Explore the vast range of titles available.

Psoriatic arthritis (PsA) accounts for around 20% of referrals to the early arthritis clinic and presents a significant diagnostic and management challenge. Early diagnosis is important to prevent long term functional disability and to ensure optimal management of arthritis and key comorbidities. From the rheumatologist’s perspective, the differential diagnosis includes rheumatoid arthritis, gout and other inflammatory arthritides. Once diagnosed, it is essential to assess the disease fully, including arthritis, enthesitis, dactylitis, skin/nail disease and axial involvement. Using this information, appropriate treatment can be planned using therapies that are effective at treating the relevant domains of disease. Despite poor data, traditional disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs are commonly used and have been effective in observational studies. Following tumour necrosis factor inhibitors, which have proven excellent efficacy in multiple domains of PsA, new biologics are available or in development and will improve treatment options for people with refractory PsA.

Since the second version of the Group for Research and Assessment of Psoriasis and Psoriatic Arthritis (GRAPPA) treatment recommendations were published in 2015, therapeutic options for psoriatic arthritis (PsA) have advanced considerably. This work reviews the literature since the previous recommendations (data published 2013–2020, including conference presentations between 2017 and 2020) and reports high-quality, evidence-based, domain-focused recommendations for medication selection in PsA developed by GRAPPA clinicians and patient research partners. The overarching principles for the management of adults with PsA were updated by consensus. Principles considering biosimilars and tapering of therapy were added, and the research agenda was revised. Literature searches covered treatments for the key domains of PsA: peripheral arthritis, axial disease, enthesitis, dactylitis, and skin and nail psoriasis; additional searches were performed for PsA-related conditions (uveitis and inflammatory bowel disease) and comorbidities. Individual subcommittees used a GRADE-informed approach, taking into account the quality of evidence for therapies, to generate recommendations for each of these domains, which were incorporated into an overall schema. Choice of therapy for an individual should ideally address all disease domains active in that patient, supporting shared decision-making. As safety issues often affect potential therapeutic choices, additional consideration was given to relevant comorbidities. These GRAPPA treatment recommendations provide up-to-date, evidence-based guidance on PsA management for clinicians and people with PsA.This Evidence-Based Guideline presents the latest treatment recommendations for medication selection in psoriatic arthritis (PsA), covering the six clinical domains of PsA, related conditions and associated comorbidities, and reflecting important advances in the field since the previous update.

Early intervention and tight control of inflammation optimise outcomes in rheumatoid arthritis but these approaches have not yet been studied in psoriatic arthritis. We aimed to assess the effect of tight control on early psoriatic arthritis using a treat-to-target approach. For this open-label multicentre randomised controlled trial, adult patients (aged ≥18 years) with early psoriatic arthritis (<24 months symptom duration), who had not previously received treatment with any disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs, were enrolled from eight secondary care rheumatology centres in the UK. Enrolled patients were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to receive either tight control (with review every 4 weeks and with escalation of treatment if minimal disease activity criteria not met) or standard care (standard therapy according to the treating clinician, with review every 12 weeks) for 48 weeks. Randomisation was done by minimisation incorporating a random element, to ensure treatment groups were balanced for randomising centre and pattern of arthritis (oligoarticular vs polyarticular). The randomisation procedure was done through a central 24-h automated telephone system based at the Leeds Institute of Clinical Trials Research (Leeds, UK). This was an open-label study in which patients and clinicians were aware of treatment group assignment. Clinical outcomes were recorded by a masked assessor every 12 weeks. The primary outcome was the proportion of patients achieving an American College of Rheumatology (ACR) 20% (ACR20) response at 48 weeks, analysed by intention to treat with multiple imputation for missing ACR components. Cost-effectiveness was also assessed. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01106079, and the ISCRCTN registry, number ISCRCTN30147736. Between May 28, 2008, and March 21, 2012, 206 eligible patients were enrolled and randomly assigned to receive tight control (n=101) or standard care (n=105). In the intention-to-treat patient population, the odds of achieving an ACR20 response at 48 weeks were higher in the tight control group than in the standard care group (odds ratio 1·91, 95% CI 1·03–3·55; p=0·0392). Serious adverse events were reported by 20 (10%) patients (25 events in 14 [14%] patients in the tight control group and eight events in six [6%] patients in the standard care group) during the course of the study. No unexpected serious adverse events or deaths occurred. Tight control of psoriatic arthritis disease activity through a treat-to-target approach significantly improves joint outcomes for newly diagnosed patients, with no unexpected serious adverse events reported. Arthritis Research UK and Pfizer.

