ACR Meeting Abstracts

ACR Meeting Abstracts

  • Meetings
    • ACR Convergence 2024
    • ACR Convergence 2023
    • 2023 ACR/ARP PRSYM
    • ACR Convergence 2022
    • ACR Convergence 2021
    • ACR Convergence 2020
    • 2020 ACR/ARP PRSYM
    • 2019 ACR/ARP Annual Meeting
    • 2018-2009 Meetings
    • Download Abstracts
  • Keyword Index
  • Advanced Search
  • Your Favorites
    • Favorites
    • Login
    • View and print all favorites
    • Clear all your favorites
  • ACR Meetings

Abstract Number: 1240

Biomarker Driven Dissection of Inflammation Modulatory Effects of Upadacitinib versus Abatacept in Patients with Active Rheumatoid Arthritis Refractory to Biologic DMARDs

Fang Cai1, Thierry Sornasse2, Feng Hong3, Heidi Camp4, Koji Kato5 and Iain McInnes6, 1AbbVie, Redwood City, CA, 2AbbVie Inc, Redwood City, CA, 3AbbVie, Worcester, MA, 4AbbVie Inc., North Chicago, IL, 5AbbVie Inc, Shinagawa- Ku, Japan, 6University of Glasgow, School of Medicine, Glasgow, Scotland, United Kingdom

Meeting: ACR Convergence 2021

Keywords: Biomarkers, clinical trial, Disease Activity, proteomics, rheumatoid arthritis

  • Tweet
  • Click to email a link to a friend (Opens in new window) Email
  • Click to print (Opens in new window) Print
Session Information

Date: Monday, November 8, 2021

Title: RA – Treatments Poster II: PROs, Biomarkers, & Systemic Inflammation (1223–1256)

Session Type: Poster Session C

Session Time: 8:30AM-10:30AM

Background/Purpose: In patients with active rheumatoid arthritis (RA) refractory to biologic DMARDs (bDMARD-IR), a phase 3, double-blind and active-controlled study (SELECT-CHOICE) demonstrated that upadacitinib (UPA) 15 mg QD was superior to abatacept (ABA) IV in driving change from baseline in DAS28-CRP and achievement of clinical remission at week 12.1 The objective of this analysis was to compare the effects of UPA versus ABA on inflammatory biomarkers in bDMARD-IR RA patients, and to assess the dynamic relationship of such biomarkers with disease activity.

Methods: A subset of patients was randomly selected from the SELECT-CHOICE study cohort that consented sample collection for exploratory research (UPA: n = 99; ABA: n = 100). Plasma biomarker levels were assessed at baseline, week 2 and week 12 using the Olink Explore 384 Inflammation panel. Change from baseline was expressed as log2 fold change (log2FC). A Repeated Measure Mixed Linear Model identified biomarkers differentially modulated from baseline. Statistical tests were corrected for multiple comparison using the Benjamini – Hochberg False Discovery Rate (FDR) method. Downstream biological effects were predicted with Ingenuity Pathway Analysis. Responders in this analysis were defined by achieving DAS28-CRP Low Disease Activity (≤3.2) at week 12.

Results: Overall, 58 out of 368 biomarkers assessed were significantly modulated by UPA or ABA at week 12 (Table 1). Compared to ABA, treatment with UPA resulted in faster and broader modulation of inflammatory mediators implicated in RA pathogenesis in bDMARD-IR RA patients. Predictive analysis of downstream biological processes showed overlapped inhibitory effects by UPA and ABA on lymphocytes, myeloid cells, antigen presenting cells, and phagocyte activities, indicating a functional convergence of UPA and ABA mechanisms of action (MOA). IL-6, CCL7, CSF1 and HSD11B1 were identified as DAS28-CRP-related biomarkers in this analysis. The levels of IL-6, CCL7, CSF1, and HSD11B1 significantly correlated with DAS28-CRP at the baseline, and the changes in these biomarkers significantly correlated with changes in DAS28-CRP at week 12. UPA had significantly greater modulation effects on IL-6, CCL7, CSF1 and HSD11B1 compared to ABA; these were more profound in responders than in non-responders.

