类风湿性关节炎患者服用乌达帕替尼与阿达木单抗的长期安全性和疗效:SELECT-COMPARE 三期随机研究的 5 年数据。

IF 5.1 2区 医学 Q1 RHEUMATOLOGY
Roy Fleischmann, Jerzy Swierkot, Sara K Penn, Patrick Durez, Louis Bessette, Xianwei Bu, Nasser Khan, Yihan Li, Charles G Peterfy, Yoshiya Tanaka, Eduardo Mysler
{"title":"类风湿性关节炎患者服用乌达帕替尼与阿达木单抗的长期安全性和疗效:SELECT-COMPARE 三期随机研究的 5 年数据。","authors":"Roy Fleischmann, Jerzy Swierkot, Sara K Penn, Patrick Durez, Louis Bessette, Xianwei Bu, Nasser Khan, Yihan Li, Charles G Peterfy, Yoshiya Tanaka, Eduardo Mysler","doi":"10.1136/rmdopen-2023-004007","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>To assess the safety and efficacy of upadacitinib versus adalimumab from SELECT-COMPARE over 5 years.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Patients with rheumatoid arthritis and inadequate response to methotrexate were randomised to receive upadacitinib 15 mg once daily, placebo or adalimumab 40 mg every other week, all with concomitant methotrexate. By week 26, patients with insufficient response to randomised treatment were rescued; patients remaining on placebo switched to upadacitinib. Patients completing the 48-week double-blind period could enter a long-term extension. Safety and efficacy were assessed through week 264, with radiographic progression analysed through week 192. Safety was assessed by treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs). Efficacy was analysed by randomised group (non-responder imputation (NRI)) or treatment sequence (as observed).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Rates of TEAEs were generally similar with upadacitinib versus adalimumab, although numerically higher rates of herpes zoster, lymphopenia, creatine phosphokinase elevation, hepatic disorder and non-melanoma skin cancer were reported with upadacitinib. Numerically greater proportions of patients randomised to upadacitinib versus adalimumab achieved clinical responses (NRI); Clinical Disease Activity Index remission (≤2.8) and Disease Activity Score based on C reactive protein <2.6 were achieved by 24.6% vs 18.7% (nominal p=0.042) and 31.8% vs 23.2% (nominal p=0.006), respectively. Radiographic progression was numerically lower with continuous upadacitinib versus adalimumab at week 192.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The safety profile of upadacitinib through 5 years was consistent with the known safety profile of upadacitinib, with no new safety risks. Clinical responses were numerically higher with upadacitinib versus adalimumab at 5 years. Upadacitinib demonstrates a favourable benefit-risk profile for long-term rheumatoid arthritis treatment.</p><p><strong>Trial registration number: </strong>NCT02629159.</p>","PeriodicalId":21396,"journal":{"name":"RMD Open","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":5.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11138271/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Long-term safety and efficacy of upadacitinib versus adalimumab in patients with rheumatoid arthritis: 5-year data from the phase 3, randomised SELECT-COMPARE study.\",\"authors\":\"Roy Fleischmann, Jerzy Swierkot, Sara K Penn, Patrick Durez, Louis Bessette, Xianwei Bu, Nasser Khan, Yihan Li, Charles G Peterfy, Yoshiya Tanaka, Eduardo Mysler\",\"doi\":\"10.1136/rmdopen-2023-004007\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>To assess the safety and efficacy of upadacitinib versus adalimumab from SELECT-COMPARE over 5 years.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Patients with rheumatoid arthritis and inadequate response to methotrexate were randomised to receive upadacitinib 15 mg once daily, placebo or adalimumab 40 mg every other week, all with concomitant methotrexate. By week 26, patients with insufficient response to randomised treatment were rescued; patients remaining on placebo switched to upadacitinib. Patients completing the 48-week double-blind period could enter a long-term extension. Safety and efficacy were assessed through week 264, with radiographic progression analysed through week 192. Safety was assessed by treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs). Efficacy was analysed by randomised group (non-responder imputation (NRI)) or treatment sequence (as observed).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Rates of TEAEs were generally similar with upadacitinib versus adalimumab, although numerically higher rates of herpes zoster, lymphopenia, creatine phosphokinase elevation, hepatic disorder and non-melanoma skin cancer were reported with upadacitinib. Numerically greater proportions of patients randomised to upadacitinib versus adalimumab achieved clinical responses (NRI); Clinical Disease Activity Index remission (≤2.8) and Disease Activity Score based on C reactive protein <2.6 were achieved by 24.6% vs 18.7% (nominal p=0.042) and 31.8% vs 23.2% (nominal p=0.006), respectively. Radiographic progression was numerically lower with continuous upadacitinib versus adalimumab at week 192.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The safety profile of upadacitinib through 5 years was consistent with the known safety profile of upadacitinib, with no new safety risks. Clinical responses were numerically higher with upadacitinib versus adalimumab at 5 years. Upadacitinib demonstrates a favourable benefit-risk profile for long-term rheumatoid arthritis treatment.</p><p><strong>Trial registration number: </strong>NCT02629159.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":21396,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"RMD Open\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":5.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-05-28\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11138271/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"RMD Open\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1136/rmdopen-2023-004007\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"RHEUMATOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"RMD Open","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1136/rmdopen-2023-004007","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"RHEUMATOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的评估SELECT-COMPARE项目中的达达替尼与阿达木单抗5年来的安全性和有效性:类风湿性关节炎患者对甲氨蝶呤反应不足,随机接受达帕替尼15毫克,每天一次,安慰剂或阿达木单抗40毫克,每隔一周一次,所有患者均同时服用甲氨蝶呤。到第26周时,对随机治疗反应不足的患者被解救;仍在服用安慰剂的患者转为服用达帕替尼。完成48周双盲期的患者可进入长期延长期。安全性和疗效评估持续到第264周,放射学进展分析持续到第192周。安全性通过治疗突发不良事件(TEAEs)进行评估。疗效按随机分组(非应答者归因(NRI))或治疗顺序(观察结果)进行分析:达帕替尼与阿达木单抗的TEAEs发生率基本相似,但达帕替尼发生带状疱疹、淋巴细胞减少症、肌酸磷酸激酶升高、肝功能紊乱和非黑色素瘤皮肤癌的比例较高。与阿达木单抗相比,随机接受达帕替尼治疗的患者中获得临床应答(NRI)、临床疾病活动指数缓解(≤2.8)和基于C反应蛋白的疾病活动评分的比例更高:达达替尼5年的安全性与已知的达达替尼安全性一致,没有新的安全性风险。与阿达木单抗相比,达帕替尼5年后的临床反应在数量上更高。在类风湿关节炎的长期治疗中,奥达替尼显示出了良好的效益-风险特征:NCT02629159。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Long-term safety and efficacy of upadacitinib versus adalimumab in patients with rheumatoid arthritis: 5-year data from the phase 3, randomised SELECT-COMPARE study.

