Safety and Efficacy of Upadacitinib in Patients with Rheumatoid Arthritis Refractory to Biologic DMARDs: Results Through Week 216 from the SELECT-CHOICE Study.
Abatacept
Biologic disease-modifying antirheumatic drug inadequate response (bDMARD-IR)
Efficacy
Janus kinase (JAK) inhibitor
Patient-reported outcomes (PROs)
Rheumatoid arthritis (RA)
SELECT-CHOICE
Safety
Upadacitinib
Journal
Rheumatology and therapy
ISSN: 2198-6576
Titre abrégé: Rheumatol Ther
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101674543
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
20 Jul 2024
20 Jul 2024
Historique:
received:
21
02
2024
accepted:
17
06
2024
medline:
20
7
2024
pubmed:
20
7
2024
entrez:
20
7
2024
Statut:
aheadofprint
Résumé
The safety and efficacy of upadacitinib 15 mg (UPA15) through week 216 was evaluated in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) from the long-term extension (LTE) of the phase 3 SELECT-CHOICE study. Patients with RA refractory to biologic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (bDMARDs) were randomized to UPA15 or abatacept (ABA) for 24 weeks. During the open-label LTE, patients on ABA switched to UPA15 at week 24, and those on UPA15 continued treatment. The safety and efficacy of continuous UPA15, and ABA to UPA15, are summarized through week 216. The LTE was comprised of 91.4% (n = 277/303) of patients that initially received UPA15, and 89.6% (n = 277/309) that initially received ABA. Of patients on UPA15 in the LTE (n = 547), 28.3% (n = 155/547) discontinued the study drug by week 216. Relative to other adverse events of special interest, and largely consistent with previous findings at week 24, higher rates of serious infection, COVID-19, herpes zoster, and elevated creatine phosphokinase were reported, while rates of malignancy excluding nonmelanoma skin cancer (NMSC), NMSC, major adverse cardiovascular event (MACE), and venous thromboembolism (VTE) were low. Long-term safety data with UPA through week 216 aligned with previous observations and no new safety risks were identified, including in patients who switched from ABA to UPA15. Proportions of patients achieving 28-joint disease activity score based on C-reactive protein (DAS28[CRP]) < 2.6/ ≤ 3.2, clinical disease activity index (CDAI) and simple disease activity index (SDAI) low disease activity/remission, ≥ 20%/50%/70% improvement in the American College of Rheumatology (ACR20/50/70) response criteria, and Boolean remission were maintained or improved with UPA15 through week 216. Improvements in the Health Assessment Questionnaire-Disability Index (HAQ-DI), patient's assessment of pain, and Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy-Fatigue (FACIT-F) were also maintained or improved with UPA15 through week 216. Across all efficacy endpoints, similar results were observed in patients who switched from ABA to UPA15 versus continuous UPA15. Patients with an inadequate response to ≥ 1 prior tumor necrosis factor (TNF) inhibitor (UPA15: n = 263/303, 86.8%; ABA to UPA15: n = 273/309, 88.3%) showed similar responses to the total population. The long-term safety profile of UPA was consistent with previous findings and the broader RA clinical program. Compared to the primary analyses at week 24, efficacy responses were maintained or further improved with UPA15 through week 216 in patients with RA. Trial registration, ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT03086343. A long-term study looked at a drug named upadacitinib to treat people with rheumatoid arthritis (RA), a disease that causes joint pain and damage. The study included patients whose RA was not improved by other injectable medicines. The study compared upadacitinib with another drug called abatacept. After 24 weeks, patients who were taking abatacept switched to upadacitinib, and patients taking upadacitinib continued on upadacitinib treatment for over 4 years. The researchers looked at how well the treatments worked over the long-term and if there were any side effects. The side effects with upadacitinib treatment in this long-term study were similar to side effects reported in previous studies with upadacitinib. The researchers also found that upadacitinib helped to lessen the symptoms of RA over time and helped patients complete their daily activities and reduced their pain and tiredness. This was true for patients who switched from abatacept to upadacitinib after 24 weeks and for patients who took upadacitinib from the start of the study. Patients who had not responded to other medicines also had similar improvements with upadacitinib. In conclusion, upadacitinib can help people with RA over the long term and no new safety risks were found.
