Search

ObjectiveEvaluate the efficacy and safety of ustekinumab, an anti-interleukin-12/23 p40 antibody, in a phase 3, randomised, placebo-controlled study of patients with active systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) despite receiving standard-of-care.MethodsActive SLE patients (SLE Disease Activity Index 2000 (SLEDAI-2K) ≥6 during screening and SLEDAI-2K ≥4 for clinical features at week 0) despite receiving oral glucocorticoids, antimalarials, or immunomodulatory drugs were randomised (3:2) to receive ustekinumab (intravenous infusion ~6 mg/kg at week 0, followed by subcutaneous injections of ustekinumab 90 mg at week 8 and every 8 weeks) or placebo through week 48. The primary endpoint was SLE Responder Index (SRI)-4 at week 52, and major secondary endpoints included time to flare through week 52 and SRI-4 at week 24.ResultsAt baseline, 516 patients were randomised to placebo (n=208) or ustekinumab (n=308). Following the planned interim analysis, the sponsor discontinued the study due to lack of efficacy but no safety concerns. Efficacy analyses included 289 patients (placebo, n=116; ustekinumab, n=173) who completed or would have had a week 52 visit at study discontinuation. At week 52, 44% of ustekinumab patients and 56% of placebo patients had an SRI-4 response; there were no appreciable differences between the treatment groups in the major secondary endpoints. Through week 52, 28% of ustekinumab patients and 32% of placebo patients had a British Isles Lupus Assessment Group flare, with a mean time to first flare of 204.7 and 200.4 days, respectively. Through week 52, 70% of ustekinumab patients and 74% of placebo patients had ≥1 adverse event.ConclusionsUstekinumab did not demonstrate superiority over placebo in this population of adults with active SLE; adverse events were consistent with the known safety profile of ustekinumab.Trial registration numberNCT03517722.

Genetic variants are vital in informing clinical phenotypes, aiding physical diagnosis, guiding genetic counseling, understanding the molecular basis of disease, and potentially stimulating drug development. Here we describe two families with an ultrarare ACVR1 gain-of-function pathogenic variant (codon 375, Arginine > Proline; ACVR1R375P ) responsible for a mild nonclassic fibrodysplasia ossificans progressiva (FOP) phenotype. Both families include people with the ultrarare ACVR1R375P variant who exhibit features of FOP while other individuals currently do not express any clinical signs of FOP. Thus, the mild ACVR1R375P variant greatly expands the scope and understanding of this rare disorder.

ObjectiveTo determine predictors of change in neuropsychiatric (NP) event status in a large, prospective, international inception cohort of patients with systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE).MethodsUpon enrollment and annually thereafter, NP events attributed to SLE and non-SLE causes and physician-determined resolution were documented. Factors potentially associated with the onset and resolution of NP events were determined by time-to-event analysis using a multistate modeling structure.ResultsNP events occurred in 955 (52.3%) of 1,827 patients, and 593 (31.0%) of 1,910 unique events were attributed to SLE. For SLE-associated NP (SLE NP) events, multivariate analysis revealed a positive association with male sex (P=0.028), concurrent non-SLE NP events excluding headache (P < 0.001), active SLE (P = 0.012), and glucocorticoid use (P = 0.008). There was a negative association with Asian race (P = 0.002), postsecondary education (P = 0.001), and treatment with immunosuppressive drugs (P = 0.019) or antimalarial drugs (P = 0.056). For non-SLE NP events excluding headache, there was a positive association with concurrent SLE NP events (P < 0.001) and a negative association with African race (P = 0.012) and Asian race (P < 0.001). NP events attributed to SLE had a higher resolution rate than non-SLE NP events, with the exception of headache, which had comparable resolution rates. For SLE NP events, multivariate analysis revealed that resolution was more common in patients of Asian race (P = 0.006) and for central/focal NP events (P < 0.001). For non-SLE NP events, resolution was more common in patients of African race (P = 0.017) and less common in patients who were older at SLE diagnosis (P < 0.001).ConclusionIn a large and long-term study of the occurrence and resolution of NP events in SLE, we identified subgroups with better and worse prognosis. The course of NP events differs greatly depending on their nature and attribution.

To explore long-term safety and tolerability of anifrolumab 300 mg compared with placebo in patients with systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) who completed a Treatment of Uncontrolled Lupus via the Interferon Pathway (TULIP) trial and enrolled in the placebo-controlled 3-year long-term extension (LTE) study (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02794285).In the blinded LTE study, patients continued anifrolumab 300 mg, switched from anifrolumab 150 mg to 300 mg, or were re-randomized from placebo to receive either anifrolumab 300 mg or to continue placebo, administered every 4 weeks. Primary comparisons in the LTE study were between patients who received anifrolumab 300 mg or placebo throughout the TULIP and LTE studies. For rare safety events, comparisons included patients who received any anifrolumab dose during TULIP or LTE. When exposure differed, exposure-adjusted incidence rates (EAIRs) per 100 patient-years were calculated.In the LTE study, EAIRs of serious adverse events (SAEs) were 8.5 with anifrolumab compared with 11.2 with placebo; likewise, EAIRs of AEs leading to treatment discontinuation were 2.5 versus 3.2, respectively. EAIRs of non-opportunistic serious infections were comparable between groups (3.7 with anifrolumab versus 3.6 with placebo). Exposure-adjusted event rates of COVID-related AEs, including asymptomatic infections, were 15.5 with anifrolumab compared with 9.8 with placebo. No COVID-related AEs occurred in fully vaccinated individuals. EAIRs of malignancy and major acute cardiovascular events were low and comparable between groups. Anifrolumab was associated with lower cumulative glucocorticoid use and greater mean improvement in the SLE Disease Activity Index 2000, compared with placebo.This LTE study represents the longest placebo-controlled clinical trial performed in SLE to date. No new safety findings were identified in the LTE study, supporting the favorable benefit-risk profile of anifrolumab for patients with moderate-to-severe SLE receiving standard therapy.

Washout of knee joint contents, whether by arthrotomy, arthroscopy, or percutaneous methods, can remove phlogistic material contributing to the problem at hand. Observations dating from the turn of the last century coupled with multiple trials suggest such that an intervention can be useful in the management of osteoarthritis, inflammatory arthropathies, crystal arthritis, and septic arthritis. We suggest that this intervention—applicable at the bedside with minimal cost, preparation, or expertise—be reconsidered as an adjunct in management of these disorders.

ObjectiveThe Systemic Lupus International Collaborating Clinics (SLICC) frailty index (FI) predicts mortality and damage accrual in systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE), but its association with hospitalizations has not been described. Our objective was to estimate the association of baseline SLICC-FI values with future hospitalizations in the SLICC inception cohort.MethodsBaseline SLICC-FI scores were calculated. The number and duration of inpatient hospitalizations during follow-up were recorded. Negative binomial regression was used to estimate the association between baseline SLICC-FI values and the rate of hospitalizations per patient-year of follow-up. Linear regression was used to estimate the association of baseline SLICC-FI scores with the proportion of follow-up time spent in the hospital. Multivariable models were adjusted for relevant baseline characteristics.ResultsThe 1,549 patients with SLE eligible for this analysis were mostly female (88.7%), with a mean ± SD age of 35.7 ± 13.3 years and a median disease duration of 1.2 years (interquartile range 0.9-1.5) at baseline. Mean ± SD baseline SLICC-FI was 0.17 ± 0.08. During mean ± SD follow-up of 7.2 ± 3.7 years, 614 patients (39.6%) experienced 1,570 hospitalizations. Higher baseline SLICC-FI values (per 0.05 increment) were associated with more frequent hospitalizations during follow-up, with an incidence rate ratio of 1.21 (95% confidence interval [95% CI] 1.13-1.30) after adjustment for baseline age, sex, glucocorticoid use, immunosuppressive use, ethnicity/location, SLE Disease Activity Index 2000 score, SLICC/American College of Rheumatology Damage Index score, and disease duration. Among patients with ≥1 hospitalization, higher baseline SLICC-FI values predicted a greater proportion of follow-up time spent hospitalized (relative rate 1.09 [95% CI 1.02-1.16]).ConclusionThe SLICC-FI predicts future hospitalizations among incident SLE patients, further supporting the SLICC-FI as a valid health measure in SLE.

