scholarly journals FRI0351 DOES SEX OR BODY MASS INDEX IMPACT RESPONSE TO THERAPY IN PSORIATIC ARTHRITIS?: RESULTS FROM A PHASE 3, DOUBLE-BLIND, RANDOMIZED TRIAL EXAMINING METHOTREXATE AND ETANERCEPT AS MONOTHERAPY OR IN COMBINATION FOR TREATING PSORIATIC ARTHRITIS

2020 ◽  
Vol 79 (Suppl 1) ◽  
pp. 771.1-771
Author(s):  
P. J. Mease ◽  
D. D. Gladman ◽  
J. F. Merola ◽  
A. Deodhar ◽  
A. Ogdie ◽  
...  

Background:In psoriatic arthritis (PsA), contextual factors such as sex and body mass index (BMI) may affect response to therapy.Objectives:To examine if sex and BMI influenced 24-week (wk) outcomes in a 48-wk PsA trial of methotrexate (MTX) and etanercept (ETN) as monotherapy (mono) or combined.1Methods:MTX- and biologic-naïve adult patients with active PsA were randomized to weekly: MTX 20mg (n=284), ETN 50mg (n=284), or MTX 20mg+ETN 50mg (n=283). Wk-24 outcomes included ACR 20, MDA, VLDA, PASDAS, DAPSA, LDI, SPARCC, BSA, sPGA, and mNAPSI. Descriptive statistics examined outcomes in each treatment arm by sex (male vs female) or BMI (≤30kg/m2vs >30kg/m2). Modeling analyses also examined sex or BMI effect on outcomes when comparing MTX mono to the ETN-containing arms (analyses were adjusted for any prior use of a nonbiologic disease-modifying antirheumatic drug; the model for the influence of sex also adjusted for baseline BMI status). Nominal P-values are provided.Results:Baseline disease activity was slightly higher in women, especially with MTX+ETN. Descriptive statistics showed men and women had similar results at wk 24 in the MTX mono and ETN mono arms; with MTX+ETN, men had better outcomes for ACR20, MDA, VLDA, and PASDAS. In treatment-interaction analyses, men had more favorable responses at wk 24 with MTX+ETN vs MTX mono for PASDAS, MDA, and LDI (Table).Baseline disease activity was similar in both BMI categories. Descriptive statistics in each treatment arm showed no consistent differences in results at wk 24 between BMI categories. In treatment-interaction analyses, BMI ≤30kg/m2had a more favorable response at wk 24 with MTX+ETN vs MTX mono for sPGA (Table).Conclusion:Results suggest contextual factors may affect response to therapy in PsA. The treatment-interaction analyses suggest disparate responses to MTX+ETN by sex; BMI only affected skin response.References:[1]Mease et al.Arthritis Rheumatol. 2019;71:1112-24Disclosure of Interests: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, Dafna D Gladman Grant/research support from: AbbVie, Amgen Inc., BMS, Celgene Corporation, Janssen, Novartis, Pfizer, UCB – grant/research support, Consultant of: AbbVie, Amgen Inc., BMS, Celgene Corporation, Janssen, Novartis, Pfizer, UCB – consultant, Joseph F. Merola Consultant of: Merck, AbbVie, Dermavant, Eli Lilly, Novartis, Janssen, UCB Pharma, Celgene, Sanofi, Regeneron, Arena, Sun Pharma, Biogen, Pfizer, EMD Sorono, Avotres and LEO Pharma, Atul Deodhar Grant/research support from: AbbVie, Eli Lilly, GSK, Novartis, Pfizer, UCB, Consultant of: AbbVie, Amgen, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol Myer Squibb (BMS), Eli Lilly, GSK, Janssen, Novartis, Pfizer, UCB, Speakers bureau: AbbVie, Amgen, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol Myer Squibb (BMS), Eli Lilly, GSK, Janssen, Novartis, Pfizer, UCB, Alexis Ogdie Grant/research support from: Novartis, Pfizer – grant/research support, Consultant of: AbbVie, BMS, Eli Lilly, Novartis, Pfizer, Takeda – consultant, David Collier Shareholder of: Amgen Inc., Employee of: Amgen Inc., Elaine Karis Shareholder of: Amgen Inc., Employee of: Amgen Inc., Lyrica Liu Shareholder of: Amgen Inc., Employee of: Amgen Inc., Arthur Kavanaugh Grant/research support from: AbbVie, Amgen, Eli Lilly, Novartis, Janssen, Pfizer, Gilead, UCB, Consultant of: AbbVie, Amgen, Eli Lilly, Novartis, Janssen, Pfizer, Gilead, UCB

