BILAG-based Composite Lupus Assessment Research Articles

Efficacy and Safety of Upadacitinib or Elsubrutinib Alone or in Combination for Systemic Lupus Erythematosus: A Phase 2 Randomized Controlled Trial.

The 48-week, phase 2 SLEek study (NCT03978520) evaluated the efficacy and safety of upadacitinib (Janus kinase inhibitor) and elsubrutinib (Bruton's tyrosine kinase inhibitor) alone or in combination (ABBV-599) in adults with moderately to severely active systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE). Patients were randomized 1:1:1:1:1 to once-daily (QD) ABBV-599 high dose (HD; elsubrutinib 60mg + upadacitinib 30mg), ABBV-599 low dose (LD; elsubrutinib 60mg + upadacitinib 15mg), elsubrutinib 60mg, upadacitinib 30mg, or placebo. The primary endpoint was the proportion of patients achieving both SLE Responder Index-4 (SRI-4) and glucocorticoid dose ≤10mg QD at week 24. Additional assessments through week 48 included British Isles Lupus Assessment Group-based Composite Lupus Assessment (BICLA) and Lupus Low Disease Activity State (LLDAS) responses, number of flares, time to first flare, and adverse events. The study enrolled 341 patients. The ABBV-599LD and elsubrutinib arms were discontinued after a planned interim analysis showed lack of efficacy (no safety concerns). More patients achieved the primary endpoint with upadacitinib (54.8%; P=0.028) and ABBV-599HD (48.5%; P=0.081) versus placebo (37.3%). SRI-4, BICLA, and LLDAS response rates were higher for both upadacitinib and ABBV-599HD versus placebo at weeks 24 and 48. Flares were reduced and time to first flare through week 48 was substantially delayed with both upadacitinib and ABBV-599HD versus placebo. No new safety signals were observed beyond those previously reported for upadacitinib or elsubrutinib. Upadacitinib 30mg alone or in combination with elsubrutinib (ABBV-599HD) demonstrated significant improvements in SLE disease activity, reduced flares and were well tolerated through 48 weeks.

Evaluation of RNase therapy in systemic lupus erythematosus: a randomised phase 2a clinical trial of RSLV-132

BackgroundCirculating, extracellular RNA is the primary trigger of type I interferon in systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE), and interferon is known to play a central pathogenic role in the disease. RSLV-132...

Model-based meta-analysis using latent variable modeling to set benchmarks for new treatments of systemic lupus erythematosus.

Several investigational agents are under evaluation in systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) clinical trials but quantitative frameworks to enable comparison of their efficacy to reference benchmark treatments are lacking. To benchmark SLE treatment effects and identify clinically important covariates, we developed a model-based meta-analysis (MBMA) within a latent variable model framework for efficacy end points and SLE composite end point scores (BILAG-based Composite Lupus Assessment and Systemic Lupus Erythematosus Responder Index) using aggregate-level data on approved and investigational therapeutics. SLE trials were searched using PubMed and www.clinicaltrials.gov for treatment name, SLE and clinical trial as search criteria that resulted in four data structures: (1) study and investigational agent, (2) dose and regimen, (3) baseline descriptors, and (4) outcomes. The final dataset consisted of 25 studies and 81 treatment arms evaluating 16 different agents. A previously developed (K Goteti etal. 2022) SLE latent variable model of data from placebo arms (placebo + standard of care treatments) was used to describe aggregate SLE end points over time for the various SLE placebo and treatment arms in a Bayesian MBMA framework. Continuous dose-effect relationships using a maximum effect model were included for anifrolumab, belimumab, CC-220 (iberdomide), epratuzumab, lulizumab pegol, and sifalimumab, whereas the remaining treatments were modeled as discrete dose effects. The final MBMA model was then used to benchmark these compounds with respect to the maximal efficacy on the latent variable compared to the placebo. This MBMA illustrates the application of latent variable models in understanding the trajectories of composite end points in chronic diseases and should enable model-informed development of new investigational agents in SLE.