Objective: There is a paucity of data regarding health care costs associated with damage accrual in systemic lupus erythematosus. The present study was undertaken to describe costs associated with damage states across the disease course using multistate modeling. Methods: Patients from 33 centers in 11 countries were enrolled in the Systemic Lupus International Collaborating Clinics (SLICC) inception cohort within 15 months of diagnosis. Annual data on demographics, disease activity, damage (SLICC/American College of Rheumatology Damage Index [SDI]), hospitalizations, medications, dialysis, and selected procedures were collected. Ten-year cumulative costs (Canadian dollars) were estimated by multiplying annual costs associated with each SDI state by the expected state duration using a multistate model. Results: A total of 1,687 patients participated; 88.7% were female, 49.0% were white, mean ± SD age at diagnosis was 34.6 ± 13.3 years, and mean time to follow-up was 8.9 years (range 0.6–18.5 years). Mean annual costs were higher for those with higher SDI scores as follows: $22,006 (Canadian) (95% confidence interval [95% CI] $16,662, $27,350) for SDI scores ≥5 versus $1,833 (95% CI $1,134, $2,532) for SDI scores of 0. Similarly, 10-year cumulative costs were higher for those with higher SDI scores at the beginning of the 10-year interval as follows: $189,073 (Canadian) (95% CI $142,318, $235,827) for SDI scores ≥5 versus $21,713 (95% CI $13,639, $29,788) for SDI scores of 0. Conclusion: Patients with the highest SDI scores incur 10-year cumulative costs that are ~9-fold higher than those with the lowest SDI scores. By estimating the damage trajectory and incorporating annual costs, data on damage can be used to estimate future costs, which is critical knowledge for evaluating the cost-effectiveness of novel therapies.

Rheumatologists' interest in arthroscopy began before the 1980s, when many era practitioners began to take up the procedure in earnest. Some of the important players in pre-World War II explorations of arthroscopy were rheumatologists, and the father of modern arthroscopy Makei Watanabe counted many rheumatologists among his postwar students, who were publishing about arthroscopic insights into rheumatic conditions in the 1960s and 1970s. We chose to review this evolution to demonstrate the diverging interests of rheumatologists and orthopedists in arthroscopy and emphasize the chances for reconciliation and cooperation. Methods involve our personal recollection and review of the literature.Guidelines for the practice of arthroscopy were published by the American Rheumatism Association (now the American College of Rheumatology) 7 years before similar guidelines appeared from the Arthroscopy Association of North America. American rheumatologists ceased arthroscopy when controlled trials showed no effect in osteoarthritis beyond placebo and biologics for synovitis virtually eliminated situations in which synovectomy might be considered. The research potential of arthroscopy has been realized mainly by European rheumatologists, although the ultrasound-guided biopsy is supplanting arthroscopy as means to secure synovium for investigation, despite the advantages of the latter, such as the ability to obtain larger amounts of tissue, select tissue based on macroscopic appearance, sample multiple area in the same joint, and deliver the potentially therapeutic effect of washout. New miniscopes suitable for office use could restore some of the lagging interest in arthroscopy for investigation. Orthopedists have generally been resistant to rheumatologists doing arthroscopy but would not be sharing any turf with rheumatologists using the miniscope.We hope that we orthopedists and rheumatologists could be friends as we enter this new phase of arthroscopy as we use the technique for different purposes.

Author(s): Almaani, Salem; Bhatt, Udayan; Arriens, Cristina; Bonfa, Eloisa; Dall'Era, Maria; Houssiau, Frederic; Kalunian, Kenneth; Mackay, Megan; Sanchez-Guerrero, Jorge; Solomons, Neil; Rovin, Brad H

Summary Background Type I interferons are involved in systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) pathogenesis. In a phase 2 trial, anifrolumab, a human monoclonal antibody to type I interferon receptor subunit 1, suppressed interferon gene signatures and substantially reduced SLE disease activity. Here, we sought to confirm the efficacy of anifrolumab versus placebo in a phase 3 trial of adult patients with SLE and moderate-to-severe disease activity despite standard-of-care treatment. Methods TULIP-1 was a double-blind, randomised, controlled, phase 3 trial done at 123 sites in 18 countries. Included patients were aged 18–70 years, with moderate-to-severe SLE, and ongoing stable treatment with either prednisone or equivalent, an antimalarial, azathioprine, mizoribine, mycophenolate mofetil or mycophenolic acid, or methotrexate. Patients were randomly assigned (2:1:2) to receive placebo, anifrolumab 150 mg, or anifrolumab 300 mg intravenously every 4 weeks for 48 weeks. Stable standard-of-care treatment continued except for mandatory attempts at oral corticosteroid tapering for patients receiving prednisone or equivalent of 10 mg/day or more at baseline. The primary outcome was the difference between the proportion of patients who achieved an SLE responder index-4 (SRI-4) response at week 52 with anifrolumab 300 mg versus with placebo. Key secondary outcomes were the difference between the anifrolumab 300 mg group and the placebo group in: proportion of patients in the interferon gene signature test—high subgroup who achieved SRI-4 at week 52; proportion of patients on 10 mg/day or more corticosteroids at baseline who achieved a sustained dose reduction to 7·5 mg/day or less from week 40 to 52; proportion of patients with a cutaneous lupus erythematosus disease area and severity index (CLASI) activity score of 10 or higher at baseline who achieved a 50% or more reduction in CLASI score by week 12; proportion of patients who achieved SRI-4 at week 24; and annualised flare rate through week 52. Other measures of disease activity were also assessed at week 52, including the British Isles Lupus Assessment Group-based composite lupus assessment (BICLA). Safety was also assessed. Efficacy and safety analyses were done in the population of patients who received at least one dose of study drug. This trial was registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT02446912). Findings Between June 9, 2015, and June 16, 2017, 457 patients were randomly assigned to the anifrolumab 300 mg group (n=180), the anifrolumab 150 mg group (n=93), or the placebo group (n=184). The proportion of patients at week 52 with an SRI-4 response was similar between anifrolumab 300 mg (65 [36%] of 180) and placebo (74 [40%] of 184; difference −4·2 [95% CI −14·2 to 5·8], p=0·41). Similarly, proportions of patients with an SRI-4 response at week 24, and at week 52 in patients in the interferon gene signature test—high subgroup, did not differ between the anifrolumab and placebo groups. In patients with baseline oral corticosteroids of at least 10 mg/day, sustained dose reduction to 7·5 mg/day or less was achieved by 42 (41%) of 103 patients in the anifrolumab 300 mg group and 33 (32%) of 102 patients in the placebo group (difference 8·9 [95% CI −4·1 to 21·9]). In patients with CLASI activity score of at least 10 at baseline, at least 50% reduction by week 12 was achieved by 24 (42%) of 58 patients in the anifrolumab 300 mg group and 14 (25%) of 54 in the placebo group (difference 17·0 [95% CI −0·3 to 34·3]). Annualised flare rates were 0·60 for anifrolumab and 0·72 for placebo (rate ratio 0·83 [95% CI 0·60 to 1·14]). BICLA response was achieved by 67 (37%) of 180 patients receiving anifrolumab 300 mg versus 49 (27%) of 184 receiving placebo (difference 10·1 [95% CI 0·6 to 19·7]). Anifrolumab's safety profile was similar to that observed in phase 2, with similar proportions of patients having a serious adverse event between groups (25 [14%] of 180 for anifrolumab 300 mg, ten [11%] of 93 for anifrolumab 150 mg, and 30 [16%] of 184 for placebo). Interpretation The primary endpoint was not reached. However, several secondary endpoints, including reduction in oral corticosteroid dose, CLASI responses, and BICLA responses, suggest clinical benefit of anifrolumab compared with placebo. Conclusive evidence for the efficacy of anifrolumab awaits further phase 3 trial data. Despite the inherent limitations of a 1-year phase 3 study, such as incomplete knowledge of applicability to the general population and scarce detection of rare safety signals, in addition to complications from prespecified restricted medication rules, our results suggest that anifrolumab might have the potential to provide a treatment option for patients who have active SLE while receiving standard therapy. Funding AstraZeneca.

