Impact of Certolizumab Pegol on Patient-Reported Outcomes in Patients With Axial Spondyloarthritis.

OBJECTIVE: Patient-reported outcomes (PROs) provide an opportunity to collect important information relating to patient well-being, which is often difficult for physicians to measure (e.g., quality of life, pain, fatigue, and sleep). Here we evaluate the effects of certolizumab pegol (CZP) on PROs during the 24-week, double-blind phase of the RAPID axial spondyloarthritis (SpA) trial, a phase 3 trial of axial SpA patients, including both ankylosing spondylitis (AS) and nonradiographic axial SpA patients. METHODS: A total of 325 patients with active axial SpA were randomized 1:1:1 to placebo, CZP 200 mg every 2 weeks, or CZP 400 mg every 4 weeks. The primary end point was the Assessment of SpondyloArthritis International Society criteria for 20% improvement in disease activity response at week 12, and has been reported previously. PROs included total back pain, nocturnal back pain, a daily pain diary, the Sleep Problems Index II (SPI) domain of the Medical Outcomes Study (MOS) Sleep Scale, fatigue, the Ankylosing Spondylitis Quality of Life (ASQOL) measure, and the Short Form 36-item (SF-36) health survey physical component summary (PCS), mental component summary (MCS), and domains. RESULTS: Patients treated with CZP reported significant improvements from week 1 for nocturnal back pain (placebo -0.6, CZP 200 mg every 2 weeks -1.9, and CZP 400 mg every 4 weeks -1.6; P < 0.001) and ASQOL (placebo -1.0, CZP 200 mg every 2 weeks -2.3, and CZP 400 mg every 4 weeks -1.9; P < 0.05) compared with placebo, while significant improvements in total back pain were seen from day 2. Patients treated with both CZP dosing regimens also had significantly greater improvements in fatigue, MOS-SPI, SF-36 PCS, MCS, and domains compared with placebo. Improvements were similar in both AS and nonradiographic axial SpA patients. CONCLUSION: Both CZP dosing schedules rapidly improved patient well-being, as measured by PROs, including pain, fatigue, sleep, SF-36, and ASQOL in both AS and nonradiographic axial SpA patients.

Effect of certolizumab pegol on signs and symptoms in patients with psoriatic arthritis: 24-week results of a Phase 3 double-blind randomised placebo-controlled study (RAPID-PsA).

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of certolizumab pegol (CZP) after 24 weeks in RAPID-PsA (NCT01087788), an ongoing Phase 3 trial in patients with psoriatic arthritis (PsA). METHODS: Patients were randomised 1:1:1 to placebo, 200 mg CZP every 2 weeks (Q2W) or 400 mg CZP every 4 weeks (Q4W). Patients could have had exposure to one previous tumour necrosis factor (TNF) inhibitor therapy. Primary endpoints were American College of Rheumatology 20% (ACR20) response at week 12 and modified Total Sharp Score change from baseline at week 24. Secondary endpoints included; Psoriatic Arthritis Response Criteria (PsARC) score, Health Assessment Questionnaire Disability Index (HAQ-DI), Psoriasis Area and Severity Index, Leeds Enthesitis Index, Leeds Dactylitis Index, and Modified Nail Psoriasis Severity Index. RESULTS: Of 409 patients randomised, 368 completed 24 weeks of treatment. ACR20 response was significantly greater in CZP 200 mg Q2W and 400 mg Q4W-treated patients than placebo (58.0% and 51.9% vs 24.3% (p<0.001)) at week 12, with improvements observed by week 1. There was a statistically significant improvement in physical function from baseline, measured by HAQ-DI in CZP patients compared with placebo (-0.50 vs -0.19, p<0.001) and more patients treated with CZP 200 mg Q2W and CZP 400 mg achieved an improvement in PsARC at week 24 than placebo (78.3% and 77.0% vs 33.1% (p<0.001)). Sustained improvements were observed in psoriatic skin involvement, enthesitis, dactylitis and nail disease. Higher ACR20 response with CZP was independent of prior TNF inhibitor exposure. No new safety signals were observed. CONCLUSIONS: Rapid improvements in the signs and symptoms of PsA, including joints, skin, enthesitis, dactylitis and nail disease were observed across both CZP dosing regimens.