2021 ◽  
Vol 10 (3) ◽  
pp. 382
Author(s):  
Jesús A. Valero-Jaimes ◽  
Ruth López-González ◽  
María A. Martín-Martínez ◽  
Carmen García-Gómez ◽  
Fernando Sánchez-Alonso ◽  
...  

Objective: Since obesity has been associated with a higher inflammatory burden and worse response to therapy in patients with chronic inflammatory rheumatic diseases (CIRD), we aimed to confirm the potential association between body mass index (BMI) and disease activity in a large series of patients with CIRDs included in the Spanish CARdiovascular in rheuMAtology (CARMA) registry. Methods: Baseline data analysis of patients included from the CARMA project, a 10-year prospective study of patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA), ankylosing spondylitis (AS), and psoriatic arthritis (PsA) attending outpatient rheumatology clinics from 67 Spanish hospitals. Obesity was defined when BMI (kg/m2) was >30 according to the WHO criteria. Scores used to evaluate disease activity were Disease Activity Score of 28 joints (DAS28) in RA, Bath Ankylosing Spondylitis Disease Activity Index (BASDAI) in AS, and modified DAS for PsA. Results: Data from 2234 patients (775 RA, 738 AS, and 721 PsA) were assessed. The mean ± SD BMI at the baseline visit were: 26.9 ± 4.8 in RA, 27.4 ± 4.4 in AS, and 28.2 ± 4.7 in PsA. A positive association between BMI and disease activity in patients with RA (β = 0.029; 95%CI (0.01–0.05); p = 0.007) and PsA (β = 0.036; 95%CI (0.015–0.058); p = 0.001) but not in those with AS (β = 0.001; 95%CI (−0.03–0.03); p = 0.926) was found. Disease activity was associated with female sex and rheumatoid factor in RA and with Psoriasis Area Severity Index and enthesitis in PsA. Conclusions: BMI is associated with disease activity in RA and PsA, but not in AS. Given that obesity is a potentially modifiable factor, adequate control of body weight can improve the outcome of patients with CIRD and, therefore, weight control should be included in the management strategy of these patients.


2020 ◽  
Vol 79 (Suppl 1) ◽  
pp. 1682.2-1683
Author(s):  
S. Ganhão ◽  
B. M. Fernandes ◽  
S. Garcia ◽  
F. Pinheiro ◽  
M. Rato ◽  
...  

