Explore the vast range of titles available.

ObjectivesTo assess the efficacy and safety of abatacept, a selective T-cell costimulation modulator, in a phase III study in psoriatic arthritis (PsA).MethodsThis study randomised patients (1:1) with active PsA (~60% with prior exposure to a tumour necrosis factor inhibitor) to blinded weekly subcutaneous abatacept 125 mg (n=213) or placebo (n=211) for 24 weeks, followed by open-label subcutaneous abatacept. Patients without ≥20% improvement in joint counts at week 16 were switched to open-label abatacept. The primary end point was the proportion of patients with ≥20% improvement in the American College of Rheumatology (ACR20) criteria at week 24.ResultsAbatacept significantly increased ACR20 response versus placebo at week 24 (39.4% vs 22.3%; p<0.001). Although abatacept numerically increased Health Assessment Questionnaire–Disability Index response rates (reduction from baseline ≥0.35) at week 24, this was not statistically significant (31.0% vs 23.7%; p=0.097). The benefits of abatacept were seen in ACR20 responses regardless of tumour necrosis factor inhibitor exposure and in other musculoskeletal manifestations, but significance could not be attributed due to ranking below Health Assessment Questionnaire–Disability Index response in hierarchical testing. However, the benefit on psoriasis lesions was modest. Efficacy was maintained or improved up to week 52. Abatacept was well tolerated with no new safety signals.ConclusionsAbatacept treatment of PsA in this phase III study achieved its primary end point, ACR20 response, showed beneficial trends overall in musculoskeletal manifestations and was well tolerated. There was only a modest impact on psoriasis lesions.Trial registration numberClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01860976 (funded by Bristol-Myers Squibb).

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 number NCT03796858.

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.

ObjectivesTo assess the efficacy of golimumab in combination with methotrexate (MTX) versus MTX monotherapy in psoriatic arthritis (PsA) dactylitis.MethodsMulticentre, investigator-initiated, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-design phase 3b trial in 11 Portuguese rheumatology centres. Patients with PsA along with active dactylitis and naive to MTX and biologic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (bDMARDs) were randomly assigned to golimumab or placebo, both in combination with MTX. The primary endpoint was Dactylitis Severity Score (DSS) change from baseline to week 24. Key secondary endpoints included DSS and Leeds Dactylitis Index (LDI) response, and changes from baseline in the LDI and MRI dactylitis score. Analysis was by intention-to-treat for the primary endpoint.ResultsTwenty-one patients received golimumab plus MTX and 23 MTX monotherapy for 24 weeks. One patient from each arm discontinued. Patient inclusion was halted at 50% planned recruitment due to a favourable interim analysis. Median baseline DSS was 6 in both arms. By week 24, patients treated with golimumab plus MTX exhibited significantly greater improvements in DSS relative to MTX monotherapy (median change of 5 vs 2 points, respectively; p=0.026). In the golimumab plus MTX arm, significantly higher proportions of patients achieved at least 50% or 70% improvement in DSS and 20%, 50% or 70% improvement in LDI in comparison to MTX monotherapy.ConclusionsThe combination of golimumab and MTX as first-line bDMARD therapy is superior to MTX monotherapy for the treatment of PsA dactylitis.Trial registration number NCT02065713

ObjectivesIn 2018, a nationwide mandatory switch from originator to biosimilar adalimumab was conducted in Denmark. The available biosimilar was GP2017 (Hyrimoz) in Eastern regions and SB5 (Imraldi) in Western regions. We aimed to assess the comparative effectiveness of GP2017 versus SB5 in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA)/psoriatic arthritis (PsA)/axial spondyloarthritis (AxSpA).MethodsObservational cohort study based on the DANBIO registry with geographical cluster pseudo-randomisation, analysed by emulating a randomised clinical trial. Main outcome was adjusted 1-year treatment retention (Cox regression). Furthermore, 6 months’ remission rates (logistic regression), reasons for withdrawal and back-switching to originator were investigated (overall and stratified by indication).ResultsOverall, of 1570 eligible patients, 1318 switched and were included (467 RA/321 PsA/530 AxSpA); 623 (47%) switched to GP2017, 695 (53%) to SB5. Baseline characteristics of the two clusters were largely similar, but some differences in registration practice were observed. The combined 1-year retention rate for the two biosimilars was 89.5%. Compared with SB5, estimated risk of withdrawal for GP2017 was lower (HR 0.60; 95% CI 0.42 to 0.86) and 6 months’ remission rate was higher (OR 1.72; 95% CI 1.25 to 2.37). Stratified analyses gave similar results (statistically significant for RA). During 1 year, 8.5% and 12.9% withdrew GP2017 and SB5, respectively (primarily lack of effect and adverse events), of whom 48 patients (3.6%) back-switched.ConclusionThis head-to-head comparison of GP2017 versus SB5 following a mandatory switch from the originator indicated differences in effectiveness in routine care. This may reflect a true difference, but other explanations, for example, differences in excipients, differences between clusters and residual confounding cannot be ruled out.

