scholarly journals Efficacy of guselkumab on axial involvement in patients with active psoriatic arthritis and sacroiliitis: a post-hoc analysis of the phase 3 DISCOVER-1 and DISCOVER-2 studies

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Philip J Mease ◽  
Philip S Helliwell ◽  
Dafna D Gladman ◽  
Denis Poddubnyy ◽  
Xenofon Baraliakos ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Psoriatic Arthritis ◽  
Phase 3 ◽  
Post Hoc Analysis ◽  
Post Hoc ◽  
Axial Involvement

scholarly journals Tofacitinib in Patients With Psoriatic Arthritis and Metabolic Syndrome: A Post hoc Analysis of Phase 3 Studies

2020 ◽  
Vol 2 (10) ◽  
pp. 543-554
Author(s):  
Christopher T. Ritchlin ◽  
Jon T. Giles ◽  
Alexis Ogdie ◽  
Juan J. Gomez‐Reino ◽  
Philip Helliwell ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Metabolic Syndrome ◽  
Psoriatic Arthritis ◽  
Phase 3 ◽  
Post Hoc Analysis ◽  
Post Hoc

scholarly journals POS1025 TOFACITINIB TREATMENT IN PATIENTS WITH PSORIATIC ARTHRITIS AND PROBABLE DEPRESSION AND/OR ANXIETY: A POST HOC ANALYSIS OF TWO PHASE 3 CLINICAL TRIALS

2021 ◽  
Vol 80 (Suppl 1) ◽  
pp. 782.1-782
Author(s):  
L. Gossec ◽  
G. Citera ◽  
A. Sellas-Fernández ◽  
D. C. Gruben ◽  
M. Valderrama ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Psoriatic Arthritis ◽  
Disease Activity ◽  
Research Support ◽  
Phase 3 ◽  
Two Phase ◽  
Post Hoc Analysis ◽  
Link Type ◽  
Sf 36 ◽  
Global Pain ◽  
Post Hoc

Background:Depression and anxiety are highly prevalent in patients (pts) with psoriatic arthritis (PsA),1 with inflammation a key pathogenic feature of depression in these pts.2 Tofacitinib is an oral Janus kinase inhibitor for the treatment of PsA. It acts by modulating immune and inflammatory responses. The link between major depressive disorder/generalised anxiety disorder (MDD/GAD), inflammation and tofacitinib effectiveness has not been fully explored.Objectives:Analyse the prevalence of probable MDD/GAD in pts with PsA initiating tofacitinib treatment and the impact of baseline (BL) probable MDD/GAD status on tofacitinib efficacy in these pts.Methods:This was a post hoc analysis of data from pts who received tofacitinib 5 or 10 mg twice daily (BID), or placebo (PBO), pooled from two Phase 3 trials (12-month OPAL Broaden [NCT01877668];3 6-month OPAL Beyond [NCT01882439]4). Pts with BL probable MDD and/or GAD were identified by a Short Form-36 Health Survey (SF-36) Mental Component Summary score (MCS) ≤38. Pt demographics/BL characteristics and outcomes were stratified by the presence (SF-36 MCS ≤38) or absence (SF-36 MCS >38) of BL probable MDD/GAD. At Months (M)3/6/9/12, changes from BL in SF-36 MCS were evaluated, and efficacy assessed by the proportions of pts who achieved: Psoriatic Arthritis Disease Activity Score (PASDAS) ≤3.2, Health Assessment Questionnaire-Disability Index (HAQ-DI) improvement ≥0.35 and Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy-Fatigue (FACIT-F) improvement ≥4. BL global pain was measured via visual analogue scale.Results:Of the 706 pts included in this analysis, BL probable MDD/GAD was identified in 46.2%, 44.9% and 46.2% of pts in the tofacitinib 5 mg BID (108/234), tofacitinib 10 mg BID (106/236) and PBO (109/236) groups, respectively. BL disease activity was similar across the three treatment groups, independent of probable MDD/GAD status (mean PASDAS: 6.1–6.4 in pts with vs 5.8–6.1 in pts without probable MDD/GAD). In the tofacitinib 5 mg BID group, mean BL scores for HAQ-DI (1.4 vs 1.0), FACIT-F total score (20.5 vs 32.4) and global pain (61.3 vs 51.5) indicated worse disability, fatigue and pain, respectively, for pts with vs without BL probable MDD/GAD. Similar findings were seen in the tofacitinib 10 mg BID and PBO groups. At M3, improvements from BL in SF-36 MCS in pts with probable MDD/GAD were numerically, but not significantly, greater with tofacitinib 5 and 10 mg BID vs PBO, and these changes were largely sustained to M12 (Figure 1a). At M3, numerically greater proportions of pts achieved improvements in PASDAS, HAQ-DI and FACIT-F with tofacitinib 5 or 10 mg BID vs PBO, regardless of BL probable MDD/GAD status (Figure 1b–d). Through M3–12, the proportions of pts who achieved PASDAS ≤3.2 with tofacitinib 5 or 10 mg BID were generally significantly greater in pts without vs with probable MDD/GAD (Figure 1b). At all timepoints, rates of improvement in HAQ-DI with tofacitinib 5 mg BID were numerically greater in pts with vs without probable MDD/GAD, whereas the opposite was true for tofacitinib 10 mg BID (Figure 1c). FACIT-F improvement rates with tofacitinib 10 mg BID were consistently numerically greater in pts with vs without probable MDD/GAD, while findings were mixed for tofacitinib 5 mg BID (Figure 1d).Conclusion:Around 46% of pts with PsA treated with tofacitinib had BL probable MDD/GAD (SF-36 MCS ≤38). Pts with BL probable MDD/GAD treated with tofacitinib had sustained changes in SF-36 MCS. Rates of clinical improvement with tofacitinib were generally greater in pts without vs with probable MDD/GAD, whereas findings for disability and fatigue improvements varied between tofacitinib doses. Further research is required to evaluate the relationship between PsA and depression, to improve treatment targets and the quality of life of pts with PsA.References:[1]Zhao et al. Clin Rheumatol 2020; 39: 217-225.[2]Mathew & Chandran. Rheumatol Ther 2020; 7: 287-300.[3]Mease et al. N Engl J Med 2017; 377: 1537-1550.[4]Gladman et al. N Engl J Med 2017; 377: 1525-1536.Acknowledgements:Study sponsored by Pfizer Inc. Medical writing support was provided by Emma Deeks, CMC Connect, and funded by Pfizer Inc.Disclosure of Interests:Laure Gossec Grant/research support from: AbbVie, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Celgene, Janssen, Eli Lilly, Novartis, Pfizer Inc, Roche, UCB, Gustavo Citera Consultant of: AbbVie, Amgen, Eli Lilly, Gema, Genzyme, Novartis, Pfizer Inc, Sanofi Genzyme, Grant/research support from: AbbVie, Amgen, Eli Lilly, Gema, Genzyme, Novartis, Pfizer Inc, Sanofi Genzyme, Agustí Sellas-Fernández: None declared, David C Gruben Shareholder of: Pfizer Inc, Employee of: Pfizer Inc, Monica Valderrama Shareholder of: Pfizer Inc, Employee of: Pfizer Inc, Susana Gómez Shareholder of: Pfizer Inc, Employee of: Pfizer Inc.