Objective: To assess cancer risk factors in incident systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE). Methods: Clinical variables and cancer outcomes were assessed annually among incident SLE patients. Multivariate hazard regression models (overall risk and most common cancers) included demographic characteristics and time-dependent medications (corticosteroids, antimalarial drugs, immunosuppressants), smoking, and the adjusted mean Systemic Lupus Erythematosus Disease Activity Index 2000 score. Results: Among 1,668 patients (average 9 years follow-up), 65 cancers occurred: 15 breast, 10 nonmelanoma skin, 7 lung, 6 hematologic, 6 prostate, 5 melanoma, 3 cervical, 3 renal, 2 each gastric, head and neck, and thyroid, and 1 each rectal, sarcoma, thymoma, and uterine cancers. Half of the cancers (including all lung cancers) occurred in past/current smokers, versus one-third of patients without cancer. Multivariate analyses indicated that overall cancer risk was related primarily to male sex and older age at SLE diagnosis. In addition, smoking was associated with lung cancer. For breast cancer risk, age was positively associated and antimalarial drugs were negatively associated. Antimalarial drugs and higher disease activity were also negatively associated with nonmelanoma skin cancer risk, whereas age and cyclophosphamide were positively associated. Disease activity was associated positively with hematologic and negatively with nonmelanoma skin cancer risk. Conclusion: Smoking is a key modifiable risk factor, especially for lung cancer, in SLE. Immunosuppressive medications were not clearly associated with higher risk except for cyclophosphamide and nonmelanoma skin cancer. Antimalarials were negatively associated with breast cancer and nonmelanoma skin cancer risk. SLE activity was associated positively with hematologic cancer and negatively with nonmelanoma skin cancer. Since the absolute number of cancers was small, additional follow-up will help consolidate these findings.

ObjectivesIn the anifrolumab systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) trial programme, there was one trial (TULIP-1) in which BILAG-based Composite Lupus Assessment (BICLA) responses favoured anifrolumab over placebo, but the SLE Responder Index (SRI(4)) treatment difference was not significant. We investigated the degree of concordance between BICLA and SRI(4) across anifrolumab trials in order to better understand drivers of discrepant SLE trial results.MethodsTULIP-1, TULIP-2 (both phase 3) and MUSE (phase 2b) were randomised, 52-week trials of intravenous anifrolumab (300 mg every 4 weeks, 48 weeks; TULIP-1/TULIP-2: n=180; MUSE: n=99) or placebo (TULIP-1: n=184, TULIP-2: n=182; MUSE: n=102). Week 52 BICLA and SRI(4) outcomes were assessed for each patient.ResultsMost patients (78%–85%) had concordant BICLA and SRI(4) outcomes (Cohen’s Kappa 0.6–0.7, nominal pConclusionsAcross trials, most patients had concordant BICLA/SRI(4) outcomes and dual BICLA/SRI(4) responses favoured anifrolumab. A BICLA non-responder/SRI(4) responder subgroup was identified where imbalances of key factors driving the BICLA/SRI(4) discordance (disease activity, glucocorticoid taper) disproportionately favoured the TULIP-1 placebo group. Careful attention to baseline disease activity and monitoring glucocorticoid taper variation will be essential in future SLE trials.Trial registration numbersNCT02446912andNCT02446899.

Objectives Vitamin D (25(OH)D) deficiency and metabolic syndrome (MetS) may both contribute to increased cardiovascular risk in SLE. We aimed to examine the association of demographic factors, SLE phenotype, therapy and vitamin D levels with MetS and insulin resistance. Methods The Systemic Lupus International Collaborating Clinics (SLICC) enrolled patients recently diagnosed with SLE ( Results Of the 1847 patients, 1163 (63%) had vitamin D measured and 398 (34.2%) subjects were in the lowest 25(OH)D tertile. MetS was present in 286 of 860 (33%) patients whose status could be determined. Patients with lower 25(OH)D were more likely to have MetS and higher HOMA-IR. The MetS components, hypertension, hypertriglyceridemia and decreased high-density lipoprotein (HDL) were all significantly associated with lower 25(OH)D. Increased average glucocorticoid exposure was associated with higher insulin resistance. Conclusions MetS and insulin resistance are associated with lower vitamin D in patients with SLE. Further studies could determine whether vitamin D repletion confers better control of these cardiovascular risk factors and improve long-term outcomes in SLE.

Objective: The Systemic Lupus International Collaborating Clinics (SLICC) 2012 systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) classification criteria and the revised American College of Rheumatology (ACR) 1997 criteria are list based, counting each SLE manifestation equally. We derived a classification rule based on giving variable weights to the SLICC criteria and compared its performance to the revised ACR 1997, the unweighted SLICC 2012, and the newly reported European Alliance of Associations for Rheumatology (EULAR)/ACR 2019 criteria sets. Methods: The physician-rated patient scenarios used to develop the SLICC 2012 classification criteria were reemployed to devise a new weighted classification rule using multiple linear regression. The performance of the rule was evaluated on an independent set of expert-diagnosed patient scenarios and compared to the performance of the previously reported classification rules. Results: The weighted SLICC criteria and the EULAR/ACR 2019 criteria had less sensitivity but better specificity compared to the list-based revised ACR 1997 and SLICC 2012 classification criteria. There were no statistically significant differences between any pair of rules with respect to overall agreement with the physician diagnosis. Conclusion: The 2 new weighted classification rules did not perform better than the existing list-based rules in terms of overall agreement on a data set originally generated to assess the SLICC criteria. Given the added complexity of summing weights, researchers may prefer the unweighted SLICC criteria. However, the performance of a classification rule will always depend on the populations from which the cases and non-cases are derived and whether the goal is to prioritize sensitivity or specificity.

ObjectivesTo characterise the efficacy and safety of anifrolumab in patients with systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) according to interferon gene signature (IFNGS), demographic and clinical subgroups.MethodsWe performed post hoc analyses of pooled data from the 52-week phase III TULIP-1/TULIP-2 placebo-controlled trials of intravenous anifrolumab in moderate-to-severe SLE. Outcomes were assessed in predefined subgroups: IFNGS (high/low), age, sex, body mass index, race, geographic region, age of onset, glucocorticoid use, disease activity and serological markers.ResultsIn pooled data, patients received anifrolumab 300 mg (360/726) or placebo (366/726); 82.6% were IFNGS-high. IFNGS-high patients had greater baseline disease activity and were more likely to have abnormal serological markers versus IFNGS-low patients. In the total population, a greater proportion of patients treated with anifrolumab versus placebo achieved British Isles Lupus Assessment Group-based Composite Lupus Assessment (BICLA) response at week 52 (difference 16.6%; nominal pConclusionsOverall, this study supports the consistent efficacy and safety of anifrolumab across a range of patients with moderate-to-severe SLE. In a few subgroups, small sample sizes limited conclusions from being drawn regarding the treatment benefit with anifrolumab.Trial registration numberNCT02446912,NCT02446899.

