Imaging in inflammatory arthritis: progress towards precision medicine

International audienceImaging techniques such as ultrasonography and MRI have gained ground in the diagnosis and management of inflammatory arthritis, as these imaging modalities allow a sensitive assessment of musculoskeletal inflammation and damage. However, these techniques cannot discriminate between disease subsets and are currently unable to deliver an accurate prediction of disease progression and therapeutic response in individual patients. This major shortcoming of today’s technology hinders a targeted and personalized patient management approach. Technological advances in the areas of high-resolution imaging (for example, high-resolution peripheral quantitative computed tomography and ultra-high field MRI), functional and molecular-based imaging (such as chemical exchange saturation transfer MRI, positron emission tomography, fluorescence optical imaging, optoacoustic imaging and contrast-enhanced ultrasonography) and artificial intelligence-based data analysis could help to tackle these challenges. These new imaging approaches offer detailed anatomical delineation and an in vivo and non-invasive evaluation of the immunometabolic status of inflammatory reactions, thereby facilitating an in-depth characterization of inflammation. By means of these developments, the aim of earlier diagnosis, enhanced monitoring and, ultimately, a personalized treatment strategy looms closer

Efficacy and safety of the biosimilar ABP 501 compared with adalimumab in patients with moderate to severe rheumatoid arthritis: a randomised, double-blind, phase III equivalence study

Objectives ABP 501 is a Food and Drug Administration-approved biosimilar to adalimumab; structural, functional and pharmacokinetic evaluations have shown that the two are highly similar. We report results from a phase III study comparing efficacy, safety and immunogenicity between ABP 501 and adalimumab. Methods In this randomised, double-blind, active comparator-controlled, 26-week equivalence study, patients with moderate to severe active rheumatoid arthritis (RA) despite methotrexate were randomised (1:1) to ABP 501 or adalimumab (40 mg) every 2 weeks. Primary endpoint was risk ratio (RR) of ACR20 between groups at week 24. Primary hypothesis that the treatments were equivalent would be confirmed if the 90% CI for RR of ACR20 at week 24 fell between 0.738 and 1.355, demonstrating that ABP 501 is similar to adalimumab. Secondary endpoints included Disease Activity Score 28-joint count-C reactive protein (DAS28-CRP). Safety was assessed via adverse events (AEs) and laboratory evaluations. Antidrug antibodies were assessed to determine immunogenicity. Results A total of 526 patients were randomised (n=264, ABP 501; n=262 adalimumab) and 494 completed the study. ACR20 response at week 24 was 74.6% (ABP 501) and 72.4% (adalimumab). At week 24, the RR of ACR20 (90% CI) between groups was 1.039 (0.954, 1.133), confirming the primary hypothesis. Changes from baseline in DAS28-CRP, ACR50 and ACR70 were similar. There were no clinically meaningful differences in AEs and laboratory abnormalities. A total of 38.3% (ABP 501) and 38.2% (adalimumab) of patients tested positive for binding antidrug antibodies. Conclusions Results from this study demonstrate that ABP 501 is similar to adalimumab in clinical efficacy, safety and immunogenicity in patients with moderate to severe RA