scholarly journals AB0831 COMPARISON OF DIFFERENT REMISSION INDICES IN PATIENTS WITH PSORIATIC ARTHRITIS: A POST HOC ANALYSIS OF DATA FROM PHASE 3 TOFACITINIB STUDIES

2020 ◽  
Vol 79 (Suppl 1) ◽  
pp. 1720-1721
Author(s):  
E. Schneeberger ◽  
G. Citera ◽  
P. Nash ◽  
J. S. Smolen ◽  
P. J. Mease ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Psoriatic Arthritis ◽  
Disease Activity ◽  
Janus Kinase ◽  
Research Support ◽  
Phase 3 ◽  
Low Disease Activity ◽  
Post Hoc Analysis ◽  
Link Type ◽  
Moderate Agreement ◽  
Post Hoc

Background:An international task force has agreed that remission and low disease activity (LDA) are treatment targets for patients (pts) with PsA, and recommends the Disease Activity Index in Psoriatic Arthritis (DAPSA) and minimal disease activity (MDA) to assess disease activity states.1Tofacitinib is an oral Janus kinase inhibitor for the treatment of PsA.Objectives:In this post hoc analysis, we compared DAPSA LDA with MDA, and DAPSA remission with very low disease activity (VLDA) and DAS28-3(CRP) remission, in pts with PsA receiving tofacitinib.Methods:Data were pooled from 2 Phase 3 studies (OPAL Broaden [12 months;NCT01877668]; OPAL Beyond [6 months;NCT01882439]) for pts receiving tofacitinib 5 or 10 mg twice daily (BID) or placebo (PBO). DAPSA was determined by summing: swollen joint count (SJC66); tender/painful joint count (TJC68); Patient’s Global Assessment of Arthritis (PtGA; visual analogue scale [VAS]); pain (VAS); and CRP. Pts were classified as achieving MDA or VLDA when meeting ≥5 (MDA) or 7 (VLDA) of the following criteria: TJC68 ≤1; SJC66 ≤1; Psoriasis Activity and Severity Index ≤1 or body surface area ≤3%; pain (VAS) ≤15; PtGA (VAS) ≤20; HAQ-DI ≤0.5; tender entheseal points (using Leeds Enthesitis Index [LEI]) ≤1. A logistic regression model was used to assess demographic and baseline characteristics as predictors of a trend in DAPSA scores at Month (M)3. DAPSA LDA (≤14), MDA, DAPSA remission (DAPSA ≤4), VLDA and DAS28-3(CRP) remission (DAS28-3[CRP]<2.6) rates were compared at M1, M3 and M6 for pts receiving tofacitinib 5 mg BID and at M6 for pts receiving tofacitinib 5 or 10 mg BID. Agreement between disease activity indices at M6 was evaluated using a kappa test. The percentage of tofacitinib-treated pts who achieved MDA, VLDA and non-response was reported at M6, stratified by achievement of DAPSA LDA, remission or non-response.Results:This analysis included 709 pts: tofacitinib 5 mg BID, n=237; tofacitinib 10 mg BID, n=236; PBO, n=236. At M3, older patients treated with tofacitinib, and tofacitinib- or PBO-treated pts with higher baseline SJC66, TJC68, PtGA VAS, HAQ-DI, LEI and Pain VAS, were significantly (p<0.05) more likely to have higher DAPSA. DAPSA LDA, MDA, remission (DAPSA and DAS28-3[CRP]) and VLDA rates generally increased from M1 to M6 for patients receiving tofacitinib 5 mg BID (Figure a). At M6, most tofacitinib-treated pts who achieved MDA, and all who achieved VLDA, were also in DAPSA remission or LDA (Figure b). At least moderate agreement (defined by kappa values 0.41–0.60) was