Search

Summary Background Recent randomised controlled trials (RCTs) in primary Sjogren's syndrome used the European League Against Rheumatism (EULAR) Sjogren's Syndrome Disease Activity Index (ESSDAI) as their primary endpoint. Given the heterogeneous and complex nature of primary Sjogren's syndrome, it might be more appropriate to also assess other clinically relevant disease features. We aimed to develop a novel composite endpoint for assessing treatment efficacy in patients with primary Sjogren's syndrome: the Composite of Relevant Endpoints for Sjogren's Syndrome (CRESS). Methods A multidisciplinary expert team selected clinically relevant items and candidate measurements for inclusion in the composite score. For each measurement, cutoff points for response to treatment were chosen based on expert opinion, previously published data on minimal clinically important improvements, and trial data, primarily the week-24 data of the single-centre ASAP-III trial of abatacept versus placebo. CRESS was validated using data from three independent RCTs: one trial of rituximab (TRACTISS), one of abatacept (multinational trial), and one of tocilizumab (ETAP). We calculated the number and percentage of patients who were responders in the separate CRESS items, and the percentage of responders based on the total CRESS at the primary endpoint visits (week 48 for TRACTISS, week 24 for the other two trials). Patients with fewer than three items available for evaluating CRESS response were imputed as non-responders. Findings Based on expert opinion, five complementary items were selected to assess response: (1) systemic disease activity by Clinical ESSDAI (less than 5 points); (2) patient-reported symptoms by EULAR Sjogren's Syndrome Patient Reported Index, assessed by a decrease of at least 1 point or at least 15% from baseline; (3) tear gland item by Schirmer's test and ocular staining score, assessed by an increase of at least 5 mm or decrease of at least 2 points, respectively, in patients with abnormal Schirmer's test or ocular staining score findings at baseline, or, in patients with normal baseline values, assessed by no change to abnormal for both; (4) salivary gland item, assessed by unstimulated whole saliva secretion (increase of at least 25%) and salivary gland ultrasonography (decrease of at least 25%); and (5) serology, assessed by rheumatoid factor (decrease of at least 25%) and IgG (decrease of at least 10%). Total CRESS response is defined as response on at least three of five items. Post-hoc assessment of phase 3 trial data showed that CRESS response rates at the primary endpoint visits were 60% (24 of 40) for abatacept versus 18% (seven of 39) for placebo (p Interpretation The CRESS is a feasible, well-balanced, composite endpoint for use in trials of primary Sjogren's syndrome. As a next step, the CRESS will require validation in a prospective RCT. Funding None. Translation For the Dutch translation of the abstract see Supplementary Materials section.

ObjectivesTo evaluate efficacy and safety of abatacept in adults with active primary Sjögren’s syndrome (pSS) in a phase III, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial.MethodsEligible patients (moderate-to-severe pSS [2016 ACR/European League Against Rheumatism (EULAR) criteria], EULAR Sjögren’s Syndrome Disease Activity Index [ESSDAI] ≥5, anti-SS-related antigen A/anti-Ro antibody positive) received weekly subcutaneous abatacept 125 mg or placebo for 169 days followed by an open-label extension to day 365. Primary endpoint was mean change from baseline in ESSDAI at day 169. Key secondary endpoints were mean change from baseline in EULAR Sjögren’s Syndrome Patient Reported Index (ESSPRI) and stimulated whole salivary flow (SWSF) at day 169. Other secondary clinical endpoints included glandular functions and patient-reported outcomes. Selected biomarkers and immune cell phenotypes were examined. Safety was monitored.ResultsOf 187 patients randomised, 168 completed double-blind period and 165 continued into open-label period. Mean (SD) baseline ESSDAI and ESSPRI total scores were 9.4 (4.3) and 6.5 (2.0), respectively. Statistical significance was not reached for primary (ESSDAI −3.2 abatacept vs −3.7 placebo, p=0.442) or key secondary endpoints (ESSPRI, p=0.337; SWSF, p=0.584). No clinical benefit of abatacept over placebo at day 169 was seen with other clinical and PRO endpoints. Relative to baseline, abatacept was associated with significant differences vs placebo in some disease-relevant biomarkers (including IgG, IgA, IgM-rheumatoid factor) and pathogenic cell subpopulations (post hoc analyses). No new safety signals were identified.ConclusionsAbatacept treatment did not result in significant clinical efficacy compared with placebo in patients with moderate-to-severe pSS, despite evidence of biological activity.

Objective.To assess the relationship between infection risk and abatacept (ABA) exposure levels in patients with polyarticular-course juvenile idiopathic arthritis (pJIA) following treatment with subcutaneous (SC) and intravenous (IV) ABA.Methods.Data from 2 published studies (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT01844518, NCT00095173) of ABA treatment in pediatric patients were analyzed. One study treated patients aged 2–17 years with SC ABA and the other treated patients aged 6–17 years with IV ABA. Association between serum ABA exposure measures and infection was evaluated using Kaplan-Meier plots of probability of first infection vs time on treatment by ABA exposure quartiles and log-rank tests. Number of infections by ABA exposure quartiles was investigated.Results.Overall, 343 patients were included in this analysis: 219 patients received SC ABA and 124 patients received IV ABA. Overall, 237/343 (69.1%) patients had ≥ 1 infection over 24 months. No significant difference in time to first infection across 4 quartiles of ABA exposure levels was observed in the pooled (P = 0.45), SC (2–5 yrs: P = 0.93; 6–17 yrs: P = 0.48), or IV (P = 0.50) analyses. Concomitant use of methotrexate and glucocorticoids (at baseline and throughout) with ABA did not increase infection risk across the ABA exposure quartiles. There was no evidence of association between number of infections and ABA exposure quartiles. No opportunistic infections related to ABA were reported.Conclusion.In patients aged 2–17 years with pJIA, no evidence of association between higher levels of exposure to IV ABA or SC ABA and incidence of infection was observed.

Juvenile idiopathic arthritis (JIA) encompasses several forms of chronic inflammatory arthritis of unknown etiology presenting in children