Safety and efficacy of biological agents in the treatment of Systemic Lupus Erythematosus (SLE)

BackgroundTo determine the safety and efficacy of biological agents used in the treatment of systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) in adults.MethodsSystematic review and meta-analysis following PRISMA guidelines.Data sourcesMEDLINE (through Pubmed), EMBASE, Cochrane library, Clinicaltrials.gov, Australianclinicaltrials.gov.au, ANZCTR.org.au and WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform for studies published from 20 May 2021 and 15 years prior. A grey literature search was performed and completed on 31 May 2021.Study criteriaPhase II, III or quasi randomised controlled trials, studies with only cerebral or cutaneous lupus were excluded. Data extraction: Two authors independently screened studies for eligibility, extracted, reviewed data for accuracy, and used the Cochrane tool to assess risk of bias.ResultsForty-four studies were identified, consisting of 15 groups of drugs and 25 different biological agents, totalling 16,889 patients. The main outcomes assessed included Systemic Lupus Erythematosus Responder Index (SRI), BILAG-Based Composite Lupus Assessment (BICLA) and combined combined/partial renal remission (CRR/PRR).Four groups of biologics were found to improve outcomes. Anti-interferons: Anifrolumab increased BICLA response and SRI 5 to 8, decreased prednisone dosages, with increased herpes zoster infections, but fewer serious adverse events. Sifalimumab improved SRI but also increased herpes zoster infections. Anti BAFF/BLyS and/or APRIL: Belimumab consistently improved SRI 4, decreased prednisone dosages, increased combined CRR/PRR, and had no adverse safety outcomes. Tabalumab increased SRI 5 at 52 weeks with no steroid sparing effect but was associated with increased infusion related adverse events. Telitacicept improved SRI 4 at 52 weeks, with no increased adverse events, though data was rather sparse. Anti CD-20 monoclonal antibody, Obinutuzumab increased combined CRR/PRR at 1 and 2 years. Anti IL12/23 monoclonal antibody, Ustekinumab, increased SRI 4 to 6, but not BICLA at 24 weeks, with no concerning safety outcomes.ConclusionMultiple biologic agents are shown in high quality studies to have a significant therapeutic impact on outcomes in SLE.

OA14 The role of anifrolumab in treating life threatening systemic lupus erythematosus with severe mucocutaneous involvement

OA14 The role of anifrolumab in treating life threatening systemic lupus erythematosus with severe mucocutaneous involvement

Performance of systemic lupus erythematosus responder index for detecting clinician-rated responders in patients with active systemic lupus erythematosus.

Disease activity measures in systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) are critical tools for trial endpoints. We aimed to evaluate the performance of current treatment outcome measures in SLE. Individuals with active SLE with a clinical SLE Disease Activity Index-2000 (SLEDAI-2K) score of at least 4 were followed up for two or more visits and classified as responders and non-responders based on a physician's judgment of improvement. The treatment outcome measures including SLEDAI-2K responder index-50 (SRI-50), SLE responder index-4 (SRI-4), substituting SLEDAI-2K with SRI-50 in SRI-4 (SRI-4(50)), SLE Disease Activity Score (SLE-DAS) responder index (Δ ≥ 1.72) and the British Isles Lupus Assessment Group (BILAG)-based Composite Lupus Assessment (BICLA) were tested. The performance of those measures was shown by sensitivity, specificity, predictive value, positive likelihood ratio, accuracy, and agreement against a physician-rated improvement. Twenty-seven patients with active SLE were followed. The total cumulative pair of visits (baseline and follow up) was 48. The overall accuracies (95% confidence interval [CI]) of SRI-50, SRI-4, SRI-4(50), SLE-DAS, and BICLA for detecting responders in all patients were 72.9 (58.2-84.7), 75.0 (60.4-86.4), 72.9 (58.2-84.7), 75.0 (60.4-86.4), and 64.6 (49.5-77.8), respectively. Subgroup analyses of lupus nephritis (23 patients had a pair of visits) found the accuracies (95% CI) of SRI-50, SRI-4, SRI-4(50), SLE-DAS, and BICLA were 82.6 (61.2-95.0), 73.9 (51.6-89.8), 82.6 (61.2-95.0), 82.6 (61.2-95.0), and 78.3 (56.3-92.5), respectively. However, there were no significant differences between the groups (P > 0.05). SRI-4, SRI-50, SRI-4(50), SLE-DAS responder index, and BICLA demonstrated comparable abilities to identify clinician-rated responders in patients with active SLE and lupus nephritis.

