Maria Antonietta D'Agostino1, Georg Schett2,3, Alejandra López-Rdz4, Ladislav Šenolt5, Katalin Fazekas6, Ruben Burgos-Vargas7, Jose Maldonado-Cocco8, Esperanza Naredo9, Philippe Carron10,11, Anne-Marie Duggan12, Punit Goyanka13, Maarten Boers14, Corine Gaillez15. 1. Department of Rheumatology, Catholic University of Sacred Heart, Roma, Italy. 2. Department of Internal Medicine 3. 3. Deutsches Zentrum für Immuntherapie (DZI), Friedrich Alexander University of Erlangen-Nuremberg and Universitätsklinikum Erlangen, Erlangen, Germany. 4. Dermatológico Country, PSOAPS Psoriasis Clinical and Research Centre, Guadalajara, Mexico. 5. Institute of Rheumatology and Department of Rheumatology, Charles University, Prague, Czech Republic. 6. Department of Rheumatology, Miskolci Semmelweis Hospital and University Teaching Hospital, Miskolci, Hungary. 7. Department of Rheumatology, Hospital General de Mexico, Mexico City, Mexico. 8. School of Medicine, University of Buenos Aires, Buenos Aires, Argentina. 9. Department of Rheumatology and Joint and Bone Research Unit, Hospital Fundación Jiménez Díaz and Autónoma University, Madrid, Spain. 10. Department of Rheumatology, Ghent University Hospital. 11. VIB Inflammation Research Centre, Ghent University, Ghent, Belgium. 12. Novartis Ireland Limited, Dublin, Ireland. 13. Novartis Healthcare Pvt Ltd, Hyderabad, India. 14. Department of Epidemiology and Data Science, and Amsterdam Rheumatology and Immunology Centre, Amsterdam UMC, Vrije Universiteit, Amsterdam, The Netherlands. 15. Novartis Pharma AG, Basel, Switzerland.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To investigate the dynamics of response of synovitis to IL-17A inhibition with secukinumab in patients with active PsA using Power Doppler ultrasound. METHODS: The randomized, placebo-controlled, Phase III ULTIMATE study enrolled PsA patients with active ultrasound synovitis and clinical synovitis and enthesitis having an inadequate response to conventional DMARDs and naïve to biologic DMARDs. Patients were randomly assigned to receive either weekly subcutaneous secukinumab (300 or 150 mg according to the severity of psoriasis) or placebo followed by 4-weekly dosing thereafter. The primary outcome was the mean change in the ultrasound Global EULAR and OMERACT Synovitis Score (GLOESS) from baseline to week 12. Key secondary endpoints included ACR 20 and 50 responses. RESULTS: Of the 166 patients enrolled, 97% completed 12 weeks of treatment (secukinumab, 99%; placebo, 95%). The primary end point was met, and the adjusted mean change in GLOESS was higher with secukinumab than placebo [-9 (0.9) vs -6 (0.9), difference (95% CI): -3 (-6, -1); one-sided P=0.004] at week 12. The difference in GLOESS between secukinumab and placebo was significant as early as one week after initiation of treatment. All key secondary endpoints were met. No new or unexpected safety findings were reported. CONCLUSION: This unique ultrasound study shows that apart from improving the signs and symptoms of PsA, IL-17A inhibition with secukinumab leads to a rapid and significant reduction of synovitis in PsA patients. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov; NCT02662985.
OBJECTIVES: To investigate the dynamics of response of synovitis to IL-17A inhibition with secukinumab in patients with active PsA using Power Doppler ultrasound. METHODS: The randomized, placebo-controlled, Phase III ULTIMATE study enrolled PsA patients with active ultrasound synovitis and clinical synovitis and enthesitis having an inadequate response to conventional DMARDs and naïve to biologic DMARDs. Patients were randomly assigned to receive either weekly subcutaneous secukinumab (300 or 150 mg according to the severity of psoriasis) or placebo followed by 4-weekly dosing thereafter. The primary outcome was the mean change in the ultrasound Global EULAR and OMERACT Synovitis Score (GLOESS) from baseline to week 12. Key secondary endpoints included ACR 20 and 50 responses. RESULTS: Of the 166 patients enrolled, 97% completed 12 weeks of treatment (secukinumab, 99%; placebo, 95%). The primary end point was met, and the adjusted mean change in GLOESS was higher with secukinumab than placebo [-9 (0.9) vs -6 (0.9), difference (95% CI): -3 (-6, -1); one-sided P=0.004] at week 12. The difference in GLOESS between secukinumab and placebo was significant as early as one week after initiation of treatment. All key secondary endpoints were met. No new or unexpected safety findings were reported. CONCLUSION: This unique ultrasound study shows that apart from improving the signs and symptoms of PsA, IL-17A inhibition with secukinumab leads to a rapid and significant reduction of synovitis in PsA patients. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov; NCT02662985.