Background:Overweight/obesity has increased exponentially in the last decades, becoming a huge Public Health problem. Moreover, an increase in adipose tissue is associated with an increased production of several proinflammatory cytokines and acute phase reactants. Higher BMI has been related with new bone formation including syndesmophytes and enthesophytes. In fact, besides rheumatologic conditions including Psoriatic Arthritis (PsA), enthesopathy can be a consequence of several clinical conditions including metabolic syndrome, mechanical injuries and degeneration.Objectives:To evaluate the effect of body mass index (BMI) on disease activity scores and enthesitis scores in Psoriatic Arthritis.Methods:Retrospective study including all the patients with PsA meeting the CASPAR criteria, beginning first-line biologic therapy at our centre. Demographic and clinical data were collected from the Portuguese database Reumapt. Statistical analysis was performed with SPSS. Continuous variables were compared through Spearman/Pearson correlations.Results:The mean BMI was 26.8 (SD 0.5). In our sample of 119 PsA patients, 21.5% were overweight and 8.3% were obese. The mean age of patients was 46.3 ± 1.03 years; 60 female and 59 male. The median disease duration was 6.8 (0.3-33.8) years. At baseline mean (SD) disease activity variables were: DAS 28 4vESR 4.9 (0.2), ESR 33.2 (2.3) mm/h; CRP 2.35 (0.3) mg/dL, BASDAI 6.6 (0.2), ASDAS 3.9 (0.1), BASMI 3.7 (0.2), BASFI 5.8 (0.3), MASES 1.9 (0.3), SPARCC 2.3 (0.3). There were statistically significant positive correlations between BMI and MASES at baseline (p=0.024, r=0.411) but there weren’t with SPARCC, DAS 28 4vESR, ESR, CRP, BASDAI, ASDAS, BASMI and BASFI.Conclusion:The data showed that patients with higher BMI values had higher enthesitis scores suggesting that overweight/obesity may have a negative impact on enthesopathy. Further studies are still needed to further understand that possible relationship.References:[1]Bakirci S, Dabague J, Eder L, McGonagle D, Aydin SZ. The role of obesity on inflammation and damage in spondyloarthritis: a systematic literature review on body mass index and imaging. Clin Exp Rheumatol. 2019 Apr 29.Disclosure of Interests:Sara Ganhão: None declared, Bruno Miguel Fernandes: None declared, Salomé Garcia: None declared, Filipe Pinheiro: None declared, Maria Rato: None declared, Eva Mariz: None declared, Miguel Bernardes Speakers bureau: Abbvie, Amgen, Biogen, Eli-Lilly, Glaxo-Smith-Kline, Pfizer, Janssen, Novartis, Lúcia Costa: None declared


2020 ◽  
Vol 79 (Suppl 1) ◽  
pp. 757.1-757
Author(s):  
R. López-González ◽  
J. A. Valero Jaimes ◽  
M. A. Martin-Martinez ◽  
S. Castañeda ◽  
C. García Gomez ◽  
...  

Objectives:Since obesity has been associated with higher inflammatory burden and worse response to therapy in patients with chronic inflammatory joint diseases (CIJDs), we aimed to confirm the potential association between body mass index (BMI) and disease activity in a large series of patients with CIJDs included in the Spanish CARdiovascular in rheuMAtology (CARMA) registry.Methods:Baseline data assessment of patients included from the CARMA project, a 10-year prospective study of patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA), ankylosing spondylitis (AS) and psoriatic arthritis (PsA) attending outpatient rheumatology clinics from 67 Spanish hospitals. Obesity was defined when BMI (kg/m2) was>30 according to the WHO criteria. Scores used to evaluate disease activity were DAS28 in RA, BASDAI in AS, and modified DAS for PsA.Results:Data from 2,234 patients (775 RA, 738 AS and 721 PsA) were assessed. The mean±SD BMI at the baseline visit were: 26.9±4.8 in RA, 27.4±4.4 in AS and 28.2±4.7 in PsA. Multivariate analyses shown a positive association between BMI and disease activity in patients with RA (β-coefficient: 0.029; 95% CI: 0.01-0.05; p=0.007) and in those with PsA (β-coefficient: 0.036; 95% CI: 0.015-0.058; p=0.001). By contrast, there was no significant association between BMI and disease activity in patients with AS (β-coefficient: 0.001; 95% CI: -0.026-0.03; p=0.926).In patients with RA, female gender (β-coefficient: 0.546; 95% CI: 0.316-0.775; p<0.001) and rheumatoid factor status (seropositivity for RF) (β-coefficient: 0.328; 95% CI: 0.106-0.549; p=0.004) also showed a positive association with disease activity, while physical activity revealed a negative association with disease activity (β-coefficient: -0.280; 95% CI: -0.479-(- 0.081); p=0.006).Besides BMI, female gender (β-coefficient: 0.720; 95% CI: 0.524-0.916; p<0.001), Psoriasis Area Severity Index (β-coefficient: 0.038; 95% CI: 0.012-0.066; p=0.005) and enthesitis (β-coefficient: 0.256; 95% CI: 0.199-0.313; p<0.001) were also positively associated with disease activity in PsA.As observed in RA and PsA, female gender was also associated with disease activity patients with AS (β-coefficient: 0.565; 95% CI: 0.299-0.832; p<0.001).Conclusion:BMI is associated with disease activity in RA and PsA but not in AS. Since obesity is a potentially modifiable factor, disease activity was associated with female gender and RF status in RA and with Psoriasis Area Severity Index and enthesitis in PsA. Adequate control over body weight may improve the outcome of patients with CIJDs and, therefore, weight control should be included in the strategy of management of these patients.Disclosure of Interests:Ruth López-González: None declared, Jesús Alejandro Valero Jaimes: None declared, Maria Auxiliadora Martin-Martinez: None declared, Santos Castañeda: None declared, Carmen García Gomez: None declared, Fernando Sánchez-Alonso: None declared, Carlos Gonzalez Juanatey: None declared, Eva Revuelta-Evrad: None declared, Carolina Perez-Garcia: None declared, Vicenç Torrente Segarra: None declared, Trinidad Pérez Sandoval: None declared, Javier Llorca: None declared, Miguel A González-Gay Grant/research support from: Pfizer, Abbvie, MSD, Speakers bureau: Pfizer, Abbvie, MSD