Lupus low disease activity state attainment in the phase 3 TULIP trials of anifrolumab in active systemic lupus erythematosus

ObjectivesIn patients with systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE), lupus low disease activity state (LLDAS) attainment is associated with improved outcomes. We investigated LLDAS attainment in anifrolumab-treated patients.MethodsWe performed post hoc analysis...

Population Pharmacokinetics and Exposure-Response for Dapirolizumab Pegol From a Phase 2b Trial in Patients With Systemic Lupus Erythematosus.

Systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) is a systemic, autoimmune disease characterized by chronic inflammation and organ damage. Dapirolizumab pegol inhibits CD40 ligand (CD40L) and is currently undergoing phase 3 trials for the treatment of SLE. To describe the pharmacokinetic characteristics of dapirolizumab pegol and the relationship between exposure and probability of achieving a British Isles Lupus Assessment Group-based Composite Lupus Assessment (BICLA) response, a population pharmacokinetic (popPK) model and an exposure-response model were developed, based on results of the phase 2b trial (RISE; NCT02804763) of dapirolizumab pegol in SLE. Dapirolizumab pegol pharmacokinetics were found to be dose proportional and well described by a 2-compartment model with first-order elimination from the central compartment. In the popPK model, body weight was the only significant covariate. The average concentration of dapirolizumab pegol, derived from the popPK model, was incorporated into the exposure-response model. Overall, the exposure-response model showed that treatment with dapirolizumab pegol increased the probability of transitioning from BICLA "Nonresponder" to "Responder." No significant covariates on BICLA responder status were identified. Notably, the half maximal effective concentration was greater for the transition from "Responder" to "Nonresponder" (150 µg/mL) than the transition from "Nonresponder" to "Responder" (12 µg/mL), indicating that sustained dapirolizumab pegol concentrations may be required to maintain BICLA response. In conclusion, dapirolizumab pegol pharmacokinetics were as expected for a PEGylated molecule and results from the exposure-response model indicate that a favorable dapirolizumab pegol effect was identified for both BICLA "Nonresponder" to "Responder" and "Responder" to "Nonresponder" transition probabilities.

Time to onset of clinical response to anifrolumab in patients with SLE: pooled data from the phase III TULIP-1 and TULIP-2 trials

ObjectivesTo evaluate the time course of clinical response following anifrolumab treatment in patients with SLE.MethodsA post hoc analysis was conducted using pooled data from phase III, randomised, 52-week, placebo-controlled, Treatment...

Disease trajectory of SLE clinical endpoints and covariates affecting disease severity and probability of response: Analysis of pooled patient-level placebo (Standard-of-Care) data to enable model-informed drug development.

Systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) is an autoimmune disease affecting multiple organ systems. Many investigational agents have failed or shown only modest effects when added to standard of care (SoC) therapy in placebo-controlled trials, and only two therapies have been approved for SLE in the last 60 years. Clinical trial outcomes have shown discordance in drug effects between clinical endpoints. Herein, we characterized longitudinal disease activity in the SLE population and the sources of variability by developing a latent disease trajectory model for SLE component endpoints (Systemic Lupus Erythematosus Disease Activity Index [SLEDAI], Physician's Global Assessment [PGA], British Isles Lupus Assessment Group Index [BILAG]) and composite endpoints (Systemic Lupus Erythematosus Responder Index [SRI], BILAG-based Composite Lupus Assessment [BICLA], and Lupus Low Disease Activity State [LLDAS]) using patient-level historical SoC data from nine phase II and III studies. Across all endpoints, in predictions up to 52 weeks from the final disease trajectory model, the following baseline covariates were associated with a greater decrease in SLE disease activity and higher response to placebo + SoC: Hispanic ethnicity from Central/South America, absence of hypocomplementemia, recent SLE diagnosis, and high baseline disease activity score using SLEDAI and BILAG separately. No discernible differences were observed in the trajectory of response to placebo + SoC across different SoC medications (antimalarial and immunosuppressant such as mycophenolate, methotrexate, and azathioprine). Across all endpoints, disease trajectory showed no difference in Asian versus non-Asian patients, supporting Asia-inclusive global SLE drug development. These results describe the first population approach to support a model-informed drug development framework in SLE.

Relationship Between Anifrolumab Pharmacokinetics, Pharmacodynamics, and Efficacy in Patients With Moderate to Severe Systemic Lupus Erythematosus.