Background:Tyrosine kinase 2 (TYK2) is an intracellular kinase that mediates IL-23, IL-12, and IFNα/β signaling. Deucravacitinib is a novel, oral selective inhibitor of TYK2 acting via the TYK2 regulatory domain. Phase 2 results showed deucravacitinib was efficacious and well tolerated versus placebo (PBO) in patients with active psoriatic arthritis (PsA).Objectives:This analysis further evaluated improvements in musculoskeletal disease manifestations in patients in the Phase 2 PsA trial.Methods:The ongoing Phase 2 trial (NCT03881059) enrolled patients who had a PsA diagnosis for ≥6 months, met CASPAR criteria, had active disease (≥3 tender joints, ≥3 swollen joints, C-reactive protein [CRP] ≥3 mg/L), and had at least 1 active skin lesion. Patients either failed or were intolerant to at least 1 nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug, corticosteroid, conventional synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drug, and/or 1 TNF inhibitor (TNFi; ≤30%). Patients were randomized 1:1:1 to deucravacitinib 6 mg QD or 12 mg QD or PBO, and stratified by TNFi status (experienced vs naive) and body weight (Results:Patients treated with deucravacitinib were numerically more likely to achieve ACR20 response at Week 16 compared with PBO-treated patients regardless of TNFi experience or body weight, although some of these groups were small (Figure). Improvements for deucravacitinib 6 mg and 12 mg QD versus PBO were observed in all ACR components, with apparent separation occurring as early as Week 4 on, for example, HAQ-DI (mean change from baseline, -0.2 vs -0.2 vs -0.1, respectively) and hCRP (mean change from baseline, -7.4 vs -5.2 vs 0.3, respectively) and maintained through Week 16 (Table).Table 1.Mean (SD) change from baseline for ACR componentsTJCSJCPtGAPainPGAHAQ-DIhCRPBaselineaPBO16.9 (9.8)10.5 (7.7)66.2 (15.8)64.9 (18.2)63.8 (14.8)1.3 (0.6)20.4 (39.1)DEUC 618.1 (10.3)11.9 (7.0)68.2 (16.8)63.6 (21.7)68.2 (14.7)1.3 (0.6)17.6 (23.6)DEUC1219.4 (11.8)11.3 (9.0)63.6 (15.6)63.8 (15.9)63.3 (16.1)1.3 (0.6)16.5 (21.7)Week 16bPBO-4.6 (9.7)-4.3 (8.0)-13.4 (23.5)-13.8 (21.5)-19.9 (21.8)-0.1 (0.4)-3.3 (22.6)DEUC 6-9.3 (9.7)-7.7 (5.8)-28.7 (23.1)-25.3 (26.1)-33.6 (23.0)-0.4 (0.5)-14.2 (24.5)DEUC 12-12.2 (10.2)-8.5 (9.1)-27.6 (25.8)-27.5 (25.0)-32.2 (25.0)-0.4 (0.6)-10.9 (22.8)PBO, n/N=58/66; DEUC 6, n/N=63/70; DEUC 12, n/N=59/67; n/N = number of patients who completed treatment/number of patients randomized; the number of patients with data available for individual components at each time point may vary.aMean (SD). bMean (SD) change from baseline.ACR, American College of Rheumatology; DEUC 6, deucravacitinib 6 mg QD; DEUC 12, deucravacitinib 12 mg QD; HAQ-DI, Health Assessment Questionnaire-Disability Index total score; hCRP, high-sensitivity C-reactive protein; PBO, placebo; PGA, Physician’s Global Assessment of psoriatic arthritis; PtGA, Patients’ Global Assessment of disease activity; QD, once daily; SJC, swollen joint count; TJC, tender joint count.Conclusion:Analyses confirmed the efficacy of deucravacitinib versus PBO across TNFi and body weight subgroups. With deucravacitinib treatment, improvements were displayed in all ACR components.Acknowledgements:This study was sponsored by Bristol Myers Squibb. Professional medical writing assistance was provided by Peloton Advantage, LLC, an OPEN Health company, and funded by Bristol Myers Squibb.Disclosure of Interests:Philip J Mease Consultant of: AbbVie, Amgen, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol Myers Squibb, Eli Lilly, Galapagos, Gilead, GlaxoSmithKline, Janssen, Novartis, Pfizer, SUN Pharma, UCB, Grant/research support from: AbbVie, Amgen, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol Myers Squibb, Eli Lilly, Galapagos, Gilead, GlaxoSmithKline, Janssen, Novartis, Pfizer, SUN Pharma, UCB, Atul Deodhar Consultant of: AbbVie, Amgen, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol Myers Squibb, Celgene, Eli Lilly, Galapagos, GlaxoSmithKline, Janssen, Novartis, Pfizer, UCB, Grant/research support from: AbbVie, Eli Lilly, GlaxoSmithKline, Novartis, Pfizer, UCB, Désirée van der Heijde Consultant of: AbbVie, Amgen, Astellas, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Bristol Myers Squibb, Boehringer Ingelheim, Celgene, Cyxone, Daiichi, Eisai, Eli Lilly, Galapagos, Gilead, GlaxoSmithKline, Janssen, Merck, Novartis, Pfizer, Regeneron, Roche, Sanofi, Takeda, UCB Pharma. Director of Imaging Rheumatology BV, Frank Behrens Consultant of: Pfizer, AbbVie, Sanofi, Lilly, Novartis, Genzyme, Boehringer, Janssen, MSD, Celgene, Roche, Chugai, Bristol Myers Squibb, UCB Pharma, Grant/research support from: Pfizer, Janssen, Chugai, Celgene, Roche, Alan Kivitz Shareholder of: Pfizer, Sanofi, GlaxoSmithKline, Gilead Sciences, Inc., Novartis; Paid consultant: AbbVie, Boehringer Ingelheim, Flexion, Janssen, Pfizer, Sanofi, Regeneron, SUN Pharma Advanced Research, Gilead Sciences, Inc, Speakers bureau: Amgen, Horizon, Lilly, Novartis, Pfizer, Sanofi, Genzyme, Flexion, AbbVie, Thomas Lehman Shareholder of: Bristol Myers Squibb, Employee of: Bristol Myers Squibb, Lan Wei Shareholder of: Bristol Myers Squibb, Employee of: Bristol Myers Squibb, Marleen Nys Shareholder of: Bristol Myers Squibb, Employee of: Bristol Myers Squibb, Subhashis Banerjee Shareholder of: Bristol Myers Squibb, Employee of: Bristol Myers Squibb, Miroslawa Nowak Shareholder of: Bristol Myers Squibb, Employee of: Bristol Myers Squibb

ObjectivesTo assess the efficacy and safety of abatacept, a selective T-cell costimulation modulator, in a phase III study in psoriatic arthritis (PsA).MethodsThis study randomised patients (1:1) with active PsA (~60% with prior exposure to a tumour necrosis factor inhibitor) to blinded weekly subcutaneous abatacept 125 mg (n=213) or placebo (n=211) for 24 weeks, followed by open-label subcutaneous abatacept. Patients without ≥20% improvement in joint counts at week 16 were switched to open-label abatacept. The primary end point was the proportion of patients with ≥20% improvement in the American College of Rheumatology (ACR20) criteria at week 24.ResultsAbatacept significantly increased ACR20 response versus placebo at week 24 (39.4% vs 22.3%; pConclusionsAbatacept treatment of PsA in this phase III study achieved its primary end point, ACR20 response, showed beneficial trends overall in musculoskeletal manifestations and was well tolerated. There was only a modest impact on psoriasis lesions.Trial registration numberClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01860976 (funded by Bristol-Myers Squibb).

Background:Maintenance of clinical response over time has been shown in individual patients (pts) with polyarticular-course juvenile idiopathic arthritis (pJIA) treated with SC abatacept (ABA).1It is unknown whether each individual pt with sustained efficacy also consistently maintains the previously reported shorter-term benefits on patient-reported outcomes (PROs)2,3over time.Objectives:Investigate whether combined efficacy and stringent, optimal PRO responses to ABA treatment are maintained by individual pts with pJIA over time.Methods:In this analysis of the intent-to-treat population, pts in two age cohorts (2–5 and 6–17 yrs) who achieved clinical response to weekly SC ABA (10–4) were followed for 2 yrs. Stringent efficacy outcomes (Juvenile Arthritis Disease Activity Score 27 [JADAS27] minimal disease activity [MDA; ≤3.8] and inactive disease [ID; ≤1] status) were combined with optimal PRO endpoints (childhood [C]HAQ-DI=0, Parental Global Assessment [PaGA] ≤1 and Pain visual analogue scale [VAS] Results:219 pts entered the study (46 [21.0%] 2–5 yrs; 173 [79.0%] 6–17 yrs); a subgroup of these pts achieved a clinical response at Mo 4 (Table 1). Many pts who achieved JADAS27 MDA or JADAS27 ID combined with optimal PROs at Mo 4 sustained their response at Mo 13, and at both Mo 13 and Mo 21 in the 2–5-yr and 6–17-yr cohorts (Table 1). Across the cohorts, 33–88% of pts maintained a combined JADAS27 MDA with optimal PRO responses through Mo 21. Where estimable, median times to combined efficacy and specific optimal PRO responses were consistent across the cohorts (Table 2; Figs 1, 2).Table 1.Proportion of pts with combined efficacy and optimal PRO responses at Mos 4, 13 and 21EndpointResponders at Mo 4Responders at Mos 4 and 13*Responders at Mos 4, 13 and 21*2–5 yrs (n=46)6–17 yrs (n=173)2–5 yrs6–17 yrs2–5 yrs6–17 yrsJADAS27 MDA and CHAQ-DI=09 (20)34 (20)5/9 (56)25/34 (74)3/9 (33)16/34 (47)JADAS27 MDA and PaGA ≤18 (17)14 (8)8/8 (100)7/14 (50)7/8 (88)5/14 (36)JADAS27 MDA and Pain VAS 28 (61)70 (41)25/28 (89)58/70 (83)21/28 (75)43/70 (61)JADAS27 ID and CHAQ-DI=07 (15)20 (12)2/7 (29)13/20 (65)1/7 (14)9/20 (45)JADAS27 ID and PaGA ≤16 (13)10 (6)4/6 (67)4/10 (40)4/6 (67)4/10 (40)JADAS27 ID and Pain VAS 17 (37)31 (18)10/17 (59)22/31 (71)8/17 (47)17/31 (55)Data are n (%) or n/N (%). *% based on n of pts who achieved response at Mo 4 (denominator)Table 2.Kaplan–Meier estimates for median (95% CI) times (mos) to achieving combined efficacy and optimal PRO responsesEndpoint2–5 yrs6–17 yrsJADAS27 MDA and CHAQ-DI=021.5 (6.8, NE)21.5 (13.1, 24.4)JADAS27 MDA and PaGA ≤1NE (15.9, NE)24.6 (24.3, NE)JADAS27 MDA and Pain VAS 2.8 (1.9, 2.9)3.8 (3.7, 6.6)JADAS27 ID and CHAQ-DI=0NE (18.4, NE)24.4 (18.7, NE)JADAS27 ID and PaGA ≤1NE (21.3, NE)24.6 (24.3, NE)JADAS27 ID and Pain VAS 3.8 (3.8, 10.3)13.2 (10.3, 15.9)NE=not estimableConclusion:Many individuals with pJIA who achieved stringent efficacy and PRO measures with weekly SC abatacept by Mo 4 sustained them over 2 years. Time to achieve combined efficacy and Pain VAS References:[1]Ruperto N, et al.Ann Rheum Dis2019;78:99–100 (abstr OP0056)[2]Brunner H, et al.Arthritis Rheumatol2019;71(suppl 10):abstr 2707[3]Ruperto N, et al.Ann Rheum Dis2017;76:75 (abstr OP0058)[4]Brunner HI, et al.Arthritis Rheumatol2018;70:1144–54Acknowledgments:Katerina Kumpan, PhD, Caudex; funding: Bristol-Myers SquibbDisclosure of Interests: :Hermine Brunner Consultant of: Hoffman-La Roche, Novartis, Pfizer, Sanofi Aventis, Merck Serono, AbbVie, Amgen, Alter, AstraZeneca, Baxalta Biosimilars, Biogen Idec, Boehringer, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Celgene, EMD Serono, Janssen, MedImmune, Novartis, Pfizer, and UCB Biosciences, Speakers bureau: GSK, Roche, and Novartis, Nikolay Tzaribachev: None declared, Ingrid Louw Consultant of: Amgen, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche (advisory boards), Inmaculada Calvo Grant/research support from: Bristol-Myers Squibb, Clementia, GlaxoSmithKline, Hoffman-La Roche, Merck Sharpe & Dohme, Novartis, Pfizer, Sanofi, Speakers bureau: AbbVie, GlaxoSmithKline, Hoffman-La Roche, Novartis, Francisco Zapata: None declared, Gerd Horneff Grant/research support from: AbbVie, Chugai, Merck Sharp & Dohme, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, Speakers bureau: AbbVie, Bayer, Chugai, Merck Sharp & Dohme, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, Ivan Foeldvari Consultant of: AbbVie, Amgen, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Chugai, Eli Lilly, Novartis, Pfizer, Daniel Kingsbury: None declared, Maria Gastanaga Grant/research support from: Amgen, Bristol-Myers Squibb, GlaxoSmithKline, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, Speakers bureau: AbbVie, Roche, Carine Wouters Grant/research support from: GlaxoSmithKline, Pfizer, Roche, Johannes Breedt: None declared, Robert Wong Shareholder of: Bristol-Myers Squibb, Employee of: Bristol-Myers Squibb, Marleen Nys Shareholder of: Bristol-Myers Squibb, Employee of: Bristol-Myers Squibb, Margarita Askelson Consultant of: Bristol-Myers Squibb, Joe Zhuo Shareholder of: Bristol-Myers Squibb, Employee of: Bristol-Myers Squibb, Alberto Martini Consultant of: AbbVie, Eli Lily, EMD Serono, Janssen, Novartis, Pfizer, UCB, Daniel J Lovell Consultant of: Abbott (consulting and PI), AbbVie (PI), Amgen (consultant and DSMC Chairperson), AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol-Myers Squibb (PI), Celgene, Forest Research (DSMB Chairman), GlaxoSmithKline, Hoffman-La Roche, Janssen (co-PI), Novartis (consultant and PI), Pfizer (consultant and PI), Roche (PI), Takeda, UBC (consultant and PI), Wyeth, Employee of: Cincinnati Children’s Hospital Medical Center, Speakers bureau: Wyeth, Nicolino Ruperto Grant/research support from: Bristol-Myers Squibb, Eli Lily, F Hoffmann-La Roche, GlaxoSmithKline, Janssen, Novartis, Pfizer, Sobi (paid to institution), Consultant of: Ablynx, AbbVie, AstraZeneca-Medimmune, Biogen, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Eli Lily, EMD Serono, GlaxoSmithKline, Hoffmann-La Roche, Janssen, Merck, Novartis, Pfizer, R-Pharma, Sanofi, Servier, Sinergie, Sobi, Takeda, Speakers bureau: Ablynx, AbbVie, AstraZeneca-Medimmune, Biogen, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Eli Lily, EMD Serono, GlaxoSmithKline, Hoffmann-La Roche, Janssen, Merck, Novartis, Pfizer, R-Pharma, Sanofi, Servier, Sinergie, Sobi, Takeda