Importance of GLOESS using Power Doppler ultrasound (PDUS) for detecting
synovitis in RA has been established.ULTIMATE is the first randomized controlled trial to show the applicability
of GLOESS using PDUS in PsA.The GLOESS results confirm rapid and early response to secukinumab on
synovitis in PsA.
Introduction
PsA is characterized by inflammation of synovial membranes and entheseal sites
leading to pain, structural damage, impairment of physical function and quality of
life [1-5]. Abrogation of inflammation in the joints is a central goal for
the treatment of PsA, like in any other form of inflammatory arthritis. However, to
date the effects of drug therapy on disease are usually measured indirectly, through
assessing the impact on signs and symptoms of disease, rather than directly
assessing inflammation at joint level. Hence, little is known about the dynamic
effect of DMARDs on synovitis.Ultrasound in B-mode combined with Power Doppler (PD; the association named PDUS),
permits visualization of both morphological and functional changes of synovium
[6, 7]. The EULAR and the OMERACT have recently standardized
the use of PDUS for detecting synovitis and developed a composite scoring system at
joint and patient level: the Global EULAR-OMERACT Synovitis Score (GLOESS), which
has shown high responsiveness to treatment and excellent reliability in RA patients
[8-11], suggesting the possibility to be used to monitor
treatment response in inflammatory arthritis.Secukinumab, a human monoclonal antibody that directly inhibits IL-17A, has
demonstrated sustained efficacy on signs and symptoms, inhibition of structural
damage progression, and a favourable long-term safety profile in patients with PsA
over 5 years [12-14]. However, little
is known of its direct effect on synovitis (and enthesitis) and the dynamics of such
response. To investigate this, we initiated the ULTIMATE study, which is the first
PDUS-based randomized placebo-controlled trial in PsA that primarily focused on
synovial responses rather than on signs and symptoms of disease. Hence, the primary
aim of the ULTIMATE study was to evaluate whether treatment with secukinumab
inhibits synovitis, as measured by PDUS, in patients with active PsA who failed
conventional synthetic DMARDs (csDMARDs) therapy and were naïve to
biological DMARDs (bDMARDs). Herein, we present the primary efficacy data of
secukinumab on synovitis in patients with active PsA.
Methods
Patients and study design
Biologic-naïve patients (aged ≥18 years) with a diagnosis
of PsA for at least 6 months, fulfilling the CASPAR criteria, and having
an inadequate response to csDMARDs and an active disease based on tender joint
count (TJC) ≥3 of 78 joints and swollen joint count (SJC) ≥3 of
76 joints were considered eligible for this study. In addition, patients had to
present active PDUS synovitis according to a pre-defined cut-off (Supplementary Fig. S1
and Table S1,
available at Rheumatology online) at screening and baseline and
at least one clinical enthesitis at screening and baseline. Patients could
continue to receive MTX, glucocorticoids and NSAIDs at a stable standard dose
from 1 month prior to screening to 24 weeks (Supplementary Fig. S2,
available at Rheumatology online).Key exclusion criteria included (i) evidence of an ongoing infection or malignant
process; (ii) prior treatment with bDMARDs, including tumor necrosis factor
inhibitors; (iii) active ongoing inflammatory conditions other than PsA; (iv)
active systemic infection within 2 weeks before randomization; (v)
history of ongoing, chronic or recurrent infectious disease or evidence of
tuberculosis infection; (vi) known infection with human immunodeficiency virus
or hepatitis B or C at screening or randomization; and (vii) history of
lymphoproliferative disease, any known malignancy, or malignancy of any organ
system within the past 5 years. Detailed inclusion and exclusion
criteria are listed in the Supplementary Table S1, available at Rheumatology
online.ULTIMATE (NCT02662985) was a multicentre, randomized, double-blind,
placebo-controlled, 52-week Phase III study (Supplementary Fig. S2,
available at Rheumatology online). The study was initiated on
22 August 2016 (first patient, first visit), and conducted across 37 active
sites in 17 countries. This study consisted of a 1- to 4-week screening phase,
followed by a 12-week, double-blind, placebo-controlled treatment period (TP 1;
baseline to week 12); a 12-week open-label period (TP 2; week 12 to week 24); a
6-month, open-label extension period (TP 3; week 24 to week 52); and a 12-week
safety follow-up period (week 52 to week 64; Supplementary Fig. S2,
available at Rheumatology online).Enrolled patients were randomized (1:1) using Interactive Response Technology
(IRT) to receive either subcutaneous secukinumab (300 mg or
150 mg) or placebo weekly followed by 4-weekly dosing at Weeks 4 and 8
in a double-blind manner (Supplementary Fig. S2, available at Rheumatology
online). Patients received secukinumab 300 mg or 150 mg
according to the severity of skin disease. The open-label phase started at week
12 (TP 2), and all patients (including the placebo group) received secukinumab
300 mg or 150 mg depending on the skin severity through IRT
every 4 weeks until week 52 in an open-label manner. Patients, study
centre personnel (including ultrasound and clinical investigators) and data
analysts were fully blinded to the treatment assigned to patients at
randomization for the first 12 weeks of the study (TP 1). The ultrasound
and clinical investigators remained blinded from each other until the final
database lock.The study protocol and its amendments were reviewed and approved by the
independent ethics committee or institutional review board for each
participating centre. The study was conducted according to the International
Council for Harmonization (ICH) E6 Guideline for Good Clinical Practice (GCP)
that has its origin in the Declaration of Helsinki [15]. Written informed consent was obtained from all
enrolled patients. Data were collected in accordance with the GCP guidelines by
the study investigators and analysed by the sponsor.
