Long-term, Real-world Safety of Adalimumab in Rheumatoid Arthritis: Analysis of a Prospective US-Based Registry

OBJECTIVE: To assess long-term safety in a US cohort of rheumatoid arthritis (RA) patients treated with adalimumab in real-world clinical care settings. METHODS: This observational study analyzed the long-term incidence of safety outcomes among RA patients initiating adalimumab using data from the Corrona RA registry. Patients were adults ( \u3e /=18 years) who initiated adalimumab treatment between January 2008 and June 2017, and who had at least 1 follow-up visit. RESULTS: In total, 2798 adalimumab initiators were available for analysis, with a mean age of 54.5 years, 77% female, and mean duration of disease of 8.3 years. Nearly half (48%) were biologic naive, and 9% were using prednisone \u3e /=10 mg at adalimumab initiation. The incidence rates per 100 person-years for serious infections, congestive heart failure requiring hospitalization, malignancy (excluding nonmelanoma skin cancer), and all-cause mortality were 1.86, 0.15, 0.64, and 0.33, respectively. The incidence of serious infections was higher in the first year of therapy (3.44 [95% confidence interval: 2.45-4.84]) than subsequent years, while other measured AEs did not vary substantially by duration of exposure. The median time to adalimumab discontinuation was 11 months, while the median time to first serious infection among those experiencing a serious infection event was 12 months. CONCLUSION: Analysis of long-term data from this prospective real-world registry demonstrated a safety profile consistent with previous studies in patients with RA. This analysis did not identify any new safety signals associated with adalimumab treatment and provides valuable guidance for physicians prescribing adalimumab for extended periods of time

Upadacitinib for psoriatic arthritis refractory to biologics : SELECT-PsA 2

Background: Upadacitinib is a Janus kinase inhibitor under evaluation for the treatment of psoriatic arthritis (PsA). We evaluated upadacitinib in patients with PsA and prior inadequate response or intolerance to at least one biologic disease-modifying antirheumatic drug (DMARD). Methods: In this 24-week randomised, placebo-controlled, double-blind, phase 3 trial, 642 patients were randomised (2:2:1:1) to once per day upadacitinib 15 mg or 30 mg, placebo followed by upadacitinib 15 mg or placebo followed by upadacitinib 30 mg at week 24. The primary endpoint was the proportion of patients achieving American College of Rheumatology (ACR) 20 response at week 12. Achievement of minimal disease activity (MDA) was assessed at week 24. Treatment-emergent adverse events are reported for all patients who received at least one dose of trial drug. Results: At week 12, significantly more patients receiving upadacitinib 15 mg and 30 mg versus placebo achieved ACR20 (56.9% and 63.8% vs 24.1%; p<0.001 for both comparisons). At week 24, MDA was achieved by more upadacitinib 15 mg-treated (25.1%) and 30 mg-treated patients (28.9%) versus placebo (2.8%; p<0.001 for both comparisons). Generally, the rates of treatment-emergent adverse events were similar with placebo and upadacitinib 15 mg and higher with upadacitinib 30 mg at week 24. Rates of serious infections were 0.5%, 0.5% and 2.8% with placebo, upadacitinib 15 mg and upadacitinib 30 mg, respectively. Conclusion: In this trial of patients with active PsA who had inadequate response or intolerance to at least one biologic DMARD, upadacitinib 15 mg and 30 mg was more effective than placebo over 24 weeks in improving signs and symptoms of PsA

Upadacitinib in patients with psoriatic arthritis and an inadequate response to non-biological therapy: 56-week data from the phase 3 SELECT-PsA 1 study