ObjectiveTo compare the efficacy and safety of brodalumab, an interleukin-17 receptor subunit A inhibitor, with placebo, in patients with psoriatic arthritis (PsA).MethodsAdult patients with active PsA and inadequate response to, or intolerance to, conventional treatment were enrolled into two phase III studies (NCT02029495 and NCT02024646) and randomised 1:1:1 to receive subcutaneous brodalumab 140 mg or 210 mg or placebo at weeks 0, 1 and every 2 weeks up to 24 weeks. About 30% of patients had prior use of biologics. The primary endpoint for both studies was the American College of Rheumatology 20 (ACR20) response at week 16.Results962 patients were randomised across the studies prior to early termination due to sponsor decision. The primary endpoint was met in both studies. Based on comparable design and eligibility criteria, data from both studies were pooled. Significantly more patients achieved ACR20 at week 16 in both brodalumab treatment groups (45.8% and 47.9% for 140 mg and 210 mg, respectively) versus placebo (20.9%) (p<0.0001). Similar results were observed at week 24. Significantly higher proportions of patients receiving brodalumab achieved ACR50/70, Psoriasis Area and Severity Index 75/90/100 and resolution of dactylitis and enthesitis versus placebo (p<0.01). Adverse event rates were similar across treatments at week 16 (54.4%, 51.6% and 54.5% for placebo, brodalumab 140 mg and 210 mg, respectively). No new safety signals were reported.ConclusionBrodalumab was associated with rapid and significant improvements in signs and symptoms of PsA versus placebo. Brodalumab was well tolerated, with a safety profile consistent with other interleukin-17 inhibitors.

Many patients with psoriatic arthritis have an inadequate response to tumor necrosis factor (TNF) inhibitors. Guselkumab, a specific inhibitor of interleukin-23 (IL-23) via IL-23 p19 subunit binding, significantly improved psoriatic arthritis signs and symptoms with an acceptable safety profile in a phase 2 trial. This multicentre, double-blind, randomised, placebo-controlled, phase 3 trial was done at 86 sites in 13 countries across Asia, Australasia, Europe, and North America and enrolled adults with active psoriatic arthritis (at least three swollen and three tender joints; and C-reactive protein ≥0·3 mg/dL) despite standard therapies. Eligibility criteria included inadequate response to or intolerance of standard treatment, including at least 4 months of apremilast, at least 3 months of non-biologic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs), or at least 4 weeks of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs for psoriatic arthritis. About 30% of study participants could have previously received one or two TNF inhibitors. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1:1, computer-generated permuted blocks; stratified by baseline DMARD and previous TNF inhibitor use) to subcutaneous guselkumab 100 mg every 4 weeks; guselkumab 100 mg at weeks 0, 4, then every 8 weeks; or matching placebo. The primary endpoint was American College of Rheumatology 20% improvement (ACR20) at week 24 in all patients per assigned treatment group using non-responder imputation. Safety was assessed in all patients per treatment received. This trial is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03162796 (active, not recruiting). From Aug 28, 2017, to Aug 17, 2018, we screened 624 patients, of whom 381 were randomly assigned and treated with guselkumab every 4 weeks (n=128), guselkumab every 8 weeks (n=127), or placebo (n=126). 362 patients continued study treatment up to week 24. The primary endpoint was met: ACR20 at week 24 was achieved by significantly greater proportions of patients in the guselkumab every 4 weeks group (76 [59%] of 128 [95% CI 50–68]) and every 8 weeks group (66 [52%] of 127 [43–61]) than in the placebo group (28 [22%] of 126 [15–30]), with percentage differences versus placebo of 37% (95% CI 26–48) for the every 4 weeks group and 30% (19–41) for the every 8 weeks group (both p<0·0001). Serious adverse events up to week 24 occurred in no patients receiving guselkumab every 4 weeks, four (3%) patients receiving guselkumab every 8 weeks, and five (4%) patients receiving placebo. Up to week 24, one patient in the placebo group died from cardiac failure and two had serious infections; no guselkumab-treated patient died or had serious infections. Guselkumab demonstrated a favourable benefit–risk profile and might be an effective treatment option for patients with active psoriatic arthritis. Janssen Research and Development.