Assessment of joints by ultrasound
PDUS evaluation was performed at screening; baseline; and Weeks 1, 2, 4, 6, 8 and
12. The following 24 joints were evaluated bilaterally: metacarpophalangeal
(MCP) joints 1–5, proximal interphalangeal (PIP) joints 1–5,
metatarsophalangeal (MTP) joints 1–5, distal interphalangeal (DIP)
joints 2–5, wrists, elbows, shoulders (glenohumeral), knees and ankles
(tibiotalar). The joints were scanned at each visit from the dorsal aspect, with
the joint in a neutral position, except for the knee, which was examined in a
flexed position (30°). All recesses of each joint were scanned, and the
detection of maximal grading of PDUS synovitis in one of these recesses
determined the final grade of the joint.All PDUS evaluations were performed at each site by an independent examiner,
expert in musculoskeletal ultrasound, with >5 years of
experience, and blinded to the clinical evaluation. To ensure homogeneity of
PDUS synovitis scoring, all ultrasound investigators completed an extensive
2-day training session, including examination of patients with PsA. In addition,
ultrasound settings were not changed during the study, standardized joint and
probe positions were used, and software was not upgraded. Centres were advised
to create a fixed study setting to be used at each evaluation.Medium- to high-level ultrasound machines [ESAOTE, Italy, Acuson, USA, Logic
Series 9, 7 and enext GE, USA, Siemens, USA, or other, such as Toshiba Xario
200, Toshiba Aplio (300, 400), Japan, Aloka Arietta V70, and Samsung HS60] were
used, which employed high frequency (12–18 MHz) transducers.
Doppler parameters were adjusted according to the device used (range of pulse
repetition frequency 400–800 Hz; Doppler frequency
7–14.1 MHz).PDUS synovitis was defined according to the EULAR-OMERACT definition as a
hypoechoic synovial hypertrophy (SH) detected in B-mode, which may show PD
signal. At each visit, PDUS synovitis was graded semi-quantitatively
(0–3) according to the EULAR-OMERACT PDUS composite score (Table 1) [8, 11]. In addition, single components of this
composite score (i.e. hypoechoic SH and PD synovial signal) were scored
separately at each visit.
Table 1
Ultrasound scoring system for B-mode and PD signal at joint level
B-mode: inflammatory or active synovial
hypertrophy
Grade 0
No hypoechoic synovial thickening
Grade 1
Minimal hypoechoic synovial thickening filling the angle between
the periarticular bones, without bulging over the line linking
tops of the bones
Grade 2
Hypoechoic synovial thickening bulging over the line linking
tops of the periarticular bones but without extension along the
bone diaphysis
Grade 3
Hypoechoic synovial thickening bulging over the line linking
tops of the periarticular bones and with extension to at least
one of the bone diaphysis
PD signal
Grade 0
No flow (PD signal) in the synovium
Grade 1
Up to three single spots signals or up to two confluent spots or
one confluent spot plus up to two single spots
Grade 2
Vessel signals in less than half of the area of the synovium
(<50%)
Grade 3
Vessel signals in more than half of the area of the synovium
(>50%)
Grades: 0, normal joint; 1, minimal synovitis; 2, moderate synovitis;
3, severe synovitis.
PD: Power Doppler; PDUS: Power Doppler ultrasonography.
Ultrasound scoring system for B-mode and PD signal at joint levelGrades: 0, normal joint; 1, minimal synovitis; 2, moderate synovitis;
3, severe synovitis.PD: Power Doppler; PDUS: Power Doppler ultrasonography.The GLOESS for the 24 paired joints was calculated as the sum of each PDUS
composite score for all joints examined, giving a potential score ranging from 0
to 144. As previously reported, GLOESS incorporates both B-mode and PD measures
of synovitis and allows for the evaluation of changes in the activity and
morphology of synovitis. To help in grading severity, an atlas with examples of
B-mode and PD grading for all joints examined was available in each centre.All images were recorded, anonymized and sent for central reading for the first
patient enrolled at each centre to allow a verification of the consistent
scoring across sites. Training sessions and central reading of the images
collected from the first included patient enrolled in each site were considered
adequate to ensure a homogeneous rating across sites.
