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.

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.

Efficacy and safety of biosimilar CT-P17 versus reference adalimumab in subjects with rheumatoid arthritis: 24-week results from a randomized study

Background To demonstrate equivalent efficacy of the proposed high-concentration (100 mg/ml), citrate-free adalimumab biosimilar CT-P17 to European Union-approved adalimumab (EU-adalimumab) in subjects with active rheumatoid arthritis (RA). Methods This randomized, double-blind phase III study (ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03789292) randomized (1:1) subjects with active RA at 52 centers to receive CT-P17 or EU-adalimumab 40 mg subcutaneously every 2 weeks until week 52. Results to week 24 are reported here. The primary endpoint was 20% improvement by American College of Rheumatology criteria (ACR20) response rate at week 24. Equivalence was concluded if the corresponding confidence intervals (CIs) for the estimate of treatment difference were within predefined equivalence margins: − 15 to 15% (95% CI; European Medicines Agency assumption); − 12 to 15% (90% CI; Food and Drug Administration assumption). Additional efficacy, pharmacokinetic, usability, safety, and immunogenicity endpoints were evaluated. Results 648 subjects were randomized (324 CT-P17; 324 EU-adalimumab). The ACR20 response rate at week 24 was 82.7% (n = 268/324) in both groups (intention-to-treat population). The 95% CI (− 5.94 to 5.94) and 90% CI (− 4.98 to 4.98) were within predefined equivalence margins for both assumptions and equivalent efficacy was concluded. Additional endpoints and overall safety were comparable between groups. Mean trough serum concentrations of CT-P17 were slightly higher than those of EU-adalimumab. Immunogenicity was slightly lower numerically for the CT-P17 group than for the EU-adalimumab group. Conclusions CT-P17 and EU-adalimumab have equivalent efficacy and comparable safety and immunogenicity in subjects with active RA. Overall safety of CT-P17 is consistent with the known safety profile of reference adalimumab. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03789292. Registered 28 December 2018—retrospectively registered.

SAT0136 RELATIVE EFFICACY AND SAFETY OF TOFACITINIB, BARICITINIB, UPADACITINIB, AND FILGOTINIB, IN COMPARISON WITH ADALIMUMAB IN PATIENTS WITH ACTIVE RHEUMATOID ARTHRITIS: A BAYESIAN NETWORK META-ANALYSIS OF RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIALS

Background:Methotrexate (MTX), an effective disease-modifying antirheumatic drug (DMARD) [2], is the most widely used DMARD for the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis (RA). However, not all patients are responsive to the drug; 30% of the patients discontinue therapy within 1 year of commencing the treatment, usually because of the lack of efficacy or undesirable adverse effects Small-molecule Janus kinase inhibitors are clinically developed for the treatment of RA.Objectives:The aim of this study is to investigate the relative efficacy and safety of tofacitinib, baricitinib, upadacitinib, and filgotinib in comparison with adalimumab in patients with active RA and having inadequate responses to MTX.Methods:We performed a Bayesian network meta-analysis to combine direct and indirect evidence from randomized controlled trials (RCTs) to examine the efficacy and safety of tofacitinib, baricitinib, upadacitinib, filgotinib, and adalimumab in RA patients having inadequate responses to MTX.Results:Four RCTs, comprising 5,451 patients, met the inclusion criteria. The baricitinib 4mg+MTX and upadacitinib 15mg+MTX group showed a significantly higher American College of Rheumatology 20% (ACR20) response rate than the adalimumab 40mg+MTX group. The ranking probability based on the surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA) indicated that baricitinib 4mg+MTX had the highest probability of being the best treatment for achieving the ACR20 response rate, followed by upadacitinib 15mg+MTX, tofacitinib 5mg+MTX, filgotinib 200mg+MTX, filgotinib 100mg+MTX, adalimumab 40mg+MTX, and placebo+MTX. The upadacitinib 15mg+MTX and baricitinib 4mg+MTX groups showed significantly higher ACR50 and ACR70 response rates than adalimumab 40mg+MTX. In terms of Herpes zoster infection, the ranking probability based on the SUCRA indicated that placebo+MTX were likely to be the safest treatments, followed by filgotinib 200mg+MTX, filgotinib 100mg+MTX, adalimumab 40mg+MTX, tofacitinib 5mg+MTX, upadacitinib 15mg+MTX, and baricitinib 4mg+MTX. Regarding safety analysis, no statistically significant differences were found between the respective intervention groups.Conclusion:In RA patients with an inadequate response to MTX, baricitinib 4mg+MTX and upadacitinib 15mg+MTX showed the highest ACR response rates, suggesting a difference in efficacy among the different JAK inhibitors.References:[1]Fleischmann R, Mysler E, Hall S, Kivitz AJ, Moots RJ, Luo Z, DeMasi R, Soma K, Zhang R, Takiya LJTL (2017) Efficacy and safety of tofacitinib monotherapy, tofacitinib with methotrexate, and adalimumab with methotrexate in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (ORAL Strategy): a phase 3b/4, double-blind, head-to-head, randomised controlled trial. 390:457-468[2]Taylor PC, Keystone EC, van der Heijde D et al (2017) Baricitinib versus Placebo or Adalimumab in Rheumatoid Arthritis. N Engl J Med 376:652-662[3]Fleischmann R, Pangan AL, Mysler E, Bessette L, Peterfy C, Durez P, Ostor A, Li Y, Zhou Y, Othman AA (2018) A phase 3, randomized, double-blind study comparing upadacitinib to placebo and to adalimumab, in patients with active rheumatoid arthritis with inadequate response to methotrexate. ARTHRITIS & RHEUMATOLOGY. WILEY 111 RIVER ST, HOBOKEN 07030-5774, NJ USA, pp[4]Combe B, Kivitz A, Tanaka Y, van der Heijde D, Matzkies F, Bartok B, Ye L, Guo Y, Tasset C, Sundy J (2019) LB0001 EFFICACY AND SAFETY OF FILGOTINIB FOR PATIENTS WITH RHEUMATOID ARTHRITIS WITH INADEQUATE RESPONSE TO METHOTREXATE: FINCH1 PRIMARY OUTCOME RESULTS. BMJ Publishing Group Ltd, ppDisclosure of Interests:None declared

FKB327, an adalimumab biosimilar, versus the reference product: results of a randomized, Phase III, double-blind study, and its open-label extension

Objective To compare the efficacy, serum drug concentrations, immunogenicity, and safety of FKB327 with the adalimumab reference product (RP) in combination with methotrexate in patients with moderate-to-severe, active rheumatoid arthritis (RA). Methods Patients were randomized 1:1 in a double-blind study (NCT02260791), received 40 mg of FKB327 or RP by subcutaneous injection every other week for 24 weeks (Period I), then re-randomized 2:1, remaining on the same study drug or switching to the other up to week 54 in an open-label extension (Period II, NCT02405780). Efficacy was evaluated using American College of Rheumatology (ACR20) response rate difference at week 24 with equivalence margins of ± 13% and − 12% to + 15% using 95% and 90% confidence intervals (CIs), respectively. Efficacy, serum drug concentrations, immunogenicity, and safety were compared at week 54. Results A total of 730 patients were randomized in Period I (n = 367 FKB327, n = 363 RP), and 645 transitioned to Period II (n = 216 FKB327–FKB327, n = 108 FKB327–RP, n = 108 RP–FKB327, n = 213 RP–RP). At week 24, ACR20 response rates were 74.1% with FKB327 versus 75.7% with RP. 95% and 90% CI of the response rate difference were − 7.9 to 4.7% and − 7.3 to 3.6%, respectively, meeting predefined equivalence margins. The ACR20 response rate remained over 70% of patients to week 54 with all treatment sequences. In Period I, mean trough serum drug concentrations were slightly higher for patients receiving FKB327 than those receiving RP. Mean concentrations were stable over time and reflected steady state in Period II. The proportions of patients with samples positive for neutralizing antidrug antibodies (ADAs) were comparable (57.7% with FKB327 vs. 55.5% with RP) at week 24, and no consistent difference in ADA were seen between continuous and switched treatments in Period II. Efficacy was slightly reduced in the small proportion of patients with high ADA titers in all treatment groups. No clinically significant differences were observed in the incidence of commonly reported treatment-emergent adverse events between the treatments across Periods I and II. Conclusion FKB327 was equivalent to RP in clinical efficacy and demonstrated comparable safety and immunogenicity in patients with moderate-to-severe RA. No effect of switching between FKB327 and RP was observed. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02260791, Registered 29 July 2014. ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02405780, Registered 17 July 2015.