Background The efficacy of SC abatacept (ABA) in patients (pts) with polyarticular-course juvenile idiopathic arthritis (pJIA) was shown in a 2-year (yr), Phase III, open-label international study (NCT01844518).1 However, it is unknown whether each individual pt within a treatment group consistently achieves the same efficacy endpoint at all time points. Objectives To investigate whether ABA efficacy is maintained by individual pts with pJIA over time. Methods In this subgroup analysis, pts in two age cohorts (2–5 yrs and 6–17 yrs) who achieved clinical response to weekly SC ABA (10 to Results A total of 219 pts entered the study (46 [21.0%] 2–5 yrs; 173 [79.0%] 6–17 yrs) and a subgroup of these pts achieved a clinical response at Day 113 (Table). Most pts who achieved JIA-ACR70, JIA-ACR100, JADAS71 MDA and JADAS71 ID at Day 113 sustained their response at Day 393 and at Days 393 and 645 in the 2–5-yr and 6–17-yr cohorts (Figure). Across cohorts, more than 75% and 60% of pts maintained a JIA-ACR 70 and JADAS71 MDA response through Day 645, respectively. Prior biologic (b)DMARD use was an important prognostic factor. In pts aged 6–17 yrs, sustained JIA-ACR70 response rate at Days 393 and 645 was 81% (57/70) in pts who did not have prior bDMARDs vs 57% (12/21) in pts who had prior bDMARDs (p=0.0715); sustained JADAS71 MDA response rate was 71% (37/52) vs 37% (7/19; p=0.0320). Prognostic factors for JIA-ACR100 response and JADAS71 ID in pts aged 6–17 yrs and for all outcomes in pts aged 2–5 yrs could not be determined due to low pt numbers. Conclusion The majority of individuals with pJIA who achieved stringent efficacy endpoints with weekly SC abatacept by Day 113 sustained that clinical endpoint over time. Prior bDMARD use may be a prognostic factor for sustained response over 2 yrs. Reference [1] Brunner HI, et al. Arthritis Rheumatol2018;70:1144–54. Acknowledgement Professional medical writing: Stacey Reeber, PhD, Caudex; funding: Bristol-Myers Squibb Disclosure of Interests Nicolino Ruperto Grant/research support from: The Gaslini Hospital, where NR works as full-time public employee, has received contributions (> 10.000 USD each) from the following industries in the last 3 years: BMS, Eli-Lilly, GlaxoSmithKline, F Hoffmann-La Roche, Janssen, Novartis, Pfizer, Sobi. This funding has been reinvested for the research activities of the hospital in a fully independent manner, without any commitment with third parties., Consultant for: Received honoraria for consultancies or speaker bureaus ( I perform consultancy activities on behalf of the Gaslini Institute for the companies listed below: AbbVie, Biogen, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol-Myers Squibb, EMD Serono, Janssen, Novartis, Pfizer, R-Pharm. The money received for these activities are directly transferred to the Gaslini Institute’s bank account. Before March 2016, I was the head of the Pediatric Rheumatology Department at the G. Gaslini Hospital, where the PRINTO Coordinating Centre is located. For the coordination activity of the PRINTO network, the Gaslini Hospital received contributions from the industries listed in this section. This money has been reinvested for the research activities of the hospital in fully independent manners besides any commitment with third parties., Daniel J Lovell Consultant for: Consulting fees and/or honoraria from Astra Zeneca, Wyeth Pharma, Amgen, Abbott, Pfizer, F. Hoffmann-La Roche, Novartis, UBC, Takeda, GSK, Boehringer, and Celgene