Clinical and safety assessments
Joints were assessed clinically for tenderness and swelling to calculate the TJC
and SJC. In addition, ACR 20, 50 and 70 responses and their core components and
the mean change from baseline in HAQ Disability Index (HAQ-DI) were evaluated.
Safety assessments, including adverse events (AEs), serious AEs and AEs of
special interest occurring during the first 12 weeks were performed in
all patients receiving at least one dose of study drug.
Statistical analysis
This study was designed to test the superiority of secukinumab compared with
placebo at a 5% significance level with a two-sided test. No data
applying the EULAR-OMERACT composite PDUS score at the joint or patient level
(GLOESS) in PsA were previously reported; however, the mean change from baseline
to week 12 was assumed based on the abatacept treatment effect from a previous
PDUS study in RA [16]. Assuming a
difference in the mean change from baseline to week 12 in GLOESS (primary
objective) of −6 with a pooled s.d. of 13.2, a total
of 218 patients (109 patients per arm) were estimated to achieve a power of
90%.Blinded sample size re-estimation (SSR) was performed after the completion of
week 12 for the first 60 patients and substantiated by data collection from the
first 72 enrolled patients to reassess variability of the disease and adjust
sample size calculation accordingly. A protocol amendment was introduced to
reduce the study sample size from 218 patients to 164 patients (82 patients per
arm) with the power relaxed to 80% and a one-sided
(α = 5%) superiority test
vs placebo for the primary objective. The detailed SSR has
been provided in Supplementary Table S2, available at Rheumatology
online.The efficacy analyses were performed on the full analysis set, which comprised
all patients who were randomized and had study treatment assigned. The primary
and key secondary endpoints were analysed according to a pre-defined statistical
hierarchy (Supplementary Fig.
S3, available at Rheumatology online). The primary
objective was to demonstrate a difference in mean change from baseline to week
12 between secukinumab and placebo groups related to PDUS synovitis response
using GLOESS (sum of the affected joints out of 48 joints). In addition, change
between secukinumab and placebo from baseline to week 12 in the core components
(SH and PD signal) of GLOESS was analysed exploratory. The clinical exploratory
outcome measures presented here include the proportion of patients achieving
ACR70, the mean change from baseline in HAQ-DI score, and distribution of joints
by ultrasound and clinical assessment at baseline.Data presented for the secukinumab group were pooled data from 300 mg and
150 mg. The primary analysis was performed using a mixed-effect model
repeated measures (MMRM; valid under the ‘missing at random’
assumption), with treatment regimen, centre and analysis visit as factors and
weight and baseline GLOESS as continuous covariates. Treatment by analysis visit
was included as an interaction term in the model. An unstructured covariance
structure was assumed for this model. The significance of the treatment effect
for secukinumab was determined using the comparisons performed between the
secukinumab and placebo arms at week 12. Missing values were imputed as
non-response [non-responder imputation (NRI)] for binary variables via logistic
regression, with study treatment as a factor and baseline weight as a covariate.
Odds ratio and relative risk (for binary variables) or differences in adjusted
mean change (for continuous variables) and 95% CI are presented
comparing secukinumab vs placebo. A ‘null zone’
derived from the CI around the difference, obtained from the MMRM analysis, was
plotted for continuous variables [17]. It shows the area where the means are located when there is no
significant difference between the groups at the
P < 0.05 level.Safety analyses included all patients who received ≥1 dose of study
medication. AEs were reported as absolute frequencies over the
placebo-controlled period, referring to the cumulative treatment period (i.e.
events started after the first dose of study treatment or events present before
the first dose of study treatment but increased in severity based on preferred
term and on or before the last dose plus 84 days). The clinical and
ultrasound response on enthesitis that were secondary and exploratory objectives
are not included in the present report.
Results
Patient disposition and baseline characteristics
Overall, 258 patients were screened, of whom 82 were ineligible for the study and
10 were not included for other reasons (Fig. 1). Out of 166 patients (64%) enrolled, 161
(97%) completed the first 12 weeks (secukinumab, 99%;
placebo, 95%; Fig. 1). The proportion of patients with at least one
protocol deviation was 15% (secukinumab, 16%; placebo,
13%; Supplementary
Table S3, available at Rheumatology online).
Demographics and baseline clinical characteristics were comparable between the
treatment groups (Table 2). The mean age was 47 years, median disease
duration was 4 years, and 55% were women. Patients had active
disease at baseline with a mean number of 14 tender joints, nine swollen joints
and four clinically active enthesitis, as well as a mean Psoriasis Area and
Severity Index score of 10.
. 1
Patient disposition through week 12
Screen failures are those who were screened but failed to meet the
inclusion or met the exclusion criteria or met eligibility but did not
move into treatment period 1 (i.e. the patient was not randomized;
percentage is computed using the number of screened patients as the
denominator). n: total number of patients.