Autres résumés
Type: plain-language-summary
(eng)
A long-term study looked at a drug named upadacitinib to treat people with rheumatoid arthritis (RA), a disease that causes joint pain and damage. The study included patients whose RA was not improved by other injectable medicines. The study compared upadacitinib with another drug called abatacept. After 24 weeks, patients who were taking abatacept switched to upadacitinib, and patients taking upadacitinib continued on upadacitinib treatment for over 4 years. The researchers looked at how well the treatments worked over the long-term and if there were any side effects. The side effects with upadacitinib treatment in this long-term study were similar to side effects reported in previous studies with upadacitinib. The researchers also found that upadacitinib helped to lessen the symptoms of RA over time and helped patients complete their daily activities and reduced their pain and tiredness. This was true for patients who switched from abatacept to upadacitinib after 24 weeks and for patients who took upadacitinib from the start of the study. Patients who had not responded to other medicines also had similar improvements with upadacitinib. In conclusion, upadacitinib can help people with RA over the long term and no new safety risks were found.
Identifiants
pubmed: 39031276
doi: 10.1007/s40744-024-00694-x
pii: 10.1007/s40744-024-00694-x
doi:
Banques de données
ClinicalTrials.gov
['NCT03086343']
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Informations de copyright
© 2024. The Author(s).
Références
Rubbert-Roth A, Kato K, Haraoui B, Rischmueller M, Liu Y, Khan N, et al. Safety and efficacy of upadacitinib in patients with rheumatoid arthritis refractory to biologic DMARDs: results through week 204 from the SELECT-CHOICE study. Arthritis Rheumatol. 2023;75(suppl 9):2513–24.
Smolen JS, Landewé RBM, Bergstra SA, Kerschbaumer A, Sepriano A, Aletaha D, et al. EULAR recommendations for the management of rheumatoid arthritis with synthetic and biological disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs: 2022 update. Ann Rheum Dis. 2023;82:3–18.
pubmed: 36357155
Fraenkel L, Bathon JM, England BR, StClair EW, Arayssi T, Carandang K, et al. 2021 American College of Rheumatology guideline for the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis. Arthritis Rheumatol. 2021;73:1108–23.
pubmed: 34101376
Lin YJ, Anzaghe M, Schulke S. Update on the pathomechanism, diagnosis, and treatment options for rheumatoid arthritis. Cells. 2020;9:880.
pubmed: 32260219
pmcid: 7226834
Nam JL, Ramiro S, Gaujoux-Viala C, Takase K, Leon-Garcia M, Emery P, et al. Efficacy of biological disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs: a systematic literature review informing the 2013 update of the EULAR recommendations for the management of rheumatoid arthritis. Ann Rheum Dis. 2014;73:516–28.
pubmed: 24399231
Curtis JR, Singh JA. Use of biologics in rheumatoid arthritis: current and emerging paradigms of care. Clin Ther. 2011;33:679–707.
pubmed: 21704234
pmcid: 3707489
Kalden JR, Schulze-Koops H. Immunogenicity and loss of response to TNF inhibitors: implications for rheumatoid arthritis treatment. Nat Rev Rheumatol. 2017;13:707–18.
pubmed: 29158574
Listing J, Strangfeld A, Rau R, Kekow J, Gromnica-Ihle E, Klopsch T, et al. Clinical and functional remission: even though biologics are superior to conventional DMARDs overall success rates remain low—results from RABBIT, the German biologics register. Arthritis Res Ther. 2006;8:R66.
pubmed: 16600016
pmcid: 1526636
Rendas-Baum R, Wallenstein GV, Koncz T, Kosinski M, Yang M, Bradley J, et al. Evaluating the efficacy of sequential biologic therapies for rheumatoid arthritis patients with an inadequate response to tumor necrosis factor-α inhibitors. Arthritis Res Ther. 2011;13:R25.
pubmed: 21324169
pmcid: 3241369
Wang F, Tang X, Zhu M, Mao H, Wan H, Luo F. Efficacy and safety of JAK inhibitors for rheumatoid arthritis: a meta-analysis. J Clin Medicine. 2022;11:4459.
Taylor PC. Clinical efficacy of launched JAK inhibitors in rheumatoid arthritis. Rheumatology (Oxford). 2019;58:i17-26.
pubmed: 30806707
Venetsanopoulou AI, Voulgari PV, Drosos AA. us kinase versus TNF inhibitors: where we stand today in rheumatoid arthritis. Expert Rev Clin Immunol. 2022;18:485–93.
pubmed: 35535405
van Vollenhoven R, Takeuchi T, Pangan AL, Friedman A, Mohamed MF, Chen S, et al. Efficacy and safety of upadacitinib monotherapy in methotrexate-naive patients with moderately-to-severely active rheumatoid arthritis (SELECT-EARLY): a multicenter, multi-country, randomized, double-blind, active comparator-controlled trial. Arthritis Rheumatol. 2020;72:1607–20.
