P106 Do high rheumatoid factor titres impact response to tumour necrosis factor inhibitors? Comparison of certolizumab pegol and adalimumab in patients with rheumatoid arthritis and high titres of rheumatoid factor: a post hoc analysis of a phase 4 trial.

Josef S Smolen,Peter C Taylor,Yoshiya Tanaka,Carlos Cara,Bernard Lauwerys,Ricardo Xavier,Jeffrey R Curtis,Ted R Mikuls,Michael Weinblatt
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/rheumatology/keae163.147
2024-04-01
Rheumatology
Abstract:Abstract Background/Aims In patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA), high rheumatoid factor (RF) titres are considered a poor prognostic factor and are associated with higher disease activity, risk of radiographic progression and decreased response to TNF inhibitors (TNFis). Recent data suggests that patients with RA and high RF titre may achieve and maintain greater clinical improvement with TNFis without a crystallisable fragment (Fc) compared to TNFis with an Fc. In this analysis of the EXXELERATE trial, we assessed efficacy outcomes of certolizumab pegol (CZP), a PEGylated Fc-free TNFi, versus adalimumab (ADA; Fc-containing TNFi) in patients with RA and high RF titres. Methods The phase 4 EXXELERATE trial (NCT01500278) compared the efficacy and safety of CZP to ADA. Patients were randomised 1:1 to CZP 200 mg every two weeks (Q2W) plus methotrexate (MTX) or ADA 40 mg Q2W plus MTX. At Week 12 (Wk), patients were classified as responders or non-responders; non-responders were switched to the other TNFi with possible follow-up to Wk104. Here, we report drug plasma concentrations, mean disease activity score (DAS)28-CRP score and proportion of patients achieving low disease activity (LDA; threshold: DAS28-CRP ≤2.7) to Wk104. Results are stratified by RF titre quartile (≤Q3: ≤203 IU/mL; >Q3: >203 IU/mL; measured by Roche Tina-quant®) and reported as observed data. Results Baseline data by RF quartile were available for 453 CZP-randomised patients (≤Q3: n = 334; >Q3: n = 119) and 454 ADA-randomised patients (≤Q3: n = 347; >Q3 n = 107). Baseline characteristics were similar between CZP- and ADA-randomised patients across the RF titre quartiles. At Wk12, 66 CZP-treated patients switched to ADA and 59 ADA-treated patients switched to CZP. At Wk104, mean ADA concentrations were 22.9% lower in patients with RF >Q3 (mean [SD] 4.8 [3.0]) vs those with RF ≤Q3 (6.2 [4.0]); in CZP-treated patients, this difference was smaller (13.0%) in patients with RF >Q3 (23.3 [15.4]) vs those with RF ≤Q3 (26.7 [13.1]). For patients in RF ≤Q3, mean DAS28-CRP scores were similar between CZP- and ADA-treated patients through Wks0-104 (mean [SD] DAS28 at Wk104: 2.48 [1.18] CZP vs 2.49 [1.14] ADA). However, for patients in RF >Q3, mean [SD] DAS28-CRP scores were nominally lower in CZP- vs ADA-treated patients (Wk104: 2.50 [1.18] CZP vs 2.93 [1.22] ADA). A similar pattern was observed for the proportion of patients achieving LDA at Wk104 (≤Q3: 64.8% CZP vs 65.1% ADA; >Q3: 65.7% CZP vs 48.3% ADA). Conclusion CZP-treated patients with RA and high titre RF had similar drug concentrations and clinical responses to patients with RA and low titre RF, a pattern not observed in ADA-treated patients. These data, together with previous reports where CZP showed consistent efficacy irrespective of baseline RF titre, suggest CZP may be a suitable therapy for patients with RA and high RF titre. Disclosure J.S. Smolen: Honoraria; AbbVie, Amgen, AstraZeneca, Astro, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Celgene, Celltrion, Chugai, Gilead, ILTOO, Janssen, Lilly, Merck Sharp & Dohme, Novartis-Sandoz, Pfizer, R-Pharma, Roche, Samsung, Sanofi, and UCB Pharma. Grants/research support; AbbVie, AstraZeneca, Eli Lilly, Novartis and Roche. Other; Editor of Annals of the Rheumatic Diseases, Co-editor of Rheumatology 7E/8E, Convenor of EULAR Task Forces and T2T Task Forces. P.C. Taylor: Consultancies; AbbVie, Biogen, Eli Lilly, Fresenius, Galapagos, Gilead, GSK, Janssen, Nordic Pharma, Pfizer, Sanofi and UCB Pharma. Grants/research support; Galapagos. Y. Tanaka: Honoraria; AbbVie, AstraZeneca, BMS, Boehringer Ingelheim, Chugai, Eisai, Eli Lilly, Gilead, GSK, Pfizer, Taiho, Taisho. Member of speakers’ bureau; AbbVie, AstraZeneca, BMS, Boehringer Ingelheim, Chugai, Eisai, Eli Lilly, Gilead, GSK, Pfizer, Taiho and Taisho. Grants/research