Objectives: To assess the safety and efficacy of upadacitinib versus adalimumab from SELECT-COMPARE over 5 years.

Methods: Patients with rheumatoid arthritis and inadequate response to methotrexate were randomised to receive upadacitinib 15 mg once daily, placebo or adalimumab 40 mg every other week, all with concomitant methotrexate. By week 26, patients with insufficient response to randomised treatment were rescued; patients remaining on placebo switched to upadacitinib. Patients completing the 48-week double-blind period could enter a long-term extension. Safety and efficacy were assessed through week 264, with radiographic progression analysed through week 192. Safety was assessed by treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs). Efficacy was analysed by randomised group (non-responder imputation (NRI)) or treatment sequence (as observed).

Results: Rates of TEAEs were generally similar with upadacitinib versus adalimumab, although numerically higher rates of herpes zoster, lymphopenia, creatine phosphokinase elevation, hepatic disorder and non-melanoma skin cancer were reported with upadacitinib. Numerically greater proportions of patients randomised to upadacitinib versus adalimumab achieved clinical responses (NRI); Clinical Disease Activity Index remission (≤2.8) and Disease Activity Score based on C reactive protein <2.6 were achieved by 24.6% vs 18.7% (nominal p=0.042) and 31.8% vs 23.2% (nominal p=0.006), respectively. Radiographic progression was numerically lower with continuous upadacitinib versus adalimumab at week 192.

Conclusion: The safety profile of upadacitinib through 5 years was consistent with the known safety profile of upadacitinib, with no new safety risks. Clinical responses were numerically higher with upadacitinib versus adalimumab at 5 years. Upadacitinib demonstrates a favourable benefit-risk profile for long-term rheumatoid arthritis treatment.

Trial registration number: NCT02629159.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
RMD Open
RMD Open RHEUMATOLOGY-
CiteScore
7.30
自引率
6.50%
发文量
205
审稿时长
14 weeks
期刊介绍: RMD Open publishes high quality peer-reviewed original research covering the full spectrum of musculoskeletal disorders, rheumatism and connective tissue diseases, including osteoporosis, spine and rehabilitation. Clinical and epidemiological research, basic and translational medicine, interesting clinical cases, and smaller studies that add to the literature are all considered.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信