The Corporations Can Help Too: Complete Stockholder Relations Programs Can Encourage Widespread Stock Ownership

1951 ◽  
Vol 7 (4) ◽  
pp. 29-30
Author(s):  
Sherman M. Hall
Keyword(s):  
2005 ◽  
Vol 35 (20) ◽  
pp. 72
Author(s):  
MARY ELLEN SCHNEIDER
Keyword(s):  

Rheumatology ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 60 (Supplement_1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Helena Marzo-Ortega ◽  
Chiara Perella ◽  
Denis Poddubnyy ◽  
Effie Pournara ◽  
Agnieszka Zielińska ◽  
...  

Abstract Background/Aims  SKIPPAIN (NCT03136861) is the first randomised controlled study involving a biological disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drug, with a primary endpoint of spinal pain at Week 8 in patients with axial spondyloarthritis (axSpA; ankylosing spondylitis [AS] and non-radiographic [nr]-axSpA). We present the 24-week results of secukinumab in reducing spinal pain and disease activity following step-up dosing. Methods  This double-blind, placebo-controlled Phase 3b study enrolled patients (aged ≥18 years) with active disease (BASDAI ≥4; average spinal pain numerical rating scale [NRS] score >4 at baseline; inadequate response to ≥ 2 non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs ≥4 weeks). Patients were randomised (3:1) to subcutaneous secukinumab 150 mg or placebo weekly followed by every 4 weeks (Q4W) from Week 4. At Week 8, placebo patients were re-randomised to secukinumab 150 or 300 mg Q4W. Patients originally randomised to secukinumab 150 mg were classified as responders or non-responders (spinal pain NRS score <4 or ≥ 4, respectively) at Week 8. Responders were re-assigned to continue doubleblind secukinumab 150 mg Q4W (Arm A1). Non-responders were re-randomised to double-blind secukinumab 150 mg (Arm A2) or a step-up dose of 300 mg (Arm A3) Q4W. Treatment was up to Week 24. Primary endpoint: proportion of patients achieving an average spinal pain score <4 on a 0-10 NRS with secukinumab vs placebo at Week 8. Results  380 axSpA patients (269/380 [70.8%] AS; 111/380 [29.2%] nr-axSpA) were randomised to secukinumab 150 mg (N = 285) or placebo (N = 95). The primary endpoint was met (proportion of spinal pain NRS [average] score responders: 32% vs 20%; odds ratio [95% confidence interval] 1.9 [1.1-3.3] favouring secukinumab vs placebo; P < 0.05). Further reductions in spinal pain occurred at Week 24, especially in those initially randomised to placebo and switched to active drug. Pronounced improvements were observed in other disease activity measurements (Table 1). Numerically, more patients achieved ASDAS low disease activity at Week 24 post-secukinumab dose escalation (Arm A3) vs those