support; Chugai, Eisai, Mitsubishi-Tanabe, Taisho. C. Cara: Shareholder/stock ownership; UCB Pharma. Other; Employee of UCB Pharma. B. Lauwerys: Shareholder/stock ownership; UCB Pharma. Other; Employee of UCB Pharma. R. Xavier: Consultancies; AbbVie, AstraZeneca, Janssen, Organon, UCB Pharma. Member of speakers’ bureau; AbbVie, AstraZeneca, Janssen, Organon, and UCB Pharma. J.R. Curtis: Consultancies; AbbVie, Amgen, BMS, Corrona, Crescendo, Genentech, Janssen, Pfizer, Roche, UCB Pharma. Grants/research support; AbbVie, Amgen, BMS, Corrona, Crescendo, Genentech, Janssen, Pfizer, Roche, UCB Pharma. T.R. Mikuls: Consultancies; Horizon Therapeutics, Pfizer, Sanofi, UCB Pharma. Royalties; Elsevier, Wolters Kluwer Health (UpToDate). Grants/research support; Horizon Therapeutics. M. Weinblatt: Consultancies; AbbVie, Aclaris, Amgen, Aqtual, BMS, CorEvitas, Eli Lilly, GSK, Gilead, Horizon, Johnson and Johnson, Prometheus, Pfizer, Rani, Revolo, Sanofi, Scipher, Sci Rhom, Set Point, UCB Pharma. Grants/research support; AbbVie, Aqtual, BMS, Janssen.
rheumatology
What problem does this paper attempt to address?
The problem that this paper attempts to solve is to evaluate the real - world clinical effects of using Upadacitinib (UPA) in the treatment of patients with moderate - to - severe rheumatoid arthritis (RA) in the UK. Specifically, the study aims to evaluate the effectiveness and safety of UPA in actual clinical applications, especially the proportion of patients achieving clinical remission and the occurrence of adverse events. ### Research Background and Objectives ENDEAVOUR is a prospective observational cohort study that recruited 97 patients with moderate - to - severe RA. The attending physicians of these patients decided to use UPA for treatment in accordance with market authorization. The main objective of the study was to evaluate the proportion of patients using UPA who achieved clinical remission (defined as DAS28 < 2.6) within six months and to collect the patients' demographic characteristics, comorbidities, concomitant therapies, and patient - reported disease activity. ### Methods - **Study Design**: Prospective observational cohort study. - **Sample**: 97 patients with moderate - to - severe RA from 14 sites in the UK. - **Data Collection**: Collect patients' demographic characteristics, comorbidities, concomitant therapies, and patient - reported disease activity at baseline, 3 months, and 6 months. - **Primary Endpoint**: The proportion of patients who achieved clinical remission (DAS28 < 2.6) within six months. - **Secondary Endpoints**: Changes in disease activity, incidence of adverse events, etc. ### Results - **Baseline Data**: Baseline data of 77 patients showed that 42% of the patients had moderate RA and 58% had severe RA. The average age was 55 years, 83% were female, and most patients had at least one comorbidity, such as hypertension (21%) or asthma (16%). 42% of the patients had previously received biologic agent treatment, and the most common reason for switching drugs was treatment failure (79%). - **3 - month Data**: Data of 47 patients showed that 38% of the patients achieved DAS28 remission. The proportion of patients with high disease activity decreased significantly from 58% at baseline to 6% at 3 months, and the proportion of patients with moderate disease activity decreased from 42% at baseline to 30%. Meanwhile, the use rate of corticosteroids decreased from 17% at baseline to 5% at 3 months. - **Adverse Events**: 9% of the patients stopped using UPA during the study period, among which 5 cases stopped due to adverse events and 4 cases stopped due to patient or physician choice. Fewer serious adverse events were reported (4%), and the most common serious adverse events were severe infections and opportunistic infections (3 cases). No MACE or venous thromboembolism events were reported, and 1 case of malignancy (extranodal marginal zone B - cell lymphoma) was considered unrelated to the treatment. ### Conclusions Preliminary analysis shows that the treatment effect of UPA on patients with moderate - to - severe RA in the real world is similar to the early efficacy in clinical trials. 38% of the patients achieved clinical remission within 3 months, and the incidence of adverse events was low. These results provide valuable evidence for the effectiveness and safety of UPA in actual clinical applications.