge gaps in this area. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]