RA Trials Research Articles

OA02 Longitudinal high throughput proteomics identifies novel proteins associated with inflammation and future response in new-onset, treatment-naïve rheumatoid arthritis

Abstract Background/Aims Despite the availability of effective targeted therapies, only 20-30% achieve low disease activity and even fewer attain remission. There remains a pressing need to identify meaningful biomarkers and disease endotypes to enable precision medicine. We aimed to identify serum protein biomarkers that associate with RA inflammation and future remission in a treatment-naïve, new-onset RA trial cohort. Methods Serum from 105 patients from the ‘VEDERA’ trial (first-line tumour necrosis factor inhibitor + methotrexate [TNFi + MTX] versus methotrexate treat-to-target [MTX-TT]) at baseline, week 24 and 48 were analysed for 92 proteins using the Olink Target 96 Inflammation panel. Clinical and MSUS assessments completed at baseline, weeks 24 and 48 were used for the analyses. Clinical remission was defined as DAS28-ESR ≤ 2.6 and joint-level remission as absence of power Doppler ultrasound synovitis (PDUS). After adjusting for age, gender and seropositive status, Bayesian mixed effects regression (posterior estimates and 95% credible intervals reported) was used to identify association of (i) proteins with clinical disease activity (DAS28-ESR) and joint-level inflammation (total power Doppler ultrasound synovitis (PDUS) scores] and (ii) baseline proteins with future (week 24 or 48) clinical and joint-level remission. Results Longitudinally, out of 92 proteins, 10 and 14 were significantly associated with DAS28-ESR and total PDUS scores respectively, with 3 proteins in common: leukaemia inhibitory factor receptor (LIF-R); fractalkine (CX3CL1); interleukin-10 receptor alpha (IL-10RA). Baseline levels of 9 proteins were associated with future clinical remission (week 24 = 6 proteins; week 48 = 3 proteins) while 6 were associated with future PDUS status (week 24 = 4 proteins; week 48 = 3 proteins). Proteins that were associated with inflammation longitudinally and whose baseline levels associated with future remission included IL-17C, fibroblast growth factor 5 (FGF-5), lymphotoxin alpha and TNF. Posterior estimates and 95% credible intervals for above proteins are reported in Table 1. Conclusion Using longitudinal high-throughput proteomics in a treatment-naïve early onset RA cohort, this study sheds new light on known and novel protein associates of inflammation and future remission. With future validation, these biomarkers could provide mechanistic understanding and allow for individualised treatment strategies to improve outcomes. Disclosure R. Shukla: None. R. Wakefield: None. A. Tan: None. P. Emery: Consultancies; BristolMyersSquibb, AbbVie, Gilead, Galapagos, Eli Lilly, MSD, Pfizer, Novartis, Roche and Samsung. Grants/research support; AbbVie, Eli Lilly, Novartis, BristolMyersSquibb, Pfizer and Roche, outside the submitted work. D. Plant: None. M.H. Buch: Consultancies; AbbVie, Arxx Therapeutics, Boehringer Ingelheim, Galapagos, Gilead, and Pfizer; and speaker fees from AbbVie, CESAS Medical, Galapagos, Gilead, Medistream, and Pfizer. Grants/research support; grant support from Gilead.

Overall survival information and population correspondence for FDA cancer accelerated approval indications between 2006 and 2021.