Conditions prompting physicians and surgeons first adapting endoscopes to peer into joints were mainly the sort of synovial conditions that would concern today's rheumatologists. Rheumatologists were among the pre-World War II pioneers developing and documenting arthroscopy. The post-War father of modern arthroscopy, Watanabe, found rheumatologists among his early students, who took back the technique to their home countries, teaching orthopedists and rheumatologists alike. Rheumatologists described and analyzed the intra-articular features of their common diseases in the '60s and '70s. A groundswell of interest from academic rheumatologists in adapting arthroscopy grew considerably in the '90s with development of "needle scopes" that could be used in an office setting. Rheumatologists helped conduct the very trials the findings of which reduced demand for their arthroscopic services by questioning the efficacy of arthroscopic debridement in osteoarthritis (OA) and also developing biological compounds that greatly reduced the call for any resective intervention in inflammatory arthropathies. The arthroscope has proven an excellent tool for viewing and sampling synovium and continues to serve this purpose at several international research centers. While cartilage is now imaged mainly by magnetic resonance imaging, some OA features - such as a high prevalence of visible calcinosis - beg further arthroscopy-directed investigation. A new generation of "needle scopes" with far superior optics awaits future investigators, should they develop interest.

Systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) is an incurable autoimmune disease disproportionately affecting women. A major obstacle in finding targeted therapies for SLE is its remarkable heterogeneity in clinical manifestations as well as in the involvement of distinct cell types. To identify cell-specific targets as well as cross-correlation relationships among expression programs of different cell types, we here analyze six major circulating immune cell types from SLE patient blood. Our results show that presence of an interferon response signature stratifies patients into two distinct groups (IFNneg vs. IFNpos). Comparing these two groups using differential gene expression and differential gene coexpression analysis, we prioritize a relatively small list of genes from classical monocytes including two known immune modulators:TNFSF13B/BAFF(target ofbelimumab, an approved therapeutic for SLE) andIL1RN(the basis ofanakinra,a therapeutic for rheumatoid arthritis). We then develop a multi–cell type extension of the weighted gene coexpression network analysis (WGCNA) framework, termed mWGCNA. Applying mWGCNA to RNA-seq data from six sorted immune cell populations (15 SLE, 10 healthy donors), we identify a coexpression module with interferon-stimulated genes (ISGs) among all cell types and a cross–cell type correlation linking expression of specific T helper cell markers to B cell response as well as toTNFSF13Bexpression from myeloid cells, all of which in turn correlates with disease severity of IFNpos patients. Our results demonstrate the power of a hypothesis-free and data-driven approach to discover drug targets and to reveal novel cross-correlation across cell types in SLE with implications for other autoimmune diseases.

Background Anaemia, thrombocytopenia and leukopenia in rheumatoid arthritis (RA) patients treated with non-Janus Kinase 1 (JAK1) selective inhibitors may be due to inhibition of haematopoietic growth factors signalling through JAK2. Therefore, we investigated anaemia, thrombocytopenia and leukopenia in patients with active RA with prior inadequate response/intolerance to biologic disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs (bDMARDs) treated with filgotinib (FIL), a selective JAK1 inhibitor (FINCH-2; NCT02873936). Methods In the randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled Phase 3 FINCH-2 trial, patients were randomised 1:1:1 to oral FIL 200 mg, 100 mg, or placebo (PBO) once daily plus conventional synthetic DMARDs for 24 weeks. In this subgroup analysis, we assessed shifts from baseline (BL) in haemoglobin (hgb), platelets (plt), neutrophils and lymphocytes. Results A total of 448 patients were treated; FIL 200 mg, n = 147; FIL 100 mg, n = 153; PBO, n = 148. Hgb, plt, lymphocyte and neutrophil counts remained consistent throughout the study. At BL, 28.8%, 0.9%, 2.2% and 5.8% patients had mild–moderate low hgb, plt, neutrophil and lymphocyte, respectively, and 1.1% had severely low lymphocyte levels. Of patients with mild–moderate hgb levels at BL, 13.1% with FIL 200 mg, 9.5% FIL 100 mg, and 7.6% PBO achieved normal hgb at Week 24, respectively (Table). Of those with normal BL hgb, only 6–9.8% had mild low levels at Week 24. Patients with BL mild-moderate low plts and neutrophils had normal levels at Week 24, except one with mild neutropenia on FIL 100 mg. Of patients with normal plt and neutrophil levels at BL, >94% maintained these at Week 24 in all treatment groups. By Week 24, 3.2%, 5.2% and 2.2% of patients treated with FIL 200 mg, FIL 100 mg and PBO, respectively, in the mild–moderate subgroup and 1.7% in the severe subgroup treated with FIL 100 mg had normal lymphocyte counts. Conclusion In this subgroup analysis, most patients with normal hgb, plt, lymphocyte and neutrophil at BL maintained them over 24 weeks of FIL treatment. Of the patients with mild–moderately low hgb at BL, >9% shifted towards normalisation. Similar patterns of improvement were observed for plt, lymphocyte and neutrophil counts. These results suggest that FIL does not increase the incidence of anaemia, thrombocytopenia or leukopenia in patients who entered the study with active RA despite prior bDMARDs.

Objective: The spectrum of antinuclear antibodies (ANAs) is changing to include both nuclear staining as well as cytoplasmic and mitotic cell patterns (CMPs) and accordingly a change is occurring in terminology to anticellular antibodies. This study examined the prevalence of indirect immunofluorescence (IIF) anticellular antibody staining using the Systemic Lupus International Collaborating Clinics inception cohort.Methods: Anticellular antibodies were detected by IIF on HEp-2000 substrate using the baseline serum. Three serologic subsets were examined: ANA positive (presence of either nuclear or mixed nuclear/CMP staining), anticellular antibody negative (absence of any intracellular staining), and isolated CMP staining. The odds of being anticellular antibody negative versus ANA or isolated CMP positive was assessed by multivariable analysis.Results: A total of 1,137 patients were included; 1,049 (92.3%) were ANA positive, 71 (6.2%) were anticellular antibody negative, and 17 (1.5%) had an isolated CMP. The isolated CMP–positive group did not differ from the ANA-positive or anticellular antibody–negative groups in clinical, demographic, or serologic features. Patients who were older (odds ratio [OR] 1.02 [95% confidence interval (95% CI) 1.00, 1.04]), of white race/ethnicity (OR 3.53 [95% CI 1.77, 7.03]), or receiving high-dose glucocorticoids at or prior to enrollment (OR 2.39 [95% CI 1.39, 4.12]) were more likely to be anticellular antibody negative. Patients on immunosuppressants (OR 0.35 [95% CI 0.19, 0.64]) or with anti-SSA/Ro 60 (OR 0.41 [95% CI 0.23, 0.74]) or anti–U1 RNP (OR 0.43 [95% CI 0.20, 0.93]) were less likely to be anticellular antibody negative. Conclusion: In newly diagnosed systemic lupus erythematosus, 6.2% of patients were anticellular antibody negative, and 1.5% had an isolated CMP. The prevalence of anticellular antibody–negative systemic lupus erythematosus will likely decrease as emerging nomenclature guidelines recommend that non-nuclear patterns should also be reported as a positive ANA.

