Skip to content

Efficacy and Safety Study of Guselkumab in the Treatment of Participants With Active Psoriatic Arthritis (PsA)

A Phase 2a, Multicenter, Randomized, Double-blind, Placebo-controlled Study Evaluating the Efficacy and Safety of Guselkumab in the Treatment of Subjects With Active Psoriatic Arthritis

Status
Completed
Phases
Phase 2
Study type
Interventional
Source
ClinicalTrials.gov
Registry ID
NCT02319759
Enrollment
149
Registered
2014-12-18
Start date
2015-03-27
Completion date
2017-01-17
Last updated
2025-02-04

For informational purposes only — not medical advice. Sourced from public registries and may not reflect the latest updates. Terms

Conditions

Psoriatic Arthritis

Keywords

Psoriatic Arthritis, Guselkumab, Ustekinumab, Placebo

Brief summary

The purpose of this study is to evaluate the efficacy, safety and tolerability of guselkumab in participants with Active Psoriatic Arthritis (PsA).

Detailed description

This is a multi-center (more than one clinical site will work on a medical research study), randomized (study medication assigned to participants by chance), double-blind (neither investigator nor participant knows which treatment the participant receives), placebo-controlled (placebo is an inactive substance that is compared with a drug to test whether the drug has a real effect in a clinical trial) study to determine the efficacy and safety of guselkumab in participants with PsA. The study will consist of 4 parts: Screening period (6 weeks), a double-blind treatment period (consists of guselkumab and placebo treatment for 24 weeks), an active treatment period (guselkumab for 20 weeks), and follow-up period (12 weeks). The maximal study duration for a participant will not exceed 62 weeks including the Screening period. Eligible participants will be randomly assigned to one of two groups in a 2:1 ratio to either receive Guselkumab 100 milligram (mg) at Weeks 0, 4 then every 8 weeks or Placebo at Weeks 0, 4 then every 8 weeks until Week 24. At week 24, participants remaining in the placebo group will start to receive guselkumab 100 mg at Weeks 24, 28, 36 and 44. Participants in both treatment groups who have less than (\<) 5 percent (%) improvement from baseline in both tender and swollen joint counts at Week 16 will qualify for early escape and will switch to open-label therapy with ustekinumab 45 mg or 90 mg at Weeks 16, 20, 32, and 44 based on the approved dosage for the PsA indication in the particular country of study. The efficacy will be assessed primarily by measuring percentage of participants who achieve an American College of Rheumatology (ACR) 20 Response at Week 24. Participants' safety will be monitored throughout the study.

Interventions

DRUGGuselkumab

In the guselkumab group, Guselkumab 100 mg subcutaneous injection will be administered at Weeks 0, 4, 12, 20, 28, 36 and 44. In the placebo group, guselkumab 100 mg subcutaneous injection will be administered at Weeks 24, 28, 36 and 44 for participants remaining on placebo at Week 24.

DRUGUstekinumab

In both placebo and guselkumab groups, if the participants qualify for early escape, they will switch to receive ustekinumab 45 mg or 90 mg subcutaneous injection at Weeks 16, 20, 32, and 44 based on the approved dosage in the particular country of the study.

DRUGPlacebo

In placebo group, Placebo subcutaneous injection will be administered at Weeks 0, 4, 12, and 20. In guselkumab group, placebo subcutaneous injection will be administered at Week 24 to maintain the blind.

Sponsors

Janssen Research & Development, LLC
Lead SponsorINDUSTRY

Study design

Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Intervention model
PARALLEL
Primary purpose
TREATMENT
Masking
DOUBLE (Subject, Investigator)

Eligibility

Sex/Gender
ALL
Age
18 Years to No maximum
Healthy volunteers
No

Inclusion criteria

* Has had Psoriatic Arthritis (PsA) for at least 6 months before the first administration of study drug and meet classification criteria for Psoriatic Arthritis (CASPAR) at Screening * Had active PsA as defined by: 1. At least 3 swollen joints and at least 3 tender joints at Screening and at baseline 2. C-reactive protein (CRP) greater than or equal to (\>=) 0.3 milligram (mg)/deciliter (dL) at Screening from the central laboratory * Has at least 1 of the PsA subsets: distal interphalangeal joint involvement, polyarticular arthritis with absence of rheumatoid nodules, arthritis mutilans, asymmetric peripheral arthritis, or spondylitis with peripheral arthritis * Has plaque psoriasis with body surface area (BSA) involvement greater than or equal to (\>=) 3% at Screening and baseline * Has active PsA despite current or previous non-biologic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARD), oral corticosteroid, and/or nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug (NSAID) therapy * If using methotrexate (MTX), oral corticosteroids or NSAIDs, the dose must be stable

Exclusion criteria

* Have other inflammatory diseases that might confound the evaluations of benefit of guselkumab therapy, including but not limited to rheumatoid arthritis (RA), ankylosing spondylitis (AS), systemic lupus erythematosus, or Lyme disease * Has previously received guselkumab or ustekinumab * Has received more than 1 type of biologic anti-tumor necrosis factor (TNF) agent previously * Have received infliximab (or its biosimilars) or golimumab intraveneous (IV) within 12 weeks before the first administration of study drug * Have received adalimumab (or its biosimilars), golimumab subcutaneous (SC), certolizumab pegol or etanercept (or its biosimilars) within 8 weeks before the first administration of study drug

Design outcomes

Primary

MeasureTime frameDescription
Percentage of Participants Who Achieved American College of Rheumatology (ACR) 20 Response at Week 24Week 24ACR 20 response: at least 20% improvement from baseline in both swollen joint (66 joints) and tender joint (68 joints) counts and at least 20% improvement from baseline in 3 of following 5 assessments: patient's assessment of pain (VAS: 0-100 millimeter \[mm\], 0=no pain and 100=worst possible pain), patient's global assessment of disease activity on arthritis (VAS:0-100mm, 0=excellent and 100=poor), physician's global assessment of disease activity (VAS:0-100mm; 0=no arthritis activity and 100 = extremely active arthritis), patient's assessment of physical function measured by HAQ-DI (defined as a 20-question instrument assessing 8 functional areas;derived HAQ-DI ranges from 0=no difficulty, to 3=inability to perform a task in that area) and serum CRP. Treatment Failure (TF) criteria: Discontinued study drug due to lack of efficacy or worsening of PsA, initiated or increased dose of methotrexate or oral corticosteroids, or initiated prohibited PsA treatments. FAS is full analysis set.

Secondary

MeasureTime frameDescription
Change From Baseline in Health Assessment Questionnaire-Disability Index (HAQ-DI) Score at Week 24Baseline and Week 24Change from baseline in HAQ-DI score is a measure of the change in the physical function, where a negative change reflects an improvement and a positive change reflects worsening of physical function. HAQ-DI is a 20-question instrument that assesses the degree of difficulty a person has in accomplishing tasks in 8 functional areas (dressing, arising, eating, walking, hygiene, reaching, gripping, and activities of daily living). Responses in each functional area are scored from 0 indicating no difficulty, to 3 indicating inability to perform a task in that area (that is, lower scores are indicative of better functioning). The total HAQ-DI score ranges from 0-24 with lower score indicating better functioning.
Percentage of Participants Who Achieved an ACR 20 Response at Week 16Week 16ACR 20 response is defined as at least 20 percent (%) improvement from baseline in both swollen joint (66 joints) and tender joint (68 joints) counts and at least 20% improvement from baseline in 3 of following 5 assessments: patient's assessment of pain (visual analog scale \[VAS\]: 0-100 millimeter \[mm\]; 0=no pain and 100=worst possible pain), patient's global assessment of disease activity on arthritis (VAS: 0-100 mm, 0=excellent and 100=poor), physician's global assessment of disease activity (VAS: 0-100mm; 0=no arthritis activity and 100 = extremely active arthritis), patient's assessment of physical function measured by Health Assessment Questionnaire-Disability Index (HAQ-DI, defined as a 20-question instrument assessing 8 functional areas;derived HAQ-DI ranges from 0 indicating no difficulty, to 3 indicating inability to perform a task in that area) and serum C-Reactive Protein (CRP).
Percentage of Participants Who an Achieved ACR 50 Response at Week 24Week 24ACR 50 response is defined as at least 50 % improvement from baseline in both swollen joint (66 joints) and tender joint (68 joints) counts and at least 50% improvement from baseline in 3 of following 5 assessments: patient's assessment of pain (VAS:0-100 mm; 0=no pain and 100=worst possible pain), patient's global assessment of disease activity on arthritis (VAS:0-100mm; 0=excellent and 100=poor), physician's global assessment of disease activity (VAS: 0-100mm; 0=no arthritis activity and 100 = extremely active arthritis), patient's assessment of physical function measured by HAQ-DI (defined as a 20-question instrument assessing 8 functional areas;derived HAQ-DI ranges from 0 indicating no difficulty, to 3 indicating inability to perform a task in that area) and serum CRP.
Percent Change From Baseline in Leeds Enthesitis Index (LEI) Scores Among Participants With Enthesitis at Week 24Baseline and Week 24Enthesitis was assessed using the Leeds Enthesitis Index (LEI). The LEI was developed to assess enthesitis in participants with psoriatic arthritis (PsA), and evaluates the presence (score of 1) or absence of pain (score of 0) by applying local pressure to Lateral elbow epicondyle, left and right, Medial femoral condyle, left and right, and Achilles tendon insertion, left and right. LEI scores ranging from 0 (0 sites with tenderness) to 6 (worst possible score; 6 sites with tenderness).
Percent Change From Baseline in Dactylitis Scores Among Participants With Dactylitis at Baseline at Week 24Baseline and Week 24Dactylitis is characterized by swelling of the entire finger or toe. The severity of dactylitis is scored on a scale of 0-3, where 0, 1, 2, 3 indicates none, mild, moderate, severe, respectively in each digit of the hands and feet. The range of total dactylitis scores for a participant is 0-60. Higher score indicates more severe dactylitis.
Percentage of Participants Who Achieved ACR 20, ACR 50, and ACR 70 Responses at Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, and 24Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, and 24ACR 20, 50, and 70 response is defined as at least 20%, 50%, and 70% improvement from baseline in swollen joint (66 joints) and tender joint (68 joints) counts and at least 20%, 50%, and 70% improvement from baseline in 3 of following 5 assessments: patient's assessment of pain (VAS: 0-100mm, 0=no pain and 100=worst possible pain), patient's global assessment of disease activity on arthritis (VAS: 0-100mm; 0=excellent and 100=poor), physician's global assessment of disease activity (VAS: 0-100mm; 0=no arthritis activity and 100= extremely active arthritis), patient's assessment of physical function measured by Health Assessment Questionnaire-Disability Index (HAQ-DI, defined as a 20-question instrument assessing 8 functional areas;derived HAQ-DI ranges from 0 indicating no difficulty, to 3 indicating inability to perform a task in that area) and serum C-Reactive Protein (CRP).
Percentage of Participants Who Achieved ACR 20, ACR 50, and ACR 70 Responses at Weeks 24, 28, 32, 36, 44, and 56Weeks 24, 28, 32, 36, 44, and 56ACR 20, ACR 50 and ACR 70 response is defined as at least 20%, 50%, and 70% improvement from baseline in swollen joint (66 joints) and tender joint (68 joints) counts and at least 20%, 50%, and 70% improvement from baseline in 3 of following 5 assessments: patient's assessment of pain (VAS: 0-100mm, 0=no pain and 100=worst possible pain), patient's global assessment of disease activity on arthritis (VAS: 0-100mm; 0=excellent and 100=poor), physician's global assessment of disease activity (VAS; 0-100mm; 0=no arthritis activity and 100 = extremely active arthritis), patient's assessment of physical function measured by Health Assessment Questionnaire-Disability Index (HAQ-DI, defined as a 20-question instrument assessing 8 functional areas;derived HAQ-DI ranges from 0 indicating no difficulty, to 3 indicating inability to perform a task in that area) and serum C-Reactive Protein (CRP). As planned, results data was analyzed and reported for the specified arms for this outcome measure.
Percent Change From Baseline in the ACR Components at Weeks 12 and 24Baseline and Weeks 12, 24The 7 components of ACR response are: swollen joint counts (0-66), tender joint counts (0-68), patient's assessment of pain (PAIN) (VAS:0-100mm; 0=no pain and 100=worst possible pain), patient's global assessment of disease activity (GDPT) on arthritis (VAS:0-100mm; 0=excellent and 100= poor), physician's global assessment of disease activity (GDEV) (VAS: 0-100mm; 0=no arthritis activity and 100 = extremely active arthritis), patient's assessment of physical function measured by HAQ-DI (20-question instrument assessing 8 functional areas (total score of 0-24 with lower score indicating better functioning);derived HAQ-DI ranges from 0 indicating no difficulty, to 3 indicating inability to perform a task in that area) and serum CRP.
Percent Change From Baseline in the ACR Components at Weeks 24, 28, 32, 36, 44 and 56Basline and Weeks 24, 28, 32, 36, 44, 56The 7 components of ACR response are: swollen joint counts (0-66), tender joint counts (0-68), patient's assessment of pain (PAIN) (VAS:0-100mm; 0=no pain and 100=worst possible pain), patient's global assessment of disease activity (GDPT) on arthritis (VAS:0-100mm; 0=excellent and 100= poor), physician's global assessment of disease activity (GDEV) (VAS: 0-100mm; 0=no arthritis activity and 100 = extremely active arthritis), patient's assessment of physical function measured by HAQ-DI (20-question instrument assessing 8 functional areas (total score of 0-24 with lower score indicating better functioning);derived HAQ-DI ranges from 0 indicating no difficulty, to 3 indicating inability to perform a task in that area) and serum CRP.
Change From Baseline in HAQ-DI Response at Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, and 24Baseline and Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, 24Change from baseline in HAQ-DI score is a measure of the change in the physical function, where a negative change reflects an improvement and a positive change reflects worsening of physical function. HAQ-DI is a 20-question instrument that assesses the degree of difficulty a person has in accomplishing tasks in 8 functional areas (dressing, arising, eating, walking, hygiene, reaching, gripping, and activities of daily living). Responses in each functional area are scored from 0 indicating no difficulty, to 3 indicating inability to perform a task in that area (that is, lower scores are indicative of better functioning). The total HAQ-DI score ranges from 0-24 with lower score indicating better functioning.
Change From Baseline in HAQ-DI Score at Weeks 24, 28, 32, 36, 44, and 56Baseline and Weeks 24, 28, 32, 36, 44, 56Change from baseline in HAQ-DI score is a measure of the change in the physical function, where a negative change reflects an improvement and a positive change reflects worsening of physical function. HAQ-DI is a 20-question instrument that assesses the degree of difficulty a person has in accomplishing tasks in 8 functional areas (dressing, arising, eating, walking, hygiene, reaching, gripping, and activities of daily living). Responses in each functional area are scored from 0, indicating no difficulty, to 3, indicating inability to perform a task in that area (that is, lower scores are indicative of better functioning). The total HAQ-DI score ranges from 0-24 with lower score indicating better functioning.
Percentage of Participants Who Achieved a HAQ-DI Response With Greater Than or Equal to (>=) 0.3 Improvement From Baseline in HAQ-DI Score at Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, and 24Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, and 24HAQ-DI response was defined as \>= 0.3 improvement from baseline in HAQ-DI score. HAQ-DI is a 20-question instrument that assesses the degree of difficulty a person has in accomplishing tasks in 8 functional areas (dressing, arising, eating, walking, hygiene, reaching, gripping, and activities of daily living). Responses in each functional area are scored from 0 indicating no difficulty, to 3 indicating inability to perform a task in that area (that is, lower scores are indicative of better functioning). The total HAQ-DI score ranges from 0-24 with lower score indicating better functioning.
Percentage of Participants Who Achieved an HAQ-DI Response With >= -0.3 Improvement From Baseline in HAQ-DI Score at Weeks 24, 28, 32, 36, 44, and 56Weeks 24, 28, 32, 36, 44, 56HAQ-DI response was defined as \>= 0.3 improvement from baseline in HAQ-DI score. HAQ-DI is a 20-question instrument that assesses the degree of difficulty a person has in accomplishing tasks in 8 functional areas (dressing, arising, eating, walking, hygiene, reaching, gripping, and activities of daily living). Responses in each functional area are scored from 0 indicating no difficulty, to 3 indicating inability to perform a task in that area (that is, lower scores are indicative of better functioning). The total HAQ-DI score ranges from 0-24 with lower score indicating better functioning. As planned, results data was analyzed and reported for the specified arms for this outcome measure.
Percent Change From Baseline in Dactylitis Scores at Weeks 4, 8, 16, and 24Baseline and Weeks 4, 8, 16, 24Dactylitis is characterized by swelling of the entire finger or toe. The severity of dactylitis is scored on a scale of 0-3, where 0, 1, 2, 3 indicates none, mild, moderate, severe, respectively in each digit of the hands and feet. The range of total dactylitis scores for a participant is 0-60. Higher score indicates more severe dactylitis.
Percent Change From Baseline in Dactylitis Scores at Weeks 24, 28, 32, 44, 56Baseline and Weeks 24, 28, 32, 44, 56Dactylitis was characterized by swelling of the entire finger or toe. The severity of dactylitis is scored on a scale of 0-3, where 0, 1, 2, 3 indicates none, mild, moderate, severe, respectively in each digit of the hands and feet. The range of total dactylitis scores for a participant is 0-60. Higher score indicates more severe dactylitis. As planned, results data was analyzed and reported for the specified arms for this outcome measure.
Percentage of Participants With Dactylitis at Weeks 4, 8, 16, and 24Weeks 4, 8, 16, and 24Dactylitis is characterized by swelling of the entire finger or toe. The severity of dactylitis is scored on a scale of 0-3, where 0, 1, 2, 3 indicates none, mild, moderate, severe, respectively in each digit of the hands and feet. The range of total dactylitis scores for a participant is 0-60. Participants with dactylitis had dactylitis score \>0. Higher score indicates more severe dactylitis.
Percentage of Participants With Dactylitis at Weeks 24, 28, 32, 44, and 56Weeks 24, 28, 32, 44, and 56Dactylitis was characterized by swelling of the entire finger or toe. The severity of dactylitis is scored on a scale of 0-3, where 0, 1, 2, 3 indicates none, mild, moderate, severe, respectively in each digit of the hands and feet. The range of total dactylitis scores for a participant is 0-60. Higher score indicates greater degree of tenderness.
Percent Change From Baseline in LEI Scores at Week 4, 8, 16, and 24Baseline and Weeks 4, 8, 16, 24Enthesitis was assessed using the Leeds Enthesitis Index (LEI). The LEI was developed to assess enthesitis in participants with psoriatic arthritis (PsA), and evaluates the presence (score of 1) or absence of pain (score of 0) by applying local pressure to Lateral elbow epicondyle, left and right, Medial femoral condyle, left and right, and Achilles tendon insertion, left and right. LEI scores ranging from 0 (0 sites with tenderness) to 6 (worst possible score; 6 sites with tenderness).
Percent Change From Baseline in LEI Scores at Weeks 24, 28, 32, 44, and 56Baseline and Weeks 24, 28, 32, 44, 56Enthesitis will be assessed using the Leeds Enthesitis Index (LEI). The LEI was developed to assess enthesitis in participants with PsA, and evaluates the presence (score of 1) or absence of pain (score of 0) by applying local pressure to Lateral elbow epicondyle, left and right, Medial femoral condyle, left and right, and Achilles tendon insertion, left and right. LEI scores ranging from 0 (0 sites with tenderness) to 6 (worst possible score; 6 sites with tenderness).
Percentage of Participants With Enthesitis Based on LEI Score at Weeks 4, 8, 16, and 24 in Participants With Enthesitis at BaselineWeeks 4, 8, 16, and 24Enthesitis was assessed using the Leeds Enthesitis Index (LEI). The LEI was developed to assess enthesitis in participants with PsA, and evaluates the presence (score of 1) or absence of pain (score of 0) by applying local pressure to Lateral elbow epicondyle, left and right, Medial femoral condyle, left and right, and Achilles tendon insertion, left and right. Participants with enthesitis had LEI score \>0. LEI scores ranging from 0 (0 sites with tenderness) to 6 (worst possible score; 6 sites with tenderness).
Percentage of Participants With Enthesitis Based on LEI at Weeks 24, 28, 32, 44, and 56 in Participants With Enthesitis at BaselineWeeks 24, 28, 32, 44, and 56Enthesitis will be assessed using the Leeds Enthesitis Index (LEI). The LEI was developed to assess enthesitis in participants with PsA, and evaluates the presence (score of 1) or absence of pain (score of 0) by applying local pressure to Lateral elbow epicondyle, left and right, Medial femoral condyle, left and right, and Achilles tendon insertion, left and right. Participants with enthesitis had LEI score \>0. LEI scores ranging from 0 (0 sites with tenderness) to 6 (worst possible score; 6 sites with tenderness).
Change From Baseline in Psoriatic ArthritiS Disease Activity Score (PASDAS) Score at Weeks 16 and 24Baseline and Weeks 16, 24Change from baseline in PASDAS score measures the change in disease activity where a negative value indicates an improvement and a positive value indicates worsening of PsA disease activity. PASDAS is a PsA disease activity score that assesses 4 domains (joints, entheses, dactylitis and quality of life) of PsA. PASDAS is a derived score combining Patient's Global Assessment of Disease Activity (arthritis and psoriasis, on a 100-unit VAS), Physician's Global Assessment of Disease Activity (on a 100-unit VAS), swollen joint count (66 joints), tender joint count (68 joints), CRP (mg/L), enthesitis based on LEI (scaled to a 0-6 range), dactylitis count (scoring each digit from 0-3 and recoding to 0-1, where any score \> 0 equaled 1), and the PCS score of the SF-36 health survey. The total score range is 0-10 and the cutoffs for disease activity were 3.2 (low) to 5.4 (high). Negative changes from baseline indicate improvement of overall disease activity.
Change From Baseline in PASDAS Score at Weeks 24 and 44Baseline and Weeks 24, 44Change from baseline in PASDAS score measures the change in disease activity where a negative value indicates an improvement and a positive value indicates worsening of PsA disease activity. PASDAS is a PsA disease activity score that assesses 4 domains (joints, entheses, dactylitis and quality of life) of PsA. PASDAS is a derived score combining Patient's Global Assessment of Disease Activity (arthritis and psoriasis, on a 100-unit VAS), Physician's Global Assessment of Disease Activity (on a 100-unit VAS), swollen joint count (66 joints), tender joint count (68 joints), CRP (mg/L), enthesitis based on LEI (scaled to a 0-6 range), dactylitis count (scoring each digit from 0-3 and recoding to 0-1, where any score \> 0 equaled 1), and the PCS score of the SF-36 health survey. The total score range is 0-10 and the cutoffs for disease activity were 3.2 (low) to 5.4 (high). Negative changes from baseline indicate improvement of overall disease activity.
Change From Baseline in GRAppa Composite scorE (GRACE) Index Score at Weeks 16 and 24Baseline and Weeks 16, 24Change from baseline in GRACE index score measures the change in disease activity, where a negative change indicates an improvement and a positive change indicates a worsening of PsA disease activity. GRACE index was converted from Arithmetic Mean of the Desirability Function (AMDF). AMDF is calculated by transforming all variables using predefined algorithms and expressing the total score as a mean with a score range of 0 - 1, where 1 indicates a better state than 0. GRACE Index = (1 - AMDF)\*10, where GRACE index has a range of 0-10, with higher scores indicate more active disease. As planned, results data was analyzed and reported for the specified arms for this outcome measure.
Change From Baseline in GRACE Index Score at Weeks 24 and 44Baseline and Weeks 24, 44Change from baseline in GRACE index score measures the change in disease activity, where a negative change indicates an improvement and a positive change indicates a worsening of PsA disease activity. GRACE index was converted from Arithmetic Mean of the Desirability Function (AMDF). AMDF is calculated by transforming all variables using predefined algorithms and expressing the total score as a mean with a score range of 0 - 1, where 1 indicates a better state than 0. GRACE Index = (1 - AMDF)\*10, where GRACE index has a range of 0-10, with higher scores indicate more active disease.
Change From Baseline in Modified Composite Psoriatic Disease Activity Index (mCPDAI) Score at Weeks 16 and 24Baseline and Weeks 16, 24The mCPDAI assessed 4 domains (joints, skin, entheses, and dactylitis). The mCPDAI scores were calculated using the following assessments: joints (66 swollen and 68 tender joint counts), HAQ-DI score, PASI, dactylitis, and enthesitis. Within each domain a score (range 0-3) was assigned, where 0= Not involved, 1= Mild, 2= Moderate and 3= Severe. The scores for each domain were then added together to give a final score range of 0 to 12. A higher score indicates more active disease activity. Negative changes from baseline indicate improvement of PsA disease activity.
Change From Baseline in mCPDAI Index Score at Weeks 24 and 44Baseline and Weeks 24, 44The mCPDAI assessed 4 domains (joints, skin, entheses, and dactylitis). The mCPDAI scores were calculated using the following assessments: joints (66 swollen and 68 tender joint counts), HAQ-DI score, PASI, dactylitis, and enthesitis. Within each domain a score (range 0-3) was assigned, where 0= Not involved, 1= Mild, 2= Moderate and 3= Severe. The scores for each domain were then added together to give a final score range of 0 to 12. A higher score indicates more active disease activity. Negative changes from baseline indicate improvement of PsA disease activity.
Change From Baseline in Disease Activity Index for Psoriatic Arthritis (DAPSA) Score at Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 20 and 24Baseline and Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, 24Change from baseline in DAPSA measures the change in disease activity, where a negative change indicates an improvement and a positive change indicates worsening of disease activity. DAPSA score is a the sum of swollen joint count (66 joints), tender joint count (68 joints), CRP (mg/dL), Patient's Assessment of Pain (on a 10-unit VAS;0=no pain, 10=worst possible pain), and Patient's Global Assessment of Disease Activity (arthritis, on a 10-unit VAS; 0 to 100 centimeter \[cm\] VAS, 0=excellent and 10=poor). Cut-off values for disease activity: 0-4 remission; 5-14 low; 15-28 moderate; \>28 high.
Change From Baseline in DAPSA Index Score at Weeks 24, 28, 32, 36, 44, and 56Baseline and Weeks 24, 28, 32, 36, 44, 56Change from baseline in DAPSA measures the change in disease activity, where a negative change indicates an improvement and a positive change indicates worsening of disease activity. DAPSA score is a the sum of swollen joint count (66 joints), tender joint count (68 joints), CRP (mg/dL), Patient's Assessment of Pain (on a 10-unit VAS;0=no pain, 10=worst possible pain), and Patient's Global Assessment of Disease Activity (arthritis, on a 10-unit VAS; 0 to 10cm VAS, 0=excellent and 10=poor). Cut-off values for disease activity: 0-4 remission; 5-14 low; 15-28 moderate; \>28 high.
Percentage of Participants Who Achieved Minimal Disease Activity (MDA) at Weeks 16 and 24Weeks 16 and 24MDA defines a satisfactory state of disease activity that includes 5 domains of PsA (joint symptoms, skin psoriasis, patient's perspective of pain and disease activity on arthritis and psoriasis, physical function and enthesitis). Participants were classified as achieving MDA if they fulfilled 5 of 7 outcome measures: tender joint count \<=1; swollen joint count \<=1; PASI \<=1; patient pain VAS score of \<=15 mm; patient global disease activity on arthritis and psoriasis; VAS score of \<=20 mm; Health Assessment Questionnaire score \<=0.5; and tender entheseal points \<=1.
Percentage of Participants Who Achieved MDA at Weeks 24 and 44Weeks 24 and 44MDA defines a satisfactory state of disease activity that includes 5 domains of PsA (joint symptoms, skin psoriasis, patient's perspective of pain and disease activity on arthritis and psoriasis, physical function and enthesitis). Participants were classified as achieving MDA if they fulfilled 5 of 7 outcome measures: tender joint count \<=1; swollen joint count \<=1; PASI \<=1; patient pain VAS score of \<=15 mm; patient global disease activity on arthritis and psoriasis; VAS score of \<=20 mm; Health Assessment Questionnaire score \<=0.5; and tender entheseal points \<=1.
Change From Baseline in the Physical and Mental Component Summary (PCS and MCS) Scores of 36- Item Short Form Health Assessment Questionnaire (SF-36) at Weeks 16 and 24Baseline and Weeks 16, 24SF-36 is a multi-domain instrument with 36 items to evaluate the health status and quality of life. It included 8 subscales (physical functioning, physical role functioning, bodily pain, general health perception, vitality, social functioning, emotional role functioning, and mental health), which yielded a Physical Component Summary (PCS) with score range 0-100 (higher score-better quality of life) and a Mental Component Summary (MCS) with score range 0-100 (higher score-better quality of life) in addition to subscale scores. The PCS and MCS scores are normalized to a mean of 50 and standard deviations of 10, based upon general US population norms as presented in this outcome measure. A positive change indicates improvement while a negative change indicates worsening of health status and quality of life.
Change From Baseline in the PCS Scores of SF-36 at Weeks 24 and 44Baseline and Weeks 24, 44SF-36 is a multi-domain instrument with 36 items to evaluate the health status and quality of life. It included 8 subscales (physical functioning, physical role functioning, bodily pain, general health perception, vitality, social functioning, emotional role functioning, and mental health), which yielded a Physical Component Summary (PCS) with score range 0-100 (higher score-better quality of life) and a Mental Component Summary (MCS) with score range 0-100 (higher score-better quality of life) in addition to subscale scores. The PCS scores are normalized to a mean of 50 and standard deviations of 10, based upon general US population norms as presented in this outcome measure. A positive change indicates improvement while a negative change indicates worsening of health status and quality of life.
Change From Baseline in the MCS Scores of SF-36 at Weeks 24 and 44Baseline and Weeks 24, 44SF-36 is a multi-domain instrument with 36 items to evaluate the health status and quality of life. It included 8 subscales (physical functioning, physical role functioning, bodily pain, general health perception, vitality, social functioning, emotional role functioning, and mental health), which yielded a Physical Component Summary (PCS) with score range 0-100 (higher score-better quality of life) and a Mental Component Summary (MCS) with score range 0-100 (higher score-better quality of life) in addition to subscale scores. The MCS scores are normalized to a mean of 50 and standard deviations of 10, based upon general US population norms as presented in this outcome measure. A positive change indicates improvement while a negative change indicates worsening of health status and quality of life.
Change From Baseline in Norm-based SF-36 Scales at Week 16 and 24Baseline and Weeks 16, 24SF-36 evaluates 8 individual subscales (physical functioning, role-physical, bodily pain, general health, vitality, social functioning, role-emotional, and mental health). Each 8 scales scored from 0 to 100 with higher scores= better health. The scores are normalized to a mean of 50 and standard deviations of 10, based upon general US population norms. Higher scores indicate better health. A positive change indicates improvement while a negative change indicates worsening of health status and quality of life.
Change From Baseline in Norm-based SF-36 Scale at Week 24 and 44Baseline and Weeks 24, 44SF-36 evaluates 8 individual subscales (physical functioning, role-physical, bodily pain, general health, vitality, social functioning, role-emotional, and mental health). Each 8 scales scored from 0 to 100 with higher scores= better health. The scores are normalized to a mean of 50 and standard deviations of 10, based upon general US population norms. Higher scores indicate better health. A positive change indicates improvement while a negative change indicates worsening of health status and quality of life.
Change From Baseline in Routine Assessment of Patient Index Data 3 (RAPID3) Score at Weeks 16 and 24Baseline and Weeks 16, 24RAPID3 is a multi-dimensional health assessment questionnaire that was designed for use in routine clinical care. Three core data set for function, pain, and patient global estimate of disease activity were recorded. Each was scored 0-10 and the score ranges from 0 to 30 with higher scores indicating worse condition. A negative change from baseline indicates improvement in condition.
Percentage of Participants Who Achieved a Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI)-75 Response at Week 24Week 24The PASI is a system used for assessing and grading the severity of psoriatic lesions and their response to therapy. In the PASI system, the body is divided into 4 regions: the head, trunk, upper extremities, and lower extremities. Each of these areas is assessed separately for the percentage of the area involved, which translates to a numeric score that ranges from 0 (indicates no involvement) to 6 (90 percentage (%)-100% involvement), and for erythema, induration and scaling, which are each rated on a scale of 0 to 4. The PASI produces a numeric score that could range from 0 (no psoriasis) to 72 (worst condition). PASI 75 response was defined as at least a 75% reduction in PASI relative to Baseline. As planned, results data was analyzed and reported for the specified arms for this outcome measure.
Percentage of Participants Who Achieved a PASI 50, PASI 75, PASI 90 and PASI 100 Response at Weeks 16 and 24Weeks 16 and 24The PASI is a system used for assessing and grading the severity of psoriatic lesions and their response to therapy. In the PASI system, the body is divided into 4 regions: the head, trunk, upper extremities, and lower extremities. Each of these areas is assessed separately for the percentage of the area involved, which translates to a numeric score that ranges from 0 (indicates no involvement) to 6 (90 percentage (%)-100% involvement), and for erythema, induration and scaling, which are each rated on a scale of 0 to 4. The PASI produces a numeric score that could range from 0 (no psoriasis) to 72. PASI 50, 75, 90, and 100 responses were defined as at least a 50%, 75%, 90%, and 100% reduction in PASI relative to Baseline respectively. As planned, results data was analyzed and reported for the specified arms for this outcome measure.
Percentage of Participants Who Achieved a PASI 50, PASI 75, PASI 90 and PASI 100 Response at Weeks 24, 28, 32, 44, and 56Weeks 24, 28, 32, 44, and 56The PASI is a system used for assessing and grading the severity of psoriatic lesions and their response to therapy. In the PASI system, the body is divided into 4 regions: the head, trunk, upper extremities, and lower extremities. Each of these areas is assessed separately for the percentage of the area involved, which translates to a numeric score that ranges from 0 (indicates no involvement) to 6 (90 percentage (%)-100% involvement), and for erythema, induration and scaling, which are each rated on a scale of 0 to 4. The PASI produces a numeric score that could range from 0 (no psoriasis) to 72. PASI 50, 75, 90, and 100 responses were defined as at least a 50%, 75%, 90%, and 100% reduction in PASI relative to Baseline respectively.
Percent Change From Baseline in PASI Score at Weeks 4, 8, 16, and 24Baseline and Weeks 4, 8, 16, 24The PASI is a system used for assessing and grading the severity of psoriatic lesions and their response to therapy. In the PASI system, the body is divided into 4 regions: the head, trunk, upper extremities, and lower extremities. Each of these areas is assessed separately for the percentage of the area involved, which translates to a numeric score that ranges from 0 (indicates no involvement) to 6 (90 percentage (%)-100% involvement), and for erythema, induration and scaling, which are each rated on a scale of 0 to 4. The PASI produces a numeric score that could range from 0 (no psoriasis) to 72. A negative percent change from baseline indicates the percent improvement from baseline in the severity of psoriatic lesions. As planned, results data was analyzed and reported for the specified arms for this outcome measure.
Percent Change From Baseline in PASI Score at Weeks 24, 28, 32, 44, and 56Baseline and Weeks 24, 28, 32, 44, 56The PASI is a system used for assessing and grading the severity of psoriatic lesions and their response to therapy. In the PASI system, the body is divided into 4 regions: the head, trunk, upper extremities, and lower extremities. Each of these areas is assessed separately for the percentage of the area involved, which translates to a numeric score that ranges from 0 (indicates no involvement) to 6 (90 percentage (%)-100% involvement), and for erythema, induration and scaling, which are each rated on a scale of 0 to 4. The PASI produces a numeric score that could range from 0 (no psoriasis) to 72. A negative percent change from baseline indicates the percent improvement from baseline in the severity of psoriatic lesions.
Change From Baseline in RAPID3 Score at Weeks 24 and 44Baseline and Weeks 24, 44RAPID3 is a multi-dimensional health assessment questionnaire that was designed for use in routine clinical care. Three core data set for function, pain, and patient global estimate of disease activity were recorded. Each was scored 0-10 and the score ranges from 0 to 30 with higher scores indicating worse condition. A negative change from baseline indicates improvement in condition.

