Efficacy and safety of guselkumab in patients with active psoriatic arthritis who are inadequate responders to tumour necrosis factor inhibitors: results through one year of a phase IIIb, randomised, controlled study (COSMOS)

ObjectiveTo evaluate efficacy and safety of guselkumab, an anti-interleukin-23p19-subunit antibody, in patients with psoriatic arthritis (PsA) with prior inadequate response (IR) to tumour necrosis factor inhibitors (TNFi).MethodsAdults with active PsA (≥3 swollen and ≥3 tender joints) who discontinued ≤2 TNFi due to IR (lack of efficacy or intolerance) were randomised (2:1) to subcutaneous guselkumab 100 mg or placebo at week 0, week 4, then every 8 weeks (Q8W) through week 44. Patients receiving placebo crossed over to guselkumab at week 24. The primary (ACR20) and key secondary (change in HAQ-DI, ACR50, change in SF-36 PCS and PASI100) endpoints, at week 24, underwent fixed-sequence testing (two-sided α=0.05). Adverse events (AEs) were assessed through week 56.ResultsAmong 285 participants (female (52%), one (88%) or two (12%) prior TNFi), 88% of 189 guselkumab and 86% of 96 placebo→guselkumab patients completed study agent through week 44. A statistically significantly higher proportion of patients receiving guselkumab (44.4%) than placebo (19.8%) achieved ACR20 (%difference (95% CI): 24.6 (14.1 to 35.2); multiplicity-adjusted p<0.001) at week 24. Guselkumab was superior to placebo for each key secondary endpoint (multiplicity-adjusted p<0.01). ACR20 response (non-responder imputation) in the guselkumab group was 58% at week 48; >80% of week 24 responders maintained response at week 48. Through week 24, serious AEs/serious infections occurred in 3.7%/0.5% of 189 guselkumab-randomised and 3.1%/0% of 96 placebo-randomised patients; the guselkumab safety profile was similar through week 56, with no deaths or opportunistic infections.ConclusionGuselkumab significantly improved joint and skin manifestations and physical function in patients with TNFi-IR PsA. A favourable benefit–risk profile was demonstrated through 1 year.Trial registration numberNCT03796858.

Long-term efficacy, safety, and immunogenicity of the adalimumab biosimilar, PF-06410293, in patients with rheumatoid arthritis after switching from reference adalimumab (Humira®) or continuing biosimilar therapy: week 52–92 data from a randomized, double-blind, phase 3 trial

Background/objective REFLECTIONS B538–02 is a randomized, double-blind comparative study of the adalimumab (ADL) biosimilar PF-06410293, (ADL-PF), and reference ADL sourced from the European Union (ADL-EU) in patients with active RA. Therapeutic equivalence was demonstrated based on ACR20 responses at week 12 (primary endpoint). We report long-term safety, immunogenicity, and efficacy of ADL-PF in patients who continued ADL-PF treatment throughout 78 weeks or who switched from ADL-EU to ADL-PF at week 26 or week 52. Methods Eligible patients (2010 ACR/EULAR RA diagnosis criteria for ≥ 4 months; inadequate response to MTX, ≤ 2 doses non-ADL biologic), stratified by geographic regions were initially randomized (1:1) in treatment period 1 (TP1) to ADL-PF or ADL-EU (40 mg subcutaneously, biweekly), both with MTX (10–25 mg/week). At week 26 (start of TP2), patients receiving ADL-EU were re-randomized to remain on ADL-EU or transition to ADL-PF for 26 weeks. At week 52 (start of TP3), all patients received open-label treatment with ADL-PF for 26 weeks and were followed after last treatment dose to week 92. To evaluate maintenance of response after switching or remaining on ADL-PF, ACR20, DAS28-4(CRP), and other measures of clinical response/remission were assessed through week 78 as secondary endpoints. Three groups were evaluated: biosimilar, week 26 switch, and week 52 switch. Results Overall, 507 patients participated in TP3. ACR20 response rates at week 52 were 88.4%, 88.2%, and 87.6% for the biosimilar, week 26, and week 52 switch groups, respectively. ACR20 response rates and DAS28-4(CRP) scores were sustained and comparable across groups in TP3. Incidence of treatment-emergent adverse events (AEs) during TP3 and follow-up was 42.6% (biosimilar), 37.0% (week 26 switch), and 50.8% (week 52 switch); 3 (0.6%) patients (all week 52 switch) reported treatment-related serious AEs. ADL-PF was generally well tolerated, with a comparable safety profile across groups. Overall, incidences of patients with anti-drug antibodies in TP3 and follow-up were comparable among groups (46.1%, 46.5%, and 54.2%, respectively). Conclusions There were no clinically meaningful differences in safety, immunogenicity, and efficacy for patients who were maintained on ADL-PF for 78 weeks and those who had switched from ADL-EU at week 26 or week 52. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02480153. First posted on June 24, 2015; EU Clinical Trials Register; EudraCT number: 2014-000352-29. Start date, October 27, 2014

