ACR Annual Meeting 2017

SAN DIEGO – Researchers found no evidence of increased risk of serious or opportunistic infections in infants born to pregnant women who were treated with biologic medication for their rheumatoid arthritis, according to a cohort study.

“These data add to what we’re beginning to learn about these medications that are so commonly used in women of reproductive age, and who have concerns about whether they can use them safely or not during pregnancy,” lead study author Christina D. Chambers, PhD, MPH, said during a press briefing at the annual meeting of the American College of Rheumatology. To date, theoretical concern exists that the use of biologics could interfere with postnatal immune function in the infant, said Dr. Chambers, a perinatal epidemiologist and teratologist at the University of California, San Diego. “The theory has been that because of the size of the molecule, little placental transfer is thought to take place early in pregnancy, but later in pregnancy, more placental transfer may be possible,” she said.

In an effort to investigate the risk of serious or opportunistic infections for infants whose mothers used biologics during pregnancy, the researchers conducted an observational cohort study from pregnant women participating in the Organization of Teratology Information Specialists (OTIS) Autoimmune Diseases in Pregnancy Project from 2004 through 2016. Mothers fell into one of three groups: 502 pregnancies where the mother with RA was treated with a biologic with or without other disease modifying anti-rheumatic medications during her pregnancy (group A); 231 pregnancies where the mother had RA but did not use any biologics during pregnancy (group B), and 423 pregnancies where the mother had no chronic diseases at all (group C). The investigators defined the serious or opportunistic infections as a list of 16 infections that included X-ray proven pneumonia, septic arthritis, osteomyelitis, tuberculosis, herpes, listeria, legionella, mycobacteria, systemic cytomegalovirus and abscess. The one-year follow-up data was collected from medical records and corroborated with maternal reports.

Among the pregnant mothers in group A, 43% took their last dose in the first or second trimester, and 57% percent took their last dose in the third trimester. Dr. Chambers reported that 20 of the 502 infants in group A developed at least one serious or opportunistic infection, for a rate of 4%, while the rates among infants in groups B and C were 2.6% and 2.1%, respectively. The most common infections seen were X-ray proven pneumonia, sepsis, bacteremia, meningitis, and abscess. Between 11% and 19% of infants had more than one infection over the one-year period.

In a subset analysis of 285 women in group A who had third trimester exposure to one of the biologics, 10 infants had at least one serious or opportunistic infection, for a rate of 3.5%, which was statistically similar to that of groups B and C (2.6% and 2.1%, respectively).

“These data provide some reassurance for clinicians who are concerned that their patients need to be treated with a biologic late in pregnancy rather than take them off the drug during that period of time,” Dr. Chambers said. She acknowledged certain limitations of the study, including the fact that the researchers did not examine risk of less serious infections, such as more frequent colds or ear infections in the infants, and they did not have any direct measure of their immune function.

Dr. Chambers disclosed having received research support from AbbVie, Amgen, Bristol Myers Squibb, Celgene, Janssen Pharmaceutica Products, L.P., Pfizer Inc, Roche Pharmaceuticals, Seqirus, GSK, UCB, and Sanofi-Aventis.

dbrunk@frontlinemedcom.com

SAN DIEGO – Researchers found no evidence of increased risk of serious or opportunistic infections in infants born to pregnant women who were treated with biologic medication for their rheumatoid arthritis, according to a cohort study.

“These data add to what we’re beginning to learn about these medications that are so commonly used in women of reproductive age, and who have concerns about whether they can use them safely or not during pregnancy,” lead study author Christina D. Chambers, PhD, MPH, said during a press briefing at the annual meeting of the American College of Rheumatology. To date, theoretical concern exists that the use of biologics could interfere with postnatal immune function in the infant, said Dr. Chambers, a perinatal epidemiologist and teratologist at the University of California, San Diego. “The theory has been that because of the size of the molecule, little placental transfer is thought to take place early in pregnancy, but later in pregnancy, more placental transfer may be possible,” she said.

In an effort to investigate the risk of serious or opportunistic infections for infants whose mothers used biologics during pregnancy, the researchers conducted an observational cohort study from pregnant women participating in the Organization of Teratology Information Specialists (OTIS) Autoimmune Diseases in Pregnancy Project from 2004 through 2016. Mothers fell into one of three groups: 502 pregnancies where the mother with RA was treated with a biologic with or without other disease modifying anti-rheumatic medications during her pregnancy (group A); 231 pregnancies where the mother had RA but did not use any biologics during pregnancy (group B), and 423 pregnancies where the mother had no chronic diseases at all (group C). The investigators defined the serious or opportunistic infections as a list of 16 infections that included X-ray proven pneumonia, septic arthritis, osteomyelitis, tuberculosis, herpes, listeria, legionella, mycobacteria, systemic cytomegalovirus and abscess. The one-year follow-up data was collected from medical records and corroborated with maternal reports.

Among the pregnant mothers in group A, 43% took their last dose in the first or second trimester, and 57% percent took their last dose in the third trimester. Dr. Chambers reported that 20 of the 502 infants in group A developed at least one serious or opportunistic infection, for a rate of 4%, while the rates among infants in groups B and C were 2.6% and 2.1%, respectively. The most common infections seen were X-ray proven pneumonia, sepsis, bacteremia, meningitis, and abscess. Between 11% and 19% of infants had more than one infection over the one-year period.

In a subset analysis of 285 women in group A who had third trimester exposure to one of the biologics, 10 infants had at least one serious or opportunistic infection, for a rate of 3.5%, which was statistically similar to that of groups B and C (2.6% and 2.1%, respectively).

“These data provide some reassurance for clinicians who are concerned that their patients need to be treated with a biologic late in pregnancy rather than take them off the drug during that period of time,” Dr. Chambers said. She acknowledged certain limitations of the study, including the fact that the researchers did not examine risk of less serious infections, such as more frequent colds or ear infections in the infants, and they did not have any direct measure of their immune function.

