Patient-Reported Outcomes from a Phase 4, Multicenter, Randomized, Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled Trial of Repository Corticotropin Injection (Acthar® Gel) for Persistently Active Systemic Lupus Erythematosus

Acthar® Gel Treatment for Patients with Autoimmune and Inflammatory Diseases: An Historical Perspective and Characterization of Clinical Evidence

Acthar® Gel (repository corticotropin injection) is a naturally sourced complex mixture of adrenocorticotropic hormone analogs and other pituitary peptides that is believed to have both steroidogenic and nonsteroidogenic immunomodulatory effects via activation of melanocortin receptors in various cells throughout the body. Since 1952, Acthar has been approved by the US Food and Drug Administration to treat a variety of autoimmune and inflammatory diseases. Since 2014, Mallinckrodt Pharmaceuticals has conducted a large number of preclinical, clinical, and real-world-evidence studies of Acthar for the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis, systemic lupus erythematosus, dermatomyositis and polymyositis, multiple sclerosis relapse, ophthalmic disorders, sarcoidosis, and nephrotic syndrome. To date, Acthar has been the subject of more than 500 publications, many of which demonstrate the safety and efficacy of Acthar in patients with inflammatory diseases for whom standard treatments were ineffective or intolerable. Here, we review the history of Acthar and the findings of studies that have investigated the mechanism of action, safety, efficacy, and real-world effectiveness of Acthar for the treatment of inflammatory diseases.

Acthar Gel (RCI): A Narrative Literature Review of Clinical and Economic Evidence

Acthar^® Gel (repository corticotropin injection [RCI]) is a naturally sourced complex mixture of adrenocorticotropic hormone analogs and other pituitary peptides used to treat patients with serious and rare inflammatory and autoimmune conditions. This narrative review summarizes the key clinical and economic findings among 9 indications: infantile spasms (IS), multiple sclerosis (MS) relapses, rheumatoid arthritis (RA), systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE), dermatomyositis and polymyositis (DM/PM), ocular inflammatory diseases (primarily uveitis and severe keratitis), symptomatic sarcoidosis, and proteinuria in nephrotic syndrome (NS). Key studies of clinical efficacy and healthcare resource utilization and cost from 1956 to 2022 are discussed. Evidence supports the efficacy of RCI across all 9 indications. RCI is recommended as first-line treatment for IS and is associated with improved outcomes for the other 8 indications, including increased recovery rates in MS relapse; improved disease control in RA, SLE, and DM/PM; real-world effectiveness in patients with uveitis and severe keratitis; improved lung function and reduced corticosteroid use in symptomatic sarcoidosis; and increased rates of partial remission of proteinuria in NS. For many indications, RCI may improve clinical outcomes during exacerbations or when conventional treatments have failed to show a benefit. RCI is also associated with a reduction in the use of biologics, corticosteroids, and disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs. Economic data suggest RCI is a cost-effective, value-based treatment option for MS relapse, RA, and SLE. Other economic benefits have been demonstrated for IS, MS relapses, RA, SLE, and DM/PM, including reduced hospitalizations, lengths of stay, inpatient and outpatient services, and emergency department visits. RCI is considered safe and effective and features economic benefits for numerous indications. Its ability to control relapse and disease activity makes RCI an important nonsteroid treatment option that could help preserve functioning and well-being among patients with inflammatory and autoimmune conditions.

Cost-Effectiveness of Acthar Gel Versus Standard of Care for the Treatment of Exacerbations in Moderate-to-Severe Systemic Lupus Erythematosus

INTRODUCTION

Despite current standard of care (SoC), there is an unmet need for the treatment of active systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE). The study assessed the cost-effectiveness of Acthar^® Gel (repository corticotropin injection) versus SoC treatment in patients with active, moderate-to-severe SLE from the US payer and societal perspectives over 2 and 3 years.

METHODS

Cost-effectiveness model was developed using a probabilistic cohort-level state-transition approach. Patients received Acthar Gel in an exacerbation state, and the outcomes were assessed at the end of a 3-month cycle for response achievement based on the probability of treatment success with Acthar Gel. Patients may sustain the response or experience an exacerbation. For the base case scenario, moderate-to-severe SLE was defined as British Isles Lupus Assessment Group (BILAG)-2004 ≥ 20 or SLE Disease Activity Index 2000 (SLEDAI-2K) ≥ 10 and clinical response was based on SLE responder index (SRI)-4. Clinical response, productivity loss, and utility were derived from a phase 4 SLE trial; cost and disutility estimates were sourced from the literature.

