Tofacitinib Efficacy in Patients with Rheumatoid Arthritis and Probable Depression/Anxiety: Post Hoc Analysis of Phase 3 and 3b/4 Randomized Controlled Trials

INTRODUCTION

The aim of our work is to assess the prevalence of probable major depressive disorder and/or probable generalized anxiety disorder (pMDD/pGAD) in patients with moderate to severe rheumatoid arthritis (RA), and to evaluate the efficacy of tofacitinib on RA symptoms stratified by baseline pMDD/pGAD status.

METHODS

Data were pooled from five phase 3 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and one phase 3b/4 RCT, assessing tofacitinib 5 or 10 mg twice daily (BID), adalimumab (two RCTs), or placebo. pMDD/pGAD was defined as Short Form-36 Health Survey (SF-36) Mental Component Summary (MCS) score ≤ 38. Efficacy outcomes over 12 months included least squares mean change from baseline in SF-36 MCS score and Health Assessment Questionnaire-Disability Index, proportions of patients with pMDD/pGAD in those with baseline pMDD/pGAD, and American College of Rheumatology 20/50/70 response, and Disease Activity Score in 28 joints, erythrocyte sedimentation rate remission (< 2.6) rates.

RESULTS

A total of 4404 patients with non-missing baseline values were included. Baseline pMDD/pGAD was reported by 44.5%, 39.8%, 45.4%, and 39.1% of patients receiving tofacitinib 5 mg BID, tofacitinib 10 mg BID, adalimumab, and placebo, respectively. SF-36 MCS improvements were greater for tofacitinib versus adalimumab/placebo through month 6, with numerical improvements for tofacitinib versus adalimumab sustained through month 12, when the proportions of patients with baseline pMDD/pGAD who continued to have pMDD/pGAD were reduced. RA efficacy outcomes were generally similar in patients with/without baseline pMDD/pGAD.

CONCLUSIONS

The percentage of patients with pMDD/pGAD reduced from baseline over 1 year of treatment with tofacitinib or adalimumab. Effective treatment of underlying RA may lead to improvements in depression and anxiety, based on the SF-36 MCS. Specially designed studies using gold-standard diagnostic tools would be warranted to investigate this further. Video Abstract available for this article.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

NCT00960440, NCT00847613, NCT00814307, NCT00856544, NCT00853385, NCT02187055. Video Abstract (MP4 204475 KB).

Impact of access to treatment on patient-reported outcomes among rheumatoid arthritis patients with tDMARDs and bDMARDS in two Latin-American countries: A prospective observational study

Background and Aims

A noninterventional prospective study was performed in Colombia and Peru. The aim was to describe the impact of access to treatment on Patient-reported outcomes (PRO) in patients with Rheumatoid arthritis (RA) after failure to conventional disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs) in real-life conditions.

Methods

The impact of access to treatment was measured by access barriers, time to supply (TtS) and interruption evaluating their effect in changes of PROs between baseline and 6-month follow-up between February 2017 and November 2019. The association of access to care with disease activity, functional status, health-related quality of life was assessed using bivariate and multivariable analysis. Results are expressed in least mean difference; TtS in mean number of days for delivery of treatment at baseline. Variability measures were standard deviation and standard error.

Results

One hundred seventy patients were recruited, 70 treated with tofacitinib and 100 with biological DMARDs. Thirty-nine patients reported access barriers. The mean of TtS was 23 ± 38.83 days. The difference from baseline to 6-month visit in PROs were affected by access barriers and interruptions. There was not statistically significant difference in the of PRO's score among visits in patients that reported delay of supply of more than 23 days compared to patients with less days of delay.

Conclusion

This study suggested the access to treatment can affect the response to the treatment at 6 months of follow-up. There seems to be no effect in the PROs for delay of TtS during the studied period.

Simplified Ankylosing Spondylitis Disease Activity Score (SASDAS) Versus ASDAS: A Post Hoc Analysis of a Randomized Controlled Trial

OBJECTIVE

To compare the Simplified Ankylosing Spondylitis Disease Activity Score (SASDAS) against the Ankylosing Spondylitis Disease Activity Score (ASDAS) for measuring and categorizing disease activity using data from the EMBARK trial (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT01258738), a randomized controlled trial of etanercept (ETN) for axial spondyloarthritis (axSpA).

