O24 Concomitant treatment with MTX does not increase the efficacy of ustekinumab or TFNi in PsA: results from the PsABio study

Rheumatology ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 59 (Supplement_2) ◽  
Author(s):  
Stefan Siebert ◽  
Elisa Gremese ◽  
Paul Bergmans ◽  
Kurt de Vlam ◽  
Beatriz Joven-Ibáñez ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Psoriatic Arthritis ◽  
Disease Activity ◽  
Real World ◽  
Concomitant Treatment ◽  
Skin Involvement ◽  
Research Support ◽  
Real World Data ◽  
Low Disease Activity ◽  
Intention To Treat ◽  
Patient Reported

Abstract Background The additional benefit of methotrexate (MTX) as a concomitant treatment in PsA has not been fully elucidated for TNF inhibitors (TNFi) and no real-world data on this currently exist for ustekinumab (UST). We investigated the additive effect of MTX on the ability to reach composite treatment targets beyond monotherapy with UST or TNFi, and the ability to improve patient-reported outcomes in a real-world clinical setting in 8 European countries. Methods The PsABio study (NCT02627768) evaluates persistence, effectiveness and tolerability of 1st, 2nd or 3rd-line UST or TNFi in patients with PsA. Proportions of patients reaching minimal disease activity (MDA)/very low disease activity (VLDA) and clinical Disease Activity in Psoriatic Arthritis (cDAPSA) low disease activity (LDA) or remission, as well as the patient acceptable symptom state (PASS; score ≤4) of the 12-item Psoriatic Arthritis Impact of Disease questionnaire (PsAID-12) were evaluated. Here we present 6-month follow-up data using intention to treat (ITT) analysis; patients who stopped/switched initial treatment were imputed as non-responders. The effect of MTX co-therapy was investigated within UST and TNFi cohorts, as well as between the cohorts, using multivariate logistic regression including interaction terms, and propensity score (PS) analysis to adjust for imbalanced, potentially prognostic, baseline covariates. Results Of 930 patients, data was available for 868 ITT patients, including patients who switched/stopped before 6 months (UST: n = 28/426 [6.6%], TNFi: n = 44/442 [10.0%]). At baseline there were no relevant differences in demographics and disease activity, however there were significant differences in skin involvement as well as csDMARD and NSAID exposure. Co-therapy with MTX did not increase the likelihood of achieving any of the outcomes in either the UST or TNFi cohorts (Table 1). After PS adjustment, co-treatment with MTX did not influence treatment effects differently when added to UST compared with TNFi. concomitant use of csDMARDs other than MTX yielded very similar results. Conclusion In a real-world setting, concomitant treatment with MTX in addition to UST or TNFi was not associated with enhanced effects across a broad variety of disease outcomes, including disease activity, disease impact, and skin involvement within or between treatment cohorts, after PS adjustment for baseline confounders. Disclosures S. Siebert: Consultancies; AbbVie, UCB, Pfizer, Janssen, Boehringer Ingelheim, Celgene, Novartis. Grants/research support; Pfizer, Janssen, BMS, Celgene, UCB, Boehringer Ingelheim. E. Gremese: Consultancies; AbbVie, BMS, Celgene, Janssen, Lilly, MSD, Novartis, Sanofi, UCB, Roche, Pfizer. P. Bergmans: Shareholder/stock ownership; Johnson & Johnson. Other; Employee of Janssen. K. de Vlam: Consultancies; Johnson & Johnson. B. Joven-Ibáñez: Member of speakers’ bureau; Celgene, Novartis, MSD, Pfizer, AbbVie, Janssen. G. Katsifis: None. T.V. Korotaeva: Consultancies; Pfizer, MSD, Novartis, AbbVie, Celgene, Biocad, Janssen, UCB, Lilly, Novartis-Sandoz. W. Noël: Other; Employee of Janssen. C. Selmi: None. P.P. Sfikakis: None. P. Smirnov: Other; Employee of Janssen. E. Theander: Other; Employee of Janssen. M.T. Nurmohamed: Grants/research support; Pfizer, AbbVie, Roche, BMS, MSD, Mundipharma, UCB, Janssen, Menarini, Lilly, Sanofi, Celgene. L. Gossec: Honoraria; AbbVie, Celgene, Janssen, Lilly, Novartis-Sandoz, Pfizer, Sanofi, UCB. Grants/research support; Pfizer. J.S. Smolen: Consultancies; AbbVie, Amgen, AstraZeneca, Astro, Celgene, Celtrion, GlaxoSmithKline, ILTOO Pharma, Janssen, Lilly, Medimmune, MSD, Novartis-Sandoz, Pfizer, Roche, Samsung, Sanofi, UCB. Grants/research support; AbbVie, Janssen, Lilly, MSD, Pfizer, Roche.

FRI0362 COMPARATIVE EFFECTIVENESS OF USTEKINUMAB (UST) AND TNF INHIBITORS (TNFI) IN PATIENTS WITH PSORIATIC ARTHRITIS (PSA) IN THE REAL-WORLD, MULTINATIONAL PSABIO STUDY: 12-MONTH FOLLOW-UP

2020 ◽  
Vol 79 (Suppl 1) ◽  
pp. 778-779
Author(s):  
J. S. Smolen ◽  
S. Siebert ◽  
T. Korotaeva ◽  
P. Bergmans ◽  
K. De Vlam ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Psoriatic Arthritis ◽  
Disease Activity ◽  
Real World ◽  
Activity Index ◽  
Treatment Options ◽  
Disease Activity Index ◽  
Rapid Screening ◽  
Research Support ◽  
Real World Data

