Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37696589›Full record

Trial reportAnnals of the rheumatic diseases2023

Anti-GM-CSF otilimab versus sarilumab or placebo in patients with rheumatoid arthritis and inadequate response to targeted therapies: a phase III randomised trial (contRAst 3).

Peter C Taylor, Michael E Weinblatt, Iain B McInnes, Tatsuya Atsumi, Vibeke Strand, Tsutomu Takeuchi, Marguerite Bracher, David Brooks, John Davies, Christopher Goode and 11 more

Registry-linked trialOpen access · hybridAbstract readRandomized Controlled TrialMulticenter StudyClinical Trial, Phase III
In one paragraph

Trial report in Annals of the rheumatic diseases, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT04134728 (A 24-week, Phase 3, Multicentre, Randomised, Double-blind, Efficacy and Safety Study, Comparing GSK3196165 With Placebo and With Sarilumab, in Combination With Conventional Synthetic DMARDs, in Participants With Moderately to Severely Active Rheumatoid Arthritis Who Have an Inadequate Response to Biological DMARDs and/or Janus Kinase Inhibitors), which is not on this map. Cited by 19 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
19citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
7.5field-weighted citation impact, top 2% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

NCT04134728 phase3completednot on this map

A 24-week, Phase 3, Multicentre, Randomised, Double-blind, Efficacy and Safety Study, Comparing GSK3196165 With Placebo and With Sarilumab, in Combination With Conventional Synthetic DMARDs, in Participants With Moderately to Severely Active Rheumatoid Arthritis Who Have an Inadequate Response to Biological DMARDs and/or Janus Kinase Inhibitors

TypeinterventionalSponsorGlaxoSmithKlineRan2019 to 2022Enrolled550ConditionsArthritis, RheumatoidArmsGSK3196165 (Otilimab), Sarilumab, Placebo to GSK3196165/ Sarilumab, csDMARDs
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

19 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 30 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Trial
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Review
  16. GM-CSFTheranostics · 2025
    Review
  17. Article
  18. Observational
  19. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

21 authors at 10 institutions in 4 countries.

Peter C TaylorBotnar Research Centre, Nuffield Department of Orthopaedics, Rheumatology and Musculoskeletal Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK peter.taylor@kennedy.ox.ac.uk.ORCID 0000-0001-7766-6167
Michael E WeinblattDivision of Rheumatology, Inflammation and Immunity, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts, USA.
Iain B McInnesCollege of Medical Veterinary and Life Sciences, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, UK.
Tatsuya AtsumiDepartment of Rheumatology, Endocrinology and Nephrology, Faculty of Medicine and Graduate School of Medicine, Hokkaido University, Sapporo, Japan.
Vibeke StrandDivision of Immunology/Rheumatology, Stanford University, Palo Alto, California, USA.ORCID 0000-0003-4978-4072
Tsutomu TakeuchiDepartment of Internal Medicine, Division of Rheumatology, Keio University School of Medicine, Tokyo, Japan.ORCID 0000-0003-1111-8218
Marguerite BracherGSK, Stevenage, UK.
David BrooksGSK, Collegeville, Pennsylvania, USA.
John DaviesGSK, Brentford, UK.
Christopher GoodeGSK, Brentford, UK.
Anubha GuptaGSK, Stevenage, UK.
Sumanta MukherjeeGSK, Collegeville, Pennsylvania, USA.
Ciara O'SheaGSK, Dublin, Ireland.
Didier SaurignyGSK, Stevenage, UK.
Lorrie A SchifanoGSK, Durham, North Carolina, USA.
Celia SheltonGSK, Collegeville, Pennsylvania, USA.
Julia E SmithGSK, Stevenage, UK.
Millie WangGSK, Brentford, UK.
Reena WangGSK, Collegeville, Pennsylvania, USA.
Sarah WattsGSK, Stevenage, UK.
Roy M FleischmannDepartment of Medicine, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, Texas, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-6630-1477
Age UK · GBGlaxoSmithKline (United States) · USBrigham and Women's Hospital · USGlaxoSmithKline (Ireland) · IEHokkaido University · JPKeio University · JPMetroplex Clinical Research Center · USNuffield Orthopaedic Centre · GBStanford University · USUniversity of Glasgow · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesTo investigate the efficacy and safety of otilimab, an anti-granulocyte-macrophage colony-stimulating factor antibody, in patients with active rheumatoid arthritis and an inadequate response to conventional synthetic (cs) and biologic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs) and/or Janus kinase inhibitors.

methodsContRAst 3 was a 24-week, phase III, multicentre, randomised controlled trial. Patients received subcutaneous otilimab (90/150 mg once weekly), subcutaneous sarilumab (200 mg every 2 weeks) or placebo for 12 weeks, in addition to csDMARDs. Patients receiving placebo were switched to active interventions at week 12 and treatment continued to week 24. The primary end point was the proportion of patients achieving an American College of Rheumatology ≥20% response (ACR20) at week 12.

resultsOverall, 549 patients received treatment. At week 12, there was no significant difference in the proportion of ACR20 responders with otilimab 90 mg and 150 mg versus placebo (45% (p=0.2868) and 51% (p=0.0596) vs 38%, respectively). There were no significant differences in Clinical Disease Activity Index, Health Assessment Questionnaire-Disability Index, pain Visual Analogue Scale or Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy-Fatigue scores with otilimab versus placebo at week 12. Sarilumab demonstrated superiority to otilimab in ACR20 response and secondary end points. The incidence of adverse or serious adverse events was similar across treatment groups.

conclusionsOtilimab demonstrated an acceptable safety profile but failed to achieve the primary end point of ACR20 and improve secondary end points versus placebo or demonstrate non-inferiority to sarilumab in this patient population. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT04134728.

Indexed as

Antirheumatic AgentsArthritis, RheumatoidAntibodies, Monoclonal, HumanizedDouble-Blind MethodHumansMethotrexateSeverity of Illness IndexTreatment OutcomeAntibodies, Monoclonal, HumanizedAntirheumatic AgentsMethotrexateOtilimabsarilumabautoimmune diseasesbiological therapycytokinesinflammationrheumatoid arthritis

Identifiers

PMID37696589
PMCPMC10646837
OpenAlexW4386616903

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.