Baricitinib, Methotrexate, or Combination in Patients With Rheumatoid Arthritis and No or Limited Prior Disease-Modifying Antirheumatic Drug Treatment

Ultrasound efficacy of targeted-synthetic disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drug treatment in rheumatoid arthritis: a multicenter prospective cohort study in Japan

OBJECTIVE

This study investigated the effectiveness of treatment with Janus kinase (JAK) inhibitors in rheumatoid arthritis (RA) assessed by ultrasonography (US) activity, and the influence of patient characteristics and previous treatments.

METHOD

This prospective study assessed 60 treatment initiations among 53 Japanese patients diagnosed with RA who underwent treatment with JAK inhibitors during June 2013 to February 2020. Of the 53 patients, seven patients were enrolled in duplicate because they were treated with two different JAK inhibitors at different periods. For each case, the improvement rate on the power Doppler (PD) score was assessed at 6 month follow-up. Median improvement rate of PD score was used to classify cases as either US responders or non-responders, and patient characteristics were compared between the two groups.

RESULTS

All indicators of clinical disease activity and US activity showed a significant improvement at 3 months compared with baseline. Although the JAK inhibitor-cycler group and the interleukin-6 (IL-6) inhibitor inadequate response (IR) group tended to show a later improvement for US activity, all indicators of clinical disease activity and US activity showed a significant improvement at 6 months compared with baseline for both groups. Multivariate analysis showed that concomitant methotrexate use and an IR to the previous biologic or targeted-synthetic disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drug (b/tsDMARD) treatment were independently and significantly associated with US responders.

CONCLUSION

Use of a JAK inhibitor in combination with methotrexate and an absence of IR to any previous b/tsDMARDs demonstrated superior effectiveness for patients with RA.

Real-world single centre use of JAK inhibitors across the rheumatoid arthritis pathway

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate real-world efficacy of approved JAK inhibitors (JAKi) tofacitinib and baricitinib in a large, single-centre cohort of RA patients across the treatment pathway, including those refractory to multiple biologic drugs.

METHODS

All RA patients, treated with tofacitinib (from time of compassionate access scheme) or baricitinib since approval in 2017 had DAS28-CRP scores and components recorded at baseline, 3 and 6 months (with retrospective data for compassionate access scheme). Efficacy was evaluated in the total cohort, each treatment group, and subgroups of number of prior biologic classes failed.

RESULTS

One hundred and fifteen patients were treated with a JAKi (tofacitinib 54, baricitinib 69, 8 both); 76.4% female; mean (s.d.) age 57.3 (14.3) years. On average patients had received three previous bDMARDs; 11 (9.6%) were bDMARD naïve. Combined group baseline DAS28-CRP (s.d.) 5.62(1.14) improved by 1.49(1.44) and 1.67(1.61) at 3 and 6 months, respectively, comparable in individual JAKi groups; with 24% in at least low disease activity at 3 months. The biggest improvement was observed in the biologic-naïve group (mean DAS28-CRP improved from 5.16-2.14 after 6 months); while those with prior exposure to minimum three bDMARD classes had DAS28-CRP improvement of >1.2. Five out of 8 patients treated with both JAKi sequentially responded. Twelve patients previously unresponsive to IL-6 blockade responded to JAKi. No unexpected safety events were recorded. Two cases of venous thromboembolism were observed.

CONCLUSION

JAK inhibition is effective in a real-world population of RA patients, including in a subset of patients refractory to multiple previous bDMARDs.

Baricitinib and the Risk of Incident Interstitial Lung Disease: A Descriptive Clinical Case Report from Clinical Trials

OBJECTIVES

Interstitial lung disease (ILD) occurs in up to 30% of patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA), resulting in increased morbidity and death in the absence of proven therapies. The aim of this study is to estimate the number of incident ILD cases reported through development studies with baricitinib in patients with RA.

METHODS

Estimates were based on 3770 patients with RA from eight randomized clinical trials (four phase 3, three phase 2, one phase 1b) and one long-term extension study on baricitinib for which ILD was not an exclusion criterion with 12,358 patient-years of exposure (PYE).

RESULTS

Twenty-one non-infectious cases of ILD were reported with an exposure-adjusted incidence rate (EAIR) of 0.17 per 100 PYE. Of the 21 cases, six were reported as serious and 15 as non-serious resulting in an incidence rate of 0.05 per 100 PYE and 0.12 per 100 PYE, respectively. There were also 11 cases caused by an infectious agent: seven serious (IR: 0.06 per 100 PYE) and four non-serious cases (IR: 0.03 per 100 PYE).

CONCLUSIONS

The findings of this analysis in patients with RA treated with baricitinib are consistent with a low risk to develop non-infectious ILD during baricitinib treatment, similar to that observed with other Janus kinase inhibitors.

Changes in selected haematological parameters associated with JAK1/JAK2 inhibition observed in patients with rheumatoid arthritis treated with baricitinib

OBJECTIVE

To characterise changes in selected haematological parameters following once-daily oral baricitinib dosing.

METHODS

Data were pooled from eight randomised clinical trials (four phase 3, three phase 2, one phase 1b) and one long-term extension. Changes in haematological parameters were evaluated up to 128 weeks (N=2387); overall safety of baricitinib was assessed up to 6 years (N=3492).

RESULTS

Mean absolute neutrophil counts decreased (-1.36×10⁹/L) within 1 month, followed by stabilisation within the normal reference range through week 128. The incidence of serious infections was not elevated in patients with neutropenia during the 24-week placebo-controlled period. Mean lymphocyte counts increased (+0.30×10⁹/L) within 1 month, then decreased to baseline (weeks 12-24). Mean platelet counts increased at week 2 (+51×10⁹/L), then decreased towards baseline. Overall, mean haemoglobin concentrations decreased (-0.12 mmol/L), then returned to baseline; however, reduced baseline haemoglobin concentrations observed in the highest baseline high-sensitivity C reactive protein quartile increased over time. Permanent drug discontinuation occurred due to laboratory abnormalities related to neutrophil count in 8 (0.2%), lymphocyte counts in 6 (0.2%), platelet counts in 8 (0.2%), and haemoglobin levels in 16 (0.5%) of all baricitinib-treated patients (N=3492 with 7993 total person-years of exposure).

CONCLUSIONS

Moderate decreases in neutrophils were seen during baricitinib treatment; however, serious infection was uncommon in patients with neutropenia. Transient increases were observed in lymphocytes and platelets, which returned to baseline over time. Changes in haemoglobin concentration were generally small. Haematological abnormalities seldom led to drug discontinuation.

The role for JAK inhibitors in the treatment of immune-mediated rheumatic and related conditions

JAK inhibitors (JAKIs) are a new class of targeted therapy that have entered clinical practice for the treatment of immune-mediated rheumatic conditions. JAKIs can block the signaling activity of a variety of proinflammatory cytokines and therefore have the potential to mediate therapeutic benefits across a wide range of immune-mediated conditions. Several JAKIs are licensed, and many more are undergoing clinical trials. Here we provide a narrative review of the current and upcoming JAKIs for adult immune-mediated rheumatic and related conditions, with a specific focus on efficacy in rheumatoid arthritis, psoriatic arthritis, axial spondyloarthritis, psoriasis, and inflammatory bowel disease. The overall safety profile of JAKIs appears largely comparable to that of existing biologic cytokine-targeting agents, particularly, TNF inhibitors, apart from risk of herpes zoster, which is increased for JAKIs. Importantly however, unresolved safety concerns remain, particularly relating to increased venous thromboembolism.

Upadacitinib monotherapy improves patient-reported outcomes in rheumatoid arthritis: results from SELECT-EARLY and SELECT-MONOTHERAPY

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the effect of upadacitinib (UPA) monotherapy vs MTX on patient-reported outcomes (PROs) in patients with RA who were MTX-naïve or who had an inadequate response to MTX (MTX-IR).

METHODS

PROs from the SELECT-EARLY and SELECT-MONOTHERAPY randomized controlled trials were evaluated at Weeks 2 and 12/14. Patients were ≥18 years of age with RA symptoms for ≥6 weeks (SELECT-EARLY, MTX-naïve) or diagnosed RA for ≥3 months (SELECT-MONOTHERAPY, MTX-IR) and received UPA monotherapy (15 or 30 mg) or MTX. PROs included Patient Global Assessment of Disease Activity (PtGA), pain visual analogue scale, HAQ Disability Index (HAQ-DI), morning stiffness duration/severity, Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy (FACIT)-Fatigue (SELECT-EARLY), health-related quality of life (HRQOL) by the 36-iem Short Form Health Survey and Work Productivity and Activity Impairment (WPAI; SELECT-EARLY). Least square mean (LSM) changes and proportions of patients reporting improvements greater than or equal to the minimum clinically important differences and normative values were determined.

RESULTS

In 945 MTX-naïve and 648 MTX-IR patients, UPA monotherapy (15 mg, 30 mg) vs MTX resulted in greater reported LSM changes from baseline at Weeks 12/14 in PtGA, pain, HAQ-DI, morning stiffness duration/severity, FACIT-F (SELECT-EARLY), HRQOL and WPAI (SELECT-EARLY). These changes were statistically significant with both doses of UPA vs MTX at Weeks 12/14 in both RCTs. Improvements were reported as early as week 2. Compared with MTX, more UPA-treated MTX-naïve and MTX-IR patients reported improvements greater than or equal to the minimum clinically important differences and scores greater than or equal to normative values.