Background:Among treatment options for PsA, IL-12/23 inhibition with UST was the first new biologic mode of action after TNFi. Few real-world data comparing UST with TNFi are available.Objectives:Comparison of UST and TNFi treatment effectiveness within the prospectively followed PsABio cohort at 12-month (mo) follow-up.Methods:The PsABio study (NCT02627768) evaluates effectiveness, tolerability and persistence of 1st, 2nd or 3rd-line UST or TNFi in PsA. Proportions of patients (pts) reaching MDA/very low disease activity (VLDA) and clinical Disease Activity index for PSoriatic Arthritis (cDAPSA) LDA/remission are described. Comparison across UST and TNFi cohorts was done on last observation carried forward up to 12 (±3) mo, with non-response imputation for pts who had stopped/switched initial treatment. Logistic regression analysis was used, including propensity score (PS) analysis to adjust for imbalanced prognostic baseline (BL) covariates: country, age, sex, BMI, smoking (yes/no), comorbidities (cardiovascular/metabolic syndrome), PsA type (axial, polyarticular, oligoarticular), psoriasis body surface area (BSA), disease duration, cDAPSA, 12-item PsA Impact of Disease (PsAID-12), dactylitis, enthesitis, Fibromyalgia Rapid Screening Tool (FiRST) score, line of biologic (b)DMARD, synthetic DMARD use, and steroid or NSAID use.Results:Of 929 eligible pts, 893 had evaluable data at BL and at follow-up; 438 (95.6%) were treated with UST and 455 (96.6%) with TNFi (including stoppers/switchers). UST and TNFi groups had BL differences in mean age (51.0 vs 48.5 years, respectively), concurrent comorbidities (68.7% vs 60.9%), time since diagnosis (7.5 vs 6.2 years), line of treatment (1st-line 45.0% vs 55.2%; 3rd-line 20.5% vs 12.1%), NSAID use (54.8% vs 68.8%), concomitant MTX use (29.9% vs 42.0%) and psoriasis skin involvement (BSA >10% in 26.6% vs 14.8%).In 714 pts with available data, mean (standard deviation) BL cDAPSA was 30.6 (20.2; n=358) for UST and 29.3 (18.6; n=356) for TNFi. Observed data showed differences in proportion of pts achieving MDA/VLDA and cDAPSA LDA/remission in favour of TNFi, but after PS adjustment for BL differences (such as line of therapy, skin psoriasis, concomitant conventional DMARD, etc.), odds ratios for reaching targets at 12 mo did not significantly differ between UST and TNFi groups (Fig. 1).Comparison of 6- and 12-mo unadjusted data showed sustained MDA/VLDA responses with both UST (21.8%) and TNFi (29.5%), with comparable proportions of additional pts achieving these targets between 6 and 12 mo (17.0% and 20.3%, respectively). Sustained efficacy became lower with successive lines of treatment (data not shown).Conclusion:Various factors, including patient characteristics such as comorbidities, influence the physician’s selection of treatment modality for patients needing a bDMARD. Our real-world results demonstrate differences in observed clinical effectiveness between UST and TNFi. However, after PS adjustment for a number of BL differences, clinical results at 12 mo were comparable between UST and TNFi groups. Data at 12 mo also show sustained response with both UST and TNFi treatment, as well as a similar rate of pts achieving targets after 6 to 12 mo of treatment.Acknowledgments:This study was funded by Janssen.Disclosure of Interests: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, Stefan Siebert Grant/research support from: BMS, Boehringer Ingelheim, Celgene, GlaxoSmithKline, Janssen, Novartis, Pfizer, UCB, Consultant of: AbbVie, Boehringer Ingelheim, Janssen, Novartis, Pfizer, UCB, Speakers bureau: AbbVie, Celgene, Janssen, Novartis, Tatiana Korotaeva Grant/research support from: Pfizer, Consultant of: Abbvie, BIOCAD, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Celgene, Eli Lilly, Janssen, Merck Sharp & Dohme, Novartis, Novartis-Sandoz, Pfizer, UCB, Speakers bureau: Abbvie, BIOCAD, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Celgene, Eli Lilly, Janssen, Merck Sharp & Dohme, Novartis, Novartis-Sandoz, Pfizer, UCB, Paul Bergmans Shareholder of: Johnson & Johnson, Employee of: Janssen, Kurt de Vlam Consultant of: Celgene Corporation, Eli Lilly, Novartis, Pfizer, UCB – consultant, Speakers bureau: Celgene Corporation, Eli Lilly, Novartis, Pfizer, UCB – speakers bureau and honoraria, Elisa Gremese Consultant of: AbbVie, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Celgene, Eli Lilly, Janssen, Merck Sharp & Dohme, Novartis, Sanofi, UCB, Roche, Pfizer, Speakers bureau: AbbVie, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Celgene, Eli Lilly, Janssen, Merck Sharp & Dohme, Novartis, Sanofi, UCB, Roche, Pfizer, Beatriz Joven-Ibáñez Speakers bureau: Abbvie, Celgene, Janssen, Merck Sharp & Dohme, Novartis, Pfizer, Wim Noel Employee of: Janssen Pharmaceuticals NV, Michael T Nurmohamed Grant/research support from: Abbvie, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Celltrion, GlaxoSmithKline, Jansen, Eli Lilly, Menarini, Merck Sharp & Dohme, Mundipharma, Pfizer, Roche, Sanofi, USB, Consultant of: Abbvie, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Celltrion, GlaxoSmithKline, Jansen, Eli Lilly, Menarini, Merck Sharp & Dohme, Mundipharma, Pfizer, Roche, Sanofi, USB, Speakers bureau: Abbvie, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Celltrion, GlaxoSmithKline, Jansen, Eli Lilly, Menarini, Merck Sharp & Dohme, Mundipharma, Pfizer, Roche, Sanofi, USB, Petros Sfikakis Grant/research support from: Grant/research support from Abvie, Novartis, MSD, Actelion, Amgen, Pfizer, Janssen Pharmaceutical, UCB, Elke Theander Employee of: Janssen-Cilag Sweden AB, Laure Gossec Grant/research support from: Lilly, Mylan, Pfizer, Sandoz, Consultant of: AbbVie, Amgen, Biogen, Celgene, Janssen, Lilly, Novartis, Pfizer, Sandoz, Sanofi-Aventis, UCB

scholarly journals AB0817 DOES SMOKING AFFECT SECUKINUMAB TREATMENT OUTCOMES AND SAFETY IN PATIENTS WITH PSORIATIC ARTHRITIS? - REAL WORLD DATA FROM THE GERMAN AQUILA STUDY

2020 ◽  
Vol 79 (Suppl 1) ◽  
pp. 1711.1-1711
Author(s):  
E. Riechers ◽  
U. Kiltz ◽  
J. Brandt-Juergens ◽  
P. Kästner ◽  
D. Peterlik ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Psoriatic Arthritis ◽  
Disease Activity ◽  
Real World ◽  
Interim Analysis ◽  
Smoking Status ◽  
Depressive Mood ◽  
Research Support ◽  
Real World Data ◽  
World Data ◽  
Number Of Patients