remaining on the same dose (Arm A2). Conclusion  Secukinumab provided rapid, significant improvement in spinal pain and led to low disease activity in axSpA patients. Secukinumab dose escalation might be beneficial for patients not responding fully to the starting dose. P188 Table 1:Spinal pain and ASDAS-CRP scores at Weeks 8 and 24Week 8SEC 150 mg (N = 285)PBO (N = 95)Change from baseline in spinal pain NRS score (total), mean (SD) [n]-2.6 (2.5) [279]-1.5 (2.2) [92]Change from baseline in ASDAS-CRP score, mean (SD) [n]-1.2 (1.0) [271]-0.5 (0.8) [89]Week 24Active treatment group (SEC treatment starting at baseline)PBO switchers group (SEC treatment starting at Week 8)Arm A1 (SEC 150 R-150) N = 90Arm A2 (SEC 150 NR-150) N = 94Arm A3 (SEC 150 NR-300) N = 94Arm B1 (PBO-SEC 150) N = 45Arm B2 (PBO-SEC 300) N = 44Change from Week 8 in spinal pain NRS score (total), mean (SD) [n]-0.4 (1.5) [88]-2.1 (2.2) [93]-1.9 (2.2) [91]-2.5 (2.6) [45]-2.9 (2.6) [43]Change from baseline in ASDAS-CRP score, mean (SD) [n]-2.2 (1.0) [86]-1.2 (1.0) [93]-1.5 (1.0) [92]-1.5 (1.1) [44]-1.8 (0.9) [43]Arm A1=SEC responder to SEC 150 mg at Week 8 (SEC 150 R-150); Arm A2=SEC non-responder to SEC 150 mg at Week 8 (SEC 150 NR-150); Arm A3=SEC non-responder to SEC 300 mg at Week 8 (SEC 150 NR-300); Arm B1=Placebo patients to SEC 150 mg (PBO-SEC 150); Arm B2=Placebo patients to SEC 300 mg (PBO-SEC 300). ASDAS-CRP, Ankylosing Spondylitis Disease Activity Score using C-reactive protein; N, total number of patients randomised; n, number of evaluable patients; NR, non-responders; NRS, numerical rating scale; PBO, placebo; R, responders; SD, standard deviation; SEC, secukinumab. Disclosure  H. Marzo-Ortega: Consultancies; AbbVie, Celgene, Janssen, Lilly, Novartis, Pfizer, UCB. Member of speakers’ bureau; AbbVie, Celgene, Janssen, Lilly, Novartis, Pfizer, Takeda, UCB. Grants/research support; Janssen, Novartis. C. Perella: Corporate appointments; Employee of Novartis. Shareholder/stock ownership; Novartis Stock. D. Poddubnyy: Consultancies; Consultant/speaker for: AbbVie, BMS, Lilly, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, UCB. Grants/research support; AbbVie, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer. E. Pournara: Corporate appointments; Employee of Novartis. Shareholder/stock ownership; Novartis Stock. A. Zielińska: Consultancies; Novartis, Pfizer. A. Baranauskaite: Consultancies; AbbVie. Member of speakers’ bureau; Novartis, AbbVie, Amgen, Roche, KRKA. S. Sadhu: Corporate appointments; Employee of Novartis. B. Schulz: Corporate appointments; Employee of Novartis. M. Rissler: Corporate appointments; Employee of Novartis. Shareholder/stock ownership; Novartis Stock.