This study aimed to elucidate the pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic and pharmacodynamic/efficacy relationships of anifrolumab, a type I interferon receptor antibody, in patients with moderate to severe systemic lupus erythematosus. Data were pooled from the randomized, 52‐week, placebo‐controlled TULIP‐1 and TULIP‐2 trials of intravenous anifrolumab (150 mg/300 mg, every 4 weeks for 48 weeks). Pharmacodynamic neutralization was measured with a 21‐gene type I interferon gene signature (21‐IFNGS) in patients with high IFNGS. The pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic relationship was analyzed graphically and modeled with a nonlinear mixed‐effects model. British Isles Lupus Assessment Group–based Composite Lupus Assessment (BICLA) response rates were compared across 21‐IFNGS neutralization quartiles. Overall, 819 patients received ≥1 dose of anifrolumab or placebo, of whom 676 were IFNGS high. Over 52 weeks, higher average anifrolumab serum concentrations were associated with increased median 21‐IFNGS neutralization, which was rapid and sustained with anifrolumab 300 mg (>80%, weeks 12‐52), lower and delayed with anifrolumab 150 mg (>50%, week 52), and minimal with placebo. The proportion of patients with week 24 anifrolumab trough concentration exceeding the IC80 (3.88 μg/mL) was greater with anifrolumab 300 mg vs anifrolumab 150 mg (≈83% vs ≈27%), owing to the higher estimated median trough concentration (15.6 vs 0.2 μg/mL). BICLA response rates increased with 21‐IFNGS neutralization; more patients had a BICLA response in the highest vs lowest neutralization quartiles at week 52 (58.1% vs 37.6%). In conclusion, anifrolumab 300 mg every 4 weeks rapidly, substantially, and sustainably neutralized the 21‐IFNGS and was associated with clinical efficacy, supporting this dosing regimen in patients with systemic lupus erythematosus.

Concordance and discordance in SLE clinical trial outcome measures: analysis of three anifrolumab phase 2/3 trials

ObjectivesIn the anifrolumab systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) trial programme, there was one trial (TULIP-1) in which BILAG-based Composite Lupus Assessment (BICLA) responses favoured anifrolumab over placebo, but the SLE Responder...

Anifrolumab efficacy and safety by type I interferon gene signature and clinical subgroups in patients with SLE: post hoc analysis of pooled data from two phase III trials

ObjectivesTo characterise the efficacy and safety of anifrolumab in patients with systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) according to interferon gene signature (IFNGS), demographic and clinical subgroups.MethodsWe performed post hoc analyses of...

Clinical meaningfulness of a British Isles Lupus Assessment Group-based Composite Lupus Assessment response in terms of patient-reported outcomes in moderate to severe systemic lupus erythematosus: a post-hoc analysis of the phase 3 TULIP-1 and TULIP-2 trials of anifrolumab