Effect of different imputation approaches on the evaluation of radiographic progression in patients with psoriatic arthritis: results of the RAPID-PsA 24-week phase III double-blind randomised placebo-controlled study of certolizumab pegol.

OBJECTIVES: To report the effect of different imputation methodologies on the assessment of radiographic progression in clinical trials. METHODS: The 216-week RAPID-psoriatic arthritis (PsA) (NCT01087788) trial of certolizumab pegol (CZP) in patients with active PsA was double-blind and placebo-controlled until week 24. A primary end point was change from baseline in modified Total Sharp Score(s) (mTSS). Prespecified imputation methodology in patients with fewer than two analysable mTSS used minimum observed baseline score for missing baseline values and maximum observed week 24 score for missing week 24 values. Post hoc analyses used alternative methods of imputation in patients with fewer than two analysable mTSS. mTSS non-progressors were defined as patients with ≤0 (predefined) or ≤0.5 (post hoc) change in mTSS from baseline to week 24. Baseline mTSS and C-reactive protein levels as predictors of radiographic progression were investigated. RESULTS: 409 patients were randomised. Baseline demographics were similar between groups. Prespecified imputation analysis inappropriately overestimated radiographic progression (least squares mean placebo, 28.9; CZP, 18.3; p≥0.05). Multiple post hoc analyses demonstrated that CZP inhibited radiographic progression compared with placebo, particularly in patients with high baseline mTSS and C-reactive protein levels. mTSS non-progression rate was higher in CZP than placebo groups in all analyses. CONCLUSIONS: Inappropriate prespecified imputation methodology resulted in an unrealistic assessment of progression in all arms. Methodologies for imputing missing radiographic data can greatly affect assessment and reporting of mTSS progression.

Effect of certolizumab pegol on multiple facets of psoriatic arthritis as reported by patients: 24-week patient-reported outcome results of a phase III, multicenter study.

OBJECTIVE: To examine the effect of certolizumab pegol (CZP) on patient-reported outcomes (PROs) in psoriatic arthritis (PsA) patients with and without prior tumor necrosis factor (TNF) inhibitor exposure. METHODS: The ongoing phase III RAPID-PsA trial was double blind and placebo controlled to week 24. Patients were randomized 1:1:1 to placebo every 2 weeks or CZP 400 mg at weeks 0, 2, and 4, followed by either CZP 200 mg every 2 weeks or CZP 400 mg every 4 weeks. PRO measures evaluated were the Health Assessment Questionnaire (HAQ) disability index (DI), health status (measured by the Short Form 36 [SF-36] health survey), Psoriatic Arthritis Quality of Life (PsAQOL), Fatigue Assessment Scale, patient assessment of pain (visual analog scale), and Dermatology Life Quality Index (DLQI). Post hoc analyses of PROs in patients with and without prior TNF inhibitor exposure were conducted. Change from baseline for all PROs was analyzed for the randomized population using analysis of covariance with last observation carried forward imputation. RESULTS: A total of 409 patients were randomized. Twenty percent had received a prior TNF inhibitor. Baseline demographics were similar between the treatment groups. At week 24, clinically meaningful differences in HAQ DI, SF-36, PsAQOL, fatigue, pain, and DLQI were observed in both CZP arms versus placebo (P < 0.001), irrespective of prior TNF inhibitor exposure. More CZP-treated patients reached SF-36 general population norms than placebo-treated patients. CONCLUSION: Both CZP dosing schedules provided rapid improvements in PROs across multiple disease aspects in patients with PsA. The benefits of CZP treatment for health-related quality of life were seen across generic, PsA-specific, and dermatology-specific measures and were observed in patients regardless of prior TNF inhibitor exposure.

Prevention of contrast media-induced renal dysfunction with prostaglandin E1: a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study.

