scholarly journals Investigating sirukumab for rheumatoid arthritis: 2-year results from the phase III SIRROUND-D study

RMD Open ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 4 (2) ◽  
pp. e000731 ◽  
Author(s):  
Carter Thorne ◽  
Tsutomu Takeuchi ◽  
George Athanasios Karpouzas ◽  
Shihong Sheng ◽  
Regina Kurrasch ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Rheumatoid Arthritis ◽  
Disease Activity ◽  
Activity Index ◽  
Clinical Signs ◽  
Disease Activity Index ◽  
Signs And Symptoms ◽  
Exposure Period ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Double Blind ◽  
Patient Reported

ObjectivesThe phase III, multicentre, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group SIRROUND-D study evaluated long-term efficacy and safety of the interleukin (IL)-6 inhibitor, sirukumab, in patients with active rheumatoid arthritis (RA) refractory to disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs).MethodsPatients were randomised 1:1:1 to sirukumab 100  mg every 2 weeks (q2w), 50  mg every 4 weeks or placebo q2w subcutaneously. Patients initially randomised to placebo were rerandomised at Weeks 18, 40 or 52 to one of the sirukumab groups until Week 104.ResultsOf 1670 randomised patients, 1402 were included in the full analysis set and 1269 in the radiographic analysis set at Week 104. American College of Rheumatology scores, Disease Activity Score based on C-reactive protein, Clinical Disease Activity Index and clinically meaningful improvements in patient-reported outcomes were sustained at Week 104 among patients initially randomised to sirukumab. Placebo patients subsequently rerandomised to sirukumab showed clinical improvements at Week 104 that were comparable to results among patients initially randomised to sirukumab. Radiographic progression from Week 52 to Week 104 was comparable between all groups whether initially randomised to sirukumab or subsequently rerandomised to sirukumab from placebo. No new safety signals were identified in the extended exposure period compared with the initial 52 weeks of treatment.ConclusionsSirukumab treatment resulted in sustained reductions in clinical signs and symptoms and minimal progression in radiographic damage over 2 years among patients with RA refractory to DMARDs. The safety profile of sirukumab was as expected for an anti-IL-6 agent, with no new signals reported.

scholarly journals Olokizumab, a monoclonal antibody against interleukin 6, in combination with methotrexate in patients with rheumatoid arthritis inadequately controlled by methotrexate: efficacy and safety results of a randomised controlled phase III study

2021 ◽  
pp. annrheumdis-2021-219876
Author(s):  
Evgeniy Nasonov ◽  
Saeed Fatenejad ◽  
Eugen Feist ◽  
Mariana Ivanova ◽  
Elena Korneva ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Rheumatoid Arthritis ◽  
Disease Activity ◽  
Activity Index ◽  
Disease Activity Index ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Double Blind Study ◽  
Efficacy And Safety ◽  
Serious Adverse Events ◽  
Double Blind ◽  
Acr20 Response

ObjectiveTo evaluate the efficacy and safety of olokizumab (OKZ) in patients with active rheumatoid arthritis despite treatment with methotrexate (MTX).MethodsIn this 24-week multicentre, placebo-controlled, double-blind study, patients were randomised 1:1:1 to receive subcutaneously administered OKZ 64 mg once every 2 weeks, OKZ 64 mg once every 4 weeks, or placebo plus MTX. The primary efficacy endpoint was the proportion of patients achieving an American College of Rheumatology 20% (ACR20) response at week 12. The secondary efficacy endpoints included percentage of subjects achieving Disease Activity Score 28-joint count based on C reactive protein <3.2, Health Assessment Questionnaire Disability Index at week 12, ACR50 response and Clinical Disease Activity Index ≤2.8 at week 24. Safety and immunogenicity were assessed throughout the study.ResultsA total of 428 patients were randomised. ACR20 responses were more frequent with OKZ every 2 weeks (63.6%) and OKZ every 4 weeks (70.4%) than placebo (25.9%) (p<0.0001 for both comparisons). There were significant differences in all secondary efficacy endpoints between OKZ-treated arms and placebo. Treatment-emergent serious adverse events (TESAEs) were reported by more patients in the OKZ groups compared with placebo. Infections were the most common TESAEs. No subjects developed neutralising antidrug antibodies.ConclusionsTreatment with OKZ was associated with significant improvement in signs, symptoms and physical function of rheumatoid arthritis without discernible differences between the two regimens. Safety was as expected for this class of agents. Low immunogenicity was observed.Trial registration numberNCT02760368.