Countries

Canada, Germany, Poland, Romania, Russia, Spain, United States

Participant flow

Participants by arm

ArmCount
Placebo
Participants were randomized to receive placebo matched to guselkumab subcutaneous injections at Weeks 0, 4, 12 and 20 and guselkumab 100 milligram (mg) subcutaneous injection at Weeks 24, 28, 36 and 44.
49
Guselkumab
Participants were randomized to receive guselkumab 100 mg subcutaneous injections at Weeks 0, 4, 12, 20, 28, 36 and 44, and placebo at Week 24, with a final follow-up at Week 56.
100
Total149

Withdrawals & dropouts

PeriodReasonFG000FG001FG002FG003FG004
Week 0 - 16Lack of Efficacy10000
Week 0 - 16Not met all Inclusion Criteria00100
Week 16 - 24Lack of Efficacy10100
Week 16 - 24Lost to Follow-up10000
Week 16 - 24Withdrawal by Subject00200
Week 24 - 56Adverse Event00200
Week 24 - 56Lack of Efficacy00021
Week 24 - 56Lost to Follow-up00001
Week 24 - 56Withdrawal by Subject01000

Baseline characteristics

CharacteristicPlaceboTotalGuselkumab
Age, Continuous44.2 years
STANDARD_DEVIATION 12.43
46.3 years
STANDARD_DEVIATION 12.75
47.4 years
STANDARD_DEVIATION 12.83
Region of Enrollment
Canada
2 Participants6 Participants4 Participants
Region of Enrollment
Germany
2 Participants4 Participants2 Participants
Region of Enrollment
Poland
12 Participants25 Participants13 Participants
Region of Enrollment
Romania
1 Participants5 Participants4 Participants
Region of Enrollment
Russia
25 Participants89 Participants64 Participants
Region of Enrollment
Spain
3 Participants9 Participants6 Participants
Region of Enrollment
United States
4 Participants11 Participants7 Participants
Sex: Female, Male
Female
25 Participants73 Participants48 Participants
Sex: Female, Male
Male
24 Participants76 Participants52 Participants

Adverse events

Event typeEG000
affected / at risk
EG001
affected / at risk
EG002
affected / at risk
EG003
affected / at risk
EG004
affected / at risk
deaths
Total, all-cause mortality
0 / 490 / 290 / 1000 / 170 / 10
other
Total, other adverse events
7 / 493 / 2924 / 1008 / 173 / 10
serious
Total, serious adverse events
1 / 490 / 296 / 1000 / 170 / 10

Outcome results

Primary

Percentage of Participants Who Achieved American College of Rheumatology (ACR) 20 Response at Week 24

ACR 20 response: at least 20% improvement from baseline in both swollen joint (66 joints) and tender joint (68 joints) counts and at least 20% improvement from baseline in 3 of following 5 assessments: patient's assessment of pain (VAS: 0-100 millimeter \[mm\], 0=no pain and 100=worst possible pain), patient's global assessment of disease activity on arthritis (VAS:0-100mm, 0=excellent and 100=poor), physician's global assessment of disease activity (VAS:0-100mm; 0=no arthritis activity and 100 = extremely active arthritis), patient's assessment of physical function measured by HAQ-DI (defined as a 20-question instrument assessing 8 functional areas;derived HAQ-DI ranges from 0=no difficulty, to 3=inability to perform a task in that area) and serum CRP. Treatment Failure (TF) criteria: Discontinued study drug due to lack of efficacy or worsening of PsA, initiated or increased dose of methotrexate or oral corticosteroids, or initiated prohibited PsA treatments. FAS is full analysis set.

Time frame: Week 24

Population: FAS (up to Week 24): participants randomized and received 1 dose of study drug per assigned treatment regardless of actual treatments received. Data after meeting TF criteria or after EE to ustekinumab and missing data are imputed as non-responders. As planned, results data was analyzed and reported for the specified arms for this outcome measure.

ArmMeasureValue (NUMBER)
PlaceboPercentage of Participants Who Achieved American College of Rheumatology (ACR) 20 Response at Week 2418.4 percentage of participants
GuselkumabPercentage of Participants Who Achieved American College of Rheumatology (ACR) 20 Response at Week 2458.0 percentage of participants
p-value: <0.00195% CI: [25.3, 54.1]Cochran-Mantel-Haenszel
Secondary

Change From Baseline in DAPSA Index Score at Weeks 24, 28, 32, 36, 44, and 56

Change from baseline in DAPSA measures the change in disease activity, where a negative change indicates an improvement and a positive change indicates worsening of disease activity. DAPSA score is a the sum of swollen joint count (66 joints), tender joint count (68 joints), CRP (mg/dL), Patient's Assessment of Pain (on a 10-unit VAS;0=no pain, 10=worst possible pain), and Patient's Global Assessment of Disease Activity (arthritis, on a 10-unit VAS; 0 to 10cm VAS, 0=excellent and 10=poor). Cut-off values for disease activity: 0-4 remission; 5-14 low; 15-28 moderate; \>28 high.

Time frame: Baseline and Weeks 24, 28, 32, 36, 44, 56

Population: Post Week 24 efficacy analysis set with observed data. Here 'n' (number analyzed) included all participants who were evaluable at specified timepoints. As planned, results data was analyzed and reported for the specified arms for this outcome measure.

ArmMeasureGroupValue (MEAN)Dispersion
PlaceboChange From Baseline in DAPSA Index Score at Weeks 24, 28, 32, 36, 44, and 56Week 24-12.99 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 22.328
PlaceboChange From Baseline in DAPSA Index Score at Weeks 24, 28, 32, 36, 44, and 56Week 28-20.85 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 21.434
PlaceboChange From Baseline in DAPSA Index Score at Weeks 24, 28, 32, 36, 44, and 56Week 32-26.12 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 21.309
PlaceboChange From Baseline in DAPSA Index Score at Weeks 24, 28, 32, 36, 44, and 56Week 36-27.37 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 22.48
PlaceboChange From Baseline in DAPSA Index Score at Weeks 24, 28, 32, 36, 44, and 56Week 44-29.54 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 20.785
PlaceboChange From Baseline in DAPSA Index Score at Weeks 24, 28, 32, 36, 44, and 56Week 56-31.98 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 20.359
GuselkumabChange From Baseline in DAPSA Index Score at Weeks 24, 28, 32, 36, 44, and 56Week 44-30.55 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 18.188
GuselkumabChange From Baseline in DAPSA Index Score at Weeks 24, 28, 32, 36, 44, and 56Week 24-26.93 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 18.238
GuselkumabChange From Baseline in DAPSA Index Score at Weeks 24, 28, 32, 36, 44, and 56Week 36-30.43 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 18.114
GuselkumabChange From Baseline in DAPSA Index Score at Weeks 24, 28, 32, 36, 44, and 56Week 28-29.71 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 18.911
GuselkumabChange From Baseline in DAPSA Index Score at Weeks 24, 28, 32, 36, 44, and 56Week 56-32.02 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 18.328
GuselkumabChange From Baseline in DAPSA Index Score at Weeks 24, 28, 32, 36, 44, and 56Week 32-30.59 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 19.72
Secondary

Change From Baseline in Disease Activity Index for Psoriatic Arthritis (DAPSA) Score at Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 20 and 24

Change from baseline in DAPSA measures the change in disease activity, where a negative change indicates an improvement and a positive change indicates worsening of disease activity. DAPSA score is a the sum of swollen joint count (66 joints), tender joint count (68 joints), CRP (mg/dL), Patient's Assessment of Pain (on a 10-unit VAS;0=no pain, 10=worst possible pain), and Patient's Global Assessment of Disease Activity (arthritis, on a 10-unit VAS; 0 to 100 centimeter \[cm\] VAS, 0=excellent and 10=poor). Cut-off values for disease activity: 0-4 remission; 5-14 low; 15-28 moderate; \>28 high.