RESULTS

From a payer perspective, Acthar Gel versus SoC resulted in an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of $133,110 per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) and $94,818 per QALY over 2 and 3 years, respectively. From a societal perspective, Acthar Gel versus SoC results in an ICER of $70,827 per QALY and $32,525 per QALY over 2 and 3 years, respectively. Results from the sensitivity and scenario analyses are consistent with those of the base case model.

CONCLUSIONS

Acthar Gel is a cost-effective, value-based treatment option for appropriate patients with moderate-to-severe SLE at a willingness-to-pay threshold of $150,000 over 2-3 years from the US payer and societal perspectives. Acthar Gel results in the reduction of direct medical and indirect costs.

The impact of distress disclosure and anxiety on the association between social support and quality of life among Chinese women with systemic lupus erythematosus

The evidence on the relationship between social support and quality of life in female systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) patients is complex. The purpose of this study was to explore the impacts of distress disclosure and anxiety on the association between social support and quality of life among Chinese women with SLE. A cross-sectional study was conducted, and 237 samples were obtained. Measures included demographic characteristics, Lupus Quality of Life (LupusQoL), social support rate scale (SSRS), distress disclosure index (DDI), and self-rating anxiety scale (SAS). Descriptive statistics, correlation analysis, and moderated mediating effect analysis were carried out. The LupusQoL was negatively correlated with age, systemic lupus erythematosus disease activity index (SLEDAI), DDI, and SAS. SSRS had a positive predictive effect on the LupusQoL, while SLEDAI and DDI had the opposite effect. SAS had a negative predictive effect on the LupusQoL. There were interactive effects of SAS and DDI on LupusQoL. In the moderated mediation model, SAS played moderating effect in the role of DDI on LupusQoL; the DDI of female patients with SLE played a partial mediator role, the mediation effect was 0.19, and the mediation effect ratio was 33.3%. In conclusion, to pay attention to the QOL, we should consider the mediator role of distress disclosure and the moderating role of anxiety.

A Narrative Review of Repository Corticotropin Injection for the Treatment of Systemic Lupus Erythematosus

Systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) is a chronic autoimmune disorder that affects multiple organ systems. The most prevalent manifestations include constitutional symptoms, arthritis, and rash. An SLE flare is defined as a measurable increase in disease activity that may prompt a change in treatment. According to the European Alliance of Associations for Rheumatology guidance, SLE treatments should be aimed at reducing disease activity and flares, as well as preventing organ damage. Standard-of-care treatment of SLE includes glucocorticoids, but their long-term use is associated with damage accrual. Repository corticotropin injection (RCI; Acthar^® Gel) is a naturally sourced complex mixture of adrenocorticotropic hormone analogs and other pituitary peptides that has anti-inflammatory and immunomodulatory effects beyond its steroidogenic effect, and has been US Food and Drug Administration–approved for the treatment of SLE flares and as a maintenance therapy. This review summarizes data from three clinical trials that evaluated the efficacy and safety of RCI in the treatment of patients with moderate–severe refractory SLE. These clinical trials confirmed that RCI improved global disease activity scores and some SLE clinical manifestations. Analysis of pooled data from these trials showed that RCI treatment significantly improved the British Isles Lupus Assessment Group 2004 (BILAG-2004) index scores after 8 weeks of treatment, and tender and swollen joint counts after 4 weeks. These clinical trials demonstrated an acceptable safety profile with few serious adverse events reported. The distinct mechanisms of action from standard-of-care therapies and the favorable safety and good efficacy profiles support the use of RCI as therapy for patients with refractory SLE.

Pain and Fatigue Improvements in Patients Treated with Repository Corticotropin Injection Across Five Indications: A Narrative Review