e13653 Background: The US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) Accelerated Approval Program (AAP) was instituted to allow patients earlier access to medications that address large unmet need and are approved based on surrogate endpoints. Recently, approvals have been criticized for not providing overall survival data, and for confirmatory trials conducted in alternative populations. We investigated the availability of overall survival (OS) data for cancer accelerated approval (AA) indications and the correspondence between the population providing OS information and that of the original indication to assess the merit of these critiques. Methods: Approval letters and labels of cancer therapy products approved between January 1, 2006 and June 31, 2021 based on their verification status as of June 10, 2022 were identified from Drugs@FDA. Information was extracted irrespective of the final decision. Information about the exact indications and the trials that were used for AA and were cited for RA (confirmatory trial). OS data was searched for both AA and RA trials irrespective of approval dates, linked by NCT numbers identified in labels and letters. When OS was available only from the trial indicated for the RA, level of correspondence between the source of the OS data and the AA indication were described and then categorized in terms of the population characteristics, treatment lines, disease stage and changes in treatment regimen, to indicate level of correspondence. Results: OS data is available for 83% of closed AAs: 50 among the 57 converted and 12 among 18 withdrawn AAs. Further OS data was identified for seven AAs among the 55 ongoing reviews, creating a set of OS data for 69 out of the 130 total number of AAs identified. Exact or very good population overlap is evident in 50% of cases, defined as the availability of the trial reporting results for a population exact or very close to the original AA population; line change down was defined if the RA trial was conducted in an earlier line (without overlap with the original AA trial); and some additional categories were identified. Conclusions: Overall, OS information was available, and in half of the cases it was reported for a population very close to the original AA indication. Likely for ethical and practical reasons, RA trials are conducted in an indication that differs from the original AA indication and changes in the population was with the consent of the FDA. Policy discussions about AAP are incomplete without assessing its impact on survival and real-world considerations for conducting confirmatory trials. [Table: see text]

Exclusion of older adults from randomized controlled trials in rheumatoid arthritis.

To assess eligibility criteria that either explicitly or implicitly exclude older patients from randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in RA. Our analysis included RCTs of pharmacological interventions registered with ClinicalTrials.gov and started between 2013 and 2022. Co-primary outcomes were proportions of trials with an upper age limit and the eligibility criteria indirectly increasing risk of the exclusion of older adults. A total of 143/290 (49%) trials had an upper age limit of 85 years or less. Multivariable analysis showed that the odds of an upper age limit were significantly lower in trials performed in the USA [adjusted odds ratio (aOR), 0.34; CI, 0.12-0.99; P = 0.04] and intercontinental trials (aOR, 0.4; CI, 0.18-0.87; P = 0.02). In total, 154/290 (53%) trials had at least one eligibility criterion implicitly excluding older adults. These included specific comorbidities (n = 114; 39%), compliance concerns (n = 67; 23%), and broad and vague exclusion criteria (n = 57; 20%); however, we found no significant associations between these criteria and trial characteristics. Overall, 217 (75%) trials either explicitly or implicitly excluded older patients; we also noted a trend towards increasing proportion of these trials over time. Only one trial (0.3%) enrolled solely patients aged 65 and older. Older adults are commonly excluded from RCTs in RA based on both age limits and other eligibility criteria. This seriously limits the evidence base for the treatment of older patients in clinical practice. Given the growing prevalence of RA in older adults, relevant RCTs should be more inclusive to them.

The effects of hyperbaric oxygen on MRI findings in rheumatoid arthritis: A pilot study

Background: Rheumatoid arthritis is a debilitating and destructive disease for which limited therapeutic options exist. Objective: This report summarizes serial magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) findings from nine study participants treated with hyperbaric oxygen (HBO2) therapy and expands upon an earlier pilot study that showed improvement in disease activity and joint pain as determined by multiple, validated clinical measures. Methods: Rheumatoid arthritis patients received 30 hyperbaric oxygen treatments over six to 10 weeks. MRI with and without contrast was completed at baseline, and at three- and six-month intervals following initiation of HBO2 therapy. Ratings were based on Outcome Measures in Rheumatology Clinical Trials (OMERACT) Rheumatoid Arthritis Magnetic Resonance Imaging Score (RAMRIS) criteria, the standard method for quantification of inflammation and damage by MRI in RA trials. Results: Using RAMRIS criteria, nine of nine patients demonstrated no radiologic progression of erosions, synovitis, or bone marrow edema at three- and six-month scans. Conclusion: Our findings suggest that HBO2 therapy may be useful as an adjunctive or alternative treatment to disease-modifying drugs for rheumatoid arthritis.

Potential Roles of Glucagon-Like Peptide 1 Receptor Agonists (GLP-1 RAs) in Nondiabetic Populations.