Time frame: Baseline and Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, 24

Population: FAS (up to Week 24). Data after early escape (EE) to ustekinumab and missing data were imputed using LOCF. As planned, results data was analyzed and reported for the specified arms for this outcome measure.

ArmMeasureGroupValue (MEAN)Dispersion
PlaceboChange From Baseline in Disease Activity Index for Psoriatic Arthritis (DAPSA) Score at Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 20 and 24Week 8-8.25 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 15.158
PlaceboChange From Baseline in Disease Activity Index for Psoriatic Arthritis (DAPSA) Score at Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 20 and 24Week 16-4.98 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 16.045
PlaceboChange From Baseline in Disease Activity Index for Psoriatic Arthritis (DAPSA) Score at Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 20 and 24Week 20-4.70 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 17.408
PlaceboChange From Baseline in Disease Activity Index for Psoriatic Arthritis (DAPSA) Score at Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 20 and 24Week 4-5.62 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 13.03
PlaceboChange From Baseline in Disease Activity Index for Psoriatic Arthritis (DAPSA) Score at Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 20 and 24Week 24-4.97 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 20.114
PlaceboChange From Baseline in Disease Activity Index for Psoriatic Arthritis (DAPSA) Score at Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 20 and 24Week 12-6.84 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 16.334
GuselkumabChange From Baseline in Disease Activity Index for Psoriatic Arthritis (DAPSA) Score at Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 20 and 24Week 24-23.08 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 20.206
GuselkumabChange From Baseline in Disease Activity Index for Psoriatic Arthritis (DAPSA) Score at Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 20 and 24Week 4-10.03 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 11.207
GuselkumabChange From Baseline in Disease Activity Index for Psoriatic Arthritis (DAPSA) Score at Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 20 and 24Week 8-16.65 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 15.948
GuselkumabChange From Baseline in Disease Activity Index for Psoriatic Arthritis (DAPSA) Score at Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 20 and 24Week 12-18.84 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 16.266
GuselkumabChange From Baseline in Disease Activity Index for Psoriatic Arthritis (DAPSA) Score at Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 20 and 24Week 20-22.56 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 19.918
GuselkumabChange From Baseline in Disease Activity Index for Psoriatic Arthritis (DAPSA) Score at Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 20 and 24Week 16-21.26 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 17.811
Secondary

Change From Baseline in GRACE Index Score at Weeks 24 and 44

Change from baseline in GRACE index score measures the change in disease activity, where a negative change indicates an improvement and a positive change indicates a worsening of PsA disease activity. GRACE index was converted from Arithmetic Mean of the Desirability Function (AMDF). AMDF is calculated by transforming all variables using predefined algorithms and expressing the total score as a mean with a score range of 0 - 1, where 1 indicates a better state than 0. GRACE Index = (1 - AMDF)\*10, where GRACE index has a range of 0-10, with higher scores indicate more active disease.

Time frame: Baseline and Weeks 24, 44

Population: Post Week 24 efficacy analysis set with observed data. Here 'n' (number analyzed) included all participants who were evaluable at specified timepoints. As planned, results data was analyzed and reported for the specified arms for this outcome measure.

ArmMeasureGroupValue (MEAN)Dispersion
PlaceboChange From Baseline in GRACE Index Score at Weeks 24 and 44Week 44-3.21 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 1.698
PlaceboChange From Baseline in GRACE Index Score at Weeks 24 and 44Week 24-0.91 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 1.498
GuselkumabChange From Baseline in GRACE Index Score at Weeks 24 and 44Week 24-2.96 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 1.717
GuselkumabChange From Baseline in GRACE Index Score at Weeks 24 and 44Week 44-3.26 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 1.856
Secondary

Change From Baseline in GRAppa Composite scorE (GRACE) Index Score at Weeks 16 and 24

Change from baseline in GRACE index score measures the change in disease activity, where a negative change indicates an improvement and a positive change indicates a worsening of PsA disease activity. GRACE index was converted from Arithmetic Mean of the Desirability Function (AMDF). AMDF is calculated by transforming all variables using predefined algorithms and expressing the total score as a mean with a score range of 0 - 1, where 1 indicates a better state than 0. GRACE Index = (1 - AMDF)\*10, where GRACE index has a range of 0-10, with higher scores indicate more active disease. As planned, results data was analyzed and reported for the specified arms for this outcome measure.

Time frame: Baseline and Weeks 16, 24

Population: FAS (up to Week 24). Data after EE to ustekinumab and missing data were imputed using LOCF. Here 'N' (number of participants analyzed) included all participants who were evaluable for this endpoint.

ArmMeasureGroupValue (MEAN)Dispersion
PlaceboChange From Baseline in GRAppa Composite scorE (GRACE) Index Score at Weeks 16 and 24Week 16-0.29 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 1.174
PlaceboChange From Baseline in GRAppa Composite scorE (GRACE) Index Score at Weeks 16 and 24Week 24-0.35 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 1.394
GuselkumabChange From Baseline in GRAppa Composite scorE (GRACE) Index Score at Weeks 16 and 24Week 16-2.49 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 1.614
GuselkumabChange From Baseline in GRAppa Composite scorE (GRACE) Index Score at Weeks 16 and 24Week 24-2.73 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 1.756
Secondary

Change From Baseline in HAQ-DI Response at Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, and 24

Change from baseline in HAQ-DI score is a measure of the change in the physical function, where a negative change reflects an improvement and a positive change reflects worsening of physical function. HAQ-DI is a 20-question instrument that assesses the degree of difficulty a person has in accomplishing tasks in 8 functional areas (dressing, arising, eating, walking, hygiene, reaching, gripping, and activities of daily living). Responses in each functional area are scored from 0 indicating no difficulty, to 3 indicating inability to perform a task in that area (that is, lower scores are indicative of better functioning). The total HAQ-DI score ranges from 0-24 with lower score indicating better functioning.

Time frame: Baseline and Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, 24

Population: FAS (up to Week 24). Data after EE to ustekinumab and missing data were imputed using LOCF. As planned, results data was analyzed and reported for the specified arms for this outcome measure.

ArmMeasureGroupValue (MEAN)Dispersion
PlaceboChange From Baseline in HAQ-DI Response at Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, and 24Week 12-0.05 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 0.45
PlaceboChange From Baseline in HAQ-DI Response at Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, and 24Week 4-0.02 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 0.329
PlaceboChange From Baseline in HAQ-DI Response at Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, and 24Week 8-0.07 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 0.44
PlaceboChange From Baseline in HAQ-DI Response at Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, and 24Week 16-0.05 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 0.428
PlaceboChange From Baseline in HAQ-DI Response at Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, and 24Week 20-0.08 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 0.479
PlaceboChange From Baseline in HAQ-DI Response at Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, and 24Week 24-0.06 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 0.53
GuselkumabChange From Baseline in HAQ-DI Response at Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, and 24Week 20-0.41 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 0.453
GuselkumabChange From Baseline in HAQ-DI Response at Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, and 24Week 16-0.38 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 0.397
GuselkumabChange From Baseline in HAQ-DI Response at Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, and 24Week 4-0.17 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 0.322
GuselkumabChange From Baseline in HAQ-DI Response at Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, and 24Week 24-0.42 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 0.512
GuselkumabChange From Baseline in HAQ-DI Response at Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, and 24Week 8-0.32 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 0.442
GuselkumabChange From Baseline in HAQ-DI Response at Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, and 24Week 12-0.33 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 0.39
Secondary

Change From Baseline in HAQ-DI Score at Weeks 24, 28, 32, 36, 44, and 56

Change from baseline in HAQ-DI score is a measure of the change in the physical function, where a negative change reflects an improvement and a positive change reflects worsening of physical function. HAQ-DI is a 20-question instrument that assesses the degree of difficulty a person has in accomplishing tasks in 8 functional areas (dressing, arising, eating, walking, hygiene, reaching, gripping, and activities of daily living). Responses in each functional area are scored from 0, indicating no difficulty, to 3, indicating inability to perform a task in that area (that is, lower scores are indicative of better functioning). The total HAQ-DI score ranges from 0-24 with lower score indicating better functioning.

Time frame: Baseline and Weeks 24, 28, 32, 36, 44, 56

Population: Post Week 24 efficacy analysis set with observed data. Here 'n' (number analyzed) included all participants who were evaluable at specified timepoints. As planned, results data was analyzed and reported for the specified arms for this outcome measure.

ArmMeasureGroupValue (MEAN)Dispersion
PlaceboChange From Baseline in HAQ-DI Score at Weeks 24, 28, 32, 36, 44, and 56Week 24-0.19 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 0.581
PlaceboChange From Baseline in HAQ-DI Score at Weeks 24, 28, 32, 36, 44, and 56Week 28-0.40 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 0.646
PlaceboChange From Baseline in HAQ-DI Score at Weeks 24, 28, 32, 36, 44, and 56Week 32-0.50 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 0.624
PlaceboChange From Baseline in HAQ-DI Score at Weeks 24, 28, 32, 36, 44, and 56Week 36-0.59 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 0.65
PlaceboChange From Baseline in HAQ-DI Score at Weeks 24, 28, 32, 36, 44, and 56Week 44-0.63 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 0.612
PlaceboChange From Baseline in HAQ-DI Score at Weeks 24, 28, 32, 36, 44, and 56Week 56-0.67 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 0.558
GuselkumabChange From Baseline in HAQ-DI Score at Weeks 24, 28, 32, 36, 44, and 56Week 44-0.54 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 0.598
GuselkumabChange From Baseline in HAQ-DI Score at Weeks 24, 28, 32, 36, 44, and 56Week 24-0.46 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 0.53
GuselkumabChange From Baseline in HAQ-DI Score at Weeks 24, 28, 32, 36, 44, and 56Week 36-0.53 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 0.618
GuselkumabChange From Baseline in HAQ-DI Score at Weeks 24, 28, 32, 36, 44, and 56Week 28-0.51 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 0.571
GuselkumabChange From Baseline in HAQ-DI Score at Weeks 24, 28, 32, 36, 44, and 56Week 56-0.55 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 0.621
GuselkumabChange From Baseline in HAQ-DI Score at Weeks 24, 28, 32, 36, 44, and 56Week 32-0.56 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 0.595
Secondary

Change From Baseline in Health Assessment Questionnaire-Disability Index (HAQ-DI) Score at Week 24

Change from baseline in HAQ-DI score is a measure of the change in the physical function, where a negative change reflects an improvement and a positive change reflects worsening of physical function. HAQ-DI is a 20-question instrument that assesses the degree of difficulty a person has in accomplishing tasks in 8 functional areas (dressing, arising, eating, walking, hygiene, reaching, gripping, and activities of daily living). Responses in each functional area are scored from 0 indicating no difficulty, to 3 indicating inability to perform a task in that area (that is, lower scores are indicative of better functioning). The total HAQ-DI score ranges from 0-24 with lower score indicating better functioning.

Time frame: Baseline and Week 24

Population: FAS (up to Week 24). Data after EE to ustekinumab and missing data were imputed using LOCF. As planned, results data was analyzed and reported for the specified arms for this outcome measure.

ArmMeasureValue (MEAN)Dispersion
PlaceboChange From Baseline in Health Assessment Questionnaire-Disability Index (HAQ-DI) Score at Week 24-0.06 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 0.53
GuselkumabChange From Baseline in Health Assessment Questionnaire-Disability Index (HAQ-DI) Score at Week 24-0.42 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 0.512
p-value: <0.00195% CI: [-0.471, -0.148]MMRM
Secondary

Change From Baseline in mCPDAI Index Score at Weeks 24 and 44

The mCPDAI assessed 4 domains (joints, skin, entheses, and dactylitis). The mCPDAI scores were calculated using the following assessments: joints (66 swollen and 68 tender joint counts), HAQ-DI score, PASI, dactylitis, and enthesitis. Within each domain a score (range 0-3) was assigned, where 0= Not involved, 1= Mild, 2= Moderate and 3= Severe. The scores for each domain were then added together to give a final score range of 0 to 12. A higher score indicates more active disease activity. Negative changes from baseline indicate improvement of PsA disease activity.

Time frame: Baseline and Weeks 24, 44

Population: Post Week 24 efficacy analysis set with observed data. Here 'n' (number analyzed) included all participants who were evaluable at specified timepoints. As planned, results data was analyzed and reported for the specified arms for this outcome measure.

ArmMeasureGroupValue (MEAN)Dispersion
PlaceboChange From Baseline in mCPDAI Index Score at Weeks 24 and 44Week 24-1.4 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 2.27
PlaceboChange From Baseline in mCPDAI Index Score at Weeks 24 and 44Week 44-4.2 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 2.88
GuselkumabChange From Baseline in mCPDAI Index Score at Weeks 24 and 44Week 24-4.3 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 2.69
GuselkumabChange From Baseline in mCPDAI Index Score at Weeks 24 and 44Week 44-4.8 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 2.55
Secondary

Change From Baseline in Modified Composite Psoriatic Disease Activity Index (mCPDAI) Score at Weeks 16 and 24

The mCPDAI assessed 4 domains (joints, skin, entheses, and dactylitis). The mCPDAI scores were calculated using the following assessments: joints (66 swollen and 68 tender joint counts), HAQ-DI score, PASI, dactylitis, and enthesitis. Within each domain a score (range 0-3) was assigned, where 0= Not involved, 1= Mild, 2= Moderate and 3= Severe. The scores for each domain were then added together to give a final score range of 0 to 12. A higher score indicates more active disease activity. Negative changes from baseline indicate improvement of PsA disease activity.

Time frame: Baseline and Weeks 16, 24

Population: FAS (up to Week 24). Data after EE to ustekinumab and missing data were imputed using LOCF. Here 'N' (number of participants analyzed) included all participants who were evaluable for this endpoint. As planned, results data was analyzed and reported for the specified arms for this outcome measure.

ArmMeasureGroupValue (MEAN)Dispersion
PlaceboChange From Baseline in Modified Composite Psoriatic Disease Activity Index (mCPDAI) Score at Weeks 16 and 24Week 16-0.5 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 1.88
PlaceboChange From Baseline in Modified Composite Psoriatic Disease Activity Index (mCPDAI) Score at Weeks 16 and 24Week 24-0.8 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 2.16
GuselkumabChange From Baseline in Modified Composite Psoriatic Disease Activity Index (mCPDAI) Score at Weeks 16 and 24Week 16-3.1 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 2.48
GuselkumabChange From Baseline in Modified Composite Psoriatic Disease Activity Index (mCPDAI) Score at Weeks 16 and 24Week 24-3.9 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 2.72
Secondary

Change From Baseline in Norm-based SF-36 Scale at Week 24 and 44

SF-36 evaluates 8 individual subscales (physical functioning, role-physical, bodily pain, general health, vitality, social functioning, role-emotional, and mental health). Each 8 scales scored from 0 to 100 with higher scores= better health. The scores are normalized to a mean of 50 and standard deviations of 10, based upon general US population norms. Higher scores indicate better health. A positive change indicates improvement while a negative change indicates worsening of health status and quality of life.

Time frame: Baseline and Weeks 24, 44

Population: Post Week 24 efficacy analysis set with observed data. Here 'n' (number analyzed) included all participants who were evaluable at specified timepoints. As planned, results data was analyzed and reported for the specified arms for this outcome measure.

ArmMeasureGroupValue (MEAN)Dispersion
PlaceboChange From Baseline in Norm-based SF-36 Scale at Week 24 and 44Week 24: Physical functioning1.09 T-scoreStandard Deviation 8.953
PlaceboChange From Baseline in Norm-based SF-36 Scale at Week 24 and 44Week 44: Physical functioning8.41 T-scoreStandard Deviation 9.969
PlaceboChange From Baseline in Norm-based SF-36 Scale at Week 24 and 44Week 24: Role-physical1.92 T-scoreStandard Deviation 7.119
PlaceboChange From Baseline in Norm-based SF-36 Scale at Week 24 and 44Week 44: Role-physical6.82 T-scoreStandard Deviation 9.198
PlaceboChange From Baseline in Norm-based SF-36 Scale at Week 24 and 44Week 24: Bodily pain2.88 T-scoreStandard Deviation 6.856
PlaceboChange From Baseline in Norm-based SF-36 Scale at Week 24 and 44Week 44: Bodily pain9.42 T-scoreStandard Deviation 8.914
PlaceboChange From Baseline in Norm-based SF-36 Scale at Week 24 and 44Week 24: General health1.94 T-scoreStandard Deviation 8.185
PlaceboChange From Baseline in Norm-based SF-36 Scale at Week 24 and 44Week 44: General health6.25 T-scoreStandard Deviation 8.998
PlaceboChange From Baseline in Norm-based SF-36 Scale at Week 24 and 44Week 24: Vitality1.49 T-scoreStandard Deviation 7.387
PlaceboChange From Baseline in Norm-based SF-36 Scale at Week 24 and 44Week 44: Vitality7.53 T-scoreStandard Deviation 10.802
PlaceboChange From Baseline in Norm-based SF-36 Scale at Week 24 and 44Week 24: Social functioning-0.18 T-scoreStandard Deviation 7.776
PlaceboChange From Baseline in Norm-based SF-36 Scale at Week 24 and 44Week 44: Social functioning6.09 T-scoreStandard Deviation 10.151
PlaceboChange From Baseline in Norm-based SF-36 Scale at Week 24 and 44Week 24: Role-emotional2.11 T-scoreStandard Deviation 7.891
PlaceboChange From Baseline in Norm-based SF-36 Scale at Week 24 and 44Week 44: Role-emotional5.47 T-scoreStandard Deviation 9.16
PlaceboChange From Baseline in Norm-based SF-36 Scale at Week 24 and 44Week 24: Mental health0.19 T-scoreStandard Deviation 7.465
PlaceboChange From Baseline in Norm-based SF-36 Scale at Week 24 and 44Week 44: Mental health7.29 T-scoreStandard Deviation 9.952
GuselkumabChange From Baseline in Norm-based SF-36 Scale at Week 24 and 44Week 44: Mental health5.42 T-scoreStandard Deviation 8.978
GuselkumabChange From Baseline in Norm-based SF-36 Scale at Week 24 and 44Week 24: Physical functioning7.54 T-scoreStandard Deviation 8.228
GuselkumabChange From Baseline in Norm-based SF-36 Scale at Week 24 and 44Week 24: Vitality7.39 T-scoreStandard Deviation 8.727
GuselkumabChange From Baseline in Norm-based SF-36 Scale at Week 24 and 44Week 44: Physical functioning8.50 T-scoreStandard Deviation 8.633
GuselkumabChange From Baseline in Norm-based SF-36 Scale at Week 24 and 44Week 24: Role-emotional5.30 T-scoreStandard Deviation 9.013
GuselkumabChange From Baseline in Norm-based SF-36 Scale at Week 24 and 44Week 24: Role-physical5.74 T-scoreStandard Deviation 7.48
GuselkumabChange From Baseline in Norm-based SF-36 Scale at Week 24 and 44Week 44: Vitality7.11 T-scoreStandard Deviation 9.891
GuselkumabChange From Baseline in Norm-based SF-36 Scale at Week 24 and 44Week 44: Role-physical6.66 T-scoreStandard Deviation 7.664
GuselkumabChange From Baseline in Norm-based SF-36 Scale at Week 24 and 44Week 24: Mental health6.30 T-scoreStandard Deviation 8.994
GuselkumabChange From Baseline in Norm-based SF-36 Scale at Week 24 and 44Week 24: Bodily pain8.39 T-scoreStandard Deviation 8.332
GuselkumabChange From Baseline in Norm-based SF-36 Scale at Week 24 and 44Week 24: Social functioning6.41 T-scoreStandard Deviation 10.919
GuselkumabChange From Baseline in Norm-based SF-36 Scale at Week 24 and 44Week 44: Bodily pain8.95 T-scoreStandard Deviation 9.952
GuselkumabChange From Baseline in Norm-based SF-36 Scale at Week 24 and 44Week 44: Role-emotional5.68 T-scoreStandard Deviation 9.635
GuselkumabChange From Baseline in Norm-based SF-36 Scale at Week 24 and 44Week 24: General health7.05 T-scoreStandard Deviation 7.657
GuselkumabChange From Baseline in Norm-based SF-36 Scale at Week 24 and 44Week 44: Social functioning5.73 T-scoreStandard Deviation 10.357
GuselkumabChange From Baseline in Norm-based SF-36 Scale at Week 24 and 44Week 44: General health6.74 T-scoreStandard Deviation 8.496
Secondary

Change From Baseline in Norm-based SF-36 Scales at Week 16 and 24

SF-36 evaluates 8 individual subscales (physical functioning, role-physical, bodily pain, general health, vitality, social functioning, role-emotional, and mental health). Each 8 scales scored from 0 to 100 with higher scores= better health. The scores are normalized to a mean of 50 and standard deviations of 10, based upon general US population norms. Higher scores indicate better health. A positive change indicates improvement while a negative change indicates worsening of health status and quality of life.

Time frame: Baseline and Weeks 16, 24

Population: FAS (up to Week 24). Data after meeting TF criteria or after EE to ustekinumab and missing data are imputed as non-responders. As planned, results data was analyzed and reported for the specified arms for this outcome measure.