Objectives To assess the prevalence of combined hormonal contraceptives (CHCs) in reproductive-age women with SLE with and without possible contraindications and to determine factors associated with their use in the presence of possible contraindications. Methods This observational cohort study included premenopausal women ages 18–45 years enrolled in the SLICC Registry ⩽15 months after SLE onset, with annual assessments spanning 2000–2017. World Health Organization Category 3 or 4 contraindications to CHCs (e.g. hypertension, aPL) were assessed at each study visit. High disease activity (SLEDAI score >12 or use of >0.5 mg/kg/day of prednisone) was considered a relative contraindication. Results A total of 927 SLE women contributed 6315 visits, of which 3811 (60%) occurred in the presence of one or more possible contraindication to CHCs. Women used CHCs during 512 (8%) visits, of which 281 (55%) took place in the setting of one or more possible contraindication. The most frequently observed contraindications were aPL (52%), hypertension (34%) and migraine with aura (22%). Women with one or more contraindication were slightly less likely to be taking CHCs [7% of visits (95% CI 7, 8)] than women with no contraindications [9% (95% CI 8, 10)]. Conclusion CHC use was low compared with general population estimates (>35%) and more than half of CHC users had at least one possible contraindication. Many yet unmeasured factors, including patient preferences, may have contributed to these observations. Further work should also aim to clarify outcomes associated with this exposure.

Objective Anti-beta 2 glycoprotein I IgA is a common isotype of anti-beta 2 glycoprotein I in SLE. Anti-beta 2 glycoprotein I was not included in the American College of Rheumatology (ACR) SLE classification criteria, but was included in the Systemic Lupus International Collaborating Clinics (SLICC) criteria. We aimed to evaluate the prevalence of anti-beta 2-glycoprotein I IgA in SLE versus other rheumatic diseases. In addition, we examined the association between anti-beta 2 glycoprotein I IgA and disease manifestations in SLE. Methods The dataset consisted of 1384 patients, 657 with a consensus physician diagnosis of SLE and 727 controls with other rheumatic diseases. Anti-beta 2 glycoprotein I isotypes were measured by ELISA. Patients with a consensus diagnosis of SLE were compared to controls with respect to presence of anti-beta 2 glycoprotein I. Among patients with SLE, we assessed the association between anti-beta 2 glycoprotein I IgA and clinical manifestations. Results The prevalence of anti-beta 2 glycoprotein I IgA was 14% in SLE patients and 7% in rheumatic disease controls (odds ratio, OR 2.3, 95% CI: 1.6, 3.3). It was more common in SLE patients who were younger patients and of African descent (p = 0.019). Eleven percent of SLE patients had anti-beta 2 glycoprotein I IgA alone (no anti-beta 2 glycoprotein I IgG or IgM). There was a significant association between anti-beta 2 glycoprotein I IgA and anti-dsDNA (p = 0.001) and the other antiphospholipid antibodies (p = 0.0004). There was no significant correlation of anti-beta 2 glycoprotein I IgA with any of the other ACR or SLICC clinical criteria for SLE. Those with anti-beta 2 glycoprotein I IgA tended to have a history of thrombosis (12% vs 6%, p = 0.071), but the difference was not statistically significant. Conclusion We found the anti-beta 2 glycoprotein I IgA isotype to be more common in patients with SLE and in particular, with African descent. It could occur alone without other isotypes.

Objectives To evaluate efficacy and safety of filgotinib in Japanese RA patients who have failed or were intolerant to one or more biologic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (bDMARD) from the global FINCH 2 study (NCT02873936) Methods This subgroup analysis was performed using the predefined statistical analyses. The FINCH 2 study is a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, Phase 3 study in adult RA patients with inadequate response to bDMARDs. The randomized patients were treated with once-daily filgotinib 200 mg, filgotinib 100 mg or placebo on a background of csDMARDs for 24 weeks. Results Of 449 patients enrolled in the overall population, 40 patients were enrolled from Japan. In the Japanese population, the American College of Rheumatology 20% response rates at week 12 (primary endpoint) were 83.3% and 53.3% for filgotinib, 200 mg and 100 mg, respectively, vs 30.8% for placebo. Filgotinib was well tolerated, similar to the overall population. Conclusions Both doses of once-daily filgotinib 200 mg and filgotinib 100 mg were effective, and generally well-tolerated in Japanese patients with active refractory RA.

Author(s): Ramsey-Goldman, Rosalind; Alexander, Roberta Vezza; Conklin, John; Arriens, Cristina; Narain, Sonali; Massarotti, Elena M; Wallace, Daniel J; Collins, Christopher E; Saxena, Amit; Putterman, Chaim; Brady, Kelley; Kalunian, Kenneth C; Weinstein, Arthur | Abstract: ObjectiveTo evaluate the usefulness of biomarkers to predict the evolution of patients suspected of systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE), designated as probable SLE (pSLE), into classifiable SLE according to the American College of Rheumatology (ACR) classification criteria.MethodsPatients suspected of SLE were enrolled by lupus experts if they fulfilled three ACR criteria for SLE and were followed for approximately 1-3 years to evaluate transition into ACR-classifiable SLE. Individual cell-bound complement activation products (CB-CAPs), serum complement proteins (C3 and C4), and autoantibodies were measured by flow cytometry, turbidimetry, and enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay, respectively. Blood levels of hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) were measured by mass spectrometry. A multianalyte assay panel (MAP), which includes CB-CAPs, was also evaluated. A MAP of greater than 0.8 reflected the optimal cutoff for transition to SLE. Time to fulfillment of ACR criteria was evaluated by Kaplan-Meier analysis and Cox proportional hazards model.ResultsOf the 92 patients with pSLE enrolled, 74 had one or two follow-up visits 9-35 months after enrollment for a total of 128 follow-up visits. Overall, 28 patients with pSLE (30.4%) transitioned to ACR-classifiable SLE, including 16 (57%) in the first year and 12 (43%) afterwards. A MAP score of greater than 0.8 at enrollment predicted transition to classifiable SLE during the follow-up period (hazard ratio = 2.72; P = 0.012), whereas individual biomarkers or fulfillment of Systemic Lupus International Collaborating Clinics criteria did not. HCQ therapy was not associated with the prevention of transition to SLE.ConclusionApproximately one-third of patients with pSLE transitioned within the study period. MAP of greater than 0.8 predicted disease evolution into classifiable SLE.

Objective: In previous studies, atherosclerotic vascular events (AVEs) were shown to occur in ~10% of patients with systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE). We undertook this study to investigate the annual occurrence and potential risk factors for AVEs in a multinational, multiethnic inception cohort of patients with SLE. Methods: A large 33-center cohort of SLE patients was followed up yearly between 1999 and 2017. AVEs were attributed to atherosclerosis based on SLE being inactive at the time of the AVE as well as typical atherosclerotic changes observed on imaging or pathology reports and/or evidence of atherosclerosis elsewhere. Analyses included descriptive statistics, rate of AVEs per 1,000 patient-years, and univariable and multivariable relative risk regression models. Results: Of the 1,848 patients enrolled in the cohort, 1,710 had ≥1 follow-up visit after enrollment, for a total of 13,666 patient-years. Of these 1,710 patients, 3.6% had ≥1 AVEs attributed to atherosclerosis, for an event rate of 4.6 per 1,000 patient-years. In multivariable analyses, lower AVE rates were associated with antimalarial treatment (hazard ratio [HR] 0.54 [95% confidence interval (95% CI) 0.32–0.91]), while higher AVE rates were associated with any prior vascular event (HR 4.00 [95% CI 1.55–10.30]) and a body mass index of >40 kg/m2 (HR 2.74 [95% CI 1.04–7.18]). A prior AVE increased the risk of subsequent AVEs (HR 5.42 [95% CI 3.17–9.27], P < 0.001). Conclusion: The prevalence of AVEs and the rate of AVE accrual demonstrated in the present study is much lower than that seen in previously published data. This may be related to better control of both the disease activity and classic risk factors.