METHODS

Patients with early active axSpA received ETN 50 mg once weekly (n = 106) or placebo (PBO; n = 109) for 12 weeks in a double-blind manner; they then received open-label ETN for 92 weeks. For this analysis, ASDAS-C-reactive protein (CRP) and SASDAS-CRP were calculated at baseline, week 12, and week 24. The SASDAS was calculated by the linear addition of the ASDAS components without adjustment.

RESULTS

A very strong correlation, as determined by the Spearman correlation coefficient, was observed between the ASDAS and SASDAS for continuous variables at baseline and during treatment. For pooled categorical data at baseline, the SASDAS placed 69.9% of patients in the same disease categories as the ASDAS but overestimated for 17.8% of patients and underestimated for 12.2% of patients. A similar pattern was seen postbaseline. Cohen weighted κ statistics for all individual and pooled treatments and timepoints (0.54-0.73) reflected moderate to substantial agreement. The capacity to differentiate between treatments (ie, ETN and PBO/ETN) was higher with the ASDAS (effect size -0.74, 95% CI -1.03 to -0.46) compared with the SASDAS (effect size -0.51, 95% CI -0.79 to -0.23), but sensitivity to change was generally similar.

CONCLUSION

A very strong correlation between the SASDAS and ASDAS was observed when considering continuous variables; however, moderate to substantial agreement was observed for categorical data, and the SASDAS classified a lower proportion of patients as being in the inactive and low disease activity categories.

Association of C-reactive Protein and Partial Mayo Score With Response to Tofacitinib Induction Therapy: Results From the Ulcerative Colitis Clinical Program

BACKGROUND

Tofacitinib is an oral, small molecule JAK inhibitor for the treatment of ulcerative colitis (UC). These post hoc analyses assessed associations between C-reactive protein (CRP), partial Mayo score (PMS), and efficacy outcomes during tofacitinib induction in UC.

METHODS

Patients received tofacitinib 10 mg twice daily (BID) in an 8-week, phase 2 induction study and 2 identical, 8-week, phase 3 induction studies (OCTAVE Induction 1&2); induction nonresponders (IndNR) received an additional 8 weeks of tofacitinib 10 mg BID in an open-label, long-term extension study. Associations between CRP and PMS, and efficacy outcomes (clinical response, clinical remission, endoscopic improvement, and endoscopic remission) were analyzed using univariate and multivariable logistic regression and receiver operating characteristic curves.

RESULTS

Changes from baseline in the logarithm of CRP ([log]CRP) and PMS at week 4 were associated with clinical response at week 8 (univariate: per unit, odds ratio [OR], 0.55 [95% confidence interval (CI), 0.48-0.62]; and 0.42 [0.37-0.47], respectively). Among IndNR, change from baseline in PMS at week 8 was associated with clinical response at week 16 (univariate: per unit, OR, 0.59; 95% CI, 0.46-0.75). C-reactive protein at week 4 (area under the curve [AUC] > 0.6) and PMS at weeks 2 and 4 (AUC, > 0.7) generally exhibited predictive value for week 8 efficacy outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients who achieved clinical response at week 8 had larger decreases in CRP and PMS at week 4 than patients who did not. IndNR who achieved clinical response at week 16 with extended tofacitinib induction had a larger decrease in PMS at week 8 vs those who did not. ClinicalTrials.gov:NCT00787202;NCT01465763;NCT01458951;NCT01470612.

Incidence Rates of Interstitial Lung Disease Events in Tofacitinib-Treated Rheumatoid Arthritis Patients: Post Hoc Analysis From 21 Clinical Trials

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVE

Tofacitinib is an oral Janus kinase inhibitor for the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis (RA). Interstitial lung disease (ILD) is an extra-articular manifestation of RA. We investigated incidence rates of ILD in patients with RA, receiving tofacitinib 5 or 10 mg twice daily, and identified potential risk factors for ILD.