Background: In SELECT-PsA 1, a randomised double-blind phase 3 study, upadacitinib 15 mg and 30 mg were superior to placebo and non-inferior to adalimumab in ≥20% improvement in American College of Rheumatology (ACR) criteria at 12 weeks in patients with psoriatic arthritis (PsA). Here, we report 56-week efficacy and safety in patients from SELECT-PsA 1. Methods: Patients received upadacitinib 15 mg or 30 mg once daily, adalimumab 40 mg every other week for 56 weeks or placebo through week 24 switched thereafter to upadacitinib 15 mg or 30 mg until week 56. Efficacy endpoints included the proportion of patients achieving ≥20%/50%/70% improvement in ACR criteria (ACR20/50/70), ≥75%/90%/100% improvement in Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI75/90/100), minimal disease activity (MDA) and change from baseline in modified total Sharp/van der Heijde Score. Treatment-emergent adverse events per 100 patient years (PY) were summarised. Results: Consistent with results through week 24, ACR20/50/70, PASI75/90/100 and MDA responses were maintained with upadacitinib through week 56 and were generally numerically higher than with adalimumab; inhibition of radiographic progression was also maintained. Patients who switched from placebo to upadacitinib exhibited comparable improvements at week 56 as patients originally randomised to upadacitinib. The rates of serious adverse events were 9.1 events/100 PY with upadacitinib 15 mg and 12.3 events/100 PY with upadacitinib 30 mg. Two deaths were reported in each of the upadacitinib groups. Conclusion: Efficacy across various domains of PsA were maintained with upadacitinib 15 mg and 30 mg through week 56 with no new safety signals observed

Trial of upadacitinib and adalimumab for psoriatic arthritis

Background: The Janus kinase inhibitor upadacitinib is a potential treatment for psoriatic arthritis. The efficacy and safety of upadacitinib as compared with adalimumab, a tumor necrosis factor α inhibitor, in patients who have an inadequate response to nonbiologic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs are unclear. Methods: In a 24-week, phase 3 trial, we randomly assigned patients in a 1:1:1:1 ratio to receive oral upadacitinib at a dose of 15 mg or 30 mg once daily, placebo, or subcutaneous adalimumab (40 mg every other week). The primary end point was an American College of Rheumatology 20 (ACR20) response (≥20% decrease in the number of tender and swollen joints and ≥20% improvement in at least three of five other domains) at week 12 with upadacitinib as compared with placebo. Secondary end points included comparisons of upadacitinib with adalimumab. Results: A total of 1704 patients received an active drug or placebo. The percentage of patients who had an ACR20 response at week 12 was 70.6% with 15-mg upadacitinib, 78.5% with 30-mg upadacitinib, 36.2% with placebo (P&lt;0.001 for both upadacitinib doses vs. placebo), and 65.0% with adalimumab. The difference between groups for 15-mg upadacitinib as compared with adalimumab was 5.6 percentage points (95% confidence interval [CI], −0.6 to 11.8) and for 30-mg upadacitinib as compared with adalimumab was 13.5 percentage points (95% CI, 7.5 to 19.4). Both upadacitinib doses were noninferior to adalimumab for the ACR20 response at week 12; the 30-mg dose but not the 15-mg dose was superior to adalimumab. The incidence of adverse events through week 24 was 66.9% with 15-mg upadacitinib, 72.3% with 30-mg upadacitinib, 59.6% with placebo, and 64.8% with adalimumab. There were serious infections in 1.2%, 2.6%, 0.9%, and 0.7% of the patients, respectively. Hepatic disorders occurred in 9.1% of patients in the 15-mg upadacitinib group and 12.3% in the 30-mg upadacitinib group, but grade 3 increases in aminotransferase levels occurred in 2% of patients or fewer in all groups. Conclusions: The percentage of patients with psoriatic arthritis who had an ACR20 response at week 12 was significantly higher with 15-mg or 30-mg upadacitinib than with placebo. The 30-mg dose but not the 15-mg dose was superior to adalimumab. Adverse events were more frequent with upadacitinib than with placebo. (Funded by AbbVie; SELECT-PsA 1 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03104400.)

