Glutaric Aciduria Type 1: Comparison between Diffusional Kurtosis Imaging and Conventional MR Imaging

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

Routine MR imaging has limited use in evaluating the severity of glutaric aciduria type 1. To better understand the mechanisms of brain injury in glutaric aciduria type 1, we explored the value of diffusional kurtosis imaging in detecting microstructural injury of the gray and white matter.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This study included 17 patients with glutaric aciduria type 1 and 17 healthy controls who underwent conventional MR imaging and diffusional kurtosis imaging. The diffusional kurtosis imaging metrics of the gray and white matter were measured. Then, the MR imaging scores and diffusional kurtosis imaging metrics of all ROIs were further correlated with the morbidity scores and Barry-Albright dystonia scores.

RESULTS

The MR imaging scores showed no significant relation to the morbidity and Barry-Albright dystonia scores. Compared with healthy controls, patients with glutaric aciduria type 1 showed higher kurtosis values in the basal ganglia, corona radiata, centrum semiovale, and temporal lobe (P < .05). The DTI metrics of the basal ganglia were higher than those of healthy controls (P < .05). The fractional anisotropy value of the temporal lobe and the mean diffusivity values of basal ganglia in glutaric aciduria type 1 were lower than those in the control group (P < .05). The diffusional kurtosis imaging metrics of the temporal lobe and basal ganglia were significantly correlated with the Barry-Albright dystonia scores. The mean kurtosis values of the anterior and posterior putamen and Barry-Albright dystonia scores were most relevant (r = 0.721, 0.730, respectively). The mean kurtosis values of the basal ganglia had the best diagnostic efficiency with area under the curve values of 0.837 for the temporal lobe, and the mean diffusivity values of the basal ganglia in glutaric aciduria type 1 were lower than those in the control group (P < .05). The diffusional kurtosis imaging metrics of the temporal lobe and basal ganglia were significantly correlated with the Barry-Albright dystonia scores. The mean kurtosis values of the anterior and posterior putamen and Barry-Albright dystonia scores were most relevant (r = 0.721, 0.730, respectively). The mean kurtosis values of the basal ganglia had the best diagnostic efficiency with area under the curve values of 0.837.

CONCLUSIONS

Diffusional kurtosis imaging provides more comprehensive quantitative information regarding the gray and white matter micropathologic damage in glutaric aciduria type 1 than routine MR imaging scores.

Immune functions of pattern recognition receptors in Lepidoptera

Pattern recognition receptors (PRRs), as the "sensors" in the immune response, play a prominent role in recognizing pathogen-associated molecular patterns (PAMPs) and initiating an effective defense response to pathogens in Lepidoptera. It is becoming increasingly clear that damage-associated molecular patterns (DAMPs) normally play a physiological role within cells; however, when exposed to extracellular, they may become "part-time" critical signals of the immune response. Based on research in recent years, we review herein typical PRRs of Lepidoptera, including peptidoglycan recognition protein (PGRP), gram-negative binding protein (GNBP), β-1,3-glucan recognition protein (βGRP), C-type lectin (CTL), and scavenger receptor (SR). We also outline the ways in which DAMPs participate in the immune response and the correlation between PRRs and immune escape. Taken together, these findings suggest that the role of PRRs in insect innate immunity may be much greater than expected and that it is possible to recognize a broader range of signaling molecules.

Preoperative prediction of microvascular invasion and perineural invasion in pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma with 18F-FDG PET/CT radiomics analysis

AIM

To develop and validate a predictive model based on 2-[¹⁸F]-fluoro-2-deoxy-d-glucose (¹⁸F-FDG) positron-emission tomography (PET)/computed tomography (CT) radiomics features and clinicopathological parameters to preoperatively identify microvascular invasion (MVI) and perineural invasion (PNI), which are important predictors of poor prognosis in patients with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Preoperative ¹⁸F-FDG PET/CT images and clinicopathological parameters of 170 patients in PDAC were collected retrospectively. The whole tumour and its peritumoural variants (tumour dilated with 3, 5, and 10 mm pixels) were applied to add tumour periphery information. A feature-selection algorithm was employed to mine mono-modality and fused feature subsets, then conducted binary classification using gradient boosted decision trees.

RESULTS

For MVI prediction, the model performed best on a fused subset of ¹⁸F-FDG PET/CT radiomics features and two clinicopathological parameters, with an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) of 83.08%, accuracy of 78.82%, recall of 75.08%, precision of 75.5%, and F1-score of 74.59%. For PNI prediction, the model achieved best prediction results only on the subset of PET/CT radiomics features, with AUC of 94%, accuracy of 89.33%, recall of 90%, precision of 87.81%, and F1 score of 88.35%. In both models, 3 mm dilation on the tumour volume produced the best results.

CONCLUSIONS

The radiomics predictors from preoperative ¹⁸F-FDG PET/CT imaging exhibited instructive predictive efficacy in the identification of MVI and PNI status preoperatively in PDAC. Peritumoural information was shown to assist in MVI and PNI predictions.

[Survival efficacy of MDS/AML patients with TP53 abnormal received allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation]

Objective: TP53-abnormal MDS/acute myeloid leukemia (AML) patients' allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (allo-HSCT) treatment's effectiveness and influencing factors should be studied. Methods: 42 patients with TP53 gene status change MDS/AML who underwent allo-HSCT from 2014.8.1 to 2021.7.31 at the Hematology Hospital of the Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences were the subject of a retrospective analysis. The 42 patients were divided into three groups: the TP53 deletion group (group A) , TP53 mono-alle mutation group (group B) , and TP53 multi-hit group (group C) . The differences in clinical features and prognostic factors after transplantation were analyzed. Results: There were 42 MDS/AML patients, including 21 patients with MDS, and 21 patients with AML. The median follow-up period was 34.0 (7.5-75.0) months and the median patient age at the time of transplantation was 41.5 (18-63) years old. The total OS was 66.3% (95% CI 53.4%-82.4%) in 3 years after transplantation, and EFS was 61.0% (95% CI 47.7%-78.0%) in 3 years. For 3 years after receiving hematopoietic stem cell transplantation, there were no statistically significant differences in 3-year OS and EFS in groups A, B, and C (P≥0.05) . The 3 years OS was 82.5% (95% CI 63.1%-100.0%) in group A, 60.6% (95% CI 43.5%-84.4%) in group B, and 57.1% (95% CI 30.1%-100.0%) in group C. Univariate analysis revealed that the number of co-mutant genes, pre-HSCT treatment, and disease type did not affect prognosis, while age, karyotype, co-mutation, positive blast cell before transplantation, and positive blast cell after transplantation were common prognostic factors for OS and EFS (P<0.1) . MRD levels before transplantation were found to be independent risk factors for OS (P=0.037, HR=33.40, 95% CI 1.24-901.17) in a multivariate analysis. Conclusion: Patients with MDS/AML who have TP53 mutations can benefit from allo-HSCT, but patients with complex karyotypes have a worse prognosis. Meanwhile, the final flow cytometry (FCM) monitoring blast cell test before HSCT has a certain guiding significance for prognostic assessment.