Background:Several studies have shown a negative association between smoking status and psoriatic arthritis (PsA) clinical outcomes.1,2The German non-interventional study AQUILA provides real-world data on the influence of smoking on therapeutic effectiveness and safety issues under secukinumab (SEC), a fully human monoclonal antibody that selectively inhibits interleukin-17A.Objectives:The aim of this interim analysis is to describe selected baseline (BL) demographics, to evaluate SEC effectiveness on disease activity and depressive mood and to report the safety profile depending on smoking status of PsA patients.Methods:AQUILA is an ongoing, multi-center study including up to 2700 patients with active PsA or ankylosing spondylitis. Patients were observed from BL up to week (w) 52. Real-world data was assessed prospectively and analyzed as observed. In addition to the assessment of C-reactive protein (CRP), data was collected on patient´s disease activity (tender/swollen joint counts, TJC/SJC), skin disease activity (Psoriasis Area and Severity Index, PASI) and depressive mood (Beck´s Depression Inventory version II, BDI-II). For calculation of the proportion of patients who experienced (serious) adverse events ((S)AEs), all PsA patients were included who received at least one dose of SEC irrespective of further documentation of any study visit. This interim analysis focuses on subgroups non-smoker (NS) and smoker (S).Results:At BL, 641 PsA patients were included: 49.8% (n=319) non-smokers (NS) and 24.3% (n=156) smokers (S). 17.5% (n=112) were ex-smoker and 8.4% (n=54) of unknown smoking status. In both, NS and S, the proportion of women was higher (58.0% in NS and 67.3% in S). NS were slightly older than S (mean age: 53.8/49.7 years). There were no significant differences between NS and S in mean CRP within the 52 weeks (Fig. 1A). Both TJC and SJC improved over time and were similar between NS and S (Fig. 1B). Although mean absolute PASI value was worse in S at BL, a similar temporal improvement was seen in both groups (NS: 7.0 at BL to 1.0 at w52; S: 9.2 at BL to 1.0 at w52). BDI-II scores decreased in both groups with overall higher values in S (NS: 10.9 at BL to 9.1 at w52; S: 12.8 at BL and 10.8 at w52). Regarding the occurrence of AEs and SAEs with or without suspected relationship to SEC, NS had percentagewise less events than S (Table 1). In addition, percentage of PsA patients who discontinued SEC treatment due to an AE was lower for NS compared to S.Table 1.Overview of AEs (and SAEs) under SEC treatment depending on smoking status in PsA patientsNumber of patients withNS (N=333), n (%)S (N=161),n (%)P valueAE233 (70.0)118 (73.3)0.11AE with suspected relationship to SEC129 (38.7)72 (44.7)0.10SAE74 (22.2)45 (28.0)0.06SAE with suspected relationship to SEC29 (8.7)18 (11.2)0.37Figure 1.Disease activity in PsA patients treated with SEC depending on the smoking status**CRP data/ACR joint counts were documented not for all PsA patients at BL and subsequent visits.Conclusion:In a real-world setting, SEC improved disease activity and depressive mood of PsA patients with no obvious differences between NS and S. Overall, this interim analysis shows that SEC is an effective and reliable treatment, irrespective of the PsA patients’ smoking status. Further progress of the AQUILA study as well as long-term data from other real-world observational studies with SEC, such as SERENA, will reveal whether this trend will continue.References:[1]Hojgaard P et al, Ann Rheum Dis 2015; 74:2130-6; 2. Eder L et al, Arthritis Care Res 2011 Aug; 63:1091-7Disclosure of Interests:Elke Riechers Grant/research support from: AbbVie, Chugai, Lilly, Janssen, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, UCB, Consultant of: AbbVie, Chugai, Novartis, UCB, Uta Kiltz Grant/research support from: AbbVie, Amgen, Biogen, Novartis, Pfizer, Consultant of: AbbVie, Biocad, Eli Lilly and Company, Grünenthal, Janssen, Novartis, Pfizer, UCB, Speakers bureau: AbbVie, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, UCB, Jan Brandt-Juergens: None declared, Peter Kästner Consultant of: Chugai, Novartis, Daniel Peterlik Employee of: Novartis Pharma GmbH, Hans-Peter Tony Consultant of: AbbVie, Astra-Zeneca, BMS, Chugai, Janssen, Lilly, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, Sanofi

scholarly journals SAT0432 EFFECT OF SEX ON DISEASE CHARACTERISTICS AND DISEASE IMPACT IN PATIENTS WITH PSORIATIC ARTHRITIS (PsA): INSIGHTS FROM THE REAL-WORLD, OBSERVATIONAL MULTINATIONAL PsABio COHORT

2020 ◽  
Vol 79 (Suppl 1) ◽  
pp. 1171.1-1173
Author(s):  
M. T. Nurmohamed ◽  
I. Van der Horst-Bruinsma ◽  
A. W. Van Kuijk ◽  
S. Siebert ◽  
P. Bergmans ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Psoriatic Arthritis ◽  
Disease Activity ◽  
Physical Functioning ◽  
Real World ◽  
Comprehensive Treatment ◽  
Diagnosis Delay ◽  
Health State ◽  
Research Support ◽  
Disease Characteristics ◽  
Disease Impact

Background:Female sex has been associated with more severe disease and poorer treatment outcomes in PsA. These observations are often based on small populations or national cohorts/registries.Objectives:To investigate the effects of sex on disease characteristics and disease impact in PsA, using data of 929 consecutive patients (pts) from PsABio.Methods:PsABio is a real-world, non-interventional European study in PsA pts treated with UST or TNFi based on their rheumatologist’s choice. Observed male and female baseline (BL) data were described and compared using 95% CI.Results:Women in PsABio (n=512 [55%]) were numerically older than men (mean [SD]: 50.5 [12.7] / 48.7 [12.3] years, respectively). Women were more obese (BMI >30), % (95% CI): F: 35 (30, 39), M: 24 (20, 29), men more overweight (BMI >25–30): F: 31 (27, 36), M:51 (46, 57). Age at diagnosis, delay from first symptom to diagnosis, and disease duration were similar for both sexes.Women entered PsABio more often on 3rd line treatment, whereas men started on 1st-line biologic treatment more often (F/M 1st line 47%/55%; 2nd line 34%/33%; 3rd line 20%/12%). Numerically, concomitant MTX was given more often to women vs men (32% vs 27%). At BL, 60% of women and 64% of men were on NSAIDs; 7.9% and 2.5% on antidepressant drugs. Women had significantly more comorbidities, with numerically more cardiovascular disease and anxiety/depression, and 3 times more IBD.Women had significantly higher 68 tender joint counts (TJC): 13.0 vs 10.4, while 66 swollen joint counts were not significantly different: 5.8 vs 5.5. Axial or combined axial-peripheral disease was similarly frequent, in 29% of women and 26% of men (Figs. 1, 2).Clinical Disease Activity index for PSoriatic Arthritis (cDAPSA) was higher in women (31.8 vs 27.3); pt-reported levels of pain, global disease activity (VAS scales) and higher TJC contributed to this. While enthesitis prevalence (based on Leeds Enthesitis Index) was comparable, men had significantly more frequent dactylitis, nail disease and worse skin psoriasis. At BL, 3.4% of women vs 7.1% of men, were in MDA.Regarding physical functioning (HAQ-DI), impact of disease (PSAID-12) and quality of life (EQ5D-3L health state), women with PsA starting a biologic (b)DMARD, expressed significantly greater negative impact and more limitations due to their disease (Fig. 2).Conclusion:In routine care, women with PsA starting a bDMARD presented with worse outcomes over a range of assessments compared with men (higher pt-reported pain and disease activity, TJC, and worse physical functioning and QoL), while men had worse dactylitis and psoriasis. Follow-up analysis will report whether the effects of biologic therapy are different in both sexes. The increased prevalence of associated features related to pain and impact on functioning and QoL may indicate the need for a more comprehensive treatment approach for women to avoid unnecessary and premature bDMARD stop or switch.Acknowledgments:This study was funded by Janssen.Disclosure of Interests:Michael T Nurmohamed Grant/research support from: Abbvie, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Celltrion, GlaxoSmithKline, Jansen, Eli Lilly, Menarini, Merck Sharp & Dohme, Mundipharma, Pfizer, Roche, Sanofi, USB, Consultant of: Abbvie, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Celltrion, GlaxoSmithKline, Jansen, Eli Lilly, Menarini, Merck Sharp & Dohme, Mundipharma, Pfizer, Roche, Sanofi, USB, Speakers bureau: Abbvie, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Celltrion, GlaxoSmithKline, Jansen, Eli Lilly, Menarini, Merck Sharp & Dohme, Mundipharma, Pfizer, Roche, Sanofi, USB, Irene van der Horst-Bruinsma Grant/research support from: AbbVie, Novartis, Eli Lilly, Bristol-Myers Squibb, MSD, Pfizer, UCB Pharma, Consultant of: AbbVie, Novartis, Eli Lilly, Bristol-Myers Squibb, MSD, Pfizer, UCB Pharma, Arno WR van Kuijk Grant/research support from: Janssen, Stefan Siebert Grant/research support from: BMS, Boehringer Ingelheim, Celgene, GlaxoSmithKline, Janssen, Novartis, Pfizer, UCB, Consultant of: AbbVie, Boehringer Ingelheim, Janssen, Novartis, Pfizer, UCB, Speakers bureau: AbbVie, Celgene, Janssen, Novartis, Paul Bergmans Shareholder of: Johnson & Johnson, Employee of: Janssen, Kurt de Vlam Consultant of: Celgene Corporation, Eli Lilly, Novartis, Pfizer, UCB – consultant, Speakers bureau: Celgene Corporation, Eli Lilly, Novartis, Pfizer, UCB – speakers bureau and honoraria, Elisa Gremese Consultant of: AbbVie, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Celgene, Eli Lilly, Janssen, Merck Sharp & Dohme, Novartis, Sanofi, UCB, Roche, Pfizer, Speakers bureau: AbbVie, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Celgene, Eli Lilly, Janssen, Merck Sharp & Dohme, Novartis, Sanofi, UCB, Roche, Pfizer, Beatriz Joven-Ibáñez Speakers bureau: Abbvie, Celgene, Janssen, Merck Sharp & Dohme, Novartis, Pfizer, Tatiana Korotaeva Grant/research support from: Pfizer, Consultant of: Abbvie, BIOCAD, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Celgene, Eli Lilly, Janssen, Merck Sharp & Dohme, Novartis, Novartis-Sandoz, Pfizer, UCB, Speakers bureau: Abbvie, BIOCAD, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Celgene, Eli Lilly, Janssen, Merck Sharp & Dohme, Novartis, Novartis-Sandoz, Pfizer, UCB, Wim Noel Employee of: Janssen Pharmaceuticals NV, Petros Sfikakis Grant/research support from: Grant/research support from Abvie, Novartis, MSD, Actelion, Amgen, Pfizer, Janssen Pharmaceutical, UCB, Elke Theander Employee of: Janssen-Cilag Sweden AB, 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, Laure Gossec Grant/research support from: Lilly, Mylan, Pfizer, Sandoz, Consultant of: AbbVie, Amgen, Biogen, Celgene, Janssen, Lilly, Novartis, Pfizer, Sandoz, Sanofi-Aventis, UCB