METHODS

This post hoc analysis comprised a pooled analysis of patients receiving tofacitinib 5 or 10 mg twice daily or placebo from 2 phase (P)1, 10 P2, 6 P3, 1 P3b/4, and 2 long-term extension studies. Interstitial lung disease events were adjudicated as "probable" (supportive clinical evidence) or "possible" (no supportive clinical evidence) compatible adverse events. Incidence rates (patients with events per 100 patient-years) were calculated for ILD events.

RESULTS

Of 7061 patients (patient-years of exposure = 23,393.7), 42 (0.6%) had an ILD event; median time to ILD event was 1144 days. Incidence rates for ILD with both tofacitinib doses were 0.18 per 100 patient-years. Incidence rates generally remained stable over time. There were 17 of 42 serious adverse events (40.5%) of ILD; for all ILD events (serious and nonserious), 35 of 42 events (83.3%) were mild to moderate in severity. A multivariable Cox regression analysis identified age 65 years or older (hazard ratio 2.43 [95% confidence interval, 1.13-5.21]), current smokers (2.89 [1.33-6.26]), and Disease Activity Score in 28 joints-erythrocyte sedimentation rate score (1.30 [1.04-1.61]) as significant risk factors for ILD events.

CONCLUSIONS

Across P1/2/3/4/long-term extension studies, incidence rates for ILD events were 0.18 following tofacitinib treatment, and ILD events were associated with known risk factors for ILD in RA.

Treatment patterns and sequencing in patients with rheumatic diseases: a retrospective claims data analysis

OBJECTIVES

Long-term real-world management of inflammatory rheumatic diseases remains unclear, especially with the advent of new treatment options. This study characterizes the number of advanced treatments used by patients with selected rheumatic diseases (rheumatoid arthritis [RA], psoriatic arthritis [PsA], ankylosing spondylitis, juvenile idiopathic arthritis) and provides a contemporary portrait of treatment patterns and therapeutic sequencing among patients with RA and PsA.

METHOD

Patients were selected from a large US claims database and classified into disease subsamples based on the latest rheumatic diagnosis recorded before/on the day of initiation of the first advanced treatment (index date). The total number of advanced treatments was assessed within the first 5 years following the index date. Treatment patterns and therapeutic sequencing were assessed over the first 2 years.

RESULTS

Approximately 20% of patients received ≥2 distinct advanced treatments during the first year following index date - the proportion increased to almost 50% among patients with 5 years of observation. Most patients (RA: 76.8%; PsA: 88.7%) initiated a tumor necrosis factor as the first advanced treatment. Over the first 2 years after the index date, 1/3 of RA and PsA patients switched to another advanced treatment. More than 50% initiated a second treatment with the same mechanism of action (MOA). A small proportion of patients received a biosimilar.

CONCLUSION

Despite advent of treatments with different MOA, cycling between treatments with the same MOA was common. Further studies with longer data follow-up would be needed to assess the impact of higher adoption of biosimilars on treatment patterns/sequencing.

Tofacitinib in Patients Hospitalized with Covid-19 Pneumonia

BACKGROUND

The efficacy and safety of tofacitinib, a Janus kinase inhibitor, in patients who are hospitalized with coronavirus disease 2019 (Covid-19) pneumonia are unclear.

METHODS

We randomly assigned, in a 1:1 ratio, hospitalized adults with Covid-19 pneumonia to receive either tofacitinib at a dose of 10 mg or placebo twice daily for up to 14 days or until hospital discharge. The primary outcome was the occurrence of death or respiratory failure through day 28 as assessed with the use of an eight-level ordinal scale (with scores ranging from 1 to 8 and higher scores indicating a worse condition). All-cause mortality and safety were also assessed.

RESULTS

A total of 289 patients underwent randomization at 15 sites in Brazil. Overall, 89.3% of the patients received glucocorticoids during hospitalization. The cumulative incidence of death or respiratory failure through day 28 was 18.1% in the tofacitinib group and 29.0% in the placebo group (risk ratio, 0.63; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.41 to 0.97; P = 0.04). Death from any cause through day 28 occurred in 2.8% of the patients in the tofacitinib group and in 5.5% of those in the placebo group (hazard ratio, 0.49; 95% CI, 0.15 to 1.63). The proportional odds of having a worse score on the eight-level ordinal scale with tofacitinib, as compared with placebo, was 0.60 (95% CI, 0.36 to 1.00) at day 14 and 0.54 (95% CI, 0.27 to 1.06) at day 28. Serious adverse events occurred in 20 patients (14.1%) in the tofacitinib group and in 17 (12.0%) in the placebo group.