Background Tofacitinib is an oral Janus kinase inhibitor for the treatment of psoriatic arthritis (PsA). This post hoc analysis assessed tofacitinib efficacy on enthesitis by baseline location and severity, and impact on disease activity and patient-reported outcomes (PROs), in patients with PsA. Methods Data were pooled from two phase 3 studies (NCT01877668/NCT01882439) in patients with PsA receiving tofacitinib 5 or 10 mg twice daily to month (M)6 or placebo to M3. Endpoints were: change from baseline in Leeds Enthesitis Index (LEI) or Spondyloarthritis Research Consortium of Canada Enthesitis Index (SPARCC); proportions of patients with enthesitis, relapsed enthesitis after resolution, de novo enthesitis , low disease activity (LDA) or remission (minimal disease activity/very low disease activity; Psoriatic Arthritis Disease Activity Score; Disease Activity Index for Psoriatic Arthritis, and Composite Psoriatic Disease Activity in Psoriatic Arthritis); and PROs (Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy-Fatigue [FACIT-F] total and arthritis pain Visual Analog Scale scores). Descriptive statistics were generated by visit and treatment. Change from baseline in PROs was evaluated by multivariate linear regression. Results Seven hundred ten patients from two studies were included: 479 had LEI > 0; 545 had SPARCC > 0; and 136 had LEI = 0 and SPARCC = 0 at baseline. At baseline, among patients with LEI > 0 or SPARCC > 0, mean LEI and SPARCC across treatments and enthesitis locations/severities ranged from 1.0–4.4 and 1.3–9.4, respectively. Across several baseline enthesitis locations/severities, changes from baseline in LEI and SPARCC up to M3 were greater with tofacitinib (-2.0–0.4 and -3.5–0.2) vs placebo (-‍0.9–‍0.4 and -1.5–1.1). Enthesitis at M6 was more common in patients with greater baseline enthesitis severity. At M6, ≤ 40% of patients with baseline LEI > 0 or SPARCC > 0 whose enthesitis had resolved by M1/M3 experienced a relapse, and < 14% of patients with baseline LEI = 0 and SPARCC = 0 had de novo enthesitis. LDA/remission rates generally increased with tofacitinib over time. Baseline LEI location was significantly associated with change from baseline in arthritis pain score, while baseline SPARCC severity was significantly associated with change from baseline in FACIT-F total and arthritis pain scores. Conclusion Tofacitinib treatment resulted in improvements in enthesitis in patients with PsA, regardless of baseline location or severity. Trial registration NCT01877668;NCT01882439.