ObjectiveEvaluate apremilast efficacy across various psoriatic arthritis (PsA) manifestations beginning at week 2 in biological-naïve patients with PsA.MethodsPatients were randomised (1:1) to apremilast 30 mg twice daily or placebo. At week 16, patients whose swollen and tender joint counts had not improved by ≥10% were eligible for early escape. At week 24, all patients received apremilast through week 52.ResultsAmong 219 randomised patients (apremilast: n=110; placebo: n=109), a significantly greater American College of Rheumatology 20 response at week 16 (primary outcome) was observed with apremilast versus placebo (38.2% (42/110) vs 20.2% (22/109); P=0.004); response rates at week 2 (first assessment) were 16.4% (18/110) versus 6.4% (7/109) (P=0.025). Improvements in other efficacy outcomes, including 28-joint count Disease Activity Score (DAS-28) using C reactive protein (CRP), swollen joint count, Health Assessment Questionnaire-Disability Index (HAQ-DI), enthesitis and morning stiffness severity, were observed with apremilast at week 2. At week 16, apremilast significantly reduced PsA disease activity versus placebo, with changes in DAS-28 (CRP) (P<0.0001), HAQ-DI (P=0.023) and Gladman Enthesitis Index (P=0.001). Improvements were maintained with continued treatment through week 52. Over 52 weeks, apremilast’s safety profile was consistent with prior phase 3 studies in psoriasis and PsA. During weeks 0–24, the incidence of protocol-defined diarrhoea was 11.0% (apremilast) and 8.3% (placebo); serious adverse event rates were 2.8% (apremilast) and 4.6% (placebo).ConclusionsIn biological-naïve patients with PsA, onset of effect with apremilast was observed at week 2 and continued through week 52. The safety profile was consistent with previous reports.Trial registration number NCT01925768; Results.

BackgroundRecently, disease activity states were developed for the Disease Activity index for PSoriatic Arthritis (DAPSA). Here, we assess if different DAPSA disease activity states are associated with different degrees of functional impairment and different extents of joint damage progression in patients with psoriatic arthritis (PsA).MethodsWe used data from two pivotal trials of tumour necrosis factor (TNF) inhibitors in PsA (IMPACT II and GO-REVEAL) and identified patients in DAPSA remission (REM, ≤4), and low, moderate or high disease activity (LDA, ≤14; MDA, ≤28; HDA, >28) at 6 months. Across these groups we compared the functional scores (Health Assessment Questionnaire Disability Index, HAQ and physical component scale of the Short Form-36, PCS), and 1-year structural progression (PsA-modified Sharp/van der Heijde Score).ResultsWe identified 310 from GO-REVEAL and 130 from IMPACT II, with a mean (SD) baseline DAPSA of 48.8 (26.4) and 44.6 (17.9), respectively. HAQ scores increased across patients groups in the four DAPSA disease activity states, while PCS decreased (p<0.001 for both). The mean progression in the combined cohort was −0.47 for REM, −0.28 for LDA, −0.14 for MDA and 0.51 for HDA (p<0.001). This association was also significant in the individual trial cohorts, and in the subgroups of patients treated with TNF inhibitors or placebo. Higher DAPSA scores were significantly and independently associated with probability of structural progression in multiple analyses.ConclusionsDisease activity states of the PsA specific DAPSA score are highly valid for future use as endpoints in clinical trials or as targets in clinical practice.Trial registration numbersIMPACT 2: NCT02152254; GO-REVEAL: NCT00265096.