CONCLUSIONS

Among patients hospitalized with Covid-19 pneumonia, tofacitinib led to a lower risk of death or respiratory failure through day 28 than placebo. (Funded by Pfizer; STOP-COVID ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT04469114.).

Review of the epidemiology and burden of ulcerative colitis in Latin America

The incidence and prevalence of ulcerative colitis (UC) has been reported to be rising in newly industrialised regions, such as Latin America. Here, we review data from published studies reporting demographics and clinical aspects of UC in Latin America to further understand epidemiology and disease burden. The incidence and prevalence of UC in Latin America varied between regions and studies, ranging between 0.04 to 8.00/100,000 and 0.23 to 76.1/100,000, respectively, and generally increased over the period from 1986 to 2015. The majority of patients with UC were female (53.6-72.6%) and urban residents (77.8-97.4%). Extraintestinal manifestations were reported in approximately 26-89.4% of patients. Use of biologic therapies was generally low (0.8-16.2%), with the exception of Mato Grosso do Sul, Brazil, with a greater proportion of patients tending to receive 5-aminosalicylates, immunosuppressants or corticosteroids; colectomy rates varied between studies (1.5-22%). A high proportion of patients had moderate to severe UC (45.9-73.0%) and, in 11 of 19 studies, the greatest proportion of patients had extensive disease (pancolitis). Colorectal cancer (0-1.7%) and mortality rates (0-7.6%) were low. This evaluation of published studies may influence therapeutic approaches and the development of strategies to improve healthcare access and patient outcomes, although further high-quality studies are required in patients with UC in Latin America.

A comparative study of PF-06438179/GP1111 (an infliximab biosimilar) and reference infliximab in patients with moderate to severe active rheumatoid arthritis: A subgroup analysis

Aim

PF‐06438179/GP1111 (PF‐SZ‐IFX) is a biosimilar of reference infliximab (Remicade^®). This analysis compared the efficacy of PF‐SZ‐IFX and reference infliximab sourced from the European Union (IFX‐EU) in patient subgroups from a randomized, comparative study of PF‐SZ‐IFX versus IFX‐EU.

Methods

Patients with rheumatoid arthritis were randomized 1:1 to PF‐SZ‐IFX (n = 324) or IFX‐EU (n = 326); study drug (3 mg/kg) was administered intravenously at weeks 0, 2, and 6, then every 8 weeks thereafter. Subgroup analyses of efficacy endpoints such as American College of Rheumatology criteria for ≥20% clinical improvement (ACR20), change in high‐sensitivity C‐reactive protein (hs‐CRP), and change in Disease Activity Score in 28 joints, four components based on hs‐CRP (DAS28‐CRP) at weeks 14 and 30 were performed by age, gender, race, region, immunogenicity status, and treatment history.

Results

Overall, ACR20 response rates as well as changes in DAS28‐CRP and hs‐CRP at week 14 were similar between PF‐SZ‐IFX and IFX‐EU within the subgroups of age, gender, race, region, treatment history, and immunogenicity status. Results to week 30 support overall similarity in efficacy between the two treatment arms in all subgroups.

Conclusion

Overall, PF‐SZ‐IFX and IFX‐EU were similar in efficacy within the analyzed subgroups of age, gender, race, region, treatment history, and immunogenicity status. The efficacy results from these subgroup analyses were aligned with the previously described results for the overall population up to week 30.

Treatment Mode Preferences in Rheumatoid Arthritis: Moving Toward Shared Decision-Making

PURPOSE

Current knowledge of the reasons for patients' preference for rheumatoid arthritis (RA) treatment modes is limited. This study was designed to identify preferences for four treatment modes, and to obtain in-depth information on the reasons for these preferences.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

In this multi-national, cross-sectional, qualitative study, in-depth interviews were conducted with adult patients with RA in the United States, France, Germany, Italy, Spain, Switzerland, the United Kingdom, and Brazil. Patients' strength of preference was evaluated using a 100-point allocation task (0-100; 100=strongest) across four treatment modes: oral, self-injection, clinic-injection, and infusion. Qualitative descriptive analysis methods were used to identify, characterize, and summarize patterns found in the interview data relating to reasons for these preferences.