Dr. Chambers disclosed having received research support from AbbVie, Amgen, Bristol Myers Squibb, Celgene, Janssen Pharmaceutica Products, L.P., Pfizer Inc, Roche Pharmaceuticals, Seqirus, GSK, UCB, and Sanofi-Aventis.

dbrunk@frontlinemedcom.com

SAN DIEGO – Researchers found no evidence of increased risk of serious or opportunistic infections in infants born to pregnant women who were treated with biologic medication for their rheumatoid arthritis, according to a cohort study.

“These data add to what we’re beginning to learn about these medications that are so commonly used in women of reproductive age, and who have concerns about whether they can use them safely or not during pregnancy,” lead study author Christina D. Chambers, PhD, MPH, said during a press briefing at the annual meeting of the American College of Rheumatology. To date, theoretical concern exists that the use of biologics could interfere with postnatal immune function in the infant, said Dr. Chambers, a perinatal epidemiologist and teratologist at the University of California, San Diego. “The theory has been that because of the size of the molecule, little placental transfer is thought to take place early in pregnancy, but later in pregnancy, more placental transfer may be possible,” she said.

In an effort to investigate the risk of serious or opportunistic infections for infants whose mothers used biologics during pregnancy, the researchers conducted an observational cohort study from pregnant women participating in the Organization of Teratology Information Specialists (OTIS) Autoimmune Diseases in Pregnancy Project from 2004 through 2016. Mothers fell into one of three groups: 502 pregnancies where the mother with RA was treated with a biologic with or without other disease modifying anti-rheumatic medications during her pregnancy (group A); 231 pregnancies where the mother had RA but did not use any biologics during pregnancy (group B), and 423 pregnancies where the mother had no chronic diseases at all (group C). The investigators defined the serious or opportunistic infections as a list of 16 infections that included X-ray proven pneumonia, septic arthritis, osteomyelitis, tuberculosis, herpes, listeria, legionella, mycobacteria, systemic cytomegalovirus and abscess. The one-year follow-up data was collected from medical records and corroborated with maternal reports.

Among the pregnant mothers in group A, 43% took their last dose in the first or second trimester, and 57% percent took their last dose in the third trimester. Dr. Chambers reported that 20 of the 502 infants in group A developed at least one serious or opportunistic infection, for a rate of 4%, while the rates among infants in groups B and C were 2.6% and 2.1%, respectively. The most common infections seen were X-ray proven pneumonia, sepsis, bacteremia, meningitis, and abscess. Between 11% and 19% of infants had more than one infection over the one-year period.

In a subset analysis of 285 women in group A who had third trimester exposure to one of the biologics, 10 infants had at least one serious or opportunistic infection, for a rate of 3.5%, which was statistically similar to that of groups B and C (2.6% and 2.1%, respectively).

“These data provide some reassurance for clinicians who are concerned that their patients need to be treated with a biologic late in pregnancy rather than take them off the drug during that period of time,” Dr. Chambers said. She acknowledged certain limitations of the study, including the fact that the researchers did not examine risk of less serious infections, such as more frequent colds or ear infections in the infants, and they did not have any direct measure of their immune function.

Dr. Chambers disclosed having received research support from AbbVie, Amgen, Bristol Myers Squibb, Celgene, Janssen Pharmaceutica Products, L.P., Pfizer Inc, Roche Pharmaceuticals, Seqirus, GSK, UCB, and Sanofi-Aventis.

dbrunk@frontlinemedcom.com

SAN DIEGO – Among patients with axial spondyloarthropathy, higher BMI and obesity independently predicts worse disease outcomes, according to results from a registry study.

“Obesity is one of the biggest public health challenges facing us in the 21st century,” lead study author Gillian Fitzgerald, MD, said in an interview in advance of the annual meeting of the American College of Rheumatology.

“Traditionally, we have a perception of patients with axial SpA being of normal or even thin body habitus. However, recent studies have indicated that this is not the case and that obesity is prevalent in axial SpA patients. The negative consequences of obesity in the general population are well documented, with affected patients suffering greater morbidity and mortality.”

Dr. Fitzgerald, of St. James’s Hospital, Dublin, Ireland, noted that research to date in axial SpA indicates that disease outcomes may be worse in obese patients. However, existing literature looking at obesity in axial SpA is relatively sparse. In an effort to clarify this issue, she and her associates evaluated 683 patients from the Ankylosing Spondylitis Registry of Ireland (ASRI), which is designed to provide descriptive epidemiological data on the Irish axSpA population via standardized clinical assessments and structured interviews. The mean age of the 683 patients enrolled as of June 2017 was 46, the majority (77%) were men, their mean disease duration was 19 years, and their mean delay to diagnosis was nine years. Most (79%) fulfilled Modified New York modified criteria, their mean Bath Ankylosing Spondylitis Disease Activity Index (BASDAI) was 3.9, their mean Bath Ankylosing Spondylitis Metrology Index (BASMI) was 3.6, their mean Bath Ankylosing Spondylitis Functional Index (BASFI) was 3.6 and their mean Health Assessment Questionnaire (HAQ) was 0.52.

Based on WHO criteria, the cohort’s mean BMI was 27.8 kg/m2. Of these, 38.9% were overweight and 28.4% were obese. “Indeed, only 32% of the cohort have a healthy BMI,” Dr. Fitzgerald commented. “When we looked at the relationship between BMI and disease outcomes, we found that obese patients had more severe disease than their normal weight and overweight counterparts, with higher measures of disease activity, quality of life, disability and function, as well as worse spinal mobility.”

The researchers also observed that the prevalence of smoking was lower in obese patients, compared with normal weight patients (18% vs. 38, respectively). In univariable linear regression, BMI and obesity were associated with higher BASDAI, BASMI, BASFI and HAQ scores. In multivariable regression analysis, only obesity remained an independent predictor of higher disease activity and worse function (P less than .01).

