Explore the vast range of titles available.

ObjectivesTo evaluate the efficacy and safety of risankizumab, a humanised monoclonal antibody targeting the p19 subunit of interleukin-23 (IL-23), in patients with active ankylosing spondylitis (AS).MethodsA total of 159 patients with biological-naïve AS, with active disease (Bath Ankylosing Spondylitis Disease Activity Index score of ≥4), were randomised (1:1:1:1) to risankizumab (18 mg single dose, 90 mg or 180 mg at day 1 and weeks 8, 16 and 24) or placebo over a 24-week blinded period. The primary outcome was a 40% improvement in Assessment in Spondylo Arthritis International Society (ASAS40) at week 12. Safety was assessed in patients who received at least one dose of study drug.ResultsAt week 12, ASAS40 response rates were 25.5%, 20.5% and 15.0% in the 18 mg, 90 mg and 180 mg risankizumab groups, respectively, compared with 17.5% in the placebo group. The estimated difference in proportion between the 180 mg risankizumab and placebo groups (primary endpoint) was –2.5% (95% CI –21.8 to 17.0; p=0.42). Rates of adverse events were similar in all treatment groups.ConclusionsTreatment with risankizumab did not meet the study primary endpoint and showed no evidence of clinically meaningful improvements compared with placebo in patients with active AS, suggesting that IL-23 may not be a relevant driver of disease pathogenesis and symptoms in AS.Trial registration numberNCT02047110; Pre-results.

Objectives Given that subjective variables might reduce remission by composite DAS (CDAS), the main objectives were to explore whether RA patients with mainly tender vs mainly swollen joints had differences in patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs), clinical or US assessments or in achieving remission defined by CDAS or US. Methods In a Nordic multicentre study, RA patients initiating tocilizumab were assessed by PROMs, clinical, laboratory and US assessments (36 joints and 4 tendons) at baseline, 4, 12 and 24 weeks. Remission was defined according to clinical disease activity index (CDAI)/Boolean or no Doppler activity present. Tender–swollen joint differences (TSJDs) were calculated. Statistics exploring changes over time/differences between groups included Wilcoxon, Mann–Whitney, Kruskal–Wallis and Spearman tests. Results One hundred and ten patients were included [mean (s.d.) age 55.6 (12.1) years, RA duration 8.7 (9.5) years]. All PROMs, clinical, laboratory and US scores decreased during follow-up (P < 0.001). During follow-up, tender joint counts were correlated primarily with PROMs [r = 0.24–0.56 (P < 0.05–0.001)] and swollen joint counts with US synovitis scores [r = 0.33–0.72 (P < 0.05–0.001)]. At 24 weeks, patients with TSJD > 0 had higher PROMs and CDAI (P < 0.05–0.001) but lower US synovitis scores (P < 0.05). Remission by CDAI/Boolean was seen in 26–34% and by Doppler 53%, but only 2–3% of patients with TSJD > 0 achieved CDAI/Boolean remission. Conclusion Patients with more tender than swollen joints scored higher on subjective assessments but had less US synovitis. They seldom achieved CDAS remission despite many being in Doppler remission. If patients with predominantly tender joints do not reach CDAS remission, objective assessments of inflammation should be performed. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov, https://clinicaltrials.gov/, NCT02046616.

As Europe advances toward low-carbon construction, bio-based materials like wood fiber insulation (WFI) are gaining traction as viable alternatives to conventional insulations. Industrial timber construction presents a strategic context for deploying WFI due to its compatibility with prefabrication and sustainability goals. This study explores the adoption potential of fire-retardant WFI through a qualitative, grounded theory approach based on expert interviews conducted in six European countries. The objective is to examine the relationship between WFI’s technical performance and the regulatory frameworks that govern its approval and market entry. The research offers a novel contribution by identifying critical gaps between WFI’s documented strengths, including fire resistance, thermal regulation, and moisture buffering—and regulatory assessment methods that were developed with non-bio-based materials in mind. These systemic mismatches create significant barriers to innovation and material diversification in sustainable construction. Three key findings emerged: (1) Current technical assessment protocols inadequately capture the real-world performance of WFI; (2) Environmental sustainability acts as a catalyst for innovation and material substitution; (3) Education and policy alignment are crucial to overcoming institutional inertia and advancing market uptake. A conceptual model is developed to illustrate the barriers and enablers influencing WFI integration. This study concludes that performance-based evaluation systems and policy incentives are essential to unlocking the full potential of WFI in climate-responsive construction. These insights are intended to inform regulators, industry stakeholders, and researchers, contributing to the broader discourse on ecological material transitions.

The treatment of rheumatoid arthritis should aim at clinical remission. This multicentre, randomised trial with 2-year follow-up sought evidence on the efficacy and tolerability of combination therapy (sulphasalazine, methotrexate, hydroxychloroquine, and prednisolone) compared with treatment with a single disease-modifying antirheumatic drug, with or without prednisolone, in the treatment of early rheumatoid arthritis. 199 patients were randomly assigned to two treatment groups. 195 started the treatment (97 received combination and 98 single drug therapy). Single-drug therapy in all patients started with sulphasalazine; in 51 patients methotrexate was later substituted. Oral prednisolone was required by 63 patients. The primary outcome measure was induction of remission. Analyses were intention to treat. 87 patients in the combination group and 91 in the single-therapy group completed the trial. After a year, remission was achieved in 24 of 97 patients with combination therapy, and 11 of 98 with single-drug therapy (p=0·011). The remission frequencies at 2 years were 36 of 97 and 18 of 98 (p=0·003). Clinical improvement (American College of Rheumatology criteria of 50% clinical response) was achieved after 1 year in 68 (75%) patients with combination therapy, and in 56 (60%) using single-drug therapy (p=0·028), while at the 2-year visit 69 and 57 respectively (71% vs 58%, p=0·058) had clinically improved. The frequencies of adverse events were similar in both treatment groups. Combination therapy was better and not more hazardous than single treatment in induction of remission in early rheumatoid arthritis. The combination strategy as an initial therapy seems to increase the efficacy of the treatment in at least a proportion of patients with early rheumatoid arthritis.