[The impact of diabetic retinopathy on vision-related quality of life]

Objective: To assess the effect of diabetic retinopathy (DR) on vision-related quality of life (VRQoL) in patients with type 2 diabetes. Methods: In this cross-sectional study, patients with type 2 diabetes residing in 15 residency communities in Fushun, Liaoning province were enrolled from July 2012 to May 2013. We measured the VRQoL by the 25-item National Eye Institute Visual Function Questionnaire (NEI-VFQ-25). Patients were grouped according to their age, gender, presence of visual impairment, and affected eyes. NEI-VFQ-25 scores were compared between/among groups using the Wilcoxon rank-sum test or Kruskal-Wallis H test. The severity of DR in the eyes was graded into no DR, mild non-proliferative diabetic retinopathy (NPDR), moderate NPDR, severe NPDR, and proliferative diabetic retinopathy (PDR). Severity scores from both eyes were then summarized to create a single per-person grade ranging from 1 (no DR in either eye) to 7 (bilateral PDR). Generalized linear models were used to assess the linear relationship between NEI-VFQ-25 scores and DR severity. Locally weighted scatterplot smoothing plots were generated to evaluate the possible nonlinear associations between concatenated severity of DR and VRQoL. Results: A total of 1 537 patients were recruited, including 836 (54.4%) with no DR, 479 (31.2%) with mild NPDR, 90 (5.9%) with moderate NPDR, 72 (4.7%) with severe NPDR and 60 (3.9%) with PDR. Compared with patients with unilateral DR, bilaterally involved subjects were statistically significantly compromised in general vision [70.2 (66.5, 72.5) vs. 68.9 (63.9, 71.6), Z=90.222, P=0.038], near activities [90.5 (85.8, 94.0) vs. 88.8 (84.5, 92.5), Z=114.942, P=0.005], dependency [91.1 (85.6, 96.5) vs. 89.3 (83.8, 94.5), Z=91.934, P=0.033], mental health [80.0 (73.4, 84.9) vs. 77.5 (70.8, 82.0), Z=118.388, P=0.003], role difficulties [76.8 (70.1, 82.4) vs. 74.5 (67.6, 80.6), Z =90.791, P=0.036] and NEI-VFQ-25 composite [88.3 (84.2, 91.0) vs. 86.9 (82.8, 90.1), Z=96.207, P=0.024]. Scores on general vision (χ²=85.665), near activities (χ²=78.462), distance activities (χ²=145.489), social function (χ²=53.629), dependency (χ²=86.710), mental health (χ²=68.281), role difficulties (χ²=45.357), color vision (χ²=68.176), peripheral vision (χ²=116.179) and NEI-VFQ-25 composite (χ²=133.291) decreased gradually as DR severity increased (all P<0.001). On role difficulties, locally weighted scatterplot smoothing plots showed significant"turning points"from bilateral mild NPDR to mild NPDR/>mild NPDR (slope m=-4.7) and from moderate NPDR/≥moderate NPDR to severe NPDR/≥severe NPDR (slope m=-12.6). Conclusion: Both greater severity and bilaterality of DR were associated with lower vision-specific VRQoL, particularly role difficulties and mental health.

[Clinical phenotype analysis of 6 cases of TTC21B gene related nephronophthisis]

Objective: To analyze the clinical characteristics of 6 children with TTC21B-related nephronophthisis to provide reference for early clinical diagnosis. Methods: The general condition, clinical manifestations, laboratory tests and other clinical data of 6 children from 4 families diagnosed with nephronophthisis by genetic testing in Shanghai Children's Hospital from January 2015 to December 2020 were analyzed retrospectively. Results: A total of 6 children (3 males and 3 females) developed proteinuria and progressive renal dysfunction in early infancy. The onset age of proteinuria was 18 (6, 25) months. The age at the onset of renal impairment was 22 (10, 36) months. All 6 children progressed to end-stage renal disease (ESRD) within 10 (4, 65) months of onset. Five children had hypertension, 3 children with abnormal liver function, 2 children with visceral translocation and 1 child with growth retardation. The genetic results suggested that all children carried variations TTC21B gene p.C518R. Conclusions: Children with TTC21B gene p.C518R nephronophthisis had proteinuria and progressed to ESRD at the early stage of life. These nephronophthisis patients commonly presented with liver and renal dysfunction.

Buntanetap, a Novel Translational Inhibitor of Multiple Neurotoxic Proteins, Proves to Be Safe and Promising in Both Alzheimer's and Parkinson's Patients

BACKGROUND

Previously we reported the clinical safety and pharmacological activity of buntanetap (known as Posiphen or ANVS401) in healthy volunteers and mild cognitive impaired (MCI) patients (21). The data supported continued clinical evaluation of buntanetap for treating Alzheimer's Disease (AD). Neurodegenerative diseases such as AD and Parkinson's disease (PD) share several pathological manifestations, including increased levels of multiple neurotoxic protein aggregates. Therefore, a treatment strategy that targets toxic species common to both disorders can potentially provide better clinical outcomes than attacking one neurotoxic protein alone. To test this hypothesis, we recently completed a clinical study in early AD and early PD participants and report the data here.

OBJECTIVES

We evaluated safety, pharmacokinetics, biomarkers, and efficacy of buntanetap in treating early AD and PD patients.

DESIGN

Double-blind, placebo-controlled, multi-center study.

SETTING

13 sites in the US participated in this clinical trial. The registration number is NCT04524351 at ClinicalTrials.gov.

PARTICIPANTS

14 early AD patients and 54 early PD patients.

INTERVENTION

AD patients were given either 80mg buntanetap or placebo QD. PD patients were given 5mg, 10mg, 20mg, 40mg, 80mg buntanetap or placebo QD.

MEASUREMENTS

Primary endpoint is safety and tolerability; secondary endpoint is pharmacokinetics of buntanetap in plasma; exploratory endpoints are 1) biomarkers in cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) in both AD and PD patients 2) psychometric tests specific for AD (ADAS-Cogs and WAIS coding test) or PD (MDS-UPDRS and WAIS coding test).

RESULTS

Buntanetap was safe and well tolerated. Biomarker data indicated a trend in lowering levels of neurotoxic proteins and inflammatory factors and improving axonal integrity and synaptic function in both AD and PD cohorts. Psychometric tests showed statistically significant improvements in ADAS-Cog11 and WAIS coding in AD patients and MDS-UPDRS and WAIS coding in PD patients.

CONCLUSIONS

Buntanetap is well tolerated and safe at doses up to 80mg QD in both AD and PD patients. Cmax and AUC increase with dose without evidence for a plateau up to 80mg QD. The drug shows promising evidence in exploratory biomarker and efficacy measures. Further evaluation of buntanetap in larger, longer-term clinical trials for the treatment of AD and PD are warranted.

[G-protein coupled receptor Smo positively regulates proliferation and migration of adult neural stem cells in vitro]

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the role of G-protein coupled receptor Smoothened (Smo) in regulating proliferation and migration of adult neural stem cells (ANSCs) and explore the underlying mechanism.

METHODS

Cultured ANSCs were treated with purmorphamine (PM, an agonist of Smo) or cyclopamine (CPM, an inhibitor of Smo), and the changes in cell proliferation migration abilities were assessed using cell counting kit-8 (CCK8) assay and wound healing assay, respectively. The mRNA expressions of membrane receptor Patched 1 (Ptch1), Smo, glioma-associated oncogene homolog 1 (Gli1), axon guidance cue slit1 (Slit1) and brain-derived neurotrophic factor (BDNF) in the treated cells were detected using real-time quantitative PCR (RT-PCR).

RESULTS

PM significantly promoted the proliferation (P < 0.01) and migration of ANSCs (P < 0.01), and up-regulated the mRNA expressions of Ptch1, Smo, Gli1, Slit1 and BDNF. Treatment with CPM significantly inhibited the proliferation and migration of ANSCs.

CONCLUSION

Modulating Smo activity can positively regulate the proliferation and migration of ANSCs possibly by regulating the expressions of BDNF and Slit1.

Insight into biosorption of heavy metals by extracellular polymer substances and the improvement of the efficacy: a review

Heavy metals are continuously released into aquatic environments in which they accumulate. This phenomenon endangers public health because heavy metals accumulate along the food chain. However, conventional remediation methods are inefficient, expensive and yield toxic intermediate products, which adversely affect the environment. The discovery of green bio-adsorbents such as microbial extracellular polymer substance (EPS) has quickly attracted considerable worldwide attention because of their low cost, high removal efficiency of heavy metals and industrial availability. Hence, this review considers the sources, hazards and treatment methods of heavy metals pollution, particularly the biosorption mechanism of EPS to heavy metals and the influencing factors of the bio-adsorption process, which are significant in the efficient removal of heavy metals-containing wastewater treatment. This review also focuses on strengthening the process of EPS adsorption of heavy metals, which can further contribute to heavy metals removal. Finally, it has been proposed that improving the yield, stability, selectivity and recoverability of EPS is the key direction of further research.