2019 ◽  
Vol 15 (3) ◽  
pp. 215-223
Author(s):  
Tanya Sapundzhieva ◽  
Rositsa Karalilova ◽  
Anastas Batalov

Aim: To investigate the impact of body mass index (BMI) on clinical disease activity indices and clinical and sonographic remission rates in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA). Patients and Methods: Sixty-three patients with RA were categorized according to BMI score into three groups: normal (BMI<25), overweight (BMI 25-30) and obese (BMI≥30). Thirty-three of them were treated with conventional synthetic disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs (csDMARDs), and 30 with biologic DMARDs (bDMARDs). Patients underwent clinical and laboratory assessment and musculoskeletal ultrasound examination (MSUS) at baseline and at 6 months after initiation of therapy. We evaluated the rate of clinical and sonographic remission (defined as Power Doppler score (PD) = 0) and its correlation with BMI score. Results: In the csDMARDs group, 60% of the normal weight patients reached DAS28 remission; 33.3% of the overweight; and 0% of the obese patients. In the bDMARDs group, the percentage of remission was as follows: 60% in the normal weight subgroup, 33.3% in the overweight; and 15.8% in the obese. Within the csDMARDs treatment group, two significant correlations were found: BMI score–DAS 28 at 6th month, rs = .372, p = .033; BMI score–DAS 28 categories, rs = .447, p = .014. Within the bDMARDs group, three significant correlations were identified: BMI score–PDUS at sixth month, rs = .506, p =.004; BMI score–DAS 28, rs = .511, p = .004; BMI score–DAS 28 categories, rs = .592, p = .001. Sonographic remission rates at 6 months were significantly higher in the normal BMI category in both treatment groups. Conclusion: BMI influences the treatment response, clinical disease activity indices and the rates of clinical and sonographic remission in patients with RA. Obesity and overweight are associated with lower remission rates regardless of the type of treatment.


2021 ◽  
Vol 80 (Suppl 1) ◽  
pp. 1303.2-1304
Author(s):  
J. Gratacos-Masmitja ◽  
J. L. Álvarez Vega ◽  
E. Beltrán ◽  
A. Urruticoechea-Arana ◽  
C. Fito-Manteca ◽  
...  