The British Isles Lupus Assessment Group-based Composite Lupus Assessment (BICLA) is a validated global measure of treatment response in systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) clinical trials but does not include patient-reported outcomes. To evaluate the clinical meaningfulness of a BICLA response from the patient perspective, we aimed to analyse patient-reported outcomes by BICLA responses with anifrolumab or placebo in patients with moderate to severe SLE. We did a post-hoc analysis of pooled data from the phase 3 TULIP-1 (NCT02446912) and TULIP-2 (NCT02446899) trials of anifrolumab, which assessed health-related quality of life using the Short Form 36 Health Survey (SF-36; version 2) and Lupus Quality of Life, fatigue using the Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy-Fatigue (FACIT-F), pain using the Numerical Rating Scale, and disease activity using Patient Global Assessment. Changes from baseline and proportions of patients reporting improvements in patient-reported outcomes greater than or equal to the minimum clinically important differences and scores greater than or equal to the normative values were compared in BICLA responders and non-responders and by treatment group (intravenous anifrolumab 300 mg or placebo). 726 patients were included in the TULIP trials, of whom 366 received placebo (184 patients in TULIP-1 and 182 in TULIP-2) and 360 received anifrolumab 300 mg (180 patients in each trial). The mean patient age was 41·8 years (SD 11·9). 674 (93%) patients were female, 52 (7%) were male, and 479 (66%) were White; 283 (39%) were BICLA responders and 443 (61%) were BICLA non-responders. Compared with non-responders, BICLA responders reported greater mean improvements from baseline at week 52 in Patient Global Assessment, SF-36, Lupus Quality of Life, FACIT-F, and pain Numerical Rating Scale scores (all nominal p<0·0053). Compared with non-responders, a greater proportion of BICLA responders reported improvements greater than or equal to the minimum clinically important difference across all SF-36 domains; eg, Physical Component Summary (165 [60%] of 277 for responders vs 63 [15%] of 416 for non-responders), Mental Component Summary (140 [51%] of 276 vs 59 [15%] of 416), and role physical (184 [70%] of 264 vs 76 [19%] of 398); Lupus Quality of Life domains; eg, physical health (151 [58%] of 262 vs 60 [15%] of 396), and intimate relationships (77 [41%] of 187 vs 33 [11%] of 286), and FACIT-F (155 [56%] of 276 vs 66 [15%] of 439). Similarly, a greater proportion of BICLA responders had scores equal to or greater than the normative values across all SF-36 domains and FACIT-F compared with BICLA non-responders at week 52. Patients who received anifrolumab reported greater numerical improvements in Patient Global Assessment, SF-36, Lupus Quality of Life, FACIT-F, and pain Numerical Rating Scale scores than those who received placebo. BICLA responders reported significant and clinically meaningful improvements in Patient Global Assessment, health-related quality of life, fatigue, and pain compared with BICLA non-responders. More patients with moderate to severe SLE who received anifrolumab were BICLA responders and had improved health-related quality of life, fatigue, and pain than those who received placebo. AstraZeneca.

Relationship of anifrolumab pharmacokinetics with efficacy and safety in patients with systemic lupus erythematosus.

ObjectivesTo characterize the relationship of anifrolumab pharmacokinetics with efficacy and safety in patients with moderate to severe SLE despite standard therapy, using pooled data from two phase 3 trials.MethodsTULIP-1 and TULIP-2 were randomized, placebo-controlled, 52-week trials of intravenous anifrolumab (every 4 weeks for 48 weeks). For the exposure–response analysis, BILAG-based Composite Lupus Assessment (BICLA) or SLE Responder Index [SRI(4)] response rates at week 52 in each quartile/tertile of average anifrolumab serum concentration (Cave) were compared for anifrolumab and placebo in all-comers, patients who completed treatment, and IFN gene signature (IFNGS)-high patients who completed treatment, using average marginal effect logistic regression. Relationships between exposure and key safety events were assessed graphically.ResultsOf patients in TULIP-1/TULIP-2 who received anifrolumab (150 mg, n = 91; 300 mg, n = 356) or placebo (n = 366), 574 completed treatment, of whom 470 were IFNGS high. In the exposure–efficacy analyses, BICLA and SRI(4) treatment differences favouring anifrolumab 300 mg vs placebo were observed across Cave subgroups and all analysis populations. Logistic regression identified Cave as a significant covariate for predicted BICLA response, as higher anifrolumab Cave predicted greater efficacy. There was no evidence of exposure-driven incidence of key safety events through week 52 in patients receiving anifrolumab 150 or 300 mg.ConclusionWhile higher Cave predicted greater efficacy, consistent positive benefit favouring anifrolumab 300 mg vs placebo was observed in BICLA and SRI(4) responses across Cave subgroups in the TULIP trials. There was no evidence of exposure-driven safety events.ClinicalTrial.gov numbersNCT02446912, NCT02446899

Clinician-reported outcome measures in lupus trials: a problem worth solving.

Systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) remains a disease of high unmet clinical need. Because of substantial patient heterogeneity, the execution of clinical trials that successfully determine the efficacy of novel therapeutics compared with placebo is a continuous challenge. Clinician-reported outcome measures of treatment response used in SLE trials have evolved from the use of individual disease activity indices, including the SLE Disease Activity Index (SLEDAI) and British Isles Lupus Assessment Group (BILAG), to composite responder definitions such as the SLE Responder Index (SRI) and BILAG-Based Composite Lupus Assessment (BICLA), which are based on these indices. However, these approaches have notable drawbacks and defining the optimal clinical trial outcome measure for SLE remains a research goal. In this Viewpoint, we explore the strengths and limitations of existing indices and composite assessments, illustrating features which should be investigated in future analysis of trial data. Further, we provide a platform from which to advance new approaches to endpoint design, which is crucial to improve the interpretability and success of subsequent clinical trials in SLE.

PMS41 The Challenges Of Comparing Therapeutic Responses Of Systemic Lupus Erythematosus (SLE) Treatments: A Network Meta-Analysis (NMA) On Two Composite Endpoint

Systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) is a chronic autoimmune disease with multisystemic involvement. There are no established guidelines to evaluate treatment responses, which makes evaluation of potential SLE interventional treatments challenging. Composite endpoints (CEPs) have been developed to detect therapeutic effects across different disease manifestations. The most commonly used CEPs are SLE Responder Index (SRI-4) and the British Isles Lupus Assessment Group-Based Composite Lupus Assessment (BICLA); the comparability of response levels measured by these two CEPs is not demonstrated. A systematic literature review identified five randomized-controlled trials which investigated 11 active treatments by assessing both SRI-4 and BICLA after 48/52 weeks. A random-effects meta-analysis using a binomial likelihood model was conducted for both CEPs. Treatments were ranked using the surface under the cumulative ranking (SUCRA) curve. SUCRA values range between 0 and 1, with a higher value indicating a higher likelihood of a treatment to be the most effective option. The range of SUCRA values was wider using BICLA (35%–60%) than for SRI-4 (42%–55%), indicating a difference in sensitivity between both endpoints when capturing treatment responses. Treatment rankings varied between both CEPs with the treatment ranked most effective using BICLA (SUCRA=59.7%), only ranked fifth when compared using SRI-4 (SUCRA=47.5%). The second-best treatment in the BICLA comparison (SUCRA=51.7%) was ranked the second-worst in the SRI-4 comparison (SUCRA=41.7%). The treatment ranked first in the SRI-4 comparison (SUCRA=54.6%) occupied the third rank in the BICLA comparison (SUCRA=49.0%). Treatment rankings differed between the two analysed CEPs. This highlights the need for future research to increase the understanding of the unique attributes of the CEPs when considering potential treatments. The difference in sensitivity between CEPs to evaluate and compare therapeutic responses should be considered if indirect treatment comparisons are conducted to appropriately inform formal value assessments and reimbursement decision-making for future interventions in SLE.

Interferon blockade in systemic lupus erythematosus: Light at the end of the tunnel for novel therapies for lupus?

Interferon blockade in systemic lupus erythematosus: Light at the end of the tunnel for novel therapies for lupus?

OP0049 EFFICACY OF ANIFROLUMAB IN ACTIVE SYSTEMIC LUPUS ERYTHEMATOSUS: PATIENT SUBGROUP ANALYSIS OF BICLA RESPONSE IN 2 PHASE 3 TRIALS