SM03, an anti-human CD22 monoclonal antibody, for active rheumatoid arthritis: a phase II, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study

Objective SM03, a novel chimaeric mAb specific to B cell-restricted antigen CD22, has been developed to treat RA and other B-cell-related diseases. This 24-week phase II randomized, double-blind, multi-dose, placebo-controlled study aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of SM03 in moderately-to-severely active RA patients in China. Methods One hundred and fifty-six patients on background MTX were randomized in a 1:1:1 ratio to receive a cumulative dose of 3600 mg (high dose, 600 mg × 6 infusions at weeks 0, 2, 4, 12, 14 and 16) or 2400 mg SM03 (low dose, 600 mg × 4 infusions at weeks 0, 2, 12 and 14) or the placebo. The primary outcome was the 24-week ACR 20% improvement criteria (ACR20) response rate. Safety was also assessed. Results The 24-week ACR20 response rate was significantly higher with high- (65.3%, P = 0.002) and low-dose SM03 (56.9%, P = 0.024) than with placebo (34.0%), but comparable between the high- and low-dose group. The rate of adverse events was not statistically different among the high-dose group (35.3%), the low-dose group (51.9%) and the placebo group (34.6%). Thirteen (12.6%) patients receiving SM03 reported treatment-emergent infections, including 3.9% patients in the high-dose group. No patients reported severe treatment-emergent infections or malignancies. Conclusions In active RA Chinese patients receiving background MTX, SM03 at a cumulative dose of both 2400 mg and 3600 mg is efficacious and well-tolerated throughout the 24 weeks of treatment. Moreover, SM03 has demonstrated a good safety profile. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov, https://clinicaltrials.gov, NCT04192617.

Effectiveness and safety of levilimab in combination with methotrexate in treatment of patients with active rheumatoid arthritis resistant to methotrexate monotherapy (double-blinded randomized placebo controlled phase III clinical study SOLAR)

Levilimab is anti-interleukin-6 receptor (IL6R) monoclonal antibody. The article presents data obtained during 24 weeks of the SOLAR phase III study.Objective: to confirm efficacy and safety of levilimab in combination with methotrexate (MTX) in patients with methotrexate resistant active rheumatoid arthritis (RA).Patients and methods. 154 adult patients, aged ≥18 years with the diagnosis of RA (ACR/EULAR 2010) and confirmed disease activity at screening despite treatment with MTX for at least 12 weeks (in a stable dose 15-25 mg/week). Patients were randomized 2:1 in levilimab (162 mg once a week, subcutaneously) + MTX (n=102) or placebo + MTX (n=52) group.The hypothesis of superiority of levilimab over placebo was tested for two co-primary efficacy endpoints: proportion of subjects who achieved ACR20 at week 12 and proportion of subjects who achieved low disease activity (LDA) of RA (DAS28-CRP <3.2) at week 24. Safety was assessed through monitoring of adverse events (AEs).Results and discussion. Seventy (68.6%) subjects who received levilimab and 20 (38.5%) who received placebo achieved ACR20 response at week 12. Fifty three (52%) subjects who received levilimab and 3 (5,8%) subjects who received placebo achieved LDA at week 24. The most common adverse events (reported in ≥5% of subjects) in levilimab and placebo arms, respectively were (by decreasing frequency): blood c holesterol increase (24% vs 12%), alanine aminotransferase elevation (11% vs 8%), lymphocyte count decrease (9% vs 8%), blood total bilirubin increase (11% vs 0%), blood triglycerides increase (10% vs 2%), aspartate aminotransferase elevation (7% vs 4%), positive interferon-gamma release assay (IGRA) with M.tuberculosis antigen blood test (5% vs 6%), absolute neutrophil count decrease (8% vs 0%). No deaths were occurred.Conclusion. The study confirmed superior efficacy of levilimab + MTX over placebo + MTX in subjects with MTX resistant active RA. Levilimab showed favorable safety profile and low immunogenicity. No new important safety risks were detected.

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

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.