RESULTS

100 patients were interviewed (female, 75.0%; mean age, 53.9 years; mean 11.6 years since diagnosis). Among the four treatment modes, oral administration was allocated the highest mean (standard deviation) preference points (47.3 [33.1]) and was ranked first choice by the greatest percentage of patients (57.0%), followed by self-injection (29.7 [27.7]; 29.0%), infusion (15.4 [24.6]; 16.0%), and clinic-injection (7.5 [14.1]; 2.0%). Overall, 56.0% of patients had a "strong" first-choice preference (ie, point allocation ≥70); most of these patients chose oral (62.5%) vs self-injection (23.2%), infusion (10.7%), or clinic-injection (3.6%). Speed and/or ease of administration were the most commonly reported reasons for patients choosing oral (52.6%) or self-injection (55.2%). The most common reasons for patients not choosing oral or self-injection were not wanting to take another pill (37.2%) and avoiding pain due to needles (46.5%), respectively.

CONCLUSION

These data report factors important to patients regarding preferences for RA treatment modes. Patients may benefit from discussions with their healthcare professionals and/or patient support groups, regarding RA treatment modes, to facilitate shared decision-making.

Age Does Not Affect Metoprolol's Effect on Perioperative Outcomes (From the POISE Database)

BACKGROUND:

Perioperative β-blockade reduces the incidence of myocardial infarction but increases that of death, stroke, and hypotension. The elderly may experience few benefits but more harms associated with β-blockade due to a normal effect of aging, that of a reduced resting heart rate. The tested hypothesis was that the effect of perioperative β-blockade is more significant with increasing age.

METHODS:

To determine whether the effect of perioperative β-blockade on the primary composite event, clinically significant hypotension, myocardial infarction, stroke, and death varies with age, we interrogated data from the perioperative ischemia evaluation (POISE) study. The POISE study randomly assigned 8351 patients, aged ≥45 years, in 23 countries, undergoing major noncardiac surgery to either 200 mg metoprolol CR daily or placebo for 30 days. Odds ratios or hazard ratios for time to events, when available, for each of the adverse effects were measured according to decile of age, and interaction term between age and treatment was calculated. No adjustment was made for multiple outcomes.

RESULTS:

Age was associated with higher incidences of the major outcomes of clinically significant hypotension, myocardial infarction, and death. Age was associated with a minimal reduction in resting heart rate from 84.2 (standard error, 0.63; ages 45–54 years) to 80.9 (standard error, 0.70; ages >85 years; P < .0001). We found no evidence of any interaction between age and study group regarding any of the major outcomes, although the limited sample size does not exclude any but large interactions.

CONCLUSIONS:

The effect of perioperative β-blockade on the major outcomes studied did not vary with age. Resting heart rate decreases slightly with age. Our data do not support a recommendation for the use of perioperative β-blockade in any age subgroup to achieve benefits but avoid harms. Therefore, current recommendations against the use of β-blockers in high-risk patients undergoing noncardiac surgery apply across all age groups.

Comparison of patient and physician perspectives in the management of rheumatoid arthritis: results from global physician- and patient-based surveys

Background

In order to better understand the perspectives of patients and physicians regarding the treatment and management of rheumatoid arthritis (RA), we present and compare results from a patient-based and a physician-based survey developed by the RA NarRAtive advisory panel.

Methods

The RA NarRAtive initiative is directed by a global advisory panel of 39 healthcare providers and patient organization leaders from 17 countries. A survey of patients self-reporting a diagnosis of RA and a physician-based survey, designed by the advisory panel, were fielded online by Harris Poll from September 2014 to April 2016, and from August 2015 to October 2015, respectively.