“As clinicians, we are always looking for ways to reduce the burden of disease that patients carry and to improve outcomes,” Dr. Fitzgerald said. “In this study, we demonstrated that over two-thirds of our axial SpA patients are either overweight or obese, and that these patients have more severe disease. Further research is needed to clarify this relationship between obesity and disease severity; in particular, the effect of losing weight on disease outcomes needs to be clarified. However, when devising treatment plans for axial SpA patients, this study provides rheumatologists with a strong rationale to include strategies to actively control weight.”

She acknowledged that the study’s cross-sectional design is a limitation. “This means cause and effect can’t be determined exclusively from this study; therefore, prospective studies are required to further clarify this relationship that we have noted between obesity and disease outcomes.”

ASRI is funded by an unrestricted grant from AbbVie and Pfizer. Dr. Fitzgerald disclosed having received research support from AbbVie.

dbrunk@frontlinemedcom.com

SAN DIEGO – Among patients with axial spondyloarthropathy, higher BMI and obesity independently predicts worse disease outcomes, according to results from a registry study.

“Obesity is one of the biggest public health challenges facing us in the 21st century,” lead study author Gillian Fitzgerald, MD, said in an interview in advance of the annual meeting of the American College of Rheumatology.

“Traditionally, we have a perception of patients with axial SpA being of normal or even thin body habitus. However, recent studies have indicated that this is not the case and that obesity is prevalent in axial SpA patients. The negative consequences of obesity in the general population are well documented, with affected patients suffering greater morbidity and mortality.”

Dr. Fitzgerald, of St. James’s Hospital, Dublin, Ireland, noted that research to date in axial SpA indicates that disease outcomes may be worse in obese patients. However, existing literature looking at obesity in axial SpA is relatively sparse. In an effort to clarify this issue, she and her associates evaluated 683 patients from the Ankylosing Spondylitis Registry of Ireland (ASRI), which is designed to provide descriptive epidemiological data on the Irish axSpA population via standardized clinical assessments and structured interviews. The mean age of the 683 patients enrolled as of June 2017 was 46, the majority (77%) were men, their mean disease duration was 19 years, and their mean delay to diagnosis was nine years. Most (79%) fulfilled Modified New York modified criteria, their mean Bath Ankylosing Spondylitis Disease Activity Index (BASDAI) was 3.9, their mean Bath Ankylosing Spondylitis Metrology Index (BASMI) was 3.6, their mean Bath Ankylosing Spondylitis Functional Index (BASFI) was 3.6 and their mean Health Assessment Questionnaire (HAQ) was 0.52.

Based on WHO criteria, the cohort’s mean BMI was 27.8 kg/m2. Of these, 38.9% were overweight and 28.4% were obese. “Indeed, only 32% of the cohort have a healthy BMI,” Dr. Fitzgerald commented. “When we looked at the relationship between BMI and disease outcomes, we found that obese patients had more severe disease than their normal weight and overweight counterparts, with higher measures of disease activity, quality of life, disability and function, as well as worse spinal mobility.”

The researchers also observed that the prevalence of smoking was lower in obese patients, compared with normal weight patients (18% vs. 38, respectively). In univariable linear regression, BMI and obesity were associated with higher BASDAI, BASMI, BASFI and HAQ scores. In multivariable regression analysis, only obesity remained an independent predictor of higher disease activity and worse function (P less than .01).

“As clinicians, we are always looking for ways to reduce the burden of disease that patients carry and to improve outcomes,” Dr. Fitzgerald said. “In this study, we demonstrated that over two-thirds of our axial SpA patients are either overweight or obese, and that these patients have more severe disease. Further research is needed to clarify this relationship between obesity and disease severity; in particular, the effect of losing weight on disease outcomes needs to be clarified. However, when devising treatment plans for axial SpA patients, this study provides rheumatologists with a strong rationale to include strategies to actively control weight.”

She acknowledged that the study’s cross-sectional design is a limitation. “This means cause and effect can’t be determined exclusively from this study; therefore, prospective studies are required to further clarify this relationship that we have noted between obesity and disease outcomes.”

ASRI is funded by an unrestricted grant from AbbVie and Pfizer. Dr. Fitzgerald disclosed having received research support from AbbVie.

dbrunk@frontlinemedcom.com

SAN DIEGO – Among patients with axial spondyloarthropathy, higher BMI and obesity independently predicts worse disease outcomes, according to results from a registry study.

“Obesity is one of the biggest public health challenges facing us in the 21st century,” lead study author Gillian Fitzgerald, MD, said in an interview in advance of the annual meeting of the American College of Rheumatology.

“Traditionally, we have a perception of patients with axial SpA being of normal or even thin body habitus. However, recent studies have indicated that this is not the case and that obesity is prevalent in axial SpA patients. The negative consequences of obesity in the general population are well documented, with affected patients suffering greater morbidity and mortality.”

Dr. Fitzgerald, of St. James’s Hospital, Dublin, Ireland, noted that research to date in axial SpA indicates that disease outcomes may be worse in obese patients. However, existing literature looking at obesity in axial SpA is relatively sparse. In an effort to clarify this issue, she and her associates evaluated 683 patients from the Ankylosing Spondylitis Registry of Ireland (ASRI), which is designed to provide descriptive epidemiological data on the Irish axSpA population via standardized clinical assessments and structured interviews. The mean age of the 683 patients enrolled as of June 2017 was 46, the majority (77%) were men, their mean disease duration was 19 years, and their mean delay to diagnosis was nine years. Most (79%) fulfilled Modified New York modified criteria, their mean Bath Ankylosing Spondylitis Disease Activity Index (BASDAI) was 3.9, their mean Bath Ankylosing Spondylitis Metrology Index (BASMI) was 3.6, their mean Bath Ankylosing Spondylitis Functional Index (BASFI) was 3.6 and their mean Health Assessment Questionnaire (HAQ) was 0.52.

