23 research outputs found

    Progressive skin fibrosis is associated with a decline in lung function and worse survival in patients with diffuse cutaneous systemic sclerosis in the European Scleroderma Trials and Research (EUSTAR) cohort.

    Get PDF
    Objectives To determine whether progressive skin fibrosis is associated with visceral organ progression and mortality during follow-up in patients with diffuse cutaneous systemic sclerosis (dcSSc). Methods We evaluated patients from the European Scleroderma Trials and Research database with dcSSc, baseline modified Rodnan skin score (mRSS) ≥7, valid mRSS at 12±3 months after baseline and ≥1 annual follow-up visit. Progressive skin fibrosis was defined as an increase in mRSS >5 and ≥25% from baseline to 12±3 months. Outcomes were pulmonary, cardiovascular and renal progression, and all-cause death. Associations between skin progression and outcomes were evaluated by Kaplan-Meier survival analysis and multivariable Cox regression. Results Of 1021 included patients, 78 (7.6%) had progressive skin fibrosis (skin progressors). Median follow-up was 3.4 years. Survival analyses indicated that skin progressors had a significantly higher probability of FVC decline ≥10% (53.6% vs 34.4%; p<0.001) and all-cause death (15.4% vs 7.3%; p=0.003) than non-progressors. These significant associations were also found in subgroup analyses of patients with either low baseline mRSS (≤22/51) or short disease duration (≤15 months). In multivariable analyses, skin progression within 1 year was independently associated with FVC decline ≥10% (HR 1.79, 95% CI 1.20 to 2.65) and all-cause death (HR 2.58, 95% CI 1.31 to 5.09). Conclusions Progressive skin fibrosis within 1 year is associated with decline in lung function and worse survival in dcSSc during follow-up. These results confirm mRSS as a surrogate marker in dcSSc, which will be helpful for cohort enrichment in future trials and risk stratification in clinical practice

    Upadacitinib monotherapy improves patient-reported outcomes in rheumatoid arthritis: results from SELECT-EARLY and SELECT-MONOTHERAPY

    No full text
    OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the effect of upadacitinib (UPA) monotherapy vs MTX on patient-reported outcomes (PROs) in patients with RA who were MTX-naïve or who had an inadequate response to MTX (MTX-IR). METHODS: PROs from the SELECT-EARLY and SELECT-MONOTHERAPY randomized controlled trials were evaluated at Weeks 2 and 12/14. Patients were ≥18 years of age with RA symptoms for ≥6 weeks (SELECT-EARLY, MTX-naïve) or diagnosed RA for ≥3 months (SELECT-MONOTHERAPY, MTX-IR) and received UPA monotherapy (15 or 30 mg) or MTX. PROs included Patient Global Assessment of Disease Activity (PtGA), pain visual analogue scale, HAQ Disability Index (HAQ-DI), morning stiffness duration/severity, Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy (FACIT)-Fatigue (SELECT-EARLY), health-related quality of life (HRQOL) by the 36-iem Short Form Health Survey and Work Productivity and Activity Impairment (WPAI; SELECT-EARLY). Least square mean (LSM) changes and proportions of patients reporting improvements greater than or equal to the minimum clinically important differences and normative values were determined. RESULTS: In 945 MTX-naïve and 648 MTX-IR patients, UPA monotherapy (15 mg, 30 mg) vs MTX resulted in greater reported LSM changes from baseline at Weeks 12/14 in PtGA, pain, HAQ-DI, morning stiffness duration/severity, FACIT-F (SELECT-EARLY), HRQOL and WPAI (SELECT-EARLY). These changes were statistically significant with both doses of UPA vs MTX at Weeks 12/14 in both RCTs. Improvements were reported as early as week 2. Compared with MTX, more UPA-treated MTX-naïve and MTX-IR patients reported improvements greater than or equal to the minimum clinically important differences and scores greater than or equal to normative values. CONCLUSION: Among MTX-naïve and MTX-IR patients with active RA, UPA monotherapy at 15 or 30 mg for 12/14 weeks resulted in statistically significant and clinically meaningful improvements in pain, physical function, morning stiffness, HRQOL and WPAI compared with MTX alone. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: SELECT-EARLY (NCT02706873) and SELECT-MONOTHERAPY (NCT02706951) are registered with ClinicalTrials.gov

    Upadacitinib monotherapy improves patient-reported outcomes in rheumatoid arthritis:results from SELECT-EARLY and SELECT-MONOTHERAPY