Background and objectives Instruments for measuring disease activity in psoriatic arthritis (PsA) are not yet firmly established, and most of the currently employed ones have been derived for rheumatoid arthritis. Some of these instruments are based on 28 joint counts, which do not capture joints frequently affected in PsA. Therefore, the reliability and validity of DAREA (for ‘Disease Activity index for REactive Arthritis’), which was originally developed for reactive arthritis and employs a 66/68 joint count, was tested in patients with PsA. Methods Trial data from the Infliximab Multinational Psoriatic Arthritis Controlled Trial were analysed. Results were then independently validated using an observational data set. DAREA was compared to other composite indices regarding correlations with core set variables, sensitivity to change and criterion validity. Results Good correlation of the DAREA with single items of disease activity, other composite scores (r=0.6−0.9) and physical function (Health Assessment Questionnaire; r=0.5) was found. Likewise, DAREA was at least as sensitive to change as the other indices and more so in patients with distal interphalangeal joint involvement. Additionally, DAREA correlated well with radiographic changes. Conclusion The analyses of this study provide evidence of the utility and validity of the DAREA for PsA disease activity assessment. A second name should therefore be assigned to this score: DAPSA (for ‘Disease Activity index for PSoriatic Arthritis’).

Since some patients with psoriatic arthritis do not respond to typical drug treatments, alternatives are needed. Findings suggest that interleukins 12 and 23 might affect clinical symptoms and pathological joint changes of psoriatic arthritis. Ustekinumab is a human monoclonal antibody that inhibits receptor-binding of these cytokines. We aimed to assess the efficacy and safety of ustekinumab for psoriatic arthritis in this phase II study. We undertook a double-blind, randomised, placebo-controlled, crossover study at 24 sites in North America and Europe. Patients with active psoriatic arthritis were randomly allocated via interactive voice response system to either ustekinumab (90 mg or 63 mg) every week for 4 weeks (weeks 0–3) followed by placebo at weeks 12 and 16 (n=76; Group 1) or placebo (weeks 0–3) and ustekinumab (63 mg) at weeks 12 and 16 (n=70; Group 2). The first 12 weeks of the study were placebo-controlled. Masking was maintained to week 16 infusion, and patients were followed up to week 36. The primary endpoint was ACR20 response at week 12. Analysis was by intention to treat. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00267956. At week 12, 32 (42%) patients in Group 1 and ten (14%) in Group 2 achieved the primary endpoint (difference 28% [95% CI 14·0–41·6]; p=0·0002). Of 124 (85%) participants with psoriasis affecting 3% or more body surface area, 33 of 63 (52%) in Group 1 and three of 55 (5%) in Group 2 had a 75% or greater improvement in psoriasis area and severity index score at week 12 (47% [33·2–60·6]; p<0·0001). During the placebo-controlled period (weeks 0–12), adverse events arose in 46 (61%) patients in Group 1 and 44 (63%) in Group 2; serious adverse events were recorded in three (4%) Group 2 patients (none in Group 1). Ustekinumab significantly reduced signs and symptoms of psoriatic arthritis and diminished skin lesions compared with placebo, and the drug was well tolerated. Larger and longer term studies are needed to further characterise ustekinumab efficacy and safety for treatment of psoriatic arthritis. Centocor.

Objective To investigate the efficacy and safety of etanercept (ETN) in paediatric subjects with extended oligoarticular juvenile idiopathic arthritis (eoJIA), enthesitis-related arthritis (ERA), or psoriatic arthritis (PsA). Methods CLIPPER is an ongoing, Phase 3b, open-label, multicentre study; the 12-week (Part 1) data are reported here. Subjects with eoJIA (2–17 years), ERA (12–17 years), or PsA (12–17 years) received ETN 0.8 mg/kg once weekly (maximum 50 mg). Primary endpoint was the percentage of subjects achieving JIA American College of Rheumatology (ACR) 30 criteria at week 12; secondary outcomes included JIA ACR 50/70/90 and inactive disease. Results 122/127 (96.1%) subjects completed the study (mean age 11.7 years). JIA ACR 30 (95% CI) was achieved by 88.6% (81.6% to 93.6%) of subjects overall; 89.7% (78.8% to 96.1%) with eoJIA, 83.3% (67.2% to 93.6%) with ERA and 93.1% (77.2% to 99.2%) with PsA. For eoJIA, ERA, or PsA categories, the ORs of ETN vs the historical placebo data were 26.2, 15.1 and 40.7, respectively. Overall JIA ACR 50, 70, 90 and inactive disease were achieved by 81.1, 61.5, 29.8 and 12.1%, respectively. Treatment-emergent adverse events (AEs), infections, and serious AEs, were reported in 45 (35.4%), 58 (45.7%), and 4 (3.1%), subjects, respectively. Serious AEs were one case each of abdominal pain, bronchopneumonia, gastroenteritis and pyelocystitis. One subject reported herpes zoster and another varicella. No differences in safety were observed across the JIA categories. Conclusions ETN treatment for 12 weeks was effective and well tolerated in paediatric subjects with eoJIA, ERA and PsA, with no unexpected safety findings.