Efficacy and safety of tregalizumab in patients with rheumatoid arthritis and an inadequate response to methotrexate: results of a phase IIb, randomised, placebo-controlled trial

ObjectiveTo evaluate the efficacy, biological activity and safety of tregalizumab in patients with active rheumatoid arthritis (RA) and an inadequate response to methotrexate (MTX).Methods321 patients were randomised (1:1:1:1) to placebo or tregalizumab 25, 100 or 200 mg once-weekly subcutaneously in addition to MTX treatment. Responders at week 12 continued the same treatment, and non-responders at week 12 were escalated to the next higher tregalizumab dose level or re-randomised from placebo to active treatment. After 24 weeks, patients could continue treatment with tregalizumab for 24 weeks (extension phase). The primary endpoint was the American College of Rheumatology 20% improvement criteria (ACR20) response rate at week 12. Safety and biological activity were monitored through week 48.ResultsAt week 12, ACR20 response rates were not statistically significantly different between placebo and any of the tregalizumab doses. Tregalizumab injections were well tolerated; most adverse events were mild to moderate and comparable among treatment and placebo groups. Biological activity was shown by dose-dependent CD4 downmodulation.ConclusionTreatment with tregalizumab did not show significant clinical efficacy in patients with active RA compared with placebo but resulted in the expected biological effect on CD4 modulation. Tregalizumab was generally well tolerated, and no new safety findings were identified.Trial registration numberNCT01999192; Results.

Efficacy and Safety of CE-224,535, an Antagonist of P2X7Receptor, in Treatment of Patients with Rheumatoid Arthritis Inadequately Controlled by Methotrexate

Objective.To evaluate efficacy and safety of CE-224,535, a selective P2X7receptor antagonist, versus placebo, in patients with active rheumatoid arthritis (RA) and inadequate response to methotrexate (MTX).Methods.In our phase IIA study (ClinicalTrials.govno.NCT00628095; A6341009), patients aged ≥ 18 years with active RA were randomized to receive either CE-224,535 (500 mg bid) or placebo for 12 weeks; all patients continued a stable background dose of ≥ 7.5 mg MTX.Results.The American College of Rheumatology 20% (ACR20) response rate (primary efficacy endpoint) was not significantly different from placebo for CE-224,535 (34.0% vs 36.2%; p = 0.591) at Week 12, or at any timepoint over the 12-week treatment period. There was no significant difference at Week 12 for the ACR20 response rate following subgroup analyses by age, sex, baseline disease activity, baseline duration of disease, geographic region, or concomitant use of steroids. ACR50/ACR70 response rates and change from baseline in Disease Activity Score 28-joint C-reactive protein (DAS28-3-CRP) and Health Assessment Questionnaire-Disability Index for CE-224,535 were not significant at Week 12 versus placebo. Treatment-emergent adverse events (AE) were reported by 62.3% (CE-224,535) and 55.3% (placebo) of patients; the most common AE were nausea (11.3%, CE-224,535; 4.3%, placebo) and diarrhea (7.5%, CE-224,535; 4.3%, placebo). The proportion of patients discontinuing due to an AE was 9.4% (CE-224,535) and 6.4% (placebo); no deaths were reported. Serious AE occurred in 3.8% (CE-224,535) and 2.1% (placebo) of patients; none was considered treatment-related.Conclusion.CE-224,535 was not efficacious, compared with placebo, for the treatment of RA in patients with an inadequate response to MTX. CE-224,535 demonstrated an acceptable safety and tolerability profile.