POS1047 IMPACT OF UPADACITINIB ON REDUCING PAIN IN PATIENTS WITH ACTIVE PSORIATIC ARTHRITIS: RESULTS FROM TWO PHASE 3 TRIALS IN PATIENTS WITH INADEQUATE RESPONSE TO NON-BIOLOGIC OR BIOLOGIC DMARDs

Background:

Pain is a dominant symptom of psoriatic arthritis (PsA), and pain reduction is a priority for patients (pts) that is often assessed in clinical trials. Upadacitinib (UPA), a Janus kinase (JAK) inhibitor engineered for increased selectivity for JAK1 over JAK2, JAK3, and tyrosine kinase2, has demonstrated safety and efficacy in pts with active PsA in the SELECT-PsA 1 and 2 studies.1,2

Objectives:

The objective of this analysis was to compare the efficacy of UPA vs placebo (PBO) and adalimumab (ADA) on pain using different assessments through 24 weeks (wks).

Methods:

The SELECT-PsA program enrolled adult pts with active PsA with prior inadequate response (IR) or intolerance to ≥1 non-biologic DMARD (SELECT-PsA 1; NCT03104400) or prior IR or intolerance to ≥1 biologic DMARD (SELECT-PsA 2; NCT03104374). Concomitant background therapy with ≤2 non-biologic DMARDs was allowed but not required. Pts were randomized to UPA 15 mg or UPA 30 mg once daily (QD) or PBO (both studies), or ADA 40 mg every other week (EOW; SELECT-PsA 1 only). Pain was assessed as proportion of pts achieving ≥30%, ≥50%, or ≥70% reduction from baseline (BL) in Pt’s global assessment (PGA) of pain numeric rating scale (NRS) score (0–10), proportion of pts achieving minimal clinically important difference (MCID) in pain (defined as ≥1 point reduction or 15% reduction from BL on a 0–10 NRS)3,4 and change from baseline in pain NRS (0–10) at all time points. In addition, change from BL in BASDAI questions 2 (spinal pain) and 3 (joint pain/swelling) and 36-Item Short Form Survey (SF-36) questions 7 (bodily pain) and 8 (pain interference) at weeks 12 and 24 were assessed. Non-responder imputation was used for binary endpoints and mixed-effects model for repeated measurements for continuous endpoints. The statistical significance defined as P<0.05 was exploratory in nature.

Results:

In both studies, a significantly higher proportion of pts receiving UPA 15 mg QD and UPA 30 mg QD vs PBO achieved improvements in most pain endpoints as early as wk 2, and improvements were generally either sustained or increased through wk 24 (nominal P<0.05). A significant improvement with UPA vs PBO was also observed for change from BL in PGA of pain NRS scores over time, as well as in BASDAI spinal pain and joint pain/swelling and SF-36 bodily pain and pain interference at weeks 12 and 24. In SELECT-PsA 1 significantly higher proportions of pts receiving UPA 30 mg QD vs ADA 40 mg EOW achieved improvements in most pain assessments as early as wk 2 which were sustained through wk 24; improvements in several assessments were also significantly greater with UPA 15 mg QD vs ADA 40 mg EOW at wk 24 (nominal P <0.05; Data will be presented).

Conclusion:

In pts with active PsA who had inadequate response to non-biologic or biologic DMARDs, a greater proportion of pts treated with UPA vs PBO achieved rapid, significant, and clinically meaningful reductions in pain across multiple pain assessments. The reductions in pain were sustained over 24 wks.

References:

[1]McInnes I. et al. Ann Rheum Dis. 2020;79(Suppl 1):12-13.

[2]Genovese M.C. et al. Ann Rheum Dis. 2020;79(Suppl 1):139.

[3]Dworkin, R.H. et al. J Pain. 2008;9(2):105-121.

[4]Salaffi F. et al. Eur J Pain. 2004;8:283–291.

Acknowledgements:

AbbVie funded this study and participated in the study design, research, analysis, data collection, interpretation of data, reviewing, and approval of the publication. All authors had access to relevant data and participated in the drafting, review, and approval of this publication. No honoraria or payments were made for authorship. Medical writing support was provided by M Hovenden and J Matsuura of ICON plc (North Wales, PA) and was funded by AbbVie.

Disclosure of Interests:

Iain McInnes Consultant of: AbbVie, AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol Myers, Celgene, Janssen, Leo, Lilly, Novartis, Pfizer, and UCB, Grant/research support from: AbbVie, AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol Myers, Celgene, Janssen, Leo, Lilly, Novartis, Pfizer, and UCB, William Tillett Speakers bureau: AbbVie, Amgen, Celgene, Janssen, Lilly, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, and UCB, Consultant of: AbbVie, Amgen, Celgene, Janssen, Lilly, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, and UCB, Philip J Mease Speakers bureau: AbbVie, Amgen, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol Myers, Celgene, Galapagos, Genentech, Gilead, GlaxoSmithKline, Janssen, Leo, Lilly, Merck, Novartis, Pfizer, Sun Pharma, and UCB, Consultant of: AbbVie, Amgen, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol Myers, Celgene, Galapagos, Genentech, Gilead, GlaxoSmithKline, Janssen, Leo, Lilly, Merck, Novartis, Pfizer, Sun Pharma, and UCB, Grant/research support from: AbbVie, Amgen, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol Myers, Celgene, Galapagos, Genentech, Gilead, GlaxoSmithKline, Janssen, Leo, Lilly, Merck, Novartis, Pfizer, Sun Pharma, and UCB, Kurt de Vlam Speakers bureau: Celgene Eli Lilly, Galapagos, Novartis, and UCB, Consultant of: Celgene, Eli Lilly, Galapagos, Novartis, and UCB, Grant/research support from: Celgene and Galapagos, Louis Bessette Speakers bureau: Amgen, BMS, Janssen, UCB, AbbVie, Pfizer, Merck, Celgene, Lilly, Novartis, and Sanofi, Consultant of: Amgen, BMS, Janssen, UCB, AbbVie, Pfizer, Merck, Celgene, Lilly, Novartis, Sanofi, Gilead, Grant/research support from: Amgen, BMS, Janssen, UCB, AbbVie, Pfizer, Merck, Celgene, Lilly, Novartis, Sanofi, and Gilead, Ralph Lippe Shareholder of: AbbVie, Employee of: AbbVie, anna maniccia Shareholder of: AbbVie, Employee of: AbbVie, Patrick Zueger Shareholder of: AbbVie, Employee of: AbbVie, Dai Feng Shareholder of: AbbVie, Employee of: AbbVie, Koji Kato Shareholder of: AbbVie, Employee of: AbbVie, Andrew Ostor Consultant of: AbbVie, BMS, Roche, Janssen, Lilly, Novartis, Pfizer, UCB, Gilead, and Paradigm.

AB0529 CHARACTERIZATION OF REMISSION IN PATIENTS WITH PSORIATIC ARTHRITIS TREATED WITH UPADACITINIB: POST-HOC ANALYSIS FROM TWO PHASE 3 TRIALS

Background:

For patients (pts) with PsA, several disease activity measures are available including very low/minimal disease activity (VLDA/MDA), cutoffs based on the Disease Activity in PsA (DAPSA) score, and on the Psoriatic Arthritis Disease Activity Score (PASDAS) score.

Objectives:

To assess the rates of pts achieving these remission or low disease activity (LDA) criteria at Wk 24 using data from the SELECT-PsA 1 and SELECT-PsA 2 phase 3 studies;1,2 Additionally, we assessed the distribution of individual MDA components among pts who did or did not achieve MDA criteria at Wk 24.