Table 2
Baseline demographic and clinical characteristics
Characteristicsa
Secukinumab
Placebo
(300 mg + 150 mg) (n = 83)
(n = 83)
Age (years)
47 (12)
47 (12)
Female, n (%)
45 (54)
46 (55)
Caucasian, n (%)
75 (90)
75 (90)
Time since diagnosis of PsA (years)
6 (7)
7 (7)
TJC (78 joints)
13 (8)
15 (12)
SJC (76 joints)
10 (8)
9 (9)
Patient pain (VAS)
59 (21)
59 (24)
Global assessment of disease activity (VAS)
Patient
60 (23)
60 (23)
Physician
56 (18)
52 (22)
HAQ-DI score
1.3 (0.6)
1.2 (0.7)
hsCRP level (mg/l), median (min–max)
7 (1‒77)
5 (0‒102)
PsOb, n (%)
36 (43)
33 (40)
PASI scoreb
9 (6)
11 (9)
GLOESSc
24 (16)
27 (17)
SH
24 (16)
27 (17)
PD
8 (8)
7 (7)
Number of joints with PDUS synovitis
9 (5)
10 (5)
Concomitant corticosteroids, n (%)
13 (16)
19 (23)
Concomitant MTX, n (%)
35 (42)
34 (41)
mean (s.d.) unless otherwise specified;
bcalculated only for patients with BSA
≥3%; c24 paired joints.
BSA: body surface area; GLOESS: Global EULAR-OMERACT Synovitis Score;
HAQ-DI: HAQ disability index; hsCRP: high sensitivity CRP; N: total
number of randomized patients; PASI: Psoriasis Area and Severity
Index; PD: Power Doppler; PDUS: Power Doppler Ultrasonography; PsO:
psoriasis; SH: Synovial hypertrophy; SJC: swollen joint count; TJC:
tender joint count; VAS: visual analogue scale (range,
0–100).
Patient disposition through week 12Screen failures are those who were screened but failed to meet the
inclusion or met the exclusion criteria or met eligibility but did not
move into treatment period 1 (i.e. the patient was not randomized;
percentage is computed using the number of screened patients as the
denominator). n: total number of patients.Baseline demographic and clinical characteristicsmean (s.d.) unless otherwise specified;
bcalculated only for patients with BSA
≥3%; c24 paired joints.BSA: body surface area; GLOESS: Global EULAR-OMERACT Synovitis Score;
HAQ-DI: HAQ disability index; hsCRP: high sensitivity CRP; N: total
number of randomized patients; PASI: Psoriasis Area and Severity
Index; PD: Power Doppler; PDUS: Power Doppler Ultrasonography; PsO:
psoriasis; SH: Synovial hypertrophy; SJC: swollen joint count; TJC:
tender joint count; VAS: visual analogue scale (range,
0–100).The average time spent on PDUS assessments at baseline for the evaluation of the
pre-specified set of 24 paired joints was 39 min, for both the
secukinumab and placebo arms. The distribution of PDUS synovitis revealed that
wrists, knees, MCPs and MTPs were the more frequently affected joints. A similar
distribution was observed on clinical examination of swollen or tender joints
with lower frequency. These data are presented in a heat map in Fig. 2 and Supplementary Fig. S4, Tables
S4 and S5 (available at Rheumatology online),
respectively.
. 2
Distribution of synovitis detected by ultrasound and tender and swollen
joints detected by clinical assessment at baseline
The distribution of synovitis detected by ultrasound and distribution of
tender and swollen joint detected by clinical examination at baseline
side by side. Frequency of distribution varies from 0 to 80%
(highest proportion of patients with ultrasound detected synovitis on
wrist) and is visualized by a code of colour from yellow to red shown on
the right bar. Grey colour means ultrasound did not assess synovitis of
these joints. CMC: carpometacarpal; DIP: distal interphalangeal; MCP:
metacarpophalangeal; MTP: metatarsophalangeal; PIP: proximal
interphalangeal.
Distribution of synovitis detected by ultrasound and tender and swollen
joints detected by clinical assessment at baselineThe distribution of synovitis detected by ultrasound and distribution of
tender and swollen joint detected by clinical examination at baseline
side by side. Frequency of distribution varies from 0 to 80%
(highest proportion of patients with ultrasound detected synovitis on
wrist) and is visualized by a code of colour from yellow to red shown on
the right bar. Grey colour means ultrasound did not assess synovitis of
these joints. CMC: carpometacarpal; DIP: distal interphalangeal; MCP:
metacarpophalangeal; MTP: metatarsophalangeal; PIP: proximal
interphalangeal.