Background Mechanistic differences between biologics are poorly understood. HLA-DRB1 alleles containing the shared epitope (SE), which are strongly associated with RA, are present in 85% of anti-cyclic citrullinated protein 2 (anti-CCP2) + patients (pts) with RA (Jiang et al. Arthritis Rheumatol 2015). In a prior retrospective exploratory analysis, abatacept (ABA) was more effective in SE+ vs SE- pts (Oryoji et al. Ann Rheum Dis 2017). Head-to-head (H2H) comparisons with other agents are lacking. Objectives This H2H, single-blinded trial (NCT02557100) in biologic-naive pts with early, active RA prospectively explored the relationship between HLA-DRB1 SE and the clinical efficacy of ABA or adalimumab (ADA). Methods Adults with early (=12 mths from symptom onset), moderate-to-severe RA (ACR/EULAR 2010 criteria) seropositive for anti-CCP2 (>3x ULN) and RF, were randomised 1:1 to SC ABA 125mg wkly or SC ADA 40mg every 2 wks (both with stable, oral MTX wkly) for 24 wks. Pts were grouped by SE status (+/-) based on HLA-DRB1 genotype (-: no SE allele; +: =1 SE allele). Safety was analysed throughout the trial and up to 8 wks post last study drug dose. Clinical efficacy was assessed at Wk24 to determine the proportion of ACR20/50/70 responders in ABA vs ADA arms, and the adjusted mean changes from baseline in DAS28 (CRP), SDAI and CDAI. Treatment (tmt) differences between ABA and ADA in SE+ and SE– pts were assessed for ACR20/50/70 responders and DAS28 (CRP) remission at Wk24. Results 80 pts were treated: 40 ABA (9 SE-, 30 SE+, 1 SE unknown) and 40 ADA (9 SE-, 31 SE+). Baseline characteristics were balanced. Mean (SD) age, disease duration and DAS28 (CRP) were 46.0 (14.4) years, 5.5 (2.6) mths and 5.2 (1.1), respectively; 75% were female. No new safety signals were identified. In each arm, related AEs (ABA: 12 [30%]; ADA: 11 [27.5%]) and related serious AEs (ABA: 0; ADA: 1 [2.5%]) were similar. Numerically higher efficacy responses were seen with ABA vs ADA at Wk24 (Table 1). Similar results were observed for DAS28 (CRP), SDAI and CDAI. In SE+ pts, numerically higher efficacy responses were seen with ABA vs ADA at Wk24; 95% CI for estimated tmt differences for ACR20/50/70 responses and DAS28 (CRP) remission did not cross 0 (Figure 1). Conclusion In this seropositive early RA population, numerically higher efficacy responses were seen with abatacept vs adalimumab after 24wks of tmt, with more pronounced tmt differences in SE+ pts. Results are consistent with a previous study in which greater efficacy was seen with abatacept, but not TNF inhibitors, in anti-CCP2+ vs anti-CCP2- pts with RA (Harrold et al. J Rheumatol 2018). Acknowledgement Marianne Peluso (protocol manager); medical writing: Lola Parfitt (Caudex; funding: BMS) Disclosure of Interests William Rigby Consultant for: AbbVie, BMS, Genentech and Pfizer, Jane Buckner Grant/research support from: Janssen, Bristol-Myers Squibb (current); Novo Nordisk, Pfizer, Eli Lilly (past), Consultant for: Bristol-Myers Squibb, Eli Lilly, Lou Bridges: None declared, Marleen Nys Shareholder of: Bristol-Myers Squibb, Employee of: Bristol-Myers Squibb, Sheng Gao Shareholder of: Bristol-Myers Squibb, Employee of: Bristol-Myers Squibb, Martin Polinsky Shareholder of: Bristol-Myers Squibb, Employee of: Bristol-Myers Squibb, Alyssa Johnsen Shareholder of: Bristol-Myers Squibb, Employee of: Bristol-Myers Squibb, Neelanjana Ray Shareholder of: Bristol-Myers Squibb, Employee of: Bristol-Myers Squibb, Vivian Bykerk Grant/research support from: Mallinckrodt, BMS, Crescendo Biosciences, Sanofi/Regeneron., Consultant for: Amgen, Pfizer, UCB, Scipher, Sanofi/Genzyme/Regeneron

Background In the placebo (PBO)-controlled Phase III aSTRAEA study (ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT01860976) in psoriatic arthritis (PsA), abatacept (ABA) 125 mg SC weekly significantly increased the aCR20 response rate at Week 24 versus PBO (39.4% vs 22.3%, respectively; p Objectives To assess aBA safety up to 2 years in patients (pts) enrolled in aSTRAEA. Methods Pts with active PsA were randomised 1:1 to aBA or PBO for 24 weeks followed by 28 weeks’ open-label (OL) aBA (total time on study: 52 weeks); pts without ≥20% improvement in joint counts at Week 16 (early escape) were switched to OL aBA (total time on study: 44 weeks).1 Pts could subsequently receive OL aBA in a 52-week long-term extension (LTE; Year 2) for the collection of safety data. The proportions of pts in the cumulative aBA population (all pts who received ≥1 dose of aBA at any time in the study) with aEs (all aEs, serious aEs [SAEs], deaths, aEs leading to discontinuation), laboratory marked abnormalities and anti-ABA antibodies over the cumulative aBA period (date of first treatment dose to end of LTE) were recorded in 1-year and 6-month intervals. Results Overall, 398 pts were included in the analysis of the cumulative aBA period (213 received aBA from study Day 1; 185 completed initial randomisation to PBO and received aBA thereafter). Of these, 322 pts entered the LTE (initial randomisation: aBA, n=162; PBO, n=160) and continued to receive OL aBA beyond the 28-week OL period. Of 162 and 160 pts initially randomised to aBA and PBO, respectively, 19 (11.7%) and 21 (13.1%) pts discontinued aBA in the LTE. Median (range) number of aBA injections in the cumulative aBA period to end of LTE was 80 (1–133). Safety during the cumulative aBA period over 2 years is shown (Table 1); 6-month interval safety data will be available at time of presentation. In the LTE, there were 3 SAEs of infection (osteomyelitis, intervertebral discitis and cellulitis) and 3 pts discontinued due to infection (hepatitis a, Epstein-Barr virus, intervertebral discitis). No malignancies or deaths were reported, and no autoimmune events were reported as serious or led to aBA discontinuation during the LTE. AEs, SAEs and aEs of special interest occurred with a similar frequency regardless of concomitant MTX or prior TNF inhibitor (TNFi) use. The proportion of pts with anti-ABA antibodies during the cumulative aBA period was higher during the post-treatment period (≥22 days after last dose; 37.1% [91/245]) than in the on-treatment period (first treatment dose date to ≤21 days after last dose; 7.1% [28/392]). No apparent relationship between anti-ABA antibodies and efficacy in the on-treatment period or aEs suggestive of systemic immune reactions was seen. Conclusion Abatacept was well tolerated up to 2 years with no new safety signals during the LTE in this Phase III study in PsA. There was no impact of concomitant MTX use or prior TNFi exposure on the safety profile of abatacept. The occurrence of anti-abatacept antibodies had no impact on abatacept efficacy or safety. References [1] Mease PJ, et al. Ann Rheum Dis2017;76:1550–8. Acknowledgement Professional medical writing: andrea Plant, PhD, Caudex; funding: Bristol-Myers Squibb. Disclosure of interests Philip J Mease Grant/research support from: abbVie, amgen, BMS, Celgene, Janssen, Lilly, Novartis, Pfizer, SUN and UCB, Consultant for: abbVie, amgen, BMS, Galapagos, Gilead Sciences, inc., Janssen, Lilly, Novartis, Pfizer, SUN and UCB, Speakers bureau: abbVie, amgen, BMS, Celgene, Genentech, Janssen, Lilly, Novartis, Pfizer and UCB, alice B Gottlieb Grant/research support from: PI: incyte Corporation, Janssen-Ortho inc., Lilly ICOS LLC, Novartis, UCB, XBiotech, Consultant for: abbVie, Dermira, incyte Corporation, Lilly ICOS LLC, Novartis, Sun Pharmaceutical industries Ltd., avotres (unpaid), XBiotech (unpaid), Speakers bureau: abbVie, Eli Lilly and Company, Janssen Biotech; advisory board: Bristol-Myers Squibb, Celgene Corporation, Janssen Biotech, Janssen-Ortho inc., LEO Pharma, Novartis, UCB, Desiree van der Heijde Consultant for: abbVie, amgen, astellas, astraZeneca, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Boehringer ingelheim, Celgene, Daiichi, Eli-Lilly, Galapagos, Gilead, GlaxoSmithKline, Janssen, Merck, Novartis, Pfizer, Regeneron, Roche, Sanofi, Takeda, Union Chimique Belge, Oliver FitzGerald: None declared, alyssa Johnsen Shareholder of: Bristol-Myers Squibb, Employee of: Bristol-Myers Squibb, Marleen Nys Shareholder of: Bristol-Myers Squibb, Employee of: Bristol-Myers Squibb, Subhashis Banerjee Shareholder of: Bristol-Myers Squibb, Employee of: Bristol-Myers Squibb, Harris a ahmad Shareholder of: Bristol-Myers Squibb, Employee of: Bristol-Myers Squibb, Dafna D Gladman Grant/research support from: abbVie, amgen, Celgene, Lilly, Novartis, Pfizer, and UCB, Consultant for: abbVie, amgen, BMS, Celgene, Galapagos, Gilead, Janssen, Lilly, Novartis, Pfizer, and UCB

