Cited by 98

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

The Efficacy and Safety of Subcutaneous Clazakizumab in Patients With Moderate‐to‐Severe Rheumatoid Arthritis and an Inadequate Response to Methotrexate: Results From a Multinational, Phase IIb, Randomized, Double‐Blind, Placebo/Active‐Controlled, Dose‐Ranging Study

Weinblatt, Michael E., Mease, Philip, Mysler, Eduardo, Takeuchi, Tsutomu, Drescher, Edit, Berman, Alberto, Xing, Jun, Zilberstein, Moshe, Banerjee, Subhashis, Emery, Paul·2015·Arthritis & Rheumatology

Abstract

Objective: Clazakizumab is a humanized monoclonal antibody that binds to the interleukin‐6 (IL‐6) cytokine. This study was undertaken to evaluate the efficacy and safety of clazakizumab in combination with methotrexate (MTX) or clazakizumab monotherapy versus MTX alone in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) and an inadequate response to MTX. Methods: In this multinational, phase IIb, randomized, double‐blind, placebo‐controlled, dose‐ranging study, patients were randomized to receive 1) once‐monthly subcutaneous (SC) clazakizumab at 25, 100, or 200 mg plus MTX, 2) once‐monthly SC clazakizumab at 100 mg or 200 mg as monotherapy, or 3) MTX plus placebo (i.e., MTX alone). Adalimumab (40 mg) plus MTX was included as an active reference. The primary end point was the American College of Rheumatology 20% (ACR20) improvement response rate at week 12. Secondary end points included ACR20, ACR50, and ACR70 response rates as well as protocol‐defined remission rates and Health Assessment Questionnaire disability index scores at weeks 12 and 24. Results: In total, 418 patients were randomized, and baseline characteristics were balanced across the treatment groups. Patients receving clazakizumab had significantly greater ACR20 response rates at week 12 compared with patients receiving MTX alone (76.3%, 73.3%, and 60.0% of patients in the clazakizumab 25, 100, and 200 mg plus MTX groups, respectively, and 55.0% and 61.0% of patients in the clazakizumab 100 and 200 mg monotherapy groups, respectively, versus 39.3% of patients receiving MTX alone; P < 0.05 for all comparisons). At week 24, all clazakizumab groups had higher ACR20, ACR50, and ACR70 response rates and higher remission rates compared with MTX alone. Rates of serious adverse events ranged from 8.3% to 13.6% in the clazakizumab treatment groups, compared with 3.3% in the MTX alone group. Changes in laboratory data were consistent with the pharmacologic effects of IL‐6 blockade. Conclusion: In patients with RA and an inadequate response to MTX, treatment with clazakizumab in combination with MTX or clazakizumab monotherapy was well tolerated, and patients achieved significant improvements in disease activity, including higher rates of remission, as compared with patients receiving MTX alone.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1002/art.39249

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Citations

Cites

Research works printed but not linked: 28

  1. 10.4049/jimmunol.169.6.3353 · DOI
  2. 10.1093/rheumatology/kep329 · DOI
  3. 10.1016/S8756-3282(02)00915-8 · DOI
  4. 10.2147/TCRM.S3470 · DOI
  5. 10.1007/BF00307733 · DOI
  6. 10.1007/s00296-006-0143-2 · DOI
  7. 10.1080/09629359890875 · DOI
  8. 10.1016/j.smim.2014.01.009 · DOI
  9. Zhao Q, 2013, Anti‐IL‐6 antibody clazakizumab is more potent than tocilizumab in blocking in vitro and ex vivo IL‐6‐induced functions [abstract], Arthritis Rheum, 65, S1020
  10. 10.1136/annrheumdis-2011-200704 · DOI
  11. 10.1186/1471-2474-12-261 · DOI
  12. 10.1002/art.1780310302 · DOI
  13. 10.1002/art.27584 · DOI
  14. 10.1002/art.1780350502 · DOI
  15. 10.1002/art.1780380602 · DOI
  16. 10.1002/art.1780360601 · DOI
  17. 10.1002/art.1780380107 · DOI
  18. 10.1186/ar1740 · DOI
  19. 10.1093/rheumatology/keg072 · DOI
  20. 10.1002/art.30129 · DOI
  21. 10.1002/art.1780230202 · DOI
  22. 10.1136/ard.2008.092866 · DOI
  23. 10.1155/2014/698313 · DOI
  24. 10.1186/ar3455 · DOI
  25. 10.1136/annrheumdis-2013-204405 · DOI
  26. 10.1136/annrheumdis-2013-204760 · DOI · Paper page
  27. 10.1136/annrheumdis-2013-204345 · DOI
  28. 10.1002/art.10697 · DOI

Cited by

Sorted by citations

See all 98

Metadata

Authors
Weinblatt, M. E., Mease, P., Mysler, E., Takeuchi, T., Drescher, E., Berman, A., Xing, J., Zilberstein, M., Banerjee, S., & Emery, P.
Venue
Arthritis & Rheumatology
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2015-09-23
Volume
67
Issue
10
Pages
2591-2600
ISSN
  • 2326-5191
  • 2326-5205
Cited by
98
References
1
Language
en
Funders
Bristol-Myers Squibb

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review