Associations of ultrasound-based inflammation patterns with peripheral innate lymphoid cell populations, serum cytokines/chemokines, and treatment response to methotrexate in rheumatoid arthritis and spondyloarthritis

Objectives We aimed to explore the associations of musculoskeletal inflammation patterns with peripheral blood innate lymphoid cell (ILC) populations, serum cytokines/chemokines, and treatment response to methotrexate in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) and spondyloarthritis (SpA). Methods We enrolled 100 patients with either RA or SpA and performed ultrasound to evaluate power Doppler signals for synovitis (52 joint regions), tenosynovitis (20 tendons), and enthesitis (44 sites). We performed clustering analysis using unsupervised random forest based on the multi-axis ultrasound information and classified the patients into groups. We identified and counted ILC1-3 populations in the peripheral blood by flow cytometry and also measured the serum levels of 20 cytokines/chemokines. We also determined ACR20 response at 3 months in 38 patients who began treatment with methotrexate after study assessment. Results Synovitis was more prevalent and severe in RA than in SpA, whereas tenosynovitis and enthesitis were comparable between RA and SpA. Patients were classified into two groups which represented synovitis-dominant and synovitis-nondominant inflammation patterns. While peripheral ILC counts were not significantly different between RA and SpA, they were significantly higher in the synovitis-nondominant group than in the synovitis-dominant group (ILC1-3: p = 0.0007, p = 0.0061, and p = 0.0002, respectively). On the other hand, clustering of patients based on serum cytokines/chemokines did not clearly correspond either to clinical diagnoses or to synovitis-dominant/nondominant patterns. The synovitis-dominant pattern was the most significant factor that predicted clinical response to methotrexate (p = 0.0065). Conclusions Musculoskeletal inflammation patterns determined by ultrasound are associated with peripheral ILC counts and could predict treatment response to methotrexate.

AB0565 JAK INHIBITORS AND PSORIATIC ARTHRITIS: A SYSTEMATIC REVIEW AND META-ANALYSIS

Background:Despite the therapeutic armamentarium for the treatment of psoriatic arthritis (PsA) has considerably expanded over the last thirty years, there is a huge necessity of finding effective drugs for this disease. JAK inhibitors (JAKi) are small molecules able to interfere with the JAK/STAT pathway, involved in the pathogenesis of PsA (1). Up to now Tofacitinib is the only JAKi approved by the European Medicines Agency (EMA) for the treatment of PsA but in the next few years the number of approved JAKi is expected to rise significantly.Objectives:To assess the efficacy and safety of different JAKi for the treatment of PsA.Methods:A systematic review of the literature was performed to identify randomized controlled trials (RCTs), by electronic search of MEDLINE and EMBASE database until October 2020. Studies were considered eligible if they met the following criteria: I) study was a RCT; II) only patients with PsA were included; III) JAKi was compared to placebo in addition to the standard of care. Two reviewers (FC and AZ) performed study selection, with disagreements solved by the opinion of an expert reviewer (AS). The outcomes were expressed as odds ratio (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (95% CI). Statistical heterogeneity was assessed with the I2 statistic.Results:We identified 557 potentially relevant studies. A total of 554 studies were excluded based on title and/or abstract screening. Three RCTs for a total of 947 PsA patients treated with JAKi were included (2,3,4). Two were phase III studies on the efficacy and safety of Tofacitinib (OPAL Beyond and OPAL Broaden) and one was a phase II study on Filgotinib (Equator). All three studies were judged at low risk of bias according to Cochrane criteria (5). The primary efficacy outcome in all the studies was the number of patients who achieved the response rate of the American College of Rheumatology 20 score (ACR20). The outcomes evaluation was performed at 12 week for the Filgotinib trial and at 16 week for the Tofacitinib trials. We used for the main analyses the group of patients randomized to Tofacitinib 5 mg because this is the only dosage approved by the EMA for the treatment of PsA. JAKi showed a significantly higher ACR20 response rate compared to placebo (OR 3.54, 95% CI 1.76 - 7.09, I^2 = 74%). JAKi also showed a significantly higher ACR50 response rate (OR 3.36, 95% CI 2.22 - 5.09, I^2 = 0%), ACR70 response rate (OR 2.82, 95% CI 1.67 - 4.76, I^2 = 20%), PsARC response rate (OR 2.67, 95% CI 1.26 - 5.65, I^2 = 79%), PASI75 response rate (OR 3.15, 95% CI 1.61 - 6.15, I^2 = 45%) compared to placebo. JAKi were also associated with significantly better HAQ-DI (mean difference -0.23 95% CI -0.31 - -0.14) and fatigue, measured with FACIT-F (mean difference 3.54 95% CI 2.13 - 4.94). JAKi compared to placebo were associated with a non-statistically significant different risk of serious adverse events (OR 0.56, 95% CI 0.11 - 2.91, I^2 = 38%).Conclusion:This is the first published systematic review that performed a comprehensive and simultaneous evaluation of the efficacy and safety of JAKi for PsA in RCTs. Our analysis suggests a statistically significant benefit of JAKi, that appears to be effective and safe over placebo. The impact of these data on international clinical guidelines needs further investigation.References:[1]George E Fragoulis, et al. JAK-inhibitors. New players in the field of immune-mediated diseases, beyond rheumatoid arthritis, Rheumatology, Volume 58, Issue Supplement_1, February 2019, Pages i43–i54[2]Mease P, et al. Tofacitinib or adalimumab versus placebo for psoriatic arthritis. N Engl J Med 2017; 377: 1537-50.[3]Gladman D, et al. Tofacitinib for psoriatic arthritis in patients with an inadequate response to TNF inhibitors. N Engl J Med 2017; 377: 1525-36.[4]Mease P, et al. Efficacy and safety of filgotinib, a selective Janus kinase 1 inhibitor, in patients with active psoriatic arthritis (EQUATOR): results from a randomised, placebo-controlled, phase 2 trial. Lancet 2018;392:2367–77.[5]Higgins JP, et Al. Measuring inconsistency in meta-analyses. BMJ 2003;327:557-560Figure 1.ACR20 response rate of Jaki over PlaceboDisclosure of Interests:None declared.