Based on WHO criteria, the cohort’s mean BMI was 27.8 kg/m2. Of these, 38.9% were overweight and 28.4% were obese. “Indeed, only 32% of the cohort have a healthy BMI,” Dr. Fitzgerald commented. “When we looked at the relationship between BMI and disease outcomes, we found that obese patients had more severe disease than their normal weight and overweight counterparts, with higher measures of disease activity, quality of life, disability and function, as well as worse spinal mobility.”

The researchers also observed that the prevalence of smoking was lower in obese patients, compared with normal weight patients (18% vs. 38, respectively). In univariable linear regression, BMI and obesity were associated with higher BASDAI, BASMI, BASFI and HAQ scores. In multivariable regression analysis, only obesity remained an independent predictor of higher disease activity and worse function (P less than .01).

“As clinicians, we are always looking for ways to reduce the burden of disease that patients carry and to improve outcomes,” Dr. Fitzgerald said. “In this study, we demonstrated that over two-thirds of our axial SpA patients are either overweight or obese, and that these patients have more severe disease. Further research is needed to clarify this relationship between obesity and disease severity; in particular, the effect of losing weight on disease outcomes needs to be clarified. However, when devising treatment plans for axial SpA patients, this study provides rheumatologists with a strong rationale to include strategies to actively control weight.”

She acknowledged that the study’s cross-sectional design is a limitation. “This means cause and effect can’t be determined exclusively from this study; therefore, prospective studies are required to further clarify this relationship that we have noted between obesity and disease outcomes.”

ASRI is funded by an unrestricted grant from AbbVie and Pfizer. Dr. Fitzgerald disclosed having received research support from AbbVie.

dbrunk@frontlinemedcom.com

New results from several investigational oral Janus kinase inhibitor trials and an antifractalkine monoclonal antibody trial for patients with rheumatoid arthritis will be made available for the first time to attendees of the annual meeting of the American College of Rheumatology on Nov. 6 and 7 in San Diego.

Selective JAK-1 inhibitor upadacitinib

Two double-blind, randomized, controlled phase 3 studies of the oral, selective JAK-1 inhibitor upadacitinib (ABT-494) will be presented at the meeting, both involving once-daily extended-release formulations of the drug at 15 mg or 30 mg. The first trial, to be presented during an ACR abstract session on Monday, Nov. 6, showed that the drug met ACR 20 response criteria at significantly higher rates than did placebo at week 12 (63.8% for 15 mg, 66.2% for 30 mg, and 35.7% for placebo) in 661 patients with active RA and an inadequate response to conventional synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (csDMARDs). Patients on the study drug also achieved low disease activity (28-joint Disease Activity Score using C-reactive protein [DAS28-CRP] of 3.2 or less) in higher proportions than did those who received placebo (48.4% for 15 mg, 47.9% for 30 mg, and 17.2% for placebo). More infections occurred in patients on 15 mg and 30 mg upadacitinib (29.0% and 31.5%, respectively), compared with placebo (21.3%), but there were no differences in serious infections. Three of the total four cases of herpes zoster infection were in patients taking upadacitinib.

A second upadacitinib trial, which involved patients on stable csDMARD therapy who could not tolerate or had disease refractory to a biologic DMARD, will be presented during a late-breaking poster session on Tuesday, Nov. 7. The study randomized 499 patients who had severe, refractory disease for a mean duration of 13 years. At 12 weeks, treatment with upadacitinib resulted in ACR 20 responses in 64.6% at 15 mg and 56.4% at 30 mg, compared with 28.4% for placebo. Responses at 12 weeks of 3.2 or less for DAS28-CRP also occurred at significantly higher rates of 43.3% for 15 mg and 42.4% for 30 mg, compared with 14.2% for placebo. Patients who were switched from placebo to active treatment at week 12 also achieved these responses at week 24, and the people who stayed on treatment with upadacitinib maintained or improved their response at week 24. More adverse events and infections tended to occur with upadacitinib at 30 mg than with 15 mg, and there were more herpes zoster infections with 30 mg (n = 4) vs. 15 mg (n = 1) and placebo (n = 1).
 

Antifractalkine monoclonal antibody

The Monday afternoon RA therapy abstract session will also feature the first-in-patient results at 52 weeks for the antifractalkine monoclonal antibody E6011 in an open-label phase 1/2 study of Japanese RA patients with active disease who had an inadequate response or intolerance to methotrexate or a TNF inhibitor. The results from the small trial of the biologic, which targets the chemokine that regulates chemotaxis and the adhesion of inflammatory cells that express CX3C chemokine receptor 1 (CX3CR1), indicate that the treatment has durable efficacy and is safe and well tolerated. Adverse events (AEs) developed in 84% of 28 patients who participated in the 52-week extension study, including a rate of 48% for treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) and 14% for serious AEs. ACR 20 rates at week 52 ranged from 58% for 100 mg of E6011 to 73% for 200 mg and 60% for 400 mg.

Filgotinib safety in an extension trial

The long-term, open-label results from two phase 2b studies of the JAK-1 inhibitor filgotinib that’s in development for RA also will be presented during the same Monday abstract session. These safety data out to 84 weeks from the long-term extension study of the DARWIN 1 and 2 studies, called DARWIN 3, show that, among patients who received at least one dose of filgotinib 100 mg twice daily or 200 mg once daily in addition to methotrexate, the rate of TEAEs ranged from about 146 to 153 per 100 patient-years of exposure (PYE), including about 41-45 infections per 100 PYE. For filgotinib monotherapy, the rate of TEAEs was 150 per 100 PYE for 200 mg once daily, including 38 infections per 100 PYE.