Background:Apremilast is a non-biologic systemic agent approved for the treatment of plaque psoriasis, oral ulcers of Behcet’s disease and PsA with proven efficacy in clinical trials [1,2]. However, more real-world evidence of apremilast use and effectiveness is needed to identify the patient profile most likely to benefit from this treatment [3].Objectives:To evaluate the persistence of apremilast treatment in patients with PsA naïve to biological treatments in routine clinical practice and assess its effectiveness. Baseline clinical characteristics on patients who started apremilast were also evaluated.Methods:Observational, prospective, multicenter (20 centers) study including consecutive adult patients with PsA naïve to biological therapies who had started treatment with apremilast during the previous 5 to 7 months and were followed-up during 12 months. Variables recorded were persistence of treatment with apremilast at 6 months (6mo) and number of swelling joints, presence of enthesitis and dactylitis, and disease activity, measured by the Disease Activity in Psoriatic Arthritis (DAPSA) score and Physician Global Assessment (PGA) of psoriasis, collected at baseline (BL) (i.e., apremilast treatment start) and 6mo; comorbidities were retrospectively collected at BL. Categorical and quantitative variables were compared using McNemar’s and Wilcoxon test, respectively. Data sets analyzed included all assessable patients.Results:Of the 60 patients recruited at the time of this interim analysis, 54 (90.0%) [mean (SD) age 53.4 (13.9) years] were assessable; 41 (75.9%) of these continued treatment with apremilast at 6mo. At BL, 34 (63.0%) patients had at least one comorbidity, the most frequent being cardiovascular disease (n=15, 27.8%), including hypertension (n=8, 14.8%), metabolic/endocrine disease (n=18, 33.3%), including obesity (n=8, 14.8%) and dyslipidemia (n=10, 18.5%). Psychiatric disease (i.e., depression) (n=5, 9.3%) and neoplasia (n=8, 14.8%) were also observed. The number of swelling joints decreased from median (Q1, Q3) 4.0 (2.0, 7.0) at BL to 1.5 (0.0, 4.0) at 6mo (p=0.0012). Patients with dactylitis and enthesitis decreased from 19 (35.2%) and 16 (29.6%) at BL to 10 (18.5%) and 9 (16.7%) at 6mo (p=0.0225 and p=0.0391), respectively. The distribution of patients in the different disease activity categories according to DAPSA scale changed between BL and 6mo, indicating a favorable disease evolution (Figure 1 next page). According to PGA, at BL (n=53), disease activity was categorized as mild in 18.0%, as moderate in 72.0%, and as severe in 10% of patients and, at 6mo (n=54), as mild in 70.6%, as moderate in 25.5%, and as severe in 3.9% of patients. Fifteen (27.8%) patients interrupted treatment permanently (n=13, 24.1%) or temporarily (n=2, 3.7%), due to no/partial response (n=8, 14.8%), tolerability issues leading to adverse events (n=3, 5.6%), patient decision (n=2, 3.7%), and other reasons (n=2, 3.7%) after a mean (SD) treatment of 3.05 (2.20) months.Conclusion:Forty-one (75.9%) patients with PsA naïve to biological therapies were treated with apremilast during ≥6 months. After treatment, the number of swelling joints, and dactylitis and enthesitis decreased and changes in disease activity according to DAPSA and PGA pointed to a favorable disease evolution. Apremilast treatment provides a clinical benefit to patients with PsA treated in clinical practice.References:[1]Gossec L, Smolen JS, Ramiro S, et al. European League Against Rheumatism (EULAR) recommendations for the management of psoriatic arthritis with pharmacological therapies: 2015 update. Ann Rheum Dis. 2016 Feb 10;75(3):499 LP-510[2]Torres T and Puig L. Apremilast: A novel oral treatment for psoriasis and psoriatic arthritis. Am J clin Dermatol. 2018 Feb;19(1):23-32[3]Coates LC, Kavanaugh A, Mease PJ et al. Group for Research and Assessment of Psoriasis and Psoriatic Arthritis 2015. Treatment Recommendations for Psoriatic Arthritis. Arthritis Rheumatol. 2016;68(5):1060– 71.Disclosure of Interests:Jordi Gratacos-Masmitja Speakers bureau: MSD, Pfizer, AbbVie, Janssen Cilag, Novartis, Celgene y Lilly., Consultant of: MSD, Pfizer, AbbVie, Janssen Cilag, Novartis, Celgene y Lilly., José Luis Álvarez Vega Speakers bureau: Abbvie, Amgen, MSD, Lilly, Roche, Esteve, UCB, Menarini, Pfizer, GSK, BMS, Janssen, Novartis, Gebro., Consultant of: Abbvie, Amgen, MSD, Lilly, Roche, Esteve, UCB, Menarini, Pfizer, GSK, BMS, Janssen, Novartis, Gebro., Grant/research support from: Abbvie, Amgen, MSD, Lilly, Roche, Esteve, UCB, Menarini, Pfizer, GSK, BMS, Janssen, Novartis, Gebro., Emma Beltrán Speakers bureau: Abbvie, Bristol, Celgene, Janssen, Lilly, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche and UCB, Consultant of: Abbvie, Bristol, Celgene, Janssen, Lilly, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche and UCB, ANA URRUTICOECHEA-ARANA: None declared., C. Fito-Manteca: None declared., Francisco Maceiras: None declared., Joaquin Maria Belzunegui Otano Speakers bureau: Lilly, Amgen, Novartis, Abbvie, Janssen., J. Fernández-Melón Speakers bureau: Amgen SL, Eugenio Chamizo Carmona: None declared., Abad Hernández Speakers bureau: MSD, Abbvie, Pfizer, Kern, Novartis, Biogen, Sandoz, Amgen, Sanofi, Lilly, Roche and Janssen-Cilag, Consultant of: MSD, Abbvie, Pfizer, Kern, Novartis, Biogen, Sandoz, Amgen, Sanofi, Lilly, Roche and Janssen-Cilag, Grant/research support from: MSD, Abbvie, Pfizer, Kern, Novartis, Biogen, Sandoz, Amgen, Sanofi, Lilly, Roche and Janssen-Cilag, Inmaculada Ros Consultant of: Amgen, Grant/research support from: MSD, Roche, Novartis, lilly, Pfizer, Amgen, Eva Pascual Shareholder of: Amgen, Employee of: Amgen, Juan Carlos Torre Speakers bureau: Amgen, Lilly, Novartis, Janssen, Pfizer, Consultant of: Amgen, Lilly, Novartis, Janssen, Pfizer, Grant/research support from: Amgen, Lilly, Novartis, Janssen, Pfizer.