Methods:

In SELECT-PsA 1 and SELECT-PsA 2, pts with PsA and prior inadequate response (IR) or intolerance to ≥1 non-biologic DMARD (N=1705) or ≥1 biologic DMARD (N=642), respectively, were randomized to once daily upadacitinib (UPA) 15mg, UPA 30mg, adalimumab (ADA) 40mg every other week (SELECT-PsA 1 only), or placebo (PBO). Remission and LDA were assessed using VLDA/MDA, DAPSA scores of ≤4/≤14, and PASDAS scores of ≤1.9/≤3.2, at Wk 24 (Table 1). Non-responder imputation (NRI) was used for handling missing data; pts rescued at Wk 16 were considered non-responders. Pairwise comparisons between UPA doses and PBO or ADA were conducted using the Cochran-Mantel-Haenszel test.

Results:

Overall, 2345 pts were analyzed; mean age 51 years, 53% female. In both studies, higher rates of remission and LDA were observed with both UPA doses vs PBO at Wk 24 (nominal P-values <0.05 for both time points; Table 1). Generally, higher rates of remission and LDA were also observed with UPA30 vs ADA in non-biologic DMARD-IR pts (nominal P-values <0.05). Greater rates of MDA/VLDA were observed at Wk 24 with UPA15 and UPA30 vs PBO in both studies and with UPA30 vs ADA in non-biologic DMARD-IR pts (nominal P-values <0.05 for all comparisons). The proportion of responder or non-responder pts receiving UPA15 or UPA30 was similar for each of the MDA components in both studies. At Wk 24, more responder and non-responder pts in both studies achieved Swollen Joint Count (SJC) 66 ≤1, Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI) ≤1 or Body Surface Area-Psoriasis (BSA-Ps) ≤3%, and Leeds Enthesitis Index (LEI) ≤1 (Figure 1). Conversely, the proportion of pts Achieving Tender Joint Count (TJC) 68 ≤1 and Pt’s Global Assessment of Pain ≤1.5 tended to be lower.

Conclusion:

Regardless of previous biologic DMARD failure, pts treated with UPA15 or UPA30 achieved a higher rate of remission or LDA measured by various disease activity measures vs PBO at Wk 24; higher rates of response were observed in most of the remission and LDA measures with UPA30 vs ADA in non-biologic DMARD-IR pts. Among pts who did or did not achieve MDA criteria at Wk 24, a greater proportion of UPA-treated pts achieved physician derived measures such as SJC ≤1, PASI ≤1 or BSA-Ps ≤3%, and LEI ≤1.

References:

[1]McInnes IB, et al. Ann Rheum Dis, 2020; 79:12.

[2]Genovese MC, et al. Ann Rheum Dis, 2020; 79:139.

Table 1.

Proportion of Patients Achieving Remission and LDA Measures at Week 24

Endpoint, n (%)SELECT-PsA 1SELECT-PsA 2PBON=423ADA 40mg EOWN=429UPA 15mg QDN=429UPA 30mg QDN=423PBON=212UPA 15mg QDN=211UPA 30mg QDN=218MDA52 (12.3)143 (33.3)157 (36.6) *, #192(45.4) *, †, #6 (2.8)53 (25.1) *, #63 (28.9) *, #≥6 VLDA components25 (5.9)90 (21.0)105 (24.5) *134 (31.7) *, †3 (1.4)26 (12.3) *44 (20.2) *VLDA11 (2.6)62 (14.5)55 (12.8) *72 (17.0) *3 (1.4)16 (7.6) *21(9.6) *DAPSA REM9 (2.1)43 (10.0)47 (11.0) *79 (18.7) *, †1 (0.5)15 (7.1) *28 (12.8) *DAPSA LDA70 (16.5)198 (46.2)204 (47.6) *235(55.6) *, †14 (6.6)73 (34.6) *91 (41.7) *PASDAS REM12 (2.8)51 (11.9)60 (14.0) *91 (21.5) *, †4 (1.9)20 (9.5) *31 (14.2) *PASDAS LDA63 (14.9)168 (39.2)195 (45.5) *211 (49.9) *, †9 (4.2)69 (32.7) *82 (37.6) *

*P ≤ 0.05 for UPA15 and UPA30 vs PBO; †P ≤ 0.05 for UPA30 vs ADA; #Statistically significant in the multiplicity-controlled analysis.

MDA (5/7) and VLDA (7/7): TJC ≤ 1; SJC ≤ 1; PASI ≤ 1 or BSA-Psoriasis ≤ 3%; Patient’s Assessment of Pain NRS ≤ 1.5; PtGA-Disease Activity NRS ≤ 2.0; HAQ-DI score ≤ 0.5; and tender entheseal points ≤ 1.

DAPSA REM ≤ 4; DAPSA LDA ≤ 14.

PASDAS REM ≤ 1.9; PASDAS LDA ≤ 3.2.

Figure 1

Acknowledgements:

AbbVie and the authors thank the patients, study sites, and investigators who participated in this clinical trial. AbbVie, Inc was the study sponsor, contributed to study design, data collection, analysis & interpretation, and to writing, reviewing, and approval of final version. No honoraria or payments were made for authorship. Medical writing support was provided by Ramona Vladea, PhD of AbbVie Inc.

Disclosure of Interests:

Philip J Mease Speakers bureau: AbbVie, Amgen, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol Myers, Celgene, Galapagos, Gilead, GlaxoSmithKline, Janssen, Lilly, Merck, Novartis, Pfizer, Sun Pharma, and UCB., Consultant of: AbbVie, Amgen, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol Myers, Celgene, Galapagos, Gilead, GlaxoSmithKline, Janssen, Lilly, Merck, Novartis, Pfizer, Sun Pharma, and UCB., Grant/research support from: AbbVie, Amgen, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol Myers, Celgene, Galapagos, Gilead, GlaxoSmithKline, Janssen, Lilly, Merck, Novartis, Pfizer, Sun Pharma, and UCB., Arthur Kavanaugh Consultant of: AbbVie Inc., Amgen, Astra-Zeneca, BMS, Celgene, Centocor-Janssen, Pfizer, Roche, and UCB, Grant/research support from: AbbVie Inc., Amgen, Astra-Zeneca, BMS, Celgene, Centocor-Janssen, Pfizer, Roche, and UCB, Dafna D Gladman Grant/research support from: AbbVie, Amgen, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Celgene Corporation, Eli Lilly, Galapagos, Gilead, Janssen, Novartis, Pfizer Inc, and UCB, Oliver FitzGerald Speakers bureau: AbbVie, Amgen, BMS, Celgene, Janssen, Lilly, Novartis, Pfizer and UCB, Consultant of: AbbVie, Amgen, BMS, Celgene, Janssen, Lilly, Novartis, Pfizer and UCB, Grant/research support from: AbbVie, Amgen, BMS, Celgene, Janssen, Lilly, Novartis, Pfizer and UCB, Enrique Soriano Speakers bureau: AbbVie, Amgen, Bristol Myers, Celgene, Janssen, Lilly, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, Sanofi, and UCB, Consultant of: AbbVie, Amgen, Bristol Myers, Celgene, Janssen, Lilly, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, Sanofi, and UCB, Grant/research support from: AbbVie, Amgen, Bristol Myers, Celgene, Janssen, Lilly, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, Sanofi, and UCB, Peter Nash Speakers bureau: AbbVie, BMS, Roche, Pfizer, Janssen, Amgen, Sanofi-Aventis, UCB, Eli Lilly, Novartis, and Celgene, Consultant of: AbbVie, BMS, Roche, Pfizer, Janssen, Amgen, Sanofi-Aventis, UCB, Eli Lilly, Novartis, and Celgene, Grant/research support from: AbbVie, BMS, Roche, Pfizer, Janssen, Amgen, Sanofi-Aventis, UCB, Eli Lilly, Novartis, and Celgene, Dai Feng Shareholder of: AbbVie, Employee of: AbbVie, Apinya Lertratanakul Shareholder of: AbbVie, Employee of: AbbVie, Kevin Douglas Shareholder of: AbbVie, Employee of: AbbVie, Ralph Lippe Shareholder of: AbbVie, Employee of: AbbVie, Laure Gossec Consultant of: AbbVie,Amgen, Biogen, Celgene, Janssen, Lilly, Novartis, Pfizer, Samsung, Sanofi, UCB, Grant/research support from: Lilly, Pfizer, and Sandoz.

