Objectives: To assess 52-week safety and efficacy of bimekizumab in patients with active psoriatic arthritis (PsA) and prior inadequate response/intolerance to tumour necrosis factor inhibitors. Methods: Patients completing the 16-week phase III double-blind, placebo-controlled BE COMPLETE (NCT03896581) study entered the open-label extension, BE VITAL (NCT04009499). All patients in BE VITAL received 160 mg bimekizumab every 4 weeks. Safety and efficacy are reported to week 52. Results: A total of 347/400 (86.8%) patients completed week 52. To week 52, the exposure-adjusted incidence rate/100 patient-years for ≥1 treatment-emergent adverse event (TEAE) was 126.0, and was 7.0 for serious TEAEs. The most frequent TEAEs were SARS-CoV-2 (COVID-19), oral candidiasis, nasopharyngitis and urinary tract infection. All fungal infections were mild or moderate in severity and localised; two patients discontinued the study due to oral candidiasis. No cases of active tuberculosis, uveitis or inflammatory bowel disease were reported. One sudden death occurred. Sustained efficacy was observed with bimekizumab from week 16 to 52 across clinical and patient-reported outcomes. At week 52, 51.7% bimekizumab-randomised and 40.6% placebo/bimekizumab patients (receiving bimekizumab from week 16 to 52) had ≥50% improvement in the American College of Rheumatology criteria. Complete skin clearance (Psoriasis Area and Severity Index 100) was achieved by 65.9% bimekizumab and 60.2% placebo/bimekizumab patients at week 52. Minimal disease activity was achieved by 47.2% bimekizumab and 33.1% placebo/bimekizumab patients at week 52. Conclusions: Bimekizumab demonstrated a safety profile consistent with previous reports; no new safety signals were identified. Sustained efficacy was observed from week 16 to 52.
1 April 2023 in Journal of Mass Spectrometry and Advances in the Clinical Lab
Mass spectrometry focusing on small endogenous molecules has become an integral part of biomarker discovery in the pursuit of an in-depth understanding of the pathophysiology of various diseases, ultimately enabling the application of personalized medicine. While LC-MS methods allow researchers to gather vast amounts of data from hundreds or thousands of samples, the successful execution of a study as part of clinical research also requires knowledge transfer with clinicians, involvement of data scientists, and interactions with various stakeholders. The initial planning phase of a clinical research project involves specifying the scope and design, and engaging relevant experts from different fields. Enrolling subjects and designing trials rely largely on the overall objective of the study and epidemiological considerations, while proper pre-analytical sample handling has immediate implications on the quality of analytical data. Subsequent LC-MS measurements may be conducted in a targeted, semi-targeted, or non-targeted manner, resulting in datasets of varying size and accuracy. Data processing further enhances the quality of data and is a prerequisite for in-silico analysis. Nowadays, the evaluation of such complex datasets relies on a mix of classical statistics and machine learning applications, in combination with other tools, such as pathway analysis and gene set enrichment. Finally, results must be validated before biomarkers can be used as prognostic or diagnostic decision-making tools. Throughout the study, quality control measures should be employed to enhance the reliability of data and increase confidence in the results. The aim of this graphical review is to provide an overview of the steps to be taken when conducting an LC-MS-based clinical research project to search for small molecule biomarkers.