scholarly journals Safety and efficacy of switching from adalimumab to sarilumab in patients with rheumatoid arthritis in the ongoing MONARCH open-label extension

RMD Open ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 5 (2) ◽  
pp. e001017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gerd R Burmester ◽  
Vibeke Strand ◽  
Andrea Rubbert-Roth ◽  
Howard Amital ◽  
Tatiana Raskina ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Rheumatoid Arthritis ◽  
Disease Activity ◽  
Activity Index ◽  
Disease Activity Index ◽  
Normative Values ◽  
Open Label ◽  
Double Blind ◽  
Safety And Efficacy ◽  
Patient Reported ◽  
Open Label Extension

ObjectiveEvaluate open-label sarilumab monotherapy in patients with rheumatoid arthritis switching from adalimumab monotherapy in MONARCH (NCT02332590); assess long-term safety and efficacy in patients continuing sarilumab during open-label extension (OLE).MethodsDuring the 48-week OLE, patients received sarilumab 200 mg subcutaneously once every 2 weeks. Safety (March 2017 cut-off) and efficacy, including patient-reported outcomes, were evaluated.ResultsIn the double-blind phase, patients receiving sarilumab or adalimumab monotherapy showed meaningful improvements in disease activity; sarilumab was superior to adalimumab for improving signs, symptoms and physical function. Overall, 320/369 patients completing the 24-week double-blind phase entered OLE (155 switched from adalimumab; 165 continued sarilumab). Sarilumab safety profile was consistent with previous reports. Treatment-emergent adverse events were similar between groups; no unexpected safety signals emerged in the first 10 weeks postswitch. Among switch patients, improvement in disease activity was evident at OLE week 12: 47.1%/34.8% had changes ≥1.2 in Disease Activity Score (28 joints) (DAS28)-erythrocyte sedimentation rate/DAS28-C-reactive protein. In switch patients achieving low disease activity (LDA: Clinical Disease Activity Index (CDAI) ≤10; Simplified Disease Activity Index (SDAI) ≤11) by OLE week 24, 70.7%/69.5% sustained CDAI/SDAI LDA at both OLE weeks 36 and 48. Proportions of switch patients achieving CDAI ≤2.8 and SDAI ≤3.3 by OLE week 24 increased through OLE week 48. Improvements postswitch approached continuation-group values, including scores ≥normative values.ConclusionsDuring this OLE, there were no unexpected safety issues in patients switching from adalimumab to sarilumab monotherapy, and disease activity improved in many patients. Patients continuing sarilumab reported safety consistent with prolonged use and had sustained benefit.

scholarly journals Efficacy and safety of sarilumab monotherapy versus adalimumab monotherapy for the treatment of patients with active rheumatoid arthritis (MONARCH): a randomised, double-blind, parallel-group phase III trial

2016 ◽  
Vol 76 (5) ◽  
pp. 840-847 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gerd R Burmester ◽  
Yong Lin ◽  
Rahul Patel ◽  
Janet van Adelsberg ◽  
Erin K Mangan ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Rheumatoid Arthritis ◽  
Disease Activity ◽  
Active Rheumatoid Arthritis ◽  
Activity Index ◽  
Joint Disease ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Inadequate Response ◽  
Efficacy And Safety ◽  
Double Blind ◽  
End Point