ObjectivesTo compare efficacy and safety of ixekizumab (IXE) to adalimumab (ADA) in biological disease-modifying antirheumatic drug-naïve patients with both active psoriatic arthritis (PsA) and skin disease and inadequate response to conventional synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drug (csDMARDs).MethodsPatients with active PsA were randomised (1:1) to approved dosing of IXE or ADA in an open-label, head-to-head, blinded assessor clinical trial. The primary objective was to evaluate whether IXE was superior to ADA at week 24 for simultaneous achievement of a ≥50% improvement from baseline in the American College of Rheumatology criteria (ACR50) and a 100% improvement from baseline in the Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI100). Major secondary objectives, also at week 24, were to evaluate whether IXE was: (1) non-inferior to ADA for achievement of ACR50 and (2) superior to ADA for PASI100 response. Additional PsA, skin, treat-to-target and quality-of-life outcome measures were assessed at week 24.ResultsThe primary efficacy endpoint was met (IXE: 36%, ADA: 28%; p=0.036). IXE was non-inferior for ACR50 response (IXE: 51%, ADA: 47%; treatment difference: 3.9%) and superior for PASI100 response (IXE: 60%, ADA: 47%; p=0.001). IXE had greater response versus ADA in additional PsA, skin, nail, treat-to-target and quality-of-life outcomes. Serious adverse events were reported in 8.5% (ADA) and 3.5% (IXE) of patients.ConclusionsIXE was superior to ADA in achievement of simultaneous improvement of joint and skin disease (ACR50 and PASI100) in patients with PsA and inadequate response to csDMARDs. Safety and tolerability for both biologicals were aligned with established safety profiles.

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.

Many patients with psoriasis develop psoriatic arthritis, a chronic inflammatory disease that afflicts peripheral synovial, axial, and entheseal structures. The fully human monoclonal antibody ustekinumab is an efficacious treatment for moderate-to-severe plaque psoriasis. We did a randomised, placebo-controlled, phase 3 trial to assess the safety and efficacy of ustekinumab in patients with active psoriatic arthritis. In this phase 3, multicentre, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial at 104 sites in Europe, North America, and Asia-Pacific, adults with active psoriatic arthritis (≥5 tender and ≥5 swollen joints, C-reactive protein ≥3·0 mg/L) were randomly assigned (1:1:1, by dynamic central randomisation based on an algorithm implemented by an interactive voice–web response system) to 45 mg ustekinumab, 90 mg ustekinumab, or placebo at week 0, week 4, and every 12 weeks thereafter. At week 16, patients with less than 5% improvement in both tender and swollen joint counts entered masked early-escape and were given 45 mg ustekinumab (if in the placebo group) or 90 mg ustekinumab (if in the 45 mg group). At week 24, all remaining patients in the placebo group received ustekinumab 45 mg, which they continued at week 28 and every 12 weeks thereafter. Our primary endpoint was 20% or greater improvement in American College of Rheumatology (ACR20) criteria at week 24. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT01009086) and EudraCT (2009-012264-14). Between Nov 30, 2009, and March 30, 2011, 615 patients were randomly assigned—206 to placebo, 205 to 45 mg ustekinumab, and 204 to 90 mg ustekinumab. More ustekinumab-treated (87 of 205 [42·4%] in the 45 mg group and 101 of 204 [49·5%] in the 90 mg group) than placebo-treated (47 of 206 [22·8%]) patients achieved ACR20 at week 24 (p<0·0001 for both comparisons); responses were maintained at week 52. At week 16, proportions of patients with adverse events were similar in the ustekinumab and placebo groups (171 of 409 [41·8%] vs 86 of 205 [42·0%]). Ustekinumab significantly improved active psoriatic arthritis compared with placebo, and might offer an alternative therapeutic mechanism of action to approved biological treatments. Janssen Research & Development.

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.

Bloodstream infections are associated with high morbidity and mortality with rates varying from 10-25% and higher. Appropriate and timely onset of antibiotic therapy influences the prognosis of these patients. It requires the diagnostic accuracy which is not afforded by current gold standards such as blood culture. Moreover, the time from blood sampling to blood culture results is a key determinant of reducing mortality. No established biomarkers exist which can differentiate bloodstream infections from other systemic inflammatory conditions. This calls for studies on biomarkers potential of molecular profiling of plasma as it is affected most by the molecular changes accompanying bloodstream infections. N-glycosylation is a post-translational modification which is very sensitive to changes in physiology. Here we have performed targeted quantitative N-glycoproteomics from plasma samples of patients with confirmed positive blood culture together with age and sex matched febrile controls with negative blood culture reports. Three hundred and sixty eight potential N-glycopeptides were quantified by mass spectrometry and 149 were further selected for identification. Twenty four N-glycopeptides were identified with high confidence together with elucidation of the peptide sequence, N-glycosylation site, glycan composition and proposed glycan structures. Principal component analysis, orthogonal projections to latent structures-discriminant analysis (S-Plot) and self-organizing maps clustering among other statistical methods were employed to analyze the data. These methods gave us clear separation of the two patient classes. We propose high-confidence N-glycopeptides which have the power to separate the bloodstream infections from blood culture negative febrile patients and shed light on host response during bacteremia. Data are available via ProteomeXchange with identifier PXD009048.