Glucagon-like peptide 1 receptor agonists (GLP-1 RAs) have been observed in several large cardiovascular outcome trials to significantly reduce the incidence of major cardiovascular event (MACE) with type 2 diabetic patients. The clinical trials of GLP-1 RAs, including lixisenatide, exenatide, liraglutide, semaglutide, albiglutide, and dulaglutide, are associated with a significantly 14% lower risk of MACE in patients with T2DM and a history of CV disease, and with a nonsignificantly 6% lower risk in patients without history of CV disease. Some of the interpretation with GLP-1 RA trials suggested the possible role of glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists (GLP-1 RAs) in primary prevention of cardiovascular diseases in nondiabetic individual, echoed by a recent editorial redefining the role of GLP-1 RAs being beyond glycaemic control. The narrative review provides an in-depth insight into GLP-1 RA use guideline in different countries and regions of the world and examines the safety and concern of GLP-1 RA use. The narrative review draws the comparison of GLP-1 RA use between diabetic and nondiabetic individual in terms of cardiovascular and metabolic benefits and points out the direction of future clinical trials of GLP-1 RAs in nondiabetic individuals. The focus of the review is on GLP-1 RAs' preventive roles in nondiabetic individuals with cardiovascular disease, chronic kidney diseases, obesity, dyslipidaemia, hypertension, nonalcoholic fatty liver diseases, polycystic ovarian syndrome (PCOS), and perioperative complications of bariatric surgery, albeit in small studies and subset analysis of clinical trials of diabetic patients.

P217 Describing the evolution of concordance/discordance between DAS28-ESR and ultrasound power Doppler synovitis in a treatment-naïve early RA cohort

Abstract Background/Aims Discordance between DAS28-ESR and ultrasound (US)-detected power Doppler synovitis (PDUS) can lead to unnecessary DMARD cycling. Using DAS28-ESR and PDUS in an early RA trial cohort, we aimed to identify and describe concordance and discordance at diagnosis and evaluate their proportional change in response to treatment. Methods The ‘VEDERA’ trial randomised 120 treatment-naïve, new-onset RA patients to first-line etanercept + methotrexate (ETN+MTX) or methotrexate treat-to-target (MTX-TT) with escalation to ETN+MTX if not in DAS28-ESR remission at week 24. Clinical and US assessments were completed at baseline, weeks 12/24/48. Remission was DAS28-ESR ≤2.6 and active disease was DAS28-ESR >2.6. PDUS presence was defined as total PDUS score ≥ 1. Active concordance was defined as active disease with PDUS while active discordance was defined as active disease without PDUS. Remission concordance was defined as remission without PDUS while remission discordance was defined as remission with PDUS. Descriptive analyses were undertaken to address the above aims. Results At baseline all patients had active disease - 67% (81/120) were concordant and 33% (39/120) were discordant. Baseline DAS28-ESR and individual components were higher in the concordant compared to discordant group. In the active concordant group, from baseline to weeks 24 and 48 respectively, 30% (24/81) and 20% (16/81) persisted, and 26% (22/81) and 38% (31/81) became remission concordant; while 30% (24/81) and 35% (28/81) shifted to active discordance at weeks 24 and 48 respectively and 14% (11/81) and 7% (6/81) became remission discordant. In the active discordant group, from baseline to weeks 24 and 48 respectively, 72% (28/39) and 49% (19/39) persisted and only one and two patients were remission discordant; while 8% (3/39) and 15% (6/39) shifted to active concordance at weeks 24 and 48 respectively and 18% (7/39) and 31% (12/39) became remission concordant. Conclusion Discordance of DAS28 is typically associated with later RA. In this report, a third of patients shifted from active concordance to discordance following DMARD treatment early in the RA pathway. Further study is needed to understand how these patients compare to those that started and persisted with active discordance, and also later discordant RA patients. Disclosure R. Shukla: None. D.A. Selby: None. P. Emery: None. D. Plant: None. M.H. Buch: None.