Background Efficacy of SC abatacept (ABA) in patients (pts) with polyarticular-course juvenile idiopathic arthritis (pJIA) was shown in a 2-year, open-label, Phase III international study (NCT01844518).1 Restricted growth and delayed puberty are associated with pJIA;2 however, the effect of ABA on growth and development is unknown. Objectives To investigate the effect of ABA on height, BMI and Tanner staging, and to assess the impact of BMI on ABA efficacy in pts with pJIA. Methods Patients with pJIA were grouped into two age cohorts (2–5 and 6–17 years [yrs]) and received weight-tiered SC ABA (10 to −2 to ≤1), overweight (>1 to ≤2) and obese (>2) (intent-to-treat, non-responder imputation for missing efficacy data). In the 6–17-yr cohort, Tanner staging was recorded at BL and at discontinuation or completion of study. Results Data for standardised height and BMI are presented. In 6–17-yr-old pts with BL Tanner stage ≤3 (n=100), BL mean (SD) height was −0.53 (1.53); at D645, mean (95% CI) change was 0.20 (0.06, 0.34; Figure 1). In 6–17-yr-old pts with a BL height ≤−1 (n=42), BL mean (SD) height was −2.10 (1.01) and mean (95% CI) change at D645 was 0.49 (0.23, 0.76). In 2–5-yr-old pts, BL mean (SD) height was 0.07 (1.37); at D645, mean (95% CI) change was 0.13 (−0.09, 0.36). In 13 pts aged 6–17 yrs of the lowest height (Tanner stage ≤3 and BL height ≤−2), mean (SD) height increased from −3.28 (1.10) at BL to −2.59 (1.31) by D645. At BL, mean (SD) BMI was 0.20 (1.33) in the 6–17-yr cohort (n=173) and 0.25 (1.57) in the 2–5-yr cohort (n=46); at D645, mean (95% CI) change in BMI was 0.02 (−0.13, 0.16; Figure 2) and 0.17 (−0.08, 0.42), respectively. Overall, no relationship was seen between change from BL in Juvenile Arthritis Disease Activity Score 71 (JADAS71) and BL BMI in either age cohort. The proportions (odds ratio [OR]; 95% CI of OR) of obese pts aged 6–17 yrs achieving JIA-ACR30 (0.15; 0.04, 0.55), JIA-ACR50 (0.18; 0.05, 0.63), JIA-ACR70 (0.17; 0.04, 0.67) and JADAS71 minimal disease activity (0.27; 0.07, 1.03) at Day 645 were significantly lower compared with pts with a normal BMI, but the sample size in the obese category was low (n=12); this effect was not seen in overweight pts (n=37). In female pts (n=92), shifts in Tanner stages from BL to D645 were as expected; male sexual maturation was difficult to assess due to the small sample size (n=20). Conclusion Abatacept improves growth and development in pts with pJIA. Early therapeutic intervention with abatacept may help reduce growth restrictions in pts with pJIA. BMI may impact the efficacy response, resulting in lower efficacy in obese, but not in overweight, pts with pJIA versus pts with normal BMI. References [1] Brunner HI, et al. Arthritis Rheumatol2018;70:1144–54. [2] Umlawska W, et al. Arch Med Sci2010;6:19–23. Acknowledgement Professional medical writing: Lola Parfitt, MRes, Caudex; funding: Bristol-Myers Squibb Disclosure of Interests Nicolino Ruperto Grant/research support from: The Gaslini Hospital, where NR works as full-time public employee, has received contributions (> 10.000 USD each) from the following industries in the last 3 years: BMS, Eli-Lilly, GlaxoSmithKline, F Hoffmann-La Roche, Janssen, Novartis, Pfizer, Sobi. This funding has been reinvested for the research activities of the hospital in a fully independent manner, without any commitment with third parties., Consultant for: Received honoraria for consultancies or speaker bureaus ( I perform consultancy activities on behalf of the Gaslini Institute for the companies listed below: AbbVie, Biogen, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol-Myers Squibb, EMD Serono, Janssen, Novartis, Pfizer, R-Pharm. The money received for these activities are directly transferred to the Gaslini Institute’s bank account. Before March 2016, I was the head of the Pediatric Rheumatology Department at the G. Gaslini Hospital, where the PRINTO Coordinating Centre is located. For the coordination activity of the PRINTO network, the Gaslini Hospital received contributions from the industries listed in this section. This money has been reinvested for the research activities of the hospital in fully independent manners besides any commitment with third parties., Daniel J Lovell Consultant for: Consulting fees and/or honoraria from Astra Zeneca, Wyeth Pharma, Amgen, Abbott, Pfizer, F. Hoffmann-La Roche, Novartis, UBC, Takeda, GSK, Boehringer, and Celgene

Background Infections are the most common expected AEs linked to biologic (b) DMARDs in paediatric patients (pts) with juvenile idiopathic arthritis (JIA). Blood concentrations achieved with bDMARDs vary greatly between individual pts. It is not known if higher abatacept (ABA) exposure is linked to higher infection risk in paediatric populations. Objectives To assess the relationship between the incidence of infection and SC (50–125 mg weekly) and IV (10 mg/kg monthly) ABA exposure in pts with polyarticular-course JIA (pJIA). Methods Data from the 4 month open-label periods of a Phase III SC ABA study (NCT01844518; weight-tiered ABA: 10– Results Baseline demographic and clinical characteristics were comparable in the SC and IV studies.1 2 Overall, 135/403 pts (33.5%) had ≥1 infection over 4 months: 77/219 (35.2%) with SC ABA and 58/184 (31.5%) with IV ABA. KM plots for pooled SC and IV ABA showed no statistically significant difference in infection probability across four quartiles of ABA Cminss (Fig A; p=0.2317; log-rank test), Cmaxss (p=0.5501) or Cavgss (p=0.3808). Consistent results were seen for individually studied SC and IV ABA Cminss (Fig B, C), Cmaxss and Cavgss (not shown). In addition, there was no difference in median ABA exposure measures by infection occurrence (yes/no) in pooled and separate SC and IV analyses. Conclusions In pts with pJIA who received SC or IV abatacept, higher relative abatacept exposure was not associated with a higher risk of infections for 4 months. References [1] Ruperto N, et al. Lancet2008;372:383–91. [2] Lovell D, et al. Arthritis Rheumatol2016;68(Suppl 10), abstract 948. Disclosure of Interest N. Ruperto Grant/research support from: Bristol-Myers Squibb, Roche, Janssen, Novartis, Pfizer, Sobi, Consultant for: AbbVie, Ablynx, Amgen, AstraZeneca, Baxalta Biosimilars, Biogen Idec, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Celgene, Eli-Lilly, EMD Serono, Gilead Sciences, Janssen, MedImmune, Novartis, Pfizer, R-Pharm, Roche, Sanofi, Servier, Takeda, Speakers bureau: AbbVie, Ablynx, Amgen, AstraZeneca, Baxalta Biosimilars, Biogen Idec, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Celgene, Eli-Lilly, EMD Serono, Gilead Sciences, Janssen, MedImmune, Novartis, Pfizer, R-Pharm, Roche, Sanofi, Servier, Takeda, H. Brunner Consultant for: Novartis, Genentech, Pfizer, UCB, Lilly, Janssen, Ablynx, AbbVie, Bristol-Myers Squibb, EMD Serono, AstraZeneca, Speakers bureau: Genentech, Novartis, N. Tzaribachev: None declared, I. Louw Consultant for: Janssen, Pfizer, Roche, I. Calvo Grant/research support from: Novartis, Speakers bureau: AbbVie, Novartis, Roche, Sobi, G. Horneff Grant/research support from: AbbVie, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Chugai, Pfizer, Janssen/MSD, Novartis, Roche, Consultant for: AbbVie, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Chugai, Pfizer, Janssen/MSD, Novartis, Roche, M. Henrickson: None declared, M. Rama: None declared, M. Fischbach: None declared, T. Miraval: None declared, M. Ally: None declared, X. Li Shareholder of: Bristol-Myers Squibb, Employee of: Bristol-Myers Squibb, R. Wong Shareholder of: Bristol-Myers Squibb, Employee of: Bristol-Myers Squibb, M. Nys Shareholder of: Bristol-Myers Squibb, Employee of: Bristol-Myers Squibb, B. Murthy Shareholder of: Bristol-Myers Squibb, Employee of: Bristol-Myers Squibb, K. Lin Employee of: Cognigen Corporation, a SimulationsPlus company, J. Passarell Employee of: Cognigen Corporation, a SimulationsPlus company, A. Martini Consultant for: AbbVie, Biogen, Boehringer-Ingelheim, Bristol-Myers Squibb, EMD Serono, Janssen, Novartis, Pfizer, R-Pharm, D. Lovell Grant/research support from: National Institutes of Health, NIAMS, Consultant for: AstraZeneca, Bristol-Myers Squibb, AbbVie, Pfizer, Roche, Novartis, UCB, Forest Research Institute, Horizon, Johnson and Johnson, Biogen, Takeda, Genentech, GlaxoSmithKline, Boehringer Ingelheim, Celgene, Janssen, Speakers bureau: Genentech