CONCLUSION

Among MTX-naïve and MTX-IR patients with active RA, UPA monotherapy at 15 or 30 mg for 12/14 weeks resulted in statistically significant and clinically meaningful improvements in pain, physical function, morning stiffness, HRQOL and WPAI compared with MTX alone.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

SELECT-EARLY (NCT02706873) and SELECT-MONOTHERAPY (NCT02706951) are registered with ClinicalTrials.gov.

Emerging protein kinase inhibitors for the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis

INTRODUCTION

Protein tyrosine kinase inhibitors are emergent drugs in the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis (RA); they block the signal transduction in immune cells preventing the production and release of pro-inflammatory cytokines.

AREAS COVERED

The current research aims to review the role of Janus, Bruton's and spleen kinase inhibitors for the treatment of RA. Mechanism of action, rationale for usage, and the main efficacy and safety outcomes in phase II and III clinical trials are described.

EXPERT OPINION

In RA, the development of Bruton kinase inhibitors was interrupted because they failed to demonstrate superiority versus placebo. The spleen kinase inhibitors had their development deprioritized because their risk/benefit profile was unfavorable compared to janus kinase inhibitors (JAKi). JAKi proved to be effective in treatment naïve patients and in those with previous failure to methotrexate and/or biological therapy. There still remain important points about JAKi that need more studies: the clinical importance of JAKi selectivity should be further evaluated in head-to-head trials and the safety profile of JAKi, mainly regarding the risk of malignancy and thromboembolic events, must be analyzed in long-term real-life studies.

The beneficial effect of baricitinib on ultrasound-detected synovial inflammation and bone damage in rheumatoid arthritis: Preliminarily data from single center-based observational study for 24 weeks

Baricitinib is a Janus kinase (JAK) inhibitor that selectively blocks against JAK1 and JAK2 signaling. This study aimed to determine the effect of baricitinib on disease activity based on musculoskeletal ultrasound in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA).A total of 20 patients with RA receiving baricitinib for 24 weeks were assessed. Ultrasound scores of gray scale and power Doppler synovitis, joint effusion, and bone erosion in each patient were assessed between baseline and 24 weeks for 27 affected joints. Disease activity in RA was evaluated using the disease activity score for 28-joint count with erythrocyte sediment rate (DAS28-ESR), simplified disease activity index (SDAI), and clinical disease activity index (CDAI).Treatment with baricitinib for 12 weeks and 24 weeks significantly decreased disease activity composites such as DAS28-ESR, SDAI, and CDAI (P < .001 for all). Treatment with baricitinib for 24 weeks improved ultrasound-detected gray-scale and power Doppler synovitis and joint effusion compared to baseline (P = .002, P = .030, and P = .002, respectively). Bone erosion scores were not different between baseline and 24 weeks (P = .317). There were no differences in ultrasound abnormalities for improvement based on DAS28-ESR. Changes in power Doppler score were significantly associated with changes in DAS28-ESR (β = 0.590, P = .044), but not SDAI and CDAI.This study demonstrates that baricitinib treatment has a favorable effect on ultrasound-detected abnormalities including synovitis and bone erosion in patients with RA.

Real-world comparative effectiveness and safety of tofacitinib and baricitinib in patients with rheumatoid arthritis

OBJECTIVE

To compare the efficacy and safety of tofacitinib and baricitinib in patients with RA in a real-world setting.

METHODS

A total of 242 patients with RA who were treated with tofacitinib (n = 161) or baricitinib (n = 81) were enrolled. We evaluated efficacy and safety between tofacitinib and baricitinib using multivariable analyses to avoid confounding. Their clinical disease activity and AEs were evaluated for 24 weeks.

RESULTS

The mean (SD) DAS28-ESR change from baseline to 24 weeks was 1.57 (1.55) (tofacitinib) and 1.46 (1.36) (baricitinib). There was no significant difference in the clinical response between the two groups (adjusted mean difference, 0.04; 95% CI, -0.35 to 0.28). The efficacy was not significantly changed in the patients without concomitant MTX use in both groups, but the concomitant MTX use showed better clinical efficacy in the cases of baricitinib treatment. In both groups, the most common AE was herpes zoster infection, and the AE rates were similar between the two groups. However, the predictive factors contributing to clinical response as revealed by a multivariable logistic analysis differed. The concomitant oral steroid use was independently associated with the achievement of DAS-low disease activity in the tofacitinib group, whereas in the baricitinib group, the number of biological and/or targeted synthetic DMARDs previously used was associated.

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings indicate that tofacitinib and baricitinib had comparable continuing efficacies and safety profiles. However, there is a possibility that the influence of clinical characteristics on the treatment response differs. The comparison provides useful information to the optimal use of JAK inhibitors in real-world settings.

Costo per responder di upadacitinib e abatacept nel trattamento dell’artrite reumatoide da moderata a grave in Italia

Purpose:

The objective of this economic evaluation was to compare the cost per responder between upadacitinib and abatacept (intravenous [iv] or subcutaneous [sc]) in patients with moderate-to-severe Rheumatoid Arthritis (RA) in Italy.

Methods:

The clinical efficacy was assessed based on SELECT-CHOICE study results. The clinical efficacy of upadacitinib and abatacept (iv or sc) was measured by Clinical Remission (CR), Low Disease Activity (LDA) and American College of Rheumatology response (ACR20, 50 and 70). The treatment cost was based on the number of administrations dispensed at 12 or 24 weeks. The cost per responder was adopted as a cost-effectiveness indicator.

Results:

Independent of the clinical efficacy measure used and the duration of treatment considered, the cost per responder was consistently lower for upadacitinib compared to abatacept (iv or sc) across all clinical measures. For example, considering the CR at 24 weeks, the cost per responder for upadacitinib was € 9,417 compared to € 17,817 for abatacept sc or to € 23,110 for abatacept iv. The differences in the cost per responder between upadacitinib and abatacept (iv or sc) increased when higher ACR response levels were considered.

Conclusions:

These results suggested that upadacitinib is a cost-effectiveness option compared to abatacept (iv or sc) from the perspective of the Italian National Health Service in patients with moderate-to-severe Rheumatoid Arthritis in Italy.

Comparison of the effects of baricitinib and tocilizumab on disease activity in patients with rheumatoid arthritis: a propensity score matching analysis

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to compare the effects of baricitinib, a Janus kinase inhibitor, and tocilizumab, a monoclonal anti-interleukin-6 receptor antibody, on disease activity in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA), and to investigate the influence of inflammation on improvement in patient global assessment (PGA) of disease activity.

METHODS

This study was performed based on data from a multicenter registry, and included 284 and 113 patients treated with tocilizumab and baricitinib, respectively, who were observed for longer than 24 weeks. Propensity score matching was performed to address potential treatment-selection bias. To assess the influence of inflammation on PGA, patients were divided into two groups based on whether or not they achieved improvement in C-reactive protein (CRP, an objective marker of inflammation) at 24 weeks.

RESULTS

A total of 48 matched pairs of patients were identified. Compared to treatment with tocilizumab, baricitinib showed a similar improvement in tender and swollen joint count and serum CRP levels, and a significantly greater improvement in PGA at 24 weeks. As a result, the baricitinib group had a significantly higher proportion of patients who achieved Boolean remission at 24 weeks. In subgroups of patients who did not achieve 50% or 70% CRP improvement, significant decreases from baseline to 24 weeks were observed in PGA in patients treated with baricitinib, but not in those treated with tocilizumab.

CONCLUSION

Compared to tocilizumab, baricitinib significantly improved PGA despite similar effects on inflammation in patients with RA. Moreover, the influence of inflammation on PGA improvement differed between baricitinib and tocilizumab. Key-points • Baricitinib and tocilizumab had similar effects on inflammation in RA patients. • Baricitinib improved patient global assessment (PGA) more than tocilizumab. • Baricitinib had a higher Boolean remission rate than tocilizumab at 24 weeks. • Influence of inflammation on PGA improvement differed between the two drugs.

Baricitinib: From Rheumatoid Arthritis to COVID-19

Baricitinib is a JAK1/2 inhibitor that was first approved for treating moderate to severe rheumatoid arthritis (RA) but that later showed considerable efficacy in the control of exaggerated inflammatory responses that occur in a wide range of diseases. There is a growing body of evidence, obtained from clinical trials and case reports, demonstrating clinical and paraclinical improvement in patients following administration of baricitinib including RA, systemic lupus erythematosus, psoriasis, atopic dermatitis, alopecia areata, interferon‐mediated autoinflammatory diseases, graft‐versus‐host disease, diabetic kidney disease, and, recently, coronavirus disease‐19. However, despite overall encouraging results, many adverse effects have been observed in baricitinib‐treated patients, ranging from simple infections to increased risk of malignancies, particularly in long‐term use. The significant efficacy of baricitinib, versus the probable adverse effects, urge further investigation before establishing it as a part of standard therapeutic protocols. Here, we have provided a review of the studies that have used baricitinib for treating various inflammatory disorders and summarized the advantages and disadvantages of its administration.

Radiographic progression in clinical trials in rheumatoid arthritis: a systemic literature review of trials performed by industry

Objectives

To summarise radiographic data in randomised controlled trials (RCTs) as part of the radiographic inhibition claim of disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs) approved for patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA).

Methods

A systemic literature review was performed using the Medline database from 1994 to February 2020. The results were grouped based on the scoring methods (Sharp, Genant modification, van der Heijde modification) and RA patient populations.

Results

One hundred sixty-eight publications were selected. After detailed assessment, 52 RCTs (7 methotrexate (MTX)-naive, 23 MTX inadequate response (IR), 9 DMARDs IR and 3 tumour necrosis factor-alpha inhibitors (TNFi) IR studies) were finally included. Information on patient population, scoring method used, reader reliability, statistical analyses and detailed radiographic data on baseline and change scores over multiple follow-up periods are presented.