pubmed: 32638504
pmcid: 7589375
Burmester GR, Kremer JM, Van den Bosch F, Kivitz A, Bessette L, Li Y, et al. Safety and efficacy of upadacitinib in patients with rheumatoid arthritis and inadequate response to conventional synthetic disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs (SELECT-NEXT): a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled phase 3 trial. Lancet. 2018;391:2503–12.
pubmed: 29908669
Fleischmann R, Pangan AL, Song IH, Mysler E, Bessette L, Peterfy C, et al. Upadacitinib versus placebo or adalimumab in patients with rheumatoid arthritis and an inadequate response to methotrexate: results of a phase III, double-blind, randomized controlled trial. Arthritis Rheumatol. 2019;71:1788–800.
pubmed: 31287230
Smolen JS, Pangan AL, Emery P, Rigby W, Tanaka Y, Vargas JI, et al. Upadacitinib as monotherapy in patients with active rheumatoid arthritis and inadequate response to methotrexate (SELECT-MONOTHERAPY): a randomised, placebo-controlled, double-blind phase 3 study. Lancet. 2019;393:2303–11.
pubmed: 31130260
Genovese MC, Fleischmann R, Combe B, Hall S, Rubbert-Roth A, Zhang Y, et al. Safety and efficacy of upadacitinib in patients with active rheumatoid arthritis refractory to biologic disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs (SELECT-BEYOND): a double-blind, randomised controlled phase 3 trial. Lancet. 2018;391:2513–24.
pubmed: 29908670
Rubbert-Roth A, Enejosa J, Pangan AL, Haraoui B, Rischmueller M, Khan N, et al. Trial of upadacitinib or abatacept in rheumatoid arthritis. N Engl J Med. 2020;383:1511–21.
pubmed: 33053283
Woodworth T, Furst DE, Alten R, Bingham CO, Bingham C, Yocum D, et al. Standardizing assessment and reporting of adverse effects in rheumatology clinical trials II: the rheumatology common toxicity criteria v.2.0. J Rheumatol. 2007;34:1401–14.
pubmed: 17552067
Prevoo MLL, van’t Hof MA, Kuper HH, van Leeuwen MA, van de Putte LBA, van Riel PLCM. Modified disease activity scores that include twenty-eight-joint counts development and validation in a prospective longitudinal study of patients with rheumatoid arthritis. Arthritis Rheum. 1995;38:44–8.
pubmed: 7818570
Wells G, Becker J-C, Teng J, Dougados M, Schiff M, Smolen J, et al. Validation of the 28-joint disease activity score (DAS28) and European League against rheumatism response criteria based on C-reactive protein against disease progression in patients with rheumatoid arthritis, and comparison with the DAS28 based on erythrocyte sedimentation rate. Ann Rheum Dis. 2009;68:954–60.
pubmed: 18490431
Aletaha D, Smolen J. The simplified disease activity index (SDAI) and the clinical disease activity index (CDAI): a review of their usefulness and validity in rheumatoid arthritis. Clin Exp Rheumatol. 2005;23:S100–8.
pubmed: 16273793
Bykerk VP, Massarotti EM. The new ACR/EULAR remission criteria: rationale for developing new criteria for remission. Rheumatology. 2012;51:vi16–20.
pubmed: 23221582
Felson DT, Smolen JS, Wells G, Zhang B, van Tuyl LHD, Funovits J, et al. American College of Rheumatology/European league against rheumatism provisional definition of remission in rheumatoid arthritis for clinical trials. Ann Rheum Dis. 2011;70:404.
pubmed: 21292833
Felson DT, Anderson JJ, Boers M, Bombardier C, Furst D, Goldsmith C, et al. American college of rheumatology preliminary definition of improvement in rheumatoid arthritis. Arthritis Rheum. 1995;38:727–35.
pubmed: 7779114
Konzett V, Kerschbaumer A, Smolen JS, Aletaha D. Determination of the most appropriate ACR response definition for contemporary drug approval trials in rheumatoid arthritis. Ann Rheum Dis. 2024;83(1):58–64.
pubmed: 37758287
Strand V, Boers M, Idzerda L, Kirwan JR, Kvien TK, Tugwell PS, et al. It’s good to feel better but it’s better to feel good and even better to feel good as soon as possible for as long as possible. Response criteria and the importance of change at OMERACT 10. J Rheumatol. 2011;38:1720–7.
pubmed: 21807792
Kirwan JR, Reeback JS. Stanford health assessment questionnaire modified to assess disability in British patients with rheumatoid arthritis. Rheumatology. 1986;25:206–9.