Background:Type I interferons and other inflammatory mediators derived from plasmacytoid dendritic cells (pDCs) are implicated in systemic lupus erythematous (SLE) pathology. BIIB059 is a humanized monoclonal antibody that targets blood dendritic cell antigen 2 (BDCA2), a pDC-specific receptor. The binding of BIIB059 to BDCA2 leads to rapid internalization of BDCA2 from the surface of pDCs and subsequent inhibition of interferon, cytokine, and chemokine production. In Part A of the 2-part, phase 2 LILAC study (NCT02847598), BIIB059 significantly reduced SLE activity, as evidenced by reduced total active joint count (primary endpoint) and higher SLE Responder Index (SRI-4)1 response (a secondary endpoint) versus placebo.2Objectives:To evaluate SRI-4 response for BIIB059 versus placebo at Week 24 in SLE participant subgroups.Methods:Enrollment in LILAC Part A was open to adults fulfilling ≥ 4 of 11 revised 1997 ACR criteria for classification of SLE, with ≥ 4 tender and ≥ 4 swollen joints, active skin disease, and positive lupus antibodies. Participants were randomized to receive either BIIB059 450 mg or placebo subcutaneously every 4 weeks for 20 weeks (with an additional dose at Week 2). SRI-4 response at Week 24 was analyzed in subgroups, though analyses were limited by small sample sizes and were not powered for statistical testing.Results:In LILAC Part A, 64 and 56 participants were dosed with BIIB059 450 mg and placebo, respectively. At week 24, SRI-4 response rate was observed in favor of BIIB059 regardless of the baseline disease activity, such as SLEDAI-2K 2Conclusion:BIIB059 treatment was associated with greater SRI-4 response rate, consistent among different subgroups of baseline disease activity as measured by SLEDAI-2K and BILAG-2004, glucocorticoid dosage, and serology. These findings provide additional evidence of the potential benefit of BIIB059 for the treatment of patients with active SLE.References:[1]Furie RA, et al. Arthritis Rheum. 2009;61(9):1143-1151. 2. Furie RA, et al. Arthritis Rheumatol. 2020;72(suppl 10). Abstract 0935.Acknowledgements:This study was sponsored by Biogen (Cambridge, MA, USA). Writing and editorial support was provided by Excel Scientific Solutions (Fairfield, CT, USA); funding was provided by Biogen.Disclosure of Interests:Ronald van Vollenhoven Consultant of: AbbVie, AstraZeneca, Biotest, Bristol Myers Squibb, Celgene, GlaxoSmithKline, Janssen, Lilly, Medac, Merck, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, UCB, Grant/research support from: AbbVie, Arthrogen, Bristol Myers Squibb, GlaxoSmithKline, Lilly, Pfizer, UCB, Richard Furie Consultant of: Biogen, Grant/research support from: Biogen, Kenneth Kalunian Consultant of: AbbVie, Amgen, AstraZeneca, Biogen, Bristol Myers Squibb, Eli Lilly, Equillium, Genentech, Gilead, ILTOO, Janssen, Nektar, Roche, Viela, Grant/research support from: Lupus Research Alliance, Pfizer, Sanford Consortium, Sandra Navarra Speakers bureau: Astellas, Johnson & Johnson, Novartis, Pfizer, Consultant of: Biogen, Grant/research support from: Biogen, Juanita Romero-Diaz Consultant of: Biogen, Boehringer Ingelheim, Victoria Werth Consultant of: AbbVie, Amgen, AstraZeneca, Biogen, Bristol Myers Squibb, Eli Lilly, EMD Serono, Gilead, GlaxoSmithKline, Janssen, Kyowa Kirin, Resolve, Viela, Grant/research support from: Biogen, Celgene, Gilead, Janssen, Viela, XIAOBI HUANG Shareholder of: Biogen, Employee of: Biogen, HUA CARROLL Shareholder of: Biogen, Employee of: Biogen, Cristina Musselli Shareholder of: Biogen, Employee of: Biogen, Catherine Barbey Shareholder of: Biogen, Employee of: Biogen, NATHALIE FRANCHIMONT Shareholder of: Biogen, OMass Therapeutics, Employee of: Biogen

Background:Remission, LDA and LDAS have been proposed as treatment goals for SLE. However, the independent impact of these states on damage accrual has not been fully evaluated.Objectives:To determine the independent impact of remission (both off & on treatment), LDA, and LLDAS on damage accrual.Methods:We studied a long-term longitudinal multinational SLE cohort, including patients completing at least two annual assessments. Remission off-treatment was defined as a SLEDAI (excluding serology) =0, without prednisone and immunosuppressive (IS) drugs. Remission on-treatment was defined as a SLEDAI (excluding serology) =0, prednisone daily doseResults:There were 1,652 patients, 1464 (88.6%) were female, mean age at diagnosis was 34.6 (SD 13.4) years and mean baseline disease duration was 5.5 (SD 4.1) months. Patients had a mean follow-up of 6.5 (SD 4.3) years, 11686 visits were included. 763 patients (46.2%) had an increase in SDI score ≥1 during follow-up. 2483 (21.2%) of the visits were classified as remission off-treatment, 2276 (19.5%) as remission on-treatment, 544 (4.7%) as LDA, 657 (5.6%) as LLDAS and 5726 (49.0%) as not-optimally controlled. Being in remission off-treatment, remission on-treatment, LDA and LLDAS were predictive of a lower probability of damage accrual [remission off-treatment IRR=0.403, 95% CI 0.301-0.541); remission on-treatment IRR=0.313 (95% CI 0.218-0.451) LDA: IRR=0.469 (CI 95% CI 0.272-0.809); LLDAS IRR=0.440 (95% CI 0.241-0.803)]. The multivariable model is summarized in Table 1.Table 1.Multivariable GEE model of the impact of disease activity states on damage accrual.Incidence Rate Ratio95% CIDisease activity stateRemission off treatment0.4030.301-0.541Remission on treatment0.3130.218-0.451LDA0.4690.272-0.809LLDAS0.4400.241-0.803Gender, male1.2741.086-1.495Age at diagnosis1.0241.020-1.029EthnicityCaucasian USRef.Caucasian other1.0170.849-1.217African1.4671.211-1.776Asian0.8630.693-1.075Hispanic1.2661.034-1.550Other1.1210.759-1.656Educational level, years0.9770.957-0.996Disease duration at baseline0.9600.801-1.150Follow-up time0.9420.923-0.960Antimalarial use0.7860.681-0.908Highest prednisone dose before baseline1.0021.001-1.007SDI before1.1001.050-1.1152LLDAS: Low lupus disease activity state LDA: Low disease activity SDI: SLICC/ACR Damage IndexConclusion:Remission on- and off-treatment, LDA and LLDAS were associated with less damage accrual, even adjusting for possible confounders and effect modifiers. This highlights the importance of treating to target in SLE.Disclosure of Interests:Manuel F. Ugarte-Gil Grant/research support from: Pfizer, Janssen, John Hanly: None declared, Murray B Urowitz: None declared, Caroline Gordon Speakers bureau: UCB, Consultant of: Center for Disease Control, Astra-Zeneca, MFP, Sanofi, UCB, Sang-Cheol Bae: None declared, Juanita Romero-Diaz: None declared, Jorge Sanchez-Guerrero: None declared, Sasha Bernatsky: None declared, Ann E Clarke Consultant of: AstraZeneca, BristolMyersSquibb, GlaxoSmithKline, and Exagen Diagnostics, Daniel J Wallace Grant/research support from: Exagen, David Isenberg: None declared, Anisur Rahman: None declared, Joan T Merrill: None declared, Paul Fortin: None declared, Dafna D Gladman Consultant of: Abbvie, Janssen, Pfizer, Novartis, Amgen, Grant/research support from: Abbvie, Janssen, Pfizer, Novartis, Amgen, Ian N. Bruce: None declared, Michelle A Petri: None declared, Ellen M Ginzler Grant/research support from: Aurinia pharmaceutical, M.A. Dooley: None declared, Rosalind Ramsey-Goldman: None declared, Susan Manzi: None declared, Andreas Jonsen: None declared, Ronald van Vollenhoven Speakers bureau: AbbVie, Galapagos, GSK, Janssen, Pfizer, UCB, Consultant of: Abbvie, AstraZeneca, Biogen, Biotest, Celgen, Galapagos, Gilead, Janssen, Pfizer, Sanofie, Servier, UCB, Vielabo, Grant/research support from: BMS, GSK, Lilly, UCB, Cynthia Aranow: None declared, Meggan Mackay: None declared, Guillermo Ruiz-Irastorza: None declared, S. Sam Lim: None declared, Murat Inanc: None declared, Kenneth C Kalunian Consultant of: Roche, Biogen, Janssen, AstraZeneca, Eli Lilly, Genetech, Gilead, ILTOO, Nektar, Viela, Equillium, Bristol-Meyers Squibb, Soren Jacobsen Grant/research support from: BMS, Christine Peschken: None declared, Diane L Kamen: None declared, Anca Askanase Consultant of: Abbvie, Grant/research support from: Glaxo Smith Kline, Astra Zeneca, Janssen, Eli Lilly and Company, Mallinckrodt, Pfizer, Bernardo Pons-Estel Consultant of: GSK, Janssen, Graciela S Alarcon: None declared.