The Use of SGLT2i and GLP-1 RA in Patients with Type 2 Diabetes in Thailand: Evidence Review and Recommendations

Background: Cardiovascular (CV) and renal comorbidities are common among type 2 diabetes (T2D) patients, and significantly increase the cost and burden of care. Both sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitors (SGLT2i) and glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists (GLP-1 RA) improve key outcomes including major CV events, hospitalization for heart failure, and renal outcomes, albeit to varying degrees in different T2D populations. Materials and Methods: The authors reviewed evidence from GLP-1 RA and SGLT2i CV outcomes trials and real-world studies in Thailand and elsewhere. Results: The authors formulated recommendations to guide selection of anti-diabetes medication based on patients’ clinical characteristics and CV or renal risk profile. Conclusion: These recommendations could help guide management of CV/renal comorbidities and risk alongside glucose-lowering therapy for individual patients. Keywords: Type 2 diabetes mellitus; Cardiovascular diseases; Chronic kidney disease; Clinical outcomes; SGLT2i; GLP-1 RA

Ozone in Medicine. The Low-Dose Ozone Concept and Its Basic Biochemical Mechanisms of Action in Chronic Inflammatory Diseases.

Low-dose ozone acts as a bioregulator in chronic inflammatory diseases, biochemically characterized by high oxidative stress and a blocked regulation. During systemic applications, “Ozone peroxides” are able to replace H2O2 in its specific function of regulation, restore redox signaling, and improve the antioxidant capacity. Two different mechanisms have to be understood. Firstly, there is the direct mechanism, used in topical treatments, mostly via radical reactions. In systemic treatments, the indirect, ionic mechanism is to be discussed: “ozone peroxide” will be directly reduced by the glutathione system, informing the nuclear factors to start the regulation. The GSH/GSSG balance outlines the ozone dose and concentration limiting factor. Antioxidants are regulated, and in the case of inflammatory diseases up-regulated; cytokines are modulated, here downregulated. Rheumatoid arthritis RA as a model for chronic inflammation: RA, in preclinical and clinical trials, reflects the pharmacology of ozone in a typical manner: SOD (superoxide dismutase), CAT (catalase) and finally GSH (reduced glutathione) increase, followed by a significant reduction of oxidative stress. Inflammatory cytokines are downregulated. Accordingly, the clinical status improves. The pharmacological background investigated in a remarkable number of cell experiments, preclinical and clinical trials is well documented and published in internationally peer reviewed journals. This should encourage clinicians to set up clinical trials with chronic inflammatory diseases integrating medical ozone as a complement.

Combinations of Anticyclic Citrullinated Protein Antibody, Rheumatoid Factor, and Serum Calprotectin Positivity Are Associated With the Diagnosis of Rheumatoid Arthritis Within 3 Years.

ObjectiveTo evaluate the prevalence of elevations of anti‐cyclic citrullinated peptide‐3 (anti‐CCP3) antibody, rheumatoid factor IgM (RF‐IgM) and serum calprotectin (sCP) in pre–rheumatoid arthritis (RA) as well as the diagnostic accuracies of these biomarkers for the timing of diagnosis of future RA.MethodsA total of 215 RA cases, each with approximately three pre‐RA diagnoses and one post–RA diagnosis serum sample, and controls were identified from the Department of Defense Serum Repository. All case samples and a single sample from each control subject were tested for anti‐CCP3 (IgG), RF‐IgM, and sCP. The diagnostic accuracies of biomarkers for future RA were evaluated.ResultsAnti‐CCP3, RF‐IgM, and sCP were elevated in pre‐RA, with anti‐CCP3 and sCP significantly elevated compared with RF‐IgM at the earliest time points. Within the cases, the combination of anti‐CCP3 and RF‐IgM positivity had a positive predictive value (PPV) of 35.6% for a diagnosis of RA in 3 years or less, which is significantly higher than the PPV of 18.7% for anti‐CCP3 positivity alone (P < 0.001). A combination of anti‐CCP3, RF‐IgM, and sCP had the highest PPV (53.0%) for a diagnosis of RA in 3 years or less; however, this was not significantly higher than the PPV for anti‐CCP3 and RF‐IgM positivity (P = 0.248).ConclusionAnti‐CCP3, RF‐IgM, and sCP are elevated in pre‐RA; furthermore, combinations of elevations of these biomarkers are more commonly seen in the period of less than or equal to 3 years to diagnosis. This may be considered in creating inclusion criteria in prevention trials in RA. In addition, the biologic relationships of these biomarkers in pre‐RA need exploration.

