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

Philip J Mease, Apinya Lertratanakul, Jaclyn K Anderson, Kim Papp, Filip Van den Bosch, Shigeyoshi Tsuji, Eva Dokoupilova, Mauro Keiserman, Xin Wang, Sheng Zhong, Reva M McCaskill, Patrick Zueger, Aileen L Pangan, William Tillett, Philip J Mease, Apinya Lertratanakul, Jaclyn K Anderson, Kim Papp, Filip Van den Bosch, Shigeyoshi Tsuji, Eva Dokoupilova, Mauro Keiserman, Xin Wang, Sheng Zhong, Reva M McCaskill, Patrick Zueger, Aileen L Pangan, William Tillett

Abstract

Background: Upadacitinib is a Janus kinase inhibitor under evaluation for the treatment of psoriatic arthritis (PsA). We evaluated upadacitinib in patients with PsA and prior inadequate response or intolerance to at least one biologic disease-modifying antirheumatic drug (DMARD).

Methods: In this 24-week randomised, placebo-controlled, double-blind, phase 3 trial, 642 patients were randomised (2:2:1:1) to once per day upadacitinib 15 mg or 30 mg, placebo followed by upadacitinib 15 mg or placebo followed by upadacitinib 30 mg at week 24. The primary endpoint was the proportion of patients achieving American College of Rheumatology (ACR) 20 response at week 12. Achievement of minimal disease activity (MDA) was assessed at week 24. Treatment-emergent adverse events are reported for all patients who received at least one dose of trial drug.

Results: At week 12, significantly more patients receiving upadacitinib 15 mg and 30 mg versus placebo achieved ACR20 (56.9% and 63.8% vs 24.1%; p<0.001 for both comparisons). At week 24, MDA was achieved by more upadacitinib 15 mg-treated (25.1%) and 30 mg-treated patients (28.9%) versus placebo (2.8%; p<0.001 for both comparisons). Generally, the rates of treatment-emergent adverse events were similar with placebo and upadacitinib 15 mg and higher with upadacitinib 30 mg at week 24. Rates of serious infections were 0.5%, 0.5% and 2.8% with placebo, upadacitinib 15 mg and upadacitinib 30 mg, respectively.

Conclusion: In this trial of patients with active PsA who had inadequate response or intolerance to at least one biologic DMARD, upadacitinib 15 mg and 30 mg was more effective than placebo over 24 weeks in improving signs and symptoms of PsA.

Clinical trial registration number: NCT03104374.

Keywords: arthritis; biological therapy; psoriatic.

Conflict of interest statement

Competing interests: PJM has received research grants, consulting fees and/or speaker’s fees from AbbVie, Amgen, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol Myers, Celgene, Eli Lilly, Galapagos, Genentech, Gilead, Janssen, Merck, Novartis, Pfizer, Sun Pharma and UCB. KP received honoraria or fees for advisory board, speaker and consultant services from AbbVie, Amgen, Astellas, Baxalta, Baxter, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol Myers Squibb, Celgene, Centocor, Dermira, Eli Lilly, Forward Pharma, Galderma, Genentech, GlaxoSmithKline, Janssen, Kyowa-Hakko Kirin, Leo Pharma, MedImmune, Merck-Serono, Merck Sharp & Dohme, Novartis, Pfizer, Regeneron, Roche, Sanofi-Genzyme, Stiefel, Sun Pharma, Takeda, UCB and Valeant and received research grants from AbbVie, Amgen, Astellas, Baxalta, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol Myers Squibb, Celgene, Centocor, Dermira, Eli Lilly, Galderma, Genentech, GlaxoSmithKline, Janssen, Kyowa-Hakko Kirin, Leo Pharma, MedImmune, Merck-Serono, Merck Sharp & Dohme, Novartis, Pfizer, Regeneron, Roche, Sanofi-Genzyme, Stiefel, Takeda, UCB and Valeant. WT received grant/research support from AbbVie, Celgene and Eli Lilly and is a consultant for AbbVie, Celgene, Eli Lilly, Janssen, Novartis, and Pfizer, Speakers bureau: AbbVie, Amgen, Celgene, Eli Lilly, Janssen, Novartis, UCB and Pfizer. FEVdB received speaker and/or consultancy fees from AbbVie, Celgene, Eli Lilly, Janssen, Merck, Novartis, Pfizer and UCB. ST received speaker fees from AbbVie, Asahi Kasei, Chugai, Daiichi Sankyo, Eli Lilly, Eisai, Mitsubishi Tanabe, Celgene and Novartis Pharma. ED received grant/research support from AbbVie, Eli Lilly, Glaxo Smith & Kline, Novartis, Pfizer, UCB Biopharma SPRL, Sanofi – Aventis, Hexal AG, Gilead, R-Pharm, Janssen-Cilag, Galapagos NV. MK has participated in Advisory Boards and/or lectures for Pfizer, Abbott, Actelion, AstraZeneca, Amgen, Roche, Bristol Myers Squibb and Janssen and has received clinical trial honoraria from Pfizer, Amgen, AstraZeneca, Anthera Pharmaceuticals, Bristol Myers Squibb, Biogen Idec, Celltrion, Eli Lilly, Human Genome Sciences, Novartis, Roche, Sanofi, UCB Inc. AL, JKA, XW, SZ, PZ, ALP and RMM are AbbVie employees and may own AbbVie stock or options.

© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2021. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Proportions of patients achieving (A) ACR20 (B) ACR50 and (C) ACR70 response over 24 weeks (NRI). *p≤0.05 for comparison of upadacitinib 15 mg once per day versus placebo; #p≤0.05 for comparison of upadacitinib 30 mg once per day versus placebo; †Significant in the multiplicity-controlled analysis. ACR20/50/70, 20%/50%/70% improvement in American College of Rheumatology criteria. Results are based on non-responder imputation. 95% CIs for response rate were calculated based on normal approximation to the binominal distribution. 95% CIs for response rate difference were calculated based on normal approximation. Nominal p value was constructed using Cochran-Mantel-Haenszel test adjusted for the main stratification factor of current disease-modifying antirheumatic drug use (yes/no).
Figure 2
Figure 2
Proportion of patients achieving (A) PASI75, (B) PASI90 and (C) PASI100. response over 24 weeks. *p≤0.05; for upadacitinib 15 mg QD versus placebo; #p≤0.05; for upadacitinib 30 mg QD versus placebo; †significant in the multiplicity-controlled analysis. After week 16, assessments have been performed. Patients may use concomitant treatments specifically for psoriasis per investigator judgement. Results are based on non-responder imputation. 95% CIs for response rate were calculated based on normal approximation to the binominal distribution. 95% CIs for response rate difference were calculated based on normal approximation. Nominal p value was constructed using Cochran-Mantel-Haenszel test adjusted for the main stratification factor of current disease-modifying antirheumatic drug use (yes/no). PASI75/90/100, 75%/90%/100% improvement in Psoriasis Area Severity Index; QD, once per day.
Figure 3
Figure 3
Proportion of patients achieving minimal disease activity (MDA) over 24 weeks. *p≤0.05; for upadacitinib 15 mg QD versus placebo; #p≤0.05; for upadacitinib 30 mg QD versus placebo; †significant in the multiplicity-controlled analysis. Results for MDA at week 24 are based on non-responder imputation with additional rescue handling, where MDA at week 24 for patients rescued at week 16 is imputed as non-responder. 95% CIs for response rate were calculated based on normal approximation to the binominal distribution. 95% CIs for response rate difference were calculated based on normal approximation. Nominal p value was constructed using Cochran-Mantel-Haenszel test adjusted for the main stratification factor of current disease-modifying antirheumatic drug use (yes/no). QD, once per day.
Figure 4
Figure 4
Change from baseline in Disease Activity in Psoriatic Arthritis (DAPSA) score. *p≤0.05; for upadacitinib 15 mg QD versus placebo; #p≤0.05; for upadacitinib 30 mg QD versus placebo. Within group least square mean and 95% CI, and between group least square mean, 95% CI and nominal p value are based on mixed-effect model repeated measurement (MMRM) analysis with unstructured variance-covariance matrix, including treatment, visit, treatment-by-visit interaction, the stratification factor current disease-modifying antirheumatic drug use (yes/no) as fixed factors and the continuous fixed covariate of baseline measurement. QD, once per day.

References

    1. Coates LC, Kavanaugh A, Mease PJ, et al. . Group for research and assessment of psoriasis and psoriatic arthritis 2015 treatment recommendations for psoriatic arthritis. Arthritis Rheumatol 2016;68:1060–71. 10.1002/art.39573
    1. Gossec L, Baraliakos X, Kerschbaumer A, et al. . EULAR recommendations for the management of psoriatic arthritis with pharmacological therapies: 2019 update. Ann Rheum Dis 2020;79:700–12. 10.1136/annrheumdis-2020-217159
    1. Singh JA, Guyatt G, Ogdie A, et al. . Special article: 2018 American College of Rheumatology/National psoriasis Foundation guideline for the treatment of psoriatic arthritis. Arthritis Care Res 2019;71:2–29. 10.1002/acr.23789
    1. Mease PJ, van der Heijde D, Ritchlin CT, et al. . Ixekizumab, an interleukin-17A specific monoclonal antibody, for the treatment of biologic-naive patients with active psoriatic arthritis: results from the 24-week randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled and active (adalimumab)-controlled period of the phase III trial SPIRIT-P1. Ann Rheum Dis 2017;76:79–87. 10.1136/annrheumdis-2016-209709
    1. Mease P, van der Heijde D, Landewé R, et al. . Secukinumab improves active psoriatic arthritis symptoms and inhibits radiographic progression: primary results from the randomised, double-blind, phase III future 5 study. Ann Rheum Dis 2018;77:890–7. 10.1136/annrheumdis-2017-212687
    1. Mease P, Hall S, FitzGerald O, et al. . Tofacitinib or adalimumab versus placebo for psoriatic arthritis. N Engl J Med 2017;377:1537–50. 10.1056/NEJMoa1615975
    1. Mease P, Coates LC, Helliwell PS, et al. . Efficacy and safety of filgotinib, a selective Janus kinase 1 inhibitor, in patients with active psoriatic arthritis (EQUATOR): results from a randomised, placebo-controlled, phase 2 trial. Lancet 2018;392:2367–77. 10.1016/S0140-6736(18)32483-8
    1. McInnes IB, Kavanaugh A, Gottlieb AB, et al. . Efficacy and safety of ustekinumab in patients with active psoriatic arthritis: 1 year results of the phase 3, multicentre, double-blind, placebo-controlled PSUMMIT 1 trial. Lancet 2013;382:780–9. 10.1016/S0140-6736(13)60594-2
    1. Deodhar A, Gottlieb AB, Boehncke W-H, et al. . Efficacy and safety of guselkumab in patients with active psoriatic arthritis: a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 2 study. Lancet 2018;391:2213–24. 10.1016/S0140-6736(18)30952-8
    1. Parmentier JM, Voss J, Graff C, et al. . In vitro and in vivo characterization of the JAK1 selectivity of upadacitinib (ABT-494). BMC Rheumatol 2018;2:23. 10.1186/s41927-018-0031-x
    1. Burmester GR, Kremer JM, Van den Bosch F, et al. . Safety and efficacy of upadacitinib in patients with rheumatoid arthritis and inadequate response to conventional synthetic disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs (SELECT-NEXT): a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled phase 3 trial. Lancet 2018;391:2503–12. 10.1016/S0140-6736(18)31115-2
    1. Fleischmann R, Pangan AL, Song I-H, et al. . Upadacitinib versus placebo or adalimumab in patients with rheumatoid arthritis and an inadequate response to methotrexate: results of a phase III, double-blind, randomized controlled trial. Arthritis Rheumatol 2019;71:1788–800. 10.1002/art.41032
    1. Genovese MC, Fleischmann R, Combe B, et al. . Safety and efficacy of upadacitinib in patients with active rheumatoid arthritis refractory to biologic disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs (SELECT-BEYOND): a double-blind, randomised controlled phase 3 trial. Lancet 2018;391:2513–24. 10.1016/S0140-6736(18)31116-4