Rheumatology ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 60 (Supplement_1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Kevin L Winthrop ◽  
Tsutomu Takeuchi ◽  
Gerd Burmester ◽  
Walter Deberdt ◽  
Douglas Schlichting ◽  
...  

Abstract Background/Aims  Baricitinib (BARI) is an oral selective inhibitor of Janus kinase (JAK)1/2, approved for treatment of moderate-to-severe- rheumatoid arthritis (RA) in adults. Here, we update the drug’s safety profile with data up to 8.4 years of treatment. Methods  Long-term safety of BARI was assessed from 9 completed randomized trials(5 Ph3, 3 Ph2, 1 Ph 1b) and 1 ongoing long-term extension(LTE) study. Incidence rates(IRs) per 100 patient-years (PY) were calculated for all RA patients treated with ≥1 dose of BARI through 1-Sep-2019(All-BARI-RA set). IRs for deep vein thrombosis(DVT), pulmonary embolism(PE), and DVT and/or PE(DVT/PE) were also calculated for groups of patients while receiving BARI 2mg/4mg within All-BARI-RA. Major adverse cardiovascular events(MACE) were adjudicated in 5 Ph3 studies and the LTE. Results  3770 pts received BARI for 13,148 PY, with median and maximum exposure: 4.2 and 8.4 years, respectively. Overall IRs per 100 PY were: for any treatment-emergent adverse event (AE)(25.8); serious AE (including death)(7.2); temporary interruption due to AE (9.5); permanent discontinuation due to AE (4.8); death (0.52); serious infection (2.7); opportunistic infection (0.46)(excluding tuberculosis [TB], including multidermatomal herpes zoster [HZ]); TB (0.15); HZ (3.0); MACE (0.50); DVT (0.31); PE (0.24); DVT/PE (0.46); malignancies excluding non-melanoma skin cancer (NMSC)(0.91); NMSC (0.33); lymphoma (0.07); and gastrointestinal perforation (0.04). (IRs)[95% confidence intervals] for patients while receiving BARI 2mg (N = 1077) and BARI 4mg (N = 3400) were DVT 2mg (0.38)[0.18, 0.73] and 4mg (0.30)[0.21, 0.43]; PE 2mg (0.26)[0.09, 0.56] and 4mg (0.25)[0.16, 0.36]; and DVT/PE 2mg (0.47)[0.23, 0.84] and 4mg (0.46)[0.34, 0.61]. IRs for death tended to increase in later time intervals (beyond 192 weeks). No particular cause of death contributed to this increase. For all other safety topics of interest, across 48-week treatment intervals, IRs remained stable over time. Across safety topics, IRs were consistent with previous analyses. Conclusion  In this update, with 3021 additional PY of exposure, BARI maintained a safety profile similar to that previously reported, with no increase of IRs across safety topics through exposures up to 8.4 years. Disclosure  K.L. Winthrop: Consultancies; AbbVie, Amgen, Bristol Myers Squibb, Eli Lilly and Company, Pfizer, and UCB Pharma. Grants/research support; Bristol Myers Squibb and Pfizer. T. Takeuchi: Consultancies; AbbVie, Asahi Kasei Medical, Astellas, AstraZeneca, Bristol Myers Squibb, Chugai, Daiichi Sankyo, Eisai, Eli Lilly and Company, GlaxoSmithKline, Janssen, Mitsubishi Tanabe Pharma, Nippon Kayaku, Novartis, Pfizer Japan, Taiho Pharmaceutical, Taiho Toyama Pharmaceutical, Takeda, and UCB Japan. G. Burmester: Consultancies; Eli Lilly and Company, Janssen, Novartis, and Pfizer. Grants/research support; Eli Lilly and Company. W. Deberdt: Shareholder/stock ownership; Eli Lilly and Company. D. Schlichting: Shareholder/stock ownership; Eli Lilly and Company. D. Mo: Shareholder/stock ownership; Eli Lilly and Company. C. Walls: Shareholder/stock ownership; Eli Lilly and Company. J.S. Smolen: Consultancies; AbbVie, Amgen, AstraZeneca, Astro Pharma, Bristol Myers Squibb, Celgene, Celltrion, Chugai, Eli Lilly and Company, Gilead Sciences, ILTOO Pharma, Janssen, MedImmune, Merck Sharp & Dohme, Novartis-Sandoz, Pfizer, Roche, Samsung, Sanofi-Aventis, and UCB Pharma. Grants/research support; AbbVie, Eli Lilly and Company, Janssen, Merck Sharp & Dohme, Novartis, Pfizer, and Roche.


Rheumatology ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 60 (Supplement_1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Alice Gottlieb ◽  
Frank Behrens ◽  
Peter Nash ◽  
Joseph F Merola ◽  
Pascale Pellet ◽  
...  

