We were unable to address clinically useful baseline (bio)markers for use in individually tailored treatment. Some predictors are consistently predictive, yet low in added predictive value, while several others are promising but await replication. The challenge now is to design studies to validate all explored and promising findings individually and in combination to make these (bio)markers relevant to clinical practice.

Tailoring biological treatment to individual patients with RA starting adalimumab using drug levels and short-term outcome is cost-effective. Results underscore the potential merit of personalised biological treatment in RA.

Background: Guselkumab is an interleukin-23 inhibitor indicated for treatment of moderate-to-severe plaque psoriasis. Objective: The objective was to determine the relative efficacy and safety of guselkumab compared to other biologics. Methods: A systematic review was performed to identify randomized controlled trials (RCTs). Bayesian network meta-analyses (NMAs) were conducted using meta-regression analyses that adjusted for cross-trial differences and risk differences. The primary outcome was Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI) 90 response. Other efficacy and safety outcomes were considered. Several meta-regressions were performed to account for variations in patient and study characteristics: baseline risk adjustment (ie, control group response), prior biologic use, duration of psoriasis, weight, age, race, and baseline PASI/dermatology life quality index scores. The best-fitting model using predefined criteria was selected. Results: Forty-five RCTs were identified. Patient and study characteristics differed between RCTs as reflected in variations in control group response. Both the baseline risk-adjusted NMA and the risk-difference NMA fit the data best and suggested guselkumab has one of the highest PASI 90 responses. Pairwise comparisons from the baseline risk-adjusted PASI 90 NMA suggested guselkumab has comparable efficacy with ixekizumab (relative risk [RR]: 0.999, 95% credible intervals [CrIs]: 0.89-1.13) and brodalumab (RR: 1.04, 95% CrIs: 0.91-1.17) and superior efficacy versus all other treatments in the network (RR range, 1.20 to 43.22). Guselkumab was superior or comparable to other therapies for other efficacy outcomes and had a more favorable safety profile than most. Conclusions: Guselkumab has one of the highest PASI 90 responses among psoriasis treatments; similar findings were observed for other efficacy outcomes. Guselkumab has a favorable benefit-risk balance compared to moderate-to-severe psoriasis therapies.

Background For patients with multiple myeloma (MM), each additional line of therapy (LOT) is associated with lower response rates, shorter treatment duration and treatment-free intervals, and increased rates of toxicities and comorbidities. Here, we examine frontline treatment patterns, and attrition rates by LOT among newly diagnosed MM (NDMM) patients in the United States who were eligible or ineligible for autologous stem cell transplant (ASCT). Methods Data were identified from three US patient-level databases collectively covering the period January 2000 to September 2018. Patients had an index diagnosis of MM on or after January 1, 2007, medical and prescription insurance coverage at diagnosis, a 1-year look-back period prior to the index diagnosis, no prior malignancies in the 1-year period before index diagnosis, and had received ≥1 LOT. Results Among patients who did not receive ASCT (non-transplant; n = 22,062), 12,557 (57%) received only 1 LOT and 9505 (43%) received > 1 LOT. Patients receiving only 1 LOT were significantly older, had higher mean Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI) scores, and higher incidences of comorbidities. Among the 2763 patients receiving ASCT, 2184 received > 1 LOT, and 579 (21%) received only 1 LOT (ie, ASCT was the last treatment). 1682 (61%) patients received induction therapy as frontline treatment, of whom 187 (11%) also received consolidation therapy. The latter group was younger than those who received only induction therapy, had lower mean CCI scores, and comparable or lower incidences of selected comorbidities. The most common frontline therapy for non-transplant and transplant-eligible patients was bortezomib/dexamethasone and bortezomib/lenalidomide/dexamethasone, respectively. Attrition rates across all LOTs were high for non-transplant patients (range, 43–57%) and transplant patients (range, 21–37%). Treatment duration decreased by LOT for non-transplant patients and was consistent across LOTs for transplant patients. Conclusions In this analysis, a substantial proportion of patients with NDMM who received frontline therapy did not appear to receive a subsequent LOT. These high attrition rates underscore the need to use the most optimal treatment regimens upfront rather than reserving them for later LOTs in which the clinical benefit may decrease.

