POS0671 CLINICAL RESPONSES TO UPADACITINIB OR ABATACEPT IN PATIENTS WITH RHEUMATOID ARTHRITIS BY TYPE OF PRIOR BIOLOGIC DISEASE-MODIFYING ANTIRHEUMATIC DRUG: DATA FROM THE PHASE 3 SELECT-CHOICE STUDY
Authors: A. Rubbert-Roth, R. Xavier, B. Haraoui, H. S. B. Baraf, M. Rischmueller, N. Martin, Y. Song, J. Suboticki, J. Cush
Journal: Annals of the Rheumatic Diseases (2021)

Background: In the phase 3 double-blind SELECT-CHOICE study of patients (pts) with prior inadequate response (IR) or intolerance to biologic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (bDMARDs), upadacitinib (UPA) showed superiority to abatacept (ABA) in change from baseline in 28-joint Disease Activity Score using C-reactive protein (DAS28[CRP]) and in the proportion of pts achieving DAS28(CRP) &lt;2.6 at Week 12. Objectives: To describe clinical responses in pts receiving UPA or ABA by number and mechanism of action of prior bDMARDs. Methods: 612 pts were randomized to once-daily UPA 15 mg or monthly intravenous ABA (&lt;60 kg, 500 mg; 60–100 kg, 750 mg; &gt;100 kg, 1000 mg). All pts continued background therapy with stable conventional synthetic DMARDs. From Week 12, pts who did not achieve ≥20% improvement in both tender and swollen joint counts vs baseline at 2 consecutive visits had background medication(s) adjusted or added. In this post hoc analysis, pts were grouped by the number and/or type of bDMARD received prior to enrollment: 1) lack of efficacy (LoE) to ≥1 tumor necrosis factor (TNF) inhibitor; 2) LoE to ≥1 interleukin-6 (IL-6) inhibitor; 3) intolerance to prior bDMARDs; 4) number of prior bDMARDs (1, 2, or ≥3). Mean change from baseline in DAS28(CRP) and DAS28(CRP) &lt;2.6 and other clinical endpoints were evaluated at Weeks 12/24. Results: Most pts had LoE to ≥1 TNF inhibitor (536, 87.6%); 96 (15.7%) had LoE to an IL-6 inhibitor; 79 (12.9%) had intolerance to prior bDMARDs; 408 (66.7%), 134 (21.9%), and 64 (10.5%) had received 1, 2, or ≥3 prior bDMARDs, respectively. Mean change from baseline in DAS28(CRP) was generally greater with UPA vs ABA across the different pt subgroups at Weeks 12/24 (Figure 1). Across endpoints, regardless of prior bDMARD therapy (except in those who failed ≥3 prior bDMARDs), UPA and ABA demonstrated similar responses at Week 12 compared with those observed for the overall treatment groups, even with more stringent criteria such as ACR70 and Clinical Disease Activity Index (CDAI) ≤2.8 (Table 1. below) Responses at Week 24 followed a similar trend to those at Week 12 for DAS28(CRP) &lt;2.6 and other endpoints (Table 1). The safety profile across subgroups was consistent with each respective treatment in the overall study population (data not shown). Table 1. Efficacy endpoints by prior bDMARD subgroup (Week 12 [top] and Week 24 [bottom]) a ACR20 ACR50 ACR70 DAS28(CRP ) ≤3.2 DAS28(CRP) &lt;2.6 CDAI ≤10 CDAI ≤2.8 HAQ-DI MCID b LoE to ≥1 TNF inhibitor UPA 15 mg n=263 75.3 77.9 44.9 59.7 22.8 38.8 49.0 61.2 30.4 46.8 40.7 58.6 9.1 22.8 75.5 74.3 ABA n=273 64.5 72.9 33.7 48.4 13.2 24.9 27.5 46.5 12.5 