The efficacy of systemic glucocorticosteroids for pain in rheumatoid arthritis: a systematic literature review and meta-analysis

ObjectivesGlucocorticosteroids (GCs) are recommended to suppress inflammation in people with active RA. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to quantify the effects of systemic GCs on RA pain.MethodsA systematic literature review of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in RA comparing systemic GCs to inactive treatment. Three databases were and spontaneous pain and evoked pain outcomes were extracted. Standardized mean differences (SMDs) and mean differences were meta-analysed. Heterogeneity (I2, tau statistics) and bias (funnel plot, Egger’s test) were assessed. Subgroup analyses investigated sources of variation. This study was pre-registered (PROSPERO CRD42019111562).ResultsA total of 18 903 titles, 880 abstracts and 226 full texts were assessed. Thirty-three RCTs suitable for the meta-analysis included 3123 participants. Pain scores (spontaneous pain) decreased in participants treated with oral GCs; SMD = −0.65 (15 studies, 95% CI −0.82, −0.49, P <0.001) with significant heterogeneity (I2 = 56%, P =0.0002). Efficacy displayed time-related decreases after GC initiation. Mean difference visual analogue scale pain was −15 mm (95% CI −20, −9) greater improvement in GC than control at ≤3 months, −8 mm (95% CI −12, −3) at >3–6 months and −7 mm (95% CI −13, 0) at >6 months. Similar findings were obtained when evoked pain outcomes were examined. Data from five RCTs suggested improvement also in fatigue during GC treatment.ConclusionOral GCs are analgesic in RA. The benefit is greatest shortly after initiation and GCs might not achieve clinically important pain relief beyond 3 months. Treatments other than anti-inflammatory GCs should be considered to reduce the long-term burden of pain in RA.

Phase III trials of JAK1 selective inhibitors in rheumatoid arthritis.

Upadacitinib and filgotinib, two JAK1 selective drugs have undergone extensive phase III clinical trials in RA and have demonstrated rapid improvements in disease activity, function and patient reported outcomes. Six global phase III randomized controlled clinical trials (SELECT phase III program) evaluated the efficacy and safety of upadacitinib and four clinical phase III trials (the FINCH program) evaluated the efficacy and safety of filgotinib. This article is a critical review of all these studies with focus on the therapeutic efficacy in RA. The aim is to display the data that could allow the approval of these new drugs for the treatment of RA (upadacitinib has been already approved in most of the markets around the world).

Association between obesity and remission in rheumatoid arthritis patients treated with disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs

The aim of this study was to investigate the association between body-mass index (BMI) and remission in RA patients receiving conventional synthetic (cs-) or the biological Disease-Modifying Antirheumatic Drug (DMARD), tocilizumab. Individual participant data (IPD) were pooled from five trials investigating tocilizumab and/or csDMARDs therapy (primarily methotrexate) for RA. Time to first remission was recorded according to the Simplified Disease Activity Index (SDAI) and Clinical Disease Activity Index (CDAI). BMI was classified according to WHO definitions. Associations between baseline BMI and remission were assessed by Cox-proportional hazard analysis. IPD were available from 5428 patients treated with tocilizumab ± csDMARDs (n = 4098) or csDMARDs alone (n = 1330). Of these, 1839 (33.9%) had normal BMI, 1780 (32.8%) overweight, 1652 (30.4%) obese and 157 (2.9%) were underweight. Obesity, compared to normal BMI, was associated with less frequent remission using SDAI (adjusted HR 0.80 [95% CI 0.70–0.92]) and CDAI (adjusted HR 0.77 [0.68–0.87]). As continuous variable, increased BMI was associated with less frequent SDAI (P = 0.001) and CDAI (P = 0.001) defined remission. No heterogeneity in identified associations was observed between studies (P = 0.08) or treatments (P = 0.22). Obesity was negatively associated with RA disease remission regardless of RA therapy, suggesting that baseline BMI should be considered as a stratification factor in future RA trials.

JAK1 inhibitor superior to abatacept in head-to-head RA trial.

JAK1 inhibitor superior to abatacept in head-to-head RA trial.