AB0550 EFFICACY OF UPADACITINIB IN PATIENTS WITH ACTIVE PSORIATIC ARTHRITIS AND A LOW OR HIGH SWOLLEN JOINT COUNT: A SUBGROUP ANALYSIS OF 2 PHASE 3 STUDIES (SELECT-PsA 1 AND SELECT-PsA 2)

Background:

Although most patients with psoriatic arthritis (PsA) enrolled in clinical trials have polyarticular arthritis, patients in clinical practice may present with oligoarthritis. Data on the efficacy of Janus kinase inhibitors in patients with PsA with low joint counts are limited.

Objectives:

To evaluate the efficacy of upadacitinib (UPA) in subgroups of patients with PsA with a low (baseline swollen joint count [SJC] <5) or high (SJC ≥5) SJC (LSJ or HSJ).

Methods:

Data were pooled across the SELECT-PsA 11 (non-biologic disease-modifying antirheumatic drug [non-bDMARD] inadequate response [IR] or intolerance) and SELECT-PsA 22 (bDMARD IR or intolerance) trials, which both enrolled patients with ≥3 involved joints (SJC ≥3 and tender joint count [TJC] ≥3). Subgroup analysis was performed for patients with LSJ or HSJ treated with UPA 15 mg once daily (QD) or placebo (PBO). Efficacy endpoints included minimal disease activity (MDA), very low disease activity (VLDA), Psoriatic Arthritis Disease Activity Score (PASDAS) low disease activity (LDA; ≤3.2), PASDAS remission (≤1.9), and 20/50/70% improvement in American College of Rheumatology (ACR) criteria (ACR20/50/70), all at Week 24, and Psoriasis Area Severity Index (PASI) 75 and static Investigator Global Assessment of Psoriasis (sIGA) 0/1 at Week 16.

Results:

At baseline, patients with HSJ (n=1060) had similar demographic characteristics but tended to have higher overall disease activity than patients with LSJ across multiple disease domains (n=215; Table 1). UPA efficacy appeared comparable in patients with LSJ and HSJ, with similar proportions of patients achieving composite (MDA, VLDA, PASDAS LDA, and PASDAS remission) measures at Week 24, and skin endpoints (PASI 75 and sIGA 0/1) at Week 16 (Figure 1). At Week 24, 60.0/36.8/22.1% of patients with LSJ receiving UPA 15 mg achieved ACR20/50/70 vs 40.0/17.5/5.8% in the PBO group; rates were 70.3/49.7/26.2% (UPA 15 mg) and 36.1/15.3/3.3% (PBO) in those with HSJ.

Table 1.

Baseline characteristics

PBOUPA 15 mg QDTotalLSJn=120HSJn=515LSJn=95HSJn=545LSJn=215HSJn=1060Female, n (%)65 (54.2)266 (51.7)49 (51.6)302 (55.4)114 (53.0)568 (53.6)Age (years), mean (SD)52.2 (12.7)51.5 (12.0)52.0 (10.6)52.0 (12.4)52.1 (11.8)51.8 (12.2)Duration since PsA symptoms (years), mean (SD)10.5 (9.2)11.1 (10.2)9.8 (8.2)10.3 (8.9)10.2 (8.7)10.7 (9.6)BMI, mean (SD)29.7 (6.3)31.1 (7.2)29.8 (6.2)30.7 (6.9)29.7 (6.2)30.9 (7.0)Prior failed bDMARDs, n (%)03 (2.5)15 (2.9)1 (1.1)15 (2.8)4 (1.9)30 (2.8)122 (18.3)113 (21.9)22 (23.2)104 (19.1)44 (20.5)217 (20.5)24 (3.3)31 (6.0)7 (7.4)28 (5.1)11 (5.1)59 (5.6)≥34 (3.3)20 (3.9)7 (7.4)27 (5.0)11 (5.1)47 (4.4)Use of ≥1 non-bDMARD atbaseline, n (%)87 (72.5)360 (69.9)63 (66.3)388 (71.2)150 (69.8)748 (70.6)Dactylitis (LDI >0), n (%)21 (17.5)169 (32.8)15 (15.8)176 (32.3)36 (16.7)345 (32.5)Enthesitis (LEI >0), n (%)60 (50.0)325 (63.1)60 (63.2)343 (62.9)120 (55.8)668 (63.0)TJC68, mean (SD)12.5 (11.3)23.9 (15.8)14.6 (13.5)23.1 (15.8)13.4 (12.3)23.5 (15.8)SJC66, mean (SD)3.5 (0.5)13.2 (8.3)3.6 (0.5)12.9 (9.0)3.6 (0.5)13.0 (8.7)HAQ-DI, mean (SD)1.0 (0.6)1.2 (0.7)0.9 (0.6)1.2 (0.6)0.9 (0.6)1.2 (0.7)hs-CRP > ULN (mg/L), n (%)82 (68.3)363 (70.5)62 (65.3)388 (71.2)144 (67.0)751 (70.8)BSA-Ps, median (range)3.0 (0.1–70.0)4.0 (0.1–95.0)2.0 (0.1–80.0)3.0 (0.1–97.0)3.0 (0.1–80.0)3.0 (0.1–97.0)BSA-Ps ≥ 3%, n (%)57 (47.5)285 (55.3)44 (46.3)300 (55.0)101 (47.0)585 (55.2)PASI (baseline BSA-Ps ≥ 3%), mean (SD)7.7 (7.5)12.1 (11.9)8.2 (7.0)10.2 (10.0)7.9 (7.2)11.1 (11.0)PASI (baseline BSA-Ps ≥ 3%), median (range)5.3 (0.1–39.4)7.9 (0.3–64.8)6.5 (0.2–35.4)6.8 (0.1–70.8)6.0 (0.1–39.4)7.3 (0.1–70.8)

Conclusion:

UPA efficacy was generally similar in patients with PsA with LSJ or HSJ, with both patient groups showing improvements in composite clinical endpoints and skin responses vs PBO.

References:

[1]McInnes I, et al. Ann Rheum Dis 2020;79(Suppl. 1):16–17;

[2]Mease PJ, et al. Ann Rheum Dis 2020; Epub ahead of print.

Acknowledgements:

AbbVie funded this study; contributed to its design; participated in data collection, analysis, and interpretation of the data; and participated in the writing, review, and approval of the abstract. No honoraria or payments were made for authorship. Medical writing support was provided by Grant Kirkpatrick, MSc of 2 the Nth (Cheshire, UK), and was funded by AbbVie.

Disclosure of Interests:

Laure Gossec Consultant of: AbbVie, Amgen, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Celgene, Eli Lilly, Janssen, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, Sanofi, and UCB, Grant/research support from: AbbVie, Amgen, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Celgene, Eli Lilly, Janssen, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, Sanofi, and UCB, Dafna D Gladman Consultant of: AbbVie, Amgen, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Celgene, Eli Lilly, Galapagos, Gilead, Janssen, Novartis, Pfizer, and UCB, Grant/research support from: AbbVie, Amgen, Celgene, Eli Lilly, Novartis, Pfizer, and UCB, Erin McDearmon-Blondell Shareholder of: May own stock or options in AbbVie, Employee of: AbbVie, Philipp Sewerin Consultant of: AbbVie, Amgen, Axiom Health, Biogen, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Celgene, Chugai, Deutscher Psoriasis Bund, Eli Lilly, Fresenius Kabi, Gilead, Hexal, Janssen, Johnson & Johnson, Medi-login, Mediri, Novartis, Onkowissen, Pfizer, Roche, Rheumazentrum Rhein-Ruhr, Sanofi, Swedish Orphan Biovitrum, and UCB, Grant/research support from: AbbVie, Amgen, Biogen, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Bundesministerium fuer Bildung und Forschung, Deutsche Forschungsgesellschaft, Deutscher Psoriasis Bund, Eli Lilly, Fresenius Kabi, Gilead, Hexal, Janssen, Novartis, Pfizer, Rheumazentrum Rhein-Ruhr, Roche, Sanofi, and UCB, Christopher T. Ritchlin Consultant of: AbbVie, Amgen, Celgene, Eli Lilly, Janssen, Novartis, Pfizer, Sun, and UCB, Grant/research support from: AbbVie, Amgen, and UCB, Dai Feng Shareholder of: May own stock or options in AbbVie, Employee of: AbbVie, Apinya Lertratanakul Shareholder of: May own stock or options in AbbVie, Employee of: AbbVie, R Ranza Consultant of: AbbVie, Eli Lilly, Janssen, Novartis, and Pfizer, Grant/research support from: AbbVie, Janssen, Novartis, and Pfizer, Lai-Shan Tam Consultant of: AbbVie, Boehringer Ingelheim, Eli Lilly, Janssen, Pfizer, and Sanofi, Grant/research support from: Amgen, Boehringer Ingelheim, GSK, Janssen, Novartis, and Pfizer, Antonio Marchesoni Consultant of: AbbVie, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Celgene, Eli Lilly, Janssen, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, and UCB, Laura C Coates: None declared., Peter Nash Consultant of: AbbVie, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Celgene, Eli Lilly, Gilead, Janssen, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, Sanofi, and UCB, Grant/research support from: AbbVie, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Celgene, Eli Lilly, Gilead, Janssen, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, Sanofi, and UCB.

POS1032 EFFICACY OF UPADACITINIB IN PATIENTS WITH PSORIATIC ARTHRITIS STRATIFIED BY NUMBER OF PRIOR BIOLOGIC DISEASE-MODIFYING ANTI-RHEUMATIC DRUGS

Background:

Upadacitinib (UPA) has shown efficacy and safety in patients (pts) with active PsA in the Phase 3 SELECT-PsA 1 and SELECT-PsA 2 clinical trials.1,2 Historically efficacy has been lower with second- and third-line therapy compared with first-line anti-TNF therapy in PsA;3,4 however, clinical trial data that describe efficacy in pts who have had an inadequate response (IR) to multiple biologic DMARDs (bDMARDs) are limited.

Objectives:

This analysis assessed the effects of prior bDMARD failure on UPA efficacy in the SELECT-PsA 2 trial.

Methods:

The SELECT-PsA 2 study enrolled pts with prior IR or intolerance to ≥1 bDMARD (N=642). Pts were randomized to placebo (PBO), UPA 15 mg once daily (QD, UPA15), or UPA 30 mg QD (UPA30). Stable background treatment of ≤2 non-bDMARDs was permitted; background therapy was not required. Only the pts who had IR to ≥1 bDMARD were included in this analysis; pts were subgrouped based on the number of bDMARDs failed prior to enrollment (1, 2, or ≥3). This analysis includes assessment of proportion of pts achieving ACR20/50/70, and change in HAQ-DI, FACIT-Fatigue, and SF-36 Physical Component Summary at Wk 12; static Investigator Global Assessment of Psoriasis of 0 or 1 and at least a 2-point improvement from baseline, PASI75, and change in Self-Assessment of Psoriasis Symptoms at Wk 16; and proportion of pts achieving minimal disease activity (MDA) at Wk 24. Non-responder imputation was used for binary endpoints. Mixed-effects model for repeated measures was used for continuous endpoints. Point estimates and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) of the PBO subtracted treatment effect were calculated.

Results:

641 pts were randomized and received study drug; 92% were bDMARD-IR: 391 (61%) of pts failed 1 bDMARD, 116 (18%) failed 2 bDMARDs, and 83 (13%) failed ≥3 bDMARDs. In the overall study population, UPA15 and UPA30 demonstrated superiority vs placebo for all endpoints evaluated. In this post hoc analysis, the PBO subtracted treatment effect demonstrates generally consistent efficacy as compared to the overall study population for UPA15 and UPA30 across efficacy endpoints in the subgroups of pts with IR to 1, 2, or ≥3 prior bDMARDs (Figure 1). Due to limited sample sizes for pts with IR to >1 bDMARD and the pt subsets analyzed for psoriasis-related endpoints, results should be interpreted with caution.

Conclusion:

Upadacitinib demonstrated consistent efficacy in treating clinical manifestations of PsA including musculoskeletal symptoms, psoriasis, physical function, fatigue, and quality of life in pts with IR to 1 or multiple prior bDMARDs. In addition, comprehensive disease control as measured by MDA, was generally consistently achieved with upadacitinib regardless of number of prior bDMARDs tried.

References:

[1]McInnes IB, et al. Ann Rheum Dis, 2020; 79:12.

[2]Genovese MC, et al. Ann Rheum Dis, 2020; 79:139.

[3]Costa L, et al. Drugs R D. 2017;17:509-522.

[4]Reddy SM, et al. 2016;35:2955-2966.

Acknowledgements:

AbbVie and the authors thank the patients, study sites, and investigators who participated in this clinical trial. AbbVie, Inc was the study sponsor, contributed to study design, data collection, analysis & interpretation, and to writing, reviewing, and approval of final version. No honoraria or payments were made for authorship. Medical writing support was provided by Ramona Vladea, PhD of AbbVie Inc.

Disclosure of Interests:

Philip J Mease Speakers bureau: AbbVie, Amgen, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol Myers, Celgene, Galapagos, Genentech, Gilead, GlaxosmithKline, Janssen, Lilly, Merck, Novartis, Pfizer, Sun Pharma, and UCB., Consultant of: AbbVie, Amgen, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol Myers, Celgene, Galapagos, Genentech, Gilead, GlaxosmithKline, Janssen, Lilly, Merck, Novartis, Pfizer, Sun Pharma, and UCB., Grant/research support from: AbbVie, Amgen, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol Myers, Celgene, Galapagos, Genentech, Gilead, GlaxosmithKline, Janssen, Lilly, Merck, Novartis, Pfizer, Sun Pharma, and UCB., Apinya Lertratanakul Shareholder of: AbbVie, Employee of: AbbVie, Bruce Strober Speakers bureau: AbbVie, Amgen, Eli Lilly, Janssen, Ortho Dermatologics, Consultant of: AbbVie, Almirall, Amgen, Arcutis, Arena, Aristea, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol-Myers-Squibb, Cara, Celgene, Dermavant, Dermira, Janssen, Leo, Eli Lilly, Meiji Seika Pharma, Novartis, Pfizer, GlaxoSmithKline, UCB Pharma, Sun Pharma, Ortho Dermatologics, Regeneron, Sanofi-Genzyme, Shigeyoshi Tsuji Speakers bureau: AbbVie Inc., Celgene, Eli Lilly, Janssen, Merck, Novartis, Pfizer and UCB, Consultant of: AbbVie Inc., Celgene, Eli Lilly, Janssen, Merck, Novartis, Pfizer and UCB, Pascal Richette Speakers bureau: AbbVie, Biogen, Janssen, BMS, Roche, Pfizer, Amgen, Sanofi-Aventis, UCB, Lilly, Novartis, and Celgene, Consultant of: AbbVie, Biogen, Janssen, BMS, Roche, Pfizer, Amgen, Sanofi-Aventis, UCB, Lilly, Novartis, and Celgene, Charles Lovan Shareholder of: AbbVie, Employee of: AbbVie, Dai Feng Shareholder of: AbbVie, Employee of: AbbVie, Jaclyn Anderson Shareholder of: AbbVie, Employee of: AbbVie, Filip van den Bosch Speakers bureau: AbbVie Inc., Celgene, Eli Lilly, Janssen, Merck, Novartis, Pfizer and UCB, Consultant of: AbbVie Inc., Celgene, Eli Lilly, Janssen, Merck, Novartis, Pfizer and UCB.

