E Dokoupilová1, J Aelion2, T Takeuchi3, N Malavolta4, P P Sfikakis5, Y Wang6, S Rohrer7, H B Richards7. 1. a Medical Plus, s.r.o ., Uherske Hradiste , Czech Republic. 2. b Jackson Arthritis Clinic, and Health Science Center , University of Tennessee , Memphis , TN , USA. 3. c Division of Rheumatology , Keio University School of Medicine , Tokyo , Japan. 4. d Department of Medical and Surgical Sciences, Division of Internal Medicine , St Orsola-Malpighi Hospital, University of Bologna , Bologna , Italy. 5. e Joint Academic Rheumatology Program , National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, School of Medicine , Athens , Greece. 6. f Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation , East Hanover , NJ , USA. 7. g Novartis Pharma AG , Basel , Switzerland.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To assess the efficacy and safety of secukinumab in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) who failed to respond to tumour necrosisfactor- α (TNF-α) inhibitors. METHOD: This phase III double-blind, double-dummy, placebo-controlled study (NCT01770379) randomized (1:1:1) patients to subcutaneous secukinumab 150 mg, secukinumab 75 mg, or placebo at baseline, weeks 1, 2, 3, and 4, and then every 4 weeks. American College of Rheumatology (ACR) 20 response at week 24 was the primary endpoint. Secondary outcomes included the 28-joint Disease Activity Score using C-reactive protein (DAS28-CRP), Health Assessment Questionnaire Disability Index (HAQ-DI), and ACR50 at week 24. Long-term treatment was planned for 5 years. RESULTS:ACR20 response rates at week 24 for the secukinumab 150 mg and 75 mg groups were not statistically superior to placebo. None of the secondary endpoints was met for either secukinumab dose. Although not statistically significant, compared with placebo, numerically greater differences in least squares mean changes from baseline in HAQ-DI score and numerically higher ACR50 response rates were observed at week 24 in both secukinumab treatment groups. No new or unexpected adverse events were observed in this study compared with the large secukinumab safety database across psoriasis, psoriatic arthritis, ankylosing spondylitis, and other RA studies. CONCLUSIONS: Given that other second-line therapies have demonstrated efficacy in RA patients who failed to respond to TNF-α inhibitors, these findings may suggest that interleukin-17A inhibition with secukinumab does not provide additional benefit to these patients. This study further confirms the well-characterized safety profile of secukinumab.
RCT Entities:
OBJECTIVE: To assess the efficacy and safety of secukinumab in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) who failed to respond to tumour necrosis factor- α (TNF-α) inhibitors. METHOD: This phase III double-blind, double-dummy, placebo-controlled study (NCT01770379) randomized (1:1:1) patients to subcutaneous secukinumab 150 mg, secukinumab 75 mg, or placebo at baseline, weeks 1, 2, 3, and 4, and then every 4 weeks. American College of Rheumatology (ACR) 20 response at week 24 was the primary endpoint. Secondary outcomes included the 28-joint Disease Activity Score using C-reactive protein (DAS28-CRP), Health Assessment Questionnaire Disability Index (HAQ-DI), and ACR50 at week 24. Long-term treatment was planned for 5 years. RESULTS: ACR20 response rates at week 24 for the secukinumab 150 mg and 75 mg groups were not statistically superior to placebo. None of the secondary endpoints was met for either secukinumab dose. Although not statistically significant, compared with placebo, numerically greater differences in least squares mean changes from baseline in HAQ-DI score and numerically higher ACR50 response rates were observed at week 24 in both secukinumab treatment groups. No new or unexpected adverse events were observed in this study compared with the large secukinumab safety database across psoriasis, psoriatic arthritis, ankylosing spondylitis, and other RA studies. CONCLUSIONS: Given that other second-line therapies have demonstrated efficacy in RApatients who failed to respond to TNF-α inhibitors, these findings may suggest that interleukin-17A inhibition with secukinumab does not provide additional benefit to these patients. This study further confirms the well-characterized safety profile of secukinumab.
Authors: Wendy Dankers; Hannah den Braanker; Sandra M J Paulissen; Jan Piet van Hamburg; Nadine Davelaar; Edgar M Colin; Erik Lubberts Journal: Arthritis Res Ther Date: 2021-06-03 Impact factor: 5.156
Authors: James T Rosenbaum; Christina A Harrington; Robert P Searles; Suzanne S Fei; Amr Zaki; Sruthi Arepalli; Michael A Paley; Lynn M Hassman; Albert T Vitale; Christopher D Conrady; Puthyda Keath; Claire Mitchell; Lindsey Watson; Stephen R Planck; Tammy M Martin; Dongseok Choi Journal: Am J Ophthalmol Date: 2021-01-24 Impact factor: 5.488
Authors: Johan Burisch; Wolfgang Eigner; Stefan Schreiber; Daniel Aletaha; Wolfgang Weninger; Michael Trauner; Walter Reinisch; Neeraj Narula Journal: PLoS One Date: 2020-05-27 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Stefan Schreiber; Jean-Frederic Colombel; Brian G Feagan; Kristian Reich; Atul A Deodhar; Iain B McInnes; Brian Porter; Ayan Das Gupta; Luminita Pricop; Todd Fox Journal: Ann Rheum Dis Date: 2019-01-23 Impact factor: 19.103
Authors: Sophie Glatt; Peter C Taylor; Iain B McInnes; Georg Schett; Robert Landewé; Dominique Baeten; Lucian Ionescu; Foteini Strimenopoulou; Mark I L Watling; Stevan Shaw Journal: Ann Rheum Dis Date: 2019-06-08 Impact factor: 19.103