Nintedanib in patients with systemic sclerosis-associated interstitial lung disease: A Japanese population analysis of the SENSCIS trial

20Citations
Citations of this article
53Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

This article is free to access.

Abstract

Objective: We examined the efficacy and safety of nintedanib in Japanese patients with systemic sclerosis-associated interstitial lung disease (SSc-ILD) in the global Safety and Efficacy of Nintedanib in Systemic Sclerosis (SENSCIS) trial. Methods: Randomised patients received oral nintedanib 150 mg (N = 34) twice daily or placebo (N = 36) until the last patient reached 52 weeks of treatment (up to 100 weeks). Data were analysed using a subgroup analysis model with Japanese and non-Japanese patients as subgroup variables. Results: In Japanese patients, the adjusted annual rate of forced vital capacity (FVC) decline over 52 weeks was –86.2 mL/year (nintedanib) and –90.9 mL/year (placebo); treatment difference, 4.67 mL/year (95% confidence interval, −103.28, 112.63). Treatment effect heterogeneity between Japanese and non-Japanese patients was not detected (treatment-by-visit-by-subgroup interaction; p =.49). FVC decline was smaller for nintedanib versus placebo through 100 weeks in Japanese patients. The most commonly reported adverse events with nintedanib were gastrointestinal and liver disorder events; most were mild-to-moderate in severity. Conclusion: In both Japanese and non-Japanese patients with SSc-ILD, nintedanib slowed the progression of ILD, with no heterogeneity detected between the subgroups. The safety profile for nintedanib in Japanese patients was similar to that observed in patients with idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT02597933).

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Kuwana, M., Ogura, T., Makino, S., Homma, S., Kondoh, Y., Saito, A., … Azuma, A. (2021). Nintedanib in patients with systemic sclerosis-associated interstitial lung disease: A Japanese population analysis of the SENSCIS trial. Modern Rheumatology, 31(1), 141–150. https://doi.org/10.1080/14397595.2020.1751402

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free