scholarly journals POS1088 EFFICACY OF SUBCUTANEOUS TANEZUMAB FOR THE TREATMENT OF OSTEOARTHRITIS OF THE KNEE OR HIP: A POST-HOC SUBGROUP ANALYSIS OF PATIENTS FROM A RANDOMIZED, NSAID-CONTROLLED STUDY WITH A HISTORY OF DEPRESSION, ANXIETY, OR INSOMNIA

2021 ◽  
Vol 80 (Suppl 1) ◽  
pp. 823-824
Author(s):  
P. J. Mease ◽  
T. Mallick-Searle ◽  
E. Johnston ◽  
L. Viktrup ◽  
D. Menuet ◽  
...  

Background:Tanezumab is a monoclonal antibody directed against nerve growth factor. It is in development for the treatment of moderate to severe chronic pain associated with osteoarthritis (OA) in adult patients for whom other treatments are ineffective or not appropriate. Phase 3 clinical trials have demonstrated the efficacy of subcutaneous tanezumab versus placebo for pain and function outcomes over various timepoints. Largely similar change from baseline was demonstrated in an oral nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug (NSAID)-controlled study.1,2,3,4 The efficacy of some other OA therapies can be dampened in patients with depression, anxiety, or insomnia.5,6,7Objectives:A post-hoc analysis to explore the efficacy of subcutaneous tanezumab after 16 weeks treatment, as compared to oral NSAID, in patients with OA and a history of depression, anxiety, or insomnia at baseline.Methods:Subgroup analysis of data from a randomized, double-blind, double-dummy, active-controlled phase 3 study of subcutaneous tanezumab (2.5 mg or 5 mg every 8 weeks) vs twice daily oral NSAID in patients (≥18 years) with radiographically-confirmed moderate to severe hip or knee OA (Kellgren-Lawrence grade ≥2; NCT02528188).4 Co-primary efficacy endpoints were change from baseline to week 16 in Western Ontario and McMaster Universities OA Index (WOMAC*) Pain and Physical Function subscale scores (both ≥5/10 at randomisation; increasing score indicates increasing pain/disability), and Patient’s Global Assessment of OA (PGA-OA, ≥3/5 at randomisation; increasing score indicates poorer condition). Enrolled patients had a history of inadequate pain relief with acetaminophen; inadequate pain relief with/intolerance to/contraindication to tramadol or opioids; or an unwillingness to take opioids. Patients were on a stable dose of NSAID for ≥30 days before screening. Data are presented as least squares (LS) mean change from baseline to week 16 for the whole population and for subgroups of patients with/without a history of depression, anxiety, or insomnia at baseline. Exploratory statistical analysis was conducted by analysis of covariance. P values were not adjusted for multiplicity. This exploratory post-hoc analysis was not part of the pre-specified hypothesis testing plan or included in any sample size calculations; therefore, comparisons between treatment arms or patient subgroups should be interpreted with caution.Results:Overall, 2996 patients were randomized and received at least one dose of study treatment (subcutaneous tanezumab 2.5 mg: n=1002; subcutaneous tanezumab 5 mg: n=998; oral NSAID: n=996). In this population (comprising patients with or without a history of anxiety, depression or insomnia), all treatments were associated with notable and largely similar magnitude improvements in WOMAC Pain, WOMAC Physical Function, and PGA-OA at week 16 (Figure 1). Across treatment groups, differences in LS mean change from baseline in patients with and without a history of depression, anxiety or insomnia ranged between 0 - 0.34 for WOMAC Pain and Physical Function and 0 - 0.19 for PGA-OA.Conclusion:Patients with a history of depression, anxiety, or insomnia did not appear to experience dampened improvements in pain or function with tanezumab or NSAID, as compared to those without.References:[1]Schnitzer T, et al. JAMA. 2019;322(1):37-48;[2]Berenbaum F, et al. Ann Rheum Dis. 2020;79(6):800-10;[3]Schnitzer T, et al. Semin Arthritis Rheum. 2020;50(3):387-93;[4]Hochberg M, et al. Arthritis Rheumatol. In Press;[5]Sharma A, et al. Open Access Rheumatol. 2016;31(8):103-13;[6]Mallen C, et al. PLoS Med. 2017;14(4):e1002273;[7]Campbell C, et al. Arthritis Care Res. 2015;67(10):1387-96.Acknowledgements:Study sponsored by Pfizer and Eli Lilly and Company. Editorial support was provided by Jennifer Bodkin of Engage Scientific Solutions and funded by Pfizer and Eli Lilly and Company.Disclosure of Interests:Philip J Mease Speakers bureau: AbbVie, Amgen, Bristol Myers Squibb, Celgene, Janssen, Eli Lilly and Company, Novartis, Pfizer, UCB, Consultant of: AbbVie, Amgen, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol Myers Squibb, Celgene, Galapagos, Gilead, GlaxoSmithKline, Janssen, Eli Lilly and Company, Novartis, Pfizer, Sun, UCB, Grant/research support from: AbbVie, Amgen, Bristol Myers Squibb, Celgene, Janssen, Eli Lilly and Company, Novartis, Pfizer, Sun, UCB, Theresa Mallick-Searle Speakers bureau: Allergan, Abbvie, Eli Lilly and Company, Salix, Consultant of: Pfizer, Eli Lilly and Company, Elizabeth Johnston Shareholder of: Eli Lilly and Company, Employee of: Eli Lilly and Company, Lars Viktrup Shareholder of: Eli Lilly and Company, Employee of: Eli Lilly and Company, Dominique Menuet Employee of: Pfizer, Ruoyong Yang Employee of: Pfizer, Robert J Fountaine Shareholder of: Pfizer, Employee of: Pfizer.