    No full text
    OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the effect of upadacitinib (UPA) monotherapy vs MTX on patient-reported outcomes (PROs) in patients with RA who were MTX-naïve or who had an inadequate response to MTX (MTX-IR). METHODS: PROs from the SELECT-EARLY and SELECT-MONOTHERAPY randomized controlled trials were evaluated at Weeks 2 and 12/14. Patients were ≥18 years of age with RA symptoms for ≥6 weeks (SELECT-EARLY, MTX-naïve) or diagnosed RA for ≥3 months (SELECT-MONOTHERAPY, MTX-IR) and received UPA monotherapy (15 or 30 mg) or MTX. PROs included Patient Global Assessment of Disease Activity (PtGA), pain visual analogue scale, HAQ Disability Index (HAQ-DI), morning stiffness duration/severity, Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy (FACIT)-Fatigue (SELECT-EARLY), health-related quality of life (HRQOL) by the 36-iem Short Form Health Survey and Work Productivity and Activity Impairment (WPAI; SELECT-EARLY). Least square mean (LSM) changes and proportions of patients reporting improvements greater than or equal to the minimum clinically important differences and normative values were determined. RESULTS: In 945 MTX-naïve and 648 MTX-IR patients, UPA monotherapy (15 mg, 30 mg) vs MTX resulted in greater reported LSM changes from baseline at Weeks 12/14 in PtGA, pain, HAQ-DI, morning stiffness duration/severity, FACIT-F (SELECT-EARLY), HRQOL and WPAI (SELECT-EARLY). These changes were statistically significant with both doses of UPA vs MTX at Weeks 12/14 in both RCTs. Improvements were reported as early as week 2. Compared with MTX, more UPA-treated MTX-naïve and MTX-IR patients reported improvements greater than or equal to the minimum clinically important differences and scores greater than or equal to normative values. CONCLUSION: Among MTX-naïve and MTX-IR patients with active RA, UPA monotherapy at 15 or 30 mg for 12/14 weeks resulted in statistically significant and clinically meaningful improvements in pain, physical function, morning stiffness, HRQOL and WPAI compared with MTX alone. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: SELECT-EARLY (NCT02706873) and SELECT-MONOTHERAPY (NCT02706951) are registered with ClinicalTrials.gov

    A randomized controlled trial comparing PF-06438179/GP1111 (an infliximab biosimilar) and infliximab reference product for treatment of moderate to severe active rheumatoid arthritis despite methotrexate therapy

    No full text
    Abstract Background This double-blind, active-controlled, randomized, multinational study evaluated the efficacy, safety, pharmacokinetics (PK), and immunogenicity of PF-06438179/GP1111 (IxifiTM/Zessly®), an infliximab biosimilar, vs infliximab (Remicade®) reference product sourced from the European Union (infliximab-EU) in biologic-naïve patients with moderate to severe active rheumatoid arthritis (RA) despite methotrexate therapy. This paper reports results from the initial 30-week treatment period. Methods Patients (N = 650) were stratified by geographic region and randomized 1:1 to PF-06438179/GP1111 or infliximab-EU (3 mg/kg intravenous at weeks 0, 2, and 6, then every 8 weeks). Dose escalation to 5 mg/kg was allowed starting at week 14 for patients with inadequate RA response. The primary endpoint was American College of Rheumatology criteria for ≥ 20% clinical improvement (ACR20) response at week 14. Therapeutic equivalence was declared if the two-sided 95% CI for the treatment difference was within the symmetric equivalence margin of ± 13.5%. Statistical analysis was also performed with a two-sided 90% CI using an asymmetric equivalence margin (− 12.0%, 15.0%). Results Patients (80.3% female; 79.4% seropositive) had a mean RA duration of 6.9 years, and mean baseline Disease Activity Score in 28 joints, four components based on C-reactive protein was 6.0 in both arms. Week 14 ACR20 in the intention-to-treat population was 62.7% for PF-06438179/GP1111 and 64.1% for infliximab-EU. Week 14 ACR20 using nonresponder imputation was 61.1% for PF-06438179/GP1111 and 63.5% for infliximab-EU, and the 95% (− 9.92%, 5.11%) and 90% (− 8.75%, 4.02%) CIs for the treatment difference (− 2.39%) were entirely contained within the prespecified symmetric and asymmetric equivalence margins, respectively. No differences were observed between arms for secondary efficacy endpoints. Overall postdose antidrug antibody (ADA) rates through week 30 were 48.6% and 51.2% for PF-06438179/GP1111 and infliximab-EU, respectively. Efficacy and immunogenicity were similar between treatments for patients with dose escalation (at or after week 14), as well as between treatments for patients without dose escalation. Safety profiles of PF-06438179/GP1111 and infliximab-EU were similar, with no clinically meaningful differences observed between arms, including after ADA development. Serum drug concentrations were similar between arms at each time point during the initial 30-week treatment period. Conclusion PF-06438179/GP1111 and infliximab-EU demonstrated similar efficacy, safety, immunogenicity, and PK with or without dose escalation in patients with moderate to severe active RA on background methotrexate. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02222493. Registered on 21 August 2014. EudraCT, 2013-004148-49. Registered on 14 July 2014