Glycaemic and non-glycaemic efficacy of once-weekly GLP-1 receptor agonists in people with type 2 diabetes.

SummaryWhat is known and objectiveGlucagon‐like peptide‐1 receptor agonists (GLP‐1 RAs) may confer a range of benefits for people with type 2 diabetes (T2D), which is reflected through their position within diabetes treatment guidelines. The objective of this narrative review is to explore the efficacy data of once‐weekly (QW) GLP‐1 RAs in terms of glycaemic control, body weight reduction, cardiovascular (CV) outcomes and potential renal protective effects to assist pharmacists and other healthcare professionals (HCPs) in treatment discussions with patients.MethodsThis a narrative review focused on 31 clinical trials involving the Phase 3 clinical programmes of the QW GLP‐1 RAs dulaglutide, exenatide extended‐release (ER) and semaglutide subcutaneous (s.c.).Results and discussionThe clinical trials were divided by their comparator arms and examined for trends. All QW GLP‐1 RAs were superior to placebo for reductions in glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c) and body weight. Data regarding QW GLP‐1 RAs versus metformin were limited, likely due to metformin’s use as the first‐line pharmacologic for T2D. In the robust head‐to‐head trials of QW versus QW GLP‐1 RAs, semaglutide s.c. was superior to both dulaglutide and exenatide ER regarding HbA1c and body weight; however, QW versus once‐daily GLP‐1 RA trials had mixed results depending on the comparators. Finally, in QW GLP‐1 RA versus insulin trials, all QW GLP‐1 RAs were as effective as insulin, particularly when hypoglycaemia and body weight were also considered. CV outcome trials demonstrated benefits in major adverse CV events and renal outcomes for semaglutide and dulaglutide.What is new and conclusionThis review collates recently published data and previously published Phase 3 results to allow pharmacists and other HCPs to understand all of the efficacy data available and the corresponding impact on treatment guidelines. QW GLP‐1 RAs are emerging as important therapeutic options for people with T2D as they offer a spectrum of benefits extending beyond glycaemic control, but it is important to be aware of their efficacy differences when prescribing and discussing them with patients.

A Systematic Review of Newer Antidiabetic Agents in the Treatment of Nonalcoholic Fatty Liver Disease.

To evaluate glucagon-like peptide 1 receptor agonists (GLP-1 RAs), dipeptidyl-peptidase IV (DPP-4) inhibitors, and sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 (SGLT) inhibitors to treat nondiabetic and type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) nonalcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD) as it relates to improvement in hepatosteatosis (HS) or steatohepatitis (SH). MEDLINE and CINAHL were searched from inception through May 1, 2020. Search terms included nonalcoholic steatohepatitis, nonalcoholic fatty liver disease, fatty liver, dipeptidyl-peptidase IV inhibitors, glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists, and sodium-glucose transporter 2 inhibitors. Full-text observational and randomized controlled studies in English were included. Patients diagnosed with NAFLD, treated with GLP-1 RAs, DPP-4 inhibitors, and SGLT2 inhibitors, with measures to evaluate HS or SH were evaluated. Eight GLP-1 RA trials were reviewed; 7 GLP-1 RA trials showed improvement in HS. Two studies demonstrated improvement in liver histology in patients with SH. Seven SGLT2 inhibitor studies were reviewed; 6 studies demonstrated improvements in NAFLD. Five studies showed improvements in HS, whereas 1 displayed improvement in liver histology in NASH. Six studies that included DPP-4 inhibitors were evaluated, and only 2 demonstrated improvement in NASH. Based on evidence reviewed, GLP-1 RAs and SGLT2 inhibitors decreased HS and SH in NAFLD patients, whereas DPP-4 inhibitor therapy was not effective for patients with HS. Based on study data utilizing imaging studies and biopsy results, GLP-1 RAs or SGLT2 inhibitors can benefit NAFLD T2DM patients. Clinical trials with larger patient populations may augment these results.

Regional variations in adverse event reporting rates and ACR responses in placebo/standard-of-care arms of rheumatoid arthritis trials.

ObjectiveClinical trials are increasingly globalized, and adverse event (AE) rates and treatment responses may differ by geographical region. This study assessed regional differences in AE reporting rates and ACR response rates (ACR20/50) in patients with RA who received placebo/standard-of-care treatment in clinical trials.MethodsPatients from the placebo arms of 7 RA trials in the TransCelerate Biopharma Inc database were grouped into 5 geographical regions (Asia, Latin America, Russian Federation and Eastern Europe [RFEE], USA, and Western Europe). Differences in demographics, AE reporting rates and ACR response were evaluated using descriptive statistics and omnibus tests for significance; pairwise comparisons were made between regions, with false discovery rate correction for multiple comparisons.ResultsAmong 970 patients included, week 12 AE rates were significantly lower in the RFEE than in Asia, Latin America and the USA (22% vs 51%, 49% and 53%, respectively; P < 0.05 after false discovery rate correction). Similar differences in AE rates across geographical regions were seen at week 52. Among 747 patients with ACR data, the lowest response rates were observed in the USA (ACR20, 22%) and RFEE (ACR50, 3%); the highest response rates were seen in Western Europe (ACR20, 43%) and Latin America (ACR50, 15%). Only the differences in ACR50 response between the RFEE and Latin America remained significant after false discovery rate correction.ConclusionThese placebo/standard-of-care arm data revealed significant regional differences in AE reporting rates and ACR50 response rates. Regional distribution of patients should be considered when conducting RA clinical trials, particularly during recruitment.

Use of daily electronic patient-reported outcome (PRO) diaries in randomized controlled trials for rheumatoid arthritis: rationale and implementation

BackgroundRheumatoid arthritis (RA) is associated with significantly diminished health-related quality of life. Patient-reported outcomes (PROs) are considered important in RA; however, some symptoms such as morning joint stiffness (MJS) and fatigue that are considered important by patients are not captured by the American College of Rheumatology “core set” measures for RA trials. The US Food and Drug Administration has endorsed electronic capture of clinical trial data including PROs, and electronic PRO (ePRO) systems may lead to more accurate and complete data capture, improved compliance, and patient acceptance compared with paper-based methods. Our objective was to assess the implementation of ePRO measures of Duration and Severity of MJS, Severity of Worst Tiredness, and Severity of Worst Joint Pain in baricitinib RA-BEAM and RA-BUILD phase 3 randomized clinical trials (RCTs).MethodsA daily electronic diary (handheld device; Invivodata®, Inc.) was utilized to capture PRO data in the RCTs. Three “reporting window” options were incorporated to accommodate differences in patients’ routine daily schedules, and alarms were programmed for each reporting window. Duration of MJS was recorded in “hours and minutes,” and Severity of MJS, Worst Tiredness, and Worst Joint Pain were captured on a 0 to 10 rating scale, with a higher score indicating more severe symptoms. The patients and site staff were trained to use the daily electronic diary.ResultsPatients with moderately to severely active RA used the daily electronic diary in the RA-BEAM study (N = 1305) and RA-BUILD study (N = 684). The average compliance, calculated as total days completed by patients compared with total days expected to complete the diary, through Week 12 was high (RA-BEAM 94% patients; RA-BUILD 93% patients), potentially attributable to appropriate training, clarity of instructions, simple user interface, and electronic device design. Identified process challenges included non-timely issuance of the device, low battery, inadequate training of patients before data collection, inappropriate diary set-up, and first response entry 1 day after the baseline visit.ConclusionsHigh compliance rates support the use of the daily electronic PRO diary in large RCTs. Despite the anticipated issues, the daily electronic diary is expected to reduce recall bias and improve the quality of PRO data collection.Trial registrationRA-BEAM (NCT01710358) and RA-BUILD (NCT01721057).

Clinical efficacy of launched JAK inhibitors in rheumatoid arthritis.