Background In the Phase III ASTRAEA trial (NCT01860976), abatacept (ABA), a selective T-cell co-stimulation modulator, significantly increased ACR20 response (primary endpoint; PE) and had an overall beneficial effect vs placebo (PBO) on musculoskeletal symptoms in patients (pts) with active psoriatic arthritis (PsA) at 24 weeks (W). 1 Objectives To analyse 1-year results from ASTRAEA. Methods Pts with active disease (≥3 swollen and ≥3 tender joints), ≥2 cm target lesion of plaque psoriasis and inadequate response/intolerance to ≥1 non-biologic DMARD were randomized (1:1) to SC ABA 125 mg weekly or PBO for 24W, followed by open-label (OL) SC ABA up to 52W. Randomization was stratified by MTX use, prior TNF inhibitor (TNFi) use and skin involvement ≥3% of body surface area. Pts without ≥20% improvement in joint counts at W16 were switched to OL ABA (early escape; EE) for 28W (total study time: 44W). Pre-specified exploratory endpoints included: ACR20/50/70 responses at W44; adjusted mean changes from baseline (BL) in DAS28 (CRP; post hoc analysis) and HAQ-DI at W44 and PsA-modified total Sharp/van der Heijde score (SHS) at W44 (EE pts)/W52 (non-EE pts); complete resolution of BL enthesitis and dactylitis at W44 (EE pts)/W52 (non-EE pts); and Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI) 50/75 responses at W44. Analyses used the ITT population with non-responder imputation for missing values and actual data at each time point for all pts (denominator at each time point equal to number of pts in ITT population). All missing responses were imputed as non-responders, except if the missing value was between 2 visits for which the pt was a responder. In that case the missing value was imputed as a responder. Results Of 424 pts enrolled, 213 received ABA and 211 PBO. Most (>60%) pts had received prior TNFis. Of pts in the ABA and PBO groups, 76 (36%) and 89 (42%) were EE, 12 (6%) and 24 (11%) discontinued by PE of W24; 197 (92%) and 185 (88%) entered the OL period, of whom 165 (84%) and 162 (88%) completed. At W44, ACR responses at W24 were maintained for pts who continued ABA, and improved for those who switched from PBO to ABA (Figure). Continued improvements in DAS28 (CRP) and HAQ-DI after W24 were seen for ABA and PBO/ABA groups, with mean (SE) changes from BL to W44 of –1.81 (0.09) and –1.84 (0.10) in DAS28 (CRP) (changes to W24 were –1.35 [0.10] and –0.94 [0.11]) and –0.37 (0.04) and –0.38 (0.04) in HAQ-DI (changes to W24 were –0.33 [0.04] and –0.20 [0.05]), respectively. There was minimal progression based on mean (SE) change from BL in PsA-modified total SHS at W44/52 in the ABA and PBO/ABA groups: 0.18 (0.12) vs 0.30 (0.12). Complete resolution of BL enthesitis occurred in 48.6% and 43.9% and BL dactylitis in 68.9% and 60.0% of pts with ABA and ABA/PBO, respectively, at W44/52. At W44, for ABA and PBO/ABA, PASI 50 responses were 30.1% and 34.5%; PASI 75 responses were 19.9% and 16.9%. There were no new safety signals. Conclusions Responses were maintained across musculoskeletal endpoints up to 1 year in a relatively refractory population of pts continuing on SC abatacept. Abatacept was well tolerated. References Mease P, et al. Arthritis Rheumatol 2016;68(Suppl 10):Abstract 1041. Disclosure of Interest P. Mease Grant/research support from: AbbVie, Amgen, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Celgene, Janssen, Lilly, Novartis, Pfizer, Sun, UCB, Consultant for: AbbVie, Amgen, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Celgene, Crescendo Bioscience, Corrona, Demira, Janssen, Lilly, Novartis, Pfizer, Sun, UCB, Zynerba, Speakers bureau: AbbVie, Amgen, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Celgene, Crescendo Bioscience, Genentech, Janssen, Novartis, Pfizer, UCB, A. Gottlieb Grant/research support from: Centocor (Janssen), Amgen, Abbott (AbbVie), Novartis, Celgene, Pfizer, Lilly, Coronado, Levia, Merck, Xenoport, Dermira, Baxalta, Consultant for: Amgen Inc.; Astellas, Akros, Centocor (Janssen), Inc.; Celgene Corp., Bristol-Myers Squibb Co., Beiersdorf, Inc., Abbott Labs. (AbbVie), TEVA, Actelion, UCB, Novo Nordisk, Novartis, Dermipsor Ltd., Incyte, Pfizer, Canfite, Lilly, Coronado, Vertex, Karyopharm, CSL Behring Biotherapies for Life, GlaxoSmithKline, Xenoport, Catabasis, Meiji Seika Pharma Co., Ltd, Takeda, Mitsubishi Tanabe Pharma Development America, Inc, Genentech, Baxalta, D. van der Heijde Consultant for: AbbVie, Amgen, Astellas, AstraZeneca, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Boeringer Ingelheim, Celgene, Daiichi, Eli-Lilly, Galapagos, Gilead, Janssen, Merck, Novartis, Pfizer, Regeneron, Roche, Sanofi, UCB, O. FitzGerald: None declared, A. Johnsen Employee of: Bristol-Myers Squibb, M. Nys Shareholder of: Bristol-Myers Squibb, Employee of: Bristol-Myers Squibb, S. Banerjee Shareholder of: Bristol-Myers Squibb, Employee of: Bristol-Myers Squibb, D. Gladman Grant/research support from: AbbVie, Amgen, Celgene, Janssen, Novartis, Pfizer, UCB, Consultant for: AbbVie, Amgen, BMS, Celgene, Eli Lilly, Janssen, Novartis, Pfizer, UCB

Background In patients (pts) with polyarticular-course juvenile idiopathic arthritis (pJIA), SC abatacept (ABA) 125 mg weekly has a similar pharmacokinetic profile, therapeutically equivalent efficacy and comparable safety to IV ABA 10 mg/kg every 4 weeks.1 Although some data on paediatric pt-reported outcomes (PRO) have been published for IV ABA,2 PRO data following treatment with SC ABA have not. Objectives This analysis examined the effect of SC ABA treatment on PROs (activities of daily living [ADL] limitation questionnaire of parent/caregiver, childhood HAQ [CHAQ]-DI, and parent global assessment of overall pt well-being [PaGA]) in 6–17-year pts with active pJIA in a Phase III trial (NCT01844518). Methods Pts with pJIA aged 2–17 years with an inadequate response/intolerance to ≥1 DMARD were enrolled in this single-arm, open-label study and received SC ABA weekly for 4 months based on body weight tier (10– 50 kg [125 mg ABA]). JIA-ACR 30 criteria (ACR Pediatric 30) responders at Month 4 could receive ABA for another 20 months. For the 6–17-year cohort reported here, ADL limitation questionnaire of parent/caregiver (mean [SD] number of days [D] of parental/caregiver missed activity, paid care and missed school [absolute values per month and percentage of D missed per month relative to an assumed average of 20 school D/month]); CHAQ-DI (0–3 scale across 8 domains of disability component); and PaGA (0–100 mm visual analogue scale) were evaluated. Results Baseline characteristics of the 173 pts with pJIA from the 6–17-year cohort were: median (min, max) age, 13.0 (6.0, 17.0) years; median (min, max) number of active joints, 10.0 (2.0, 42.0); 78.6% of pts used MTX (median dose: 11.6 mg/m2/week); and 26.6% were with prior biologic failure. All ADL limitation components improved from baseline to D113 (Month 4); these improvements were largely maintained at D309 (Figure). Relative percentage D missed from school decreased from 15% (D1) to 5.5% (D309, Figure D). CHAQ-DI and PaGA improved from baseline to D309 (Table). Further 2-year data are pending. Conclusions In this analysis of patients with pJIA aged 6–17 years, SC abatacept demonstrated a beneficial effect on PROs including reductions in activity limitation and disability (CHAQ-DI) and improvement in well-being (PaGA) up to D309. References Lovell D, et al. Arthritis Rheumatol 2016;68(suppl 10): Abstract 948. Ruperto N, et al. Arthritis Care Res 2010;62:1542–51. Disclosure of Interest N. Ruperto Grant/research support from: The G. Gaslini Hospital has received contributions from the following industries for the coordination activity of the PRINTO network: Bristol-Myers Squibb, GlaxoSmithKline, Hoffman-La Roche, Novartis, Pfizer,sanofi-aventis, Schwarz Biosciences, Abbott, Francesco Angelini S.P.A., Sobi, Merck Serono, Consultant for: AbbVie, Amgen, Biogen Idec, Alter, AstraZeneca, Baxalta Biosimilars, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Celgene, Crescendo Bioscience, EMD Serono, Hoffman-La Roche, Italfarmaco, Janssen, MedImmune, Medac, Novartis, Novo Nordisk, Pfizer, sanofi-aventis, Servier, Takeda, UCB Biosciences GmbH, Speakers bureau: AbbVie, Amgen, Biogen Idec, Alter, AstraZeneca, Baxalta Biosimilars, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Celgene, Crescendo Bioscience, EMD Serono, Hoffman-La Roche, Italfarmaco, Janssen, MedImmune, Medac, Novartis, Novo Nordisk, Pfizer, sanofi-aventis, Servier, Takeda, UCB Biosciences GmbH, H. Brunner: None declared, N. Tzaribachev: None declared, G. Vega-Cornejo: None declared, I. Louw: None declared, J. Anton Grant/research support from: Bristol-Myers Squibb, Novartis, Pfizer, AbbVie, GSK, Sobi, Roche, Alexion, Sanofi, Genzyme, Consultant for: Novartis, Sobi, Roche, Gebro, Pfizer, AbbVie, Alexion, Speakers bureau: Novartis, AbbVie, Pfizer, Sobi, Roche, Gebro, D. Viola: None declared, I. Foeldvari: None declared, V. Keltsev: None declared, D. Kingsbury: None declared, C. Wouters: None declared, B. Lauwerys: None declared, E. Alemao Shareholder of: Bristol-Myers Squibb, Employee of: Bristol-Myers Squibb, R. Wong Shareholder of: Bristol-Myers Squibb, Employee of: Bristol-Myers Squibb, M. Nys Shareholder of: Bristol-Myers Squibb, Employee of: Bristol-Myers Squibb, S. Banerjee Shareholder of: Bristol-Myers Squibb, Employee of: Bristol-Myers Squibb, A. Martini: None declared, D. Lovell Grant/research support from: National Institutes of Health, NIAMS, Consultant for: AstraZeneca, Bristol-Myers Squibb, AbbVie, Pfizer, Roche, Novartis, UBC, Forest Research Institute, Horizon, Johnson & Johnson, Biogen, Takeda, Genentech, GlaxoSmithKline, Boehringer Ingelheim, Celgene, Janssen, Speakers bureau: Genentech