AB0199 PLACEBO AND NOCEBO RESPONSES IN RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIALS OF NON-TUMOR NECROSIS FACTOR BIOLOGICS AND JANUS KINASE INHIBITORS IN PATIENTS WITH ACTIVE RHEUMATOID ARTHRITIS SHOWING INSUFFICIENT RESPONSE TO TUMOR NECROSIS FACTOR INHIBITORS: A META-ANALYSIS

Background:Placebo and nocebo responses have important consequences for the development of pharmaceutical drugs and the design of randomized controlled trials (RCTs). They can lead to the incorrect measurement of treatment-related efficacy and adverse effects (AEs).Objectives:The goal of this study was to evaluate the frequency and magnitude of placebo and nocebo responses in placebo-controlled RCTs of non-tumor necrosis factor (TNF) biologics and Janus kinase (JAK) inhibitors in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) showing an insufficient response to TNF inhibitors.Methods:We performed a meta-analysis on the rates of placebo response, AEs, severe AEs (SAEs), and withdrawal owing to AEs in placebo-controlled randomized clinical trials (RCTs) of non-TNF biologics and JAK inhibitors in patients with RA showing an insufficient response to TNF inhibitors.Results:Nine RCTs contained a total of 3,442 patients (1,840 experimental subjects and 1,602 controls). The pooled incidence of an ACR20 response rate in placebo-treated patients was 22.1% (95% CI 16.4–29.1%) and 27.9% (95% CI 24.5–31.6%) in RCTs of non-TNF inhibitors and JAK inhibitors, respectively. A strong negative correlation was observed between drug efficacies (ACR20 response) and AE rates in the placebo arm, indicating that the greater the placebo response, the weaker the nocebo response (r = -0.762, P = 0.017). A strong positive correlation was observed between drug efficacies (ACR20 response) in the placebo and active comparator, indicating that the greater the placebo response, the greater the treatment response (r = 0.737, P = 0.003). The pooled estimate in placebo-treated patients with at least one AE was 71.8% (95% CI 57.4–82.7%) and 58.7% (95% CI 52.8–64.3%) in RCTs of non-TNF inhibitors and JAK inhibitors, respectively. The pooled estimate in placebo-treated patients who withdrew from treatment owing to an AE was 3.8% (95% CI 2.7–5.3%) and 4.0% (95% CI 2.7–6.0%) in RCTs of non-TNF inhibitors and JAK inhibitors, respectively. A strong positive correlation was observed between AE rates in the placebo and active arms, indicating that the greater the nocebo response, the stronger the AE rate in the active arm (r = 0.855, P = 0.003).Conclusion:The frequency of the placebo and nocebo responses was 22.1% vs. 27.9% and 71.8% vs. 58.7% in placebo-controlled RCTs of non-TNF inhibitors and JAK inhibitors for RA, respectively, and the greater the placebo response, the weaker the nocebo response and the greater the efficacy.References:[1]Mitsikostas DD, Chalarakis NG, Mantonakis LI, Delicha EM, Sfikakis PP. Nocebo in fibromyalgia: meta-analysis of placebo-controlled clinical trials and implications for practice. Eur J Neurol 2012;19:672-80.[2]Kravvariti E, Kitas GD, Mitsikostas DD, Sfikakis PP. Nocebos in rheumatology: emerging concepts and their implications for clinical practice. Nat Rev Rheumatol 2018;14:727-40.[3]Colloca L, Barsky AJ. Placebo and Nocebo Effects. N Engl J Med 2020;382:554-61.Disclosure of Interests:None declared