scholarly journals POS1021 THE PsABio STUDY IN ITALY: A REAL-WORLD COMPARISON OF THE PERSISTENCE, EFFECTIVENESS AND SAFETY OF USTEKINUMAB AND TUMOUR NECROSIS FACTOR INHIBITORS IN PATIENTS WITH PSORIATIC ARTHRITIS

2021 ◽  
Vol 80 (Suppl 1) ◽  
pp. 778-779
Author(s):  
E. Gremese ◽  
F. Ciccia ◽  
C. Selmi ◽  
G. Cuomo ◽  
R. Foti ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Adverse Event ◽  
Psoriatic Arthritis ◽  
Disease Activity ◽  
Tumour Necrosis Factor ◽  
Tumour Necrosis ◽  
Research Support ◽  
Treatment Persistence ◽  
Low Disease Activity ◽  
Necrosis Factor

Background:There are still unmet needs in the treatment of psoriatic arthritis (PsA), including in terms of treatment persistence, which is a function of effectiveness, safety and patient satisfaction. Ustekinumab (UST) was the first new biologic drug to be developed for the treatment of PsA after tumour necrosis factor inhibitors (TNFi).Objectives:To compare treatment persistence, effectiveness and safety of UST and TNFi in Italian patients within the PsABio cohort.Methods:PsABio (NCT02627768) is an observational study of 1st/2nd/3rd-line UST or TNFi treatment in PsA in 8 European countries. The current analysis set includes 222 eligible patients treated in 15 Italian centres, followed to Month 12 (±3 months). Treatment persistence/risk of stopping was analysed using Kaplan−Meier (KM) and Cox regression analysis. Proportions of patients reaching minimal disease activity (MDA)/very low disease activity (VLDA) and clinical Disease Activity Index for PsA (cDAPSA) low disease activity (LDA)/remission were analysed using logistic regression, including propensity score (PS) adjustment for imbalanced baseline covariates, and non-response imputation of effectiveness endpoints if treatment was stopped/switched before 1 year. Last observation carried forward data are reported.Results:Of patients starting UST and TNFi, 75/101 (74.3%) and 77/121 (63.6%), respectively, persisted with treatment at 1 year. The observed mean persistence was 410 days for UST and 363 days for TNFi. KM curves and PS-adjusted hazard ratios confirmed significantly higher persistence (hazard ratio [95% confidence interval (CI)]) for UST versus TNFi overall (0.46 [0.26; 0.82]; Figure 1). Persistence was also higher for UST than TNFi in patients receiving monotherapy without methotrexate (0.31 [0.15; 0.63]), in females (0.41 [0.20; 0.83]), and in patients with body mass index (BMI) <25 kg/m2 (0.34 [0.14; 0.87]) or >30 kg/m2 (0.19 [0.06; 0.54]). There was no significant difference in persistence between treatments in patients with BMI 25−30 kg/m2. While patients receiving 1st- and 3rd-line UST or TNFi showed similar risk of discontinuation (0.60 [0.27; 1.29] and 0.36 [0.10; 1.25], respectively), patients receiving 2nd-line UST showed better persistence than those receiving 2nd-line TNFi (0.33 [0.13; 0.87]). Other factors added to the PS-adjusted Cox model did not show significant effects. In patients with available follow-up data, the mean (standard deviation) baseline cDAPSA was 26.3 (15.4) for UST and 23.5 (12.3) for TNFi; at 1-year follow-up, 43.5% of UST- and 43.6% of TNFi-treated patients reached cDAPSA LDA/remission. MDA was reached in 24.2% of UST- and 28.0% of TNFi-treated patients, and VLDA in 12.5% of UST- and 10.2% of TNFi-treated patients. After PS adjustment (stoppers/switchers as non-responders), odds ratios (95% CI) at 1 year did not differ significantly between UST and TNFi groups for reaching cDAPSA LDA/remission (1.08 [0.54; 2.15]), MDA (0.96 [0.45; 2.05]) or VLDA (0.98 [0.35; 2.76]). In total, 23 (20.4%) patients reported ≥1 treatment emergent adverse event with UST and 30 (22.2%) with TNFi; 6 (5.3%) and 10 (7.4%) patients, respectively, discontinued treatment because of an adverse event.Conclusion:In the Italian PsABio cohort, UST had better overall persistence compared with TNFi, as well as in specific subgroups: females, patients on monotherapy without methotrexate, with BMI <25 or >30 kg/m2, and patients receiving UST as 2nd-line treatment. At 1 year, both treatments showed similar effectiveness, as measured by cDAPSA responses and MDA/VLDA achievement.Acknowledgements:This study was funded by Janssen. Contributing author: Prof. Piercarlo Sarzi-Puttini, ASST Fatebenefratelli-Sacco, University of Milan, ItalyDisclosure of Interests:Elisa Gremese: None declared, Francesco Ciccia Speakers bureau: AbbVie, Abiogen, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Celgene, Janssen, Lilly, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, Consultant of: Celgene, Janssen, Lilly, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, Grant/research support from: Celgene, Janssen, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, Carlo Selmi Speakers bureau: AbbVie, Alfa-Wassermann, Amgen, Biogen, Celgene, Eli Lilly, Gilead, Janssen, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, Sanofi-Genzyme, Consultant of: AbbVie, Alfa-Wassermann, Amgen, Biogen, Celgene, Eli Lilly, Gilead, Janssen, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, Sanofi-Genzyme, Grant/research support from: AbbVie, Amgen, Janssen, Pfizer, Giovanna CUOMO: None declared, Rosario Foti Speakers bureau: AbbVie, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Celgene, Lilly, MSD, Janssen, Roche, Sanofi, Consultant of: AbbVie, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Celgene, Lilly, MSD, Janssen, Roche, Sanofi, Marco Matucci Cerinic Speakers bureau: Actelion, Biogen, Janssen, Lilly, Consultant of: Chemomab, Grant/research support from: MSD, Fabrizio Conti Consultant of: AbbVie, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Galapagos, Lilly, Pfizer, Enrico Fusaro Speakers bureau: AbbVie, Amgen, Lilly, Grant/research support from: AbbVie, Pfizer, Giuliana Guggino Speakers bureau: AbbVie, Celgene, Novartis, Pfizer, Sandoz, Grant/research support from: Celgene, Pfizer, Florenzo Iannone Speakers bureau: AbbVie, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Celgene, Lilly, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, Sanofi, UCB, Consultant of: AbbVie, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Celgene, Lilly, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, Sanofi, UCB, Andrea Delle Sedie: None declared, Roberto Perricone: None declared, Luca Idolazzi Speakers bureau: AbbVie, Eli Lilly, Janssen, MSD, Novartis, Sandoz, Paolo Moscato: None declared, Elke Theander Employee of: Janssen, Wim Noel Employee of: Janssen, Paul Bergmans Shareholder of: Johnson & Johnson, Employee of: Janssen, Silvia Marelli Employee of: Janssen, Laure Gossec Consultant of: AbbVie, Amgen, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Biogen, Celgene, Galapagos, Gilead, Janssen, Lilly, Novartis, Pfizer, Samsung Bioepis, Sanofi-Aventis, UCB, Grant/research support from: Amgen, Galapagos, Janssen, Lilly, Pfizer, Sandoz, Sanofi, Josef S. Smolen Speakers bureau: AbbVie, Amgen, AstraZeneca, Astro, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Celgene, Celltrion, Chugai, Gilead, ILTOO, Janssen, Lilly, MSD, Novartis- Sandoz, Pfizer, Roche, Samsung, Sanofi, UCB, Grant/research support from: AbbVie, AstraZeneca, Lilly, Novartis, Roche.