Objective We previously documented that abatacept was effective and safe in patients with juvenile idiopathic arthritis (JIA) who had not previously achieved a satisfactory clinical response with disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs or tumor necrosis factor blockade. Here, we report results from the long-term extension (LTE) phase of that study. Methods This report describes the long-term, open-label extension phase of a double-blind, randomized, controlled withdrawal trial in 190 patients with JIA ages 6–17 years. Children were treated with 10 mg/kg abatacept administered intravenously every 4 weeks, with or without methotrexate. Efficacy results were based on data derived from the 153 patients who entered the open-label LTE phase and reflect ≥21 months (589 days) of treatment. Safety results include all available open-label data as of May 7, 2008. Results Of the 190 enrolled patients, 153 entered the LTE. By day 589, 90%, 88%, 75%, 57%, and 39% of patients treated with abatacept during the double-blind and LTE phases achieved responses according to the American College of Rheumatology (ACR) Pediatric 30 (Pedi 30), Pedi 50, Pedi 70, Pedi 90, and Pedi 100 criteria for improvement, respectively. Similar response rates were observed by day 589 among patients previously treated with placebo. Among patients who had not achieved an ACR Pedi 30 response at the end of the open-label lead-in phase and who proceeded directly into the LTE, 73%, 64%, 46%, 18%, and 5% achieved ACR Pedi 30, Pedi 50, Pedi 70, Pedi 90, and Pedi 100 responses, respectively, by day 589 of the LTE. No cases of tuberculosis and no malignancies were reported during the LTE. Pneumonia developed in 3 patients, and multiple sclerosis developed in 1 patient. Conclusion Abatacept provided clinically significant and durable efficacy in patients with JIA, including those who did not initially achieve an ACR Pedi 30 response during the initial 4-month open-label lead-in phase.

Objective: Major mental disorders are associated with an increased risk for obesity-related cardiovascular mortality, leading to interest in risk-reduction approaches that target weight and risk-related plasma lipids, including use of antipsychotic agents with low metabolic risk. This multicenter, randomized, double-blind study compared the metabolic effects of aripiprazole versus olanzapine in overweight persons with schizophrenia or schizoaffective disorder who were previously on olanzapine treatment. Method: In total, 173 subjects with DSM-IV-TR-defined schizophrenia or schizoaffective disorder were randomly assigned to receive aripiprazole (N = 88) or olanzapine (N = 85) for 16 weeks in a study conducted from March 30, 2004, to August 8, 2006. Primary and secondary endpoints were mean weight change from baseline and percentage change from baseline in fasting triglyceride levels, respectively. Results: At week 16, weight decreased significantly with aripiprazole versus olanzapine (-1.8 vs. +1.41 kg; p

Background IV abatacept (ABA) 10 mg/kg every 4 weeks is safe and effective in reducing signs and symptoms of polyarticular forms of juvenile idiopathic arthritis (pJIA) in children and adolescents. 1 SC ABA 125 mg weekly has therapeutically equivalent efficacy and comparable safety to IV ABA in adult RA, but similar data in pJIA are lacking. Objectives To assess the PK, efficacy and safety of SC ABA in children and adolescents with active pJIA. Methods This single-arm, open-label (OL), Phase III study (NCT01844518) enrolled patients (pts) aged 2–17 years (yrs) with pJIA and an inadequate response/intolerance to ≥1 DMARD. Pts received SC ABA weekly OL for 4 months (M), based on body weight tier (10– 50 kg [125 mg ABA]). JIAACR criteria 30 (JIAACR30) responders at 4M could enter a 20M OL extension; JIAACR30 non-responders could continue SC ABA for 3M more and discontinued if JIAACR30 was not achieved by M7. The primary endpoint was steady-state blood trough concentration (C minss ) of ABA at 4M in the 6–17-yr-old pJIA pts (n=173); we report PK, efficacy and safety from the initial 4M OL phase for these pts. Results Baseline characteristics of the 173 pJIA pts were: mean age (SD) =12.3 (3.1) yrs; mean number of active joints (SD) =12.4 (8.3); 78.6% of patients used MTX (mean dose: 12 mg/m 2 /week) and 26.6% failed prior biologic treatment. The target therapeutic C minss of 10 μg/mL was achieved (Figure); at 4M, mean (SD) C minss was 42.1 (14.7) μg/mL and was consistent across all three weight groups. Robust JIAACR responses were seen at 4M (Figure): JIAACR30, 80.9%; inactive disease, 29.5%. Biologic-naive pts had a numerically higher JIAACR30 response than biologic-experienced pts at 4M. The number of pts with serious AEs and those who discontinued study drug due to AEs during the initial 4M were low (n=5 and n=3 [fatigue, exanthematous rash and ovarian germ cell teratoma] pts, respectively). AEs of interest reported included infections (31.8%) with 1 case of sepsis, injection-site reactions (5.2%) and malignancy (0.6%). No laboratory abnormalities or unexpected safety concerns were reported. Conclusions The target therapeutic exposure for SC abatacept was achieved in pts aged 6–17 yrs with pJIA irrespective of weight group. The exposures for SC abatacept were within the range for IV abatacept in pJIA and comparable with SC abatacept in adult RA. Robust efficacy was observed with SC abatacept with no new safety concerns after 4M of treatment. References Ruperto N, et al. Lancet 2008;372:383–91. Disclosure of Interest N. Ruperto Grant/research support from: Gaslini Hospital, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Hoffman-La Roche, Janssen, Novartis, Pfizer, sanofi aventis, Schwarz Biosciences, Sobi, Consultant for: AbbVie, Amgen, Biogen Idec, Baxalta, Boehringer, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Celgene, EMD Serono, Hoffman-La Roche, Janssen, Novartis, Pfizer, Servier, Sinergie,Takeda, Speakers bureau: AbbVie, Amgen, Biogen Idec, Baxalta, Boehringer, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Celgene, EMD Serono, Hoffman-La Roche, Janssen, Novartis, Pfizer, Servier, Sinergie,Takeda, D. J. Lovell Grant/research support from: NIH, Consultant for: AstraZeneca, Bristol-Myers Squibb, AbbVie, Pfizer, Roche, Novartis, UBC, Forest Research Institute, Horizon, Johnson & Johnson, Biogen, Takeda, Genentech, GlaxoSmithKline, Boehringer Ingelheim, Celgene, Janssen, N. Tzaribachev Grant/research support from: UCB, Pfizer, Janssen, Roche, G. Vega-Cornejo: None declared, I. Louw: None declared, A. Berman: None declared, I. Calvo Grant/research support from: Novartis, Speakers bureau: AbbVie, Roche, Novartis, Sobi, R. Cuttica: None declared, G. Horneff Grant/research support from: Pfizer, AbbVie, Roche, F. Avila-Zapata: None declared, J. Anton Grant/research support from: Pfizer, Novartis, Speakers bureau: Pfizer, AbbVie, Novartis, Sobi, Roche, D. Viola: None declared, I. Foeldvari: None declared, V. Keltsev: None declared, D. Kingsbury: None declared, X. Li Shareholder of: Bristol-Myers Squibb, Employee of: Bristol-Myers Squibb, M. Nys Shareholder of: Bristol-Myers Squibb, Employee of: Bristol-Myers Squibb, R. Wong Shareholder of: Bristol-Myers Squibb, Employee of: Bristol-Myers Squibb, S. Banerjee Shareholder of: Bristol-Myers Squibb, Employee of: Bristol-Myers Squibb, A. Martini Grant/research support from: The Gaslini Hospital, which is the public Hospital where I work as full time public employee, has received contributions from the following industries: Abbott, Bristol-Myers Squibb, “Francesco Angelini”, GlaxoSmithKline, Hoffman-La Roche, Italfarmaco, Janssen, Novartis, Pfizer, sanofi aventis, Schwarz Biosciences, Sobi, Xoma, Wyeth, Consultant for: Abbott, AbbVie, Amgen, Biogen, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Astellas, Boehringer, Italfarmaco, Janssen, MedImmune, Novartis, NovoNordisk, H. I. Brunner Consultant for: Pfizer, Bristol-Myers Squibb, UCB, Janssen, Amgen, Celgene, AstraZeneca, Novartis, Genentech, Speakers bureau: Novartis, Genentech