Study of Trends and Outcomes of Prescription Medications Continued During Hospice Care (STOP Med)

Hospice was founded with the primary goal of eliminating aggressive treatment measures and providing holistic, end of life palliative care aimed at relieving pain and symptoms and maximizing quality of life. This includes the discontinuation of limited benefit medications (LBMs) which may no longer provide a patient benefit in the context of limited life expectancy. The continued use of LBMs in the hospice population was poorly characterized in the literature, and evidence was needed to inform providers and policy makers regarding the scope of suboptimal medication use in this vulnerable patient group. This dissertation aimed to broadly characterize LBM use and continuation and identify factors associated with LBM continuation after admission among patients admitted to hospice for cancer and non-cancer causes. Our research aims were accomplished via a series of retrospective cross-sectional and cohort studies in the Medicare hospice population using patient-level administrative claims data from the Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Results (SEER)-Medicare linked database between 2007 and 2013. LBMs for the purposes of this research consisted of anti-hyperlipidemics, antihypertensives, oral antidiabetics, antiplatelets, anti-dementia and anti-osteoporotic medications, and proton pump inhibitors, with medication use measured via Medicare Part D dispensing claims. We found that the prevalence of LBM use after hospice admission was high, differed by primary hospice admission diagnosis and LBM class, and was relatively stable among patient cohorts defined by hospice admission year. After hospice enrollment, approximately 30% of patients continued at least one LBM that had been used prior to hospice admission. Anti-dementia medications were the most frequently continued LBM class while anti-osteoporotic medications were continued least often. In adjusted analysis, the likelihood of continuing at least one LBM after hospice admission was significantly greater in older patients, patients admitted to hospice in a nursing or assisted-living facility (compared to home hospice), and patients with longer hospice stays. Patients experiencing a care transition from a hospice to a non-hospice setting after hospice admission, particularly those experiencing hospitalizations, were also at an increased risk of continuing LBMs. Despite hospice care principles, use and continuation of LBMs in the hospice population is common. This work provides critical evidence on the scope of problematic medication use at the end of life and will ideally be used to promote the development of tailored medication management strategies that minimize burden without impacting quality of life during the patient’s final weeks and months. Until then, a more careful review of patients’ drug regimens at the time of hospice enrollment is warranted, including thoughtful consideration of the need to continue each medication in the context of its risks, benefits and the patient’s preferences and care goals

Site-specific resolution of enthesitis in patients with axial spondyloarthritis treated with tumor necrosis factor inhibitors

Abstract Background Enthesitis is a hallmark of spondyloarthritis (SpA) with a substantial impact on quality of life. Reports of treatment effectiveness across individual enthesitis sites in real-world patients with axial SpA (axSpA) are limited. We investigated the evolution of enthesitis following tumor necrosis factor inhibitor (TNFi) initiation in axSpA patients, both cumulatively and at specific axial and peripheral sites. Methods AxSpA patients in the Swiss Clinical Quality Management Registry were included if they initiated a TNFi, had an available Maastricht Ankylosing Spondylitis Enthesitis Score, modified to include the plantar fascia (mMASES, 0–15), at start of treatment and after 6 and/or 12 months and ≥12 months follow-up. Logistic regression models were utilized to analyze explanatory variables for enthesitis resolution. Results Overall, 1668 TNFi treatment courses (TCs) were included, of which 1117 (67%) had active enthesitis at baseline. Reduction in mMASES at the 6- and 12-month timepoints was experienced in 72% and 70% of TCs, respectively. Enthesitis resolution at 6/12 months occurred in 37.9%/43.0% of all TNFi TCs and 40.7%/50.9% of first TNFi TCs. At 6 months, a significant reduction in the frequency of enthesitis was observed at all sites, except for the Achilles tendon and plantar fascia among first TNFi TCs, while at 12 months, reduction was significant at all sites in both TC groups. Enthesitis resolved in 60.3–77% across anatomical sites, while new incident enthesitis occurred in 4.0–13.5% of all TNFi TCs at 12 months. Both baseline and new-incident enthesitis occurred most frequently at the posterior superior iliac spine and the fifth lumbar spinous process. Younger age and lower mMASES at baseline were predictors of complete enthesitis resolution, while female sex and second- or later-line TNFi treatment were associated with persistence of enthesitis at 12 months. Conclusion In real-world axSpA patients treated with a TNFi, enthesitis improved in the majority of patients across all anatomical sites. Significant improvement at the Achilles and plantar fascia entheses was observed only at 12 months. Complete and site-specific enthesitis resolution occurred in ≥40% and ≥60% of TCs evaluated at 12 months, with a low incidence of new site-specific enthesitis. Trial registration Not applicable

Improvement in Patient-Reported Outcomes in Patients with Psoriatic Arthritis Treated with Upadacitinib Versus Placebo or Adalimumab: Results from SELECT-PsA 1.