scholarly journals SAT0398 PERSISTENCE OF USTEKINUMAB (UST) OR TNF INHIBITOR (TNFI) TREATMENT IN PSORIATIC ARTHRITIS (PsA): INSIGHTS FROM THE LARGE, PROSPECTIVE, MULTINATIONAL, REAL-WORLD PsABio COHORT

2020 ◽  
Vol 79 (Suppl 1) ◽  
pp. 1149-1150
Author(s):  
L. Gossec ◽  
S. Siebert ◽  
P. Bergmans ◽  
K. De Vlam ◽  
E. Gremese ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Psoriatic Arthritis ◽  
Real World ◽  
Treatment Effect ◽  
Cox Model ◽  
Tnf Inhibitor ◽  
Skin Involvement ◽  
Research Support ◽  
Treatment Persistence ◽  
Kaplan Meier ◽  
Significant Difference

Background:Several biologic DMARDs (bDMARDs) exist for PsA, TNFi and UST being the earliest on European markets. When bDMARDs are insufficiently effective, later-line bDMARDs typically have shorter persistence. Treatment persistence reflects a mix of effectiveness and adverse events (AEs), and persistence data are limited in PsA.Objectives:Comparative analysis of 1-year persistence of UST and TNFi within the prospective PsABio cohort.Methods:PsABio is an observational, multinational study of PsA patients (pts) treated with 1st to 3rd line UST or TNFi at their rheumatologist’s discretion.1Treatment persistence (up to 15 months of follow-up) was defined as time between start of first bDMARD treatment in PsABio, and either stop or switch to another bDMARD, or withdrawal.Persistence of UST and TNFi is shown by Kaplan-Meier curves and compared using Cox regression analysis, with propensity score (PS) to adjust for baseline imbalanced demographic and disease-related covariates (age, sex, bDMARD line, BMI, Clinical Disease Activity index for PSoriatic Arthritis [cDAPSA], 12-item PsA Impact of Disease [PsAID-12], Fibromyalgia Rapid Screening Tool [FiRST] score, co-treatments with MTX, NSAIDs, glucocorticoids, cardiovascular/metabolic comorbidities, dactylitis, enthesitis and body surface area [BSA]). Factors including concomitant MTX use and skin involvement: <3%, 3–10% and >10%, were added to the Cox model to investigate their impact on the PS-adjusted treatment effect.Results:Of 438 and 455 pts who started UST and TNF, respectively, 121 (28%) and 134 (29%) stopped or switched treatment before Month 15, with differences (as expected) according to treatment line (Fig. 1a, b). Reasons for stop/switch were related to safety/AEs in 12% (UST) and 28% (TNFi), and effectiveness (joints, nails or skin) in 77% (UST) and 69% (TNFi) of pts.The observed mean time on drug was 397 days for UST and 385 days for TNFi pts (1st line 410/397 days, 2nd 390/382 days, 3rd 381/338 days). Fig. 1b shows similar persistence for all drugs and treatment lines, except for lower persistence in TNFi 3rd line vs 1st/2nd. In PS-adjusted Cox analysis, no statistically significant difference between UST and TNFi persistence was seen; hazard ratio (HR; 95% CI) for stop/switch bDMARD (UST vs TNFi) was 0.82 (0.60, 1.13). In the model, bDMARD monotherapy (without MTX) and extensive skin involvement (BSA >10%), showed significantly better persistence for UST (HR 0.61 [0.42, 0.90] and 0.41 [0.19, 0.89] respectively; unadjusted Kaplan-Meier graphs shown in Fig. 1c, d). MTX co-therapy and low BSA did not affect the PS-adjusted treatment effect. Other factors added to the PS-adjusted Cox model did not show significant effects.Conclusion:In this real-world PsA cohort undergoing bDMARD treatment, persistence was generally comparable for UST and TNFi, but some clinical situations led to better drug persistence with UST compared to TNFi – particularly monotherapy, more extensive skin involvement, and in 3rd-line treatment. Our data emphasise the importance of skin involvement for pts with PsA.References:[1]Gossec L, et al.Ann Rheum Dis. 2018;77(suppl 2):Abstract AB0928Acknowledgments:This study was funded by Janssen.Disclosure of Interests:Laure Gossec Grant/research support from: Lilly, Mylan, Pfizer, Sandoz, Consultant of: AbbVie, Amgen, Biogen, Celgene, Janssen, Lilly, Novartis, Pfizer, Sandoz, Sanofi-Aventis, UCB, Stefan Siebert Grant/research support from: BMS, Boehringer Ingelheim, Celgene, GlaxoSmithKline, Janssen, Novartis, Pfizer, UCB, Consultant of: AbbVie, Boehringer Ingelheim, Janssen, Novartis, Pfizer, UCB, Speakers bureau: AbbVie, Celgene, Janssen, Novartis, Paul Bergmans Shareholder of: Johnson & Johnson, Employee of: Janssen, Kurt de Vlam Consultant of: Celgene Corporation, Eli Lilly, Novartis, Pfizer, UCB – consultant, Speakers bureau: Celgene Corporation, Eli Lilly, Novartis, Pfizer, UCB – speakers bureau and honoraria, Elisa Gremese Consultant of: AbbVie, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Celgene, Eli Lilly, Janssen, Merck Sharp & Dohme, Novartis, Sanofi, UCB, Roche, Pfizer, Speakers bureau: AbbVie, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Celgene, Eli Lilly, Janssen, Merck Sharp & Dohme, Novartis, Sanofi, UCB, Roche, Pfizer, Beatriz Joven-Ibáñez Speakers bureau: Abbvie, Celgene, Janssen, Merck Sharp & Dohme, Novartis, Pfizer, Tatiana Korotaeva Grant/research support from: Pfizer, Consultant of: Abbvie, BIOCAD, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Celgene, Eli Lilly, Janssen, Merck Sharp & Dohme, Novartis, Novartis-Sandoz, Pfizer, UCB, Speakers bureau: Abbvie, BIOCAD, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Celgene, Eli Lilly, Janssen, Merck Sharp & Dohme, Novartis, Novartis-Sandoz, Pfizer, UCB, Wim Noel Employee of: Janssen Pharmaceuticals NV, Michael T Nurmohamed Grant/research support from: Abbvie, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Celltrion, GlaxoSmithKline, Jansen, Eli Lilly, Menarini, Merck Sharp & Dohme, Mundipharma, Pfizer, Roche, Sanofi, USB, Consultant of: Abbvie, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Celltrion, GlaxoSmithKline, Jansen, Eli Lilly, Menarini, Merck Sharp & Dohme, Mundipharma, Pfizer, Roche, Sanofi, USB, Speakers bureau: Abbvie, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Celltrion, GlaxoSmithKline, Jansen, Eli Lilly, Menarini, Merck Sharp & Dohme, Mundipharma, Pfizer, Roche, Sanofi, USB, Petros Sfikakis Grant/research support from: Grant/research support from Abvie, Novartis, MSD, Actelion, Amgen, Pfizer, Janssen Pharmaceutical, UCB, Elke Theander Employee of: Janssen-Cilag Sweden AB, 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