ArmMeasureGroupValue (MEAN)Dispersion
PlaceboChange From Baseline in Norm-based SF-36 Scales at Week 16 and 24Week 16: Physical functioning-0.31 T-scoreStandard Deviation 6.657
PlaceboChange From Baseline in Norm-based SF-36 Scales at Week 16 and 24Week 24: Physical functioning-0.04 T-scoreStandard Deviation 8.227
PlaceboChange From Baseline in Norm-based SF-36 Scales at Week 16 and 24Week 16: Role-physical-0.23 T-scoreStandard Deviation 5.674
PlaceboChange From Baseline in Norm-based SF-36 Scales at Week 16 and 24Week 24: Role-physical-0.09 T-scoreStandard Deviation 6.813
PlaceboChange From Baseline in Norm-based SF-36 Scales at Week 16 and 24Week 16: Bodily pain0.21 T-scoreStandard Deviation 5.675
PlaceboChange From Baseline in Norm-based SF-36 Scales at Week 16 and 24Week 24: Bodily pain0.81 T-scoreStandard Deviation 6.445
PlaceboChange From Baseline in Norm-based SF-36 Scales at Week 16 and 24Week 16: General health0.74 T-scoreStandard Deviation 5.857
PlaceboChange From Baseline in Norm-based SF-36 Scales at Week 16 and 24Week 24: General health1.49 T-scoreStandard Deviation 7.274
PlaceboChange From Baseline in Norm-based SF-36 Scales at Week 16 and 24Week 16: Vitality0.73 T-scoreStandard Deviation 7.779
PlaceboChange From Baseline in Norm-based SF-36 Scales at Week 16 and 24Week 24: Vitality1.46 T-scoreStandard Deviation 7.254
PlaceboChange From Baseline in Norm-based SF-36 Scales at Week 16 and 24Week 16: Social functioning-0.82 T-scoreStandard Deviation 8.272
PlaceboChange From Baseline in Norm-based SF-36 Scales at Week 16 and 24Week 24: Social functioning-0.82 T-scoreStandard Deviation 7.613
PlaceboChange From Baseline in Norm-based SF-36 Scales at Week 16 and 24Week 16: Role-emotional1.14 T-scoreStandard Deviation 8.774
PlaceboChange From Baseline in Norm-based SF-36 Scales at Week 16 and 24Week 24: Role-emotional0.64 T-scoreStandard Deviation 8.754
PlaceboChange From Baseline in Norm-based SF-36 Scales at Week 16 and 24Week 16: Mental health1.28 T-scoreStandard Deviation 7.007
PlaceboChange From Baseline in Norm-based SF-36 Scales at Week 16 and 24Week 24: Mental health0.21 T-scoreStandard Deviation 7.02
GuselkumabChange From Baseline in Norm-based SF-36 Scales at Week 16 and 24Week 24: Mental health5.68 T-scoreStandard Deviation 8.877
GuselkumabChange From Baseline in Norm-based SF-36 Scales at Week 16 and 24Week 16: Physical functioning6.30 T-scoreStandard Deviation 7.255
GuselkumabChange From Baseline in Norm-based SF-36 Scales at Week 16 and 24Week 16: Vitality5.85 T-scoreStandard Deviation 8.138
GuselkumabChange From Baseline in Norm-based SF-36 Scales at Week 16 and 24Week 24: Physical functioning6.93 T-scoreStandard Deviation 8.009
GuselkumabChange From Baseline in Norm-based SF-36 Scales at Week 16 and 24Week 16: Role-emotional4.77 T-scoreStandard Deviation 9.643
GuselkumabChange From Baseline in Norm-based SF-36 Scales at Week 16 and 24Week 16: Role-physical4.22 T-scoreStandard Deviation 7.146
GuselkumabChange From Baseline in Norm-based SF-36 Scales at Week 16 and 24Week 24: Vitality6.39 T-scoreStandard Deviation 8.861
GuselkumabChange From Baseline in Norm-based SF-36 Scales at Week 16 and 24Week 24: Role-physical4.69 T-scoreStandard Deviation 7.961
GuselkumabChange From Baseline in Norm-based SF-36 Scales at Week 16 and 24Week 16: Mental health5.10 T-scoreStandard Deviation 8.683
GuselkumabChange From Baseline in Norm-based SF-36 Scales at Week 16 and 24Week 16: Bodily pain6.56 T-scoreStandard Deviation 7.832
GuselkumabChange From Baseline in Norm-based SF-36 Scales at Week 16 and 24Week 16: Social functioning5.87 T-scoreStandard Deviation 9.346
GuselkumabChange From Baseline in Norm-based SF-36 Scales at Week 16 and 24Week 24: Bodily pain7.56 T-scoreStandard Deviation 8.288
GuselkumabChange From Baseline in Norm-based SF-36 Scales at Week 16 and 24Week 24: Role-emotional4.67 T-scoreStandard Deviation 9.393
GuselkumabChange From Baseline in Norm-based SF-36 Scales at Week 16 and 24Week 16: General health6.19 T-scoreStandard Deviation 7.964
GuselkumabChange From Baseline in Norm-based SF-36 Scales at Week 16 and 24Week 24: Social functioning6.22 T-scoreStandard Deviation 10.426
GuselkumabChange From Baseline in Norm-based SF-36 Scales at Week 16 and 24Week 24: General health6.48 T-scoreStandard Deviation 7.676
Secondary

Change From Baseline in PASDAS Score at Weeks 24 and 44

Change from baseline in PASDAS score measures the change in disease activity where a negative value indicates an improvement and a positive value indicates worsening of PsA disease activity. PASDAS is a PsA disease activity score that assesses 4 domains (joints, entheses, dactylitis and quality of life) of PsA. PASDAS is a derived score combining Patient's Global Assessment of Disease Activity (arthritis and psoriasis, on a 100-unit VAS), Physician's Global Assessment of Disease Activity (on a 100-unit VAS), swollen joint count (66 joints), tender joint count (68 joints), CRP (mg/L), enthesitis based on LEI (scaled to a 0-6 range), dactylitis count (scoring each digit from 0-3 and recoding to 0-1, where any score \> 0 equaled 1), and the PCS score of the SF-36 health survey. The total score range is 0-10 and the cutoffs for disease activity were 3.2 (low) to 5.4 (high). Negative changes from baseline indicate improvement of overall disease activity.

Time frame: Baseline and Weeks 24, 44

Population: Post Week 24 efficacy analysis set with observed data. Here 'n' (number analyzed) included all participants who were evaluable at specified timepoints. As planned, results data was analyzed and reported for the specified arms for this outcome measure.

ArmMeasureGroupValue (MEAN)Dispersion
PlaceboChange From Baseline in PASDAS Score at Weeks 24 and 44Week 44-3.17 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 1.524
PlaceboChange From Baseline in PASDAS Score at Weeks 24 and 44Week 24-1.05 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 1.44
GuselkumabChange From Baseline in PASDAS Score at Weeks 24 and 44Week 24-2.80 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 1.454
GuselkumabChange From Baseline in PASDAS Score at Weeks 24 and 44Week 44-3.15 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 1.57
Secondary

Change From Baseline in Psoriatic ArthritiS Disease Activity Score (PASDAS) Score at Weeks 16 and 24

Change from baseline in PASDAS score measures the change in disease activity where a negative value indicates an improvement and a positive value indicates worsening of PsA disease activity. PASDAS is a PsA disease activity score that assesses 4 domains (joints, entheses, dactylitis and quality of life) of PsA. PASDAS is a derived score combining Patient's Global Assessment of Disease Activity (arthritis and psoriasis, on a 100-unit VAS), Physician's Global Assessment of Disease Activity (on a 100-unit VAS), swollen joint count (66 joints), tender joint count (68 joints), CRP (mg/L), enthesitis based on LEI (scaled to a 0-6 range), dactylitis count (scoring each digit from 0-3 and recoding to 0-1, where any score \> 0 equaled 1), and the PCS score of the SF-36 health survey. The total score range is 0-10 and the cutoffs for disease activity were 3.2 (low) to 5.4 (high). Negative changes from baseline indicate improvement of overall disease activity.

Time frame: Baseline and Weeks 16, 24

Population: FAS (up to Week 24). Data after meeting TF criteria or after EE to ustekinumab and missing data are imputed as non-responders. As planned, results data was analyzed and reported for the specified arms for this outcome measure.

ArmMeasureGroupValue (MEAN)Dispersion
PlaceboChange From Baseline in Psoriatic ArthritiS Disease Activity Score (PASDAS) Score at Weeks 16 and 24Week 24-0.49 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 1.333
PlaceboChange From Baseline in Psoriatic ArthritiS Disease Activity Score (PASDAS) Score at Weeks 16 and 24Week 16-0.45 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 1.099
GuselkumabChange From Baseline in Psoriatic ArthritiS Disease Activity Score (PASDAS) Score at Weeks 16 and 24Week 16-2.24 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 1.458
GuselkumabChange From Baseline in Psoriatic ArthritiS Disease Activity Score (PASDAS) Score at Weeks 16 and 24Week 24-2.50 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 1.587
Secondary

Change From Baseline in RAPID3 Score at Weeks 24 and 44

RAPID3 is a multi-dimensional health assessment questionnaire that was designed for use in routine clinical care. Three core data set for function, pain, and patient global estimate of disease activity were recorded. Each was scored 0-10 and the score ranges from 0 to 30 with higher scores indicating worse condition. A negative change from baseline indicates improvement in condition.

Time frame: Baseline and Weeks 24, 44

Population: Post Week 24 efficacy analysis set with observed data. Here 'n' (number analyzed) included all participants who were evaluable at specified timepoints. As planned, results data was analyzed and reported for the specified arms for this outcome measure.

ArmMeasureGroupValue (MEAN)Dispersion
PlaceboChange From Baseline in RAPID3 Score at Weeks 24 and 44Week 24-2.28 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 5.244
PlaceboChange From Baseline in RAPID3 Score at Weeks 24 and 44Week 44-7.60 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 6.588
GuselkumabChange From Baseline in RAPID3 Score at Weeks 24 and 44Week 24-6.36 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 6.205
GuselkumabChange From Baseline in RAPID3 Score at Weeks 24 and 44Week 44-7.48 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 6.31
Secondary

Change From Baseline in Routine Assessment of Patient Index Data 3 (RAPID3) Score at Weeks 16 and 24

RAPID3 is a multi-dimensional health assessment questionnaire that was designed for use in routine clinical care. Three core data set for function, pain, and patient global estimate of disease activity were recorded. Each was scored 0-10 and the score ranges from 0 to 30 with higher scores indicating worse condition. A negative change from baseline indicates improvement in condition.

Time frame: Baseline and Weeks 16, 24

Population: FAS (up to Week 24). Data after meeting TF criteria or after EE to ustekinumab and missing data are imputed as non-responders. As planned, results data was analyzed and reported for the specified arms for this outcome measure.

ArmMeasureGroupValue (MEAN)Dispersion
PlaceboChange From Baseline in Routine Assessment of Patient Index Data 3 (RAPID3) Score at Weeks 16 and 24Week 24-0.57 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 5.123
PlaceboChange From Baseline in Routine Assessment of Patient Index Data 3 (RAPID3) Score at Weeks 16 and 24Week 16-0.19 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 4.405
GuselkumabChange From Baseline in Routine Assessment of Patient Index Data 3 (RAPID3) Score at Weeks 16 and 24Week 16-5.41 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 5.307
GuselkumabChange From Baseline in Routine Assessment of Patient Index Data 3 (RAPID3) Score at Weeks 16 and 24Week 24-5.81 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 5.968
Secondary

Change From Baseline in the MCS Scores of SF-36 at Weeks 24 and 44

SF-36 is a multi-domain instrument with 36 items to evaluate the health status and quality of life. It included 8 subscales (physical functioning, physical role functioning, bodily pain, general health perception, vitality, social functioning, emotional role functioning, and mental health), which yielded a Physical Component Summary (PCS) with score range 0-100 (higher score-better quality of life) and a Mental Component Summary (MCS) with score range 0-100 (higher score-better quality of life) in addition to subscale scores. The MCS scores are normalized to a mean of 50 and standard deviations of 10, based upon general US population norms as presented in this outcome measure. A positive change indicates improvement while a negative change indicates worsening of health status and quality of life.

Time frame: Baseline and Weeks 24, 44

Population: Post Week 24 efficacy analysis set with observed data. Here 'n' (number analyzed) included all participants who were evaluable at specified timepoints. As planned, results data was analyzed and reported for the specified arms for this outcome measure.

ArmMeasureGroupValue (MEAN)Dispersion
PlaceboChange From Baseline in the MCS Scores of SF-36 at Weeks 24 and 44Week 24: MCS0.51 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 6.77
PlaceboChange From Baseline in the MCS Scores of SF-36 at Weeks 24 and 44Week 44: MCS5.53 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 9.013
GuselkumabChange From Baseline in the MCS Scores of SF-36 at Weeks 24 and 44Week 24: MCS5.45 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 9.081
GuselkumabChange From Baseline in the MCS Scores of SF-36 at Weeks 24 and 44Week 44: MCS4.56 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 9.548
Secondary

Change From Baseline in the PCS Scores of SF-36 at Weeks 24 and 44

SF-36 is a multi-domain instrument with 36 items to evaluate the health status and quality of life. It included 8 subscales (physical functioning, physical role functioning, bodily pain, general health perception, vitality, social functioning, emotional role functioning, and mental health), which yielded a Physical Component Summary (PCS) with score range 0-100 (higher score-better quality of life) and a Mental Component Summary (MCS) with score range 0-100 (higher score-better quality of life) in addition to subscale scores. The PCS scores are normalized to a mean of 50 and standard deviations of 10, based upon general US population norms as presented in this outcome measure. A positive change indicates improvement while a negative change indicates worsening of health status and quality of life.

Time frame: Baseline and Weeks 24, 44

Population: Post Week 24 efficacy analysis set with observed data. Here 'n' (number analyzed) included all participants who were evaluable at specified timepoints. As planned, results data was analyzed and reported for the specified arms for this outcome measure.

ArmMeasureGroupValue (MEAN)Dispersion
PlaceboChange From Baseline in the PCS Scores of SF-36 at Weeks 24 and 44Week 24: PCS2.13 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 7.365
PlaceboChange From Baseline in the PCS Scores of SF-36 at Weeks 24 and 44Week 44: PCS8.02 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 8.647
GuselkumabChange From Baseline in the PCS Scores of SF-36 at Weeks 24 and 44Week 24: PCS7.40 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 7.448
GuselkumabChange From Baseline in the PCS Scores of SF-36 at Weeks 24 and 44Week 44: PCS8.34 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 8.783
Secondary

Change From Baseline in the Physical and Mental Component Summary (PCS and MCS) Scores of 36- Item Short Form Health Assessment Questionnaire (SF-36) at Weeks 16 and 24

SF-36 is a multi-domain instrument with 36 items to evaluate the health status and quality of life. It included 8 subscales (physical functioning, physical role functioning, bodily pain, general health perception, vitality, social functioning, emotional role functioning, and mental health), which yielded a Physical Component Summary (PCS) with score range 0-100 (higher score-better quality of life) and a Mental Component Summary (MCS) with score range 0-100 (higher score-better quality of life) in addition to subscale scores. The PCS and MCS scores are normalized to a mean of 50 and standard deviations of 10, based upon general US population norms as presented in this outcome measure. A positive change indicates improvement while a negative change indicates worsening of health status and quality of life.

Time frame: Baseline and Weeks 16, 24

Population: FAS (up to Week 24). Data after meeting TF criteria or after EE to ustekinumab and missing data are imputed as non-responders. As planned, results data was analyzed and reported for the specified arms for this outcome measure.

ArmMeasureGroupValue (MEAN)Dispersion
PlaceboChange From Baseline in the Physical and Mental Component Summary (PCS and MCS) Scores of 36- Item Short Form Health Assessment Questionnaire (SF-36) at Weeks 16 and 24Week 16: PCS-0.44 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 5.025
PlaceboChange From Baseline in the Physical and Mental Component Summary (PCS and MCS) Scores of 36- Item Short Form Health Assessment Questionnaire (SF-36) at Weeks 16 and 24Week 24: MCS0.42 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 6.737
PlaceboChange From Baseline in the Physical and Mental Component Summary (PCS and MCS) Scores of 36- Item Short Form Health Assessment Questionnaire (SF-36) at Weeks 16 and 24Week 16: MCS1.14 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 7.075
PlaceboChange From Baseline in the Physical and Mental Component Summary (PCS and MCS) Scores of 36- Item Short Form Health Assessment Questionnaire (SF-36) at Weeks 16 and 24Week 24: PCS0.46 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 6.513
GuselkumabChange From Baseline in the Physical and Mental Component Summary (PCS and MCS) Scores of 36- Item Short Form Health Assessment Questionnaire (SF-36) at Weeks 16 and 24Week 16: MCS4.80 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 8.952
GuselkumabChange From Baseline in the Physical and Mental Component Summary (PCS and MCS) Scores of 36- Item Short Form Health Assessment Questionnaire (SF-36) at Weeks 16 and 24Week 24: MCS4.95 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 9.064
GuselkumabChange From Baseline in the Physical and Mental Component Summary (PCS and MCS) Scores of 36- Item Short Form Health Assessment Questionnaire (SF-36) at Weeks 16 and 24Week 24: PCS6.59 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 7.465
GuselkumabChange From Baseline in the Physical and Mental Component Summary (PCS and MCS) Scores of 36- Item Short Form Health Assessment Questionnaire (SF-36) at Weeks 16 and 24Week 16: PCS5.86 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 7.315
Secondary

Percentage of Participants Who Achieved ACR 20, ACR 50, and ACR 70 Responses at Weeks 24, 28, 32, 36, 44, and 56

ACR 20, ACR 50 and ACR 70 response is defined as at least 20%, 50%, and 70% improvement from baseline in swollen joint (66 joints) and tender joint (68 joints) counts and at least 20%, 50%, and 70% improvement from baseline in 3 of following 5 assessments: patient's assessment of pain (VAS: 0-100mm, 0=no pain and 100=worst possible pain), patient's global assessment of disease activity on arthritis (VAS: 0-100mm; 0=excellent and 100=poor), physician's global assessment of disease activity (VAS; 0-100mm; 0=no arthritis activity and 100 = extremely active arthritis), patient's assessment of physical function measured by Health Assessment Questionnaire-Disability Index (HAQ-DI, defined as a 20-question instrument assessing 8 functional areas;derived HAQ-DI ranges from 0 indicating no difficulty, to 3 indicating inability to perform a task in that area) and serum C-Reactive Protein (CRP). As planned, results data was analyzed and reported for the specified arms for this outcome measure.

Time frame: Weeks 24, 28, 32, 36, 44, and 56

Population: Post Week 24 Efficacy analysis set: included all randomized participants who did not EE to ustekinumab at Week 24, with observed data. Here 'n' (number analyzed) included all participants who were evaluable at specified timepoints.

ArmMeasureGroupValue (NUMBER)
PlaceboPercentage of Participants Who Achieved ACR 20, ACR 50, and ACR 70 Responses at Weeks 24, 28, 32, 36, 44, and 56Week 24: ACR 20 responders31.0 percentage of participants
PlaceboPercentage of Participants Who Achieved ACR 20, ACR 50, and ACR 70 Responses at Weeks 24, 28, 32, 36, 44, and 56Week 24: ACR 50 responders17.2 percentage of participants
PlaceboPercentage of Participants Who Achieved ACR 20, ACR 50, and ACR 70 Responses at Weeks 24, 28, 32, 36, 44, and 56Week 28: ACR 70 responders14.3 percentage of participants
PlaceboPercentage of Participants Who Achieved ACR 20, ACR 50, and ACR 70 Responses at Weeks 24, 28, 32, 36, 44, and 56Week 32: ACR 20 responders60.7 percentage of participants
PlaceboPercentage of Participants Who Achieved ACR 20, ACR 50, and ACR 70 Responses at Weeks 24, 28, 32, 36, 44, and 56Week 32: ACR 70 responders21.4 percentage of participants
PlaceboPercentage of Participants Who Achieved ACR 20, ACR 50, and ACR 70 Responses at Weeks 24, 28, 32, 36, 44, and 56Week 36: ACR 20 responders71.4 percentage of participants
PlaceboPercentage of Participants Who Achieved ACR 20, ACR 50, and ACR 70 Responses at Weeks 24, 28, 32, 36, 44, and 56Week 36: ACR 70 responders29.6 percentage of participants
PlaceboPercentage of Participants Who Achieved ACR 20, ACR 50, and ACR 70 Responses at Weeks 24, 28, 32, 36, 44, and 56Week 44: ACR 20 responders75.0 percentage of participants
PlaceboPercentage of Participants Who Achieved ACR 20, ACR 50, and ACR 70 Responses at Weeks 24, 28, 32, 36, 44, and 56Week 44: ACR 70 responders25.0 percentage of participants
PlaceboPercentage of Participants Who Achieved ACR 20, ACR 50, and ACR 70 Responses at Weeks 24, 28, 32, 36, 44, and 56Week 56: ACR 50 responders66.7 percentage of participants
PlaceboPercentage of Participants Who Achieved ACR 20, ACR 50, and ACR 70 Responses at Weeks 24, 28, 32, 36, 44, and 56Week 56: ACR 70 responders28.6 percentage of participants
PlaceboPercentage of Participants Who Achieved ACR 20, ACR 50, and ACR 70 Responses at Weeks 24, 28, 32, 36, 44, and 56Week 24: ACR 70 responders3.4 percentage of participants
PlaceboPercentage of Participants Who Achieved ACR 20, ACR 50, and ACR 70 Responses at Weeks 24, 28, 32, 36, 44, and 56Week 28: ACR 20 responders57.1 percentage of participants
PlaceboPercentage of Participants Who Achieved ACR 20, ACR 50, and ACR 70 Responses at Weeks 24, 28, 32, 36, 44, and 56Week 28: ACR 50 responders28.6 percentage of participants
PlaceboPercentage of Participants Who Achieved ACR 20, ACR 50, and ACR 70 Responses at Weeks 24, 28, 32, 36, 44, and 56Week 32: ACR 50 responders42.9 percentage of participants
PlaceboPercentage of Participants Who Achieved ACR 20, ACR 50, and ACR 70 Responses at Weeks 24, 28, 32, 36, 44, and 56Week 36: ACR 50 responders46.4 percentage of participants
PlaceboPercentage of Participants Who Achieved ACR 20, ACR 50, and ACR 70 Responses at Weeks 24, 28, 32, 36, 44, and 56Week 44: ACR 50 responders46.4 percentage of participants
PlaceboPercentage of Participants Who Achieved ACR 20, ACR 50, and ACR 70 Responses at Weeks 24, 28, 32, 36, 44, and 56Week 56: ACR 20 responders81.5 percentage of participants
GuselkumabPercentage of Participants Who Achieved ACR 20, ACR 50, and ACR 70 Responses at Weeks 24, 28, 32, 36, 44, and 56Week 56: ACR 20 responders73.5 percentage of participants
GuselkumabPercentage of Participants Who Achieved ACR 20, ACR 50, and ACR 70 Responses at Weeks 24, 28, 32, 36, 44, and 56Week 24: ACR 20 responders66.3 percentage of participants
GuselkumabPercentage of Participants Who Achieved ACR 20, ACR 50, and ACR 70 Responses at Weeks 24, 28, 32, 36, 44, and 56Week 28: ACR 20 responders75.3 percentage of participants
GuselkumabPercentage of Participants Who Achieved ACR 20, ACR 50, and ACR 70 Responses at Weeks 24, 28, 32, 36, 44, and 56Week 56: ACR 50 responders53.0 percentage of participants
GuselkumabPercentage of Participants Who Achieved ACR 20, ACR 50, and ACR 70 Responses at Weeks 24, 28, 32, 36, 44, and 56Week 28: ACR 70 responders30.6 percentage of participants
GuselkumabPercentage of Participants Who Achieved ACR 20, ACR 50, and ACR 70 Responses at Weeks 24, 28, 32, 36, 44, and 56Week 44: ACR 20 responders77.4 percentage of participants
GuselkumabPercentage of Participants Who Achieved ACR 20, ACR 50, and ACR 70 Responses at Weeks 24, 28, 32, 36, 44, and 56Week 32: ACR 20 responders75.0 percentage of participants
GuselkumabPercentage of Participants Who Achieved ACR 20, ACR 50, and ACR 70 Responses at Weeks 24, 28, 32, 36, 44, and 56Week 32: ACR 50 responders51.2 percentage of participants
GuselkumabPercentage of Participants Who Achieved ACR 20, ACR 50, and ACR 70 Responses at Weeks 24, 28, 32, 36, 44, and 56Week 56: ACR 70 responders32.5 percentage of participants
GuselkumabPercentage of Participants Who Achieved ACR 20, ACR 50, and ACR 70 Responses at Weeks 24, 28, 32, 36, 44, and 56Week 32: ACR 70 responders29.8 percentage of participants
GuselkumabPercentage of Participants Who Achieved ACR 20, ACR 50, and ACR 70 Responses at Weeks 24, 28, 32, 36, 44, and 56Week 24: ACR 50 responders39.5 percentage of participants
GuselkumabPercentage of Participants Who Achieved ACR 20, ACR 50, and ACR 70 Responses at Weeks 24, 28, 32, 36, 44, and 56Week 36: ACR 20 responders73.8 percentage of participants
GuselkumabPercentage of Participants Who Achieved ACR 20, ACR 50, and ACR 70 Responses at Weeks 24, 28, 32, 36, 44, and 56Week 36: ACR 50 responders48.8 percentage of participants
GuselkumabPercentage of Participants Who Achieved ACR 20, ACR 50, and ACR 70 Responses at Weeks 24, 28, 32, 36, 44, and 56Week 28: ACR 50 responders44.7 percentage of participants
GuselkumabPercentage of Participants Who Achieved ACR 20, ACR 50, and ACR 70 Responses at Weeks 24, 28, 32, 36, 44, and 56Week 24: ACR 70 responders16.3 percentage of participants
GuselkumabPercentage of Participants Who Achieved ACR 20, ACR 50, and ACR 70 Responses at Weeks 24, 28, 32, 36, 44, and 56Week 44: ACR 50 responders46.4 percentage of participants
GuselkumabPercentage of Participants Who Achieved ACR 20, ACR 50, and ACR 70 Responses at Weeks 24, 28, 32, 36, 44, and 56Week 36: ACR 70 responders31.0 percentage of participants
GuselkumabPercentage of Participants Who Achieved ACR 20, ACR 50, and ACR 70 Responses at Weeks 24, 28, 32, 36, 44, and 56Week 44: ACR 70 responders26.2 percentage of participants
Secondary

Percentage of Participants Who Achieved ACR 20, ACR 50, and ACR 70 Responses at Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, and 24

ACR 20, 50, and 70 response is defined as at least 20%, 50%, and 70% improvement from baseline in swollen joint (66 joints) and tender joint (68 joints) counts and at least 20%, 50%, and 70% improvement from baseline in 3 of following 5 assessments: patient's assessment of pain (VAS: 0-100mm, 0=no pain and 100=worst possible pain), patient's global assessment of disease activity on arthritis (VAS: 0-100mm; 0=excellent and 100=poor), physician's global assessment of disease activity (VAS: 0-100mm; 0=no arthritis activity and 100= extremely active arthritis), patient's assessment of physical function measured by Health Assessment Questionnaire-Disability Index (HAQ-DI, defined as a 20-question instrument assessing 8 functional areas;derived HAQ-DI ranges from 0 indicating no difficulty, to 3 indicating inability to perform a task in that area) and serum C-Reactive Protein (CRP).

Time frame: Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, and 24

Population: FAS (up to Week 24). Data after meeting TF criteria or after EE to ustekinumab and missing data are imputed as non-responders. As planned, results data was analyzed and reported for the specified arms for this outcome measure.

ArmMeasureGroupValue (NUMBER)
PlaceboPercentage of Participants Who Achieved ACR 20, ACR 50, and ACR 70 Responses at Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, and 24Week 24: ACR 70 responders2.0 percentage of participants
PlaceboPercentage of Participants Who Achieved ACR 20, ACR 50, and ACR 70 Responses at Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, and 24Week 4: ACR 20 responders0 percentage of participants
PlaceboPercentage of Participants Who Achieved ACR 20, ACR 50, and ACR 70 Responses at Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, and 24Week 4: ACR 50 responders0 percentage of participants
PlaceboPercentage of Participants Who Achieved ACR 20, ACR 50, and ACR 70 Responses at Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, and 24Week 4: ACR 70 responders0 percentage of participants
PlaceboPercentage of Participants Who Achieved ACR 20, ACR 50, and ACR 70 Responses at Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, and 24Week 8: ACR 20 responders22.4 percentage of participants
PlaceboPercentage of Participants Who Achieved ACR 20, ACR 50, and ACR 70 Responses at Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, and 24Week 8: ACR 50 responders6.1 percentage of participants
PlaceboPercentage of Participants Who Achieved ACR 20, ACR 50, and ACR 70 Responses at Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, and 24Week 8: ACR 70 responders2.0 percentage of participants
PlaceboPercentage of Participants Who Achieved ACR 20, ACR 50, and ACR 70 Responses at Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, and 24Week 12: ACR 20 responders12.2 percentage of participants
PlaceboPercentage of Participants Who Achieved ACR 20, ACR 50, and ACR 70 Responses at Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, and 24Week 12: ACR 50 responders6.1 percentage of participants
PlaceboPercentage of Participants Who Achieved ACR 20, ACR 50, and ACR 70 Responses at Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, and 24Week 12: ACR 70 responders0 percentage of participants
PlaceboPercentage of Participants Who Achieved ACR 20, ACR 50, and ACR 70 Responses at Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, and 24Week 16: ACR 20 responders16.3 percentage of participants
PlaceboPercentage of Participants Who Achieved ACR 20, ACR 50, and ACR 70 Responses at Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, and 24Week 16: ACR 50 responders6.1 percentage of participants
PlaceboPercentage of Participants Who Achieved ACR 20, ACR 50, and ACR 70 Responses at Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, and 24Week 16: ACR 70 responders4.1 percentage of participants
PlaceboPercentage of Participants Who Achieved ACR 20, ACR 50, and ACR 70 Responses at Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, and 24Week 20: ACR 20 responders22.4 percentage of participants
PlaceboPercentage of Participants Who Achieved ACR 20, ACR 50, and ACR 70 Responses at Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, and 24Week 20: ACR 50 responders10.2 percentage of participants
PlaceboPercentage of Participants Who Achieved ACR 20, ACR 50, and ACR 70 Responses at Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, and 24Week 20: ACR 70 responders2.0 percentage of participants
PlaceboPercentage of Participants Who Achieved ACR 20, ACR 50, and ACR 70 Responses at Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, and 24Week 24: ACR 20 responders18.4 percentage of participants
PlaceboPercentage of Participants Who Achieved ACR 20, ACR 50, and ACR 70 Responses at Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, and 24Week 24: ACR 50 responders10.2 percentage of participants
GuselkumabPercentage of Participants Who Achieved ACR 20, ACR 50, and ACR 70 Responses at Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, and 24Week 24: ACR 20 responders58.0 percentage of participants
GuselkumabPercentage of Participants Who Achieved ACR 20, ACR 50, and ACR 70 Responses at Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, and 24Week 24: ACR 70 responders14.0 percentage of participants
GuselkumabPercentage of Participants Who Achieved ACR 20, ACR 50, and ACR 70 Responses at Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, and 24Week 12: ACR 70 responders7.0 percentage of participants
GuselkumabPercentage of Participants Who Achieved ACR 20, ACR 50, and ACR 70 Responses at Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, and 24Week 4: ACR 20 responders21.0 percentage of participants
GuselkumabPercentage of Participants Who Achieved ACR 20, ACR 50, and ACR 70 Responses at Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, and 24Week 20: ACR 50 responders37.0 percentage of participants
GuselkumabPercentage of Participants Who Achieved ACR 20, ACR 50, and ACR 70 Responses at Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, and 24Week 4: ACR 50 responders1.0 percentage of participants
GuselkumabPercentage of Participants Who Achieved ACR 20, ACR 50, and ACR 70 Responses at Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, and 24Week 16: ACR 20 responders60.0 percentage of participants
GuselkumabPercentage of Participants Who Achieved ACR 20, ACR 50, and ACR 70 Responses at Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, and 24Week 4: ACR 70 responders0 percentage of participants
GuselkumabPercentage of Participants Who Achieved ACR 20, ACR 50, and ACR 70 Responses at Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, and 24Week 16: ACR 70 responders9.0 percentage of participants
GuselkumabPercentage of Participants Who Achieved ACR 20, ACR 50, and ACR 70 Responses at Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, and 24Week 8: ACR 20 responders42.0 percentage of participants
GuselkumabPercentage of Participants Who Achieved ACR 20, ACR 50, and ACR 70 Responses at Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, and 24Week 16: ACR 50 responders30.0 percentage of participants
GuselkumabPercentage of Participants Who Achieved ACR 20, ACR 50, and ACR 70 Responses at Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, and 24Week 8: ACR 50 responders12.0 percentage of participants
GuselkumabPercentage of Participants Who Achieved ACR 20, ACR 50, and ACR 70 Responses at Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, and 24Week 20: ACR 70 responders11.0 percentage of participants
GuselkumabPercentage of Participants Who Achieved ACR 20, ACR 50, and ACR 70 Responses at Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, and 24Week 8: ACR 70 responders4.0 percentage of participants
GuselkumabPercentage of Participants Who Achieved ACR 20, ACR 50, and ACR 70 Responses at Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, and 24Week 24: ACR 50 responders34.0 percentage of participants
GuselkumabPercentage of Participants Who Achieved ACR 20, ACR 50, and ACR 70 Responses at Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, and 24Week 12: ACR 20 responders49.0 percentage of participants
GuselkumabPercentage of Participants Who Achieved ACR 20, ACR 50, and ACR 70 Responses at Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, and 24Week 20: ACR 20 responders63.0 percentage of participants
GuselkumabPercentage of Participants Who Achieved ACR 20, ACR 50, and ACR 70 Responses at Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, and 24Week 12: ACR 50 responders15.0 percentage of participants
Secondary

Percentage of Participants Who Achieved a HAQ-DI Response With Greater Than or Equal to (>=) 0.3 Improvement From Baseline in HAQ-DI Score at Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, and 24

HAQ-DI response was defined as \>= 0.3 improvement from baseline in HAQ-DI score. HAQ-DI is a 20-question instrument that assesses the degree of difficulty a person has in accomplishing tasks in 8 functional areas (dressing, arising, eating, walking, hygiene, reaching, gripping, and activities of daily living). Responses in each functional area are scored from 0 indicating no difficulty, to 3 indicating inability to perform a task in that area (that is, lower scores are indicative of better functioning). The total HAQ-DI score ranges from 0-24 with lower score indicating better functioning.

Time frame: Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, and 24

Population: FAS (up to Week 24). Data after EE to ustekinumab and missing data were imputed using LOCF. As planned, results data was analyzed and reported for the specified arms for this outcome measure.

ArmMeasureGroupValue (NUMBER)
PlaceboPercentage of Participants Who Achieved a HAQ-DI Response With Greater Than or Equal to (>=) 0.3 Improvement From Baseline in HAQ-DI Score at Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, and 24Week 412.2 percentage of participants
PlaceboPercentage of Participants Who Achieved a HAQ-DI Response With Greater Than or Equal to (>=) 0.3 Improvement From Baseline in HAQ-DI Score at Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, and 24Week 826.5 percentage of participants
PlaceboPercentage of Participants Who Achieved a HAQ-DI Response With Greater Than or Equal to (>=) 0.3 Improvement From Baseline in HAQ-DI Score at Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, and 24Week 1222.4 percentage of participants
PlaceboPercentage of Participants Who Achieved a HAQ-DI Response With Greater Than or Equal to (>=) 0.3 Improvement From Baseline in HAQ-DI Score at Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, and 24Week 1620.4 percentage of participants
PlaceboPercentage of Participants Who Achieved a HAQ-DI Response With Greater Than or Equal to (>=) 0.3 Improvement From Baseline in HAQ-DI Score at Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, and 24Week 2022.4 percentage of participants
PlaceboPercentage of Participants Who Achieved a HAQ-DI Response With Greater Than or Equal to (>=) 0.3 Improvement From Baseline in HAQ-DI Score at Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, and 24Week 2428.6 percentage of participants
GuselkumabPercentage of Participants Who Achieved a HAQ-DI Response With Greater Than or Equal to (>=) 0.3 Improvement From Baseline in HAQ-DI Score at Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, and 24Week 2048.0 percentage of participants
GuselkumabPercentage of Participants Who Achieved a HAQ-DI Response With Greater Than or Equal to (>=) 0.3 Improvement From Baseline in HAQ-DI Score at Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, and 24Week 429.0 percentage of participants
GuselkumabPercentage of Participants Who Achieved a HAQ-DI Response With Greater Than or Equal to (>=) 0.3 Improvement From Baseline in HAQ-DI Score at Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, and 24Week 1650.0 percentage of participants
GuselkumabPercentage of Participants Who Achieved a HAQ-DI Response With Greater Than or Equal to (>=) 0.3 Improvement From Baseline in HAQ-DI Score at Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, and 24Week 843.0 percentage of participants
GuselkumabPercentage of Participants Who Achieved a HAQ-DI Response With Greater Than or Equal to (>=) 0.3 Improvement From Baseline in HAQ-DI Score at Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, and 24Week 2451.0 percentage of participants
GuselkumabPercentage of Participants Who Achieved a HAQ-DI Response With Greater Than or Equal to (>=) 0.3 Improvement From Baseline in HAQ-DI Score at Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, and 24Week 1247.0 percentage of participants
Secondary

Percentage of Participants Who Achieved an ACR 20 Response at Week 16

ACR 20 response is defined as at least 20 percent (%) improvement from baseline in both swollen joint (66 joints) and tender joint (68 joints) counts and at least 20% improvement from baseline in 3 of following 5 assessments: patient's assessment of pain (visual analog scale \[VAS\]: 0-100 millimeter \[mm\]; 0=no pain and 100=worst possible pain), patient's global assessment of disease activity on arthritis (VAS: 0-100 mm, 0=excellent and 100=poor), physician's global assessment of disease activity (VAS: 0-100mm; 0=no arthritis activity and 100 = extremely active arthritis), patient's assessment of physical function measured by Health Assessment Questionnaire-Disability Index (HAQ-DI, defined as a 20-question instrument assessing 8 functional areas;derived HAQ-DI ranges from 0 indicating no difficulty, to 3 indicating inability to perform a task in that area) and serum C-Reactive Protein (CRP).

Time frame: Week 16

Population: FAS (up to Week 24). Data after meeting TF criteria or after EE to ustekinumab and missing data are imputed as non-responders. As planned, results data was analyzed and reported for the specified arms for this outcome measure.

ArmMeasureValue (NUMBER)
PlaceboPercentage of Participants Who Achieved an ACR 20 Response at Week 1616.3 percentage of participants
GuselkumabPercentage of Participants Who Achieved an ACR 20 Response at Week 1660.0 percentage of participants
Secondary

Percentage of Participants Who Achieved an HAQ-DI Response With >= -0.3 Improvement From Baseline in HAQ-DI Score at Weeks 24, 28, 32, 36, 44, and 56

HAQ-DI response was defined as \>= 0.3 improvement from baseline in HAQ-DI score. HAQ-DI is a 20-question instrument that assesses the degree of difficulty a person has in accomplishing tasks in 8 functional areas (dressing, arising, eating, walking, hygiene, reaching, gripping, and activities of daily living). Responses in each functional area are scored from 0 indicating no difficulty, to 3 indicating inability to perform a task in that area (that is, lower scores are indicative of better functioning). The total HAQ-DI score ranges from 0-24 with lower score indicating better functioning. As planned, results data was analyzed and reported for the specified arms for this outcome measure.

Time frame: Weeks 24, 28, 32, 36, 44, 56

Population: Post Week 24 efficacy analysis set with observed data. Here 'n' (number analyzed) included all participants who were evaluable at specified timepoints. As planned, results data was analyzed and reported for the specified arms for this outcome measure.

ArmMeasureGroupValue (NUMBER)
PlaceboPercentage of Participants Who Achieved an HAQ-DI Response With >= -0.3 Improvement From Baseline in HAQ-DI Score at Weeks 24, 28, 32, 36, 44, and 56Week 2444.8 percentage of participants
PlaceboPercentage of Participants Who Achieved an HAQ-DI Response With >= -0.3 Improvement From Baseline in HAQ-DI Score at Weeks 24, 28, 32, 36, 44, and 56Week 2853.6 percentage of participants
PlaceboPercentage of Participants Who Achieved an HAQ-DI Response With >= -0.3 Improvement From Baseline in HAQ-DI Score at Weeks 24, 28, 32, 36, 44, and 56Week 3257.1 percentage of participants
PlaceboPercentage of Participants Who Achieved an HAQ-DI Response With >= -0.3 Improvement From Baseline in HAQ-DI Score at Weeks 24, 28, 32, 36, 44, and 56Week 3664.3 percentage of participants
PlaceboPercentage of Participants Who Achieved an HAQ-DI Response With >= -0.3 Improvement From Baseline in HAQ-DI Score at Weeks 24, 28, 32, 36, 44, and 56Week 4471.4 percentage of participants
PlaceboPercentage of Participants Who Achieved an HAQ-DI Response With >= -0.3 Improvement From Baseline in HAQ-DI Score at Weeks 24, 28, 32, 36, 44, and 56Week 5675.0 percentage of participants
GuselkumabPercentage of Participants Who Achieved an HAQ-DI Response With >= -0.3 Improvement From Baseline in HAQ-DI Score at Weeks 24, 28, 32, 36, 44, and 56Week 4461.9 percentage of participants
GuselkumabPercentage of Participants Who Achieved an HAQ-DI Response With >= -0.3 Improvement From Baseline in HAQ-DI Score at Weeks 24, 28, 32, 36, 44, and 56Week 2455.8 percentage of participants
GuselkumabPercentage of Participants Who Achieved an HAQ-DI Response With >= -0.3 Improvement From Baseline in HAQ-DI Score at Weeks 24, 28, 32, 36, 44, and 56Week 3659.5 percentage of participants
GuselkumabPercentage of Participants Who Achieved an HAQ-DI Response With >= -0.3 Improvement From Baseline in HAQ-DI Score at Weeks 24, 28, 32, 36, 44, and 56Week 2860.0 percentage of participants
GuselkumabPercentage of Participants Who Achieved an HAQ-DI Response With >= -0.3 Improvement From Baseline in HAQ-DI Score at Weeks 24, 28, 32, 36, 44, and 56Week 5659.0 percentage of participants
GuselkumabPercentage of Participants Who Achieved an HAQ-DI Response With >= -0.3 Improvement From Baseline in HAQ-DI Score at Weeks 24, 28, 32, 36, 44, and 56Week 3256.0 percentage of participants
Secondary

Percentage of Participants Who Achieved a PASI 50, PASI 75, PASI 90 and PASI 100 Response at Weeks 16 and 24

The PASI is a system used for assessing and grading the severity of psoriatic lesions and their response to therapy. In the PASI system, the body is divided into 4 regions: the head, trunk, upper extremities, and lower extremities. Each of these areas is assessed separately for the percentage of the area involved, which translates to a numeric score that ranges from 0 (indicates no involvement) to 6 (90 percentage (%)-100% involvement), and for erythema, induration and scaling, which are each rated on a scale of 0 to 4. The PASI produces a numeric score that could range from 0 (no psoriasis) to 72. PASI 50, 75, 90, and 100 responses were defined as at least a 50%, 75%, 90%, and 100% reduction in PASI relative to Baseline respectively. As planned, results data was analyzed and reported for the specified arms for this outcome measure.

Time frame: Weeks 16 and 24

Population: FAS (up to Week 24). Data after EE to ustekinumab and missing data were imputed using LOCF. Here 'N' (number of participants analyzed) included all participants who were evaluable for this endpoint.

ArmMeasureGroupValue (NUMBER)
PlaceboPercentage of Participants Who Achieved a PASI 50, PASI 75, PASI 90 and PASI 100 Response at Weeks 16 and 24Week 16: PASI 75 responders8.3 percentage of participants
PlaceboPercentage of Participants Who Achieved a PASI 50, PASI 75, PASI 90 and PASI 100 Response at Weeks 16 and 24Week 24: PASI 75 responders12.5 percentage of participants
PlaceboPercentage of Participants Who Achieved a PASI 50, PASI 75, PASI 90 and PASI 100 Response at Weeks 16 and 24Week 16: PASI 100 responders6.3 percentage of participants
PlaceboPercentage of Participants Who Achieved a PASI 50, PASI 75, PASI 90 and PASI 100 Response at Weeks 16 and 24Week 24: PASI 90 responders6.3 percentage of participants
PlaceboPercentage of Participants Who Achieved a PASI 50, PASI 75, PASI 90 and PASI 100 Response at Weeks 16 and 24Week 16: PASI 90 responders6.3 percentage of participants
PlaceboPercentage of Participants Who Achieved a PASI 50, PASI 75, PASI 90 and PASI 100 Response at Weeks 16 and 24Week 24: PASI 100 responders6.3 percentage of participants
PlaceboPercentage of Participants Who Achieved a PASI 50, PASI 75, PASI 90 and PASI 100 Response at Weeks 16 and 24Week 24: PASI 50 responders29.2 percentage of participants
PlaceboPercentage of Participants Who Achieved a PASI 50, PASI 75, PASI 90 and PASI 100 Response at Weeks 16 and 24Week 16: PASI 50 responders27.1 percentage of participants
GuselkumabPercentage of Participants Who Achieved a PASI 50, PASI 75, PASI 90 and PASI 100 Response at Weeks 16 and 24Week 16: PASI 50 responders81.6 percentage of participants
GuselkumabPercentage of Participants Who Achieved a PASI 50, PASI 75, PASI 90 and PASI 100 Response at Weeks 16 and 24Week 16: PASI 75 responders71.4 percentage of participants
GuselkumabPercentage of Participants Who Achieved a PASI 50, PASI 75, PASI 90 and PASI 100 Response at Weeks 16 and 24Week 16: PASI 90 responders53.1 percentage of participants
GuselkumabPercentage of Participants Who Achieved a PASI 50, PASI 75, PASI 90 and PASI 100 Response at Weeks 16 and 24Week 16: PASI 100 responders31.6 percentage of participants
GuselkumabPercentage of Participants Who Achieved a PASI 50, PASI 75, PASI 90 and PASI 100 Response at Weeks 16 and 24Week 24: PASI 50 responders86.7 percentage of participants
GuselkumabPercentage of Participants Who Achieved a PASI 50, PASI 75, PASI 90 and PASI 100 Response at Weeks 16 and 24Week 24: PASI 75 responders78.6 percentage of participants
GuselkumabPercentage of Participants Who Achieved a PASI 50, PASI 75, PASI 90 and PASI 100 Response at Weeks 16 and 24Week 24: PASI 90 responders66.3 percentage of participants
GuselkumabPercentage of Participants Who Achieved a PASI 50, PASI 75, PASI 90 and PASI 100 Response at Weeks 16 and 24Week 24: PASI 100 responders39.8 percentage of participants
Secondary

Percentage of Participants Who Achieved a PASI 50, PASI 75, PASI 90 and PASI 100 Response at Weeks 24, 28, 32, 44, and 56

The PASI is a system used for assessing and grading the severity of psoriatic lesions and their response to therapy. In the PASI system, the body is divided into 4 regions: the head, trunk, upper extremities, and lower extremities. Each of these areas is assessed separately for the percentage of the area involved, which translates to a numeric score that ranges from 0 (indicates no involvement) to 6 (90 percentage (%)-100% involvement), and for erythema, induration and scaling, which are each rated on a scale of 0 to 4. The PASI produces a numeric score that could range from 0 (no psoriasis) to 72. PASI 50, 75, 90, and 100 responses were defined as at least a 50%, 75%, 90%, and 100% reduction in PASI relative to Baseline respectively.

Time frame: Weeks 24, 28, 32, 44, and 56

Population: Post Week 24 efficacy analysis set with observed data. Here 'n' (number analyzed) included all participants who were evaluable at specified timepoints. As planned, results data was analyzed and reported for the specified arms for this outcome measure.

ArmMeasureGroupValue (NUMBER)
PlaceboPercentage of Participants Who Achieved a PASI 50, PASI 75, PASI 90 and PASI 100 Response at Weeks 24, 28, 32, 44, and 56Week 24: PASI 50 responders37.9 percentage of participants
PlaceboPercentage of Participants Who Achieved a PASI 50, PASI 75, PASI 90 and PASI 100 Response at Weeks 24, 28, 32, 44, and 56Week 24: PASI 75 responders20.7 percentage of participants
PlaceboPercentage of Participants Who Achieved a PASI 50, PASI 75, PASI 90 and PASI 100 Response at Weeks 24, 28, 32, 44, and 56Week 24: PASI 90 responders10.3 percentage of participants
PlaceboPercentage of Participants Who Achieved a PASI 50, PASI 75, PASI 90 and PASI 100 Response at Weeks 24, 28, 32, 44, and 56Week 24: PASI 100 responders10.3 percentage of participants
PlaceboPercentage of Participants Who Achieved a PASI 50, PASI 75, PASI 90 and PASI 100 Response at Weeks 24, 28, 32, 44, and 56Week 28: PASI 50 responders60.7 percentage of participants
PlaceboPercentage of Participants Who Achieved a PASI 50, PASI 75, PASI 90 and PASI 100 Response at Weeks 24, 28, 32, 44, and 56Week 28: PASI 75 responders35.7 percentage of participants
PlaceboPercentage of Participants Who Achieved a PASI 50, PASI 75, PASI 90 and PASI 100 Response at Weeks 24, 28, 32, 44, and 56Week 28: PASI 90 responders25.0 percentage of participants
PlaceboPercentage of Participants Who Achieved a PASI 50, PASI 75, PASI 90 and PASI 100 Response at Weeks 24, 28, 32, 44, and 56Week 28: PASI 100 responders17.9 percentage of participants
PlaceboPercentage of Participants Who Achieved a PASI 50, PASI 75, PASI 90 and PASI 100 Response at Weeks 24, 28, 32, 44, and 56Week 32: PASI 50 responders78.6 percentage of participants
PlaceboPercentage of Participants Who Achieved a PASI 50, PASI 75, PASI 90 and PASI 100 Response at Weeks 24, 28, 32, 44, and 56Week 32: PASI 75 responders67.9 percentage of participants
PlaceboPercentage of Participants Who Achieved a PASI 50, PASI 75, PASI 90 and PASI 100 Response at Weeks 24, 28, 32, 44, and 56Week 32: PASI 90 responders50.0 percentage of participants
PlaceboPercentage of Participants Who Achieved a PASI 50, PASI 75, PASI 90 and PASI 100 Response at Weeks 24, 28, 32, 44, and 56Week 44: PASI 75 responders82.1 percentage of participants
PlaceboPercentage of Participants Who Achieved a PASI 50, PASI 75, PASI 90 and PASI 100 Response at Weeks 24, 28, 32, 44, and 56Week 44: PASI 90 responders75.0 percentage of participants
PlaceboPercentage of Participants Who Achieved a PASI 50, PASI 75, PASI 90 and PASI 100 Response at Weeks 24, 28, 32, 44, and 56Week 44: PASI 100 responders67.9 percentage of participants
PlaceboPercentage of Participants Who Achieved a PASI 50, PASI 75, PASI 90 and PASI 100 Response at Weeks 24, 28, 32, 44, and 56Week 56: PASI 50 responders96.3 percentage of participants
PlaceboPercentage of Participants Who Achieved a PASI 50, PASI 75, PASI 90 and PASI 100 Response at Weeks 24, 28, 32, 44, and 56Week 56: PASI 75 responders81.5 percentage of participants
PlaceboPercentage of Participants Who Achieved a PASI 50, PASI 75, PASI 90 and PASI 100 Response at Weeks 24, 28, 32, 44, and 56Week 56: PASI 90 responders74.1 percentage of participants
PlaceboPercentage of Participants Who Achieved a PASI 50, PASI 75, PASI 90 and PASI 100 Response at Weeks 24, 28, 32, 44, and 56Week 56: PASI 100 responders55.6 percentage of participants
PlaceboPercentage of Participants Who Achieved a PASI 50, PASI 75, PASI 90 and PASI 100 Response at Weeks 24, 28, 32, 44, and 56Week 32: PASI 100 responders35.7 percentage of participants
PlaceboPercentage of Participants Who Achieved a PASI 50, PASI 75, PASI 90 and PASI 100 Response at Weeks 24, 28, 32, 44, and 56Week 44: PASI 50 responders89.3 percentage of participants
GuselkumabPercentage of Participants Who Achieved a PASI 50, PASI 75, PASI 90 and PASI 100 Response at Weeks 24, 28, 32, 44, and 56Week 56: PASI 100 responders57.3 percentage of participants
GuselkumabPercentage of Participants Who Achieved a PASI 50, PASI 75, PASI 90 and PASI 100 Response at Weeks 24, 28, 32, 44, and 56Week 24: PASI 50 responders89.5 percentage of participants
GuselkumabPercentage of Participants Who Achieved a PASI 50, PASI 75, PASI 90 and PASI 100 Response at Weeks 24, 28, 32, 44, and 56Week 32: PASI 90 responders80.7 percentage of participants
GuselkumabPercentage of Participants Who Achieved a PASI 50, PASI 75, PASI 90 and PASI 100 Response at Weeks 24, 28, 32, 44, and 56Week 24: PASI 75 responders82.6 percentage of participants
GuselkumabPercentage of Participants Who Achieved a PASI 50, PASI 75, PASI 90 and PASI 100 Response at Weeks 24, 28, 32, 44, and 56Week 56: PASI 75 responders85.4 percentage of participants
GuselkumabPercentage of Participants Who Achieved a PASI 50, PASI 75, PASI 90 and PASI 100 Response at Weeks 24, 28, 32, 44, and 56Week 24: PASI 90 responders70.9 percentage of participants
GuselkumabPercentage of Participants Who Achieved a PASI 50, PASI 75, PASI 90 and PASI 100 Response at Weeks 24, 28, 32, 44, and 56Week 44: PASI 75 responders90.4 percentage of participants
GuselkumabPercentage of Participants Who Achieved a PASI 50, PASI 75, PASI 90 and PASI 100 Response at Weeks 24, 28, 32, 44, and 56Week 24: PASI 100 responders44.2 percentage of participants
GuselkumabPercentage of Participants Who Achieved a PASI 50, PASI 75, PASI 90 and PASI 100 Response at Weeks 24, 28, 32, 44, and 56Week 44: PASI 50 responders94.0 percentage of participants
GuselkumabPercentage of Participants Who Achieved a PASI 50, PASI 75, PASI 90 and PASI 100 Response at Weeks 24, 28, 32, 44, and 56Week 28: PASI 50 responders95.2 percentage of participants
GuselkumabPercentage of Participants Who Achieved a PASI 50, PASI 75, PASI 90 and PASI 100 Response at Weeks 24, 28, 32, 44, and 56Week 44: PASI 90 responders81.9 percentage of participants
GuselkumabPercentage of Participants Who Achieved a PASI 50, PASI 75, PASI 90 and PASI 100 Response at Weeks 24, 28, 32, 44, and 56Week 28: PASI 75 responders84.5 percentage of participants
GuselkumabPercentage of Participants Who Achieved a PASI 50, PASI 75, PASI 90 and PASI 100 Response at Weeks 24, 28, 32, 44, and 56Week 56: PASI 90 responders78.0 percentage of participants
GuselkumabPercentage of Participants Who Achieved a PASI 50, PASI 75, PASI 90 and PASI 100 Response at Weeks 24, 28, 32, 44, and 56Week 28: PASI 90 responders72.6 percentage of participants
GuselkumabPercentage of Participants Who Achieved a PASI 50, PASI 75, PASI 90 and PASI 100 Response at Weeks 24, 28, 32, 44, and 56Week 44: PASI 100 responders63.9 percentage of participants
GuselkumabPercentage of Participants Who Achieved a PASI 50, PASI 75, PASI 90 and PASI 100 Response at Weeks 24, 28, 32, 44, and 56Week 28: PASI 100 responders53.6 percentage of participants
GuselkumabPercentage of Participants Who Achieved a PASI 50, PASI 75, PASI 90 and PASI 100 Response at Weeks 24, 28, 32, 44, and 56Week 32: PASI 100 responders62.7 percentage of participants
GuselkumabPercentage of Participants Who Achieved a PASI 50, PASI 75, PASI 90 and PASI 100 Response at Weeks 24, 28, 32, 44, and 56Week 32: PASI 50 responders92.8 percentage of participants
GuselkumabPercentage of Participants Who Achieved a PASI 50, PASI 75, PASI 90 and PASI 100 Response at Weeks 24, 28, 32, 44, and 56Week 56: PASI 50 responders92.7 percentage of participants
GuselkumabPercentage of Participants Who Achieved a PASI 50, PASI 75, PASI 90 and PASI 100 Response at Weeks 24, 28, 32, 44, and 56Week 32: PASI 75 responders86.7 percentage of participants
Secondary

Percentage of Participants Who Achieved a Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI)-75 Response at Week 24

The PASI is a system used for assessing and grading the severity of psoriatic lesions and their response to therapy. In the PASI system, the body is divided into 4 regions: the head, trunk, upper extremities, and lower extremities. Each of these areas is assessed separately for the percentage of the area involved, which translates to a numeric score that ranges from 0 (indicates no involvement) to 6 (90 percentage (%)-100% involvement), and for erythema, induration and scaling, which are each rated on a scale of 0 to 4. The PASI produces a numeric score that could range from 0 (no psoriasis) to 72 (worst condition). PASI 75 response was defined as at least a 75% reduction in PASI relative to Baseline. As planned, results data was analyzed and reported for the specified arms for this outcome measure.

Time frame: Week 24

Population: Full Analysis Set (FAS) (up to Week 24). Data after EE to ustekinumab and missing data were imputed using last observation carried forward (LOCF). Here 'N' (number of participants analyzed) included all participants who were evaluable for this endpoint.

ArmMeasureValue (NUMBER)
PlaceboPercentage of Participants Who Achieved a Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI)-75 Response at Week 2412.5 percentage of participants
GuselkumabPercentage of Participants Who Achieved a Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI)-75 Response at Week 2478.6 percentage of participants
p-value: <0.00195% CI: [53.8, 78.4]Cochran-Mantel-Haenszel
Secondary

Percentage of Participants Who Achieved MDA at Weeks 24 and 44

MDA defines a satisfactory state of disease activity that includes 5 domains of PsA (joint symptoms, skin psoriasis, patient's perspective of pain and disease activity on arthritis and psoriasis, physical function and enthesitis). Participants were classified as achieving MDA if they fulfilled 5 of 7 outcome measures: tender joint count \<=1; swollen joint count \<=1; PASI \<=1; patient pain VAS score of \<=15 mm; patient global disease activity on arthritis and psoriasis; VAS score of \<=20 mm; Health Assessment Questionnaire score \<=0.5; and tender entheseal points \<=1.

Time frame: Weeks 24 and 44

Population: Post Week 24 efficacy analysis set with observed data. Here 'n' (number analyzed) included all participants who were evaluable at specified timepoints. As planned, results data was analyzed and reported for the specified arms for this outcome measure.

ArmMeasureGroupValue (NUMBER)
PlaceboPercentage of Participants Who Achieved MDA at Weeks 24 and 44Week 243.4 percentage of participants
PlaceboPercentage of Participants Who Achieved MDA at Weeks 24 and 44Week 4428.6 percentage of participants
GuselkumabPercentage of Participants Who Achieved MDA at Weeks 24 and 44Week 2426.7 percentage of participants
GuselkumabPercentage of Participants Who Achieved MDA at Weeks 24 and 44Week 4434.5 percentage of participants
Secondary

Percentage of Participants Who Achieved Minimal Disease Activity (MDA) at Weeks 16 and 24

MDA defines a satisfactory state of disease activity that includes 5 domains of PsA (joint symptoms, skin psoriasis, patient's perspective of pain and disease activity on arthritis and psoriasis, physical function and enthesitis). Participants were classified as achieving MDA if they fulfilled 5 of 7 outcome measures: tender joint count \<=1; swollen joint count \<=1; PASI \<=1; patient pain VAS score of \<=15 mm; patient global disease activity on arthritis and psoriasis; VAS score of \<=20 mm; Health Assessment Questionnaire score \<=0.5; and tender entheseal points \<=1.

Time frame: Weeks 16 and 24

Population: FAS (up to Week 24). Data after meeting TF criteria or after EE to ustekinumab and missing data are imputed as non-responders. As planned, results data was analyzed and reported for the specified arms for this outcome measure.

ArmMeasureGroupValue (NUMBER)
PlaceboPercentage of Participants Who Achieved Minimal Disease Activity (MDA) at Weeks 16 and 24Week 160 percentage of participants
PlaceboPercentage of Participants Who Achieved Minimal Disease Activity (MDA) at Weeks 16 and 24Week 242.0 percentage of participants
GuselkumabPercentage of Participants Who Achieved Minimal Disease Activity (MDA) at Weeks 16 and 24Week 2423.0 percentage of participants
GuselkumabPercentage of Participants Who Achieved Minimal Disease Activity (MDA) at Weeks 16 and 24Week 1618.0 percentage of participants
Secondary

Percentage of Participants Who an Achieved ACR 50 Response at Week 24

ACR 50 response is defined as at least 50 % improvement from baseline in both swollen joint (66 joints) and tender joint (68 joints) counts and at least 50% improvement from baseline in 3 of following 5 assessments: patient's assessment of pain (VAS:0-100 mm; 0=no pain and 100=worst possible pain), patient's global assessment of disease activity on arthritis (VAS:0-100mm; 0=excellent and 100=poor), physician's global assessment of disease activity (VAS: 0-100mm; 0=no arthritis activity and 100 = extremely active arthritis), patient's assessment of physical function measured by HAQ-DI (defined as a 20-question instrument assessing 8 functional areas;derived HAQ-DI ranges from 0 indicating no difficulty, to 3 indicating inability to perform a task in that area) and serum CRP.

Time frame: Week 24

Population: FAS (up to Week 24). Data after meeting TF criteria or after EE to ustekinumab and missing data are imputed as non-responders. As planned, results data was analyzed and reported for the specified arms for this outcome measure.

ArmMeasureValue (NUMBER)
PlaceboPercentage of Participants Who an Achieved ACR 50 Response at Week 2410.2 percentage of participants
GuselkumabPercentage of Participants Who an Achieved ACR 50 Response at Week 2434.0 percentage of participants
Secondary

Percentage of Participants With Dactylitis at Weeks 24, 28, 32, 44, and 56

Dactylitis was characterized by swelling of the entire finger or toe. The severity of dactylitis is scored on a scale of 0-3, where 0, 1, 2, 3 indicates none, mild, moderate, severe, respectively in each digit of the hands and feet. The range of total dactylitis scores for a participant is 0-60. Higher score indicates greater degree of tenderness.

Time frame: Weeks 24, 28, 32, 44, and 56

Population: Post Week 24 efficacy analysis set with observed data and who had dactylitis at baseline. Here 'n' (number analyzed) included all participants who were evaluable at specified timepoints. As planned, results data was analyzed and reported for the specified arms for this outcome measure.

ArmMeasureGroupValue (NUMBER)
PlaceboPercentage of Participants With Dactylitis at Weeks 24, 28, 32, 44, and 56Week 3231.3 percentage of participants
PlaceboPercentage of Participants With Dactylitis at Weeks 24, 28, 32, 44, and 56Week 4412.5 percentage of participants
PlaceboPercentage of Participants With Dactylitis at Weeks 24, 28, 32, 44, and 56Week 566.3 percentage of participants
PlaceboPercentage of Participants With Dactylitis at Weeks 24, 28, 32, 44, and 56Week 2481.3 percentage of participants
PlaceboPercentage of Participants With Dactylitis at Weeks 24, 28, 32, 44, and 56Week 2862.5 percentage of participants
GuselkumabPercentage of Participants With Dactylitis at Weeks 24, 28, 32, 44, and 56Week 2838.8 percentage of participants
GuselkumabPercentage of Participants With Dactylitis at Weeks 24, 28, 32, 44, and 56Week 2440.0 percentage of participants
GuselkumabPercentage of Participants With Dactylitis at Weeks 24, 28, 32, 44, and 56Week 4420.4 percentage of participants
GuselkumabPercentage of Participants With Dactylitis at Weeks 24, 28, 32, 44, and 56Week 3236.7 percentage of participants
GuselkumabPercentage of Participants With Dactylitis at Weeks 24, 28, 32, 44, and 56Week 5625.0 percentage of participants
Secondary

Percentage of Participants With Dactylitis at Weeks 4, 8, 16, and 24

Dactylitis is characterized by swelling of the entire finger or toe. The severity of dactylitis is scored on a scale of 0-3, where 0, 1, 2, 3 indicates none, mild, moderate, severe, respectively in each digit of the hands and feet. The range of total dactylitis scores for a participant is 0-60. Participants with dactylitis had dactylitis score \>0. Higher score indicates more severe dactylitis.