PsA is a chronic disease with heterogeneous clinical manifestations requiring treatment options with long-term efficacy and safety. In this follow-up analysis, the 52-week efficacy and safety of risankizumab 150 mg in patients with active PsA who had previous inadequate response/intolerance to one or more conventional synthetic DMARDs (csDMARD-IR) were evaluated. KEEPsAKE 1 is an ongoing, global, phase 3 study with a 24-week, double-blind, placebo-controlled period (period 1) and an open-label extension period (period 2). In period 1, eligible patients were randomized 1:1 to receive subcutaneous risankizumab 150 mg or placebo at weeks 0, 4 and 16. At week 24 (period 2), all continuing patients received open-label risankizumab 150 mg every 12 weeks through week 208. At week 24, 57.3% of risankizumab-treated patients (n =483) achieved ≥20% improvement in ACR criteria (ACR20) vs 33.5% of placebo-treated patients (n =481; P < 0.001). At week 52, 70.0% of patients who were randomized to receive continuous risankizumab therapy and 63.0% of patients who were randomized to receive placebo in period 1 and then receive risankizumab at week 24 achieved ACR20. Similar result trends were observed for other efficacy measures. Risankizumab was well tolerated through 52 weeks of treatment with a consistent safety profile from week 24 through week 52. In patients with active PsA who were csDMARD-IR, continuous risankizumab treatment demonstrated robust long-term efficacy and was well tolerated through 52 weeks of treatment. ClinicalTrials.gov, http://clinicaltrials.gov, KEEPsAKE1, NCT03675308.
The definitive diagnosis and early treatment of many immune-mediated inflammatory diseases (IMIDs) is hindered by variable and overlapping clinical manifestations. Psoriatic arthritis (PsA), which develops in ~30% of people with psoriasis, is a key example. This mixed-pattern IMID is apparent in entheseal and synovial musculoskeletal structures, but a definitive diagnosis often can only be made by clinical experts or when an extensive progressive disease state is apparent. As with other IMIDs, the detection of multimodal molecular biomarkers offers some hope for the early diagnosis of PsA and the initiation of effective management and treatment strategies. However, specific biomarkers are not yet available for PsA. The assessment of new markers by genomic and epigenomic profiling, or the analysis of blood and synovial fluid/tissue samples using proteomics, metabolomics and lipidomics, provides hope that complex molecular biomarker profiles could be developed to diagnose PsA. Importantly, the integration of these markers with high-throughput histology, imaging and standardized clinical assessment data provides an important opportunity to develop molecular profiles that could improve the diagnosis of PsA, predict its occurrence in cohorts of individuals with psoriasis, differentiate PsA from other IMIDs, and improve therapeutic responses. In this review, we consider the technologies that are currently deployed in the EU IMI2 project HIPPOCRATES to define biomarker profiles specific for PsA and discuss the advantages of combining multi-omics data to improve the outcome of PsA patients.
Background Psoriatic arthritis (PsA) and axial spondyloarthritis (axSpA) show certain overlaps: A subset of patients with PsA can develop axial involvement (axial PsA, axPsA), while a subset of patients with axSpA presents with psoriasis (axSpA+pso). Treatment strategy for axPsA is mostly based on axSpA evidence. Objectives To compare demographic and disease-specific parameters of axPsA and axSpA+pso. Methods RABBIT-SpA is a prospective longitudinal cohort study. AxPsA was defined based on (1) clinical judgement by rheumatologists; (2) imaging (sacroiliitis according to modified New York criteria in radiographs or signs of active inflammation in MRI or syndesmophytes/ankylosis in radiographs or signs of active inflammation in spine MRI). axSpA was stratified into axSpA+pso and axSpA without pso. Results Psoriasis was documented in 181/1428 axSpA patients (13%). Of 1395 PsA patients, 359 (26%) showed axial involvement. 297 patients (21%) fulfilled the clinical definition and 196 (14%) the imaging definition of axial manifestation of PsA. AxSpA+pso differed from axPsA regardless whether clinical or imaging definition was used. axPsA patients were older, more often female and less often HLA-B27+. Peripheral manifestations were more often present in axPsA than in axSpA+pso, whereas uveitis and inflammatory bowel disease were more common in axSpA+pso. Burden of disease (patient global, pain, physician global) was similar among axPsA and axSpA+pso patients. Conclusions AxPsA differs from axSpA+pso in its clinical manifestations, irrespective of whether axPsA is defined clinically or by imaging. These findings support the hypothesis that axSpA and PsA with axial involvement are distinct entities, so extrapolation of treatment data from randomised controlled trials in axSpA should be performed with caution.