    Tofacitinib, un inhibidor oral de la quinasa Janus, para el tratamiento de artritis reumatoide en pacientes de Latinoamérica: eficacia y seguridad de estudios fase 3 y de extensión a largo plazo

    No full text
    Objective: Tofacitinib is an oral Janus kinase inhibitor for the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis (RA). We assessed tofacitinib efficacy and safety in the Latin American (LA) subpopulation of global Phase 3 and long-term extension (LTE) studies. Materials and methods: Data from LA patients with RA and inadequate response to disease modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs) were pooled across five Phase 3 studies. Phase 3 patients received tofacitinib 5 or 10 mg twice daily (BID), adalimumab or placebo; patients in the single LTE study received tofacitinib 5 or 10 mg BID; treatments were administered alone or with conventional synthetic DMARDs. Efficacy was reported up to 12 months (Phase 3) and 36 months (LTE) by American College of Rheumatology (ACR) 20/50/70 response rates, Disease Activity Score (DAS)28-4(erythrocyte sedimentation rate [ESR]) and Health Assessment Questionnaire-Disability Index (HAQ-DI). Incidence rates (IRs; patients with event/100 patient-years) of adverse events (AEs) of special interest were reported. Results: The Phase 3 studies randomized 496 LA patients; the LTE study enrolled 756 LA patients from Phase 2 and Phase 3. In the Phase 3 studies, patients who received tofacitinib 5 and 10 mg BID showed improvements vs placebo at Month 3 in ACR20 (68.9% and 75.7% vs 35.6%), ACR50 (45.8% and 49.7% vs 20.7%) and ACR70 (17.5% and 23.1% vs 6.9%) responses, mean change from baseline in HAQ-DI (-0.6 and -0.8 vs -0.3) and DAS28-4(ESR) score (-2.3 and -2.4 vs -1.4). The improvements were sustained up to Month 36 in the LTE study. In the Phase 3 studies, IRs with tofacitinib 5 and 10 mg BID and placebo were 7.99, 6.57 and 9.84, respectively, for SAES, and 3.87, 5.28 and 3.26 for discontinuation due to AEs. IRs of AEs of special interest in tofacitinib-treated LA patients were similar to the global population. Conclusion: In Phase 3 and LTE studies in LA patients with RA, tofacitinib demonstrated efficacy up to 36 months with a manageable safety profile up to 60 months, consistent with the overall tofacitinib study population.Objetivo: Tofacitinib es un inhibidor oral de la quinasa Janus para el tratamiento de la artritis reumatoide (AR). Este análisis evaluó la eficacia y la seguridad de tofacitinib en la subpoblación Latinoamericana (LA) de los estudios fase 3 y de extensión a largo plazo (ELP). Materiales y métodos: Se agruparon datos de pacientes de Latinoamérica con AR y una respuesta inadecuada a agentes modificadores de la enfermedad (DMARD) de 5 estudios fase 3. Los pacientes en estos estudios recibieron tofacitinib 5 o 10 mg/2 veces al día (bid), adalimumab o placebo; los pacientes en el estudio de seguridad recibieron tofacitinib 5 o 10 mg/bid; los tratamientos se administraron en monoterapia o con DMARD sintéticos convencionales. La eficacia se reporta hasta 12 (fase 3) y 36 meses (ELP) mediante las tasas de respuesta del Colegio Americano de Reumatología (ACR) 20/50/70, el índice de actividad de la enfermedad (DAS)28-4 ESR (tasa de sedimentación globular [ESR]) y el índice de discapacidad del cuestionario de evaluación de la salud (HAQ-DI). Se reportan las tasas de incidencia (IR: pacientes con evento/100 pacientes/a˜no) de eventos adversos (EA) de interés especial. Resultados: Los estudios fase 3, incluyeron 496 pacientes de LA, el ELP reclutó 756 pacientes de fase 2 y fase 3. En los estudios de fase 3, los pacientes que recibieron tofacitinib 5 y 10 mg/bid presentaron mejorías vs placebo al mes 3 en las respuestas ACR20 (68,9% y 75,7% vs 35,6%), ACR50 (45,8% y 49,7% vs 20,7%) y ACR70 (17,5% y 23,1% vs 6,9%), en cambio, desde el valor basal en el escore HAQ-DI (−0,6 y −0,8 vs −0,3) y en el escore DAS28-4(ESR) (−2,3 y −2,4 vs −1,4); estas mejorías fueron sostenidas hasta el mes 36, último mes de evaluación en el estudio de ELP. En los pacientes con tofacitinib 5 o 10 mg/bid y placebo, las tasas de incidencia de SAE fueron de 7,99, 6,57 y 9,84, mientras que la incidencia de descontinuaciones por EA fueron de 3,87, 5,28 y 3,26, respectivamente. Las IR de EA de interés especial en pacientes de LA fueron similares a la población global. Conclusión: En los pacientes de LA con AR de estudios fase 3 y ELP, tofacitinib demostró eficacia hasta por 36 meses con un perfil de seguridad manejable hasta por 60 meses, en los pacientes de LA con AR, datos consistentes con el de la población global de los estudios de tofacitinib.Pfizer Inc