Cella D, Yount S, Sorensen M, Chartash E, Sengupta N, Grober J. Validation of the functional assessment of chronic illness therapy fatigue scale relative to other instrumentation in patients with rheumatoid arthritis. J Rheumatol. 2005;32:811–9.
pubmed: 15868614
Fleischmann R, Mysler E, Bessette L, Peterfy CG, Durez P, Tanaka Y, et al. Long-term safety and efficacy of upadacitinib or adalimumab in patients with rheumatoid arthritis: results through 3 years from the SELECT-COMPARE study. RMD Open. 2022;8: e002012.
pubmed: 35121639
pmcid: 8819784
Burmester GR, Cohen SB, Winthrop KL, Nash P, Irvine AD, Deodhar A, et al. Safety profile of upadacitinib over 15 000 patient-years across rheumatoid arthritis, psoriatic arthritis, ankylosing spondylitis and atopic dermatitis. RMD Open. 2023;9: e002735.
pubmed: 36754548
pmcid: 9923346
Cohen SB, van Vollenhoven RF, Winthrop KL, Zerbini CAF, Tanaka Y, Bessette L, et al. Safety profile of upadacitinib in rheumatoid arthritis: integrated analysis from the SELECT phase III clinical programme. Ann Rheum Dis. 2021;3:304–11.
Clarke B, Yates M, Adas M, Bechman K, Galloway J. The safety of JAK-1 inhibitors. Rheumatology. 2021;60:ii24–30.
pubmed: 33950230
pmcid: 8098103
Harigai M. Growing evidence of the safety of JAK inhibitors in patients with rheumatoid arthritis. Rheumatology (Oxford). 2019;58:i34-42.
pubmed: 30806708
Sunzini F, McInnes I, Siebert S. JAK inhibitors and infections risk: focus on herpes zoster. Ther Adv Musculoskelet Dis. 2020. https://doi.org/10.1177/1759720X20936059 .
doi: 10.1177/1759720X20936059
pubmed: 32655703
pmcid: 7328488
Rubbert-Roth A, Kakehasi AM, Takeuchi T, Schmalzing M, Palac H, Coombs D, et al. Malignancy in the upadacitinib clinical trials for rheumatoid arthritis, psoriatic arthritis, ankylosing spondylitis, and non-radiographic axial spondyloarthritis. Rheumatol Ther. 2023;11:97–112.
pubmed: 37982966
pmcid: 10796874
Wang J, Yin W, Zhou L, Zhou G, Liu K, Hu C, et al. Risk of non-melanoma skin cancer for rheumatoid arthritis patients receiving TNF antagonist: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Clin Rheumatol. 2020;39:769–78.
pubmed: 31823140
Liu R, Wan Q, Zhao R, Xiao H, Cen Y, Xu X. Risk of non-melanoma skin cancer with biological therapy in common inflammatory diseases: a systemic review and meta-analysis. Cancer Cell Int. 2021;21:614.
pubmed: 34809619
pmcid: 8607648
Jalles C, Lepelley M, Mouret S, Charles J, Leccia M-T, Trabelsi S. Skin cancers under Janus kinase inhibitors: a World Health Organization drug safety database analysis. Therapies. 2022;77:649–56.
Nash P, Kerschbaumer A, Dörner T, Dougados M, Fleischmann RM, Geissler K, et al. Points to consider for the treatment of immune-mediated inflammatory diseases with Janus kinase inhibitors: a consensus statement. Ann Rheum Dis. 2021;80:71–87.
pubmed: 33158881
Charles-Schoeman C, Choy E, McInnes IB, Mysler E, Nash P, Yamaoka K, et al. MACE and VTE across upadacitinib clinical trial programmes in rheumatoid arthritis, psoriatic arthritis and ankylosing spondylitis. RMD Open. 2023;9: e003392.
pubmed: 37945286
pmcid: 10649869
Bergman M, Tundia N, Martin N, Suboticki JL, Patel J, Goldschmidt D, et al. Patient-reported outcomes of upadacitinib versus abatacept in patients with rheumatoid arthritis and an inadequate response to biologic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs: 12- and 24-week results of a phase 3 trial. Arthritis Res Ther. 2022;24:155.
pubmed: 35751108
pmcid: 9229430
Bartlett SJ, Leon ED, Orbai A-M, Haque UJ, Manno RL, Ruffing V, et al. Patient-reported outcomes in RA care improve patient communication, decision-making, satisfaction and confidence: qualitative results. Rheumatology. 2019;59:1662–70.
pmcid: 7310086
Strangfeld A, Eveslage M, Schneider M, Bergerhausen HJ, Klopsch T, Zink A, et al. Treatment benefit or survival of the fittest: what drives the time-dependent decrease in serious infection rates under TNF inhibition and what does this imply for the individual patient? Ann Rheum Dis. 2011;70:1914.
pubmed: 21791449