Repository corticotropin injection (RCI; Acthar^® Gel) is approved by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) for use in 19 indications, including for the treatment of selected patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA), systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE), symptomatic sarcoidosis, uveitis, and keratitis. Despite treatment with disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs, many patients with RA, SLE, and other chronic inflammatory rheumatic diseases continue to be affected by severe pain and fatigue, indicating a need for other therapies. To examine the clinical data regarding the impact of RCI treatment on pain and fatigue in selected populations, this review included English-language peer-reviewed publications of clinical trials of any size and cohort studies with more than 10 patients that included pain and/or fatigue based on patient-reported outcomes (PROs) and/or physician-assessed measures in adults following treatment with RCI for RA, SLE, symptomatic sarcoidosis, uveitis, or keratitis. Literature searches identified eight studies that met these criteria. Four studies (reported in five publications) were in patients with RA or SLE, two in patients with sarcoidosis, one in patients with uveitis, and one in patients with noninfectious keratitis. Across the different types of studies assessed (clinical trials, chart reviews, real-world evidence), the results were consistent with respect to the impact of RCI treatment on improving pain and fatigue. As summarized in this review, data from patient- and physician-reported outcome measures in eight studies demonstrate that, in addition to improving more traditional efficacy measures, RCI may also improve pain and fatigue in patients with RA, SLE, symptomatic sarcoidosis, uveitis, and noninfectious keratitis.

Rheumatoid arthritis (RA) and systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) are chronic autoimmune diseases. Clinical studies of drugs for these diseases do not often ask patients how they feel after treatment. Despite treatment, many people with these diseases have pain and feel tired. Repository corticotropin injection (RCI) is a prescription drug for patients with RA, SLE, and other chronic immune diseases. We reviewed the results of published studies with data on pain and fatigue from patients treated with RCI. Four studies were in patients with RA or SLE. Two studies were in patients with symptomatic sarcoidosis. One study was in patients with uveitis. One study was in patients with noninfectious keratitis. These eight studies show that adding RCI to standard treatment lowers pain and fatigue in some patients. It would be helpful to measure pain and fatigue in future clinical studies of drugs for patients with chronic immune diseases.

Capturing the patient experience in systemic lupus erythematosus: Are widely used measures fit-for-purpose and adherent to FDA PRO guidance recommendations?

Background

The 2009 Food and Drug Administration (FDA) patient-reported outcome (PRO) guidance outlines characteristics of rigorous PRO-measure development. There are a number of widely used PRO measures for Systemic Lupus Erythematosus (SLE), but it is unknown how well the development processes of SLE PRO measures align with FDA guidance; including updated versions. The objective of this study was to assess how well the LupusQoL and LupusPRO, and corresponding updated versions, LupusQoL-US and LupusPROv1.8, align with Food and Drug Administration (FDA) 2009 patient-reported outcome (PRO) guidance.

Methods

LupusQoL and LupusPRO were selected as the most widely studied and used Lupus PROs in the UK and US. Original (LupusQoL (2007) and LupusQoL-US (2010)) and revised (LupusPROVv1.7 (2012) and LupusPROv1.8 (2018)) versions were reviewed. We used FDA PRO guidance to create evaluation criteria for key components: target population, concepts measured, measurement properties, documentation across the phases of content validity (item-generation and cognitive interviewing, separately) and other psychometric-property testing. Two reviewers abstracted data independently, compared results, and resolved discrepancies.

Results

For all measures, the target population was unclear as population characteristics (e.g., ethnicity, education, disease severity) varied, and/or were not consistently reported or not considered across the three phases (e.g., LupusQoL item-generation lacked male involvement, LupusPRO cognitive-interviewing population characteristics were not reported). The item-generation phase for both original measures was conducted with concepts elicited via patient-engagement interviews and item derivation from experts. Cognitive interviewing was conducted via patient feedback with limited item-tracking for original measures. In contrast, the revised measures assumed content validity. Other psychometric testing recommendations (reliability, construct validity, ability to detect change) were reported for both original and revised measures, except for ability to detect change for revised measures.

Conclusions

The SLE PRO measures adhere to some but not all FDA PRO guidance recommendations. Limitations in processes and documentation of the study population, make it unclear for which target population(s) the current Lupus measures are fit-for-purpose.

Patient-Reported Outcomes for Quality of Life in SLE: Essential in Clinical Trials and Ready for Routine Care

Patient-reported outcome (PRO) instruments are widely used to assess quality of life in Systemic Lupus Erythematosus (SLE) research, and there is growing evidence for their use in clinical care. In this review, we evaluate the current evidence for their use in assessing quality of life in SLE in both research and clinical settings and examine the different characteristics of the commonly used PRO tools. There are now several well-validated generic and SLE-specific tools that have demonstrated utility in clinical trials and several tools that complement activity and damage measures in the clinical setting. PRO tools may help overcome physician–patient discordance in SLE and are valuable in the assessment of fibromyalgia and type 2 symptoms such as widespread pain and fatigue. Future work will identify optimal PRO tools for different settings but, despite current limitations, they are ready to be incorporated into patient care.