Department of Medicine, The University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center and Metroplex Clinical Research Center, Dallas, Texas, USA
Division of Rheumatology, Hospital Universitario Marques de Valdecilla, Santander, Cantabria, Spain.
Ann Rheum Dis. 2021 Apr;80(4):432-439. doi: 10.1136/annrheumdis-2020-218412. Epub 2020 Nov 4.
To evaluate efficacy and safety of immediate switch from upadacitinib to adalimumab, or vice versa, in patients with rheumatoid arthritis with non-response or incomplete-response to the initial therapy.
SELECT-COMPARE randomised patients to upadacitinib 15 mg once daily (n=651), placebo (n=651) or adalimumab 40 mg every other week (n=327). A treat-to-target study design was implemented, with blinded rescue occurring prior to week 26 for patients who did not achieve at least 20% improvement in both tender and swollen joint counts ('non-responders') and at week 26 based on Clinical Disease Activity Index (CDAI) >10 ('incomplete-responders') without washout.
A total of 39% (252/651) and 49% (159/327) of patients originally randomised to upadacitinib and adalimumab were rescued to the alternate therapy. In both switch groups (adalimumab to upadacitinib and vice versa) and in non-responders and incomplete-responders, improvements in disease activity were observed at 3 and 6 months following rescue. CDAI low disease activity was achieved by 36% and 47% of non-responders and 45% and 58% of incomplete-responders switched to adalimumab and upadacitinib, respectively, 6 months following switch. Overall, approximately 5% of rescued patients experienced worsening in disease activity at 6 months postswitch. The frequency of adverse events was similar between switch groups.
These observations support a treat-to-target strategy, in which patients who fail to respond initially (or do not achieve sufficient response) are switched to a therapy with an alternate mechanism of action and experience improved outcomes. No new safety findings were observed despite immediate switch without washout.
评估在初始治疗无应答或应答不完全的类风湿关节炎患者中,由乌帕替尼转换为阿达木单抗或反之的疗效和安全性。
SELECT-COMPARE 将随机患者分为乌帕替尼 15mg 每日一次(n=651)、安慰剂(n=651)或阿达木单抗每两周 40mg(n=327)。采用了达标治疗研究设计,对于未达到压痛和肿胀关节计数至少改善 20%(“无应答者”)和基于临床疾病活动指数(CDAI)>10(“应答不完全者”)且无洗脱的患者,在第 26 周前(“无应答者”)和第 26 周时(“应答不完全者”)进行盲法解救治疗。
最初随机分配至乌帕替尼和阿达木单抗的患者中,分别有 39%(252/651)和 49%(159/327)接受了挽救治疗。在转换组(阿达木单抗转换为乌帕替尼和反之亦然)和无应答者和应答不完全者中,在挽救治疗后 3 个月和 6 个月观察到疾病活动的改善。无应答者和应答不完全者分别有 36%和 47%及 45%和 58%转换为阿达木单抗和乌帕替尼后在 6 个月时达到 CDAI 低疾病活动度。总体而言,约 5%的挽救患者在转换后 6 个月时疾病活动恶化。转换组之间的不良事件发生率相似。
这些观察结果支持了达标治疗策略,即在初始治疗无应答或应答不完全的患者中,转换为具有不同作用机制的治疗方法,从而获得更好的治疗效果。尽管未进行洗脱就立即进行转换,但未观察到新的安全性发现。