Dataset Information

Achievement of Remission Endpoints with Secukinumab Over 3 Years in Active Ankylosing Spondylitis: Pooled Analysis of Two Phase 3 Studies.

ABSTRACT:

Introduction

Clinical remission in patients with ankylosing spondylitis (AS) has been determined using composite indices such as the AS Disease Activity Score inactive disease (ASDAS-ID), Assessment of SpondyloArthritis international Society criteria partial remission (ASAS-PR), and low Bath AS Disease Activity Index (BASDAI) scores. The objective of this exploratory analysis was to evaluate the proportion of secukinumab-treated patients with AS achieving remission defined based on the ASDAS-ID (score < 1.3), ASAS-PR or BASDAI score ≤ 2.

Methods

The analysis pooled data from the MEASURE 1 and 2 studies over 3 years. The proportion of patients who achieved ASDAS-ID, ASAS-PR, or BASDAI ≤ 2 with secukinumab was compared with placebo at week 16; results for secukinumab-treated patients were summarized through week 156. Sustainability of each criterion was assessed from week 16 to 156 using shift analysis. The association between each of these criteria and specific patient-reported outcomes (PROs), such as health-related quality of life, function, fatigue, and work impairment, was also explored.

Results

At week 16, a higher proportion of secukinumab-treated patients versus placebo achieved ASDAS-ID (17.6 vs. 3.5%), ASAS-PR (15.4 vs. 4.1%), or BASDAI ≤ 2 (22.3 vs. 6.4%) criteria (all P < 0.0001), which were sustained through 156 weeks. Shift analysis showed that the majority of secukinumab-treated patients achieving remission at week 16 maintained their status at week 156 (ASDAS-ID, 57.1%; ASAS-PR, 68.0% and BASDAI ≤ 2, 74.3%). Remission was also associated with improved PROs over 156 weeks.

Conclusions

Secukinumab-treated patients maintained ASDAS-ID, ASAS-PR, or BASDAI ≤ 2 from week 16 up to 3 years. Patients who achieved at least one of the three responses/states, reported improvement in PROs, which suggests an association of clinical remission/ID with PROs in patients with active AS.

Trial registration

ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT01358175, NCT01863732, and NCT01649375.

SUBMITTER: Baraliakos X

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7991028 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:ObjectiveThe aim of this study was to compare radiographic progression in patients with ankylosing spondylitis (AS) treated for up to 2 years with secukinumab (MEASURE 1) with a historical cohort of biologic-naïve patients treated with NSAIDs (ENRADAS).MethodsBaseline and 2-year lateral cervical and lumbar spine radiographs were independently evaluated using mSASSS by two readers, who were blinded to the chronology and cohort of the radiographs. The primary endpoint was the proportion of patients with no radiographic progression (mSASSS change ≤ 0 from baseline to year 2). The Primary Analysis Set included patients with baseline (≤ day 30) and post-baseline day 31-743 radiographs. Sensitivity analyses were performed to assess the robustness of the comparison between the two cohorts, as follows: Sensitivity Analysis Set 1 included all patients with baseline (≤ day 30) and year 2 (days 640-819) radiographs; Sensitivity Analysis Set 2 included all patients with baseline and post-baseline (> day 30) radiographs.ResultsA total of 168 patients (84%) from the MEASURE 1 cohort and 69 (57%) from the ENRADAS cohort qualified for the Primary Analysis Set. Over 2 years, the LS (SE) mean change from baseline in mSASSS for the primary analysis was 0.55 (0.139) for MEASURE 1 vs 0.89 (0.216) for ENRADAS (p = 0.1852). Mean changes from baseline in mSASSS were lower in MEASURE 1 vs ENRADAS for the primary and sensitivity analyses. The proportion of patients with no radiographic progression was consistently higher in the MEASURE 1 vs ENRADAS cohort across all cutoffs for no radiographic progression (change in mSASSS from baseline to year 2 of ≤ 0, ≤ 0.5, ≤ 1, and ≤ 2), but the differences were not statistically significant.ConclusionSecukinumab-treated patients demonstrated a numerical, but statistically non-significant, higher proportion of non-progressors and lower change in mSASSS over 2 years versus a cohort of biologic-naïve patients treated with NSAIDs.

Project description:ObjectiveTo determine the cost effectiveness of secukinumab, a fully human interleukin-17A inhibitor, for adults in the UK with active ankylosing spondylitis (AS) who have not responded adequately to previous treatment with conventional care (CC; biologic-naïve population) or previous biologic therapy (biologic-experienced population).Perspective and settingUK National Health Service (NHS).MethodsThe model was structured as a 3-month decision tree leading into a Markov model. Comparators were licensed tumour necrosis factor inhibitors (including available biosimilars) and CC in the biologic-naïve and biologic-experienced populations, respectively. Clinical parameters captured treatment response, short-term disease activity and patient functioning, as well as long-term structural disease progression. Utilities were derived from secukinumab trial data. List prices were used for all drugs. The cost year was 2017 and costs and outcomes were discounted at 3.5%.ResultsIn the biologic-naïve population, secukinumab dominated adalimumab and certolizumab pegol. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) versus other comparators were either below £10,000 per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) gained or south-west ICERs that implied cost effectiveness of secukinumab. In biologic-experienced patients, the ICER for secukinumab versus CC was £4927 per QALY gained. Treatment response rates, short-term treatment effects, long-term radiographic progression and biologic acquisition costs were key model drivers. Scenario analysis found results to be robust to changes in model structural assumptions. Probabilistic analysis identified greater uncertainty in results in the biologic-naïve population.ConclusionsEven at list price, secukinumab appears to represent a cost-effective use of NHS resources for biologic-naïve and biologic-experienced patients with active AS. Further research on long-term radiographic progression outcomes would be valuable for future cost-effectiveness analyses in AS.