Efficacy and safety of tildrakizumab in patients with active psoriatic arthritis: results of a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, multiple-dose, 52-week phase IIb study

ObjectivesTo evaluate efficacy and safety of the anti-interleukin-23p19 monoclonal antibody tildrakizumab in patients with psoriatic arthritis (PsA).MethodsIn this randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase IIb study, patients with active PsA were randomised 1:1:1:1:1 to tildrakizumab 200 mg every 4 weeks (Q4W); tildrakizumab 200, 100 or 20 mg Q12W; or placebo Q4W. Patients receiving tildrakizumab 20 mg or placebo switched to tildrakizumab 200 mg Q12W at W24; treatment continued to W52. The primary efficacy endpoint was proportion of patients with ACR20 response (≥20% improvement by American College of Rheumatology criteria) at W24. Secondary efficacy endpoints were assessed without adjustment for multiplicity. Safety was evaluated from treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs).Results391/500 patients screened were randomised and treated. At W24, 71.4%–79.5% of tildrakizumab-treated versus 50.6% of placebo-treated patients achieved ACR20 (all p<0.01). Patients receiving tildrakizumab versus placebo generally achieved higher rates of ACR50, Disease Activity Score in 28 joints with C reactive protein <3.2, minimal disease activity and 75%/90%/100% improvement from baseline Psoriasis Area and Severity Index responses at W24 and through W52. Improvement in dactylitis and enthesitis was not observed; results were mixed for other outcomes. Responses in patients switched to tildrakizumab 200 mg at W24 were consistent with treatment from baseline. TEAEs and serious TEAEs occurred in 64.5% and 3.3%, respectively, of all patients through W52 and were comparable among treatment arms.ConclusionsTildrakizumab treatment significantly improved joint and skin manifestations of PsA other than dactylitis and enthesitis. Treatment was generally well tolerated through W52. Clinicaltrials.gov NCT02980692.

Safety and efficacy of faecal microbiota transplantation for active peripheral psoriatic arthritis: an exploratory randomised placebo-controlled trial

ObjectivesAlthough causality remains to be established, targeting dysbiosis of the intestinal microbiota by faecal microbiota transplantation (FMT) has been proposed as a novel treatment for inflammatory diseases. In this exploratory, proof-of-concept study, we evaluated the safety and efficacy of FMT in psoriatic arthritis (PsA).MethodsIn this double-blind, parallel-group, placebo-controlled, superiority trial, we randomly allocated (1:1) adults with active peripheral PsA (≥3 swollen joints) despite ongoing treatment with methotrexate to one gastroscopic-guided FMT or sham transplantation into the duodenum. Safety was monitored throughout the trial. The primary efficacy endpoint was the proportion of participants experiencing treatment failure (ie, needing treatment intensification) through 26 weeks. Key secondary endpoints were change in Health Assessment Questionnaire Disability Index (HAQ-DI) and American College of Rheumatology (ACR20) response at week 26.ResultsOf 97 screened, 31 (32%) underwent randomisation (15 allocated to FMT) and 30 (97%) completed the 26-week clinical evaluation. No serious adverse events were observed. Treatment failure occurred more frequently in the FMT group than in the sham group (9 (60%) vs 3 (19%); risk ratio, 3.20; 95% CI 1.06 to 9.62; p=0.018). Improvement in HAQ-DI differed between groups (0.07 vs 0.30) by 0.23 points (95% CI 0.02 to 0.44; p=0.031) in favour of sham. There was no difference in the proportion of ACR20 responders between groups (7 of 15 (47%) vs 8 of 16 (50%)).ConclusionsIn this first preliminary, interventional randomised controlled trial of FMT in immune-mediated arthritis, we did not observe any serious adverse events. Overall, FMT appeared to be inferior to sham in treating active peripheral PsA.Trial registration numberNCT03058900.