Results

We present findings from 1805 patients whose RA was primarily managed by a rheumatologist, and 1736 physicians managing patients with RA. Results confirmed that RA carries a substantial disease burden; half of the patients surveyed reported stopping participation in certain activities as a result of their disease. While 90% of physicians were satisfied with their communications with their patients regarding RA treatment, 61% of patients felt uncomfortable raising concerns or fears with their physician. Of the patients providing responses, 52% felt that improved dialogue/discussion would optimize their RA management, and 68% of physicians wished that they and their patients talked more about their RA goals and treatment. Overall, 88% of physicians agreed that patients involved in making treatment decisions tend to be more satisfied with their treatment experience.

Conclusion

The results of these surveys highlight the impact of RA on patients, and a discrepancy between patient and physician views on communication. Further research, focused on improving patient–physician dialogue, shared goal-setting, and treatment planning, is needed.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1186/s12955-018-1035-3) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Tofacitinib, an oral Janus kinase inhibitor, in patients from Brazil with rheumatoid arthritis: Pooled efficacy and safety analyses

BACKGROUND

Tofacitinib is an oral Janus kinase inhibitor for the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis (RA). Efficacy and safety of tofacitinib in Brazilian patients from Phase 2 (P2) and Phase 3 (P3) global studies of up to 24 months' duration were evaluated.

METHODS

Data were pooled from Brazilian patients with RA and an inadequate response to conventional synthetic or biologic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs enrolled in P2/P3 tofacitinib studies who received tofacitinib 5 or 10 mg twice daily (BID), or placebo, as monotherapy or in combination with methotrexate. Efficacy, safety, and patient-reported outcomes were assessed over 24 months.

RESULTS

Patients (226) from Brazil were treated in tofacitinib global P2/P3 studies. At Month 3, there were improvements in American College of Rheumatology 20/50/70 response rates, Disease Activity Score in 28 joints, erythrocyte sedimentation rate, and Health Assessment Questionnaire-Disability Index scores with both tofacitinib doses. Improvements from baseline in pain, fatigue, and health-related quality of life with tofacitinib 5 and 10 mg BID were reported. Efficacy improvements were sustained up to Month 24. The most frequent class of adverse events was infections and infestations. No cases of tuberculosis or other opportunistic infections were reported.

CONCLUSION

In a Brazilian subpopulation of patients with RA, tofacitinib reduced disease signs and symptoms and improved physical function up to Month 24, with a safety profile consistent with findings from global studies.

Comparison of an interferon-gamma assay with tuberculin skin testing for detection of tuberculosis (TB) infection in patients with rheumatoid arthritis in a TB-endemic population

OBJECTIVE

Tuberculosis (TB) in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) undergoing treatment with anti-tumor necrosis factor (TNF) agents is commonly the result of reactivation of latent TB infection (LTBI); detection and treatment of LTBI is essential before treatment with anti-TNF agents. We reported previously that the tuberculin skin test (TST) is inaccurate for diagnosis of LTBI in patients with RA. Here, we compare the prevalence of LTBI in RA patients and matched controls according to positive TST and QuantiFeron-TB Gold In-Tube version (QFT) results and determine their agreement.

METHODS

A cross-sectional study of 101 RA patients and 93 controls was conducted in Lima, Perú, where the prevalence of LTBI in the general population has been estimated to be 68%. Blood was drawn for QFT assay followed by TST using 2-TU of RT 23 purified protein derivative. TST was deemed positive at >or= 5 mm for RA patients and >or= 10 mm for controls.

RESULTS

There were no significant differences between RA patients and controls for age, sex, bacillus Calmette-Guérin vaccination, or history of or contact with TB. 88% of patients had active RA disease and 2 (1.9%) patients had indeterminate QFT results. The number of subjects testing positive with the QuantiFeron assay was comparable between patients and controls (44.6% vs 59.1%, respectively), whereas the TST detected significantly less LTBI among RA patients (26.7%) than controls (65.6%). Thus, the rate of LTBI in RA patients represented 75% and 41% of the rate in their controls using QFT or TST, respectively (p = 0.008). Poor agreement between TST and QFT was seen in RA patients, but in controls, good agreement was observed between these tests.

CONCLUSION

In a TB-endemic population, the QuantiFeron-TB Gold In-Tube assay seemed to be a more accurate test for detection of LTBI in RA patients compared with the TST, and may potentially improve the targeting of prophylactic therapy before treatment with anti-TNF agents.