Tofacitinib and baricitinib are the first orally available, small-molecule inhibitors of Janus kinase (JAK) enzymes to be approved for the treatment of RA. Tofacitinib is a selective JAK1, 3 inhibitor with less activity against JAK2 and TYK2 and baricitinib is a selective, oral JAK1, 2 inhibitor with moderate activity against TYK2 and significantly less activity against JAK3. Both drugs have undergone extensive phase III clinical trials in RA and demonstrated rapid improvements in disease activity, function and patient-reported outcomes as well as disease modification. Tofacitinib 5 mg bd, was approved by the Federal Drug Administration in 2012 for the treatment of RA in patients who are intolerant or unresponsive to MTX. An extended release formulation for the treatment of RA was approved by Federal Drug Administration in 2016. In 2017 the European Medicines Agency approved tofacitinib 5 mg bd in combination with MTX and baricitinib 4 mg and 2 mg once daily for the treatment of moderate to severe active RA in adult patients who are intolerant or unresponsive to one or more conventional synthetic DMARDs.

Early phase and adaptive design clinical trials in rheumatoid arthritis: a systematic review of early phase trials.

ObjectiveAdaptive designs can enable highly sophisticated and efficient early phase trials, but the clinical inference from these trials is surrounded by complexity, and currently there is a paucity but steadily increasing amount of use of these designs in all fields of medicine. We aim to review early phase trials in RA to discover those that have used adaptive designs and benchmark trial characteristics.MethodsFrom an OVID search for journal articles reporting the results of early phase trials in rheumatology, 35 studies were found, with 9 subsequently excluded; 11 were added from manual searches and 19 from searching the references. Study characteristics were extracted from the 56 papers (describing 62 trials), including the number of arms, number of patients, the primary outcome and when it was measured.ResultOne early phase trial using an adaptive design was found. The benchmark early phase trial in RA is a phase II double-blinded randomized trial, with four arms (one control and three intervention), each with 34 patients, and ACR20 measured at 16 weeks as the primary outcome.ConclusionThe one adaptive design reviewed here, and a simulation study found in the search, both indicate that adaptive designs can be applied to early phase trials in RA. We have described the benchmark, which the efficiency of early phase trials using an adaptive design needs to exceed. These efficient designs could drive down numbers required, time for data collection and thus cost. Changes have been suggested, but more needs to be done.

A protocol for a randomised controlled trial of prefabricated versus customised foot orthoses for people with rheumatoid arthritis: the FOCOS RA trial [Foot Orthoses \u2013 Customised v Off-the-Shelf in Rheumatoid Arthritis

BackgroundFoot pain is common in rheumatoid arthritis and appears to persist despite modern day medical management. Several clinical practice guidelines currently recommend the use of foot orthoses for the treatment of foot pain in people with rheumatoid arthritis. However, an evidence gap currently exists concerning the comparative clinical- and cost-effectiveness of prefabricated and customised foot orthoses in people with early rheumatoid arthritis. Early intervention with orthotics may offer the best opportunity for positive therapeutic outcomes. The primary aim of this study is to evaluate the comparative clinical- and cost-effectiveness of prefabricated versus customised orthoses for reducing foot pain over 12 months.Methods/designThis is a multi-centre two-arm parallel randomised controlled trial comparing prefabricated versus customised orthoses in participants with early rheumatoid arthritis (< 2 years disease duration). A total of 160 (a minimum of 80 randomised to each arm) eligible participants will be recruited from United Kingdom National Health Service Rheumatology Outpatient Clinics. The primary outcome will be foot pain measured via the Foot Function Index pain subscale at 12 months. Secondary outcomes will include foot related impairments and disability via the Foot Impact Scale for rheumatoid arthritis, global functional status via the Stanford Health Assessment Questionnaire, foot disease activity via the Rheumatoid Arthritis Foot Disease Activity Index, and health-related quality of life at baseline, 6 and 12 months. Process outcomes will include recruitment/retention rates, data completion rates, intervention adherence rates, and participant intervention and trial participation satisfaction. Cost-utility and cost-effectiveness analyses will be undertaken.DiscussionOutcome measures collected at baseline, 6 and 12 months will be used to evaluate the comparative clinical- and cost- effectiveness of customised versus prefabricated orthoses for this treatment of early rheumatoid arthritis foot conditions. This trial will help to guide orthotic prescription recommendations for the management of foot pain for people with early rheumatoid arthritis in future.Trial registrationISRCTN13654421. Registered 09 February 2016.