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: 0294

Safety and Efficacy of Upadacitinib in Patients with Rheumatoid Arthritis and Inadequate Response or Intolerance to Biologic DMARDs: Results Through 5 Years from the SELECT-BEYOND Study

Roy Fleischmann1, Sebastian Meerwein2, Christina Charles-Schoeman3, BERNARD COMBE4, Stephen Hall5, Nasser Khan6, Kyle Carter7, Heidi Camp8 and Andrea Rubbert-Roth9, 1Metroplex Clinical Research Center and University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, TX, 2AbbVie Deutschland GmbH & Co KG, LUDWIGSHAFEN, Germany, 3Division of Rheumatology, University of California, Los Angeles, Santa Monica, CA, 4Montpellier University, Montpellier, France, 5Emeritus Research and Monash University, Melbourne, Australia, 6AbbVie, Inc., Abbott Park, IL, 7AbbVie, Inc., North Chicago, IL, 8Abbvie, Winnetka, IL, 9Division of Rheumatology, Cantonal Clinic St Gallen, St.Gallen, Switzerland

Meeting: ACR Convergence 2022

Keywords: clinical trial, Disease-Modifying Antirheumatic Drugs (Dmards), Randomized Trial, Response Criteria, rheumatoid arthritis

  • Tweet
  • Email
  • Print
Session Information

Date: Saturday, November 12, 2022

Title: RA – Treatment Poster I

Session Type: Poster Session A

Session Time: 1:00PM-3:00PM

Background/Purpose: To evaluate the long-term efficacy and safety of upadacitinib (UPA) over 5 yrs among patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) in a long-term extension (LTE) of the SELECT-BEYOND study.

Methods: In SELECT-BEYOND (a double-blind, randomized phase 3 trial), patients with an inadequate response or intolerance to ≥1 biologic DMARD(s) received UPA 15 mg or 30 mg once daily or placebo (PBO) for 12 wks, each with background conventional synthetic DMARD(s) (csDMARD).1 From wk 12 onwards, patients randomized to PBO switched to UPA 15 mg or 30 mg in a prespecified manner. All patients who completed the wk 24 visit could enter an LTE of up to a total of 5 yrs. Per protocol amendment, patients receiving UPA 30 mg switched to the approved 15 mg dose, with the earliest switch occurring at wk 180. Efficacy data up to wk 260 are shown for patients randomized to UPA 15 mg or 30 mg and reported as observed (AO); missing data for categorical endpoints were also imputed using NRI. Treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) per 100 patient yrs (PY) were summarized over 5 yrs for UPA 15 mg and 30 mg and shown separately for those who switched from UPA 30 mg to 15 mg.

Results: Of the 498 patients randomized, 418 (84%) completed wk 24 and entered the LTE. During the LTE, 197 (40%) patients discontinued study drug due to the following: TEAEs (13%), withdrawal of consent (7%), lack of efficacy (6%), lost to follow-up (4%), or other reasons (11%). Of the patients receiving concomitant corticosteroid or csDMARDs at baseline, approximately 20% and 10%, respectively, discontinued their use during the study. In both UPA dosage groups, patients demonstrated similar clinical improvements over 5 yrs (Figure 1). At wk 260, for example, 36%/36% and 81%/77% of patients receiving UPA 15 mg/30 mg achieved CDAI remission or low disease activity (LDA), respectively (AO). By wk 260, 88%/68%/51% of patients achieved ACR20/50/70 responses on UPA 15 mg and 88%/67%/46% on UPA 30 mg (AO) (Figure 2). Consistent results were observed based on more conservative estimates using NRI. Boolean remission was achieved by 28% of patients on UPA 15 mg and 23% on UPA 30 mg (AO). Functional and pain-related outcomes demonstrated similar improvements with UPA 15 mg/30 mg: the mean change from baseline was -0.6/-0.6 for HAQ-DI and -39/-37 mm for patient’s assessment of pain (AO). Patients who switched from PBO showed similar efficacy at wk 260 (data not shown). Also, no apparent loss of benefit was observed with UPA 15 mg treatment in patients who switched from UPA 30 mg to UPA 15 mg. Dose-dependent increases in rates of herpes zoster and CPK elevation were observed with UPA 30 mg vs 15 mg (Table). Treatment-emergent deaths were comparable between both UPA doses. No new safety issues were identified from the long-term study.

Conclusion: Treatment with either UPA 15 mg or 30 mg continued to be effective in improving clinical and functional outcomes in RA. Notably, at wk 260, over three-quarters of patients attained CDAI LDA, a reasonable target for this treatment-refractory population. Overall, the safety profile observed over 5 yrs was consistent with earlier assessments of UPA treatment in this population.2

References

1. Genovese, et al. Lancet 2018;391:2513–24.
2. Genovese, et al. Ann Rheum Dis 2019;78:360–1.

Supporting image 1

Supporting image 2

Supporting image 3


Disclosures: R. Fleischmann, AbbVie, Amgen, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Eli Lilly, Galvani, GlaxoSmithKlein (GSK), Janssen, Pfizer, Gilead, UCB, Novartis, Arthrosi, AstraZeneca, Flexion, Genentech, Horizon, Selecta, Viela, Vorso, Vyne; S. Meerwein, AbbVie; C. Charles-Schoeman, AbbVie, Bristol Myers Squibb (BMS), Pfizer, Regeneron-Sanofi, Gilead; B. COMBE, AbbVie, Bristol Myers Squibb, Celltrion, Galapagos, Gilead, Janssen, Lilly, MSD, Pfizer, Roche-Chugai, Novartis; S. Hall, AbbVie, Bristol-Myers Squibb (BMS), Lilly, Janssen, UCB, Novartis, Amgen, Gilead, Merck; N. Khan, AbbVie; K. Carter, AbbVie/Abbott; H. Camp, AbbVie; A. Rubbert-Roth, None.

To cite this abstract in AMA style:

Fleischmann R, Meerwein S, Charles-Schoeman C, COMBE B, Hall S, Khan N, Carter K, Camp H, Rubbert-Roth A. Safety and Efficacy of Upadacitinib in Patients with Rheumatoid Arthritis and Inadequate Response or Intolerance to Biologic DMARDs: Results Through 5 Years from the SELECT-BEYOND Study [abstract]. Arthritis Rheumatol. 2022; 74 (suppl 9). https://acrabstracts.org/abstract/safety-and-efficacy-of-upadacitinib-in-patients-with-rheumatoid-arthritis-and-inadequate-response-or-intolerance-to-biologic-dmards-results-through-5-years-from-the-select-beyond-study/. Accessed .
  • Tweet
  • Email
  • Print

« Back to ACR Convergence 2022

ACR Meeting Abstracts - https://acrabstracts.org/abstract/safety-and-efficacy-of-upadacitinib-in-patients-with-rheumatoid-arthritis-and-inadequate-response-or-intolerance-to-biologic-dmards-results-through-5-years-from-the-select-beyond-study/

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