Conclusion

The data gathered in this review serve as a repository for the design of future trials with radiographic damage as an outcome.

Current and Emerging DMARDs for the Treatment of Rheumatoid Arthritis

Rheumatoid arthritis (RA) is the most prevalent form of inflammatory arthritis. It is a profoundly serious and severe disease that if it goes untreated could have severe consequences to the joints and health of the patient who carries this diagnosis. The treatment of RA has dramatically changed since the year 2000, with the discovery of the TNFis, then other biologics, and finally the JAKi. All these new medications with or without methotrexate in combination, tight control and treat to target have produced a revolution in the outcome of this disease. We reviewed and summarized the treatment options, and the most significant papers for each one of these new drugs. The reader could have a full picture with all the references of the recent publications. We also updated the biosimilar situation in RA, as well as the new drugs that will be coming to the market in the next 5 years.

Interferon lambda in inflammation and autoimmune rheumatic diseases

Interferons are potent antiviral cytokines that modulate immunity in response to infection or other danger signals. In addition to their antiviral functions, type I interferons (IFNα and IFNβ) are important in the pathogenesis of autoimmune diseases. Type III interferons (IFNλs) were initially described as a specialized system that inhibits viral replication at epithelial barrier surfaces while limiting inflammatory damage. However, evidence now suggests that type III interferons have complex effects on both innate and adaptive immune responses and might also be pathogenic in systemic autoimmune diseases. Concentrations of IFNλs are increased in blood and tissues in a number of autoimmune rheumatic diseases, including systemic lupus erythematosus, and are further associated with specific clinical and laboratory parameters. This Review is aimed at providing a critical evaluation of the current literature on IFNλ biology and how type III interferons might contribute to immune dysregulation and tissue damage in autoimmunity. The potential effects of type III interferons on treatment strategies for autoimmune rheumatic diseases, such as interferon blockade, are also considered.

Efficacy of Long-Term Treatment with Once-Daily Baricitinib 2 mg in Patients with Active Rheumatoid Arthritis: Post Hoc Analysis of Two 24-Week, Phase III, Randomized, Controlled Studies and One Long-Term Extension Study

INTRODUCTION

To evaluate long-term efficacy of once-daily baricitinib 2 mg in patients with active rheumatoid arthritis who had an inadequate response (IR) to conventional synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (csDMARD) or biologic DMARDs (bDMARD).

METHODS

Data from patients treated with baricitinib 2 mg daily in two 24-week, phase III studies, RA-BUILD (csDMARD-IR; NCT01721057) and RA-BEACON (bDMARD-IR; NCT01721044), and one long-term extension study (RA-BEYOND; NCT01885078), were analyzed (120 weeks). The main outcomes were achievement of low-disease activity (LDA; Simple Disease Activity Index [SDAI] ≤ 11), clinical remission (SDAI ≤ 3.3), Health Assessment Questionnaire Disability Index (HAQ-DI) ≤ 0.5 and improvement from baseline of ≥ 0.22, and safety. Analysis populations included (1) all patients and (2) never-rescued patients. Completer and non-responder imputation (NRI) analyses were conducted on each population.

RESULTS

In RA-BUILD, 684 were randomized (229 to baricitinib 2 mg, 180 of whom completed RA-BUILD and entered RA-BEYOND). In RA-BEACON, 527 were randomized (174 to baricitinib 2 mg, 117 of whom completed RA-BEACON and entered RA-BEYOND). In RA-BUILD-BEYOND, 85.1% (63/74, completer) and 27.5% (63/229, NRI) of csDMARD-IR patients treated with baricitinib 2 mg achieved SDAI LDA; 40.5% (30/74, completer) and 13.1% (30/229, NRI) were in SDAI remission; 62.2% (46/74, completer) and 20.1% (46/229, NRI) had HAQ-DI ≤ 0.5 and 81.1% (60/74, completer); and 26.2% (60/229, NRI) achieved ≥ 0.22 change from baseline at week 120. In RA-BEACON-BEYOND, 86.5% (32/37, completer) and 18.4% (32/174, NRI) of bDMARD-IR patients treated with baricitinib 2 mg achieved SDAI LDA; 24.3% (9/37, completer) and 5.2% (9/174, NRI) were in SDAI remission; 50.0% (19/38, completer) and 10.9% (19/174, NRI) had HAQ-DI ≤ 0.5; and 73.7% (28/38, completer) and 16.1% (28/174, NRI) achieved ≥ 0.22 change from baseline at week 120. Rates of adverse events of special interest were consistent with previous reports.

CONCLUSIONS

Long-term treatment with baricitinib 2 mg demonstrated efficacy for up to 120 weeks and was well tolerated.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov identifier, NCT01721057, NCT01721044, and NCT01885078.

Current jakinibs for the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis: a systematic review

OBJECTIVE

One-third of patients with severe rheumatoid arthritis (RA) do not achieve remission or low disease activity, or they have side effects from cDMARD and bDMARD. They will need a new treatment option such as the small molecule JAK inhibitors. In this systematic review, we evaluate the efficacy and safety data of the current jakinibs: tofacitinib, peficitinib, decernotinib, upadacitinib, baricitinib and filgotinib in patients in whom treatment with conventional or biological disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (cDMARD and/or bDMARD) failed.

METHODS

We searched for randomized controlled trials comparing efficacy and safety of jakinibs for RA treatment using the Web of Science, Scopus, PubMed, and clinicaltrials.gov databases with the terms: "rheumatoid arthritis" OR "arthritis rheumatoid" OR "RA" AND "inhibitor" OR "jak inhibitor" AND "clinical trial" OR "treatment" OR "therapy".

RESULTS

All jakinibs achieved good results in ACR 20, 50, 70 and with CRP-DAS28 for LDA and remission, upadacitinib showed better results compared to the others. In ESR-DAS28 for remission, tofacitinib achieved the best result. Regarding the safety of all jakinibs, peficitinib, baricitinib and filgotinib did not register deaths in their studies unlike tofacitinib that presented 11 deaths. Despite all benefits of jakinibs, the use in patients with severe liver and kidney disease should be avoided.

CONCLUSIONS

Jakinibs in monotherapy or in combination with methotrexate can be considered a viable alternative in the treatment of moderate-to-severe RA. Even after failures with combination of cDMARDS and bDMARDS, jakinibs demonstrated efficacy.

The intersection of COVID-19 and cancer: signaling pathways and treatment implications

The outbreak of the novel coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) has emerged as a serious public health concern. Patients with cancer have been disproportionately affected by this pandemic. Increasing evidence has documented that patients with malignancies are highly susceptible to severe infections and mortality from COVID-19. Recent studies have also elucidated the molecular relationship between the two diseases, which may not only help optimize cancer care during the pandemic but also expand the treatment for COVID-19. In this review, we highlight the clinical and molecular similarities between cancer and COVID-19 and summarize the four major signaling pathways at the intersection of COVID-19 and cancer, namely, cytokine, type I interferon (IFN-I), androgen receptor (AR), and immune checkpoint signaling. In addition, we discuss the advantages and disadvantages of repurposing anticancer treatment for the treatment of COVID-19.

Efficacy and safety of jakinibs in rheumatoid arthritis: a systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVES

To assess the efficacy and safety of jakinibs for the treatment of active rheumatoid arthritis (RA) in patients with an inadequate response or intolerance to conventional synthetic or biologic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs).

METHODS

A systematic search was conducted in PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Library. Randomized placebo-controlled trials (RCTs) of jakinibs in RA patients were eligible. The effective outcome was RA improvement to reach an American College of Rheumatology 20%/50%/70% (ACR20/50/70) response rate at weeks 12 and 24 after treatment. The safety outcomes included treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs), serious adverse events (SAEs), and discontinuations due to adverse events, infections, and serious infections.

RESULTS

Twenty-eight randomized, double-blind, controlled trials including 14,500 patients were included. At both weeks 12 and 24, the pooled analysis suggested effective treatment with jakinibs, represented as an increased clinical response of ACR20, ACR50, and ACR70. Subgroup analysis based on different types of jakinibs demonstrated that only peficitinib treatment had no impact on the clinical response of ACR50 or ACR70 at week 12. Jakinibs were associated with an increased incidence of infections at week 12 and TEAEs and infections at week 24. No increase in the risk of SAEs, discontinuations due to adverse events, or serious infections was observed in comparisons between treatment with jakinibs and treatment with placebo in these patients.

CONCLUSIONS

Jakinibs are efficacious and well tolerated in RA patients up to 24 weeks, although they are associated with an increased risk of infectious complications. Key Points • ACR20/50/70 in patients treated with jakinibs was significantly higher than those in patients treated with placebo. • No difference in ACR50/70 was observed in patients with RA treated with peficitinib and placebo. • Jakinibs are beneficial and well tolerated in RA treatment.

Efficacy of baricitinib in patients with moderate-to-severe rheumatoid arthritis with 3 years of treatment: results from a long-term study

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the long-term efficacy of once-daily baricitinib 4 mg in patients with active RA who were either naïve to DMARDs or who had inadequate response (IR) to MTX.

METHODS

Analyses of data from two completed 52-week, phase III studies, RA-BEGIN (DMARD-naïve) and RA-BEAM (MTX-IR), and one ongoing long-term extension (LTE) study (RA-BEYOND) were performed (148 total weeks). At week 52, DMARD-naïve patients treated with MTX monotherapy or baricitinib 4 mg+MTX in RA-BEGIN were switched to open-label baricitinib 4 mg monotherapy; MTX-IR patients treated with adalimumab (+MTX) in RA-BEAM were switched to open-label baricitinib 4 mg (+MTX) in the LTE. Patients who received placebo (+MTX) were switched to baricitinib 4 mg (+MTX) at week 24. Low disease activity (LDA) [Simple Disease Activity Index (SDAI) ≤11], clinical remission (SDAI ≤ 3.3), and physical functioning [Health Assessment Questionnaire Disability Index (HAQ-DI) ≤ 0.5] were assessed. Data were assessed using a non-responder imputation.