POS1035 UPADACITINIB AS MONOTHERAPY AND IN COMBINATION WITH NON-BIOLOGIC DMARDs FOR THE TREATMENT OF PSORIATIC ARTHRITIS: SUBGROUP ANALYSIS FROM TWO PHASE 3 TRIALS

Background:

Approximately 40% of PsA patients (pts) on advanced therapy are on monotherapy.1,2 Upadacitinib (UPA) showed efficacy and safety in pts with active PsA in the Phase 3 SELECT-PsA 1 and SELECT-PsA 2 clinical trials.3,4

Objectives:

Assess efficacy and safety in subgroups of pts treated with UPA as monotherapy or in combination with non-biologic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (non-bDMARDs).

Methods:

The SELECT-PsA program enrolled pts with prior inadequate response (IR) or intolerance to ≥1 non-bDMARD (N=1705) and prior IR or intolerance to ≥1 bDMARD (N=642). Data from both trials was integrated for pts receiving placebo (PBO), UPA 15 mg once daily (QD) and UPA 30 mg QD. Stable background treatment of ≤2 non-bDMARDs was permitted, but not required. Analysis includes UPA monotherapy vs combination therapy for endpoints: ACR20/50/70 responses and change from baseline in pain and HAQ-DI (Wk 12); Static Investigator Global Assessment of Psoriasis of 0 or 1 and at least a 2-point improvement from baseline and PASI75/90/100 responses (Wk 16); proportion of pts achieving resolution of enthesitis, dactylitis, and minimal disease activity (Wk 24). Binary outcomes, using the Cochran-Mantel-Haenszel-method and continuous outcomes, using mixed-effects model, were analyzed for repeated measures in the subgroups of UPA monotherapy and combination therapy. Point estimates and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) of PBO subtracted treatment effect were calculated. Treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) were analyzed.

Results:

Of 1916 pts, 574 (30%) received monotherapy and 1342 (70%) received combination therapy; 84% in combination therapy group received MTX +/- another non-bDMARD. Both UPA monotherapy and combination therapy led to improvements in efficacy vs PBO and across endpoints, for each dose, generally consistent point estimates of PBO subtracted treatment effect and associated overlapping CIs were observed (Figure 1). Generally, frequency of AEs and serious AEs, were comparable with UPA administered as monotherapy and combination therapy (Table 1). Frequency of AEs of serious infections and hepatic disorder were lower with monotherapy while frequency of AEs leading to discontinuation of study drug were lower with combination therapy. Most hepatic disorders were transient transaminase elevations.

Conclusion:

In the SELECT PsA trials, efficacy and safety of UPA was generally consistent when administered as monotherapy or when given in combination with non-bDMARDs. Results from this analysis support the use of UPA with or without concomitant non-bDMARDs.

References:

[1]Ianculescu I and Weisman MH, Clin Exp Rheumatol 2015; 33:S94–S97.

[2]Mease PJ, et al. RMD Open 2015; 1:e0000181.

[3]McInnes IB, et al. Ann Rheum Dis, 2020; 79:12.

[4]Genovese MC, et al. Ann Rheum Dis, 2020; 79:139.

Acknowledgements:

AbbVie and the authors thank the patients, study sites, and investigators who participated in this clinical trial. AbbVie, Inc was the study sponsor, contributed to study design, data collection, analysis & interpretation, and to writing, reviewing, and approval of final version. No honoraria or payments were made for authorship. Medical writing support was provided by Ramona Vladea of AbbVie Inc.

Disclosure of Interests:

Peter Nash Speakers bureau: AbbVie, BMS, Roche, Pfizer, Janssen, Amgen, Sanofi-Aventis, UCB, Eli Lilly, Novartis, and Celgene, Consultant of: AbbVie, BMS, Roche, Pfizer, Janssen, Amgen, Sanofi-Aventis, UCB, Eli Lilly, Novartis, and Celgene, Grant/research support from: AbbVie, BMS, Roche, Pfizer, Janssen, Amgen, Sanofi-Aventis, UCB, Eli Lilly, Novartis, and Celgene, Pascal Richette Speakers bureau: AbbVie, Biogen, Janssen, BMS, Roche, Pfizer, Amgen, Sanofi-Aventis, UCB, Lilly, Novartis, and Celgene, Consultant of: AbbVie, Biogen, Janssen, BMS, Roche, Pfizer, Amgen, Sanofi-Aventis, UCB, Lilly, Novartis, and Celgene, Laure Gossec Speakers bureau: Abbvie, Amgen, Biogen, BMS, Celgene, Lilly, Novartis, Pfizer, Janssen, Sandoz, Sanofi-Aventis, UCB, Consultant of: Abbvie, Amgen, Biogen, BMS, Celgene, Lilly, Novartis, Pfizer, Janssen, Sandoz, Sanofi-Aventis, UCB, Grant/research support from: Abbvie, Amgen, Biogen, BMS, Celgene, Lilly, Novartis, Pfizer, Janssen, Sandoz, Sanofi-Aventis, UCB, Antonio Marchesoni Speakers bureau: AbbVie, BMS, Celgene, Eli-Lilly, Janssen, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, and UCB, Consultant of: AbbVie, BMS, Celgene, Eli-Lilly, Janssen, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, and UCB, Christopher T. Ritchlin Consultant of: AbbVie, Amgen, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Janssen, Novartis, UCB, Grant/research support from: UCB, Koji Kato Shareholder of: AbbVie, Employee of: AbbVie, Erin McDearmon-Blondell Shareholder of: AbbVie, Employee of: AbbVie, Elizabeth Lesser Shareholder of: AbbVie, Employee of: AbbVie, Reva McCaskill Shareholder of: AbbVie, Employee of: AbbVie, Dai Feng Shareholder of: AbbVie, Employee of: AbbVie, Jaclyn Anderson Shareholder of: AbbVie, Employee of: AbbVie, Eric Ruderman Consultant of: AbbVie, Amgen, Gilead, Janssen, Lilly, Novartis, and Pfizer.

The role of liver metabolism in compensatory-growth piglets induced by protein restriction and subsequent protein realimentation

The aim of this work was to study the role of hepatic metabolism of compensatory growth in piglets induced by protein restriction and subsequent protein realimentation. Thirty-six weaned piglets were randomly distributed in a control group and a treatment group. The control group piglets were fed with a normal protein level diet (18.83% CP) for the entire experimental period (day 1-28). The treatment group piglets were fed with a protein-restriction diet (13.05% CP) for day 1 to day 14, and the diet was restored to normal protein level diet for day 15 to day 28. RNA-seq is used to analyze samples of liver metabolism on day 14 and day 28, respectively. Hepatic RNA-sequencing analysis revealed that some KEGG signaling pathways involved in glycolipid metabolism (eg, "AMPK signaling pathway," "insulin signaling pathway," and "glycolysis or gluconeogenesis") were significantly enriched on day 14 and day 28. On day 14, protein restriction promoted hepatic lipogenesis by increasing the genes expression level of ACACA, FASN, GAPM, and SREBP1C, decreasing protein phosphorylation levels of AMPKɑ and ACC in AMPK signaling pathway. In contrast, on day 28, protein realimentation promoted hepatic gluconeogenesis by increasing the concentration of G6Pase and PEPCK, decreasing protein phosphorylation levels of IRS1, Akt, and FoXO1 in insulin signaling pathway. In addition, protein realimentation activated the GH-IGF1 axis between the liver and skeletal muscle. Overall, these findings revealed the importance of liver metabolism in achieving compensatory growth.