Objective The efficacy of the novel interleukin (IL)-23p19 inhibitor guselkumab for psoriatic arthritis (PsA) has recently been demonstrated in two phase 3 trials (DISCOVER-1 & -2) but has not been evaluated vs other targeted therapies for PsA. The objective was to compare guselkumab to targeted therapies for PsA for safety and joint and skin efficacy through network meta-analysis (NMA). Methods A systematic literature review was conducted in January 2020 to identify randomized controlled trials. Bayesian NMAs were performed to compare treatments on American College of Rheumatology (ACR) 20/50/70 response, mean change from baseline in van der Heijde-Sharp (vdH-S) score, Psoriasis Area Severity Index (PASI) 75/90/100 response, adverse events (AEs) and serious adverse events (SAEs). Results Twenty-six phase 3 studies evaluating 13 targeted therapies for PsA were included. For ACR 20 response, guselkumab 100 mg every 8 weeks (Q8W) was comparable to IL-17A inhibitors and subcutaneous tumor necrosis factor (TNF) inhibitors. Similar findings were observed for ACR 50 and 70. For vdH-S score, guselkumab Q8W was comparable to other agents except intravenous TNF therapies. Results for PASI 75 and PASI 90 response suggested guselkumab Q8W was better than most other agents. For PASI 100, guselkumab Q8W was comparable to other active agents. For AEs and SAEs, guselkumab Q8W ranked highly but comparative conclusions were uncertain. Similar results were observed for all outcomes for guselkumab 100 mg every four weeks. Conclusions In this NMA, guselkumab demonstrated favorable arthritis efficacy comparable to IL-17A and subcutaneous TNF inhibitors while offering better PASI response relative to many other treatments.

Aim: The importance of adjusting for cross-study heterogeneity when conducting network meta-analyses (NMAs) was demonstrated using a case study of biologic therapies for moderate-to-severe plaque psoriasis. Methods: Bayesian NMAs were conducted for Psoriasis Area and Severity Index 90 response. Several covariates were considered to account for cross-trial differences: baseline risk (i.e., placebo response), prior biologic use, body weight, psoriasis duration, age, race and baseline Psoriasis Area and Severity Index score. Model fit was evaluated. Results: The baseline risk-adjusted NMA, which adjusts for multiple observed and unobserved effect modifiers, was associated with the best model fit. Lack of adjustment for cross-trial differences led to different clinical interpretations of findings. Conclusion: Failure to adjust for cross-trial differences in NMA can have important implications for clinical interpretations when studying the comparative efficacy of healthcare interventions.

ObjectiveIn end-stage knee osteoarthritis the treatment of choice is total knee arthroplasty (TKA). An alternative treatment is knee joint distraction (KJD), suggested to postpone TKA. Several studies reported significant and prolonged clinical improvement of KJD. To make an appropriate decision regarding the position of this treatment, a cost-effectiveness and cost-utility analysis from healthcare perspective for different age and gender categories was performed.MethodsA treatment strategy starting with TKA and a strategy starting with KJD for patients of different age and gender was simulated. To extrapolate outcomes to long-term health and economic outcomes a Markov (Health state) model was used. The number of surgeries, QALYs, and treatment costs per strategy were calculated. Costs-effectiveness is expressed using the cost-effectiveness plane and cost-effectiveness acceptability curves.ResultsStarting with KJD the number of knee replacing procedures could be reduced, most clearly in the younger age categories; especially revision surgery. This resulted in the KJD strategy being dominant (more effective with cost-savings) in about 80% of simulations (with only inferiority in about 1%) in these age categories when compared to TKA. At a willingness to pay of 20.000 Euro per QALY gained, the probability of starting with KJD to be cost-effective compared to starting with a TKA was already found to be over 75% for all age categories and over 90–95% for the younger age categories.ConclusionA treatment strategy starting with knee joint distraction for knee osteoarthritis has a large potential for being a cost-effective intervention, especially for the relatively young patient.

In these subjects with no or doubtful radiographic knee OA, uCTX-II might not only reflect articular cartilage degradation but also endochondral ossification in osteophytes. Furthermore, sCOMP and sHA relate to osteophytes, maybe because synovitis drives osteophyte development. High bone turnover may aggravate articular cartilage loss. Metabolic activity in osteophytes and synovial tissue, but not in articular cartilage may be related to knee pain.