Total cholesterol of 200-239 mg/dL occurred at a rate of about 79 per 100 PYE and a level of 240 mg/dL or greater was seen in 61-64 per 100 PYE for patients who took filgotinib plus methotrexate. Filgotinib monotherapy at 200 mg once daily gave rates of about 94 and 71 per 100 PYE for those respective total cholesterol levels.

jevans@frontlinemedcom.com

New results from several investigational oral Janus kinase inhibitor trials and an antifractalkine monoclonal antibody trial for patients with rheumatoid arthritis will be made available for the first time to attendees of the annual meeting of the American College of Rheumatology on Nov. 6 and 7 in San Diego.

Selective JAK-1 inhibitor upadacitinib

Two double-blind, randomized, controlled phase 3 studies of the oral, selective JAK-1 inhibitor upadacitinib (ABT-494) will be presented at the meeting, both involving once-daily extended-release formulations of the drug at 15 mg or 30 mg. The first trial, to be presented during an ACR abstract session on Monday, Nov. 6, showed that the drug met ACR 20 response criteria at significantly higher rates than did placebo at week 12 (63.8% for 15 mg, 66.2% for 30 mg, and 35.7% for placebo) in 661 patients with active RA and an inadequate response to conventional synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (csDMARDs). Patients on the study drug also achieved low disease activity (28-joint Disease Activity Score using C-reactive protein [DAS28-CRP] of 3.2 or less) in higher proportions than did those who received placebo (48.4% for 15 mg, 47.9% for 30 mg, and 17.2% for placebo). More infections occurred in patients on 15 mg and 30 mg upadacitinib (29.0% and 31.5%, respectively), compared with placebo (21.3%), but there were no differences in serious infections. Three of the total four cases of herpes zoster infection were in patients taking upadacitinib.

A second upadacitinib trial, which involved patients on stable csDMARD therapy who could not tolerate or had disease refractory to a biologic DMARD, will be presented during a late-breaking poster session on Tuesday, Nov. 7. The study randomized 499 patients who had severe, refractory disease for a mean duration of 13 years. At 12 weeks, treatment with upadacitinib resulted in ACR 20 responses in 64.6% at 15 mg and 56.4% at 30 mg, compared with 28.4% for placebo. Responses at 12 weeks of 3.2 or less for DAS28-CRP also occurred at significantly higher rates of 43.3% for 15 mg and 42.4% for 30 mg, compared with 14.2% for placebo. Patients who were switched from placebo to active treatment at week 12 also achieved these responses at week 24, and the people who stayed on treatment with upadacitinib maintained or improved their response at week 24. More adverse events and infections tended to occur with upadacitinib at 30 mg than with 15 mg, and there were more herpes zoster infections with 30 mg (n = 4) vs. 15 mg (n = 1) and placebo (n = 1).
 

Antifractalkine monoclonal antibody

The Monday afternoon RA therapy abstract session will also feature the first-in-patient results at 52 weeks for the antifractalkine monoclonal antibody E6011 in an open-label phase 1/2 study of Japanese RA patients with active disease who had an inadequate response or intolerance to methotrexate or a TNF inhibitor. The results from the small trial of the biologic, which targets the chemokine that regulates chemotaxis and the adhesion of inflammatory cells that express CX3C chemokine receptor 1 (CX3CR1), indicate that the treatment has durable efficacy and is safe and well tolerated. Adverse events (AEs) developed in 84% of 28 patients who participated in the 52-week extension study, including a rate of 48% for treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) and 14% for serious AEs. ACR 20 rates at week 52 ranged from 58% for 100 mg of E6011 to 73% for 200 mg and 60% for 400 mg.

Filgotinib safety in an extension trial

The long-term, open-label results from two phase 2b studies of the JAK-1 inhibitor filgotinib that’s in development for RA also will be presented during the same Monday abstract session. These safety data out to 84 weeks from the long-term extension study of the DARWIN 1 and 2 studies, called DARWIN 3, show that, among patients who received at least one dose of filgotinib 100 mg twice daily or 200 mg once daily in addition to methotrexate, the rate of TEAEs ranged from about 146 to 153 per 100 patient-years of exposure (PYE), including about 41-45 infections per 100 PYE. For filgotinib monotherapy, the rate of TEAEs was 150 per 100 PYE for 200 mg once daily, including 38 infections per 100 PYE.

Total cholesterol of 200-239 mg/dL occurred at a rate of about 79 per 100 PYE and a level of 240 mg/dL or greater was seen in 61-64 per 100 PYE for patients who took filgotinib plus methotrexate. Filgotinib monotherapy at 200 mg once daily gave rates of about 94 and 71 per 100 PYE for those respective total cholesterol levels.

jevans@frontlinemedcom.com

New results from several investigational oral Janus kinase inhibitor trials and an antifractalkine monoclonal antibody trial for patients with rheumatoid arthritis will be made available for the first time to attendees of the annual meeting of the American College of Rheumatology on Nov. 6 and 7 in San Diego.

Selective JAK-1 inhibitor upadacitinib

Two double-blind, randomized, controlled phase 3 studies of the oral, selective JAK-1 inhibitor upadacitinib (ABT-494) will be presented at the meeting, both involving once-daily extended-release formulations of the drug at 15 mg or 30 mg. The first trial, to be presented during an ACR abstract session on Monday, Nov. 6, showed that the drug met ACR 20 response criteria at significantly higher rates than did placebo at week 12 (63.8% for 15 mg, 66.2% for 30 mg, and 35.7% for placebo) in 661 patients with active RA and an inadequate response to conventional synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (csDMARDs). Patients on the study drug also achieved low disease activity (28-joint Disease Activity Score using C-reactive protein [DAS28-CRP] of 3.2 or less) in higher proportions than did those who received placebo (48.4% for 15 mg, 47.9% for 30 mg, and 17.2% for placebo). More infections occurred in patients on 15 mg and 30 mg upadacitinib (29.0% and 31.5%, respectively), compared with placebo (21.3%), but there were no differences in serious infections. Three of the total four cases of herpes zoster infection were in patients taking upadacitinib.