observed between DAPSA LDA and MDA, and between DAPSA remission and VLDA, with both doses of tofacitinib at M6 (Figure c).Conclusion:Remission and LDA rates generally increased over time in pts with PsA receiving tofacitinib. DAPSA LDA showed moderate agreement with MDA, and DAPSA remission showed at least moderate agreement with VLDA, confirming that DAPSA and MDA are useful measurement tools to assess disease activity in pts with PsA treated with tofacitinib.References:[1]Smolen et al. Ann Rheum Dis 2018;77:3-17.Acknowledgments:Study sponsored by Pfizer Inc. Medical writing support was provided by Sarah Piggott of CMC Connect, McCann Health Medical Communications, and funded by Pfizer Inc.Disclosure of Interests:Emilce Schneeberger: None declared, Gustavo Citera Grant/research support from: AbbVie, Amgen, Eli Lilly, Gema, Genzyme, Novartis and Pfizer Inc, Consultant of: AbbVie, Amgen, Eli Lilly, Gema, Genzyme, Novartis and Pfizer Inc, Peter Nash Grant/research support from: AbbVie, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Celgene, Eli Lilly and Company, Gilead, Janssen, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer Inc, Roche, Sanofi, UCB, Consultant of: AbbVie, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Celgene, Eli Lilly, Gilead, Janssen, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer Inc, Roche, Sanofi, UCB, Speakers bureau: AbbVie, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Celgene, Eli Lilly, Gilead, Janssen, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer Inc, Roche, Sanofi, UCB, Josef S. Smolen Grant/research support from: AbbVie, AstraZeneca, Celgene, Celltrion, Chugai, Eli Lilly, Gilead, ILTOO, Janssen, Novartis-Sandoz, Pfizer Inc, Samsung, Sanofi, Consultant of: AbbVie, AstraZeneca, Celgene, Celltrion, Chugai, Eli Lilly, Gilead, ILTOO, Janssen, Novartis-Sandoz, Pfizer Inc, Samsung, Sanofi, Philip J Mease Grant/research support from: Abbott, Amgen, Biogen Idec, BMS, Celgene Corporation, Eli Lilly, Novartis, Pfizer, Sun Pharmaceutical, UCB – grant/research support, Consultant of: Abbott, Amgen, Biogen Idec, BMS, Celgene Corporation, Eli Lilly, Novartis, Pfizer, Sun Pharmaceutical, UCB – consultant, Speakers bureau: Abbott, Amgen, Biogen Idec, BMS, Eli Lilly, Genentech, Janssen, Pfizer, UCB – speakers bureau, Enrique Soriano Grant/research support from: AbbVie, Eli Lilly, GlaxoSmithKline, Novartis, Pfizer Inc, Sandoz, Consultant of: AbbVie, Eli Lilly, GlaxoSmithKline, Novartis, Pfizer Inc, Sandoz, Speakers bureau: AbbVie, Amber, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Eli Lilly, Novartis, Pfizer Inc, Roche, Claudia Helling Shareholder of: Pfizer Inc, Employee of: Pfizer Inc, Annette E Szumski Shareholder of: Pfizer Inc, Employee of: Pfizer Inc, Rajiv Mundayat Shareholder of: Pfizer Inc, Employee of: Pfizer Inc, Daniela Graham Shareholder of: Pfizer Inc, Employee of: Pfizer Inc, Dario Ponce de Leon Shareholder of: Pfizer Inc, Employee of: Pfizer Inc

scholarly journals POS0239 ROOT JOINT INVOLVEMENT IN SPONDYLOARTHRITIS: A POST-HOC ANALYSIS FROM THE INTERNATIONAL ASAS-PERSPA STUDY