ObjectivesTo compare efficacy and safety of sarilumab monotherapy with adalimumab monotherapy in patients with active rheumatoid arthritis (RA) who should not continue treatment with methotrexate (MTX) due to intolerance or inadequate response.MethodsMONARCH was a randomised, active-controlled, double-blind, double-dummy, phase III superiority trial. Patients received sarilumab (200 mg every 2 weeks (q2w)) or adalimumab (40 mg q2w) monotherapy for 24 weeks. The primary end point was change from baseline in 28-joint disease activity score using erythrocyte sedimentation rate (DAS28-ESR) at week 24.ResultsSarilumab was superior to adalimumab in the primary end point of change from baseline in DAS28-ESR (−3.28 vs −2.20; p<0.0001). Sarilumab-treated patients achieved significantly higher American College of Rheumatology 20/50/70 response rates (sarilumab: 71.7%/45.7%/23.4%; adalimumab: 58.4%/29.7%/11.9%; all p≤0.0074) and had significantly greater improvement in Health Assessment Questionnaire-Disability Index (p=0.0037). Importantly, at week 24, more patients receiving sarilumab compared with adalimumab achieved Clinical Disease Activity Index remission (7.1% vs 2.7%; nominal p=0.0468) and low disease activity (41.8% vs 24.9%; nominal p=0.0005, supplemental analysis). Adverse events occurred in 63.6% (adalimumab) and 64.1% (sarilumab) of patients, the most common being neutropenia and injection site reactions (sarilumab) and headache and worsening RA (adalimumab). Incidences of infections (sarilumab: 28.8%; adalimumab: 27.7%) and serious infections (1.1%, both groups) were similar, despite neutropenia differences.ConclusionsSarilumab monotherapy demonstrated superiority to adalimumab monotherapy by improving the signs and symptoms and physical functions in patients with RA who were unable to continue MTX treatment. The safety profiles of both therapies were consistent with anticipated class effects.Trial registration numberNCT02332590.

THU0620-HPR MEASUREMENT OF LOW DISEASE ACTIVITY USING THE CLINICAL DISEASE ACTIVITY INDEX (CDAI) VERSUS THE DISEASE ACTIVITY SCORE 28 (DAS 28): IMPACT OF INFLAMMATION MARKERS ON THE COMPARATIVE EFFECTIVENESS OF BIOLOGICS FOR THE TREATMENT OF RHEUMATOID ARTHRITIS

2020 ◽  
Vol 79 (Suppl 1) ◽  
pp. 553.1-553
Author(s):  
K. Janke ◽  
K. Biester ◽  
D. Krause ◽  
B. Richter ◽  
C. Schürmann ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Rheumatoid Arthritis ◽  
Disease Activity ◽  
Comparative Effectiveness ◽  
Inflammatory Markers ◽  
Activity Index ◽  
Disease Activity Index ◽  
Signs And Symptoms ◽  
Acute Phase Reactants ◽  
Das 28 ◽  
Effectiveness Studies

Background:Biologics for the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis (RA) have different modes of action to target auto-inflammatory processes causing the signs and symptoms of the disease. Different biologics may thus have different effects on inflammatory markers. For instance, previous studies have shown that the interleukin-6-inhibitor tocilizumab (TOC) decreases the level of acute phase reactants (APRs) [1]. Such direct effects on inflammatory markers may lead to an overestimation of clinical response if disease activity is measured via scores including inflammatory markers, such as the Disease Activity Score 28 (DAS 28). The detected changes in disease activity may not adequately reflect the clinical improvement of signs and symptoms.Objectives:In our study, we compared biologics with each other using two different disease activity scores: the DAS 28 including APRs and the clinical disease activity index (CDAI) excluding APRs. The aim of this study was to assess whether the use of the two different scores affects comparative effectiveness studies on biologics for the treatment of RA.Methods:We compared results on the comparative effectiveness of biologics using the corresponding thresholds for low disease activity (LDA) for the DAS 28 (< 3.2) and the CDAI (≤ 10). We performed two separate network meta-analyses (NMAs) after a thorough step-by-step evaluation of the similarity, homogeneity and consistency assumptions of the patient populations and the study data.Our study formed part of a systematic review (including NMAs) that was largely based on clinical study reports and re-analyses of LDA using individual patient data provided by sponsors for studies conducted up to 2017. Thus, the analyses include hitherto unknown data on LDA analysed by means of the CDAI, especially data from older studies. An extensive comparison of DAS 28 and CDAI in different patient populations was possible.Results:For all analysed patient populations, comparisons of TOC versus other biologics yielded remarkable results: advantages for TOC were found in NMAs using the DAS 28, which were not confirmed in NMAs using the CDAI. For methotrexate (MTX)-naïve patients, using the DAS 28, TOC showed a greater benefit than abatacept (ABA), certolizumab pegol (CZP), and etanercept (ETA), which was not confirmed by the CDAI. In contrast, TOC showed less benefit than adalimumab (ADA) and ETA. For patients after MTX failure and using the DAS 28, TOC showed a greater benefit than ABA, ADA, anakinra (ANA), ETA, golimumab (GOL), and infliximab (INF). With the exception of ANA, these advantages were not confirmed by the CDAI. Similar differences between DAS 28 and CDAI were shown in patients treated with biologics in monotherapy or after failure of biologics.Conclusion:In comparative effectiveness studies of biologics, the assessment of LDA using the DAS 28 instead of the CDAI leads to a consistent overestimation of the benefit of TOC in all patient populations, regardless of pre-treatment or combined therapy with MTX. The inclusion of APRs in disease activity scores may thus introduce bias. A score excluding inflammatory markers should therefore be used to ensure valid results.References:[1]Smolen JS, Aletaha D. Interleukin-6 receptor inhibition with tocilizumab and attainment of disease remission in rheumatoid arthritis: the role of acute-phase reactants. Arthritis Rheum 2011; 63(1): 43-52.Disclosure of Interests:Kirsten Janke: None declared, Katharina Biester: None declared, Dietmar Krause Grant/research support from: Pfizer and AbbVie (Abbott), Bernd Richter: None declared, Christoph Schürmann: None declared, Katharina Hirsch: None declared, Beate Wieseler: None declared

