Article Text

PDF
OP0044 Head-To-Head Comparison of Subcutaneous Abatacept Versus Adalimumab on Background Methotrexate in RA: Two Year Results from the Ample Study
  1. M. Schiff1,
  2. M. Weinblatt2,
  3. R. Valente3,
  4. D. van der Heijde4,
  5. G. Citera5,
  6. A. Elegbe6,
  7. M. Maldonado6,
  8. R. Fleischmann7
  1. 1University of Colorado, Denver
  2. 2Brigham and Women’s Hospital, Boston
  3. 3Arthritis Center of Nebraska, Lincoln, United States
  4. 4Leiden Univ Medical Center, Leiden, Netherlands
  5. 5Instituto de Rehabilitación Psicofísica de Buenos Aires, Buenos Aires, Argentina
  6. 6Bristol-Myers Squibb, Princeton
  7. 7Univ of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, United States

Abstract

Background AMPLE (Abatacept Versus Adalimumab Comparison in Biologic-Naive RA Subjects with Background Methotrexate) is the first 2 year, active comparator study in RA patients utilizing biologic agents. At Year 1, SC abatacept (ABA) and adalimumab (ADA) demonstrated comparable efficacy, including radiographic outcomes, with similar safety.1Here we report 2 year study results including radiographic outcomes.

Objectives To evaluate comparative efficacy and safety following two years of continued treatment with ABA or ADA, both on the standard of care, background MTX.

Methods AMPLE is a phase IIIb randomized, investigator-blinded study of 2 years duration with a primary efficacy endpoint at Day 365. Biologic-naïve patients with active RA and an inadequate response to MTX were randomized to 125 mg ABA weekly (without an IV load) or 40 mg ADA bi-weekly, with a stable dose of MTX.1 Study conduct continued unchanged from Year 1, including investigator blinding; all clinical efficacy endpoints were captured through Day 729 including radiographs assessed using the van der Heijde modified Total Sharp score (mTSS). All efficacy analyses were done using the intent-to-treat population with non-responder imputation where appropriate. All radiographs were read through Day 729, including re-reading Year 1 images, by readers blinded to treatment allocation and sequence.

Results Baseline characteristics of the 646 patients, equally randomized to each group, were similar as previously reported.1 79.2% (252 of 318) ABA patients and 74.7% (245 of 328) ADA patients completed Day 729. At Year 1, 64.8% ABA and 63.4% ADA patients were ACR20 responders. Consistent with Year 1, clinical efficacy measures and inhibition of radiographic progression were comparable between groups at Year 2 (Table). There were similar rates of AEs, SAEs (13.8% vs. 16.5%), and malignancies (2.2% vs. 2.1%). More autoimmune AEs occurred in the ABA arm (3.8% vs. 1.8%); none were SAEs. Fewer infections (3.8% vs 5.8%) and opportunistic infections (3 vs 5) occurred with ABA including 2 cases of tuberculosis in the ADA arm that led to discontinuations (DC). There were fewer DC due to AEs (3.8% vs. 9.5%), SAEs (1.6% vs. 4.9%), and serious infections (0/12 vs. 9/19 patients) in the ABA arm. Injection site reactions (ISR) occurred less frequently in the ABA arm (4.1% vs. 10.4%).

Conclusions Through 2 years of treatment, in this first active comparator study between biologic agents in RA patients with an inadequate response to MTX, this robust data set demonstrates that SC abatacept and adalimumab were equally efficacious in clinical, functional and radiographic outcomes. Overall, the frequency of AEs was similar in both groups but there were less discontinuations due to AEs, SAEs, serious infections, and fewer local ISR in patients treated with SC abatacept.

References

  1. Weinblatt et al. Arthritis Rheum. January, 2013; 65(1): 28-38

Disclosure of Interest M. Schiff Consultant for: Bristol-Myers Squibb, Abbott, Speakers bureau: Bristol-Myers Squibb, Abbott, M. Weinblatt Grant/research support from: Bristol-Myers Squibb, Abbott, Consultant for: Bristol-Myers Squibb, Abbott, R. Valente Grant/research support from: UCB, Pfizer, Novartis, Eli Lilly, Takeda, Bristol-Myers Squibb, and Centocor, D. van der Heijde Grant/research support from: Abbott, Amgen, AstraZeneca, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Centocor, Chugai, Eli-Lilly, GSK, Merck, Novartis, Otsuka, Pfizer, Roche, Sanofi-Aventis, Schering-Plough, UCB, Wyeth, Consultant for: Abbott, Amgen, AstraZeneca, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Centocor, Chugai, Eli-Lilly, GSK, Merck, Novartis, Otsuka, Pfizer, Roche, Sanofi-Aventis, Schering-Plough, UCB, Wyeth, Employee of: Imaging Rheumatology Bv, G. Citera Grant/research support from: Pfizer, Consultant for: Bristol-Myers Squibb, Pfizer, A. Elegbe Employee of: Bristol-Myers Squibb, M. Maldonado Employee of: Bristol-Myers Squibb, R. Fleischmann Grant/research support from: Genentech Inc, Roche, Abbott, Amgen, UCB, Pfizer, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Lilly, Sanofi Aventis, MSD, Novartis, BiogenIdec, Astellas, Astra-Zeneca, Jansen, Consultant for: Roche, Abbott, Amgen, UCB, Pfizer, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Lilly, Sanofi Aventis, Astra-Zeneca, Jansen

Statistics from Altmetric.com

Request permissions

If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.