INTRODUCTION: The aim of this work is to assess the effect of upadacitinib versus adalimumab and placebo on patient-reported outcomes (PROs) in psoriatic arthritis (PsA) patients with inadequate responses to ≥ 1 non-biologic disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs (non-bDMARD-IR) in SELECT PsA-1. METHODS: In this placebo- and active comparator, phase 3 randomized, controlled trial, patients received daily upadacitinib 15 or 30 mg, placebo, or adalimumab 40 mg every other week through 56 weeks. At week 24, placebo-assigned patients were rerandomized to upadacitinib 15 or 30 mg. PROs included Patient Global Assessment of Disease Activity (PtGA), pain, Health Assessment Questionnaire Disability Index (HAQ-DI), Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy-Fatigue (FACIT-F), Short Form 36 Health Survey (SF-36), EQ-5D-5L index score, Bath Ankylosing Spondylitis Disease Activity Index, morning stiffness, Self-Assessment of Psoriasis Symptoms, and Work Productivity and Activity Impairment. Mean changes from baseline in PROs, improvements ≥ minimum clinically important differences (MCID), scores ≥ normative values, and sustained clinically meaningful responses were compared between treatment groups. RESULTS: At weeks 12 and 24, upadacitinib treatment resulted in improvements from baseline versus placebo across all PROs as well as improvements versus adalimumab in HAQ-DI and SF-36 Physical Component Summary score (nominal p \u3c 0.05). Improvements in PtGA, pain, and HAQ-DI were reported as early as week 2. At week 12, significantly (nominal p \u3c 0.05) more upadacitinib- versus placebo-treated patients reported improvements ≥ MCID across all PROs including seven SF-36 domains. The proportions of upadacitinib-treated patients reporting clinically meaningful improvements at week 12 were similar to or greater than with adalimumab and sustained through week 56. Significantly (nominal p \u3c 0.05) more upadacitinib-treated (both doses) patients reported scores ≥ normative values at week 12 versus placebo, and scores were generally similar to or greater than adalimumab. CONCLUSIONS: Upadacitinib treatment provides rapid, sustained, and clinically meaningful improvements in PROs in non-bDMARD-IR patients with PsA. SELECT-PsA 1 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03104400

Patient-reported outcomes in psoriatic arthritis patients with an inadequate response to biologic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs : SELECT-PsA 2

Introduction Psoriatic arthritis (PsA) has a major impact on health-related quality of life (HRQOL) and other patient-reported outcomes (PROs), important components in the assessment of therapeutic efficacy. We evaluated the impact of upadacitinib on PROs in PsA patients with inadequate responses or intolerance to biologic disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs (bDMARD-IR). Methods Patients enrolled in the phase 3 SELECT-PsA 2 randomized controlled trial (RCT) received 56 weeks of oral upadacitinib 15 mg QD, upadacitinib 30 mg QD, or placebo switched to either dose of upadacitinib at week 24. PROs included patient global assessment of disease activity (PtGA), pain, physical function (HAQ-DI), health-related quality of life (SF-36 physical (PCS) and mental (MCS) component summary and domain scores), fatigue (FACIT-F), psoriasis symptom severity (SAPS), and work productivity (WPAI). Mean changes from baseline in PROs, improvements >= minimum clinically important differences (MCID) and scores >= normative values, and maintenance of improvements were assessed. Results At weeks 12 and 24, patients treated with either upadacitinib dose reported statistically and nominally significant improvements from baseline across all PROs versus placebo (p = MCID and scores >= normative values versus placebo (nominal p = MCID were reported as early as week 2 in PtGA, pain, and HAQ-DI. Conclusions Upadacitinib provides rapid, clinically meaningful, and sustained improvements in PROs reported by bDMARD-IR PsA patients. SELECT-PsA 2 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03104374