Publications

Mease et al. showed that guselkumab provided significantly higher rates of clinical improvement and significant inhibition of structural damage progression versus PBO, with no new safety signals, at Week 24 in biologic-naïve participants with active and erosive PsA. Mease et al. report primary efficacy and safety results for the double-blind PBO-controlled phase (Weeks 0-24) of the 3-year APEX study.

Marzo-Ortega et al. report that dactylitis and enthesitis are associated with a greater disease burden and worse prognosis, highlighting the importance for physicians to identify these conditions and provide adequate treatment. Authors evaluated guselkumab’s efficacy on dactylitis resolution (DR) and enthesitis resolution (ER), and their impact on subsequent disease control, in patients with active PsA and prior inadequate response to tumour necrosis factor inhibitors (TNFi-IR).

Baraliakos et al. compared real-world effectiveness of upadacitinib, TNF inhibitors, or IL-17 inhibitors following inadequate response to an initial TNF inhibitor in patients with axSpA. Upadacitinib was associated with greater reductions in pain and fewer affected joints compared with switching to a second TNF inhibitor or IL-17 inhibitor.

Treatment with risankizumab provides durable improvement in the signs and symptoms of PsA across all the GRAPPA disease domains and related conditions. This post hoc analysis by Coates et al. aimed to assess the efficacy of long-term treatment with risankizumab across the updated GRAPPA domains and key related conditions of PsA.

Wang et al. validated the effectiveness and safety of UPA in this real-world study of Chinese PsA patients. UPA demonstrated comparable effectiveness to secukinumab (SEC) in psoriatic lesion improvement while showing comparable joint symptom relief compared with adalimumab (ADA), coupled with a favourable safety profile.

Burmester et al. provide insights into the benefit–risk profiles of UPA and adalimumab in patients with varying cardiovascular (CV) risks, suggesting that UPA may offer efficacy advantages over adalimumab irrespective of baseline CV risk, with generally similar rates of AEs. To better understand the benefits and risks of RA treatments in patients with different background CV risk, Burmester et al. assessed the short-term and long-term benefit–risk profiles of UPA and adalimumab in patients enrolled in SELECT-COMPARE.