Abstract Background/Aims  Psoriatic arthritis (PsA) is a heterogeneous disease comprising musculoskeletal and dermatological manifestations, especially plaque psoriasis. Secukinumab, an interleukin17A inhibitor, provided significantly greater PASI75/100 responses in two head-to-head trials versus etanercept or ustekinumab, a tumour necrosis factor inhibitor (TNFi), in patients with moderate-to-severe plaque psoriasis. The EXCEED study (NCT02745080) investigated whether secukinumab was superior to adalimumab, another TNFi, as monotherapy in biologic-naive active PsA patients with active plaque psoriasis (defined as having ≥1 psoriatic plaque of ≥ 2 cm diameter, nail changes consistent with psoriasis or documented history of plaque psoriasis). Here we report the pre-specified skin outcomes from the EXCEED study in the subset of patients with ≥3% body surface area (BSA) affected with psoriasis at baseline. Methods  In this head-to-head, Phase 3b, randomised, double-blind, active-controlled, multicentre, parallel-group trial, patients were randomised to receive subcutaneous secukinumab 300 mg at baseline and Weeks 1-4, followed by dosing every 4 weeks until Week 48, or subcutaneous adalimumab 40 mg at baseline followed by the same dosing every 2 weeks until Week 50. The primary endpoint was superiority of secukinumab versus adalimumab on ACR20 response at Week 52. Pre-specified outcomes included the proportion of patients achieving a combined ACR50 and PASI100 response, PASI100 response, and absolute PASI score ≤3. Missing data were handled using multiple imputation. Results  Overall, 853 patients were randomised to receive secukinumab (n = 426) or adalimumab (n = 427). At baseline, 215 and 202 patients had at least 3% BSA affected with psoriasis in the secukinumab and adalimumab groups, respectively. At Week 52, more patients achieved simultaneous improvement in ACR50 and PASI100 response with secukinumab versus adalimumab (30.7% versus 19.2%, respectively; P = 0.0087). Greater efficacy was demonstrated for secukinumab versus adalimumab for PASI100 responses and for the proportion of patients achieving absolute PASI score ≤3 (Table 1). Conclusion  In this pre-specified analysis, secukinumab provided higher responses compared with adalimumab in achievement of combined improvement in joint and skin disease (combined ACR50 and PASI100 response) and in skin-specific endpoints (PASI100 and absolute PASI score ≤3) at Week 52. P189 Table 1:Skin-specific outcomes at Week 52Endpoints, % responseSEC 300 mg (N = 215)ADA 40 mg (N = 202)P value (unadjusted)PASI10046300.0007Combined ACR50 and PASI10031190.0087Absolute PASI score ≤379650.0015P value vs ADA; unadjusted P values are presented. Multiple imputation was used for handling missing data. ADA, adalimumab; ACR, American College of Rheumatology; N, number of patients in the psoriasis subset; PASI, Psoriasis Area and Severity Index; SEC, secukinumab. Disclosure  A. Gottlieb: Grants/research support; A.G. has received research support, consultation fees or speaker honoraria from Pfizer, AbbVie, BMS, Lilly, MSD, Novartis, Roche, Sanofi, Sandoz, Nordic, Celltrion and UCB. F. Behrens: Consultancies; F.B. is a consultant for Pfizer, AbbVie, Sanofi, Lilly, Novartis, Genzyme, Boehringer Ingelheim, Janssen, MSD, Celgene, Roche and Chugai. Grants/research support; F.B. has received grant/research support from Pfizer, Janssen, Chugai, Celgene, Lilly and Roche. P. Nash: Consultancies; P.N. is a consultant for AbbVie, Bristol Myers Squibb, Celgene, Eli Lilly, Gilead, Janssen, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer Inc., Roche, Sanofi and UCB. Member of speakers’ bureau; for AbbVie, Bristol Myers Squibb, Celgene, Eli Lilly, Gilead, Janssen, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer Inc., Roche, Sanofi and UCB. Grants/research support; P.N. has received research support from AbbVie, Bristol Myers Squibb, Celgene, Eli Lilly and Company, Gilead, Janssen, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer Inc, Roche, Sanofi and UCB. J. Merola: Consultancies; J.F.M. is a consultant for Merck, AbbVie, Dermavant, Eli Lilly, Novartis, Janssen, UCB Pharma, Celgene, Sanofi, Regeneron, Arena, Sun Pharma, Biogen, Pfizer, EMD Sorono, Avotres and LEO Pharma. P. Pellet: Corporate appointments; P.P. is an employee of Novartis. Shareholder/stock ownership; P.P. is a shareholder of Novartis. L. Pricop: Corporate appointments; L.P. is an employee of Novartis. Shareholder/stock ownership; L.P. is a shareholder of Novartis. I. McInnes: Consultancies; I.M. is a consultant for AbbVie, Bristol Myers Squibb, Celgene, Eli Lilly and Company, Gilead, Janssen, Novartis, Pfizer and UCB. Grants/research support; I.M. has received grant/research support from Bristol Myers Squibb, Celgene, Eli Lilly and Company, Janssen and UCB.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document