The need for comparative data in spondyloarthritis

Spondyloarthritis comprises a group of inflammatory diseases, characterised by inflammation within axial joints and/or peripheral arthritis, enthesitis and dactylitis. An increasing number of biologic treatments, including biosimilars, are available for the treatment of spondyloarthritis. Although there are a growing number of randomised controlled trials assessing treatments in spondyloarthritis, there is a paucity of data from head-to-head studies. Comparative data are required so that clinicians and payers have the level of evidence required to inform clinical decision-making and health economic assessments. In the absence of head-to-head studies, statistical methods such as network meta-analyses and matching-adjusted indirect comparisons (MAICs) are used for assessing comparative effectiveness. Network meta-analysis can be used to compare treatments for trials using a common comparator (e.g. placebo); however, for those without a common comparator or where considerable heterogeneity exists between the study populations, a MAIC that controls for differences in study design and baseline patient characteristics may be used. MAICs, unlike network meta-analyses, are of value for longer-term comparisons beyond the placebo-controlled phase of clinical trials, which is important for chronic diseases requiring long-term treatment, like spondyloarthritis. At present, there are a number of limitations that restrict the effectiveness of MAIC, such as the poor availability of individual patient-level data from trials, which results in patient-level data from one trial being compared with published whole-population data from another. Despite these limitations, drug reimbursement agencies are increasingly accepting MAIC as a means of comparative effectiveness and greater methodological guidance is needed. This report highlights a number of challenges that are specific to conducting comparative studies like MAIC in spondyloarthritis, including disease heterogeneity, the paucity of biomarkers and the duration of studies required for radiographic endpoints in this slow-progressing disease

Secukinumab for moderate to severe palmoplantar pustular psoriasis: Results of the 2PRECISE study

Palmoplantar pustular psoriasis (PPP) is a debilitating disease of the palms and/or soles that is resistant to treatment. Secukinumab, an anti-IL-17A monoclonal antibody, is highly efficacious in the treatment of moderate to severe psoriasis. The primary objective was ppPASI75 response with secukinumab at Week 16 vs. placebo (2.5% significance level). 2PRECISE was a phase 3b multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group study comparing secukinumab 300 mg (n=79) and 150 mg (n=80) to placebo (n=78) in subjects with moderate to severe PPP over 52 Weeks. The primary endpoint was not met. At Week 16, 26.6% of subjects with secukinumab 300 mg achieved ppPASI75 vs.. 14.1% with placebo (P=0.0411) [OR: 2.62; 95% CI: 1.04, 6.60]. At Week 52, 41.8% of subjects with secukinumab 300mg had ppPASI75. More DLQI 0/1 responses were achieved with secukinumab 300 mg (13.0%) vs. placebo (4.3%) at Week 16. At Week 52, 43.1% of subjects receiving secukinumab 300 mg had DLQI 0/1. No unexpected adverse events were observed. Small sample size and characteristics of PPP disease course. PPP patients treated with secukinumab 300 mg showed benefit in ppPASI75 responses over 52 weeks and improved quality of life. [Abstract copyright: Copyright © 2019. Published by Elsevier Inc.

The need for comparative data in spondyloarthritis

Spondyloarthritis comprises a group of inflammatory diseases, characterised by inflammation within axial joints and/or peripheral arthritis, enthesitis and dactylitis. An increasing number of biologic treatments, including biosimilars, are available for the treatment of spondyloarthritis. Although there are a growing number of randomised controlled trials assessing treatments in spondyloarthritis, there is a paucity of data from head-to-head studies. Comparative data are required so that clinicians and payers have the level of evidence required to inform clinical decision-making and health economic assessments. In the absence of head-to-head studies, statistical methods such as network meta-analyses and matching-adjusted indirect comparisons (MAICs) are used for assessing comparative effectiveness. Network meta-analysis can be used to compare treatments for trials using a common comparator (e.g. placebo); however, for those without a common comparator or where considerable heterogeneity exists between the study populations, a MAIC that controls for differences in study design and baseline patient characteristics may be used. MAICs, unlike network meta-analyses, are of value for longer-term comparisons beyond the placebo-controlled phase of clinical trials, which is important for chronic diseases requiring long-term treatment, like spondyloarthritis. At present, there are a number of limitations that restrict the effectiveness of MAIC, such as the poor availability of individual patient-level data from trials, which results in patient-level data from one trial being compared with published whole-population data from another. Despite these limitations, drug reimbursement agencies are increasingly accepting MAIC as a means of comparative effectiveness and greater methodological guidance is needed. This report highlights a number of challenges that are specific to conducting comparative studies like MAIC in spondyloarthritis, including disease heterogeneity, the paucity of biomarkers and the duration of studies required for radiographic endpoints in this slow-progressing disease