scholarly journals Effect of Glucocorticoids on the Clinical and Radiographic Efficacy of Tofacitinib in Patients with Rheumatoid Arthritis: A Posthoc Analysis of Data from 6 Phase III Studies

2017 ◽  
Vol 45 (2) ◽  
pp. 177-187 ◽  
Author(s):  
Christina Charles-Schoeman ◽  
Désirée van der Heijde ◽  
Gerd R. Burmester ◽  
Peter Nash ◽  
Cristiano A.F. Zerbini ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Rheumatoid Arthritis ◽  
Disease Activity ◽  
Radiographic Progression ◽  
Activity Index ◽  
Disease Activity Index ◽  
Response Rates ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Inadequate Response ◽  
Link Type ◽  
Phase Iii Studies

Objective.Tofacitinib has been investigated for the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis (RA) in phase III studies in which concomitant glucocorticoids (GC) were allowed. We analyzed the effect of GC use on efficacy outcomes in patients with RA receiving tofacitinib and/or methotrexate (MTX) or conventional synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (csDMARD) in these studies.Methods.Our posthoc analysis included data from 6 phase III studies (NCT01039688; NCT00814307; NCT00847613; NCT00853385; NCT00856544; NCT00960440). MTX-naive patients or patients with inadequate response to csDMARD or biological DMARD received tofacitinib 5 or 10 mg twice daily alone or with csDMARD, with or without concomitant GC. Patients receiving GC (≤ 10 mg/day prednisone or equivalent) before enrollment maintained a stable dose throughout. Endpoints included the American College of Rheumatology (ACR) 20/50/70 response rates, rates of Clinical Disease Activity Index (CDAI)-defined low disease activity (LDA; CDAI ≤ 10) and remission (CDAI ≤ 2.8), and changes from baseline in CDAI, 28-joint count Disease Activity Score (DAS28-4)–erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR), Health Assessment Questionnaire–Disability Index (HAQ-DI), pain visual analog scale (VAS), and modified total Sharp score.Results.Of 3200 tofacitinib-treated patients, 1258 (39.3%) received tofacitinib monotherapy and 1942 (60.7%) received tofacitinib plus csDMARD; 1767 (55.2%) received concomitant GC. ACR20/50/70 response rates, rates of CDAI LDA and remission, and improvements in CDAI, DAS28-4-ESR, HAQ-DI, and pain VAS with tofacitinib were generally similar with or without GC in monotherapy and combination therapy studies. GC use did not appear to affect radiographic progression in tofacitinib-treated MTX-naive patients. MTX plus GC appeared to inhibit radiographic progression to a numerically greater degree than MTX alone.Conclusion.Concomitant use of GC with tofacitinib did not appear to affect clinical or radiographic efficacy. MTX plus GC showed a trend to inhibit radiographic progression to a greater degree than MTX alone.

scholarly journals “From Where I Stand”: Using Multiple Anchors Yields Different Benchmarks for Meaningful Improvement and Worsening in the Rheumatoid Arthritis Flare Questionnaire (RA-FQ)

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Susan J. Bartlett ◽  
Vivian P. Bykerk ◽  
Orit Schieir ◽  
Marie-France Valois ◽  
Janet E Pope ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Rheumatoid Arthritis ◽  
Disease Activity ◽  
Global Assessment ◽  
Activity Index ◽  
Disease Activity Index ◽  
Early Arthritis ◽  
Meaningful Change ◽  
Meaningful Improvement ◽  
Patient Reported ◽  
New Evidence