Background:Patients with cutaneous lupus erythematosus (CLE) experience symptoms including photosensitivity, rash, pain, and skin damage that can impact their quality of life. No targeted therapies are approved for CLE. BIIB059 is a humanized monoclonal antibody that targets blood dendritic cell antigen-2 (BDCA2), expressed exclusively on the surface of plasmacytoid dendritic cells (pDCs). The binding of BIIB059 to BDCA2 leads to rapid internalization of BDCA2 from the cell surface of pDCs, thereby inhibiting the production of pDC-derived type I interferons, cytokines, and chemokines, which are involved in CLE pathology. In Part B of the 2-part, phase 2 LILAC study (NCT02847598), the primary endpoint was met: BIIB059 significantly reduced CLE activity, as evidenced by a statistically significant dose response and statistically significant differences in least-squares mean percent changes in Cutaneous Lupus Erythematosus Disease Area and Severity Index – Activity (CLASI-A) score1 versus placebo.2Objectives:To determine the proportion of patients with CLE who presented at baseline with moderate or severe disease (CLASI-A ≥ 10) or with the higher category of mild disease (CLASI-A < 10 [i.e., 8 or 9]) and experienced a shift in CLASI-A score to a mild skin disease category or clear/almost clear skin status.Methods:Adults with histologically confirmed CLE with or without systemic manifestations were enrolled if they had CLASI-A ≥ 8 at baseline, despite prior use of or intolerance to topical corticosteroids (CS) and/or antimalarials, in addition to ≥ 1 lesion diagnostic of subacute CLE (CLASI-A erythema score ≥ 2) and/or chronic CLE (CLASI-A erythema score ≥ 2 and CLASI-Damage scarring score ≥1). Concomitant CLE/SLE therapy was allowed if doses were initiated ≥ 12 weeks and kept stable ≥ 4 weeks before randomization and throughout the treatment period. Systemic corticosteroid doses could not exceed 15 mg/day of prednisone (or equivalent). BIIB059 (50, 150, 450 mg) or placebo was subcutaneously administered once every 4 weeks for 12 weeks, with an additional dose at Week 2. An ad hoc analysis was conducted to determine the proportion of participants (CLASI-A ≥ 10 or < 10 at baseline) with a shift in CLASI-A score to ≤ 1, ≤ 3, ≤ 6, and ≤ 8 at Week 16.Results:In this ad hoc analysis from LILAC Part B, 106 (80.3%) and 26 (19.7%) of participants had a baseline CLASI-A score ≥ 10 and < 10, respectively. Compared with placebo, higher proportions of participants treated with BIIB059 achieved a shift in CLASI-A score from either ≥ 10 or < 10 at baseline to ≤ 1, ≤ 3, ≤ 6, and ≤ 8 at Week 16 (Figure 1). Treatment with BIIB059 resulted in higher proportions of participants achieving reduced scores, indicating shifts to more mild disease activity, compared with placebo. A score ≤ 1 (clear or almost clear skin) at Week 16 was achieved by 0.0% (0/25), 5.0% (1/20), 14.3% (3/21), and 12.5% (5/40) of participants with baseline CLASI-A ≥ 10 who were treated with placebo and BIIB059 50, 150, and 450 mg, respectively. Two of 26 participants with baseline CLASI-A < 10 achieved a score ≤ 1 (both received BIIB059 150 mg).Conclusion:A greater proportion of participants achieved milder skin disease or clear/almost clear skin status in the BIIB059 groups as compared with the placebo group. This effect was observed in participants with moderate or severe disease as well as in those in the higher range of the mild category of disease severity at baseline, indicating the ability of BIIB059 to improve skin lesions in patients with a broad range of cutaneous disease activity.References:[1]Albrecht J, et al. J Invest Dermatol. 2005;125(5):889-894.[2]Werth V, et al. Arthritis Rheumatol. 2020;72(suppl 10). Abstract 0986.Acknowledgements:This study was sponsored by Biogen (Cambridge, MA, USA). Writing and editorial support was from Excel Scientific Solutions (Fairfield, CT, USA); funding was provided by Biogen.Disclosure of Interests:Victoria Werth Consultant of: AbbVie, Amgen, AstraZeneca, Biogen, Bristol Myers Squibb, Eli Lilly, EMD Serono, Gilead, GlaxoSmithKline, Janssen, Kyowa Kirin, Resolve, Viela, Grant/research support from: Biogen, Celgene, Gilead, Janssen, Viela, Richard Furie Consultant of: AstraZeneca, Biogen, Grant/research support from: AstraZeneca, Biogen, Kenneth Kalunian Consultant of: AbbVie, Amgen, AstraZeneca, Biogen, Bristol Myers Squibb, Eli Lilly, Equillium, Genentech, Gilead, ILTOO, Janssen, Nektar, Roche, Viela, Grant/research support from: Lupus Research Alliance, Pfizer, Sanford Consortium, Ronald van Vollenhoven Consultant of: AbbVie, AstraZeneca, Biotest, Bristol Myers Squibb, Celgene, GlaxoSmithKline, Janssen, Lilly, Medac, Merck, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, UCB, Grant/research support from: AbbVie, Arthrogen, Bristol-Myers Squibb, GlaxoSmithKline, Lilly, Pfizer, UCB, Sandra Navarra Speakers bureau: Astellas, Johnson & Johnson, Novartis, Pfizer, Consultant of: Biogen, Filippa Nyberg Consultant of: Biogen, Juanita Romero-Diaz Consultant of: Biogen, Boehringer Ingelheim, Michael Tee Speakers bureau: Pfizer, Novartis, Johnson & Johnson, Celltrion, Consultant of: Neovacs, Grant/research support from: Celltrion, Johnson & Johnson, Pfizer, XIAOBI HUANG Shareholder of: Biogen, Employee of: Biogen, HUA CARROLL Shareholder of: Biogen, Employee of: Biogen, Catherine Barbey Shareholder of: Biogen, Employee of: Biogen, Cristina Musselli Shareholder of: Biogen, Employee of: Biogen, NATHALIE FRANCHIMONT Shareholder of: Biogen, OMass Therapeutics, Employee of: Biogen