Preexisting renal impairment is an all-encompassing risk factor for radiocontrast-associated nephrotoxicity. Renal impairment appears to be associated with the inadequate production of renal prostaglandins at the critical time of radiocontrast administration and for a variable time period afterward. We prospectively studied 130 patients with chronic renal insufficiency (serum creatinine > or =1.5 mg/dL) who were undergoing radiocontrast administration. Using a double-blind, randomized, prospective technique, patients were assigned to either placebo or one of three prostaglandin E1 (PGE1) treatment groups (10, 20, or 40 ng/kg/min). Infusion was started 60 +/- 30 minutes before the administration of radiocontrast and was continued for a total of 6 hours. In the placebo group, radiocontrast administration resulted in a mean increase (+/- SD) in serum creatinine of 0.72 +/- 1.15 mg/dL at 48 hours. This increase was less in each of the PGE1 treatment groups after 48 hours, with a significant difference between placebo and the 20 ng/kg/min PGE1 group (P = 0.01). Using baseline adjusted means, analysis of covariance with baseline serum creatinine as the covariable demonstrated significant differences between the placebo and 20 ng/kg/min PGE1 group (P = 0.03) and between the placebo and 10 ng/kg/min PGE1 group P = 0.047). In a subgroup analysis of the diabetic patients, the increase in serum creatinine was less pronounced in the three PGE1 groups versus the placebo group, and the 20 ng/kg/min PGE1 group had the most favorable outcome. The parenteral administration of PGE1 immediately before radiocontrast exposure and continued for a period of 5 to 5.5 hours significantly reduced the elevation of serum creatinine poststudy. The most effective of the three PGE1 dosing regimens was 20 ng/kg/min.

Randomized reliability study evaluating constant-load and graded-exercise treadmill test for intermittent claudication.

The aim of this randomized study was to compare the reliability of the treadmill test at constant-load (C-test, 3 km/hr; fixed grade of 12%) recommended in Germany with that of the graded-exercise test (G-test, 3 km/hr; increase in grade of 3.5% every 3 minutes) propagated in the United States. In 50 patients with an absolute claudication distance (ACD) in the C-test of between 50 and 400 m, the two treadmill tests were carried out in randomized order on one and the same day, and repeated on 3 days within 1 week. For the initial claudication distance (ICD), the intraclass correlation was 0.88 in the C-test and 0.87 in the G-test. For the ACD the coefficients were identical at 0.91. The within-subject variation (CVwithin) in the C-test and G-test was 25% and 27% for the ICD and for the ACD 24% and 21%, respectively. The between-subject variation was very similar with 72% and 73% (ICD) and with 78% and 68% (ACD). However, in ACDs below 100 m and between 100 to 150 m, the C-test showed significantly smaller coefficients of variation than the G-test: 13% vs 81% and 14% vs 50%, respectively. In conclusion, the results showed that both C-test and G-test are equally well reproducible.

Treadmill testing for evaluation of claudication: comparison of constant-load and graded-exercise tests.

OBJECTIVES: To compare the correlation and practicability of single-stage vs. graded treadmill protocols in the assessment of the absolute claudication distance (ACD). DESIGN: Randomized open study. MATERIAL AND METHODS: In 52 patients with peripheral arterial occlusive disease, the ACD on treadmill at 3 km/h and 12% grade (constant-load test = C-test) ranged form 50 to 400 m. The C-test and the graded-exercise test (walking on the treadmill at 3 km/h and 0% gradient for 3 min, with subsequent increase in gradient of 3.5% every 3 min = G-test) were carried out at random on the same day under standardized conditions. RESULTS: The ACD was higher in the G-test than in the C-test (360.4 +/- 208.8m vs. 166.5 +/- 93.6m; p < 0.001). The coefficients of variation were very similar (57.9% and 56.2%, respectively). In the subgroup of patients with an ACD of between 100 m and 150 m, a large difference was found both for the coefficient of variation (58.6% G-test, 9.6% C-test) and for the standard deviation (339.8 +/- 199.0m and 133.1 +/- 12.8m, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: For the assessment of the ACD in patients with severe claudication the C-test would seem to be more suitable than the G-test.