Time frame: Weeks 4, 8, 16, and 24

Population: FAS (up to Week 24) and who had dactylitis at baseline. Data after EE to ustekinumab or missing data were imputed using LOCF. As planned, results data was analyzed and reported for the specified arms for this outcome measure.

ArmMeasureGroupValue (NUMBER)
PlaceboPercentage of Participants With Dactylitis at Weeks 4, 8, 16, and 24Week 491.3 percentage of participants
PlaceboPercentage of Participants With Dactylitis at Weeks 4, 8, 16, and 24Week 869.6 percentage of participants
PlaceboPercentage of Participants With Dactylitis at Weeks 4, 8, 16, and 24Week 1678.3 percentage of participants
PlaceboPercentage of Participants With Dactylitis at Weeks 4, 8, 16, and 24Week 2482.6 percentage of participants
GuselkumabPercentage of Participants With Dactylitis at Weeks 4, 8, 16, and 24Week 2444.8 percentage of participants
GuselkumabPercentage of Participants With Dactylitis at Weeks 4, 8, 16, and 24Week 472.4 percentage of participants
GuselkumabPercentage of Participants With Dactylitis at Weeks 4, 8, 16, and 24Week 1648.3 percentage of participants
GuselkumabPercentage of Participants With Dactylitis at Weeks 4, 8, 16, and 24Week 856.9 percentage of participants
Secondary

Percentage of Participants With Enthesitis Based on LEI at Weeks 24, 28, 32, 44, and 56 in Participants With Enthesitis at Baseline

Enthesitis will be assessed using the Leeds Enthesitis Index (LEI). The LEI was developed to assess enthesitis in participants with PsA, and evaluates the presence (score of 1) or absence of pain (score of 0) by applying local pressure to Lateral elbow epicondyle, left and right, Medial femoral condyle, left and right, and Achilles tendon insertion, left and right. Participants with enthesitis had LEI score \>0. LEI scores ranging from 0 (0 sites with tenderness) to 6 (worst possible score; 6 sites with tenderness).

Time frame: Weeks 24, 28, 32, 44, and 56

Population: Post Week 24 efficacy analysis set with observed data and who had enthesitis at baseline. Here 'n' (number analyzed) included all participants who were evaluable at specified timepoints. As planned, results data was analyzed and reported for the specified arms for this outcome measure.

ArmMeasureGroupValue (NUMBER)
PlaceboPercentage of Participants With Enthesitis Based on LEI at Weeks 24, 28, 32, 44, and 56 in Participants With Enthesitis at BaselineWeek 2466.7 percentage of participants
PlaceboPercentage of Participants With Enthesitis Based on LEI at Weeks 24, 28, 32, 44, and 56 in Participants With Enthesitis at BaselineWeek 3235.3 percentage of participants
PlaceboPercentage of Participants With Enthesitis Based on LEI at Weeks 24, 28, 32, 44, and 56 in Participants With Enthesitis at BaselineWeek 2864.7 percentage of participants
PlaceboPercentage of Participants With Enthesitis Based on LEI at Weeks 24, 28, 32, 44, and 56 in Participants With Enthesitis at BaselineWeek 4447.1 percentage of participants
PlaceboPercentage of Participants With Enthesitis Based on LEI at Weeks 24, 28, 32, 44, and 56 in Participants With Enthesitis at BaselineWeek 5637.5 percentage of participants
GuselkumabPercentage of Participants With Enthesitis Based on LEI at Weeks 24, 28, 32, 44, and 56 in Participants With Enthesitis at BaselineWeek 4437.9 percentage of participants
GuselkumabPercentage of Participants With Enthesitis Based on LEI at Weeks 24, 28, 32, 44, and 56 in Participants With Enthesitis at BaselineWeek 5629.2 percentage of participants
GuselkumabPercentage of Participants With Enthesitis Based on LEI at Weeks 24, 28, 32, 44, and 56 in Participants With Enthesitis at BaselineWeek 2438.8 percentage of participants
GuselkumabPercentage of Participants With Enthesitis Based on LEI at Weeks 24, 28, 32, 44, and 56 in Participants With Enthesitis at BaselineWeek 2844.8 percentage of participants
GuselkumabPercentage of Participants With Enthesitis Based on LEI at Weeks 24, 28, 32, 44, and 56 in Participants With Enthesitis at BaselineWeek 3231.8 percentage of participants
Secondary

Percentage of Participants With Enthesitis Based on LEI Score at Weeks 4, 8, 16, and 24 in Participants With Enthesitis at Baseline

Enthesitis was assessed using the Leeds Enthesitis Index (LEI). The LEI was developed to assess enthesitis in participants with PsA, and evaluates the presence (score of 1) or absence of pain (score of 0) by applying local pressure to Lateral elbow epicondyle, left and right, Medial femoral condyle, left and right, and Achilles tendon insertion, left and right. Participants with enthesitis had LEI score \>0. LEI scores ranging from 0 (0 sites with tenderness) to 6 (worst possible score; 6 sites with tenderness).

Time frame: Weeks 4, 8, 16, and 24

Population: FAS (up to Week 24) and who had enthesitis at baseline. Data after EE to ustekinumab or missing data were imputed using LOCF. As planned, results data was analyzed and reported for the specified arms for this outcome measure.

ArmMeasureGroupValue (NUMBER)
PlaceboPercentage of Participants With Enthesitis Based on LEI Score at Weeks 4, 8, 16, and 24 in Participants With Enthesitis at BaselineWeek 487.1 percentage of Participants
PlaceboPercentage of Participants With Enthesitis Based on LEI Score at Weeks 4, 8, 16, and 24 in Participants With Enthesitis at BaselineWeek 887.1 percentage of Participants
PlaceboPercentage of Participants With Enthesitis Based on LEI Score at Weeks 4, 8, 16, and 24 in Participants With Enthesitis at BaselineWeek 1683.9 percentage of Participants
PlaceboPercentage of Participants With Enthesitis Based on LEI Score at Weeks 4, 8, 16, and 24 in Participants With Enthesitis at BaselineWeek 2471.0 percentage of Participants
GuselkumabPercentage of Participants With Enthesitis Based on LEI Score at Weeks 4, 8, 16, and 24 in Participants With Enthesitis at BaselineWeek 2443.4 percentage of Participants
GuselkumabPercentage of Participants With Enthesitis Based on LEI Score at Weeks 4, 8, 16, and 24 in Participants With Enthesitis at BaselineWeek 476.3 percentage of Participants
GuselkumabPercentage of Participants With Enthesitis Based on LEI Score at Weeks 4, 8, 16, and 24 in Participants With Enthesitis at BaselineWeek 1653.9 percentage of Participants
GuselkumabPercentage of Participants With Enthesitis Based on LEI Score at Weeks 4, 8, 16, and 24 in Participants With Enthesitis at BaselineWeek 859.2 percentage of Participants
Secondary

Percent Change From Baseline in Dactylitis Scores Among Participants With Dactylitis at Baseline at Week 24

Dactylitis is characterized by swelling of the entire finger or toe. The severity of dactylitis is scored on a scale of 0-3, where 0, 1, 2, 3 indicates none, mild, moderate, severe, respectively in each digit of the hands and feet. The range of total dactylitis scores for a participant is 0-60. Higher score indicates more severe dactylitis.

Time frame: Baseline and Week 24

Population: FAS (up to Week 24) and had dactylitis at baseline. Data after EE to ustekinumab or missing data were imputed using LOCF. As planned, results data was analyzed and reported for the specified arms for this outcome measure.

ArmMeasureValue (MEDIAN)
PlaceboPercent Change From Baseline in Dactylitis Scores Among Participants With Dactylitis at Baseline at Week 24-33.33 percent change
GuselkumabPercent Change From Baseline in Dactylitis Scores Among Participants With Dactylitis at Baseline at Week 24-100.00 percent change
Secondary

Percent Change From Baseline in Dactylitis Scores at Weeks 24, 28, 32, 44, 56

Dactylitis was characterized by swelling of the entire finger or toe. The severity of dactylitis is scored on a scale of 0-3, where 0, 1, 2, 3 indicates none, mild, moderate, severe, respectively in each digit of the hands and feet. The range of total dactylitis scores for a participant is 0-60. Higher score indicates more severe dactylitis. As planned, results data was analyzed and reported for the specified arms for this outcome measure.

Time frame: Baseline and Weeks 24, 28, 32, 44, 56

Population: Post Week 24 efficacy analysis set with observed data and who had dactylitis at baseline. Here 'n' (number analyzed) included all participants who were evaluable at specified timepoints. As planned, results data was analyzed and reported for the specified arms for this outcome measure.

ArmMeasureGroupValue (MEDIAN)
PlaceboPercent Change From Baseline in Dactylitis Scores at Weeks 24, 28, 32, 44, 56Week 28-70.83 percent change
PlaceboPercent Change From Baseline in Dactylitis Scores at Weeks 24, 28, 32, 44, 56Week 44-100.00 percent change
PlaceboPercent Change From Baseline in Dactylitis Scores at Weeks 24, 28, 32, 44, 56Week 32-100.00 percent change
PlaceboPercent Change From Baseline in Dactylitis Scores at Weeks 24, 28, 32, 44, 56Week 56-100.00 percent change
PlaceboPercent Change From Baseline in Dactylitis Scores at Weeks 24, 28, 32, 44, 56Week 24-45.00 percent change
GuselkumabPercent Change From Baseline in Dactylitis Scores at Weeks 24, 28, 32, 44, 56Week 56-100.00 percent change
GuselkumabPercent Change From Baseline in Dactylitis Scores at Weeks 24, 28, 32, 44, 56Week 24-100.00 percent change
GuselkumabPercent Change From Baseline in Dactylitis Scores at Weeks 24, 28, 32, 44, 56Week 28-100.00 percent change
GuselkumabPercent Change From Baseline in Dactylitis Scores at Weeks 24, 28, 32, 44, 56Week 32-100.00 percent change
GuselkumabPercent Change From Baseline in Dactylitis Scores at Weeks 24, 28, 32, 44, 56Week 44-100.00 percent change
Secondary

Percent Change From Baseline in Dactylitis Scores at Weeks 4, 8, 16, and 24

Dactylitis is characterized by swelling of the entire finger or toe. The severity of dactylitis is scored on a scale of 0-3, where 0, 1, 2, 3 indicates none, mild, moderate, severe, respectively in each digit of the hands and feet. The range of total dactylitis scores for a participant is 0-60. Higher score indicates more severe dactylitis.

Time frame: Baseline and Weeks 4, 8, 16, 24

Population: FAS (up to week 24) and who had dactylitis at baseline. Data after EE to ustekinumab or missing data were imputed using LOCF. As planned, results data was analyzed and reported for the specified arms for this outcome measure.

ArmMeasureGroupValue (MEDIAN)
PlaceboPercent Change From Baseline in Dactylitis Scores at Weeks 4, 8, 16, and 24Week 16-50.00 percent change
PlaceboPercent Change From Baseline in Dactylitis Scores at Weeks 4, 8, 16, and 24Week 24-33.33 percent change
PlaceboPercent Change From Baseline in Dactylitis Scores at Weeks 4, 8, 16, and 24Week 4-33.33 percent change
PlaceboPercent Change From Baseline in Dactylitis Scores at Weeks 4, 8, 16, and 24Week 8-50.00 percent change
GuselkumabPercent Change From Baseline in Dactylitis Scores at Weeks 4, 8, 16, and 24Week 8-75.00 percent change
GuselkumabPercent Change From Baseline in Dactylitis Scores at Weeks 4, 8, 16, and 24Week 16-100.00 percent change
GuselkumabPercent Change From Baseline in Dactylitis Scores at Weeks 4, 8, 16, and 24Week 4-32.46 percent change
GuselkumabPercent Change From Baseline in Dactylitis Scores at Weeks 4, 8, 16, and 24Week 24-100.00 percent change
Secondary

Percent Change From Baseline in Leeds Enthesitis Index (LEI) Scores Among Participants With Enthesitis at Week 24

Enthesitis was assessed using the Leeds Enthesitis Index (LEI). The LEI was developed to assess enthesitis in participants with psoriatic arthritis (PsA), and evaluates the presence (score of 1) or absence of pain (score of 0) by applying local pressure to Lateral elbow epicondyle, left and right, Medial femoral condyle, left and right, and Achilles tendon insertion, left and right. LEI scores ranging from 0 (0 sites with tenderness) to 6 (worst possible score; 6 sites with tenderness).

Time frame: Baseline and Week 24

Population: FAS (up to Week 24) and had enthesitis at baseline. Data after EE to ustekinumab or missing data are imputed using LOCF. As planned, results data was analyzed and reported for the specified arms for this outcome measure.

ArmMeasureValue (MEDIAN)
PlaceboPercent Change From Baseline in Leeds Enthesitis Index (LEI) Scores Among Participants With Enthesitis at Week 24-33.33 percent change
GuselkumabPercent Change From Baseline in Leeds Enthesitis Index (LEI) Scores Among Participants With Enthesitis at Week 24-100.00 percent change
Secondary

Percent Change From Baseline in LEI Scores at Week 4, 8, 16, and 24

Enthesitis was assessed using the Leeds Enthesitis Index (LEI). The LEI was developed to assess enthesitis in participants with psoriatic arthritis (PsA), and evaluates the presence (score of 1) or absence of pain (score of 0) by applying local pressure to Lateral elbow epicondyle, left and right, Medial femoral condyle, left and right, and Achilles tendon insertion, left and right. LEI scores ranging from 0 (0 sites with tenderness) to 6 (worst possible score; 6 sites with tenderness).

Time frame: Baseline and Weeks 4, 8, 16, 24

Population: FAS (up to Week 24) and who had enthesitis at baseline. Data after EE to ustekinumab or missing data are imputed using LOCF. As planned, results data was analyzed and reported for the specified arms for this outcome measure.

ArmMeasureGroupValue (MEDIAN)
PlaceboPercent Change From Baseline in LEI Scores at Week 4, 8, 16, and 24Week 40.00 percent change
PlaceboPercent Change From Baseline in LEI Scores at Week 4, 8, 16, and 24Week 80.00 percent change
PlaceboPercent Change From Baseline in LEI Scores at Week 4, 8, 16, and 24Week 160.00 percent change
PlaceboPercent Change From Baseline in LEI Scores at Week 4, 8, 16, and 24Week 24-33.33 percent change
GuselkumabPercent Change From Baseline in LEI Scores at Week 4, 8, 16, and 24Week 24-100.00 percent change
GuselkumabPercent Change From Baseline in LEI Scores at Week 4, 8, 16, and 24Week 4-18.33 percent change
GuselkumabPercent Change From Baseline in LEI Scores at Week 4, 8, 16, and 24Week 16-50.04 percent change
GuselkumabPercent Change From Baseline in LEI Scores at Week 4, 8, 16, and 24Week 8-58.33 percent change
Secondary

Percent Change From Baseline in LEI Scores at Weeks 24, 28, 32, 44, and 56

Enthesitis will be assessed using the Leeds Enthesitis Index (LEI). The LEI was developed to assess enthesitis in participants with PsA, and evaluates the presence (score of 1) or absence of pain (score of 0) by applying local pressure to Lateral elbow epicondyle, left and right, Medial femoral condyle, left and right, and Achilles tendon insertion, left and right. LEI scores ranging from 0 (0 sites with tenderness) to 6 (worst possible score; 6 sites with tenderness).

Time frame: Baseline and Weeks 24, 28, 32, 44, 56

Population: Post Week 24 efficacy analysis set with observed data and who had enthesitis at baseline. Here 'n' (number analyzed) included all participants who were evaluable at specified timepoints. As planned, results data was analyzed and reported for the specified arms for this outcome measure.

ArmMeasureGroupValue (MEDIAN)
PlaceboPercent Change From Baseline in LEI Scores at Weeks 24, 28, 32, 44, and 56Week 28-60.00 percent change
PlaceboPercent Change From Baseline in LEI Scores at Weeks 24, 28, 32, 44, and 56Week 44-100.00 percent change
PlaceboPercent Change From Baseline in LEI Scores at Weeks 24, 28, 32, 44, and 56Week 32-100.00 percent change
PlaceboPercent Change From Baseline in LEI Scores at Weeks 24, 28, 32, 44, and 56Week 56-100.00 percent change
PlaceboPercent Change From Baseline in LEI Scores at Weeks 24, 28, 32, 44, and 56Week 24-50.00 percent change
GuselkumabPercent Change From Baseline in LEI Scores at Weeks 24, 28, 32, 44, and 56Week 56-100.00 percent change
GuselkumabPercent Change From Baseline in LEI Scores at Weeks 24, 28, 32, 44, and 56Week 24-100.00 percent change
GuselkumabPercent Change From Baseline in LEI Scores at Weeks 24, 28, 32, 44, and 56Week 28-100.00 percent change
GuselkumabPercent Change From Baseline in LEI Scores at Weeks 24, 28, 32, 44, and 56Week 32-100.00 percent change
GuselkumabPercent Change From Baseline in LEI Scores at Weeks 24, 28, 32, 44, and 56Week 44-100.00 percent change
Secondary

Percent Change From Baseline in PASI Score at Weeks 24, 28, 32, 44, and 56

The PASI is a system used for assessing and grading the severity of psoriatic lesions and their response to therapy. In the PASI system, the body is divided into 4 regions: the head, trunk, upper extremities, and lower extremities. Each of these areas is assessed separately for the percentage of the area involved, which translates to a numeric score that ranges from 0 (indicates no involvement) to 6 (90 percentage (%)-100% involvement), and for erythema, induration and scaling, which are each rated on a scale of 0 to 4. The PASI produces a numeric score that could range from 0 (no psoriasis) to 72. A negative percent change from baseline indicates the percent improvement from baseline in the severity of psoriatic lesions.

Time frame: Baseline and Weeks 24, 28, 32, 44, 56

Population: Post Week 24 efficacy analysis set with observed data. Here 'n' (number analyzed) included all participants who were evaluable at specified timepoints. As planned, results data was analyzed and reported for the specified arms for this outcome measure.

ArmMeasureGroupValue (MEDIAN)
PlaceboPercent Change From Baseline in PASI Score at Weeks 24, 28, 32, 44, and 56Week 28-57.69 percent change
PlaceboPercent Change From Baseline in PASI Score at Weeks 24, 28, 32, 44, and 56Week 44-100.00 percent change
PlaceboPercent Change From Baseline in PASI Score at Weeks 24, 28, 32, 44, and 56Week 32-90.61 percent change
PlaceboPercent Change From Baseline in PASI Score at Weeks 24, 28, 32, 44, and 56Week 56-100.00 percent change
PlaceboPercent Change From Baseline in PASI Score at Weeks 24, 28, 32, 44, and 56Week 24-34.26 percent change
GuselkumabPercent Change From Baseline in PASI Score at Weeks 24, 28, 32, 44, and 56Week 56-100.00 percent change
GuselkumabPercent Change From Baseline in PASI Score at Weeks 24, 28, 32, 44, and 56Week 24-97.85 percent change
GuselkumabPercent Change From Baseline in PASI Score at Weeks 24, 28, 32, 44, and 56Week 28-100.00 percent change
GuselkumabPercent Change From Baseline in PASI Score at Weeks 24, 28, 32, 44, and 56Week 32-100.00 percent change
GuselkumabPercent Change From Baseline in PASI Score at Weeks 24, 28, 32, 44, and 56Week 44-100.00 percent change
Secondary

Percent Change From Baseline in PASI Score at Weeks 4, 8, 16, and 24

The PASI is a system used for assessing and grading the severity of psoriatic lesions and their response to therapy. In the PASI system, the body is divided into 4 regions: the head, trunk, upper extremities, and lower extremities. Each of these areas is assessed separately for the percentage of the area involved, which translates to a numeric score that ranges from 0 (indicates no involvement) to 6 (90 percentage (%)-100% involvement), and for erythema, induration and scaling, which are each rated on a scale of 0 to 4. The PASI produces a numeric score that could range from 0 (no psoriasis) to 72. A negative percent change from baseline indicates the percent improvement from baseline in the severity of psoriatic lesions. As planned, results data was analyzed and reported for the specified arms for this outcome measure.

Time frame: Baseline and Weeks 4, 8, 16, 24

Population: FAS (up to Week 24). Data after EE to ustekinumab and missing data were imputed using LOCF. Here 'N' (number of participants analyzed) included all participants who were evaluable for this endpoint.