The Janus kinase 1 (JAK1) pathway has been implicated in the pathogenesis of psoriatic arthritis. We aimed to investigate the efficacy and safety of filgotinib, a selective JAK1 inhibitor, for the treatment of psoriatic arthritis. The EQUATOR trial was a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled phase 2 trial that enrolled adults from 25 sites in seven countries (Belgium, Bulgaria, Czech Republic, Estonia, Poland, Spain, and Ukraine). Patients (aged ≥18 years) had active moderate-to-severe psoriatic arthritis (defined as at least five swollen joints and at least five tender joints) fulfilling Classification for psoriatic arthritis (CASPAR) criteria, active or a documented history of plaque psoriasis, and an insufficient response or intolerance to at least one conventional synthetic disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drug (csDMARD). Patients continued to take csDMARDs during the study if they had received this treatment for at least 12 weeks before screening and were on a stable dose for at least 4 weeks before baseline. Using an interactive web-based system, we randomly allocated patients (1:1) to filgotinib 200 mg or placebo orally once daily for 16 weeks (stratified by current use of csDMARDs and previous use of anti-tumour necrosis factor). Patients, study team, and sponsor were masked to treatment assignment. The primary endpoint was proportion of patients achieving 20% improvement in American College of Rheumatology response criteria (ACR20) at week 16 in the full analysis set (patients who received at least one dose of study drug), which was compared between groups with the Cochran-Mantel-Haenszel test and non-responder imputation method. This trial is registered with ClincalTrials.gov, number NCT03101670. Between March 9, and Sept 27, 2017, 191 patients were screened and 131 were randomly allocated to treatment (65 to filgotinib and 66 to placebo). 60 (92%) patients in the filgotinib group and 64 (97%) patients in the placebo group completed the study; five patients (8%) in the filgotinib group and two patients (3%) in the placebo group discontinued treatment. 52 (80%) of 65 patients in the filgotinib group and 22 (33%) of 66 in the placebo group achieved ACR20 at week 16 (treatment difference 47% [95% CI 30·2–59·6], p<0·0001). 37 (57%) patients who received filgotinib and 39 (59%) patients who received placebo had at least one treatment-emergent adverse event. Six participants had an event that was grade 3 or worse. The most common events were nasopharyngitis and headache, occurring at similar proportions in each group. One serious treatment-emergent adverse event was reported in each group (pneumonia and hip fracture after a fall), one of which (pneumonia) was fatal in the filgotinib group. Filgotinib is efficacious for the treatment of active psoriatic arthritis, and no new safety signals were identified. Galapagos and Gilead Sciences.

Background Axial involvement constitutes a specific domain of psoriatic arthritis (PsA). Interleukin (IL)-23 inhibitors have demonstrated improvement in axial PsA (axPsA) symptoms, but have not shown efficacy in treating ankylosing spondylitis (AS), suggesting differences in axPsA processes and treatments. In a post hoc, pooled analysis of patients with investigator- and imaging-confirmed sacroiliitis in two phase 3, randomized, placebo-controlled studies (DISCOVER-1 and DISCOVER-2), patients treated with guselkumab, an IL-23p19 inhibitor, had greater axial symptom improvements compared with placebo. Confirmatory imaging at baseline was restricted to the sacroiliac (SI) joints, occurred prior to/at screening, and was locally read. Methods The STAR study will prospectively assess efficacy outcomes in PsA patients with magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)-confirmed axial inflammation. Eligible, biologic-naïve patients with PsA ( N =  405) for ≥ 6 months and active disease (≥ 3 swollen and ≥ 3 tender joints, C-reactive protein [CRP] ≥ 0.3 mg/dL) despite prior non-biologic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs, apremilast, and/or nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs will be randomized (1:1:1) to guselkumab every 4 weeks (Q4W); guselkumab at week (W) 0, W4, then every 8 weeks (Q8W); or placebo with crossover to guselkumab at W24, W28, then Q8W. Patients will have Bath Ankylosing Spondylitis Disease Activity Index (BASDAI) score ≥ 4, spinal pain component score (0–10 visual analog scale) ≥ 4, and screening MRI-confirmed axial involvement (positive spine and/or SI joints according to centrally read Spondyloarthritis Research Consortium of Canada [SPARCC] score ≥ 3 in ≥ 1 region). The primary endpoint is mean change from baseline in BASDAI at W24; multiplicity controlled secondary endpoints at W24 include AS Disease Activity Score employing CRP (ASDAS), Disease Activity Index for PsA (DAPSA), Health Assessment Questionnaire – Disability Index (HAQ-DI), Investigator’s Global Assessment of skin disease (IGA), and mean changes from baseline in MRI SI joint SPARCC scores. Centrally read MRIs of spine and SI joints (scored using SPARCC) will be obtained at W0, W24, and W52, with readers blinded to treatment group and timepoint. Treatment group comparisons will be performed using a Cochran-Mantel-Haenszel or chi-square test for binary endpoints and analysis of covariance, mixed model for repeated measures, or constrained longitudinal data analysis for continuous endpoints. Discussion This study will evaluate the ability of guselkumab to reduce both axial symptoms and inflammation in patients with active PsA. Trial registration This trial was registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04929210 , on 18 June 2021. Protocol version: Version 1.0 dated 14 April 2021.