scholarly journals Disease Activity in Psoriatic Arthritis: Comparison of the Discriminative Capacity and Construct Validity of Six Composite Indices in a Real World

2014 ◽  
Vol 2014 ◽  
pp. 1-12 ◽  
Author(s):  
Fausto Salaffi ◽  
Alessandro Ciapetti ◽  
Marina Carotti ◽  
Stefania Gasparini ◽  
Marwin Gutierrez
Keyword(s):  
Psoriatic Arthritis ◽  
Disease Activity ◽  
Real World ◽  
Disease Activity Score ◽  
Activity Index ◽  
Mental Component Summary Score ◽  
Disease Activity Index ◽  
Activity Score ◽  
Patient Reported ◽  
Activity Indices

Objective. To compare, “in a real world,” the performance of the most common composite activity indices in a cohort of PsA patients.Methods. A total of 171 PsA patients were involved. The following variables were evaluated: peripheral joint assessment, patient reported of pain, physician and patient assessments of disease activity, patient general health status, dactylitis digit count, Leeds Enthesitis Index, Health Assessment Questionnaire (HAQ), physical and mental component summary score of the Medical Outcome Survey (SF-36), Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI), Dermatology Life Quality Index, C-reactive protein (CRP), and erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR). To measure the disease activity, the Disease Activity Score (DAS28-ESR and DAS28-CRP), Simple Disease Activity Index (SDAI), Composite Psoriatic Disease Activity Index (CPDAI), disease activity in psoriatic arthritis (DAPSA), and Psoriatic Arthritis Disease Activity Score (PASDAS) have been calculated. The criteria for minimal disease activity (MDA) and remission were applied as external criterion.Results. The ROC were similar in all the composite measures. Only the CPDAI showed less discriminative ability. There was a high degree of correlation between all the indices (P<0.0001). The highest correlations were between DAPSA and SDAI (rho = 0.996) and between DAPSA and DAS28-CRP (rho = 0.957). CPDAI, DAPSA, and PASDAS had the most stringent definitions of remission and MDA category. DAS28-ESR and DAS28-CRP had the highest proportions in remission and MDA.Conclusions. Although a good concurrent validity and discriminant capacity of six disease activity indices were observed, the proportions of patients classified in the disease activity levels differed. In particular, the rate of patients in remission was clearly different among the respective indices.

scholarly journals FRI0289 DOES SMOKING AFFECT SECUKINUMAB TREATMENT OUTCOMES AND SAFETY IN PATIENTS WITH ANKYLOSING SPONDYLITIS? – REAL WORLD DATA FROM THE GERMAN AQUILA STUDY

2020 ◽  
Vol 79 (Suppl 1) ◽  
pp. 733.1-733
Author(s):  
E. Riechers ◽  
U. Kiltz ◽  
J. Brandt-Juergens ◽  
P. Kästner ◽  
D. Peterlik ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Ankylosing Spondylitis ◽  
Disease Activity ◽  
Real World ◽  
Smoking Status ◽  
Interventional Study ◽  
Research Support ◽  
Real World Data ◽  
Global Functioning ◽  
Mean Values ◽  
World Data

Background:There is growing body of evidence that smoking is associated with more active and severe disease in patients (pts) with ankylosing spondylitis (AS).1,2The German non-interventional study AQUILA provides real-world data on the influence of smoking on therapeutic effectiveness and safety under secukinumab (SEC), a fully human monoclonal antibody that selectively inhibits interleukin-17A.Objectives:The aim of this interim analysis is to describe selected baseline (BL) demographics, to evaluate SEC effectiveness on disease activity and global functioning and health, and to report safety profile depending on smoking status of AS pts.Methods:AQUILA is an ongoing, multi-center, non-interventional study including up to 2700 pts with active AS or psoriatic arthritis. Pts were observed from BL up to week (w) 52. Real-world data was assessed prospectively and analyzed as observed. Assessment of CRP and validated questionnaires were used to collect data on disease activity (Bath Ankylosing Spondylitis Disease Activity Index, BASDAI), global functioning and health (Assessment of SpondyloArthritis-Health Index, ASAS-HI) and depressive mood (Beck´s Depression Inventory version II, BDI-II). For calculation of proportion of pts who experienced (serious) adverse events ((S)AEs), all AS pts were included who received at least one dose of SEC irrespective of further documentation of any study visit. This analysis focuses on the subgroups non-smoker (NS) and smoker (S).Results:At BL, 311 AS pts were included: 42.1% (n=131) NS and 32.8% (n=102) S. Remaining subgroups were 15.1% (n=47) ex-smoker and 10.0% (n=31) of unknown smoking status. About half of AS pts in NS were male, while in S (69.6%) portion of men was more than twice as high as of women. S were slightly younger than NS (mean age: 43.9/49.0 years). During the study, CRP value decreased irrespective of smoking status with numerically higher fluctuations in S (Fig. 1A). BASDAI (NS: 5.2 at BL to 3.7 at w52, S: 5.6 at BL to 4.1 at w52) and ASAS-HI (Fig. 1B) scores numerically improved best in NS, whereas more variations were seen in S; the same was observed for BDI-II score values (NS: 11.8 at BL to 9.2 at w52, S: 13.0 at BL to 12.1 at w52). Although no major significant differences in mean values existed between NS and S, S displayed – except in w4 – overall higher mean values in the parameters mentioned above. Regarding the occurrence of AEs/SAEs with or without suspected relationship to SEC, there was no significant difference between NS and S (Table 1).Table 1.Overview of AEs (and SAEs) under SEC treatment depending on smoking status in AS ptsNumber of pts withNS (N=140), n (%)S (N=110),n (%)P valueAE95 (67.9)78 (70.9)0.80AE with suspected relationship to SEC66 (47.1)41 (37.3)0.29SAE39 (27.9)30 (27.3)0.95SAE with suspected relationship to SEC15 (10.7)10 (9.1)0.87Conclusion:In a real-world setting, SEC improved disease activity and global functioning and health in AS pts with slight (mostly non-significant) differences between NS and S. Overall, this interim analysis shows that SEC is an effective treatment with a favorable safety profile up to 52 weeks, irrespective of the pts’ smoking status. Further progress of the AQUILA study will reveal whether this trend will continue.Figure 1.CRP and global functioning and health in AS pts treated with SEC depending on smoking status**CRP data/ASAS-HI scores were documented not for all AS pts at BL and subsequent visits.References:[1]Averns HL et al, Scand J Rheumatol 1996;25:138-42; 2. Chung HY et al, Ann Rheum Dis 2012;71:809-16Disclosure of Interests:Elke Riechers Grant/research support from: AbbVie, Chugai, Lilly, Janssen, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, UCB, Consultant of: AbbVie, Chugai, Novartis, UCB, Uta Kiltz Grant/research support from: AbbVie, Amgen, Biogen, Novartis, Pfizer, Consultant of: AbbVie, Biocad, Eli Lilly and Company, Grünenthal, Janssen, Novartis, Pfizer, UCB, Speakers bureau: AbbVie, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, UCB, Jan Brandt-Juergens: None declared, Peter Kästner Consultant of: Chugai, Novartis, Daniel Peterlik Employee of: Novartis Pharma GmbH, Hans-Peter Tony Consultant of: AbbVie, Astra-Zeneca, BMS, Chugai, Janssen, Lilly, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, Sanofi

