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: 1371

Improvement in Patient-Reported Outcomes for Upadacitinib versus Placebo Among Patients with Psoriatic Arthritis and an Inadequate Response to Biologic Disease-Modifying Anti-Rheumatic Drugs

Vibeke Strand1, Filip Van den Bosch2, Roberto Ranza3, Ying Ying Leung4, Edit Drescher5, Apinya Lertratanakul6, Ralph Lippe7, Christopher Saffore6, Patrick Zueger6 and Peter Nash8, 1Division of Immunology/Rheumatology, Stanford University, Palo Alto, CA, 2Ghent University Hospital, Ghent, Belgium, 3Hospital de Clinicas, Universidade Federal de Uberlândia, Uberlândia, Brazil, 4Department of Rheumatology & Immunology, Singapore General Hospital, Singapore, Singapore, 5Veszprém Csolnoky Ferenc County Hospital, Veszprém, Hungary, 6AbbVie Inc., North Chicago, IL, 7AbbVie Deutschland GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden, Germany, 8School of Medicine Griffith University, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia

Meeting: ACR Convergence 2020

Keywords: Patient reported outcomes, physical function, quality of life

  • Tweet
  • Email
  • Print
Session Information

Date: Sunday, November 8, 2020

Title: Spondyloarthritis Including Psoriatic Arthritis – Treatment Poster III

Session Type: Poster Session C

Session Time: 9:00AM-11:00AM

Background/Purpose: The efficacy and safety of upadacitinib (UPA), a selective Janus kinase inhibitor, in patients with PsA is under investigation in Phase 3 clinical trials. Patient-reported outcomes (PROs) are an important component in the evaluation of efficacy for a new therapy. This post hoc analysis evaluated the impact of UPA vs placebo (PBO) on PROs in patients with active PsA and an inadequate response to biologic DMARDs (bDMARD-IR).

Methods: Patients in SELECT-PsA 2 (NCT03104374), a Phase 3, randomized, PBO-controlled trial, received UPA 15 mg or UPA 30 mg once daily or PBO for 24 weeks, with the primary endpoint assessment at Week 12. The following PROs were assessed: Patient Global Assessment of Disease Activity (PtGA), Patient’s Assessment of Pain, HAQ-Disability Index (HAQ-DI), Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy-Fatigue, 36-Item Short-Form Health Survey (SF-36), EQ-5D-5L, Self-Assessment of Psoriasis Symptoms (SAPS), Work Productivity and Activity Impairment, Bath Ankylosing Spondylitis Disease Activity Index (BASDAI), and morning stiffness (items 5 and 6 from the BASDAI). BASDAI was assessed in patients with evidence of psoriatic spondylitis at baseline (BL). Least squares mean changes from BL to Week 12 (Week 16 for SAPS) were assessed. The proportions of patients reporting improvements ≥ minimal clinically important differences (MCID) from BL through Week 24 were compared between both doses of UPA and PBO. The number needed to treat (NNT) to achieve 1 additional MCID response for each PRO of interest with UPA vs PBO were calculated at Weeks 12/24.

Results: Data from 641 patients (UPA 15 mg: 211; UPA 30 mg: 218; PBO: 212) were analyzed. Significant improvements from BL to Week 12 were reported with both doses of UPA vs PBO across all PROs, including all SF-36 domains (Table, Figure 1). Significantly greater proportions of patients receiving either dose of UPA vs PBO reported improvements ≥ MCID as early as Week 2 (the first post-BL visit) in PtGA, pain, and HAQ-DI. Compared with PBO at Week 12, a significantly greater proportion of patients receiving either dose of UPA reported improvements ≥ MCID across all PROs except SF-36 mental component summary (UPA 30 mg) (Figure 2). Improvements were maintained or further improved through Week 24. NNTs with UPA 15 mg and 30 mg ranged from 3–10 across PROs at Week 12.

Conclusion: Among bDMARD-IR patients with active PsA, treatment with UPA 15 mg or 30 mg once daily for 12 weeks resulted in clinically meaningful improvements in PROs, which were maintained or further improved through 24 weeks.

Medical writing services provided by Brandy Menges of JK Associates, Inc. (a member of Fishawack Group of Companies; Conshohocken, PA) and funded by AbbVie.


Disclosure: V. Strand, AbbVie, 5, Amgen, 5, Celltrion, 5, Janssen, 5, Merck, 5, Novartis, 5, Regeneron, 5, Sanofi, 5, UCB, 5, Genentech/Roche, 5, GSK, 5, Pfizer, 5, Bayer, 5, Bristol-Myers Squibb, 5, Boehringer Ingelheim, 5, Galapagos, 5, Lilly, 5, Gilead, 5, Samsung, 5, Servier, 5, Setpoint, 5, Arena, 5, AstraZeneca, 5, Horizon, 5, Ichnos, 5, Inmedix, 5, Sandoz, 5; F. Van den Bosch, AbbVie, 5, 8, Celgene, 5, 8, Eli Lilly, 5, 8, Galapagos, 5, 8, Novartis, 5, 8, Pfizer, 5, 8, UCB, 5, 8, Gilead, 5, Merck, 5, 8; R. Ranza, AbbVie, 2, 5, 8, Janssen, 2, 5, 8, Lilly, 5, 8, Novartis, 5, 8, Pfizer, 5, 8; Y. Leung, AbbVie, 5, 8, Novartis, 5, 8, Eli Lilly, 5, 8, Janssen, 5, 8; E. Drescher, None; A. Lertratanakul, AbbVie Inc., 1, 3; R. Lippe, AbbVie Inc., 1, 3; C. Saffore, AbbVie, 1, 3; P. Zueger, AbbVie Inc., 1, 3; P. Nash, AbbVie, 2, 5, 8, Bristol Myers Squibb, 2, 5, 8, Celgene, 2, 5, 8, Eli Lilly, 2, 5, 8, Janssen, 2, 5, 8, Novartis, 2, 5, 8, Pfizer, 2, 5, 8, Roche, 2, 5, 8, Sanofi, 2, 5, 8, UCB, 2, 5, 8.

To cite this abstract in AMA style:

Strand V, Van den Bosch F, Ranza R, Leung Y, Drescher E, Lertratanakul A, Lippe R, Saffore C, Zueger P, Nash P. Improvement in Patient-Reported Outcomes for Upadacitinib versus Placebo Among Patients with Psoriatic Arthritis and an Inadequate Response to Biologic Disease-Modifying Anti-Rheumatic Drugs [abstract]. Arthritis Rheumatol. 2020; 72 (suppl 10). https://acrabstracts.org/abstract/improvement-in-patient-reported-outcomes-for-upadacitinib-versus-placebo-among-patients-with-psoriatic-arthritis-and-an-inadequate-response-to-biologic-disease-modifying-anti-rheumatic-drugs/. Accessed .
  • Tweet
  • Email
  • Print

« Back to ACR Convergence 2020

ACR Meeting Abstracts - https://acrabstracts.org/abstract/improvement-in-patient-reported-outcomes-for-upadacitinib-versus-placebo-among-patients-with-psoriatic-arthritis-and-an-inadequate-response-to-biologic-disease-modifying-anti-rheumatic-drugs/

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