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 ◽  
...  

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


2021 ◽  
Vol 80 (Suppl 1) ◽  
pp. 778-779
Author(s):  
E. Gremese ◽  
F. Ciccia ◽  
C. Selmi ◽  
G. Cuomo ◽  
R. Foti ◽  
...  

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.


2020 ◽  
Vol 79 (Suppl 1) ◽  
pp. 35-36 ◽  
Author(s):  
X. Baraliakos ◽  
L. Gossec ◽  
E. Pournara ◽  
S. Jeka ◽  
R. Blanco ◽  
...  

Background:Although axial disease may affect up to 70% of patients (pts) with Psoriatic Arthritis (PsA), evidence on the efficacy of biologics in the treatment of axial manifestations in such pts is limited,1particularly as validated classification criteria for this subtype of PsA are not yet available. MAXIMISE (NCT02721966) is the first randomised controlled trial evaluating the efficacy of a biologic in the management of the axial manifestations of PsA and showed that secukinumab (SEC) 300 and 150 mg provided rapid and significant improvement in ASAS20 responses in these pts through week (Wk) 12.2Objectives:To present 52 wks efficacy results and imaging data from the MAXIMISE trial.Methods:This phase 3b, double-blind, placebo (PBO)-controlled, multicentre 52-wk trial included 498 pts (aged ≥18 years) with a diagnosis of PsA and classified by CASPAR criteria, spinal pain VAS score ≥ 40/100 and BASDAI score ≥ 4 despite use of at least two NSAIDs. Pts were randomised to SEC 300 mg (N=167) or SEC 150 mg (N=165) or PBO (N=166) wkly for 4 wks and every 4 wks thereafter. At Wk 12, PBO pts were re-randomised to SEC 300/150 mg. The primary endpoint was ASAS20 response with SEC 300 mg at Wk 12. The key secondary endpoint was ASAS20 response with SEC 150 mg at Wk 12. Wk 52 data are presented as observed. Bone marrow oedema of the entire spine and sacroiliac joints were assessed centrally with Berlin MRI scores at Baseline, Wk 12 and Wk 52.Results:Primary and key secondary endpoints were met; ASAS20 responses were sustained and increased further through Wk 52. 75%/79.7% of the PBO pts re-randomised at Wk 12 to SEC 300/150 mg achieved ASAS20 response at Wk 52 (Figure 1). ASAS40 responses at Wk 52 were 69.1% [SEC 300 mg], 64.5% [SEC 150 mg], 62.5% [PBO-SEC 300 mg], and 54.1% [PBO-SEC 150 mg]. At baseline, 59.5% [SEC 300 mg], 53.5% [SEC 150 mg] and 64.2% [PBO] of the pts had positive MRIs for the sacroiliac joints and/or the spine with Berlin MRI score ≥1. The reductions of Berlin MRI score for entire spine and sacroiliac joints were statistically significant for pts treated with SEC 300/150 mg vs. placebo (Figure 2a and b). There were no new or unexpected safety findings.Figure 1.ASAS20 Response over 52 Wks*Figure 2.Total Berlin MRI score for the Entire Spine and Sacroiliac Joints at Wk 12Conclusion:Secukinumab improved all evaluated ASAS responses through Wk 52 in PsA pts with axial manifestations and inadequate responses to NSAIDs and led to significant reduction of inflammatory MRI lesions in the spine and the Sacroiliac Joints. The safety profile of secukinumab through Wk 52 was consistent with previous reports.3-4References:[1]McInnes IB, et al.Lancet.2015;386(9999):1137–46.[2]Baraliakos X, et al.Arthritis Rheumatol. 2019;71 (suppl 10).[3]Langley RG, et al.N Engl J Med.2014;371:326–38.[4]Sieper J, et al.Ann Rheum Dis.2016;0:1–8.Acknowledgments:The study was sponsored by Novartis Pharma AG, Basel, Switzerland.Disclosure of Interests:Xenofon Baraliakos Grant/research support from: Grant/research support from: AbbVie, BMS, Celgene, Chugai, Merck, Novartis, Pfizer, UCB and Werfen, Consultant of: AbbVie, BMS, Celgene, Chugai, Merck, Novartis, Pfizer, UCB and Werfen, Speakers bureau: AbbVie, BMS, Celgene, Chugai, Merck, Novartis, Pfizer, UCB and Werfen, Laure Gossec Grant/research support from: Lilly, Mylan, Pfizer, Sandoz, Consultant of: AbbVie, Amgen, Biogen, Celgene, Janssen, Lilly, Novartis, Pfizer, Sandoz, Sanofi-Aventis, UCB, Effie Pournara Shareholder of: Novartis, Employee of: Novartis, Sławomir Jeka Grant/research support from: AbbVie, Pfizer, Roche, Novartis, MSD, Sandoz, Eli Lilly, Egis, UCB, Celgene, Speakers bureau: AbbVie, Pfizer, Roche, Novartis, MSD, Sandoz, Eli Lilly, Egis, UCB, Celgene, Ricardo Blanco Grant/research support from: AbbVie, MSD, Roche, Consultant of: Abbvie, Eli Lilly, Pfizer, Roche, Bristol-Myers, Janssen, UCB Pharma and MSD, Speakers bureau: Abbvie, Eli Lilly, Pfizer, Roche, Bristol-Myers, Janssen, UCB Pharma. MSD, Salvatore D’Angelo Consultant of: AbbVie, Biogen, BMS, Celgene, Eli Lilly, MSD, Novartis, and UCB, Speakers bureau: AbbVie, BMS, Celgene, Eli Lilly, Novartis, Pfizer, and Sanofi, Georg Schett Speakers bureau: AbbVie, BMS, Celgene, Janssen, Eli Lilly, Novartis, Roche and UCB, Barbara Schulz Employee of: Novartis, Michael Rissler Shareholder of: Novartis, Employee of: Novartis, Kriti Nagar Employee of: Novartis, Chiara Perella Shareholder of: Novartis, Employee of: Novartis, Laura C Coates: None declared


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document