RESULTS

At week 148, SDAI LDA was achieved in up to 61% of DMARD-naïve patients and 59% of MTX-IR patients initially treated with baricitinib, and SDAI remission was achieved in up to 34% of DMARD-naïve patients and 24% of MTX-IR patients; HAQ-DI ≤ 0.5 was reached in up to 48% of DMARD-naïve patients and 38% of MTX-IR patients initially treated with baricitinib. Over 148 weeks, 3.6% and 10.7% of MTX-IR patients discontinued across treatment groups due to lack of efficacy or due to adverse events, respectively; discontinuation rates were similar in the DMARD-naïve population.

CONCLUSION

Treatment with baricitinib 4 mg demonstrated efficacy for up to 3 years and was well tolerated.

Baricitinib in the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis: clinical and ultrasound evaluation of a real-life single-centre experience

Background:

Ultrasound (US) is useful in monitoring RA patients, with the US7 score allowing grey-scale and power-Doppler (PD) semi-quantitative evaluation of synovitis and teno-synovitis. We evaluated real-life efficacy and safety of Baricitinib, an oral selective JAK1-2 inhibitor, in RA patients using clinical, clinimetric, and US assessments.

Methods:

Disease activity score in 28 joints calculated with C-reactive protein (DAS28-CRP), disease activity score in 28 joints calculated with erythrocyte sedimentation rate (DAS28-ESR), clinical disease activity index (CDAI), simplified disease activity index (SDAI), visual analogue scale (VAS)-pain, health assessment questionnaire (HAQ), COCHIN scale, adverse events (AE), concomitant medications, laboratory parameters, and US7 were performed/recorded at baseline, 1, 3, and 6 months in RA patients starting Baricitinib. Responder/non-responder status was determined according to the EULAR Response Criteria at 3 months. SDAI clinical remission or low disease activity (LDA) were calculated at 3 and 6 months.

Results:

In 43 enrolled patients, a significant improvement in disease activity and US7 components (except tendon PD) and a reduction of steroid dosage were observed. Responders at 3 months showed a significantly higher reduction of CDAI, SDAI, COCHIN scale, VAS-pain, and US7 synovialPD, compared with non-responders. At 3 and 6 months, remission/LDA was achieved by 12.8/53.8% and 21.6/51.3% patients, respectively. The csDMARD co-treatment was independently associated with remission/LDA at 3 months. Safety-related drop-outs were in line with literature data. The steroid dosage was associated with AE development at 6 months.

Conclusion:

The real-life data, also obtained with US evaluation, confirmed the Baricitinib efficacy in RA disease control, as well as the utility of assessment during the follow up of disease activity.

Clinical use of Jak 1 inhibitors for rheumatoid arthritis

The uptake of Jak inhibitors in the RA space has been among the most rapid in rheumatology, based on the results of comprehensive clinical trial programmes of five agents. Newer generations of Jak inhibitors, like upadacitinib and filgotinib, target Jak 1 selectively with the aim of maximizing efficacy and to improve safety. This article will review the clinical significance of evidence on: (i) Jak 1 selectivity; (ii) efficacy from the SELECT and FINCH clinical trial programmes including patient intolerant or inadequately responding to MTX (MTX-IR) and other csDMARDs patients who are bDMARD-IR) and those using monotherapy when MTX is not tolerated or contraindicated and those treated when methotrexate naive; and (iii) safety from the clinical trial programmes of these two agents will be discussed.

JAK1: Number one in the family; number one in inflammation?

Several cytokines involved in inflammatory pathologies signal via the Janus kinase-signal transducer and activator of transcription pathway. Four JAKs are known: JAK1, JAK2, JAK3 and TYK2. The specific activation of JAKs and STATs determines the biological effects of each cytokine. JAK1 is involved in the signalling of 'γc' receptor cytokines (IL-2, IL-4, IL-7, IL-9, IL-15 and IL-21), pro-inflammatory cytokines including IL-6, as well as IFN. The critical position of JAK1 downstream of these cytokines suggests that JAK1-selective inhibitors are comparable to non-selective ones, without the unwanted consequences of JAK2- or JAK3-blockade. JAK inhibition has led to a better understanding of the biology of synovial inflammation and bone homeostasis. Moreover, the efficacy of non-selective JAK inhibitors and novel JAK1-selective drugs in RA supports a role for JAK1 in its pathogenesis. JAK1-selective drugs are also showing promise in axial spondyloarthritis, suggesting that they may target additional regulatory pathways that impact cytokines such as TNF and IL-17A, which do not use JAKs. Additionally, evidence now supports a JAK1 predominance in the signalling of IL-6 and oncostatin M, and indirectly, of TNF in synovial fibroblasts, macrophages and endothelial cells. Notably, bone homeostasis is also dependent on cytokines relying on JAK1 signalling to promote receptor activator of NF-κB ligand expression in osteoblasts and T cells, contributing to osteoclastogenesis. Here, the contribution of JAK1 over other kinases is unclear. While beneficial effects of JAK inhibitors on bone erosion are supported by preclinical and clinical data, effects on new bone formation in axial spondyloarthritis requires additional study.

Role of Janus Kinase inhibitors in rheumatoid arthritis treatment

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

To review recently published articles on use of Janus Kinase inhibitors (Jaki) in the clinic for rheumatoid arthritis (RA).

RECENT FINDINGS

Several Jaki have been approved for RA patients failing csDMARDS. Over the last 2 years, EULAR and ACR have published updated recommendations for the pharmacologic management of RA providing guidance on the utilization of Jaki after csDMARD failure. Clinical trials have been published addressing the efficacy of Jaki monotherapy as patients often choose monotherapy because of a desire to avoid multiple therapies and aggravating adverse events with csDMARDs. Previous clinical trials have compared the efficacy and safety of Jaki to adalimumab, and a trial comparing abatacept to upadacitinib has recently been published. An increased risk of venous thromboembolism (VTE) has been suggested with Jaki and additional information has recently become available with conflicting results.

SUMMARY

Jaki are now standard therapy for RA patients failing csDMARDs and are being utilized frequently as an alternative to biologics in patients without risk factors for VTE. Jaki monotherapy has been demonstrated to be effective, although combination therapy has been demonstrated to be superior in clinical and radiographic outcomes. Preliminary data suggests that cycling through Jaki in patients with incomplete response to initial Jaki treatment may be an appropriate strategy.

Efficacy of methotrexate in reducing the risk of bone erosion in patients with rheumatoid arthritis: a systematic review of randomized controlled trials

Even though new drugs for the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis (RA) have been developed, methotrexate (MTX) remains a commonly used drug for RA management. In addition to monitoring disease activity during RA treatment, bone erosion should be closely assessed throughout long-term RA management. In this review article, we present a systematic review of MTX effectiveness in reducing the risk of bone erosion. We reviewed randomized controlled trial studies that involved MTX monotherapy or MTX in combination with placebo. Evaluation of the progression of bone erosion was examined by radiographic assessment such as total Sharp score (TSS) or van der Heijde score (SvdH or vdH TSS), joint space narrowing (JSN), erosion score (ERO), and proportion of radiographic nonprogressors. Several key factors were found to influence the response to MTX treatment, such as gene polymorphism. The exact mechanism of the prevention of bone erosion by MTX remains unclear, which warrants future investigations. The variability of RA disease activity in study subjects resulted in variations in the results reported by individual studies. Collective analysis suggests that MTX could slow down the progression of bone erosion based on a radiographic score of less than 0.5-1/year.

Upadacitinib in Rheumatoid Arthritis: A Benefit-Risk Assessment Across a Phase III Program

Treating to a target of clinical remission or low disease activity is an important principle for managing rheumatoid arthritis (RA). Despite the availability of biologic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (bDMARDs), a substantial proportion of patients with RA do not achieve these treatment targets. Upadacitinib is a once-daily, oral Janus kinase (JAK) inhibitor with increased selectivity for JAK1 over JAK2, JAK3, and tyrosine kinase 2. The SELECT phase III upadacitinib clinical program comprised five pivotal trials of approximately 4400 patients with RA, including inadequate responders (IR) to conventional synthetic (cs)DMARDs or bDMARDs. This review aims to provide insights into the benefit-risk profile of upadacitinib in patients with RA. Upadacitinib 15 mg once daily, in combination with csDMARDs or as monotherapy, achieved all primary and ranked secondary endpoints in the five pivotal trials across csDMARD-naïve, csDMARD-IR, and bDMARD-IR populations. Upadacitinib 15 mg also demonstrated significantly higher rates of remission and low disease activity in all five pivotal trials, compared with placebo, methotrexate, or adalimumab. Labeled warnings of JAK inhibitors include serious infections, herpes zoster, malignancies, major cardiovascular events, and venous thromboembolic events. Short- and long-term integrated analyses showed that upadacitinib 15 mg was associated with increased risk of herpes zoster and creatine phosphokinase elevations compared with methotrexate and adalimumab but otherwise had comparable safety with these active comparators. This review suggests that upadacitinib 15 mg had a favorable benefit-risk profile. The safety of upadacitinib will continue to be monitored in long-term extensions and post-marketing studies.

Safety of Baricitinib 4 mg for the Treatment of Moderate to Severe Rheumatoid Arthritis

OBJECTIVE

We evaluated the safety of baricitinib 4 mg at 24 weeks for the treatment of moderate to severe rheumatoid arthritis (RA).

METHODS

Multiple databases were searched from inception up to November 26, 2019 for randomized controlled trials comparing baricitinib 4 mg with placebo for the treatment of moderate to severe RA. The safety outcomes of interest were the incidence of serious adverse events, adverse events leading to study discontinuation, all infections, and serious infections. Adjusted risk ratios (RRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were pooled for safety outcomes. The Cochrane tool was used to assess the risk of bias.

RESULTS

This analysis included four randomized controlled trials with 3106 patients. For serious adverse events, the pooled RR (95% CI) was 1.09 (0.76-1.57). For adverse events leading to study discontinuation, the pooled RR (95% CI) was 1.41 (0.94-2.11). For all reported infections, the pooled RR (95% CI) was 1.24 (1.10-1.40), For serious infections, pooled RR (95% CI) was 0.97 (0.51-2.57).

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with RA taking 4 mg baricitinib daily did have an increased risk of infections; however, the incidence of serious adverse events, adverse events leading to study discontinuation, or serious infections were not significantly different in patients treated with baricitinib 4 mg compared with placebo.

Effect of janus kinase inhibitors and methotrexate combination on malignancy in patients with rheumatoid arthritis: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

Background

Rheumatoid arthritis (RA) is a systemic autoimmune disease. The combination therapy of methotrexate (MTX) and Janus kinase inhibitor (JAKi) is commonly used. Patients with RA are at increased risk of malignancy, however, it remains unclear whether the combination therapy is associated with a higher risk.

Objective

To assess the malignancy risk among patients with RA receiving combination therapy of JAKi and MTX compared to MTX alone.

Methods

PubMed, Cochrane and Embase were thoroughly searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in patients with RA receiving JAKi and MTX, from inception to July 2020. Primary endpoints were malignancy events, Non melanomatous skin cancer (NMSC) and malignancy excluding NMSC and secondary endpoints were serious adverse events (SAE), deaths. Risk ratio (RR) and 95% CI were calculated using the Mantel–Haenszel random-effect method.

Results

659 publications were screened and 13 RCTs with a total of 6911 patients were included in the analysis. There was no statistically significant difference in malignancy [RR = 1.42; 95% CI (0.59, 3.41)], neither NMSC [RR = 1.44 (0.36, 5.76)] nor malignancies excluding NMSC [RR = 1.12 (0.40, 3.13)]. No statistically significant difference between the two groups for SAE [RR = 1.15 (0.90, 1.47)] and deaths [RR = 1.99 (0.75, 5.27)] was found.

Conclusion

The adjunction of JAKi to MTX is not associated with an increased risk of malignancy when compared to MTX alone. There is no increased risk of SAE and deaths when compared to MTX alone in patients with RA.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s13317-021-00153-5.

Cost-Effectiveness of Baricitinib for Patients with Moderate-to-Severe Rheumatoid Arthritis After Methotrexate Failed in China

INTRODUCTION

A phase 3 (RA-BEAM study) clinical trial reported that baricitinib (BCT) + methotrexate (MTX) had clinical improvement compared with adalimumab (ADA) + MTX as a first-line strategy in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) who had inadequate responses to MTX monotherapy. However, from the perspective of the Chinese healthcare system, the cost-effectiveness of introducing BCT into current treatment for patients with RA unresponsive to MTX remains unclear.

METHODS

A patient-level microsimulation model was used to extrapolate the lifetime incremental cost per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) and other outcomes. This study compared treatment sequences with or without first-line BCT with current treatment sequences, including adalimumab, etanercept, tocilizumab, and palliative care. Effectiveness and physical function were assessed using the American College of Rheumatology (ACR) 20/50/70 response and Health Assessment Questionnaire (HAQ). The input parameters of the model, comprising patient characteristics (sex and age) and treatment efficacy (ACR responses and HAQ score), were derived from a phase III clinical trial and network meta-analysis. The total cost estimation included direct costs and indirect costs. Probabilistic and univariate sensitivity analyses were performed, as were a series of scenario analyses.

RESULTS

The lifetime analysis revealed that adding BCT as a first-line treatment resulted in a QALY gain of 2.66 years; this gain would cost an incremental $26,662, leading to an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of $10,036/QALY per patient compared with the current treatment sequence. Sensitivity and scenario analyses showed the results to be robust.

CONCLUSIONS

From a Chinese payer perspective, the introduction of BCT into the current treatment sequence is projected to be a cost-effective option as first-, second-, third-, and fourth-line treatment for patients with moderate-to-severe RA.

Tibetan medicine Ershiwuwei Lvxue Pill attenuates collagen-induced arthritis via inhibition of JAK2/STAT3 signaling pathway

ETHNOPHARMACOLOGICAL RELEVANCE

Ershiwuwei Lvxue Pill (ELP, མགྲིན་མཚལ་ཉེར་ལྔ།), a traditional Tibetan medicine preparation, has been used hundreds of years for the clinical treatment of rheumatoid arthritis (RA) in the highland region of Tibet, China. However, the underlying mechanism of its therapeutic effect remains unclear.

AIM OF THE STUDY

The present study aimed to investigate the potential pharmacological mechanisms of anti-arthritic effect of ELP.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The main chemical constituents of ELP were analyzed by ultra-performance liquid chromatography quadrupole-time-flight mass spectrometry (UPLC-Q-TOF-MS). Forty-eight male Wistar rats (220 ± 20 g) were randomly divided into six groups: normal group, collagen-induced arthritis (CIA) group, methotrexate group (1.05 mg/kg), ELP groups (115, 230 and 460 mg/kg). CIA rat models were assigned to evaluate the anti-RA activity of ELP by determining the paws swelling, arthritis score, organ coefficients of spleen and thymus, and histopathological analysis of knee joints of synovial tissues. The levels of TNF-α, IL-10, IL-6 and IL-17 in serum were measured by ELISA. In addition, mRNA and protein expression levels associated with JAK2/STAT3 signaling pathway in synovial tissues of CIA rats were detected by qRT-PCR, immunohistochemistry and Western blot analyses.

RESULTS

Fourteen main chemical constituents of ELP were quantitatively determined by UPLC-Q-TOF-MS analysis. Treatment with ELP reduced the paw swelling, arthritis score and organ coefficients of spleen and thymus. Histopathological examination revealed the protective effects of ELP on CIA rats with knee joint injury. The levels of serum pro-inflammatory cytokines (TNF-α, IL-6 and IL-17) were markedly reduced while the anti-inflammatory cytokine IL-10 was significantly increased with the treatment of ELP. Further investigations showed ELP down-regulated the mRNA and protein expression levels of Bcl-2, whereas up-regulated Bax, SOCS1 and SOCS3. Meanwhile, the ratios of p-JAK2/JAK2 and p-STAT3/STAT3 proteins from synovial tissues were dramatically decreased with the treatment of ELP, whereas no changes of the mRNA and protein expression levels of JAK2 and STAT3 were observed.

CONCLUSION

These results indicated that ELP reduced the severity of arthritis and joint swelling, suggesting an antirheumatic effect on CIA rats. The possible mechanism is related to inhibiting inflammatory response and inducing apoptosis in synovial tissues by regulating JAK2/STAT3 signaling pathway. However, further in vivo and in vitro investigations are still needed to clarify the underlying mechanism of ELP in treating RA.

Comparative effectiveness of improvement in pain and physical function for baricitinib versus adalimumab, tocilizumab and tofacitinib monotherapies in rheumatoid arthritis patients who are naïve to treatment with biologic or conventional synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs: a matching-adjusted indirect comparison

Objective

To compare improvement in pain and physical function for patients treated with baricitinib, adalimumab, tocilizumab and tofacitinib monotherapy from randomised, methotrexate (MTX)-controlled trials in conventional synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (csDMARDs)/biologic (bDMARD)-naïve RA patients using matching-adjusted indirect comparisons (MAICs).

Methods

Data were from Phase III trials on patients receiving monotherapy baricitinib, tocilizumab, adalimumab, tofacitinib or MTX. Pain was assessed using a visual analogue scale (0–100 mm) and physical function using the Health Assessment Questionnaire-Disability Index (HAQ-DI). An MAIC based on treatment-arm matching, an MAIC with study-level matching and Bucher’s method without matching compared change in outcomes between therapies. Matching variables included age, gender, baseline disease activity and baseline value of outcome measure.

Results

With all methods, greater improvements were observed in pain and HAQ-DI at 6 months for baricitinib compared with adalimumab and tocilizumab (p<0.05). Differences in treatment effects (TEs) favouring baricitinib for pain VAS for treatment-arm matching, study-level matching and Bucher’s method, respectively, were −12, −12 and −12 for baricitinib versus adalimumab and −7, −7 and −9 for baricitinib versus tocilizumab; the difference in TEs for HAQ-DI was −0.28, −0.28 and −0.30 for adalimumab and −0.23, −0.23 and −0.26 for tocilizumab. For baricitinib versus tofacitinib, no statistically significant differences for pain improvement were observed except with one of the three methods (Bucher method) and none for HAQ-DI.

Conclusions

Results suggest greater pain reduction and improved physical function for baricitinib monotherapy compared with tocilizumab and adalimumab monotherapy. No statistically significant differences in pain reduction and improved physical function were observed between baricitinib and tofacitinib with the MAIC analyses.

Evaluation of hepatitis B virus in clinical trials of baricitinib in rheumatoid arthritis

BACKGROUND

Reactivation of hepatitis B virus (HBV) replication is a well-recognised complication in patients receiving disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs (DMARDs) for rheumatoid arthritis (RA). Limited data exist on HBV reactivation among patients with RA treated with janus kinase (JAK) inhibitors. The objective of the current study was to assess HBV reactivation in clinical trials of baricitinib, an oral selective JAK1 and JAK2 inhibitor in RA.