The Addressing Lupus Pillars for Health Advancement (ALPHA) Project is a global consensus effort to identify, prioritise and address top barriers in lupus impacting diagnosis, care, treatment and research. To conduct this process, the ALPHA Project convened a multistakeholder Global Advisory Committee (GAC) of lupus experts and collected input from global audiences, including patients. In phase I, the ALPHA Project used expert interviews and a global survey of lupus experts to identify and categorise barriers into three overarching pillars: drug development, clinical care and access to care. In phase II, reported here, the GAC developed recommended actionable solutions to address these previously identified barriers through an in-person stakeholder meeting, followed by a two-round scoring process. Recommendations were assessed for feasibility, impact and timeline for implementation (FIT), where potential FIT component values were between 1 and 3 and total scores were between 3 and 9. Higher scores represented higher achievability based on the composite of the three criteria. Simplifying and standardising outcomes measures, including steroid sparing as an outcome (drug development) and defining the lupus spectrum (clinical care) ranked as the highest two priority solutions during the GAC meeting and received high FIT scores (7.67 and 7.44, respectively). Leveraging social media (access to care) received the highest FIT score across all pillars (7.86). Cross-cutting themes of many solutions include leveraging digital technology and applying specific considerations for special populations, including paediatrics. Implementing the recommendations to address key barriers to drug development, clinical care and access to care is essential to improving the quality of life of adults and children with lupus. Multistakeholder collaboration and guidance across existing efforts globally is warranted.

Background and Aims Lupus nephritis (LN) is a leading cause of morbidity and mortality in systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) patients. T cells are believed to play a central role in the pathogenesis of both SLE and LN. CD6 is a co-stimulatory receptor, predominantly expressed on T cells, that binds to activated leukocyte cell adhesion molecule (ALCAM), a ligand expressed on antigen presenting cells and various epithelial and endothelial tissues. The CD6-ALCAM pathway plays an integral role in modulating T cell activation, proliferation, differentiation and trafficking, and is central to immune mediated inflammation. Itolizumab (EQ001) is a humanized IgG1 monoclonal antibody that binds CD6, blocks the interaction between CD6 and ALCAM, and inhibits both the activation and trafficking of T cells. Inhibiting the CD6-ALCAM pathway with itolizumab potentially represents a promising therapeutic approach for the treatment of LN. The aim of this study is to assess the safety and tolerability, pharmacokinetics, pharmacodynamics, and clinical activity of subcutaneously administered itolizumab in patients with SLE with and without active proliferative lupus nephritis (apLN). Method This cohort-based dose escalation study includes two types of patients: The Type A cohort will enroll ∼24 patients with SLE without apLN (all treated with itolizumab) and the Type B cohort will randomize in a blinded manner ∼36 patients (3:1, itolizumab:placebo) with biopsy-proven ISN/RPS class III or IV (+ V) apLN who have had inadequate response to induction and/or post-induction maintenance treatment, exhibiting urine protein to creatinine ratio [UPCR] ≥1 g/g and active serology. Within both the Type A and Type B cohorts, up to 4 dose groups will be tested (Figure). Background treatments for SLE or LN are allowed. Following 4 weeks of treatment in a new higher dose Type A cohort and recommendation by an independent safety data review committee (DRC), the dose studied in the Type A cohort may then be studied in a Type B Cohort for a 12-week treatment duration (Figure). The primary endpoint is the safety and tolerability of itolizumab. Efficacy endpoints (in the Type B cohorts) include UPCR, estimated glomerular filtration rate, prednisone dose requirements, renal response, Systemic Lupus Erythematosus Disease Activity Index 2000 (SLEDAI-2K), FACIT Fatigue Scale, serologic markers, and other patient reported outcomes. In Type A cohort patients, clinical responses and pharmacologic activity will be assessed based on changes in serologic markers, SLEDAI-2K, FACIT Fatigue Scale. Pharmacodynamic markers, including markers that may allow future risk stratification, urinary ALCAM and CD6, will be examined in both cohort types. Results The study is ongoing. Six patients have been enrolled in Type A Cohort 1 (0.4 mg/kg dose) and completed both treatment and 4 weeks of post-treatment follow-up. The mean age was 59.5 (12.9) years, 100% were female; 67% were Hispanic/Latino; and 50% were White, and 50% were Black. Duration of SLE ranged from 3 years to 31 years. Concomitant medications for lupus included prednisone (83%, dose range 2.5 mg – 10 mg), methotrexate (33%), and anti-malarials (33%). Baseline SLEDAI-2K (mean 7.5 [2.2]) was based on findings of alopecia (83%); arthritis (67%); mucosal ulcers and rash (50% each); fever, increased dsDNA, and low complement (17% each). There were no adverse events. Additional data from this ongoing study will be presented. Conclusion Itolizumab, a monoclonal antibody blocking the CD6-ALCAM pathway, is a novel experimental treatment for LN. This is the first trial of itolizumab in patients with SLE and apLN. Data from the first cohort of patients suggest that the drug is safe and well-tolerated at a dose of 0.4 mg/kg over a 4-week treatment period. Additional cohorts of patients with SLE and apLN are currently being enrolled.

The systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) is an incurable autoimmune disease disproportionately affecting women and may lead to damage in multiple different organs. The marked heterogeneity in its clinical manifestations is a major obstacle in finding targeted treatments and involvement of multiple immune cell types further increases this complexity. Thus, identifying molecular subtypes that best correlate with disease heterogeneity and severity as well as deducing molecular cross-talk among major immune cell types that lead to disease progression are critical steps in the development of more informed therapies for SLE. Here we profile and analyze gene expression of six major circulating immune cell types from patients with well-characterized SLE (classical monocytes (n=64), T cells (n=24), neutrophils (n=24), B cells (n=20), conventional (n=20) and plasmacytoid (n=22) dendritic cells) and from healthy control subjects. Our results show that the interferon (IFN) response signature was the major molecular feature that classified SLE patients into two distinct groups: IFN-signature negative (IFNneg) and positive (IFNpos). We show that the gene expression signature of IFN response was consistent (i) across all immune cell types, (ii) all single cells profiled from three IFNpos donors using single-cell RNA-seq, and (iii) longitudinal samples of the same patient. For a better understanding of molecular differences of IFNpos versus IFNneg patients, we combined differential gene expression analysis with differential Weighted Gene Co-expression Network Analysis (WGCNA), which revealed a relatively small list of genes from classical monocytes including two known immune modulators, one the target of an approved therapeutic for SLE (TNFSF13B/BAFF: belimumab) and one itself a therapeutic for Rheumatoid Arthritis (IL1RN: anakinra). For a more integrative understanding of the cross-talk among different cell types and to identify potentially novel gene or pathway connections, we also developed a novel gene co-expression analysis method for joint analysis of multiple cell types named integrated WGNCA (iWGCNA). This method revealed an interesting cross-talk between T and B cells highlighted by a significant enrichment in the expression of known markers of T follicular helper cells (Tfh), which also correlate with disease severity in the context of IFNpos patients. Interestingly, higher expression of BAFF from all myeloid cells also shows a strong correlation with enrichment in the expression of genes in T cells that may mark circulating Tfh cells or related memory cell populations. These cell types have been shown to promote B cell class-switching and antibody production, which are well-characterized in SLE patients. In summary, we generated a large-scale gene expression dataset from sorted immune cell populations and present a novel computational approach to analyze such data in an integrative fashion in the context of an autoimmune disease. Our results reveal the power of a hypothesis-free and data-driven approach to discover drug targets and reveal novel cross-talk among multiple immune cell types specific to a subset of SLE patients. This approach is immediately useful for studying autoimmune diseases and is applicable in other contexts where gene expression profiling is possible from multiple cell types within the same tissue compartment.