Objective To assess the efficacy and safety of abatacept in biological-naive patients with rheumatoid arthritis and an inadequate response to methotrexate treated in the long-term extension (LTE) of the ATTEST trial. Methods Patients randomly assigned to abatacept, placebo or infliximab completing the 1-year double-blind period were eligible to receive abatacept ∼10 mg/kg in the open-label LTE. Efficacy to year 2 is presented for patients randomly assigned to abatacept or infliximab who switched to open-label abatacept. Safety data are presented for all patients entering LTE regardless of double-blind treatment. Results Of 431 patients randomly assigned, 79.8% remained on abatacept at year 2. At years 1 and 2, 19.7% and 26.1% of abatacept and 13.3% and 28.6% of infliximab-to-abatacept patients achieved disease activity score 28-defined remission (

Abstract —Angiotensin type 1 receptor antagonists have direct effects on the autonomic nervous system and myocardium. Because of this, we hypothesized that irbesartan would reduce QT dispersion to a greater degree than amlodipine, a highly selective vasodilator. To test this, we gathered electrocardiographic (ECG) data from a multinational, multicenter, randomized, double-blind parallel group study that compared the antihypertensive efficacy of irbesartan and amlodipine in elderly subjects with mild to moderate hypertension. Subjects were treated for 6 months with either drug. Hydrochlorothiazide and atenolol were added after 12 weeks if blood pressure (BP) remained uncontrolled. ECGs were obtained before randomization and at 6 months. A total of 188 subjects (118 with baseline ECGs) were randomized. We analyzed 104 subjects who had complete ECGs at baseline and after 6 months of treatment. Baseline characteristics between treatments were similar, apart from a slight imbalance in diastolic BP (irbesartan [n=53] versus amlodipine [n=51], 99.2 [SD 3.6] versus 100.8 [3.8] mm Hg; P =0.03). There were no significant differences in BP normalization (diastolic BP P =0.378). We found a significant reduction in QT indexes in the irbesartan group (QTc dispersion mean, –11.4 [34.5] milliseconds, P =0.02; QTc max, –12.8 [35.5] milliseconds, P =0.01), and QTc dispersion did not correlate with the change in BP. The reduction in QT indexes with amlodipine (QTc dispersion, –9.7 [35.4] milliseconds, P =0.06; QTc max, –8.6 [33.2] milliseconds, P =0.07) did not quite reach statistical significance, but there was a correlation between the change in QT indexes and changes in systolic BP. In conclusion, irbesartan improved QT dispersion, and this effect may be important in preventing sudden cardiac death in at-risk hypertensive subjects.

Background Immunogenicity with therapeutic proteins has been linked to reduction in both efficacy and safety in patients (pts) with RA.1,2 We previously reported in clinical trials that IV abatacept (ABA) demonstrated low (∼3%) and transient immunogenicity that has no apparent impact on efficacy or safety.3 Objectives To evaluate immunogenicity in a large pt group with long-term (up to 8 yrs) IV ABA exposure. Methods Data from 7 ABA RA clinical trials were included in immunogenicity assessments, including double-blind periods from 6 placebo-controlled studies (AIM, ATTEST, ATTAIN, ASSURE, 101 and 100) and 1 non-randomized, open-label study (ARRIVE), and their open-label, long-term extensions. Pts had active RA, inadequate response/intolerance to MTX/DMARDs or biologics and were treated with IV ABA (∼10 mg/kg) every 4 weeks. Anti-ABA antibodies were detected using two ELISA assays: one to whole ABA molecule (CTLA4 and IgG1), and one to CTLA4 “tip” region (T). Positive samples had titers≥400 for anti-ABA or ≥25 for anti-CTLA4-T. Persistent immunogenicity was defined as positive response on ≥2 consecutive visits. Data are as-observed for all ABA-treated pts. Results 3985 pts were included with up to 8 yrs’ ABA exposure. A total of 6.3% of pts demonstrated immunogenicity; titers were low and did not increase with continued treatment. Persistent immunogenicity (2.4%) and immunogenicity with missed doses (3.8% for 1 and 4.6% for ≥2 missed doses) were also low. Serious adverse events (SAEs) attributed as being related to study drug were reported in 32/252 (12.7%) pts who experienced immunogenicity. No relationship was identified between immunogenicity and SAEs, peri-infusional, acute infusional or autoimmune events, or hypersensitivity reactions. No consistent relationship between immunogenicity and efficacy (measured by ACR20) was observed; 83% (55/66) of ACR20 responders maintained ACR20 vs 36% (10/28) of non-responders achieved ACR20 following positive antibody response. Conclusions Abatacept demonstrated low immunogenicity in pts with RA and up to 8 yrs of abatacept exposure. Titers of anti-abatacept and anti-CTLA-4-T antibodies were low and did not persist nor increase with continued treatment. No consistent association was observed between antibody response and clinical efficacy or safety. References Bartelds GM, et al. JAMA 2011;305:1460–8. Pascual-Salcedo D, et al. Rheumatology 2011;50:1445–52. Haggerty HG, et al. J Rheum 2007;34:2365–73. Disclosure of Interest M. Weinblatt Grant/Research support from: Bristol-Myers Squibb, Consultant for: Bristol-Myers Squibb, M. Genovese Consultant for: Bristol-Myers Squibb, M. Schiff Consultant for: Bristol-Myers Squibb, R. Westhovens Grant/Research support from: Roche, UCB, Inc., Consultant for: Bristol-Myers Squibb, Centocor, Inc., Roche, Schering-Plough, Speakers Bureau: Bristol-Myers Squibb, R. Alten Grant/Research support from: BMS, Merck Pharma GmbH, Wyeth Pharmaceuticals, Pfizer, Consultant for: Abbott Laboratories, Horizon Pharma, Merck Pharma GmbH, Nitec Pharma GmbH, Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation, Roche, Speakers Bureau: Abbott Laboratories, BMS, Horizon Pharma, Merck Pharma GmbH, Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation, Roche, I. Delaet Employee of: Bristol-Myers Squibb, M. Nys Employee of: Bristol-Myers Squibb, J. Manning Employee of: Bristol-Myers Squibb, J. Kremer Grant/Research support from: Bristol-Myers Squibb, Speakers Bureau: Bristol-Myers Squibb

ObjectiveTo develop a composite responder index in primary Sjögren’s syndrome (pSS): the Sjögren’s Tool for Assessing Response (STAR).MethodsTo develop STAR, the NECESSITY (New clinical endpoints in primary Sjögren’s syndrome: an interventional trial based on stratifying patients) consortium used data-driven methods based on nine randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and consensus techniques involving 78 experts and 20 patients. Based on reanalysis of rituximab trials and the literature, the Delphi panel identified a core set of domains with their respective outcome measures. STAR options combining these domains were proposed to the panel for selection and improvement. For each STAR option, sensitivity to change was estimated by the C-index in nine RCTs. Delphi rounds were run for selecting STAR. For the options remaining before the final vote, a meta-analysis of the RCTs was performed.ResultsThe Delphi panel identified five core domains (systemic activity, patient symptoms, lachrymal gland function, salivary gland function and biological parameters), and 227 STAR options combining these domains were selected to be tested for sensitivity to change. After two Delphi rounds, a meta-analysis of the 20 remaining options was performed. The candidate STAR was then selected by a final vote based on metrological properties and clinical relevance.ConclusionThe candidate STAR is a composite responder index that includes all main disease features in a single tool and is designed for use as a primary endpoint in pSS RCTs. The rigorous and consensual development process ensures its face and content validity. The candidate STAR showed good sensitivity to change and will be prospectively validated by the NECESSITY consortium in a dedicated RCT.