A second upadacitinib trial, which involved patients on stable csDMARD therapy who could not tolerate or had disease refractory to a biologic DMARD, will be presented during a late-breaking poster session on Tuesday, Nov. 7. The study randomized 499 patients who had severe, refractory disease for a mean duration of 13 years. At 12 weeks, treatment with upadacitinib resulted in ACR 20 responses in 64.6% at 15 mg and 56.4% at 30 mg, compared with 28.4% for placebo. Responses at 12 weeks of 3.2 or less for DAS28-CRP also occurred at significantly higher rates of 43.3% for 15 mg and 42.4% for 30 mg, compared with 14.2% for placebo. Patients who were switched from placebo to active treatment at week 12 also achieved these responses at week 24, and the people who stayed on treatment with upadacitinib maintained or improved their response at week 24. More adverse events and infections tended to occur with upadacitinib at 30 mg than with 15 mg, and there were more herpes zoster infections with 30 mg (n = 4) vs. 15 mg (n = 1) and placebo (n = 1).
 

Antifractalkine monoclonal antibody

The Monday afternoon RA therapy abstract session will also feature the first-in-patient results at 52 weeks for the antifractalkine monoclonal antibody E6011 in an open-label phase 1/2 study of Japanese RA patients with active disease who had an inadequate response or intolerance to methotrexate or a TNF inhibitor. The results from the small trial of the biologic, which targets the chemokine that regulates chemotaxis and the adhesion of inflammatory cells that express CX3C chemokine receptor 1 (CX3CR1), indicate that the treatment has durable efficacy and is safe and well tolerated. Adverse events (AEs) developed in 84% of 28 patients who participated in the 52-week extension study, including a rate of 48% for treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) and 14% for serious AEs. ACR 20 rates at week 52 ranged from 58% for 100 mg of E6011 to 73% for 200 mg and 60% for 400 mg.

Filgotinib safety in an extension trial

The long-term, open-label results from two phase 2b studies of the JAK-1 inhibitor filgotinib that’s in development for RA also will be presented during the same Monday abstract session. These safety data out to 84 weeks from the long-term extension study of the DARWIN 1 and 2 studies, called DARWIN 3, show that, among patients who received at least one dose of filgotinib 100 mg twice daily or 200 mg once daily in addition to methotrexate, the rate of TEAEs ranged from about 146 to 153 per 100 patient-years of exposure (PYE), including about 41-45 infections per 100 PYE. For filgotinib monotherapy, the rate of TEAEs was 150 per 100 PYE for 200 mg once daily, including 38 infections per 100 PYE.

Total cholesterol of 200-239 mg/dL occurred at a rate of about 79 per 100 PYE and a level of 240 mg/dL or greater was seen in 61-64 per 100 PYE for patients who took filgotinib plus methotrexate. Filgotinib monotherapy at 200 mg once daily gave rates of about 94 and 71 per 100 PYE for those respective total cholesterol levels.

jevans@frontlinemedcom.com

The treatment and prevention of rheumatic diseases through a precision medicine approach that takes into account individual variability in genes, environment, and lifestyle has not yet become a reality in clinical practice, but researchers in the field hope to demonstrate its potential at a course before and a session during the annual meeting of the American College of Rheumatology in San Diego.

In a 2-day premeeting course that begins on Friday, Nov. 3, a multidisciplinary faculty will discuss the technologies involved in precision medicine research; the complexities and challenges of identifying optimal drug treatments for rheumatic diseases; past, ongoing, and future research initiatives in precision medicine affecting rheumatic diseases; and how large data-set analysis and collaborative networks of researchers can shape its future.

Later, during the meeting on the afternoon of Monday, Nov. 6, an ACR session will look at how precision medicine research in patients with systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) has laid groundwork to improve clinical trial design and the implementation of more tailored treatment for SLE and other complex autoimmune diseases.

The first day of the 2-day premeeting course will cover current approaches to studying familial and pediatric rheumatic diseases as well as an outline of how precision medicine could affect treatment approaches to SLE. Later in the day, presentations will focus on examples of personalized medicine approaches that have been derived from studies of cancer genomics and familial syndromes and the genetic underpinning of different responses to medications. The impact of direct-to-consumer genetic testing will also be discussed. Abstract presentations at the end of the day will focus on new genetic biomarkers that differentiate active disease from remission in granulomatosis with polyangiitis and mutations related to cancer-associated myositis.

The second day of the course on Saturday, Nov. 4, will focus on the technology behind precision medicine, followed by data analysis and integration into clinical practice. Technology presentations aim to demonstrate how transcriptional analysis of single immune cells and epigenetics in small numbers of cells can provide information about disease activity and prognosis. Examples of how multiple types of data can be integrated to form a picture of the pathogenesis of diseases such as rheumatoid arthritis will be discussed. Two abstract presentations will serve to show how analysis of tissue-specific serum biomarkers can identify rheumatoid arthritis patients with structural progression and how the presence of a specific antibody can predict better response to anti–tumor necrosis factor treatment and better disease control over time. In the afternoon, sessions will focus on analyzing single-cell data in key cell subpopulations in rheumatic disease and specifically address immune cell interactions across systems in SLE.

On Monday at 1:00 p.m., Maria Virginia Pascual, PhD, director of the Drukier Institute for Children’s Health and the Ronay A. Menschel Professor of Pediatrics at Cornell University in New York will speak in the ACR session, “Precision Medicine for Rheumatic Disease: Closer Than You Think?” Dr. Pascual will provide an overview of her lab’s recent work in transcriptional profiling of pediatric SLE patients, which demonstrates the potential value of immunomonitoring in order to stratify patients into discrete molecular groups to make clinical trial design better and offer more targeted therapies.

jevans@frontlinemedcom.com

The treatment and prevention of rheumatic diseases through a precision medicine approach that takes into account individual variability in genes, environment, and lifestyle has not yet become a reality in clinical practice, but researchers in the field hope to demonstrate its potential at a course before and a session during the annual meeting of the American College of Rheumatology in San Diego.