[Characteristics of methadone maintenance treatment clinic patients and influencing factors for HBsAg positivity based on Bayesian network model]

Objective: To understand the characteristics and explore the influencing factors of HBsAg positivity in methadone maintenance treatment (MMT) clinic patients. Methods: A face to face interview and medical record review were conducted in 1 040 patients at three MMT clinics in Guangxi from September to November in 2014. The questionnaire information included general demographic characteristics, drug use history, MMT status, sexual behaviors, and health status, etc. Blood samples were collected from the patients at the same time for the detections of the level of HBsAg, anti-HBs and anti-HCV. By using χ(2) test, unconditional logistic regression model and Bayesian network model the influencing factors for HBsAg positivity in MMT clinic patients and the complex network relationship among these factors were explored. Results: A total of 1 031 MMT clinic patients were surveyed, the HBsAg positive rate was 11.35% (117/1 031). The anti-HCV positive rate was 71.77% (740/1 031), among the anti-HCV positive patients, the HBsAg positive rate was 10.27% (76/740). After adjusting for the confounding factors, anti-HBs positive persons might not be HBsAg positive (OR=0.05, 95%CI: 0.03-0.09), and anti-HCV positive persons might not be HBsAg positive too (OR=0.30, 95%CI: 0.17-0.52) compared with anti-HBs negative and anti-HCV negative persons, respectively. The persons with family history of hepatitis B virus infection were more likely to be HBsAg positive compared those with no such family history (OR=5.30, 95%CI: 2.68-10.52). Bayesian network model analysis results showed that family history of hepatitis B virus infection and anti-HBs were directly related with HBsAg positivity. Anti-HCV, intravenous drug use in the past three months and other drug using during treatment were indirectly related with HBsAg positivity. Conclusions: Anti-HBs, family history of hepatitis B virus infection, anti-HCV, intravenous drug use in past three months and other drug use during treatment were related with the HBsAg positivity in MMT clinic patients. So, it is necessary to enhance health education, improve health awareness and decrease high risk behaviors to reduce the rate of HBV infection.

A novel, rapid and simple method for detecting brucellosis based on rapid vertical flow technology

AIMS

To prevent the spread of brucellosis, a simple and rapid vertical flow technology (RVFT) for the detection of antibodies targeting brucellosis was developed.

METHODS AND RESULTS

In this study, Brucella sp. lipopolysaccharide was purified and used to detect brucellosis antibodies. Sheep IgG was used as a negative control. Colloidal gold-labeled recombinant staphylococcus aureus protein A was sprayed on a fibreglass membrane to prepare immunogold pads. Rapid vertical flow technology was used to detect Brucella in 1668 Sheep, 2743 bovine, 674 red deer and 420 human samples. The results indicated that the accuracy of this assay can reach 98%.

CONCLUSIONS

The established RVFT uses a single multifunctional buffer that can be used to detect antibodies in serum, plasma, whole blood and other biological samples while preserving the advantages of lateral-flow immunoassays.

SIGNIFICANCE AND IMPACT OF THE STUDY

This technology would be of great use in primary medical units and veterinary stations, and it is of great significance for the control of epidemic diseases.

Effects of bisphenol A exposure on DNA integrity and protamination of mouse spermatozoa

BACKGROUND

Bisphenol A is widely used in the manufacture of polycarbonate plastics and has caused increasing concern over its potential adverse impacts on spermatogenesis. However, the effect of bisphenol A on spermiogenesis is yet to be explored.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate whether bisphenol A has adverse effects on DNA integrity and protamination of spermatogenic cell.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Newborn male mice were subcutaneously injected with bisphenol A (0.1, 5 mg/kg body weight, n = 15) or coin oil (control group, n = 20) daily from post-natal day 1 until 35. At post-natal day 70, epididymis caudal spermatozoa and testes were collected. Sperm count, sperm motility, and sperm morphology were analyzed. The sperm chromatin structure assay was performed to examine the sperm DNA fragmentation. Terminal deoxynucleotidyl transferase dUTP nick end labeling (TUNEL) method was used to assess apoptosis of spermatogenic cells. The ultrastructural features of testicular sections were examined under a transmission electron microscope. Western blot and RT-PCR were used to detect the expression levels of transition protein (Tnp) 1 and Tnp2, protamine (Prm) 1 and Prm2 protein, and mRNA in mice testes.

RESULTS

Bisphenol A significantly reduced sperm counts, impaired sperm motility, and increased the percentage of malformed spermatozoa. Poor sperm chromatin integrity and increased TUNEL-positive spermatogenic cells were also observed in mice exposed to bisphenol A. Ultrastructural analysis of testes showed that bisphenol A exposure caused incomplete chromatin condensation, retention of residual cytoplasm, and abnormal acrosome formation. In addition, the relative expression levels of Tnp2 and Prm2 in mice testes decreased significantly in bisphenol A groups.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION

Our findings identified that neonatal bisphenol A exposure may negatively contribute to the sperm quality in adult mice. Mechanistically, we showed that bisphenol A reduced sperm chromatin integrity along with increased DNA damage, which may be due to poor protamination of spermatozoa.

A new diagnostic index for sarcopenia and its association with short-term postoperative complications in patients undergoing surgery for colorectal cancer

AIM

Sarcopenia is a robust prognostic indicator of outcomes after surgery for colorectal cancer (CRC). However, there are no serum markers routinely available for estimating skeletal muscle mass (SMM). The present study aimed to describe a new sarcopenia index (SI), serum creatinine (Scr) × cystatin C-based glomerular filtration rate, and investigate its association with short-term complications after curative resection of CRC.

METHOD

Consecutive patients who underwent curative resection of CRC from December 2011 to January 2017 were retrospectively identified. Skeletal muscle cross-sectional area was analysed on L3 computed tomographic images. Receiver operating characteristic curve analysis showed that the cutoff points of SI for sarcopenia were below 56.1 in men and below 43.7 in women. Patients were classified into low and high SI groups in accordance with these cutoff values. The association between SI and body composition and the impact of preoperative SI on postoperative outcomes were analysed.

RESULTS

Among 417 patients, SI showed a stronger correlation with skeletal muscle area (SMA) (r = 0.537, P < 0.001) than with the Scr/cystatin C ratio (r = 0.469, P < 0.001) and Scr (r = 0.447, P < 0.001). The low SI group had a lower SMA, lower preoperative haemoglobin, a higher prevalence of sarcopenia and experienced more postoperative complications compared with the high SI group (all P < 0.001). Multivariate logistic regression analysis showed that the independent risk factors for overall complications were low preoperative haemoglobin, low SI, sarcopenia and American Society of Anesthesiologists grade ≥ 3.

CONCLUSION

This new SI is a simple and useful surrogate marker for estimating SMM, and is associated with outcomes after CRC surgery.

[Related factors and interaction on HIV/HCV co-infection of patients access to methadone maintenance treatment]

Objective: To estimate the prevalence of HIV/HCV co-infection and explore the influence factors and their interaction on HIV/HCV co-infection of patient's access to methadone maintenance treatment (MMT). Methods: A face to face interviews were conducted among 750 patients at two MMT clinics in Guangxi Zhuang Autonomous Region. The questionnaires information included demographic characteristics, HIV and HCV infection status, history of drug abuse, urine test for morphine, high risk sex behaviors, needle sharing, dropped out etc. Methods of χ(2) test one-way, multivariate logistic regression and interactions were used to analyze the related factors of HIV/HCV co-infection. Results: The study subjects included 750 participants, 18.31% (127/691) of patients were co-infected with HIV and HCV. The HIV/HCV co-infection rate in patients who shared needles with others or dropped out of treatment was 35.84% (81/226) and 19.88% (64/322) respectively, which were higher than those who have never shared needles or dropped out (9.89%, 46/465 and 17.07%, 63/369). Logistic regression analysis results showed that after adjusted for confounding factors, patients who shared needles (OR=4.50, 95%CI: 2.72-7.43) and dropped out of treatment (OR=1.71, 95%CI: 1.04-2.80) were more likely to be infected with HIV/HCV. Interaction analysis showed that sharing needles and dropping out of treatment exist additive effect on co-infection of HIV and HCV (RERI=4.21, AP=0.44, SI=1.95). Conclusions: Needle sharing and dropping out of treatment are associated with HIV/HCV co-infection. Health education, psychological counseling and other measures should be taken to reduce needle sharing and dropping out of MMT.