Abstract Purpose The Rheumatoid Arthritis Flare Questionnaire (RA-FQ) is a patient-reported measure of disease activity in RA. We estimated minimal and meaningful change from the perspective of RA patients, physicians, and using a disease activity index. Methods Data were from 3- and 6-month visits of adults with early RA enrolled in the Canadian Early Arthritis Cohort. Participants completed the RA-FQ, the Patient Global Assessment of RA, and Patient Global Change Impression at consecutive visits. Rheumatologists recorded joint counts and MD Global. Clinical Disease Activity Index (CDAI) scores were computed. We compared mean RA-FQ change across categories using patients, physicians, and CDAI anchors. Results The 808 adults were mostly white (84%) women (71%) with a mean age of 55 and moderate-high disease activity (85%) at enrollment. At V2, 79% of patients classified their RA as changed; 59% were better and 20% were worse. Patients reporting they were a lot worse had a mean RA-FQ increase of 8.9 points whereas those who were a lot better had a -6.0 decrease. Minimal worsening and improvement were associated with a mean 4.7 and -1.8 change in RA-FQ, respectively, while patients rating their RA unchanged had stable scores. Physician and CDAI classified more patients as worse than patients, and minimal and meaningful RA-FQ thresholds differed by group. Conclusion Thresholds to identify meaningful change vary by anchor used. These data offer new evidence demonstrating robust psychometric properties of the RA-FQ and offer guidance about improvement or worsening, supporting its use in RA care, research and decision-making.

scholarly journals Impact of assessing patient-reported outcomes with mobile apps on patient–provider interaction

RMD Open ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 7 (1) ◽  
pp. e001566
Author(s):  
Yomei Shaw ◽  
Delphine S Courvoisier ◽  
Almut Scherer ◽  
Adrian Ciurea ◽  
Thomas Lehmann ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Rheumatoid Arthritis ◽  
Disease Activity ◽  
Rheumatic Diseases ◽  
Patient Reported Outcomes ◽  
Activity Index ◽  
Mobile Apps ◽  
Disease Activity Index ◽  
Discussion Group ◽  
Patient Reported ◽  
Physician Awareness

ObjectiveTo explore the effect of apps measuring patient-reported outcomes (PROs) on patient–provider interaction in the rheumatic diseases in an observational setting.MethodsPatients in the Swiss Clinical Quality Management in Rheumatic Diseases Registry were offered mobile apps (iDialog and COmPASS) to track disease status between rheumatology visits using validated PROs (Rheumatoid Arthritis Disease Activity Index-5 score, Bath Ankylosing Spondylitis Disease Activity Index score, Routine Assessment of Patient Index Data-3 score and Visual Analogue Scale score for pain, disease activity and skin symptoms). We assessed two aspects of patient–provider interaction: shared decision making (SDM) and physician awareness of disease fluctuations. We used logistic regressions to compare outcomes among patients who (1) used an app and discussed app data with their physician (app+discussion group), (2) used an app without discussing the data (app-only group) or (3) did not use any app (non-app users).Results2111 patients were analysed, including 1799 non-app users, 150 app-only users and 162 app+discussion users (43% male; with 902 patients with rheumatoid arthritis, 766 patients with axial spondyloarthritis and 443 patients with psoriatic arthritis). App users were younger than non-app users (mean age of 47 vs 51 years, p<0.001). Compared with non-app users, the app+discussion group rated their rheumatologist more highly in SDM (OR 1.7, 95% CI 1.1 to 2.4) and physician awareness of disease fluctuations (OR 2.0, 95% CI 1.3 to 3.1). This improvement was absent in the app-only group.ConclusionApp users who discussed app data with their rheumatologist reported more favourably on patient–provider interactions than app users who did not and non-app users. Apps measuring PROs may contribute little to patient–provider interactions without integration of app data into care processes.

scholarly journals Pooled analysis of TNF inhibitor biosimilar studies comparing radiographic progression by disease activity states in rheumatoid arthritis

