Explore the vast range of titles available.

ObjectivesTo compare the efficacy and safety of SB4 (an etanercept biosimilar) with reference product etanercept (ETN) in patients with moderate to severe rheumatoid arthritis (RA) despite methotrexate (MTX) therapy.MethodsThis is a phase III, randomised, double-blind, parallel-group, multicentre study with a 24-week primary endpoint. Patients with moderate to severe RA despite MTX treatment were randomised to receive weekly dose of 50 mg of subcutaneous SB4 or ETN. The primary endpoint was the American College of Rheumatology 20% (ACR20) response at week 24. Other efficacy endpoints as well as safety, immunogenicity and pharmacokinetic parameters were also measured.Results596 patients were randomised to either SB4 (N=299) or ETN (N=297). The ACR20 response rate at week 24 in the per-protocol set was 78.1% for SB4 and 80.3% for ETN. The 95% CI of the adjusted treatment difference was −9.41% to 4.98%, which is completely contained within the predefined equivalence margin of −15% to 15%, indicating therapeutic equivalence between SB4 and ETN. Other efficacy endpoints and pharmacokinetic endpoints were comparable. The incidence of treatment-emergent adverse events was comparable (55.2% vs 58.2%), and the incidence of antidrug antibody development up to week 24 was lower in SB4 compared with ETN (0.7% vs 13.1%).ConclusionsSB4 was shown to be equivalent with ETN in terms of efficacy at week 24. SB4 was well tolerated with a lower immunogenicity profile. The safety profile of SB4 was comparable with that of ETN.Trial registration numbersNCT01895309, EudraCT 2012-005026-30.

Ixekizumab, a high-affinity interleukin-17A (IL-17A) monoclonal antibody, has previously shown efficacy in radiographic axial spondyloarthritis (also known as ankylosing spondylitis). We aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of ixekizumab, an IL-17 inhibitor, in non-radiographic axial spondyloarthritis. Here, we report the primary results of COAST-X. COAST-X was a 52-week, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group study done at 107 sites in 15 countries in Europe, Asia, North America, and South America. Eligible participants were adults (aged ≥18 years) with active axial spondyloarthritis without definite radiographic sacroiliitis (non-radiographic axial spondyloarthritis), objective signs of inflammation (via MRI or C-reactive protein), and an inadequate response or intolerance to non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs). Patients were randomly assigned (1:1:1) to receive subcutaneous 80 mg ixekizumab every 4 weeks (Q4W) or every 2 weeks (Q2W), or placebo. Changing background medications or switching to open-label ixekizumab Q2W, or both, was allowed after week 16 at investigator discretion. Primary endpoints were Assessment of SpondyloArthritis international Society-40 (ASAS40) response (defined as an improvement of 40% or more and an absolute improvement from baseline of 2 units or more [range 0–10] in at least three of the four domains [patient global, spinal pain, function, and inflammation] without any worsening in the remaining one domain) at weeks 16 and 52. Patients who switched to open-label ixekizumab were imputed as non-responders in logistic regression analysis. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT02757352. Between Aug 2, 2016, and Jan 29, 2018, 303 patients were enrolled (105 to placebo, 96 to ixekizumab Q4W, and 102 to ixekizumab Q2W). Both primary endpoints were met: ASAS40 at week 16 (ixekizumab Q4W: 34 [35%] of 96, p=0·0094 vs placebo; ixekizumab Q2W: 41 [40%] of 102, p=0·0016; placebo: 20 [19%] of 105) and ASAS40 at week 52 (ixekizumab Q4W: 29 [30%] of 96, p=0·0045; ixekizumab Q2W: 32 [31%] of 102, p=0·0037; placebo: 14 [13%] of 105). 60 (57%) of 104 patients in the placebo group, 63 (66%) of 96 in the ixekizumab Q4W group, and 79 (77%) of 102 in the ixekizumab Q2W group had at least one treatment-emergent adverse event. The most common treatment-emergent adverse events in the ixekizumab groups were nasopharyngitis and injection site reaction. Of the treatment-emergent adverse events of special interest, there was one case of serious infection in the ixekizumab Q4W group. The frequency of serious adverse events was low (four [1%] of 302) and similar across the three groups. There were no malignancies or deaths. No new safety signals were identified. Ixekizumab was superior to placebo for improving signs and symptoms in patients with non-radiographic axial spondyloarthritis at weeks 16 and 52. Reports of adverse events were similar to those of previous ixekizumab studies. Ixekizumab offers a potential therapeutic option for patients with non-radiographic axial spondyloarthritis who had an inadequate response or were intolerant to NSAID therapy. Eli Lilly and Company.