PDUS efficacy
The primary end point was met at week 12 (Fig. 3); the adjusted mean (s.e.) change
in GLOESS was significantly higher in the secukinumab vs
placebo [−9 (0.9) vs −6 (0.9), difference
(95% CI): −3 (−6, −1); one-sided
P = 0.004]. A markedly significant difference
between secukinumab and placebo was observed as early as 1 week after treatment
initiation. The mean (s.e.) change from baseline to week 12 in
SH (secukinumab vs placebo) was −9 (0.9)
vs −6 (0.9) and in PD was −4 (0.5)
vs −2 (0.5), with significance as early as week 1
for SH and week 2 for PD signal (Fig. 3).
. 3
PDUS efficacy outcomes through week 12
*P < 0.05 vs placebo.
(A) primary endpoint GLOESS [MMRM, difference
(95% CI): –3 (–6, –1),
P =0.004] at Week 12; (B)
GLOESS SH [MMRM, difference (95% CI): –3 (–6,
–1), P =0.004]; and (C)
GLOESS PD [MMRM, difference (95% CI): –2 (–3,
–1), P =0.001]. The ‘null
zone’ presented GLOESS scores was derived from the CI around the
difference, which was obtained from the MMRM. It shows the area where
the means are located when there is no significant difference between
the groups at the P <0.05 level. GLOESS: Global
OMERACT-EULAR Synovitis Score; LS: least squares; MMRM: mixed-effect
model repeated measures; N: total number of randomized patients;
n: number of evaluable patients; PD: Power Doppler;
SEC: secukinumab; SH: synovial hypertrophy.
PDUS efficacy outcomes through week 12*P < 0.05 vs placebo.
(A) primary endpoint GLOESS [MMRM, difference
(95% CI): –3 (–6, –1),
P =0.004] at Week 12; (B)
GLOESS SH [MMRM, difference (95% CI): –3 (–6,
–1), P =0.004]; and (C)
GLOESS PD [MMRM, difference (95% CI): –2 (–3,
–1), P =0.001]. The ‘null
zone’ presented GLOESS scores was derived from the CI around the
difference, which was obtained from the MMRM. It shows the area where
the means are located when there is no significant difference between
the groups at the P <0.05 level. GLOESS: Global
OMERACT-EULAR Synovitis Score; LS: least squares; MMRM: mixed-effect
model repeated measures; N: total number of randomized patients;
n: number of evaluable patients; PD: Power Doppler;
SEC: secukinumab; SH: synovial hypertrophy.
Clinical efficacy
ACR20 and ACR50 responses were met and favored secukinumab-treated patients
against placebo at week 12, with significant improvements observed as early as
week 1 for ACR20 and week 2 for ACR50 compared with placebo (Fig. 4). Significantly higher
responses were observed in secukinumab-treated patients for the exploratory
endpoints (ACR70 response and HAQ-DI score) at week 12 compared with placebo
(Fig. 4). The mean
changes from baseline to week 12 in ACR core components are presented in Supplementary Table S6,
available at Rheumatology online.
. 4
Clinical efficacy outcomes through week 12
*P < 0.05 vs placebo.
(A) ACR20 response [NRI, odds ratio (95% CI): 5
(2, 9), P <0.0001, relative risk: 2];
(B) ACR50 response [NRI, odds ratio (95% CI):
10 (4, 24), P <0.0001, relative risk: 5];
(C) ACR70 response [NRI, odds ratio (95% CI):
23 (3, 178), P =0.0013, relative risk: 18]; and
(D) HAQ-DI score [MMRM, difference: ‒0.5
(‒0.6, ‒0.3); P <0.0001]. The
‘null zone’ presented HAQ-DI score was derived from the
CI around the difference, which was obtained from the MMRM. It shows the
area where the means are located when there is no significant difference
between the groups at the P <0.05 level.
HAQ-DI: Health Assessment Questioner Disability Index; LS: least
squares; MMRM: mixed-effect model repeated measures; N: total number of
randomized patients; n: number of evaluable patients;
NRI: non-responder imputation; SEC: secukinumab.
Clinical efficacy outcomes through week 12*P < 0.05 vs placebo.
(A) ACR20 response [NRI, odds ratio (95% CI): 5
(2, 9), P <0.0001, relative risk: 2];
(B) ACR50 response [NRI, odds ratio (95% CI):
10 (4, 24), P <0.0001, relative risk: 5];
(C) ACR70 response [NRI, odds ratio (95% CI):
23 (3, 178), P =0.0013, relative risk: 18]; and
(D) HAQ-DI score [MMRM, difference: ‒0.5
(‒0.6, ‒0.3); P <0.0001]. The
‘null zone’ presented HAQ-DI score was derived from the
CI around the difference, which was obtained from the MMRM. It shows the
area where the means are located when there is no significant difference
between the groups at the P <0.05 level.
HAQ-DI: Health Assessment Questioner Disability Index; LS: least
squares; MMRM: mixed-effect model repeated measures; N: total number of
randomized patients; n: number of evaluable patients;
NRI: non-responder imputation; SEC: secukinumab.