scholarly journals POS0608 SWITCHING OF TREATMENT FROM REFERENCE ETANERCEPT TO SANDOZ ETANERCEPT BIOSIMILAR IN PATIENTS WITH RHEUMATIC DISEASES: AN INTERIM ANALYSIS OF REAL-WORLD DATA FROM THE COMPACT STUDY

2021 ◽  
Vol 80 (Suppl 1) ◽  
pp. 540.1-540
Author(s):  
M. Schmalzing ◽  
A. Askari ◽  
T. Sheeran ◽  
D. Walsh ◽  
J. De Toro Santos ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Disease Activity ◽  
Real World ◽  
Targeted Therapies ◽  
Clinical Remission ◽  
Interim Analysis ◽  
Disease Activity Score ◽  
Research Support ◽  
Low Disease Activity ◽  
Group A ◽  
The Mean

Background:Sandoz etanercept (SDZ ETN) is a biosimilar of etanercept (ETN). COMPACT is an ongoing, non-interventional study, evaluating the effectiveness, safety, and quality of life with SDZ ETN treatment in patients (pts) with rheumatoid arthritis (RA), axial-spondyloarthritis (axSpA) or psoriatic arthritis (PsA) in real-world conditions.Objectives:We have reported an interim analysis, with the effectiveness and safety data focusing on pts who were in clinical remission or low disease activity under treatment with reference ETN or biosimilar ETN other than SDZ ETN (initial ETN; iETN) and switched to SDZ ETN.Methods:Pts aged ≥18 years for whom treatment with SDZ ETN were initiated are being enrolled. Pts were categorized under four treatment groups based on prior treatment status: Group A,pts on clinical remission or low disease activity under treatment with iETN and switched to SDZ ETN; Group B, pts who received targeted therapies and switched to SDZ ETN; Group C, biologic naïve considered uncontrolled with conventional therapy; Group D, DMARD naïve with recent diagnosis of RA considered suitable for treatment initiation with a biologic and started on treatment with SDZ ETN. Effectiveness assessments included Disease Activity Score 28-joint count Erythrocyte Sedimentation Rate (DAS28-ESR) or Ankylosing Spondylitis Disease Activity Score (ASDAS) until Week 24 after enrollment (baseline; BL) in the study. Functional disability was measured by the Health Assessment Questionnaire Disability Index (HAQ-DI). The effectiveness and safety results are reported for the pts who switched from iETN (Group A).Results:Of the 1437 pts recruited (analysis cut-off date: 16 Oct, 2020), 567 pts were switched from iETN, 163 were switched from other targeted therapies, 697 were biologic-naïve, and 10 were RA DMARD-naïve. Among pts who switched from iETN, 51.5% had RA, followed by axSpA (28.0%) and PsA (20.5%). Comorbidities were more frequent in pts with RA (70.2%) followed by PsA (58.6%) and axSpA (49.7%); musculoskeletal and connective tissue disorders were reported in 31.8% and 15.7% of pts with RA and axSpA, respectively. At BL, whilst receiving iETN, the mean (SD) DAS28-ESR scores were 2.5 (1.1) and 2.1 (1.1) in pts with RA and PsA, respectively (figure 1). The mean change from BL in DAS28-ESR score at Week 24 after switch to SDZ ETN was -0.1 (1.1) and 0 (1.0) in pts with RA and PsA, respectively. In pts with axSpA, the mean (SD) ASDAS score was 1.5 (0.7) at BL; mean change from BL in ASDAS score at Week 24 was 0.1 (0.5). At BL, the mean (SD) HAQ-DI scores were 0.8 (0.7), 0.5 (0.7) and 0.5 (0.6) in pts with RA, PsA and axSpA, respectively. Overall, the proportion of patients with at least one adverse event (AE) was 37.3%, 33.6% and 25.8% in pts with RA, PsA and axSpA, respectively. Serious AEs were reported in 6.5%, 1.7% and 3.1% of pts with RA, PsA, and axSpA, respectively. Injections site reactions were reported in 2.7%, 0.9% and 1.3% of pts with RA, PsA and axSpA, respectively.Figure 1.Disease activity in patients who switched from iETN to SDZ ETNConclusion:The interim analysis results shows that switch from iETN to SDZ ETN does not impact the effectiveness of ETN in pts with RA, axSpA or PsA, without any new safety signals.Disclosure of Interests:Marc Schmalzing Speakers bureau: Novartis, AbbVie, Chugai/Roche, Janssen-Cilag, Lilly, Consultant of: AstraZeneca, Chugai/Roche, Hexal/Sandoz, Gilead, AbbVie, Janssen-Cilag, Boehringer/Ingelheim, Grant/research support from: Travel grants: Chugai/Roche, Boehringer/Ingelheim, Celgene, Medac, Ayman Askari: None declared, Tom Sheeran Speakers bureau: Pfizer, UCB, Roche, Consultant of: Novartis, Pfizer, Grant/research support from: Novartis, UCB, Roche, David Walsh: None declared, Javier de Toro Santos: None declared, JULIO CESAR VAZQUEZ PEREZ-COLEMAN Speakers bureau: Sandoz, Abbvie, Sanofi, Fresenius, Charlotte Both Employee of: Sandoz employee Global Medical Affairs, Fabricio Furlan Employee of: Sandoz employee Global Medical Affairs, Sohaib HACHAICHI Employee of: Sandoz employee Global Medical Affairs, Herbert Kellner: None declared

