7
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Evaluating the efficacy of upadacitinib in patients with moderate rheumatoid arthritis: a post-hoc analysis of the SELECT phase 3 trials

      brief-report

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Objectives

          Moderately active RA is associated with poor patient outcomes. Despite this, some health systems have restricted access to advanced therapies to those with severe RA. There is also limited evidence of the efficacy of advanced therapies in the moderately active RA population. This post-hoc analysis from four phase 3 trials explored the efficacy of upadacitinib (UPA) for moderately active RA.

          Methods

          Patients included in this analysis received UPA 15 mg once daily [monotherapy after switching from MTX or in combination with stable background conventional synthetic DMARDs (csDMARDs)] or placebo. Clinical, functional and radiographic outcomes were analysed separately for patients with moderate disease activity {28-joint count DAS using CRP [DAS28(CRP)] of >3.2 and ≤5.1} and severe disease activity [DAS28(CRP) >5.1].

          Results

          Patients with moderate disease activity who received UPA 15 mg (combination or monotherapy) after an inadequate response to biologic DMARDs and/or csDMARDs were significantly more likely to achieve a 20% improvement in the ACR response criteria, low disease activity status [DAS28(CRP) ≤ 3.2] or clinical remission [DAS28(CRP) < 2.6] by week 12/14 vs placebo. Statistically significant improvements in patient-reported functioning and pain from baseline were observed for UPA 15 mg vs placebo at week 12/14. Radiographic progression was also significantly reduced at week 26 compared with placebo. Similar improvements were observed for severe disease.

          Conclusion

          This analysis provides support for the use of UPA for the treatment of patients with moderate RA.

          Trial registration

          ClinicalTrials.gov: SELECT-NEXT: NCT02675426; SELECT-COMPARE: NCT02629159; SELECT-MONOTHERAPY: NCT02706951; SELECT-BEYOND: NCT02706847.

          Related collections

          Most cited references19

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          American College of Rheumatology. Preliminary definition of improvement in rheumatoid arthritis.

          Trials of rheumatoid arthritis (RA) treatments report the average response in multiple outcome measures for treated patients. It is more clinically relevant to test whether individual patients improve with treatment, and this identifies a single primary efficacy measure. Multiple definitions of improvement are currently in use in different trials. The goal of this study was to promulgate a single definition for use in RA trials. Using the American College of Rheumatology (ACR) core set of outcome measures for RA trials, we tested 40 different definitions of improvement, using a 3-step process. First, we performed a survey of rheumatologists, using actual patient cases from trials, to evaluate which definitions corresponded best to rheumatologists' impressions of improvement, eliminating most candidate definitions of improvement. Second, we tested 20 remaining definitions to determine which maximally discriminated effective treatment from placebo treatment and also minimized placebo response rates. With 8 candidate definitions of improvement remaining, we tested to see which were easiest to use and were best in accord with rheumatologists' impressions of improvement. The following definition of improvement was selected: 20% improvement in tender and swollen joint counts and 20% improvement in 3 of the 5 remaining ACR core set measures: patient and physician global assessments, pain, disability, and an acute-phase reactant. Additional validation of this definition was carried out in a comparative trial, and the results suggest that the definition is statistically powerful and does not identify a large percentage of placebo-treated patients as being improved. We present a definition of improvement which we hope will be used widely in RA trials.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Upadacitinib versus Placebo or Adalimumab in Patients with Rheumatoid Arthritis and an Inadequate Response to Methotrexate: Results of a Phase 3, Double‐Blind, Randomized Controlled Trial

            To evaluate the efficacy, including capacity for inhibition of radiographic progression, and safety of upadacitinib, a JAK1-selective inhibitor, as compared to placebo or adalimumab in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) who have experienced an inadequate response to methotrexate (MTX).
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: not found
              • Article: not found

              The dimensions of health outcomes: the health assessment questionnaire, disability and pain scales.

                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                Journal
                Rheumatol Adv Pract
                Rheumatol Adv Pract
                rheumap
                Rheumatology Advances in Practice
                Oxford University Press
                2514-1775
                2023
                08 February 2023
                08 February 2023
                : 7
                : 1
                : rkad017
                Affiliations
                Leeds Institute of Rheumatic and Musculoskeletal Medicine, University of Leeds , Leeds, UK
                National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR), Leeds Biomedical Research Centre , Leeds, UK
                Institute of Rheumatology, Charles University , Prague, Czech Republic
                International Medicine, National Taiwan University Hospital , Taipei, Taiwan
                Medical, AbbVie Ltd , Chicago, IL, USA
                Medical, AbbVie Ltd , Chicago, IL, USA
                Medical, AbbVie Ltd , Chicago, IL, USA
                NIHR Southampton Clinical Research Facility, University Hospital Southampton NHS Foundation Trust , Southampton, UK
                Author notes
                Correspondence to: Philip G. Conaghan, Leeds Institute of Rheumatic and Musculoskeletal Medicine, Chapel Allerton Hospital, 2nd Floor, Chapeltown Road, Leeds LS7 4SA, UK. E-mail: p.conaghan@ 123456leeds.ac.uk
                Author information
                https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3478-5665
                https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8233-6602
                Article
                rkad017
                10.1093/rap/rkad017
                9924096
                c5f015a7-cf50-45ca-ba59-3b81d78bbcd8
                © The Author(s) 2023. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the British Society for Rheumatology.

                This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial License ( https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/), which permits non-commercial re-use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. For commercial re-use, please contact journals.permissions@oup.com

                History
                : 18 November 2022
                : 04 January 2022
                : 13 February 2023
                Page count
                Pages: 7
                Funding
                Funded by: AbbVie, DOI 10.13039/100006483;
                Categories
                Concise Report
                AcademicSubjects/MED00010

                ra,moderate,moderate disease activity,upadacitinib,jak inhibitors

                Comments

                Comment on this article