RMD Open ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 6 (1) ◽  
pp. e001096 ◽  
Author(s):  
Josef S Smolen ◽  
Jung-Yoon Choe ◽  
Michael E Weinblatt ◽  
Paul Emery ◽  
Edward Keystone ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Rheumatoid Arthritis ◽  
Disease Activity ◽  
Radiographic Progression ◽  
Activity Index ◽  
Logistic Models ◽  
Disease Activity Index ◽  
Pooled Analysis ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Tnf Inhibitor ◽  
Link Type

ObjectiveTo evaluate the relationship between disease activity and radiographic progression in rheumatoid arthritis, three phase III studies of SB4, SB2 and SB5 (biosimilars of etanercept, infliximab and adalimumab) were pooled to assess radiographic progression by disease activity status.MethodsPatients from each study with radiographic data were pooled and grouped based on disease activity state (remission, low disease activity (LDA), moderate disease activity (MDA) and high disease activity (HDA)), determined by disease activity score based on 28-joint count (DAS28) per erythrocyte sedimentation rate, Simplified Disease Activity Index (SDAI) and Clinical Disease Activity Index (CDAI) at different time points. Mean change in modified Total Sharp Score (mTSS) and the proportion of radiographic non-progressors of higher disease activity groups (LDA, MDA and HDA) in reference to remission were summarised descriptively, with comparison of ORs using logistic models.Results1265 patients were included. In all treatments combined, the 1 year mean change in mTSS was 0.03, 0.4, 0.3 and 1.3 and proportion of radiographic non-progressors was 79.8%, 78.1%, 74.1% and 58.4% in the week 24/30 DAS28-determined remission, LDA, MDA and HDA groups, respectively. ORs (95% CIs) of the proportion of non-progressors were lowest in the HDA group in reference to remission (0.35 (0.23 to 0.54)), followed by MDA (0.72 (0.50 to 1.05)) and LDA (0.90 (0.55 to 1.48)) groups. Similar trends were observed when disease activity was assessed using SDAI or CDAI.ConclusionA pooled analysis of radiographic assessment data from three biosimilar studies showed that radiographic progression is small overall but increases with worse disease activity.Trial registration numbersNCT01895309, NCT01936181 and NCT02167139

scholarly journals Efficacy and safety of upadacitinib over 84 weeks in Japanese patients with rheumatoid arthritis (SELECT-SUNRISE)

2021 ◽  
Vol 23 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Hideto Kameda ◽  
Tsutomu Takeuchi ◽  
Kunihiro Yamaoka ◽  
Motohiro Oribe ◽  
Mitsuhiro Kawano ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Rheumatoid Arthritis ◽  
Disease Activity ◽  
Activity Index ◽  
Disease Activity Index ◽  
Japanese Patients ◽  
Inadequate Response ◽  
Efficacy And Safety ◽  
Double Blind ◽  
Dose Rates ◽  
American College Of Rheumatology

Abstract Background The objective of the study was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of upadacitinib over 84 weeks in Japanese patients with active rheumatoid arthritis (RA) and an inadequate response to conventional synthetic disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs. Methods All patients completing a 12-week, randomized, double-blind treatment period entered a blinded extension and continued upadacitinib 7.5, 15, or 30 mg once daily (QD), or were switched from placebo to upadacitinib 7.5, 15, or 30 mg QD. Efficacy and safety were assessed over 84 weeks. Results Of 197 randomized patients, 187 (94.9%) completed the 12-week period and entered the blinded extension; 152 (77.2%) patients were ongoing at week 84. At week 84, the proportions of patients achieving a 20% improvement in American College of Rheumatology criteria (ACR20) were 85.7%, 77.6%, and 58.0% with continued upadacitinib 7.5, 15, and 30 mg, respectively (nonresponder imputation), and were similar in patients who had switched from placebo. Favorable response rates were also observed for more stringent measures of response (ACR50/70) and remission (defined by the Disease Activity Score of 28 joints with C-reactive protein, Clinical Disease Activity Index, or Simplified Disease Activity Index). The 15 mg and 30 mg doses of upadacitinib were associated with more rapid and numerically higher initial responses for some measures of disease activity and remission compared with the 7.5 mg dose. Rates of adverse events, infection, opportunistic infection, serious infection, and herpes zoster were lower with upadacitinib 7.5 and 15 mg versus 30 mg. Conclusions Upadacitinib demonstrated sustained efficacy and was well tolerated over 84 weeks in Japanese patients with RA, with upadacitinib 15 mg offering the most favorable benefit–risk profile. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02720523. Registered on March 22, 2016.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document