    Polypharmacy: a rarely-discussed problem in rheumatoid arthritis. data from a large real-life study

    No full text
    Polypharmacy is concomitant use of five or more drugs and is usually associated with various comorbidities and advanced age. The already demonstrated consequences of polypharmacy are increased side effects, drug interactions, increased hospitalizations, drug handling difficulties, reduced adherence, and even increased mortality. Rheumatoid arthritis (RA) is a chronic systemic disease with preferential involvement between the third and fifth decades. Owing to treatment of underlying disease and comorbidities, patients with RA frequently require combined use of several drugs. Despite the possible negative consequences of polypharmacy in RA, there is a shortage of studies in literature78684685Annual European Congress of Rheumatology (EULAR

    Determinants of discordance in patient's and physician's global assessements of disease activity of rheumatoid arthritis in the "real" study - Brazil

    No full text
    Discordance between the patient‘s global assessment of disease activity (PGA) and examiner’s global assessment (EGA) has been described in rheumatoid arthritis (RA) (1,2). Understanding the reasons for this discrepancy is essential in the context of treat-to-target treatment strategy78340341Annual European Congress of Rheumatology (EULAR

    The Effect of 3 or 6 Years of Denosumab Exposure in Women With Postmenopausal Osteoporosis: Results From the FREEDOM Extension.

    Get PDF
    Context:The FREEDOM extension is evaluating the long-term efficacy and safety of denosumab for up to 10 years.Objective:Report results from the first 3 years of the extension, representing up to 6 years of denosumab exposure.Design, Setting, and Participants: Multicenter, international, open-label study of 4550 women.Intervention:Women from the FREEDOM denosumab group received 3 more years of denosumab for a total of 6 years (long-term) and women from the FREEDOM placebo group received 3 years of denosumab (cross-over).Main Outcome Measures:Bone turnover markers (BTMs), bone mineral density (BMD), fracture, and safety.Results:Reductions in BTMs were maintained (long-term) or achieved rapidly (cross-over) following denosumab administration. In the long-term group, BMD further increased for cumulative 6-year gains of 15.2% (lumbar spine) and 7.5% (total hip). During the first 3 years of denosumab treatment, the cross-over group had significant gains in lumbar spine (9.4%) and total hip (4.8%) BMD, similar to the long-term group during the 3-year FREEDOM trial. In the long-term group, fracture incidences remained low and below rates projected for a "virtual placebo" cohort. In the cross-over group, 3-year incidences of new vertebral and nonvertebral fractures were similar to those of the FREEDOM denosumab group. Incidence rates of adverse events did not increase over time. Six participants had events of ONJ confirmed by adjudication. One participant had a fracture adjudicated as consistent with atypical femoral fracture.Conclusion:Denosumab treatment for 6 years remained well tolerated, maintained reduced bone turnover, and continued to increase BMD. Fracture incidence remained low
    corecore