METHODS

Data were integrated from four completed Phase 3 trials and one ongoing long-term extension (data up to 1 April 2017) in patients naïve to DMARDs or who had inadequate response (IR) to DMARDs including methotrexate (MTX)-IR and/or other conventional synthetic DMARD (csDMARD)-IR, or tumour necrosis factor inhibitors-IR. Within the clinical programme, baricitinib-treated patients may have received concomitant csDMARDs including MTX, or previous treatment with active comparators including MTX or adalimumab + MTX. At screening, all patients were tested for HBV surface antigen (HBsAg), core antibody (HBcAb) and surface antibody (HBsAb). Patients were excluded if they had (1) HBsAg+, (2) HBcAb+/HBsAb- (in Japan, could enrol if HBV DNA-) or (3) HBsAb+ and HBV DNA+. HBV DNA monitoring, following randomisation in the originating Phase 3 studies, was performed in Japan for patients with HBcAb+ and/or HBsAb+ at screening, and was later instituted globally for HBcAb+ patients in accordance with evolving guidance for HBV monitoring and management with immunomodulatory therapy.

RESULTS

In total, 2890 patients received at least one dose of baricitinib in Phase 3 (6993 patient-years exposure). Of 215 patients with baseline serology suggestive of prior HBV infection (HbcAb+) who received a post-baseline DNA test, 32 (14.9%) were HBV DNA+ at some point following treatment initiation; 8 of 215 patients (3.7%) had a single quantifiable result (≥29 IU/mL). Of these eight patients, four met the definition of reactivation of HBV (HBV DNA level ≥100 IU/mL); baricitinib was permanently discontinued in four patients, and temporarily interrupted in two patients. No patient developed clinical evidence of hepatitis and in five of eight patients, antiviral therapy was not used.

CONCLUSION

HBV reactivation can occur among RA patients treated with DMARDs, including baricitinib, with prior HBV exposure. Our data suggest that such patients should be monitored for HBV DNA during treatment and might be treated safely with the use of antiviral therapy as needed. The risk of HBV reactivation in patients with HBsAg treated with baricitinib is unknown.

Efficacy and safety of tofacitinib versus baricitinib in patients with rheumatoid arthritis in real clinical practice: analyses with propensity score-based inverse probability of treatment weighting

Objectives

The differences of efficacy between each Janus kinase (JAK) inhibitors have not been clarified in the patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) in clinical practice. Here, we compared the efficacy between tofacitinib (TOFA) and baricitinib (BARI) in clinical practice.

Methods

The efficacy of TOFA (n=156) in patients with RA was compared with BARI (n=138). Selection bias was reduced to a minimum using propensity score-based inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW). The Clinical Disease Activity Index (CDAI) trajectory for patients who started TOFA or BARI was analysed using growth mixture modelling (GMM).

Results

No significant difference was observed in patient characteristics between the TOFA and BARI groups in after adjustment by propensity score-based IPTW. The BARI group had a significantly higher rate of CDAI remission at week 24 after the introduction of JAK inhibitors than the TOFA group. The treatment-resistant group defined by GMM, comprising patients who did not achieve low disease activity at week 24, was more likely to include those who had received many biological disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (bDMARDs) before the introduction of JAK inhibitors and those who received TOFA. Among patients with RA who received TOFA, those who had received ≥4 bDMARDs before the introduction of TOFA were more likely to be classified into the treatment-resistant group.

Conclusions

BARI showed a similar safety profile and better clinical outcome when compared with TOFA after reduction to a minimum of selection bias. However, these were observed in a small population. Accordingly, further investigation is required in an accurately powered head-to-head trial.

Use of Anti-Cytokine Therapy in Kidney Transplant Recipients with COVID-19

In the context of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, we aimed to evaluate the impact of anti-cytokine therapies (AT) in kidney transplant recipients requiring hospitalization due to severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection. This is an observational retrospective study, which included patients from March to May 2020. An inverse probability of treatment weighting from a propensity score to receive AT was used in all statistical analyses, and we applied a bootstrap procedure in order to calculate an estimation of the 2.5th and 97.5th percentiles of odds ratio (OR). outcomes were measured using an ordinal scale determination (OSD). A total of 33 kidney recipients required hospitalization and 54% of them received at least one AT, mainly tocilizumab (42%), followed by anakinra (12%). There was no statistical effect in terms of intensive care unit (ICU) admission, respiratory secondary infections (35% vs. 7%) or mortality (16% vs. 13%) comparing patients that received AT with those who did not. Nevertheless, patients who received AT presented better outcomes during hospitalization in terms of OSD ≥5 ((OR 0.31; 2.5th, 97.5th percentiles (0.10; 0.72)). These analyses indicate, as a plausible hypothesis, that the use of AT in kidney transplant recipients presenting with COVID-19 could be beneficial, even though multicenter randomized control trials using these therapies in transplanted patients are needed.

Placebo and nocebo responses in randomized controlled trials of Janus kinase inhibitor monotherapy for rheumatoid arthritis : A meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

The goal of this meta-analysis was to assess the frequency and magnitude of placebo and nocebo responses in placebo-controlled randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of Janus kinase (JAK) inhibitor monotherapy for rheumatoid arthritis (RA) METHODS: We performed a meta-analysis on the rates of placebo response, adverse effects (AEs), severe AEs (SAEs) and withdrawal due to AEs in placebo-controlled randomized clinical trials (RCTs) of JAK inhibitor therapy for RA.

RESULTS

Five RCTs contained a total of 1422 patients (746 trial participants and 676 controls). The pooled incidence of an American College of Rheumatology 20% (ACR20) response rate was 33.0% (95% CI 19.6-44.9%) in placebo-treated patients and 68.3% (95% CI 61.4-74.1%) in active drug-treated patients. A strong negative correlation was observed between drug efficacies (ACR20 response) and AE rates in the placebo arm, indicating that the stronger the placebo response, the weaker the nocebo response (r = -0.906, P = 0.034). The pooled estimate of at least one AE was 54.1% (95% CI 44.6-63.4%) in placebo-treated patients and 54.5% (95% CI 46.2-62.6%) in active drug-treated patients. The pooled SAE rate was 3.9% (95% CI 2.7-5.7%) in placebo-treated patients and 3.8% (95% CI 2.5-5.7%) in active comparator-treated patients. The pooled estimate of withdrawal owing to an AE was 4.1% (95% CI 1.4-11.3%) in placebo-treated patients and 2.1% (95% CI 0.8-5.4%) in active drug-treated patients. However, there were no differences in the pooled risk of AE, SAEs, or withdrawal owing to AEs between the active comparator and placebo groups. A strong positive correlation was observed in AE rates between the placebo and active arms, indicating that the stronger the nocebo response, the higher the AE rate in the active arm (r = 0.957, P = 0.012).

CONCLUSION

The frequency of placebo and nocebo responses was 33.0 and 54.1%, respectively, in JAK monotherapy trials for RA. The findings indicated that the strengths of placebo and nocebo responses are inversely proportional and that clinically significant differences were absent between AE, SAE, and dropout owing to AEs.

Interpretation of network meta-analyses of the efficacy of rheumatoid arthritis drugs

WHAT IS KNOWN AND OBJECTIVE

Both biological agents and Janus kinase (JAK) inhibitors have been shown to be effective in rheumatoid arthritis (RA) patients with inadequate responses to tumour necrosis factor (TNF) inhibitors. Network meta-analyses are useful for comparing drug effectiveness in the absence of direct head-to-head comparisons. We comment on two such meta-analyses reported in this Journal to highlight aspects of their interpretation.

COMMENT

In network meta-analyses, it is important to critically examine whether the direct and indirect estimates are divergent, keeping in mind that the surface under the cumulative ranking probability curve (SUCRA) is a relative value in such analyses. In two studies, examining the effect of therapeutic agents for RA by using NMA, the SUCRA method, produced a distinct ranking for JAK inhibitors in monotherapy, and non-TNF inhibitors and JAK inhibitors, in cases of TNF failure. Nonetheless, the differences in treatment effects were small and their clinical significance requires validation.

WHAT IS NEW AND CONCLUSION

NMA is a useful method for studying the comparative effectiveness of multiple treatments. However, increased attention should be paid when using this method to distinguish statistically significant differences from clinically meaningful differences.

JAK Inhibitors and Modulation of B Cell Immune Responses in Rheumatoid Arthritis

Rheumatoid arthritis (RA) is a chronic, systemic immune-mediated inflammatory disease that can lead to joint destruction, functional disability and substantial comorbidity due to the involvement of multiple organs and systems. B cells have several important roles in RA pathogenesis, namely through autoantibody production, antigen presentation, T cell activation, cytokine release and ectopic lymphoid neogenesis. The success of B cell depletion therapy with rituximab, a monoclonal antibody directed against CD20 expressed by B cells, has further supported B cell intervention in RA development. Despite the efficacy of synthetic and biologic disease modifying anti-rheumatic drugs (DMARDs) in the treatment of RA, few patients reach sustained remission and refractory disease is a concern that needs critical evaluation and close monitoring. Janus kinase (JAK) inhibitors or JAKi are a new class of oral medications recently approved for the treatment of RA. JAK inhibitors suppress the activity of one or more of the JAK family of tyrosine kinases, thus interfering with the JAK-Signal Transducer and Activator of Transcription (STAT) signaling pathway. To date, there are five JAK inhibitors (tofacitinib, baricitinib, upadacitinib, peficitinib and filgotinib) approved in the USA, Europe and/ or Japan for RA treatment. Evidence from the literature indicates that JAK inhibitors interfere with B cell functions. In this review, the main results obtained in clinical trials, pharmacokinetic, in vitro and in vivo studies concerning the effects of JAK inhibitors on B cell immune responses in RA are summarized.

Serum IL-37 Level Is Associated with Rheumatoid Arthritis and Disease Activity: A Meta-Analysis

Interleukin-37 (IL-37) inhibits the pathogenesis of rheumatoid arthritis (RA) via downregulating proinflammatory cytokines. Accordingly, we performed an analysis to accurately assess the relationship between serum IL-37 cytokine levels and disease activity of RA. Subgroup analysis and sensitivity analysis were applied to explore the sources of heterogeneity. Correlation coefficient (r) was utilized to evaluate the relationship between IL-37 and disease activity of RA patients. Ten studies were included into the research. Functional analysis revealed elevated serum IL-37 concentrations in RA patients (SMD = 1.61, P < 0.00001). The relationship between serum IL-37 levels and disease activity was statistically significant (C-reactive protein: r = 1.47, P = 0.0002; erythrocyte sedimentation rate: r = 1.55, P < 0.00001; rheumatoid factor: r = 1.40, P = 0.004; tumor necrosis factor⁃α: r = 1.64, P = 0.0003; Disease Activity Score for 28 joints: r = 1.63, P < 0.00001; tender joint count: r = 1.48, P < 0.00001; and swollen joint count: r = 1.52, P = 0.0003), but anti-CCP was not significant (anti-CCP: r = 0.98, P = 0.72). In summary, these data are suggesting that the elevated serum level of IL-37 in RA is positively correlated with the disease activity of RA, suggesting a role for IL-37in the pathogenesis of RA.

Network theoretic analysis of JAK/STAT pathway and extrapolation to drugs and viruses including COVID-19

Whenever some phenomenon can be represented as a graph or a network it seems pertinent to explore how much the mathematical properties of that network impact the phenomenon. In this study we explore the same philosophy in the context of immunology. Our objective was to assess the correlation of "size" (number of edges and minimum vertex cover) of the JAK/STAT network with treatment effect in rheumatoid arthritis (RA), phenotype of viral infection and effect of immunosuppressive agents on a system infected with the coronavirus. We extracted the JAK/STAT pathway from Kyoto Encyclopedia of Genes and Genomes (KEGG, hsa04630). The effects of the following drugs, and their combinations, commonly used in RA were tested: methotrexate, prednisolone, rituximab, tocilizumab, tofacitinib and baricitinib. Following viral systems were also tested for their ability to evade the JAK/STAT pathway: Measles, Influenza A, West Nile virus, Japanese B virus, Yellow Fever virus, respiratory syncytial virus, Kaposi's sarcoma virus, Hepatitis B and C virus, cytomegalovirus, Hendra and Nipah virus and Coronavirus. Good correlation of edges and minimum vertex cover with clinical efficacy were observed (for edge, rho =  - 0.815, R² = 0.676, p = 0.007, for vertex cover rho =  - 0.793, R² = 0.635, p = 0.011). In the viral systems both edges and vertex cover were associated with acuteness of viral infections. In the JAK/STAT system already infected with coronavirus, maximum reduction in size was achieved with baricitinib. To conclude, algebraic and combinatorial invariant of a network may explain its biological behaviour. At least theoretically, baricitinib may be an attractive target for treatment of coronavirus infection.

Frequency of Prescription Claims for Drugs that May Interact with Janus Kinase Inhibitors Among Patients with Rheumatoid Arthritis in the US

Introduction

This study describes the frequency of prescription claims for drugs that may interact with Janus kinase (JAK) inhibitors among adult patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) in a large US claims database.

Methods

This observational, retrospective, cross-sectional study of the IBM^® MarketScan^® Research Commercial and the Medicare Supplemental Database included adults (≥ 18 years) with ≥ 2 outpatient claims 30 or more days apart or ≥ 1 inpatient visit claim with an RA diagnosis between January 1, 2013 and March 31, 2017 (the index period). During the study period, from January 1, 2013 to March 31, 2018, strong organic anion transporter (OAT3) inhibitors, strong cytochrome P450 (CYP) 3A4 inhibitors, and moderate or strong CYP3A4 inhibitors in combination with strong CYP2C19 inhibitors, were identified as drugs with potential for drug–drug interactions (DDIs) with JAK inhibitors approved for RA treatment in the US. Descriptive statistics were conducted.

Results

A total of 152,853 patients met eligibility criteria. Approximately 76% were women and the median age was 57 years. Of these patients, < 0.1% had a claim for a strong OAT3 inhibitor, and 1% had claims for the combination of a strong CYP3A4 and strong CYP2C19 inhibitor; 3% of patients had a claim for a strong CYP3A4 inhibitor and almost 10% had claims for both a moderate CYP3A4 and a strong CYP2C19 inhibitor.

Conclusions

Up to 10% of RA patients have been prescribed a drug with a potential JAK interaction. Rheumatologists should consider potential DDIs when managing patients with RA.

Working and safety profiles of JAK/STAT signaling inhibitors. Are these small molecules also smart?

The Janus kinase (JAK)/signal transducers and activators of transcription (STAT) pathway is an important intracellular route through which many different extracellular soluble molecules, by reaching membrane receptors, can signal the nucleus. The spectrum of soluble molecules that use the JAK/STAT pathway through their corresponding receptors is quite large (almost 50 different molecules), and includes some cytokines involved in the pathogenesis of many immune-mediated diseases. Such diseases, when left untreated, present an evident hyperactivation of JAK/STAT signaling. Therefore, given the pathogenetic role of JAK/STAT, drugs known as JAK inhibitors (JAKi), that target one or more JAKs, have been developed to counteract JAK/STAT signal hyperactivation. As some hematological malignancies present an intrinsic JAK/STAT hyperactivation due to a JAK mutation, some JAKi have also been successfully used in this context. Regulatory agencies for drug administration in different countries have already approved a few JAKi in the setting of either immune-mediated diseases or hematological malignancies. Aim of this review is to describe the physiology of intracellular JAK/STAT pathway signaling and the pathological conditions associated to its dysregulation. Then, the rationale for targeting JAK in rheumatic autoimmune diseases is discussed, along with clinical data from registration studies showing the efficacy of these drugs. Finally, the excellent safety profile of JAKi is discussed in the context of the apparent poor specificity of JAK/STAT pathway signal.

Baricitinib inhibits structural joint damage progression in patients with rheumatoid arthritis-a comprehensive review

Baricitinib is an oral selective inhibitor of Janus kinase (JAK)1 and JAK2 that has proved effective and well tolerated in the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis (RA) in an extensive programme of clinical studies of patients with moderate-to-severe disease. In a phase 2b dose-ranging study of baricitinib in combination with traditional disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs) in RA patients, magnetic resonance imaging showed that baricitinib 2 mg or 4 mg once daily provided dose-dependent suppression of synovitis, osteitis, erosion and cartilage loss at weeks 12 and 24 versus placebo. These findings correlated with clinical outcomes and were confirmed in three phase 3 studies (RA-BEGIN, RA-BEAM and RA-BUILD) using X-rays to assess structural joint damage. In patients naïve to DMARDs (RA-BEGIN study), baricitinib 4 mg once daily as monotherapy or combined with methotrexate produced smaller mean changes in structural joint damage than methotrexate monotherapy at week 24. Differences versus methotrexate were statistically significant for combined therapy. In patients responding inadequately to methotrexate (RA-BEAM study), baricitinib 4 mg plus background methotrexate significantly inhibited structural joint damage at week 24 versus placebo, and the results were comparable to those observed with adalimumab plus background methotrexate. In patients responding inadequately to conventional synthetic DMARDs (csDMARDs; RA-BUILD study), baricitinib 4 mg again significantly inhibited radiographic progression compared with placebo at week 24. Benefits were also observed with baricitinib 2 mg once daily, but the effects of baricitinib 4 mg were more robust. The positive effects of baricitinib 4 mg on radiographic progression continued over 1 and 2 years in the long-term extension study RA-BEYOND, with similar effects to adalimumab and significantly greater effects than placebo. Findings from the phase 3 studies of patients with RA were supported by preclinical studies, which showed that baricitinib has an osteoprotective effect, increasing mineralisation in bone-forming cells. In conclusion, baricitinib 4 mg once daily inhibits radiographic joint damage progression in patients with moderate-to-severe RA who are naïve to DMARDs or respond inadequately to csDMARDs, including methotrexate, and the beneficial effects are similar to those observed with adalimumab.

Points to consider for the treatment of immune-mediated inflammatory diseases with Janus kinase inhibitors: a consensus statement

OBJECTIVES

Janus kinase inhibitors (JAKi) have been approved for use in various immune-mediated inflammatory diseases. With five agents licensed, it was timely to summarise the current understanding of JAKi use based on a systematic literature review (SLR) on efficacy and safety.

METHODS

Existing data were evaluated by a steering committee and subsequently reviewed by a 29 person expert committee leading to the formulation of a consensus statement that may assist the clinicians, patients and other stakeholders once the decision is made to commence a JAKi. The committee included patients, rheumatologists, a gastroenterologist, a haematologist, a dermatologist, an infectious disease specialist and a health professional. The SLR informed the Task Force on controlled and open clinical trials, registry data, phase 4 trials and meta-analyses. In addition, approval of new compounds by, and warnings from regulators that were issued after the end of the SLR search date were taken into consideration.

RESULTS

The Task Force agreed on and developed four general principles and a total of 26 points for consideration which were grouped into six areas addressing indications, treatment dose and comedication, contraindications, pretreatment screening and risks, laboratory and clinical follow-up examinations, and adverse events. Levels of evidence and strengths of recommendations were determined based on the SLR and levels of agreement were voted on for every point, reaching a range between 8.8 and 9.9 on a 10-point scale.

CONCLUSION

The consensus provides an assessment of evidence for efficacy and safety of an important therapeutic class with guidance on issues of practical management.

Rapid Onset of Efficacy of Baricitinib in Chinese Patients with Moderate to Severe Rheumatoid Arthritis: Results from Study RA-BALANCE

INTRODUCTION

Baricitinib is an oral, selective inhibitor of Janus kinase which demonstrates clinical efficacy in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA). This report aims to analyze the onset time of baricitinib in Chinese patients with moderately to severely active RA who had an inadequate response to methotrexate.

METHODS

This post hoc analysis evaluated clinical improvements of Chinese patients treated with baricitinib 4 mg once daily compared with placebo, based on data from a phase 3 study RA-BALANCE. Efficacy measures including American College of Rheumatology 20% (ACR20) response, ACR core set values, Disease Activity Score modified to include the 28 diarthrodial joint count (DAS28) using high-sensitivity C-reactive protein (hsCRP), DAS28-erythrocyte sedimentation rate, Simplified Disease Activity Index, Clinical Disease Activity Index, DAS28-hsCRP ≤ 3.2 response (low disease activity), and Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy-Fatigue (FACIT-F) were evaluated at weeks 1, 2, 4, 8, 12, 14, 16, 20, and 24 (except for FACIT-F evaluated every 4 weeks). A logistic regression model and an analysis of covariance model were used to analyze treatment comparisons of categorical and continuous measures, respectively.

RESULTS

Statistically significant (p ≤ 0.05) improvements were observed as early as week 1 or 2 for the baricitinib group compared to placebo in almost all main efficacy measures. For other outcomes including 66 swollen joint count, 68 tender joint count, FACIT-F, and DAS28-hsCRP ≤ 3.2 response rate, differences were evident (p ≤ 0.05) by week 4 in the baricitinib group compared with placebo. Significant improvements in all efficacy measures were sustained through 24 weeks.

CONCLUSIONS

Baricitinib demonstrated a rapid onset of efficacy on ACR20 response, ACR core set values, disease activity, and patient-reported outcome improvements in Chinese patients from RA-BALANCE.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov identifier, NCT02265705.

Points to consider for the treatment of immune-mediated inflammatory diseases with Janus kinase inhibitors: a consensus statement

OBJECTIVES

Janus kinase inhibitors (JAKi) have been approved for use in various immune-mediated inflammatory diseases. With five agents licensed, it was timely to summarise the current understanding of JAKi use based on a systematic literature review (SLR) on efficacy and safety.

METHODS

Existing data were evaluated by a steering committee and subsequently reviewed by a 29 person expert committee leading to the formulation of a consensus statement that may assist the clinicians, patients and other stakeholders once the decision is made to commence a JAKi. The committee included patients, rheumatologists, a gastroenterologist, a haematologist, a dermatologist, an infectious disease specialist and a health professional. The SLR informed the Task Force on controlled and open clinical trials, registry data, phase 4 trials and meta-analyses. In addition, approval of new compounds by, and warnings from regulators that were issued after the end of the SLR search date were taken into consideration.

RESULTS

The Task Force agreed on and developed four general principles and a total of 26 points for consideration which were grouped into six areas addressing indications, treatment dose and comedication, contraindications, pretreatment screening and risks, laboratory and clinical follow-up examinations, and adverse events. Levels of evidence and strengths of recommendations were determined based on the SLR and levels of agreement were voted on for every point, reaching a range between 8.8 and 9.9 on a 10-point scale.

CONCLUSION

The consensus provides an assessment of evidence for efficacy and safety of an important therapeutic class with guidance on issues of practical management.

Baricitinib for the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis

Rheumatoid arthritis (RA) is a common inflammatory disease with several implications on health, disability and economy. Conventional treatment for RA centers on anti-inflammatory drugs and specific targeting of tumor necrosis factor α (TNF-α) and interleukin 6 (IL-6). Baricitinib is a novel, Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approved, once daily oral drug that is effective in combination with current treatment and results in significantly reduced symptoms with good safety profile. Further studies are required to find rare side effects and evaluate the long term efficacy in disease modulation and patient symptom reduction. This is a comprehensive review of the literature on baricitinib for the treatment of RA.

This review provides an update on the pathophysiology, diagnosis and conventional treatment of RA, then proceeds to introduce baricitinib and the data that exists to support or refute its use in RA. The presented study also indicated clinical trials confirming the effectiveness of baricitinib in this indication.

Predictors for clinical effectiveness of baricitinib in rheumatoid arthritis patients in routine clinical practice: data from a Japanese multicenter registry

This study aimed to evaluate the short-term effectiveness and safety profiles of baricitinib and explore factors associated with improved short-term effectiveness in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) in clinical settings. A total of 113 consecutive RA patients who had been treated with baricitinib were registered in a Japanese multicenter registry and followed for at least 24 weeks. Mean age was 66.1 years, mean RA disease duration was 14.0 years, 71.1% had a history of use of biologics or JAK inhibitors (targeted DMARDs), and 48.3% and 40.0% were receiving concomitant methotrexate and oral prednisone, respectively. Mean DAS28-CRP significantly decreased from 3.55 at baseline to 2.32 at 24 weeks. At 24 weeks, 68.2% and 64.1% of patients achieved low disease activity (LDA) and moderate or good response, respectively. Multivariate logistic regression analysis revealed that no previous targeted DMARD use and lower DAS28-CRP score at baseline were independently associated with achievement of LDA at 24 weeks. While the effectiveness of baricitinib was similar regardless of whether patients had a history of only one or multiple targeted DMARDs use, patients with previous use of non-TNF inhibitors or JAK inhibitors showed lower rates of improvement in DAS28-CRP. The overall retention rate for baricitinib was 86.5% at 24 weeks, as estimated by Kaplan-Meier analysis. The discontinuation rate due to adverse events was 6.5% at 24 weeks. Baricitinib significantly improved RA disease activity in clinical practice. Baricitinib was significantly more effective when used as a first-line targeted DMARDs.

Risk of Venous Thromboembolism Associated With Tofacitinib and Baricitinib: A Systematic Review and Indirect Meta-Analysis

To conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis investigating the effect of tofacitinib and baricitinib on venous thromboembolism (VTE) risk. Search of PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, Scopus, ClinicalTrials.gov, LILACS, and Google Scholar databases to identify controlled observational and clinical trials reporting on adverse effects in patients treated with oral tofacitinib or baricitinib up to July 2020. The outcome measure was occurrence of VTE events. We analyzed 59 studies involving 14,335 patients treated with tofacitinib or baricitinib and 11,612 patients who received another active drug or placebo. The meta-analysis showed an odds ratio (OR) for VTE events of 0.29 (95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.10-0.84) overall for tofacitinib based on data from 10 clinical trials with 15 treatment arms; similar ORs were observed for the 10 mg/d dose (OR = 0.18; 95% CI = 0.02-1.60) and the 20 mg/d dose (OR = 0.19; 95% CI = 0.04-0.91). The ORs for VTE events for baricitinib were 3.39 (95% CI = 0.82-14.04) overall, 3.05 (95% CI = 0.12-75.43) for 2 mg, 3.64 (95% CI = 0.59-22.46) for 4 mg, and 3.0 (95% CI = 0.12-76.49) for 7 mg. The indirect meta-analysis comparing tofacitinib with baricitinib (10 clinical trials with 15 treatment arms) showed an OR for VTE events of 0.086 (95% CI = 0.02-0.51) for tofacitinib and a superior safety profile for VTE events. In the meta-regression analysis (19 clinical trials with 21 treatment arms), the effect was 0.02 (95% CI = -0.04 to 0.08) for tofacitinib and -0.01 (95% CI = -1.29 to 1.26 for baricitinib. Plotting of the data for tofacitinib showed that VTE risk increased with high doses. The effect, however, was less than 1 for the 10-mg and 20-mg doses, indicating a protective effect. This effect was not observed for baricitinib. Tofacitinib is not associated with an increased risk of VTE and has a superior safety profile to baricitinib in this respect. Tofacitinib may exert a protective effect against VTE.

Development of JAK inhibitors for the treatment of immune-mediated diseases: kinase-targeted inhibitors and pseudokinase-targeted inhibitors

JAKs are a family of intracellular tyrosine kinases consisting of four members, JAK1, JAK2, JAK3, and TYK2. They are key components of the JAK-STAT pathway that transmit signals of many cytokines involved in the pathogenesis of numerous immune-mediated diseases and have been major molecular targets in developing new drugs for the treatment of such diseases. Some small-molecule inhibitors of JAKs have been approved by the FDA for rheumatoid arthritis, psoriatic arthritis, and inflammatory bowel disease. Now, newer JAK inhibitors with isoform-selectivity among the four different JAKs are being developed, with the aim of improving clinical outcomes compared with earlier developed drugs with pan-JAK inhibition. Most of these selective inhibitors target the kinase domains of JAKs, functioning through the traditional inhibition mode of kinases; but recently those that target their pseudokinase domains, allosterically inhibiting the enzymes, have been under development. In this review, key characteristics, efficacy, and safety of FDA-approved and representative drugs in late stages of development are briefly described in order to provide clinical implications with respect to JAK inhibitor selectivity and future development perspectives. The recent development of pseudokinase-targeted inhibitors of JAKs is also included.