The need for comparative data in spondyloarthritis

Spondyloarthritis comprises a group of inflammatory diseases, characterised by inflammation within axial joints and/or peripheral arthritis, enthesitis and dactylitis. An increasing number of biologic treatments, including biosimilars, are available for the treatment of spondyloarthritis. Although there are a growing number of randomised controlled trials assessing treatments in spondyloarthritis, there is a paucity of data from head-to-head studies. Comparative data are required so that clinicians and payers have the level of evidence required to inform clinical decision-making and health economic assessments. In the absence of head-to-head studies, statistical methods such as network meta-analyses and matching-adjusted indirect comparisons (MAICs) are used for assessing comparative effectiveness.Network meta-analysis can be used to compare treatments for trials using a common comparator (e.g. placebo); however, for those without a common comparator or where considerable heterogeneity exists between the study populations, a MAIC that controls for differences in study design and baseline patient characteristics may be used. MAICs, unlike network meta-analyses, are of value for longer-term comparisons beyond the placebo-controlled phase of clinical trials, which is important for chronic diseases requiring long-term treatment, like spondyloarthritis. At present, there are a number of limitations that restrict the effectiveness of MAIC, such as the poor availability of individual patient-level data from trials, which results in patient-level data from one trial being compared with published whole-population data from another. Despite these limitations, drug reimbursement agencies are increasingly accepting MAIC as a means of comparative effectiveness and greater methodological guidance is needed.This report highlights a number of challenges that are specific to conducting comparative studies like MAIC in spondyloarthritis, including disease heterogeneity, the paucity of biomarkers and the duration of studies required for radiographic endpoints in this slow-progressing disease.status: publishe

Renal function with delayed or immediate cyclosporine microemulsion in combination with enteric-coated mycophenolate sodium and steroids: results of follow up to 30 months post-transplant.

International audienceBACKGROUND: In the multicenter, open-label Myriade study, renal transplant patients were randomized to early cyclosporine microemulsion (CsA-ME, day 0) or delayed CsA-ME (day 6) with enteric-coated mycophenolate sodium (EC-MPS), steroids and interleukin-2 receptor induction. One-yr results have been published previously. We now report the results of an extension study in which patients were followed up for a period of three yr post-transplant. METHODS: All patients completing the one-yr core study on-treatment were eligible to enter the extension study. RESULTS: Of the 203 patients, 153 completed the core trial on-treatment; 144 (94%) entered the extension study with a minimum follow-up of one yr (73 early CsA-ME, 71 delayed CsA-ME). In 75% of patients receiving EC-MPS during the extension, the recommended dose was administered (1440 mg/d). Median creatinine clearance remained constant (57 mL/min) at 12, 24 and 30 months post-transplant and was similar in the early and delayed CsA-ME groups as well as in subpopulations with or without delayed graft function. One patient in the early CsA-ME group died. No grafts were lost. The incidence of BPAR from time of transplant to the end of the extension study was 17% (24/139). Seven patients (5%) discontinued the extension study prematurely because of adverse events. CONCLUSION: These results suggest that a regimen of CsA-ME, EC-MPS and steroids results in excellent survival rates with stable renal function over a mean follow-up of 30 months. Immediate introduction of CsA-ME has no deleterious effect on long-term renal function, even among patients with delayed graft function

Tolerability of enteric-coated mycophenolate sodium to 1 year in combination with cyclosporine and corticosteroids in renal transplant recipients.

International audienceEnteric-coated mycophenolate sodium (EC-MPS) is therapeutically equivalent to mycophenolate mofetil, but delays release of mycophenolic acid until it reaches the small intestine. De novo renal transplant patients taking part in a 12-month, multicenter, randomized study received cyclosporine microemulsion (CsA-ME, early or delayed to day 6), EC-MPS, steroids, and interleukin-2 antagonist induction. Tolerability data relating to EC-MPS are reported. Ninety-seven patients were randomized to early CsA-ME and 100 patients to delayed CsA-ME. Median daily dose of EC-MPS was 1440 mg at all time points throughout the 12-month period. The most frequently reported adverse events were constipation, anemia, urinary tract infection, abdominal pain, leukopenia, and cytomegalovirus infection; there were four malignancies. Fifty patients (24.6%) discontinued EC-MPS prematurely by 12 months, including 42 patients (84%) who discontinued owing to adverse events. No patient discontinued treatment because of gastrointestinal adverse events. Two-thirds of patients (137 [67.5%]) maintained full EC-MPS dose throughout the 12-month study and did not require any dose reduction or dose interruption. EC-MPS is well tolerated in de novo renal transplant recipients when administered in combination with CsA-ME and steroids, with low rates of dose reductions or interruptions. Gastrointestinal adverse events were responsible for dose reduction or interruption in only 5% of patients