Biological disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs (bDMARDs) are recommended for radiographic axial spondyloarthritis, otherwise known as ankylosing spondylitis, when conventional therapies are not effective. We report efficacy and safety data on ixekizumab, a high-affinity monoclonal antibody that selectively targets interleukin-17A (IL-17A), in patients with radiographic axial spondyloarthritis who have not previously been treated with bDMARDs. In this phase 3, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled superiority study of ixekizumab, adult patients with inadequate response or intolerance to non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, an established diagnosis of radiographic axial spondyloarthritis, radiographic sacroiliitis centrally defined by modified New York criteria, and at least one spondyloarthritis feature according to the Assessment of SpondyloArthritis international Society (ASAS) criteria, were recruited from 84 sites (12 countries) in Europe, Asia, and North America. By use of a computer-generated random sequence, patients were randomly assigned (1:1:1:1) to 80 mg subcutaneous ixekizumab every two (Q2W) or four (Q4W) weeks, 40 mg adalimumab Q2W (active reference group), or placebo. The primary objective was to compare the proportion of patients achieving an ASAS40 response, a composite measure of clinical improvement in axial spondyloarthritis, at week 16 for both ixekizumab treatment groups versus the placebo group. The adalimumab reference group was included as an in-study active reference for comparison with placebo to provide additional context to interpretation of the ixekizumab study results. Between June 20, 2016, and Aug 22, 2017, 341 patients were randomly assigned to either the placebo group (n=87), adalimumab group (n=90), ixekizumab Q2W (n=83), or ixekizumab Q4W (n=81). At week 16, compared with placebo (16 [18%] of 87), more patients achieved ASAS40 with ixekizumab Q2W (43 [52%] of 83; p<0·0001), ixekizumab Q4W (39 [48%] of 81; p<0·0001), and adalimumab (32 [36%] of 90; p=0·0053). One serious infection occurred in each of the ixekizumab Q2W (1%), ixekizumab Q4W (1%), and adalimumab (1%) groups; none were reported with placebo. One (1%) Candida infection occurred in the adalimumab group and one (1%) patient receiving ixekizumab Q2W was adjudicated as having probable Crohn's disease. No treatment-emergent opportunistic infections, malignancies, or deaths occurred. Each dosing regimen of ixekizumab was superior to placebo for improving radiographic axial spondyloarthritis signs and symptoms in patients not previously treated with bDMARDs; the safety profile was consistent with previous indications of ixekizumab. Eli Lilly and Company

ObjectivesThe objective of COAST-Y was to evaluate the effect of continuing versus withdrawing ixekizumab (IXE) in patients with axial spondyloarthritis (axSpA) who had achieved remission.MethodsCOAST-Y is an ongoing, phase III, long-term extension study that included a double-blind, placebo (PBO)-controlled, randomised withdrawal-retreatment period (RWRP). Patients who completed the originating 52-week COAST-V, COAST-W or COAST-X studies entered a 24-week lead-in period and continued either 80 mg IXE every 2 (Q2W) or 4 weeks (Q4W). Patients who achieved remission (an Ankylosing Spondylitis Disease Activity Score (ASDAS)<1.3 at least once at week 16 or week 20, and <2.1 at both visits) were randomly assigned equally at week 24 to continue IXE Q4W, IXE Q2W or withdraw to PBO in a blinded fashion. The primary endpoint was the proportion of flare-free patients (flare: ASDAS≥2.1 at two consecutive visits or ASDAS>3.5 at any visit) after the 40-week RWRP, with time-to-flare as a major secondary endpoint.ResultsOf 773 enrolled patients, 741 completed the 24-week lead-in period and 155 entered the RWRP. Forty weeks after randomised withdrawal, 83.3% of patients in the combined IXE (85/102, p<0.001), IXE Q4W (40/48, p=0.003) and IXE Q2W (45/54, p=0.001) groups remained flare-free versus 54.7% in the PBO group (29/53). Continuing IXE significantly delayed time-to-flare versus PBO, with most patients remaining flare-free for up to 20 weeks after IXE withdrawal.ConclusionsPatients with axSpA who continued treatment with IXE were significantly less likely to flare and had significantly delayed time-to-flare compared with patients who withdrew to PBO.

ObjectivesTo achieve consensus on domains of active disease for inclusion in a novel outcome measure for SLE randomised controlled trials (RCTs), the Treatment Response Measure for SLE (TRM-SLE).MethodsDomains nominated by TRM-SLE Taskforce members were rated in a two-stage modified Delphi study. Each stage comprised two online survey rounds separated by a structured discussion meeting. In Stage 1, expert lupus clinicians and patient representatives rated domain ‘importance’ (impact on symptoms, function or survival). In Stage 2, clinicians rated ‘important’ domains on three characteristics relevant to RCT utility: ‘appropriateness’ for evaluating change in disease activity, ‘representation’ in patients with active SLE and ‘measurability’ in an RCT context. Consensus for domain inclusion was prespecified as all four characteristics achieving a rating ≥7 on a 1–9 scale by ≥70% of participants.ResultsDomain nominations from 36/59 (61%) TRM-SLE Taskforce members yielded 34 potential domains which were rated in the modified Delphi study. At least one Delphi round was completed by 87 clinicians and 13 patient representatives. In Stage 1, 14 domains met consensus on ‘importance’ in both clinician and patient groups, and 11 domains met consensus among patients only. After Stage 2, eight of these domains also reached consensus on ‘appropriateness’, ‘representation’ and ‘measurability’: alopecia, arthritis, haemolytic anaemia, nephritis, mucosal ulcers, rash, serositis and thrombocytopenia.ConclusionsConsidering patient and clinician perspectives, we reached consensus to include eight disease activity domains for future development into the novel TRM-SLE clinical trial outcome measure, aiming to improve trial interpretability and success.