The relationship between patient acceptable symptom state and disease activity in patients with psoriatic arthritis

Rheumatology ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 59 (1) ◽  
pp. 69-76 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jeanie Z Fei ◽  
Anthony V Perruccio ◽  
Justine Y Ye ◽  
Dafna D Gladman ◽  
Vinod Chandran
Keyword(s):  
Psoriatic Arthritis ◽  
Disease Activity ◽  
Activity Index ◽  
Area Under The Curve ◽  
Disease Activity Index ◽  
High Disease Activity ◽  
Operating Characteristics ◽  
Low Disease Activity ◽  
Patient Reported ◽  
Patient Acceptable Symptom State

Abstract Objectives The Psoriatic Arthritis Disease Activity Score (PASDAS) and Disease Activity Index for Psoriatic Arthritis (DAPSA) are composite PsA disease activity measures. We sought to identify the PASDAS and DAPSA cut-off points consistent with patient acceptable symptom state (PASS), the threshold of symptoms beyond which patients consider themselves well, and examine PASS across published PASDAS and DAPSA thresholds for low, moderate and high disease activity. Methods We used a standard protocol including physician assessment and patient-reported outcomes to prospectively record measures required to calculate PASDAS and DAPSA. We identified PASS thresholds for the PASDAS and DAPSA using receiver operating characteristics curve analyses. We assessed the frequency of reporting acceptable symptom state across disease activity thresholds for PASDAS and DAPSA scores. Results A total of 229 patients (58.5% male, mean age 55.5 years, mean disease duration 17.1 years) were recruited. The PASS threshold for the PASDAS was 3.79 [area under the curve (AUC) 0.86, sensitivity 0.75, specificity 0.82] and for the DAPSA was 11.10 (AUC 0.91, sensitivity 0.89, specificity 0.82). With the PASDAS, 90% of patients defined as having low disease activity considered their symptom state acceptable, compared with 55% and 17% among those with moderate and high disease activity, respectively. With the DAPSA, 98% of patients in disease remission considered their symptom state acceptable compared with 85, 22 and 18% among those with low, moderate and high disease activity, respectively. Conclusion We have defined PASS thresholds for PASDAS and DAPSA. The PASDAS target for low disease activity and DAPSA targets of low disease activity or remission align well with PASS.

scholarly journals POS0445 PHYSICIAN AND PATIENT REPORTED EFFECTIVENESS OUTCOMES ARE SIMILAR IN TOFACITINIB AND TNF INHIBITORS IN RHEUMATOID ARTHRITIS PATIENTS: DATA FROM A RHEUMATOID ARTHRITIS REGISTRY IN CANADA

2021 ◽  
Vol 80 (Suppl 1) ◽  
pp. 452.1-452
Author(s):  
M. Movahedi ◽  
A. Cesta ◽  
X. Li ◽  
E. Keystone ◽  
C. Bombardier
Keyword(s):  
Rheumatoid Arthritis ◽  
Real World ◽  
Treatment Initiation ◽  
Activity Index ◽  
Disease Activity Index ◽  
Research Support ◽  
Real World Data ◽  
Treatment Groups ◽  
Patient Reported ◽  
Anxiety Depression

Background:Tofacitinib (TOFA) is an oral, small molecule drug used for rheumatoid arthritis (RA) treatment as an alternative option to biologic disease modifying antirheumatic drugs (bDMARDs) including tumor necrosis factor inhibitors (TNFi).Objectives:We aimed to evaluate physician and patient reported effectivness outcomes in TNFi compared to TOFA, using real-world data from the Ontario Best Practices Research Initiative (OBRI).Methods:RA patients enrolled in the OBRI initiating their TOFA or TNFi (Adalimumab, Certolizumab, Etanercept, Golimumab, Infliximab, and Biosimilars) between 1st June 2014 (TOFA approval date in Canada) and 31st Dec 2019 were included. Patients were required to have physician and patient reported effectivness outcomes data available at treatment initiation and 6-month (± 2 months) follow-up. These included clinical disease activity index (CDAI), rheumatoid arthritis disease activity index (RADAI), HAQ-DI, sleep problem, and anxiety/depression scores. Multiple imputation (Imputation Chained Equation, N=20) was used to deal with missing data for covaraites at treatment initiation. To deal with confounding by indication, we estimated propensity scores for covariates with an absolute standard difference greater than 0.1 between the two treatment groups.Results:A total of 419 patients were included. Of those, 226 were initiating a TNFi and 193 TOFA, and had a mean (SD) disease duration of 8.0 (8.7) and 12.6 (9.6) years, respectively. In the TNFi group, 81.9% were female and mean age (SD) at treatment initiation was 56.6 (13.4) years. In the TOFA group, 85% were female and mean (SD) age at treatment initiation was 60.3 (11.2) years. The TNFi group was less likely to have prior biologic use (21.7%) compared to the TOFA group (67.9%). At treatment initiation, physical function measured by HAQ-DI was significantly lower in TNFi compared to the TOFA group (1.2 vs.1.4).The rate of CDAI LDA/remission at 6 months was 36.7% and 33.2% in TNFi and TOFA group, respectively. The generalized linear mixed models (GLMM) adjusting for propensity score quantile, showed that there was no significant difference in CDAI LDA/remission (ORs: 0.85, 95% CI: 0.51, 1.43), RADAI (coefficient: 0.48, 95% CI: -0.18, 1.14), HAQ-DI (coefficient: -0.01, 95% CI: -0.18, 0.16), sleep problems (coefficient: -0.25, 95% CI: -0.95, 0.45), and anxiety/depression scores (coefficient: 0.12, 95% CI: -0.35, 0.58) between the two treatment groups (TOFA used as reference).Conclusion:In this real-world data study, we found that, physician and patient reported effectivness outcomes are similar in the TNFi and TOFA groups 6 months after treatment initiation in patients with RA.Disclosure of Interests:Mohammad Movahedi: None declared, Angela Cesta: None declared, Xiuying Li: None declared, Edward Keystone Grant/research support from: Amgen, Merck, Pfizer Pharmaceuticals, PuraPharm. Speaker Honoraria Agreements: AbbVie, Amgen, Bristol-Myers Squibb Company, Celltrion, Myriad Autoimmune, F. Hoffmann-La Roche Inc, Gilead, Janssen Inc, Lilly Pharmaceuticals, Merck, Pfizer Pharmaceuticals, Sandoz, Sanofi-Genzyme, Samsung Bioepsis. Consulting Agreements/Advisory Board Membership: AbbVie, Amgen, Bristol-Myers Squibb Company, Celltrion, Myriad Autoimmune, F. Hoffmann-La Roche Inc, Gilead, Janssen Inc, Lilly Pharmaceuticals, Merck, Pfizer Pharmaceuticals, Sandoz, Sanofi-Genzyme, Samsung Bioepsis, Claire Bombardier Grant/research support from: OBRI was funded by peer reviewed grants from CIHR (Canadian Institute for Health Research), Ontario Ministry of Health and Long-Term Care (MOHLTC), Canadian Arthritis Network (CAN) and unrestricted grants from: Abbvie, Amgen, Aurora, Bristol-Meyers Squibb, Celgene, Hospira, Janssen, Lilly, Medexus, Merck, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, Sanofi, & UCB. Dr. Bombardier held a Canada Research Chair in Knowledge Transfer for Musculoskeletal Care and a Pfizer Research Chair in Rheumatology

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document