    1. Smolen JS, Pangan AL, Emery P, et al. . Upadacitinib as monotherapy in patients with active rheumatoid arthritis and inadequate response to methotrexate (SELECT-MONOTHERAPY): a randomised, placebo-controlled, double-blind phase 3 study. Lancet 2019;393:2303–11. 10.1016/S0140-6736(19)30419-2
    1. van Vollenhoven R, Takeuchi T, Pangan AL, et al. . Efficacy and safety of Upadacitinib monotherapy in Methotrexate-naïve patients with moderately to severely active rheumatoid arthritis (SELECT-EARLY): a randomized, double-blind, Active-comparator, multi-center, Multi-country trial. Arthritis Rheumatol 2020. 10.1002/art.41384. [Epub ahead of print: 08 Jul 2020].
    1. Taylor W, Gladman D, Helliwell P, et al. . Classification criteria for psoriatic arthritis: development of new criteria from a large international study. Arthritis Rheum 2006;54:2665–73. 10.1002/art.21972
    1. Fries JF, Spitz PW, Young DY. The dimensions of health outcomes: the health assessment questionnaire, disability and pain scales. J Rheumatol 1982;9:789–93.
    1. Chandran V, Bhella S, Schentag C, et al. . Functional assessment of chronic illness therapy-fatigue scale is valid in patients with psoriatic arthritis. Ann Rheum Dis 2007;66:936–9. 10.1136/ard.2006.065763
    1. Ware J, Kosinski MA, Dewey JE. How to score version two of the SF-36 health survey. Lincoln, RI: Quality Metric, 2000.
    1. Langley RGB, Feldman SR, Nyirady J, et al. . The 5-point investigator's global assessment (IgA) scale: a modified tool for evaluating plaque psoriasis severity in clinical trials. J Dermatolog Treat 2015;26:23–31. 10.3109/09546634.2013.865009
    1. Fredriksson T, Pettersson U. Severe psoriasis-oral therapy with a new retinoid. Dermatologica 1978;157:238–44. 10.1159/000250839
    1. Armstrong AW, Banderas B, Foley C, et al. . Development and psychometric evaluation of the self-assessment of psoriasis symptoms (SAPS) - clinical trial and the SAPS - real world patient-reported outcomes. J Dermatolog Treat 2017;28:505–14. 10.1080/09546634.2017.1290206
    1. Coates LC, Fransen J, Helliwell PS. Defining minimal disease activity in psoriatic arthritis: a proposed objective target for treatment. Ann Rheum Dis 2010;69:48–53. 10.1136/ard.2008.102053
    1. Healy PJ, Helliwell PS. Measuring clinical enthesitis in psoriatic arthritis: assessment of existing measures and development of an instrument specific to psoriatic arthritis. Arthritis Rheum 2008;59:686–91. 10.1002/art.23568
    1. Maksymowych WP, Mallon C, Morrow S, et al. . Development and validation of the spondyloarthritis research Consortium of Canada (SPARCC) Enthesitis index. Ann Rheum Dis 2009;68:948–53. 10.1136/ard.2007.084244
    1. Helliwell PS, Firth J, Ibrahim GH, et al. . Development of an assessment tool for dactylitis in patients with psoriatic arthritis. J Rheumatol 2005;32:1745–50.
    1. Schoels M Psoriatic arthritis indices. Clin Exp Rheumatol 2014;32:109–12.
    1. Gladman D, Rigby W, Azevedo VF, et al. . Tofacitinib for psoriatic arthritis in patients with an inadequate response to TNF inhibitors. N Engl J Med 2017;377:1525–36. 10.1056/NEJMoa1615977
    1. Nash P, Kirkham B, Okada M, et al. . Ixekizumab for the treatment of patients with active psoriatic arthritis and an inadequate response to tumour necrosis factor inhibitors: results from the 24-week randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled period of the SPIRIT-P2 phase 3 trial. Lancet 2017;389:2317–27. 10.1016/S0140-6736(17)31429-0
    1. Mease PJ, McInnes IB, Kirkham B, et al. . Secukinumab inhibition of interleukin-17A in patients with psoriatic arthritis. N Engl J Med 2015;373:1329–39. 10.1056/NEJMoa1412679

Source: PubMed

3
Abonner