Background:Treatment of patients with systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) with the type I interferon (IFN) receptor inhibitor anifrolumab resulted in higher British Isles Lupus Assessment Group (BILAG)–based Composite Lupus Assessment (BICLA) response rates vs placebo at Week 52 in the phase 3 randomized trials, TULIP-2 (primary endpoint; 16.3% difference)1and TULIP-1 (secondary endpoint; 16.4% difference).2BICLA is a validated composite global disease measure that registers both partial and complete improvement within organ systems.Objectives:TULIP-2 and TULIP-1 data were analyzed to evaluate BICLA responses to anifrolumab vs placebo at Week 52 in protocol-defined subgroups of patients with active SLE.Methods:TULIP-2 and TULIP-1 were randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trials that evaluated efficacy and safety of intravenous anifrolumab vs placebo administered every 4 weeks, with the primary endpoints assessed at Week 52, in patients with moderate to severe SLE despite standard-of-care treatment.1,2BICLA responses are defined by all of the following: reduction of baseline BILAG-2004 A and B domain scores to B/C/D and C/D, respectively, and no worsening in any organ system; no worsening of the SLE Disease Activity Index 2000 (SLEDAI-2K) score; no worsening of ≥0.3 points in the Physician’s Global Assessment (range 0–3); no trial treatment discontinuation; and no use of medications restricted by the protocol.3BICLA responses were compared between anifrolumab 300 mg and placebo groups, and robustness of BICLA responses was assessed across protocol-defined subgroups. TULIP-1 data were analyzed incorporating the amended restricted medication rules, as described.2Results:In TULIP-2 and TULIP-1, 180 patients in each trial received anifrolumab 300 mg (182 and 184 patients received placebo, respectively). Baseline demographics, disease characteristics, and standard-of-care medications were balanced between anifrolumab and placebo groups within both TULIP trials. Patients in TULIP-2 and TULIP-1 had comparable BICLA responses (Figure). Across multiple subgroups, higher percentages of patients achieved BICLA responses at Week 52 in the anifrolumab vs placebo arms (Figure). There was concordance of BICLA responses favoring anifrolumab across the protocol-defined subgroups of baseline disease severity (SLEDAI-2K &lt;10 points [difference 15.3%, TULIP-2; 16.9%, TULIP-1] vs ≥10 points [difference 16.7%, TULIP-2; 17.1%, TULIP-1]) and baseline oral corticosteroid use (prednisone or equivalent &lt;10 mg/d [difference 20.1%, TULIP-2; 16.2%, TULIP-1] vs ≥10 mg/d [difference 12.0%, TULIP-2; 17.7%, TULIP-1]). Numerically different BICLA effect sizes between the anifrolumab vs placebo arms were observed in both studies in relation to baseline IFN gene signature status (high [difference 17.3%, TULIP-2; 19.1%, TULIP-1] vs low [difference 11.2%, TULIP-2; 7.5%, TULIP-1]). Other subgroups including age, sex, age at onset, race, and anti-drug antibody status showed similar uniformity of response.Conclusion:The uniformity of robust BICLA response rates across prespecified subgroups in both phase 3 trials shows consistent clinical benefit of anifrolumab irrespective of patient baseline characteristics. However, given the small patient numbers in some subgroups, these results should be interpreted with caution.

SAT0174 FLARE ASSESSMENTS IN PATIENTS WITH ACTIVE SYSTEMIC LUPUS ERYTHEMATOSUS TREATED WITH ANIFROLUMAB IN 2 PHASE 3 TRIALS

Background:Anifrolumab treatment resulted in improved British Isles Lupus Assessment Group (BILAG)–based Composite Lupus Assessment (BICLA) response rates in patients with systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) in the phase 3 TULIP-2 and TULIP-1 trials.1,2In addition, annualized flare rates were lower among the groups treated with anifrolumab compared with placebo.1,2Objectives:TULIP-2 and TULIP-1 data were analyzed to assess the effects of anifrolumab on the number of SLE flares and time to first flare during 52 weeks of treatment.Methods:The randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled TULIP-2 and TULIP-1 trials evaluated efficacy and safety of intravenous anifrolumab 300 mg vs placebo every 4 weeks for 48 weeks, with the primary endpoints assessed at Week 52, in patients with moderate to severe SLE despite standard-of-care treatment. Flares were defined as ≥1 new BILAG-2004 A or ≥2 new (worsening) BILAG-2004 B domain scores compared with the prior month’s visit. Time to first flare was evaluated using a Cox proportional hazards model. Annualized flare rate was analyzed using a negative binomial regression model.Results:In TULIP-2 (anifrolumab, n=180; placebo, n=182) and TULIP-1 (anifrolumab, n=180; placebo, n=184), fewer patients experienced ≥1 BILAG-2004 flare in the anifrolumab groups (TULIP-2: 31.1%, n=56; TULIP-1: 36.1%, n=65) compared with the placebo groups (TULIP-2: 42.3%, n=77; TULIP-1: 43.5%, n=80; Figure 1). Results favoring anifrolumab were observed in time to first flare (TULIP-2: hazard ratio [HR] 0.65, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.46–0.91 and TULIP-1: HR 0.76, 95% CI 0.55–1.06; Figure 2) and BILAG-based annualized flare rates (TULIP-2: adjusted rate ratio 0.67, 95% CI 0.48–0.94 and TULIP-1: rate ratio 0.83, 95% CI 0.60–1.14) across both trials.Conclusion:Across 2 phase 3 trials, we observed reductions in the total number of flares and annualized flare rates, as well as prolongation of time to first flare with anifrolumab treatment compared with placebo. These results support the potential of anifrolumab to reduce disease activity and reduce flares, benefiting patients with SLE.