Objective Deucravacitinib is a first-in-class, oral, selective, allosteric tyrosine kinase 2 (TYK2) inhibitor approved in multiple countries for the treatment of moderate-to-severe plaque psoriasis. The 48-week, double-blind, phase 2 PAISLEY trial in patients with active SLE (NCT03252587) met its primary endpoint and all key secondary endpoints at deucravacitinib 3 mg twice-daily (BID) vs placebo. In this post-hoc analysis, response rates over time were evaluated for ≥50% reduction in Cutaneous Lupus Erythematosus Disease Area and Severity Index (CLASI) score from baseline in patients with a baseline CLASI score ≥10 (CLASI-50), ≥50% reduction in active (swollen+tender) joint count in patients with ≥6 active joints at baseline (AJC-50), and other key secondary endpoints. Methods Patients with active SLE receiving standard-of-care were randomized 1:1:1:1 to placebo (n=90), deucravacitinib 3 mg BID (n=91), 6 mg BID (n=93), or 12 mg once-daily (QD) (n=89). Previous reporting from PAISLEY used strict nonresponder imputation criteria with several conditions considered a nonresponse applied after week 20, including not achieving a glucocorticoid dose ≤7.5 mg/day by week 20, resulting in different imputation methods used before vs after week 20. Here, we characterize disease activity improvement in 2 key lupus manifestations, imputing only missing data as nonresponse (M=NR) through week 48 and assessing response rate kinetics using the same imputation method. Results Patients receiving deucravacitinib had numerically higher CLASI-50 response rates vs placebo starting at week 4 (placebo, 4.2%; 3 mg BID, 21.7%; 6 mg BID, 8.0%; 12 mg QD, 27.6%) (figure 1A); robust differences were maintained through week 48. Numerical differences in AJC-50 response rates were first observed at week 8 (placebo, 54.7%; 3 mg BID, 69.8%; 6 mg BID, 73.8%; 12 mg QD, 59.7%) and became more notable from week 24 (figure 1B). Differences in responses of both organs were maintained with deucravacitinib beyond week 20, after the protocol-mandated glucocorticoid taper. Conclusion These data suggest that higher response rates with deucravacitinib vs placebo occur early on for mucocutaneous and somewhat later for musculoskeletal manifestations. Permitted concomitant glucocorticoid use may partially explain the placebo group responses. Robust differences were seen after the glucocorticoid taper, further supporting the efficacy of deucravacitinib. Acknowledgements We would like to thank the patients and their families who made this study possible, as well as the clinical teams who participated. This study was sponsored by Bristol Myers Squibb. Professional medical writing assistance was provided by SciMentum, Inc, a Nucleus Group Holdings, Inc, company, and funded by Bristol Myers Squibb. Conflict of Interest Disclosures RFvV: Research support: Bristol Myers Squibb, GSK, and Eli Lilly. Research support, consultancy, and speaker fees: UCB. Support for educational programs, consultancy, and speaker fees: Pfizer. Support for educational programs: Roche. Consultancy and speaker fees: AbbVie, Galapagos, and Janssen. Consultancy: AstraZeneca, Biogen, Biotest, Celgene, Gilead, and Servier JFM: Consultant and/or investigator: AbbVie, Amgen, Biogen, Bristol Myers Squibb, Dermavant, Eli Lilly, Janssen, LEO Pharma, Novartis, Pfizer, Regeneron, Sanofi, Sun Pharma, and UCB KHD: Consultancy: Bristol Myers Squibb PL: Research support: Bristol Myers Squibb. Speaker fees: Novartis, AbbVie, AstraZeneca, Bristol Myers Squibb, Pfizer, and UCB MP: Consultancy: AstraZeneca, Bristol Myers Squibb, Pfizer, and UCB SP, CH, MJC, SB, TW: Employee and shareholder of Bristol Myers Squibb RK: Employee of Syneos Health and provides statistical services to Bristol Myers Squibb EM: Research support: AbbVie, Amgen, AstraZeneca, Biogen, Bristol Myers Squibb, Eli Lilly, EMD Serono, Genentech, GSK, Janssen, and UCB. Consultancy: AstraZeneca, Biogen, Bristol Myers Squibb, Eli Lilly, EMD Serono, Genentech, Gilead, Novartis, and Servier
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Vollenhoven et al. (2024) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: