scholarly journals Tofacitinib in Combination With Conventional Disease‐Modifying Antirheumatic Drugs in Patients With Active Rheumatoid Arthritis: Patient‐Reported Outcomes From a Phase III Randomized Controlled Trial

2017 ◽  
Vol 69 (4) ◽  
pp. 592-598 ◽  
Author(s):  
Vibeke Strand ◽  
Joel M. Kremer ◽  
David Gruben ◽  
Sriram Krishnaswami ◽  
Samuel H. Zwillich ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Patient Reported Outcomes ◽  
Active Rheumatoid Arthritis ◽  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Disease Modifying Antirheumatic Drugs ◽  
Antirheumatic Drugs ◽  
Randomized Controlled ◽  
Active Rheumatoid Arthritis Patient ◽  
Patient Reported ◽  
Disease Modifying

scholarly journals Effects of upadacitinib on patient-reported outcomes: results from SELECT-BEYOND, a phase 3 randomized trial in patients with rheumatoid arthritis and inadequate responses to biologic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs

2019 ◽  
Vol 21 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Vibeke Strand ◽  
Michael Schiff ◽  
Namita Tundia ◽  
Alan Friedman ◽  
Sebastian Meerwein ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Rheumatoid Arthritis ◽  
Patient Reported Outcomes ◽  
Short Form ◽  
Normative Values ◽  
Number Needed To Treat ◽  
Disease Modifying Antirheumatic Drugs ◽  
Antirheumatic Drugs ◽  
Sf 36 ◽  
Patient Reported ◽  
Disease Modifying

Abstract Background Patient-reported outcomes (PROs) are important when evaluating treatment benefits in rheumatoid arthritis (RA). We compared upadacitinib, an oral, selective JAK-1 inhibitor, with placebo to assess clinically meaningful improvements in PROs in patients with RA who have had inadequate responses to biologic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (bDMARD-IR). Methods PRO responses between upadacitinib 15 mg or 30 mg and placebo were evaluated at week 12 from the SELECT-BEYOND trial. Improvement was determined by measuring Patient Global Assessment of Disease Activity (PtGA), pain, Health Assessment Questionnaire Disability Index (HAQ-DI), Short Form-36 Health Survey (SF-36), duration and severity of morning (AM) stiffness, and Insomnia Severity Index (ISI). Least squares mean changes and percentage of patients reporting improvements ≥ minimum clinically important differences (MCID) and scores greater than or equal to normative values were determined. The number needed to treat (NNT) to achieve clinically meaningful improvements was calculated. Results In 498 patients, both upadacitinib doses resulted in statistically significant changes from baseline versus placebo in PtGA, pain, HAQ-DI, SF-36 Physical Component Summary (PCS), 7 of 8 SF-36 domains (15 mg), 6 of 8 SF-36 domains (30 mg), and AM stiffness duration and severity. Compared with placebo, more upadacitinib-treated patients reported improvements ≥ MCID in PtGA, pain, HAQ-DI, SF-36 PCS, 7 of 8 SF-36 domains (15 mg), 5 of 8 SF-36 domains (30 mg), AM stiffness duration and severity, and ISI (30 mg) and scores ≥ normative values in HAQ-DI and SF-36 domains. Across most PROs, NNTs to achieve MCID with upadacitinib ranged from 4 to 7 patients. Conclusions In bDMARD-IR RA patients, upadacitinib (15 mg or 30 mg) improved multiple aspects of quality of life, and more patients reached clinically meaningful improvements approaching normative values compared with placebo. Trial registration The trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT02706847), registered 6 March 2016.

scholarly journals Patient-Reported Outcomes of Upadacitinib Versus Abatacept in Patients with Rheumatoid Arthritis and an Inadequate Response to Biologic Disease-Modifying Antirheumatic Drugs: 12-Week Results of a Phase 3 Trial

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Martin Bergman ◽  
Namita Tundia ◽  
Naomi Martin ◽  
Jessica L Suboticki ◽  
Debbie Goldschmidt ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Patient Reported Outcomes ◽  
Morning Stiffness ◽  
Inadequate Response ◽  
Disease Modifying Antirheumatic Drugs ◽  
Antirheumatic Drugs ◽  
Phase 3 ◽  
Activity Impairment ◽  
Sf 36 ◽  
Patient Reported ◽  
Disease Modifying

Abstract Background In previous clinical trials, patients with active rheumatoid arthritis (RA) treated with upadacitinib (UPA) have improved patient-reported outcomes (PROs). This post hoc analysis of SELECT-CHOICE, a phase 3, double-blind, randomized clinical trial evaluated the impact of UPA vs abatacept (ABA) with background conventional synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (csDMARDs) on PROs in patients with RA who have inadequate response or intolerance to biologic DMARDs (bDMARD-IR).Methods: Patients in SELECT-CHOICE received UPA (oral 15 mg once daily) or ABA (intravenous). PROs evaluated included Patient Global Assessment of Disease Activity (PtGA) by visual analog scale (VAS), patient’s assessment of pain by VAS, Health Assessment Questionnaire Disability Index (HAQ-DI), duration and severity of morning stiffness, 36-Item Short Form Health Survey (SF-36), Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy-Fatigue (FACIT-F), Work Productivity and Activity Impairment (WPAI), and EQ-5D 5-Level (EQ-5D-5L) index score. Least squares mean (LSM) changes from baseline to week 12 were based on an analysis of covariance model. Proportions of patients reporting improvements ≥ minimal clinically important differences (MCID) were compared using chi-square tests.Results: Data from 612 patients were analyzed (UPA, n=303; ABA, n=309). Mean age was 56 years and mean disease duration was 12 years. Thirty-two percent received >1 bDMARD and 72% received concomitant methotrexate at baseline. At week 12, UPA treatment showed significantly greater improvements than ABA treatment in PtGA, pain, HAQ-DI, morning stiffness severity, EQ-5D-5L, WPAI activity impairment domain, and 3/8 SF-36 domains and physical component summary (PCS) scores (P<0.05). Significantly more UPA- vs ABA-treated patients reported improvements ≥ MCID in HAQ-DI (74% vs 64%) and SF-36 PCS (79% vs 66%) and 4/8 domain scores (P<0.05). The proportions of patients achieving MCID in the remaining PROs were similar between groups.Conclusions: In this study, treatment with UPA or ABA resulted in clinically meaningful improvements in PROs at week 12 in patients with active RA. UPA treatment elicited greater improvements in key domains of physical functioning, pain, and general health, and earlier improvements in HAQ-DI compared with ABA.Trial registration: NCT03086343, March 22, 2017

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document