Safety
Overall, the incidence of treatment-emergent AEs up to week 12 was 58%
for the secukinumab group and 57% for the placebo group. The most
frequent treatment-emergent AEs in terms of crude incidence rates up to week 12
were nasopharyngitis, hypertension, diarrhoea, headache and latent tuberculosis
in either secukinumab or placebo group. No serious AEs were reported in the
secukinumab group. No deaths, serious infections, neutropaenia, major adverse
cardiovascular events, inflammatory bowel disease or malignancies were reported
in either treatment group. Safety data are presented separately for individual
treatment groups (secukinumab and placebo) in Supplementary Table S7,
available at Rheumatology online.
Discussion
ULTIMATE is the first randomized, placebo-controlled, PDUS Phase III study in PsA
that primarily aimed to address the effects of biological DMARDs on synovitis
detected by a validated ultrasound outcome measurement instrument as a primary end
point. The primary efficacy data of the ULTIMATE study showed a significant effect
of secukinumab treatment compared with placebo in reducing active synovitis in PsA.
This effect was observed as early as 1 week after the initiation of treatment and
continued to improve at each time point of evaluation until week 12. The ultrasound
approach also allowed assessment of which aspects of synovitis improved first. Thus,
the SH component showed the response as early as 1 week and the PD component as
early as 2 weeks after treatment initiation, highlighting a fast onset of
efficacy of secukinumab in controlling inflammation in PsA.To date, only one small observational study has suggested that DMARDs have an effect
on synovitis in PsA [18]. Large
controlled studies aiming to assess the direct effect of DMARDs on synovitis are
lacking, despite the availability of objective instruments to measure such effects.
The ULTIMATE study revealed that the activity of synovitis in PsA can be scored at
patient level using a validated ultrasound scoring system (GLOESS). Moreover, the
study showed that reliable assessment of synovitis in PsA is feasible across
different centres. Thus, GLOESS was sensitive to detect decrease in synovitis across
different ultrasound devices and examiners even without excluding patients with
protocol deviations. The absence of a true reliability exercise among the examiners
may be considered as a limitation. However, potential variability in ultrasound
assessment related to expertise was minimized using a rigorous ultrasound training,
an atlas with reference images and central reading of images of the first patient
enrolled across all sites. Possible remaining variability did not detract from the
high sensitivity to change of GLOESS, which was developed to be sensitive across
examiners and machines. Hence, these data suggest that assessment of synovitis by
GLOESS is a reliable method to address the direct effect of DMARDs on synovitis in
PsA.The observed improvement in the signs and symptoms of PsA upon exposure to
secukinumab confirmed its known clinical efficacy and was in accordance with earlier
studies. Higher ACR responses were observed with secukinumab in the current study
than in the secukinumab FUTURE 2 and FUTURE 5 studies [19, 20],
possibly because of the uniquely rigorous combined clinical and ultrasound inclusion
criteria on joints, and the stringent monitoring in this study over the initial
3 months. Treatment with secukinumab was well tolerated and the safety
profile was consistent with the established safety profile across approved
indications [21].In conclusion, ULTIMATE is the first randomized study that evaluated the effect of
DMARDs on PDUS measured synovitis as the primary end point. It demonstrated that
secukinumab rapidly and significantly decreased synovitis, indicating a direct
effect of IL-17 inhibition on the synovium in patients with PsA. As synovitis is
critical for cartilage and bone destruction in PsA [1, 3,
4], these data also provide the
basis for the observed protection of joint structure by secukinumab in patients with
PsA.
Acknowledgements
The authors thank the patients and investigators who participated in the study. The
authors also thank John Gallagher (Novartis Pharmaceuticals UK Ltd, UK) and Corine
Gaillez (Novartis Pharma AG, Basel, Switzerland) for medical guidance and editorial
support. The study was designed by the scientific steering committee and Novartis
personnel. The first draft of the manuscript was written by medical writers,
employed by the study sponsor (Niladri Maity and Gurleen Kaur, Novartis Healthcare
Pvt. Ltd, Hyderabad, India), under the guidance of the authors. Statistical analyses
were performed by statisticians employed by the study sponsor (Novartis Pharma AG,
Basel, Switzerland). All authors had access to the data, contributed to the
interpretation, and collaborated in the development of the manuscript. All authors
critically reviewed and provided feedback on subsequent versions for important
intellectual content. All authors approved the final version of the manuscript to be
submitted for publication and vouch for the accuracy and completeness of the data
and fidelity of this report to the study protocol.The study protocol was reviewed and approved by the Independent Ethics Committee or
Institutional Review Board for each participating centre. The study was conducted
according to the ICH E6 guideline for Good Clinical Practice that has its origin in
the Declaration of Helsinki. Written informed consent was obtained from all enrolled
patients.Study conception and design: M.A.D’A., G.S., A.-M.D., P.G., M.B. and C.G.
