O09 Pooled safety analyses from Phase 3 studies of filgotinib in patients with RA
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Background Filgotinib (FIL) is an oral, selective janus kinase 1 inhibitor under development for the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis (RA) and other inflammatory diseases. Safety and efficacy of FIL was investigated in the FINCH clinical program, which includes three Phase 3, summarized, summarized studies in patients with moderate to severely active RA. FINCH1: patients with inadequate response to MTX (NCT02889796); FINCH2: patients receiving conventional disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (csDMARDs) with inadequate response to biological DMARDs (NCT02873936); FINCH3: MTX-naïve patients initiating MTX ± FIL, or receiving FIL monotherapy (NCT02886728). We present pooled safety data up to 24 weeks (W24). Methods The FINCH studies enrolled patients with RA (2010 ACR/EULAR criteria), ≥6 swollen joints and ≥6 tender joints at screening and Day 1. Safety analyses included patients receiving ≥1 dose of study drug. Patients in FINCH 1 and 2 who did not experience at least a 20% improvement in both swollen joint count and tender joint count by W14 discontinued study drug and switched to standard of care. W24 safety data from all studies were aggregated and ummarized. Key safety endpoints were treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs), serious TEAEs, TEAEs of interest, deaths and treatment-emergent laboratory abnormalities. Results 3,452 patients were evaluated; 2,088 received FIL. At W24, the frequency of TEAEs and TEAEs of interest were similar for those who received FIL and those in the control groups (Table 1). Most TEAEs were infections. Laboratory abnormality rates were similar between FIL and control groups, and were mild to moderate (grades 1 and 2). Overall, the frequency of major adverse cardiac events, herpes zoster virus, deep vein thrombosis and pulmonary embolism was low, and similar across groups. Conclusion Pooled data from this large database highlights the favourable safety and tolerability profile of FIL in patients with RA both as monotherapy and in combination with MTX/csDMARD. Disclosures D. Walker: Other; Received support from Lilly, Pfizer, Novartis and Roche. K. Winthrop: Grants/research support; Received grants for clinical research from Bristol-Myers Squibb Company and Insmed Incorporated. Other; Received support from AbbVie, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Gilead, Janssen, Eli Lilly & Co., MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche-Chugai, Sanofi, and UCB. M.C. Genovese: Other; Gilead Sciences Inc., Galapagos NV, AbbVie Inc. Eli Lilly and Company, Pfizer. B.G. Combe: Honoraria; Honoraria from AbbVie, BMS, Gilead, Janssen, Eli Lilly and Co., MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche-Chugai, Sanofi and UCB. Y. Tanaka: Honoraria; Received from Daiichi-Sankyo, Astellas, Chugai, Eli Lilly and Co., Pfizer, AbbVie, YL Biologics, BMS, Takeda, Misubishi-Tanabe, Novartis, Eisai, Janssen, Teijin. Grants/research support; Received grant support from Asahi-Kasei, Mitsubishi-Tanabe, Chugai, Takeda, Sanofi, BMS, UCB, Daiichi-Sankyo, Eisai, and Ono. A. Kivitiz: Consultancies; Consultant for AbbVie, Celgene, Horizon, Janssen, Merck, Novartis, Pfizer, UCB, Genzyme,Sanofi, Regeneron, SUN Pharma Advanced Research, Boehringer Ingelheim and Flexion. Shareholder/stock ownership; Shareholder of Novartis. F. Matzkies: Corporate appointments; Employee of Gilead Sciences, Inc. Shareholder/stock ownership; Shareholder of Gilead Sciences, Inc. B. Bartok: Corporate appointments; Employee of Gilead Sciences, Inc. Shareholder/stock ownership; Shareholder of Gilead Sciences, Inc. L. Ye: Corporate appointments; Employee of Gilead Sciences, Inc. Shareholder/stock ownership; Shareholder of Gilead Sciences, Inc. Y. Guo: Corporate appointments; Gilead Sciences, Inc. Shareholder/stock ownership; Gilead Sciences, Inc. C. Tasset: Corporate appointments; Employee of Galapagos NV. J.S. Sundy: Corporate appointments; Employee of Gilead Sciences, Inc. Shareholder/stock ownership; Shareholder of Gilead Sciences, Inc. E. Keystone: Consultancies; AbbVie, Amgen, AstraZeneca Pharma, Biotest, BMS Canada, Celltrion, Crescendo, Bioscience, F.Hoffman-La Roche Inc., Genentech, Janssen, Eli Lilly and Co., Merck, Pfizer, PuraPharm, Sandoz,, Sanofi-Aventis, Sanofi- Genzyme Samsung Bioepsis, and UCB. Other; AbbVie, Amgen, AstraZeneca Pharma, Biotest, BMS Canada, Celltrion, Crescendo, Bioscience, F.Hoffman-La Roche Inc., Genentech, Janssen, Eli Lilly and Co., Merck, Pfizer, PuraPharm, Sandoz,, Sanofi-Aventis, Sanofi-Genzyme, Samsumg Bioepsis, and UCB. R. Westhovens: Corporate appointments; An investigator and advisor for Celltrion and Galapagos/Gilead. W. Rigby: Consultancies; Consultancy for Gilead. G.R. Burmester: Consultancies; Consultancy from AbbVie, Gilead, Eli Lilly, and Pfizer. Honoraria; Honoraria from AbbVie, Gilead, Eli Lilly, and Pfizer.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.032 | 0.036 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.019 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".