In a 2-day premeeting course that begins on Friday, Nov. 3, a multidisciplinary faculty will discuss the technologies involved in precision medicine research; the complexities and challenges of identifying optimal drug treatments for rheumatic diseases; past, ongoing, and future research initiatives in precision medicine affecting rheumatic diseases; and how large data-set analysis and collaborative networks of researchers can shape its future.

Later, during the meeting on the afternoon of Monday, Nov. 6, an ACR session will look at how precision medicine research in patients with systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) has laid groundwork to improve clinical trial design and the implementation of more tailored treatment for SLE and other complex autoimmune diseases.

The first day of the 2-day premeeting course will cover current approaches to studying familial and pediatric rheumatic diseases as well as an outline of how precision medicine could affect treatment approaches to SLE. Later in the day, presentations will focus on examples of personalized medicine approaches that have been derived from studies of cancer genomics and familial syndromes and the genetic underpinning of different responses to medications. The impact of direct-to-consumer genetic testing will also be discussed. Abstract presentations at the end of the day will focus on new genetic biomarkers that differentiate active disease from remission in granulomatosis with polyangiitis and mutations related to cancer-associated myositis.

The second day of the course on Saturday, Nov. 4, will focus on the technology behind precision medicine, followed by data analysis and integration into clinical practice. Technology presentations aim to demonstrate how transcriptional analysis of single immune cells and epigenetics in small numbers of cells can provide information about disease activity and prognosis. Examples of how multiple types of data can be integrated to form a picture of the pathogenesis of diseases such as rheumatoid arthritis will be discussed. Two abstract presentations will serve to show how analysis of tissue-specific serum biomarkers can identify rheumatoid arthritis patients with structural progression and how the presence of a specific antibody can predict better response to anti–tumor necrosis factor treatment and better disease control over time. In the afternoon, sessions will focus on analyzing single-cell data in key cell subpopulations in rheumatic disease and specifically address immune cell interactions across systems in SLE.

On Monday at 1:00 p.m., Maria Virginia Pascual, PhD, director of the Drukier Institute for Children’s Health and the Ronay A. Menschel Professor of Pediatrics at Cornell University in New York will speak in the ACR session, “Precision Medicine for Rheumatic Disease: Closer Than You Think?” Dr. Pascual will provide an overview of her lab’s recent work in transcriptional profiling of pediatric SLE patients, which demonstrates the potential value of immunomonitoring in order to stratify patients into discrete molecular groups to make clinical trial design better and offer more targeted therapies.

jevans@frontlinemedcom.com

The treatment and prevention of rheumatic diseases through a precision medicine approach that takes into account individual variability in genes, environment, and lifestyle has not yet become a reality in clinical practice, but researchers in the field hope to demonstrate its potential at a course before and a session during the annual meeting of the American College of Rheumatology in San Diego.

In a 2-day premeeting course that begins on Friday, Nov. 3, a multidisciplinary faculty will discuss the technologies involved in precision medicine research; the complexities and challenges of identifying optimal drug treatments for rheumatic diseases; past, ongoing, and future research initiatives in precision medicine affecting rheumatic diseases; and how large data-set analysis and collaborative networks of researchers can shape its future.

Later, during the meeting on the afternoon of Monday, Nov. 6, an ACR session will look at how precision medicine research in patients with systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) has laid groundwork to improve clinical trial design and the implementation of more tailored treatment for SLE and other complex autoimmune diseases.

The first day of the 2-day premeeting course will cover current approaches to studying familial and pediatric rheumatic diseases as well as an outline of how precision medicine could affect treatment approaches to SLE. Later in the day, presentations will focus on examples of personalized medicine approaches that have been derived from studies of cancer genomics and familial syndromes and the genetic underpinning of different responses to medications. The impact of direct-to-consumer genetic testing will also be discussed. Abstract presentations at the end of the day will focus on new genetic biomarkers that differentiate active disease from remission in granulomatosis with polyangiitis and mutations related to cancer-associated myositis.

The second day of the course on Saturday, Nov. 4, will focus on the technology behind precision medicine, followed by data analysis and integration into clinical practice. Technology presentations aim to demonstrate how transcriptional analysis of single immune cells and epigenetics in small numbers of cells can provide information about disease activity and prognosis. Examples of how multiple types of data can be integrated to form a picture of the pathogenesis of diseases such as rheumatoid arthritis will be discussed. Two abstract presentations will serve to show how analysis of tissue-specific serum biomarkers can identify rheumatoid arthritis patients with structural progression and how the presence of a specific antibody can predict better response to anti–tumor necrosis factor treatment and better disease control over time. In the afternoon, sessions will focus on analyzing single-cell data in key cell subpopulations in rheumatic disease and specifically address immune cell interactions across systems in SLE.

On Monday at 1:00 p.m., Maria Virginia Pascual, PhD, director of the Drukier Institute for Children’s Health and the Ronay A. Menschel Professor of Pediatrics at Cornell University in New York will speak in the ACR session, “Precision Medicine for Rheumatic Disease: Closer Than You Think?” Dr. Pascual will provide an overview of her lab’s recent work in transcriptional profiling of pediatric SLE patients, which demonstrates the potential value of immunomonitoring in order to stratify patients into discrete molecular groups to make clinical trial design better and offer more targeted therapies.

jevans@frontlinemedcom.com

Two “Great Debates” at this year’s annual meeting of the American College of Rheumatology in San Diego will center on important, but completely separate, issues in rheumatology: whether it is safe to switch to a biosimilar and the relevance of curricular milestones in rheumatology training.

At 2:30 p.m. on Sunday, Nov. 5, a session titled “Biosimilars ... To Switch or Not to Switch? That Is the Question“ will pit Jonathan Kay, MD, against Roy Fleischmann, MD, to try to sway the audience to their point of view in the face of a small evidence base about the consequences of switching.

Dr. Kay, the Timothy S. and Elaine L. Peterson Chair in Rheumatology and professor of medicine at the University of Massachusetts, Worcester, where he directs clinical research in the division of rheumatology, will discuss and defend the usefulness of biosimilars for rheumatoid arthritis in his presentation, “The Data Supports That It Is Safe, Effective and Cost-Effective to Switch to a Biosimilar.” He has been greatly involved in clinical research on the development of biosimilars to treat rheumatic diseases in recent years.

In his presentation, “The Data Is Not Convincing. One Study Cannot Be Generalized to All Indications, and Some Studies Suggest That It Is Not Safe, Not Effective and Not Cost-Effective to Switch All Patients (YET) to a Biosimilar,” Dr. Fleischmann will discuss and defend the position that biosimilars are not yet well-enough researched to confidently allow switching. Dr. Fleischmann is clinical professor in the department of internal medicine at the University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas.

At 7:30 a.m. on Monday, Nov. 6, two clinician-educators will advocate for opposing opinions in “The Great (Educational) Debate: Milestones: Meaningful vs. Millstone.” The debate will focus on the relative merits of the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education’s Next Accreditation System, which in 2013 led to a paradigm shift in how training programs approach curriculum development, and how both trainees and their programs are assessed.

Calvin Brown, MD, professor of medicine in the division of rheumatology and director of the rheumatology training program at Northwestern University, Chicago, will describe the reported and perceived benefits of the milestones, while Simon Helfgott, MD, of Brigham and Women’s Hospital, Boston, will summarize the arguments that underlie the call for radical change in the milestones system of evaluation

jevans@frontlinemedcom.com

Two “Great Debates” at this year’s annual meeting of the American College of Rheumatology in San Diego will center on important, but completely separate, issues in rheumatology: whether it is safe to switch to a biosimilar and the relevance of curricular milestones in rheumatology training.

At 2:30 p.m. on Sunday, Nov. 5, a session titled “Biosimilars ... To Switch or Not to Switch? That Is the Question“ will pit Jonathan Kay, MD, against Roy Fleischmann, MD, to try to sway the audience to their point of view in the face of a small evidence base about the consequences of switching.

Dr. Kay, the Timothy S. and Elaine L. Peterson Chair in Rheumatology and professor of medicine at the University of Massachusetts, Worcester, where he directs clinical research in the division of rheumatology, will discuss and defend the usefulness of biosimilars for rheumatoid arthritis in his presentation, “The Data Supports That It Is Safe, Effective and Cost-Effective to Switch to a Biosimilar.” He has been greatly involved in clinical research on the development of biosimilars to treat rheumatic diseases in recent years.

In his presentation, “The Data Is Not Convincing. One Study Cannot Be Generalized to All Indications, and Some Studies Suggest That It Is Not Safe, Not Effective and Not Cost-Effective to Switch All Patients (YET) to a Biosimilar,” Dr. Fleischmann will discuss and defend the position that biosimilars are not yet well-enough researched to confidently allow switching. Dr. Fleischmann is clinical professor in the department of internal medicine at the University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas.

At 7:30 a.m. on Monday, Nov. 6, two clinician-educators will advocate for opposing opinions in “The Great (Educational) Debate: Milestones: Meaningful vs. Millstone.” The debate will focus on the relative merits of the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education’s Next Accreditation System, which in 2013 led to a paradigm shift in how training programs approach curriculum development, and how both trainees and their programs are assessed.

Calvin Brown, MD, professor of medicine in the division of rheumatology and director of the rheumatology training program at Northwestern University, Chicago, will describe the reported and perceived benefits of the milestones, while Simon Helfgott, MD, of Brigham and Women’s Hospital, Boston, will summarize the arguments that underlie the call for radical change in the milestones system of evaluation

jevans@frontlinemedcom.com

Two “Great Debates” at this year’s annual meeting of the American College of Rheumatology in San Diego will center on important, but completely separate, issues in rheumatology: whether it is safe to switch to a biosimilar and the relevance of curricular milestones in rheumatology training.

At 2:30 p.m. on Sunday, Nov. 5, a session titled “Biosimilars ... To Switch or Not to Switch? That Is the Question“ will pit Jonathan Kay, MD, against Roy Fleischmann, MD, to try to sway the audience to their point of view in the face of a small evidence base about the consequences of switching.

Dr. Kay, the Timothy S. and Elaine L. Peterson Chair in Rheumatology and professor of medicine at the University of Massachusetts, Worcester, where he directs clinical research in the division of rheumatology, will discuss and defend the usefulness of biosimilars for rheumatoid arthritis in his presentation, “The Data Supports That It Is Safe, Effective and Cost-Effective to Switch to a Biosimilar.” He has been greatly involved in clinical research on the development of biosimilars to treat rheumatic diseases in recent years.

In his presentation, “The Data Is Not Convincing. One Study Cannot Be Generalized to All Indications, and Some Studies Suggest That It Is Not Safe, Not Effective and Not Cost-Effective to Switch All Patients (YET) to a Biosimilar,” Dr. Fleischmann will discuss and defend the position that biosimilars are not yet well-enough researched to confidently allow switching. Dr. Fleischmann is clinical professor in the department of internal medicine at the University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas.

At 7:30 a.m. on Monday, Nov. 6, two clinician-educators will advocate for opposing opinions in “The Great (Educational) Debate: Milestones: Meaningful vs. Millstone.” The debate will focus on the relative merits of the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education’s Next Accreditation System, which in 2013 led to a paradigm shift in how training programs approach curriculum development, and how both trainees and their programs are assessed.

Calvin Brown, MD, professor of medicine in the division of rheumatology and director of the rheumatology training program at Northwestern University, Chicago, will describe the reported and perceived benefits of the milestones, while Simon Helfgott, MD, of Brigham and Women’s Hospital, Boston, will summarize the arguments that underlie the call for radical change in the milestones system of evaluation

jevans@frontlinemedcom.com