Acquisition of data: M.A.D’A., G.S., A.L.-R., L.Š., K.F., R.B.-V.,
J.M.-C., E.N., P.C. and M.B. Analysis and interpretation of data: M.A.D’A.,
G.S., A.L.-R., L.Š., K.F., R.B.-V., J.M.-C., E.N., P.C., A.-M.D., P.G., M.B.
and C.G.Funding: The study (NCT02662985) was supported by Novartis Pharma
AG, Basel, Switzerland.Disclosure statement: M.A.D’A. has received honoraria for
consulting or speaking from Sanofi, Novartis, BMS, Janssen, Celgene, AbbVie, UCB
pharma, and Eli Lilly. G.S. has received honoraria for speaking from AbbVie, BMS,
Celgene, Gilead, Janssen, Eli Lilly, Novartis, Roche and UCB pharma. A.L.-R. has
received honoraria for consulting or speaking from Roche, Eli Lilly, Novartis, BMS
and Neovacs and research grant from those companies. L.Š. has received
research grants from AbbVie; honoraria for speaking from AbbVie, Amgen, BMS,
Celgene, Eli Lilly, Gilead, MSD, Mylan, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, Sanofi, Sandoz and
UCB pharma; expenses for attendance at advisory board meeting from AbbVie, BMS,
Celgene, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche and UCB pharma; and honoraria for clinical
trials from AbbVie, Amgen, BMS, Celgene, Novartis, Pfizer, Takeda and UCB. K.F.
declares no competing interest. R.B.-V. has received honoraria for speaking from
Novartis. J.M.-C. has received honoraria for speaking or consulting from Pfizer,
MSD, Sanofi-Aventis, Novartis, BMS, Roche, Boehringer Ingelheim, Schering-Plough,
Abbott, UCB, Eli Lilly and Gilead and principal investigator in clinical trials for
those companies. E.N. has received honoraria for speaking from AbbVie, Roche, BMS,
Pfizer, UCB, Eli Lilly, Novartis, Janssen and Celgene; honoraria for clinical trials
from AbbVie, Novartis and BMS; and research grants from Eli Lilly. P.C. has received
research grants from UCB, MSD and Pfizer; honoraria for speaking or consulting from
Pfizer, MSD, Novartis, BMS, AbbVie, UCB, Eli Lilly, Gilead and Celgene. A.-M.D. and
P.G. are employees of Novartis. M.B. has received honoraria for consulting from BMS,
Novartis, Pfizer and GSK. C.G. is an employee of Novartis and owns stock from
Novartis and BMS.
Data availability statement
The datasets generated during and/or analysed during the current study are not
publicly available. Novartis is committed to sharing with qualified external
researchers access to patient-level data and supporting clinical documents from
eligible studies. These requests are reviewed and approved the basis of scientific
merit. All data provided are anonymized to respect the privacy of patients who have
participated in the trial, in line with applicable laws and regulations. The data
may be requested from the corresponding author.
Supplementary data
Supplementary data are
available at Rheumatology online.Click here for additional data file.
Authors: Richard J Wakefield; Maria-Antonietta D'Agostino; Annamaria Iagnocco; Emilio Filippucci; Marina Backhaus; Alexander K Scheel; Fredrick Joshua; Esperanza Naredo; Wolfgang A Schmidt; Walter Grassi; Ingrid Moller; Carlos Pineda; Andrea Klauser; Marcin Szkudlarek; Lene Terslev; Peter Balint; George A W Bruyn; Wijnand A A Swen; Sandrine Jousse-Joulin; David Kane; Juhani M Koski; Philip O'Connor; Sanja Milutinovic; Philip G Conaghan Journal: J Rheumatol Date: 2007-04 Impact factor: 4.666
Authors: Iain B McInnes; Philip J Mease; Bruce Kirkham; Arthur Kavanaugh; Christopher T Ritchlin; Proton Rahman; Désirée van der Heijde; Robert Landewé; Philip G Conaghan; Alice B Gottlieb; Hanno Richards; Luminita Pricop; Gregory Ligozio; Manmath Patekar; Shephard Mpofu Journal: Lancet Date: 2015-06-28 Impact factor: 79.321
Authors: Lene Terslev; Esperanza Naredo; Philippe Aegerter; Richard J Wakefield; Marina Backhaus; Peter Balint; George A W Bruyn; Annamaria Iagnocco; Sandrine Jousse-Joulin; Wolfgang A Schmidt; Marcin Szkudlarek; Philip G Conaghan; Emilio Filippucci; Maria Antonietta D'Agostino Journal: RMD Open Date: 2017-07-11
Authors: Désirée van der Heijde; Philip J Mease; Robert B M Landewé; Proton Rahman; Hasan Tahir; Atul Singhal; Elke Boettcher; Sandra Navarra; Xuan Zhu; Gregory Ligozio; Aimee Readie; Shephard Mpofu; Luminita Pricop Journal: Rheumatology (Oxford) Date: 2020-06-01 Impact factor: 7.580