Conclusion: The results of inflammatory biomarker modulation by UPA and ABA treatment demonstrates their MOA in bDMARD-IR RA patients, consistent with previous findings.2,3 The more profound modulation of DAS28-CRP-related biomarkers by UPA may provide a mechanistic rationale for the superior efficacy of UPA compared to ABA, which warrants further investigation.

References

  1. Rubbert-Roth A, et al. N Engl J Med 2020;383:1511-21.
  2. Sornasse T, et al. Arthritis Rheumatol 2019;71(Suppl 10).
  3. Weisman MH, et al. J Rheumatol 2006; 33(11):2162-6.

Table 1: Significantly modulated biomarkers by UPA or ABA in the bDMARD-IR RA patients


Disclosures: F. Cai, AbbVie, 3, 11; T. Sornasse, AbbVie, 3, 11; F. Hong, AbbVie, 3, 11; H. Camp, AbbVie, 3, 11; K. Kato, AbbVie, 3, 11; I. McInnes, Bristol Myers Squibb, 2, 5, Celgene, 2, 5, Eli Lilly, 2, 5, Janssen, 2, 5, Novartis, 2, 5, UCB, 2, 5, Gilead, 2, AbbVie, 2, AstraZeneca, 5, Boehringer Ingelheim, 2, Amgen, 2, 5, 6, Pfizer, 2, 5, 6.

To cite this abstract in AMA style:

Cai F, Sornasse T, Hong F, Camp H, Kato K, McInnes I. Biomarker Driven Dissection of Inflammation Modulatory Effects of Upadacitinib versus Abatacept in Patients with Active Rheumatoid Arthritis Refractory to Biologic DMARDs [abstract]. Arthritis Rheumatol. 2021; 73 (suppl 9). https://acrabstracts.org/abstract/biomarker-driven-dissection-of-inflammation-modulatory-effects-of-upadacitinib-versus-abatacept-in-patients-with-active-rheumatoid-arthritis-refractory-to-biologic-dmards/. Accessed .
  • Tweet
  • Click to email a link to a friend (Opens in new window) Email
  • Click to print (Opens in new window) Print

« Back to ACR Convergence 2021

ACR Meeting Abstracts - https://acrabstracts.org/abstract/biomarker-driven-dissection-of-inflammation-modulatory-effects-of-upadacitinib-versus-abatacept-in-patients-with-active-rheumatoid-arthritis-refractory-to-biologic-dmards/

Advanced Search

Your Favorites

You can save and print a list of your favorite abstracts during your browser session by clicking the “Favorite” button at the bottom of any abstract. View your favorites »

All abstracts accepted to ACR Convergence are under media embargo once the ACR has notified presenters of their abstract’s acceptance. They may be presented at other meetings or published as manuscripts after this time but should not be discussed in non-scholarly venues or outlets. The following embargo policies are strictly enforced by the ACR.

Accepted abstracts are made available to the public online in advance of the meeting and are published in a special online supplement of our scientific journal, Arthritis & Rheumatology. Information contained in those abstracts may not be released until the abstracts appear online. In an exception to the media embargo, academic institutions, private organizations, and companies with products whose value may be influenced by information contained in an abstract may issue a press release to coincide with the availability of an ACR abstract on the ACR website. However, the ACR continues to require that information that goes beyond that contained in the abstract (e.g., discussion of the abstract done as part of editorial news coverage) is under media embargo until 10:00 AM ET on November 14, 2024. Journalists with access to embargoed information cannot release articles or editorial news coverage before this time. Editorial news coverage is considered original articles/videos developed by employed journalists to report facts, commentary, and subject matter expert quotes in a narrative form using a variety of sources (e.g., research, announcements, press releases, events, etc.).

Violation of this policy may result in the abstract being withdrawn from the meeting and other measures deemed appropriate. Authors are responsible for notifying colleagues, institutions, communications firms, and all other stakeholders related to the development or promotion of the abstract about this policy. If you have questions about the ACR abstract embargo policy, please contact ACR abstracts staff at [email protected].

Wiley

  • Online Journal
  • Privacy Policy
  • Permissions Policies
  • Cookie Preferences

© Copyright 2025 American College of Rheumatology