Cookies on this website

We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website. If you click 'Accept all cookies' we'll assume that you are happy to receive all cookies and you won't see this message again. If you click 'Reject all non-essential cookies' only necessary cookies providing core functionality such as security, network management, and accessibility will be enabled. Click 'Find out more' for information on how to change your cookie settings.

<jats:title>Abstract</jats:title> <jats:sec> <jats:title>Objectives</jats:title> <jats:p>Evaluate the importance of treatment sequencing in SELECT-COMPARE, assessing potential differences between starting upadacitinib or adalimumab therapy following inadequate MTX response.</jats:p> </jats:sec> <jats:sec> <jats:title>Methods</jats:title> <jats:p>Patients from SELECT-COMPARE were randomized to upadacitinib 15 mg once daily, placebo, or adalimumab 40 mg. Per protocol, patients with &amp;lt;20% improvement in tender or swollen joint counts (weeks 14, 18, 22) or failure to achieve CDAI LDA at week 26 were blindly switched from upadacitinib to adalimumab or vice versa. Treatment outcomes, including clinical remission/LDA, physical function, pain, and a novel combined end point for deep response, were evaluated through 48 weeks and corresponding time-averaged response rates determined. Data were analysed by initial randomized group regardless of any subsequent switch in therapy.</jats:p> </jats:sec> <jats:sec> <jats:title>Results</jats:title> <jats:p>This post hoc analysis included 651 patients initially randomized to upadacitinib (of whom 252 switched to adalimumab) and 327 patients initially randomized to adalimumab (of whom 159 switched to upadacitinib). At week 48, patients randomized to either therapy demonstrated similar achievement of most treatment endpoints. Greater improvements in the total time spent in a lower disease state were observed for initial upadacitinib versus initial adalimumab therapy across most clinical and patient-reported outcomes through 48 weeks, and the median time to DAS28(CRP) &amp;lt;2.6/≤3.2 occurred 6–8 weeks earlier among those randomized to upadacitinib.</jats:p> </jats:sec> <jats:sec> <jats:title>Conclusion</jats:title> <jats:p>Following a modified treat-to-target strategy, rates of CDAI remission/LDA and DAS28(CRP) &amp;lt;2.6/≤3.2 at 48 weeks were similar, regardless of starting therapy. However, patients initially receiving upadacitinib reached treatment targets more quickly and spent more time in clinical targets over the initial 48 weeks of treatment.</jats:p> </jats:sec> <jats:sec> <jats:title>Trial registration</jats:title> <jats:p>,, NCT02629159</jats:p> </jats:sec>

Original publication




Journal article




Oxford University Press (OUP)

Publication Date