2020 ◽  
Vol 79 (Suppl 1) ◽  
pp. 1011.1-1011
Author(s):  
M. C. Kapetanovic ◽  
M. Andersson ◽  
A. Friedman ◽  
T. Shaw ◽  
Y. Song ◽  
...  

Background:Early treatment of RA within the therapeutic window(0-3 months from symptom onset), has been associated with improved clinical outcomes and physical function. However, ≤42% of RA patients(pts) visit a rheumatologist within 90 days of symptom onset1,2.Objectives:To assess safety and efficacy of Upadacitinib(UPA), an oral, reversible, potent JAK-1 selective inhibitor3, in pts with moderate to severely active RA who were MTX-naïve or had an inadequate response to csDMARDs/bDMARDs4-6.Methods:In SELECT–EARLY, MTX-naïve pts with active RA and poor prognosis were randomized 1:1:1 to once-daily UPA monotherapy at 15 or 30 mg or weekly MTX (titrated up to 20 mg/week through Week 8). Efficacy (including ACR, DAS28(CRP), CDAI responses and change in mTSS) and safety outcomes from a post-hoc analysis of patients who received treatment within 90 days from diagnosis are reported here. The statistical significance defined asp<0.05was exploratory in nature.Results:A total of 270 pts commenced treatment within 90 days from RA diagnosis (median: 44 days [11, 89]). Pts in each arm were mostly female (70%), had moderately to severely active RA with mean DAS28(CRP) =5.9±1.02, had structural joint damage (mean mTSS =7.7±21.5) and were seropositive for both ACPA and RF at baseline (72%)4. At Week 24, compared to MTX, significantly greater proportions of pts receiving UPA 15 or 30 mg monotherapy achieved efficacy outcomes including ACR20, 50 and 70 responses, DAS28CRP<2.6, CDAI≤2.8 or Boolean remission. Improvements in physical function (HAQ-DI) and decrease in pain were also significantly greater in pts receiving UPA 15 and 30 mg vs MTX at Week 24. Treatment with UPA was also associated with a greater inhibition of structural joint damage compared with MTX (Figure 1). Safety outcomes were consistent with the full study and the integrated safety analysis (all phase 3 studies of UPA). Compared to MTX, higher frequencies of serious infections and herpes zoster were reported in both UPA groups. There were 2 deaths in total (UPA 30 mg: 1 due to cardiovascular death and 1 due to pneumonia and sepsis) (Figure 2).Conclusion:In RA pts, early initiation of treatment with UPA 15 mg and 30 mg monotherapy within 3 months from diagnosis was associated with clinically meaningful improvements in efficacy, including remission and inhibition of progression of structural joint damage compared to MTX. The safety profile was consistent with the overall study and the integrated phase 3 safety analysis7. UPA seems to be a promising treatment option for more patients to reach their treatment targets of remission or low disease activity when treated within 3 months of diagnosis.References:[1]Raza K et al. Ann Rheum Dis. 2011;70(10):1822-5.[2]Stack RJ et al. BMJ Open. 2019;9:e024361.[3]Parmentier et al. BMC Rheumatol. 2018;2:23.[4]van Vollenhoven R et al, Arth Rheumatol. 2018; 70 (s10) [Abs ACR2018].[5]Burmester GR et al. Lancet 2018;391:2503-12.[6]Genovese MC et al, Lancet 2018;391:2513-24.[7]Cohen S et al, Ann Rheum Dis [Abs EULAR2019].Disclosure of Interests:Meliha C Kapetanovic: None declared, Maria Andersson Shareholder of: AbbVie, Employee of: AbbVie, Alan Friedman Shareholder of: AbbVie Inc, Employee of: AbbVie Inc, Tim Shaw Shareholder of: AbbVie, Employee of: AbbVie, Yanna Song Shareholder of: AbbVie Inc., Employee of: AbbVie Inc., Daniel Aletaha Grant/research support from: AbbVie, Novartis, Roche, Consultant of: AbbVie, Amgen, Celgene, Lilly, Medac, Merck, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, Sandoz, Sanofi Genzyme, Speakers bureau: AbbVie, Celgene, Lilly, Merck, Novartis, Pfizer, Sanofi Genzyme, UCB, Maya H Buch Grant/research support from: Pfizer, Roche, and UCB, Consultant of: Pfizer; AbbVie; Eli Lilly; Gilead Sciences, Inc.; Merck-Serono; Sandoz; and Sanofi, Ulf Müller-Ladner Speakers bureau: Biogen, Janet Pope Grant/research support from: AbbVie, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Eli Lilly & Company, Merck, Roche, Seattle Genetics, UCB, Consultant of: AbbVie, Actelion, Amgen, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Eicos Sciences, Eli Lilly & Company, Emerald, Gilead Sciences, Inc., Janssen, Merck, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, Sandoz, Sanofi, UCB, Speakers bureau: UCB


2020 ◽  
Vol 79 (Suppl 1) ◽  
pp. 813.2-814
Author(s):  
Y. Yazici ◽  
S. Kennedy ◽  
C. Swearingen ◽  
J. Tambiah

Background:Lorecivivint (LOR; SM04690) is a small-molecule, intra-articular (IA) CLK/DYRK1A inhibitor that modulates the Wnt pathway1and has demonstrated some beneficial effects on patient-reported outcomes (PROs) relative to placebo (PBO) in two Phase 2 knee OA trials. With subjective measures such as PROs, meaningful benefits may be better characterized by representation as discrete threshold responses rather than by changes in mean point estimates.Objectives:To conduct a post hoc analysis of subjects in a 24-week Phase 2b study by measuring the proportions of subjects treated with LOR and placebo (PBO) who achieved 30%, 50%, or 70% threshold responses of improvement over baseline in Pain Numeric Rating Scale (NRS), Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) Pain, WOMAC Function, and Patient Global Assessment (PtGA) at Week 12. Results from the Phase 3-selected dose of 0.07 mg LOR are presented here.Methods:Subjects had ACR-defined knee OA, Kellgren-Lawrence (KL) grades 2–3, and Pain NRS scores ≥4 and ≤8 in the target knee and <4 in the contralateral knee. A single 2mL IA injection of 0.03 mg, 0.07 mg, 0.15 mg, or 0.23 mg LOR, or vehicle PBO was given in the target knee at baseline. The proportion of subjects meeting 30%, 50%, or 70% threshold responses over baseline in the weekly average of daily Pain NRS [0–10], WOMAC Pain [0–100], WOMAC Function [0–100], and PtGA [0–100] at Week 12 was determined. The odds ratios (OR [95% CI]) of achieving each threshold response level were calculated and compared between LOR and PBO.Results:In total, 635 subjects (91.4%) completed the study (mean age 59.0±8.5 years, BMI 29.0±4.0 kg/m2, female 58.4%, KL grade 3 57.3%). At Week 12, treatment with 0.07 mg LOR significantly (P<0.05) increased the odds of a 30% threshold response in Pain NRS (OR 2.47 [1.45, 4.19]) and WOMAC Function (OR 1.86 [1.10, 3.12]) and a 50% threshold response in WOMAC Pain (OR 1.79 [1.06, 3.03]) and PtGA (OR 2.28 [1.25, 4.16]). Numerically, more (not statistically significant) subjects achieved a 70% threshold response in all PROs. All improvements were maintained through Week 24.Conclusion:In this post hoc analysis, LOR-treated subjects reported greater improvements in PRO threshold responses versus PBO from Week 12 through Week 24. LOR demonstrated significantly higher odds of achieving and maintaining improvements in PROs at 30% and 50% thresholds. Phase 3 studies of 0.07 mg LOR are ongoing.References:[1]Deshmukh V, et al.Osteoarthr Cartil. 2019.Disclosure of Interests:Yusuf Yazici Shareholder of: Samumed, LLC, Grant/research support from: Bristol-Myers Squibb, Celgene, and Genentech, Consultant of: Celgene and Sanofi, Employee of: Samumed, LLC, Sarah Kennedy Shareholder of: Samumed, LLC, Employee of: Samumed, LLC, Christopher Swearingen Shareholder of: Samumed, LLC, Employee of: Samumed, LLC, Jeyanesh Tambiah Shareholder of: Samumed, LLC, Employee of: Samumed, LLC


2021 ◽  
Vol Volume 14 ◽  
pp. 2059-2070
Author(s):  
J Scott Andrews ◽  
David Kudrow ◽  
Mallikarjuna Rettiganti ◽  
Tina Oakes ◽  
Jennifer N Bardos ◽  
...  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document