29.7 33.7 49.8 2.2 12.5 65.2 66.3 LoE to ≥1 IL-6 inhibitor UPA 15 mg n=48 70.8 85.4 37.5 66.7 20.8 29.2 45.8 66.7 25.0 41.7 41.7 58.3 6.3 16.7 78.3 78.3 ABA n=48 77.1 79.2 41.7 56.3 22.9 27.1 25.0 43.8 14.6 29.2 27.1 52.1 2.1 10.4 75.0 75.0 Intolerance to prior bDMARDs UPA 15 mg n=47 83.0 76.6 53.2 57.4 17.0 27.7 53.2 57.4 31.9 29.8 44.7 44.7 8.5 14.9 80.0 73.3 ABA n=32 62.5 71.9 28.1 50.0 0.0 31.3 21.9 56.3 6.3 31.3 21.9 56.3 3.1 9.4 61.3 67.7 1 prior bDMARD UPA 15 mg n=206 77.2 81.1 51.9 63.1 21.8 38.8 52.4 66.0 32.5 47.6 41.7 61.2 9.2 20.9 79.6 76.6 ABA n=202 67.3 77.7 35.1 53.5 15.8 33.7 29.2 51.5 12.4 35.6 36.1 55.9 3.0 16.3 66.7 71.7 2 prior bDMARDs UPA 15 mg n=64 78.1 76.6 34.4 56.3 23.4 39.1 51.6 62.5 26.6 50.0 45.3 54.7 4.7 23.4 73.8 70.5 ABA n=70 64.3 64.3 28.6 42.9 4.3 11.4 27.1 41.4 11.4 24.3 28.6 44.3 1.4 8.6 55.7 55.7 ≥3 prior bDMARDs UPA 15 mg n=29 55.2 65.5 24.1 44.8 17.2 24.1 27.6 41.4 20.7 27.6 27.6 48.3 10.3 17.2 58.6 72.4 ABA n=35 65.7 71.4 40.0 40.0 20.0 17.1 28.6 37.1 20.0 20.0 37.1 40.0 2.9 8.6 77.1 74.3 a Missing information was imputed using NRI. b HAQ-DI MCID=reduction from baseline of ≥0.22 ACR20/50/70, 20/50/70% improvement in ACR criteria; HAQ-DI, Health Assessment Questionnaire-Disability Index Conclusion: Although sample sizes were small for some subgroups, treatment with UPA led to greater clinical responses vs ABA at Week 12, including in pts with LoE to TNF or IL-6 inhibitors, and those with IR or intolerance to 1, 2, or ≥3 prior bDMARDs. Acknowledgements: AbbVie funded this study; contributed to its design; participated in data collection, analysis, and interpretation of the data; and participated in the writing, review, and approval of the abstract. No honoraria or payments were made for authorship. Medical writing support was provided by Grant Kirkpatrick, MSc of 2 the Nth (Cheshire, UK), and was funded by AbbVie. Disclosure of Interests: Andrea Rubbert-Roth Consultant of: AbbVie, Amgen, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Chugai, Eli Lilly, Gilead, Janssen, Novartis, Roche, and Sanofi, Ricardo Xavier Consultant of: AbbVie, Amgen, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Eli Lilly, Janssen, Novartis, Pfizer, and UCB, Boulos Haraoui Consultant of: AbbVie, Amgen, Eli Lilly, Gilead, MSD, Pfizer, Sandoz, and UCB, Herbert S.B. Baraf Consultant of: Gilead, Janssen, and UCB, Grant/research support from: AbbVie, Eli Lilly, Genentech, Gilead, and Janssen, Maureen Rischmueller Consultant of: AbbVie, Bristol-Myers Squibb, CSL Behring, Eli Lilly, Gilead, Janssen, Pfizer, Sanofi, and UCB, Grant/research support from: AbbVie, Amgen, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Eli Lilly, Janssen, Novartis, Pfizer, Sanofi, and UCB, Naomi Martin Shareholder of: May own stock or options in AbbVie, Employee of: AbbVie, Yanna Song Shareholder of: May own stock or options in AbbVie, Employee of: AbbVie, Jessica Suboticki Shareholder of: May own stock or options in AbbVie, Employee of: AbbVie, John Cush Consultant of: AbbVie, Amgen, Bristol-Myers Squibb, and Novartis.