Skip to main content

Table 3 Statistical analysis of CDAI AUC and ACR-N AUC for months 0 − 12

From: Differences and similarities in clinical and functional responses among patients receiving tofacitinib monotherapy, tofacitinib plus methotrexate, and adalimumab plus methotrexate: a post hoc analysis of data from ORAL Strategy

Treatment group      Tofacitinib + MTX vs
tofacitinib monotherapya
Tofacitinib + MTX vs ADA + MTXa
Nb LSM SE 95% CI LSMc SE 95% CI P value LSMd SE 95% CI P value
CDAI AUCe for months 0 − 12
 Tofacitinib monotherapy 319 194.9 7.1 181.0, 208.7         
 Tofacitinib + MTX 309 180.0 7.0 166.3, 193.7  − 14.9 8.5  − 31.5, 1.7 0.0788 5.4 8.5  − 11.2, 22.1 0.5234
 ADA + MTX 312 174.6 7.1 160.7, 188.4  − 20.3 8.4  − 36.8, − 3.8 0.0162*     
ACR-N AUCefor months 0 − 12
 Tofacitinib monotherapy 320 318.7 35.3 249.3, 388.1         
 Tofacitinib + MTX 310 436.8 35.0 368.1, 505.4 118.1 42.6 34.4, 201.7 0.0057** 34.4 42.8  − 49.6, 118.4 0.4214
 ADA + MTX 314 402.3 35.4 332.9, 471.8 83.7 42.5 0.3, 167.0 0.0491*     
  1. ACR-N, American College of Rheumatology response rate, where ACR is the percentage improvement from baseline in American College of Rheumatology components, and N represents the minimum percentage achieved by each patient; ADA, adalimumab; AUC, area under the curve; CDAI, Clinical Disease Activity Index; CI, confidence interval; LSM, least squares mean; MTX, methotrexate; SE, standard error
  2. *P < 0.05, **P < 0.01, combination treatment vs tofacitinib monotherapy
  3. aTreatment comparisons were analyzed using analysis of variance at month 12 with fixed effects of treatment and geographic region (North America; Latin America; Eastern Europe, Israel, and South Africa; Western Europe and Turkey; Asia and Australia)
  4. bNumber of patients with month 12 data for ≥ 1 efficacy endpoint
  5. cCombination treatment minus tofacitinib monotherapy
  6. dTofacitinib + MTX minus ADA + MTX
  7. eCalculated in months