ArmMeasureGroupValue (MEDIAN)
PlaceboPercent Change From Baseline in PASI Score at Weeks 4, 8, 16, and 24Week 40.00 percent change
PlaceboPercent Change From Baseline in PASI Score at Weeks 4, 8, 16, and 24Week 81.58 percent change
PlaceboPercent Change From Baseline in PASI Score at Weeks 4, 8, 16, and 24Week 16-1.10 percent change
PlaceboPercent Change From Baseline in PASI Score at Weeks 4, 8, 16, and 24Week 24-7.89 percent change
GuselkumabPercent Change From Baseline in PASI Score at Weeks 4, 8, 16, and 24Week 24-96.21 percent change
GuselkumabPercent Change From Baseline in PASI Score at Weeks 4, 8, 16, and 24Week 4-41.49 percent change
GuselkumabPercent Change From Baseline in PASI Score at Weeks 4, 8, 16, and 24Week 16-90.55 percent change
GuselkumabPercent Change From Baseline in PASI Score at Weeks 4, 8, 16, and 24Week 8-66.67 percent change
Secondary

Percent Change From Baseline in the ACR Components at Weeks 12 and 24

The 7 components of ACR response are: swollen joint counts (0-66), tender joint counts (0-68), patient's assessment of pain (PAIN) (VAS:0-100mm; 0=no pain and 100=worst possible pain), patient's global assessment of disease activity (GDPT) on arthritis (VAS:0-100mm; 0=excellent and 100= poor), physician's global assessment of disease activity (GDEV) (VAS: 0-100mm; 0=no arthritis activity and 100 = extremely active arthritis), patient's assessment of physical function measured by HAQ-DI (20-question instrument assessing 8 functional areas (total score of 0-24 with lower score indicating better functioning);derived HAQ-DI ranges from 0 indicating no difficulty, to 3 indicating inability to perform a task in that area) and serum CRP.

Time frame: Baseline and Weeks 12, 24

Population: FAS (up to Week 24). Data after EE to ustekinumab and missing data were imputed using LOCF. Here 'n' (number analyzed) included all participants who were evaluable at specified timepoints. As planned, results data was analyzed and reported for the specified arms for this outcome measure.

ArmMeasureGroupValue (MEDIAN)
PlaceboPercent Change From Baseline in the ACR Components at Weeks 12 and 24Week 12: Swollen joints (0-66)-29.41 percent change
PlaceboPercent Change From Baseline in the ACR Components at Weeks 12 and 24Week 12: Tender joints (0-68)-13.33 percent change
PlaceboPercent Change From Baseline in the ACR Components at Weeks 12 and 24Week 12: PAIN (VAS, 0-100 mm)1.79 percent change
PlaceboPercent Change From Baseline in the ACR Components at Weeks 12 and 24Week 12: GDPT (VAS, 0-100 mm, arthritis)-11.39 percent change
PlaceboPercent Change From Baseline in the ACR Components at Weeks 12 and 24Week 12: GDEV (VAS, 0-100 mm)-11.39 percent change
PlaceboPercent Change From Baseline in the ACR Components at Weeks 12 and 24Week 12: HAQ-DI score (0-3)0.00 percent change
PlaceboPercent Change From Baseline in the ACR Components at Weeks 12 and 24Week 24: GDPT (VAS, 0-100 mm, arthritis)-2.22 percent change
PlaceboPercent Change From Baseline in the ACR Components at Weeks 12 and 24Week 12: CRP-3.95 percent change
PlaceboPercent Change From Baseline in the ACR Components at Weeks 12 and 24Week 24: Swollen joints (0-66)-11.76 percent change
PlaceboPercent Change From Baseline in the ACR Components at Weeks 12 and 24Week 24: Tender joints (0-68)-5.56 percent change
PlaceboPercent Change From Baseline in the ACR Components at Weeks 12 and 24Week 24: PAIN (VAS, 0-100 mm)2.38 percent change
PlaceboPercent Change From Baseline in the ACR Components at Weeks 12 and 24Week 24: GDEV (VAS, 0-100 mm)-8.86 percent change
PlaceboPercent Change From Baseline in the ACR Components at Weeks 12 and 24Week 24: HAQ-DI score (0-3)-10.00 percent change
PlaceboPercent Change From Baseline in the ACR Components at Weeks 12 and 24Week 24: CRP7.94 percent change
GuselkumabPercent Change From Baseline in the ACR Components at Weeks 12 and 24Week 12: HAQ-DI score (0-3)-21.43 percent change
GuselkumabPercent Change From Baseline in the ACR Components at Weeks 12 and 24Week 12: Swollen joints (0-66)-64.50 percent change
GuselkumabPercent Change From Baseline in the ACR Components at Weeks 12 and 24Week 24: PAIN (VAS, 0-100 mm)-32.93 percent change
GuselkumabPercent Change From Baseline in the ACR Components at Weeks 12 and 24Week 12: Tender joints (0-68)-45.80 percent change
GuselkumabPercent Change From Baseline in the ACR Components at Weeks 12 and 24Week 12: CRP-42.95 percent change
GuselkumabPercent Change From Baseline in the ACR Components at Weeks 12 and 24Week 12: PAIN (VAS, 0-100 mm)-22.05 percent change
GuselkumabPercent Change From Baseline in the ACR Components at Weeks 12 and 24Week 24: GDPT (VAS, 0-100 mm, arthritis)-35.53 percent change
GuselkumabPercent Change From Baseline in the ACR Components at Weeks 12 and 24Week 12: GDPT (VAS, 0-100 mm, arthritis)-55.24 percent change
GuselkumabPercent Change From Baseline in the ACR Components at Weeks 12 and 24Week 24: HAQ-DI score (0-3)-28.57 percent change
GuselkumabPercent Change From Baseline in the ACR Components at Weeks 12 and 24Week 12: GDEV (VAS, 0-100 mm)-55.24 percent change
GuselkumabPercent Change From Baseline in the ACR Components at Weeks 12 and 24Week 24: Tender joints (0-68)-51.05 percent change
GuselkumabPercent Change From Baseline in the ACR Components at Weeks 12 and 24Week 24: Swollen joints (0-66)-84.11 percent change
GuselkumabPercent Change From Baseline in the ACR Components at Weeks 12 and 24Week 24: GDEV (VAS, 0-100 mm)-68.47 percent change
GuselkumabPercent Change From Baseline in the ACR Components at Weeks 12 and 24Week 24: CRP-42.64 percent change
Secondary

Percent Change From Baseline in the ACR Components at Weeks 24, 28, 32, 36, 44 and 56

The 7 components of ACR response are: swollen joint counts (0-66), tender joint counts (0-68), patient's assessment of pain (PAIN) (VAS:0-100mm; 0=no pain and 100=worst possible pain), patient's global assessment of disease activity (GDPT) on arthritis (VAS:0-100mm; 0=excellent and 100= poor), physician's global assessment of disease activity (GDEV) (VAS: 0-100mm; 0=no arthritis activity and 100 = extremely active arthritis), patient's assessment of physical function measured by HAQ-DI (20-question instrument assessing 8 functional areas (total score of 0-24 with lower score indicating better functioning);derived HAQ-DI ranges from 0 indicating no difficulty, to 3 indicating inability to perform a task in that area) and serum CRP.

Time frame: Basline and Weeks 24, 28, 32, 36, 44, 56

Population: Post Week 24 efficacy analysis set, based on observed data. Here 'n' (number analyzed) included all participants who were evaluable at specified timepoints. As planned, results data was analyzed and reported for the specified arms for this outcome measure.

ArmMeasureGroupValue (MEDIAN)
PlaceboPercent Change From Baseline in the ACR Components at Weeks 24, 28, 32, 36, 44 and 56Week 32: HAQ-DI score (0-3)-42.86 percent change
PlaceboPercent Change From Baseline in the ACR Components at Weeks 24, 28, 32, 36, 44 and 56Week 28: Swollen joints (0-66)-69.05 percent change
PlaceboPercent Change From Baseline in the ACR Components at Weeks 24, 28, 32, 36, 44 and 56Week 36: GDEV (VAS, 0-100 mm)-81.82 percent change
PlaceboPercent Change From Baseline in the ACR Components at Weeks 24, 28, 32, 36, 44 and 56Week 32: Swollen joints (0-66)-84.91 percent change
PlaceboPercent Change From Baseline in the ACR Components at Weeks 24, 28, 32, 36, 44 and 56Week 36: HAQ-DI score (0-3)-50.00 percent change
PlaceboPercent Change From Baseline in the ACR Components at Weeks 24, 28, 32, 36, 44 and 56Week 36: Swollen joints (0-66)-79.14 percent change
PlaceboPercent Change From Baseline in the ACR Components at Weeks 24, 28, 32, 36, 44 and 56Week 56: GDPT (VAS, 0-100 mm, arthritis)-68.12 percent change
PlaceboPercent Change From Baseline in the ACR Components at Weeks 24, 28, 32, 36, 44 and 56Week 44: Swollen joints (0-66)-86.11 percent change
PlaceboPercent Change From Baseline in the ACR Components at Weeks 24, 28, 32, 36, 44 and 56Week 44: HAQ-DI score (0-3)-57.14 percent change
PlaceboPercent Change From Baseline in the ACR Components at Weeks 24, 28, 32, 36, 44 and 56Week 56: Swollen joints (0-66)-100.00 percent change
PlaceboPercent Change From Baseline in the ACR Components at Weeks 24, 28, 32, 36, 44 and 56Week 44: GDEV (VAS, 0-100 mm)-82.41 percent change
PlaceboPercent Change From Baseline in the ACR Components at Weeks 24, 28, 32, 36, 44 and 56Week 24: Tender joints (0-68)-50.00 percent change
PlaceboPercent Change From Baseline in the ACR Components at Weeks 24, 28, 32, 36, 44 and 56Week 56: HAQ-DI score (0-3)-54.55 percent change
PlaceboPercent Change From Baseline in the ACR Components at Weeks 24, 28, 32, 36, 44 and 56Week 28: Tender joints (0-68)-65.99 percent change
PlaceboPercent Change From Baseline in the ACR Components at Weeks 24, 28, 32, 36, 44 and 56Week 28: GDEV (VAS, 0-100 mm)-66.07 percent change
PlaceboPercent Change From Baseline in the ACR Components at Weeks 24, 28, 32, 36, 44 and 56Week 32: Tender joints (0-68)-71.76 percent change
PlaceboPercent Change From Baseline in the ACR Components at Weeks 24, 28, 32, 36, 44 and 56Week 24: CRP6.19 percent change
PlaceboPercent Change From Baseline in the ACR Components at Weeks 24, 28, 32, 36, 44 and 56Week 36: Tender joints (0-68)-81.67 percent change
PlaceboPercent Change From Baseline in the ACR Components at Weeks 24, 28, 32, 36, 44 and 56Week 56: GDEV (VAS, 0-100 mm)-86.36 percent change
PlaceboPercent Change From Baseline in the ACR Components at Weeks 24, 28, 32, 36, 44 and 56Week 44: Tender joints (0-68)-86.06 percent change
PlaceboPercent Change From Baseline in the ACR Components at Weeks 24, 28, 32, 36, 44 and 56Week 28: CRP-35.63 percent change
PlaceboPercent Change From Baseline in the ACR Components at Weeks 24, 28, 32, 36, 44 and 56Week 56: Tender joints (0-68)-80.00 percent change
PlaceboPercent Change From Baseline in the ACR Components at Weeks 24, 28, 32, 36, 44 and 56Week 44: GDPT (VAS, 0-100 mm, arthritis)-49.53 percent change
PlaceboPercent Change From Baseline in the ACR Components at Weeks 24, 28, 32, 36, 44 and 56Week 24: PAIN (VAS, 0-100 mm)-11.69 percent change
PlaceboPercent Change From Baseline in the ACR Components at Weeks 24, 28, 32, 36, 44 and 56Week 32: CRP-42.61 percent change
PlaceboPercent Change From Baseline in the ACR Components at Weeks 24, 28, 32, 36, 44 and 56Week 28: PAIN (VAS, 0-100 mm)-23.52 percent change
PlaceboPercent Change From Baseline in the ACR Components at Weeks 24, 28, 32, 36, 44 and 56Week 24: HAQ-DI score (0-3)-19.38 percent change
PlaceboPercent Change From Baseline in the ACR Components at Weeks 24, 28, 32, 36, 44 and 56Week 32: PAIN (VAS, 0-100 mm)-51.08 percent change
PlaceboPercent Change From Baseline in the ACR Components at Weeks 24, 28, 32, 36, 44 and 56Week 36: CRP-38.90 percent change
PlaceboPercent Change From Baseline in the ACR Components at Weeks 24, 28, 32, 36, 44 and 56Week 36: PAIN (VAS, 0-100 mm)-61.13 percent change
PlaceboPercent Change From Baseline in the ACR Components at Weeks 24, 28, 32, 36, 44 and 56Week 32: GDEV (VAS, 0-100 mm)-71.40 percent change
PlaceboPercent Change From Baseline in the ACR Components at Weeks 24, 28, 32, 36, 44 and 56Week 44: PAIN (VAS, 0-100 mm)-58.76 percent change
PlaceboPercent Change From Baseline in the ACR Components at Weeks 24, 28, 32, 36, 44 and 56Week 44: CRP-53.43 percent change
PlaceboPercent Change From Baseline in the ACR Components at Weeks 24, 28, 32, 36, 44 and 56Week 56: PAIN (VAS, 0-100 mm)-71.99 percent change
PlaceboPercent Change From Baseline in the ACR Components at Weeks 24, 28, 32, 36, 44 and 56Week 28: HAQ-DI score (0-3)-31.25 percent change
PlaceboPercent Change From Baseline in the ACR Components at Weeks 24, 28, 32, 36, 44 and 56Week 24: GDPT (VAS, 0-100 mm, arthritis)-17.74 percent change
PlaceboPercent Change From Baseline in the ACR Components at Weeks 24, 28, 32, 36, 44 and 56Week 56: CRP-51.26 percent change
PlaceboPercent Change From Baseline in the ACR Components at Weeks 24, 28, 32, 36, 44 and 56Week 28: GDPT (VAS, 0-100 mm, arthritis)-40.73 percent change
PlaceboPercent Change From Baseline in the ACR Components at Weeks 24, 28, 32, 36, 44 and 56Week 24: GDEV (VAS, 0-100 mm)-37.88 percent change
PlaceboPercent Change From Baseline in the ACR Components at Weeks 24, 28, 32, 36, 44 and 56Week 32: GDPT (VAS, 0-100 mm, arthritis)-48.62 percent change
PlaceboPercent Change From Baseline in the ACR Components at Weeks 24, 28, 32, 36, 44 and 56Week 36: GDPT (VAS, 0-100 mm, arthritis)-52.17 percent change
PlaceboPercent Change From Baseline in the ACR Components at Weeks 24, 28, 32, 36, 44 and 56Week 24: Swollen joints (0-66)-33.33 percent change
GuselkumabPercent Change From Baseline in the ACR Components at Weeks 24, 28, 32, 36, 44 and 56Week 56: Swollen joints (0-66)-100.00 percent change
GuselkumabPercent Change From Baseline in the ACR Components at Weeks 24, 28, 32, 36, 44 and 56Week 44: GDPT (VAS, 0-100 mm, arthritis)-47.21 percent change
GuselkumabPercent Change From Baseline in the ACR Components at Weeks 24, 28, 32, 36, 44 and 56Week 56: GDPT (VAS, 0-100 mm, arthritis)-55.32 percent change
GuselkumabPercent Change From Baseline in the ACR Components at Weeks 24, 28, 32, 36, 44 and 56Week 24: GDEV (VAS, 0-100 mm)-72.41 percent change
GuselkumabPercent Change From Baseline in the ACR Components at Weeks 24, 28, 32, 36, 44 and 56Week 28: GDEV (VAS, 0-100 mm)-80.26 percent change
GuselkumabPercent Change From Baseline in the ACR Components at Weeks 24, 28, 32, 36, 44 and 56Week 32: GDEV (VAS, 0-100 mm)-82.14 percent change
GuselkumabPercent Change From Baseline in the ACR Components at Weeks 24, 28, 32, 36, 44 and 56Week 36: GDEV (VAS, 0-100 mm)-79.75 percent change
GuselkumabPercent Change From Baseline in the ACR Components at Weeks 24, 28, 32, 36, 44 and 56Week 44: GDEV (VAS, 0-100 mm)-80.00 percent change
GuselkumabPercent Change From Baseline in the ACR Components at Weeks 24, 28, 32, 36, 44 and 56Week 56: GDEV (VAS, 0-100 mm)-83.93 percent change
GuselkumabPercent Change From Baseline in the ACR Components at Weeks 24, 28, 32, 36, 44 and 56Week 24: HAQ-DI score (0-3)-37.50 percent change
GuselkumabPercent Change From Baseline in the ACR Components at Weeks 24, 28, 32, 36, 44 and 56Week 28: HAQ-DI score (0-3)-41.05 percent change
GuselkumabPercent Change From Baseline in the ACR Components at Weeks 24, 28, 32, 36, 44 and 56Week 32: HAQ-DI score (0-3)-41.18 percent change
GuselkumabPercent Change From Baseline in the ACR Components at Weeks 24, 28, 32, 36, 44 and 56Week 36: HAQ-DI score (0-3)-37.50 percent change
GuselkumabPercent Change From Baseline in the ACR Components at Weeks 24, 28, 32, 36, 44 and 56Week 44: HAQ-DI score (0-3)-37.50 percent change
GuselkumabPercent Change From Baseline in the ACR Components at Weeks 24, 28, 32, 36, 44 and 56Week 56: HAQ-DI score (0-3)-39.23 percent change
GuselkumabPercent Change From Baseline in the ACR Components at Weeks 24, 28, 32, 36, 44 and 56Week 24: CRP-43.62 percent change
GuselkumabPercent Change From Baseline in the ACR Components at Weeks 24, 28, 32, 36, 44 and 56Week 28: CRP-52.70 percent change
GuselkumabPercent Change From Baseline in the ACR Components at Weeks 24, 28, 32, 36, 44 and 56Week 32: CRP-50.63 percent change
GuselkumabPercent Change From Baseline in the ACR Components at Weeks 24, 28, 32, 36, 44 and 56Week 36: CRP-53.22 percent change
GuselkumabPercent Change From Baseline in the ACR Components at Weeks 24, 28, 32, 36, 44 and 56Week 44: CRP-53.36 percent change
GuselkumabPercent Change From Baseline in the ACR Components at Weeks 24, 28, 32, 36, 44 and 56Week 56: CRP-54.91 percent change
GuselkumabPercent Change From Baseline in the ACR Components at Weeks 24, 28, 32, 36, 44 and 56Week 24: Swollen joints (0-66)-85.71 percent change
GuselkumabPercent Change From Baseline in the ACR Components at Weeks 24, 28, 32, 36, 44 and 56Week 28: Swollen joints (0-66)-93.75 percent change
GuselkumabPercent Change From Baseline in the ACR Components at Weeks 24, 28, 32, 36, 44 and 56Week 32: Swollen joints (0-66)-100.00 percent change
GuselkumabPercent Change From Baseline in the ACR Components at Weeks 24, 28, 32, 36, 44 and 56Week 36: Swollen joints (0-66)-93.93 percent change
GuselkumabPercent Change From Baseline in the ACR Components at Weeks 24, 28, 32, 36, 44 and 56Week 44: Swollen joints (0-66)-94.56 percent change
GuselkumabPercent Change From Baseline in the ACR Components at Weeks 24, 28, 32, 36, 44 and 56Week 32: GDPT (VAS, 0-100 mm, arthritis)-56.83 percent change
GuselkumabPercent Change From Baseline in the ACR Components at Weeks 24, 28, 32, 36, 44 and 56Week 24: Tender joints (0-68)-72.00 percent change
GuselkumabPercent Change From Baseline in the ACR Components at Weeks 24, 28, 32, 36, 44 and 56Week 28: Tender joints (0-68)-74.36 percent change
GuselkumabPercent Change From Baseline in the ACR Components at Weeks 24, 28, 32, 36, 44 and 56Week 32: Tender joints (0-68)-79.66 percent change
GuselkumabPercent Change From Baseline in the ACR Components at Weeks 24, 28, 32, 36, 44 and 56Week 36: Tender joints (0-68)-73.32 percent change
GuselkumabPercent Change From Baseline in the ACR Components at Weeks 24, 28, 32, 36, 44 and 56Week 44: Tender joints (0-68)-77.22 percent change
GuselkumabPercent Change From Baseline in the ACR Components at Weeks 24, 28, 32, 36, 44 and 56Week 56: Tender joints (0-68)-77.27 percent change
GuselkumabPercent Change From Baseline in the ACR Components at Weeks 24, 28, 32, 36, 44 and 56Week 24: PAIN (VAS, 0-100 mm)-40.98 percent change
GuselkumabPercent Change From Baseline in the ACR Components at Weeks 24, 28, 32, 36, 44 and 56Week 28: PAIN (VAS, 0-100 mm)-49.40 percent change
GuselkumabPercent Change From Baseline in the ACR Components at Weeks 24, 28, 32, 36, 44 and 56Week 32: PAIN (VAS, 0-100 mm)-50.00 percent change
GuselkumabPercent Change From Baseline in the ACR Components at Weeks 24, 28, 32, 36, 44 and 56Week 36: PAIN (VAS, 0-100 mm)-55.83 percent change
GuselkumabPercent Change From Baseline in the ACR Components at Weeks 24, 28, 32, 36, 44 and 56Week 44: PAIN (VAS, 0-100 mm)-45.50 percent change
GuselkumabPercent Change From Baseline in the ACR Components at Weeks 24, 28, 32, 36, 44 and 56Week 56: PAIN (VAS, 0-100 mm)-52.44 percent change
GuselkumabPercent Change From Baseline in the ACR Components at Weeks 24, 28, 32, 36, 44 and 56Week 24: GDPT (VAS, 0-100 mm, arthritis)-41.98 percent change
GuselkumabPercent Change From Baseline in the ACR Components at Weeks 24, 28, 32, 36, 44 and 56Week 28: GDPT (VAS, 0-100 mm, arthritis)-52.17 percent change
GuselkumabPercent Change From Baseline in the ACR Components at Weeks 24, 28, 32, 36, 44 and 56Week 36: GDPT (VAS, 0-100 mm, arthritis)-52.09 percent change

Source: ClinicalTrials.gov · Data processed: Mar 6, 2026