2021 ◽  
Vol 80 (Suppl 1) ◽  
pp. 340.1-341
Author(s):  
N. Ziade ◽  
J. El-Hajj ◽  
J. Rassi ◽  
S. Hlais ◽  
C. López-Medina ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Psoriatic Arthritis ◽  
Positive Answer ◽  
Categorical Variables ◽  
Joint Involvement ◽  
Main Diagnosis ◽  
Post Hoc Analysis ◽  
Wall Distance ◽  
History Of ◽  
Axial Disease ◽  
Post Hoc

Background:In patients with spondyloarthritis (SpA), root joint diseases (RJD), i.e. hip or shoulder involvement, may be associated with a distinct disease phenotype compared to those with other affected joints. The ASAS-PerSpA study (PERipheral involvement in SPondyloArthritis) [1], offers a unique opportunity to study the phenotypes of patients with RJD in a global cohort.Objectives:Primary objective was to compare the clinical characteristics of SpA patients with and without RJD. Secondary objectives were to compare the prevalence of RJD across the different SpA subtypes and the different regions of the world, compare the severity of axial disease as well as the disease burden in SpA patients with and without RJD.Methods:This is a post-hoc analysis of the ASAS-PerSpA study, which included 4,465 patients with any subtype of SpA (axial SpA (axSpA), peripheral SpA (pSpA), psoriatic arthritis (PsA), inflammatory bowel disease associated SpA (IBD-SpA), reactive arthritis (ReA) and Juvenile SpA (Juv-SpA)) according to the rheumatologist’s diagnosis. RJD was defined as a positive answer by the investigator to the following question: “Do you consider that the patient has ever suffered from RJD (e.g. hip, shoulder) related to SpA?” In case of a positive answer, a potential specific treatment (e.g. Total Articular Replacement) was investigated. The patient’s characteristics were compared between those with and without RJD involvement, using Chi-2 or Fisher exact test for the categorical variables and t-test for the continuous variables. Two separate multivariable stepwise binary logistic regression analyses were conducted to identify factors associated with the dependent variables “hip involvement” and “shoulder involvement”.Results:RJD occurred in 1,503 patients (33.7%), with more prevalent hip (24.2%) than shoulder (13.2%) involvement. The prevalence of RJD as a group was the highest in Juv-SpA (52.7%), followed by pSpA (44.3%) and axSpA (33.9%). The highest prevalence of RJD was found in Asia and the lowest in Europe and North America. Among patients with hip involvement, 6.0% had a history of hip replacement (highest in the Middle East and North Africa and Latin America); among patients with shoulder involvement, 0.8% had a history of shoulder replacement. Hip had a distinct pattern of associations compared to shoulder involvement (Figure 1). Hip involvement was significantly associated with the SpA main diagnosis (highest in pSpA, lowest in PsA), younger age at first SpA symptom, lower prevalence of family history of psoriasis, positive HLA-B27, occiput-to-wall distance>0, and treatment with cs-DMARDs and b-DMARDs. Shoulder involvement was associated with the SpA main diagnosis (highest in Juv-SpA and pSpA, lowest in axSpA), older age at first SpA symptom, higher prevalence of enthesitis, dactylitis, tender joints count, IBD, occiput-to-wall distance>0, EQ5D score and treatment with cs-DMARDs.Conclusion:Hip involvement was more prevalent than shoulder involvement in patients with SpA, and had a distinct phenotype resembling axial disease whereas shoulder involvement was mostly associated with features of peripheral disease. Hip and shoulder involvement should be analyzed separately in future studies rather than under the RJD entity.References:[1]Lopez-medina, C. et al. Prevalence and Distribution of Peripheral Musculoskeletal Manifestations in Axial Spondyloarthritis, Peripheral Spondyloarthritis and Psoriatic Arthritis: Results of the International, Cross-sectional ASAS-PerSpA Study. RMD Open; 2021;7:e001450.Disclosure of Interests:None declared

scholarly journals Itch and Sleep Improvements with Baricitinib in Patients with Atopic Dermatitis: A Post Hoc Analysis of 3 Phase 3 Studies

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Timo Buhl ◽  
David Rosmarin ◽  
Esther Serra-Baldrich ◽  
Pablo Fernandez-Peñas ◽  
Atsuyuki Igarashi ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Atopic Dermatitis ◽  
Phase 3 ◽  
Post Hoc Analysis ◽  
Post Hoc
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document