Tofacitinib and Risk of Malignancy: Results From the Safety of Tofacitinib in Routine Care Patients With Rheumatoid Arthritis (STAR-RA) Study

Prevalence and Factors Associated with De-escalation of Anti-TNFs in Older Adults with Rheumatoid Arthritis: A Medicare Claims-Based Observational Study

OBJECTIVE

The aim was to evaluate prevalence and factors associated with anti-tumor necrosis factor (anti-TNF) de-escalation in older adults with rheumatoid arthritis (RA).

METHODS

We identified adults ≥ 66 years of age with RA on anti-TNF therapy within 6 months after RA diagnosis with at least 6-7 months duration of use (proxy for stable use), using 20% Medicare data from 2008-2017. Patient demographic and clinical characteristics, including concomitant use of glucocorticoid (GC), were collected. Anti-TNF use was categorized as either de-escalation (identified by dosing interval increase, dose reduction, or cessation of use) or continuation. We used (1) an observational cohort design with Cox regression to assess patient characteristics associated with de-escalation and (2) a case-control design with propensity score-adjusted logistic regression to assess the association of de-escalation with different clinical conditions and concomitant medication use.

RESULTS

We identified 5106 Medicare beneficiaries with RA on anti-TNF, 65.5% of whom had de-escalation. De-escalation was more likely with older age (hazard ratio [HR] 1.01, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.01-1.02) or greater comorbidity (HR 1.07, 95% CI 1.05-1.09), but was less likely with low-income subsidy status (HR 0.85, 95% CI 0.78-0.92), adjusting for patient sex and race/ethnicity. Lower odds of de-escalation were associated with serious infection (odds ratio [OR] 0.79, 95% CI 0.66-0.94), new heart failure diagnosis (OR 0.70, 95% CI 0.52-0.95), and long-term GC use (OR 0.84, 95% CI 0.74-0.95), whereas higher odds were associated with concomitant methotrexate use (OR 1.16, 95% CI 1.03-1.31).

CONCLUSIONS

Anti-TNFs are de-escalated in two-thirds of older adults with RA in usual care. Further study is needed on RA outcomes after anti-TNF de-escalation.

A narrative review of the comparative safety of disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs used for the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis

INTRODUCTION

Disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs (DMARDs) have improved the outcomes of patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA). DMARDs are classified into three categories: conventional synthetic DMARDs, biological DMARDs (including biosimilars), and targeted synthetic DMARDs. DMARDs, by way of their effect on the immune system, are associated with increased risk of adverse events, including infections, malignancies, cardiovascular disease, gastrointestinal perforations, and other less common events.

AREAS COVERED

In this narrative literature review performed with searches of the PubMed database from 1 January 2010 through 1 January 2023, we compare the risk of safety events between DMARDs using data from both randomized clinical trials and observational studies.

EXPERT OPINION

DMARD use in RA is associated with higher rates of serious infections, tuberculosis reactivation, opportunistic infections, and possibly malignancies. Specific biologic DMARDs and higher doses are associated with elevated risks of various adverse events (gastrointestinal perforations, thromboembolism, serious infection). Shared decision-making is paramount when choosing a treatment regimen for patients based on their own comorbidities. JAKi are the newest class of medications used for RA with robust safety data provided in clinical trials. However, more real-world evidence and phase-IV pharmacovigilance data are needed to better understand comparative safety profile of DMARDs in RA.

Biologics Versus JAK Inhibitors. Part I: Cancer Risk. A Narrative Review

INTRODUCTION

Biological drugs (BD) and Janus kinase inhibitors (JAKi) have revolutionized the treatment of diverse dermatoses. However, there are concerns regarding their safety, especially the risk of cancer and opportunistic infections. Here, we discuss the risk of cancer associated with the BD and JAKi used in dermatology.

METHODS

A narrative review was carried out. All relevant articles evaluating the risk of cancer associated with BD or JAKi and published between January 2010 and February 2024 were selected.

RESULTS

Multiple large studies have evaluated the association between BD, JAKi and cancer risk. However, there is a lack of prospective, comparative studies. Overall, patients undergoing BD and JAKi present a cutaneous cancer incidence similar to that in the general population. The drugs more strongly associated with non-skin cancer risk were anti-tumor necrosis factor (anti-TNFs) agents and JAKi (especially tofacitinib and oral ruxolitinib). This risk appears to increase with age, the presence of other factors (such as chronic immunosuppression from previous drugs or other comorbidities), and specific diseases such as rheumatoid arthritis (RA) and myelodysplastic syndrome. Conversely, BD such as interleukin (IL)-17 and IL-23 inhibitors may even reduce the risk of some visceral and hematological malignancies. In patients with dermatological conditions such as psoriasis and atopic dermatitis, the risk of malignancies may be lower than in other subgroups, and probably comparable to the general population.

CONCLUSIONS

The incidence of cancer in patients undergoing BD or JAKi is generally low. This incidence can be higher in elderly patients with RA or myelodysplastic syndrome, and in those undergoing prolonged therapy with tofacitinib or ruxolitinib (oral), or anti-TNF agents.

Safety of Immunosuppression in a Prospective Cohort of Inflammatory Bowel Disease Patients With a HIstoRy of CancEr: SAPPHIRE Registry

BACKGROUND & AIMS

In patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) and a history of cancer, retrospective studies have suggested that exposure to immunosuppressive agents does not increase the risk of incident (recurrent or new) cancer compared with unexposed patients. SAPPHIRE is a prospective registry aimed at addressing this issue.

METHODS

Since 2016, patients with IBD and confirmed index cancer before enrollment were followed up annually. Patients receiving chemotherapy or radiation at enrollment, or recurrent cancer within 5 years, were excluded. The primary outcome was development of incident cancer related to exposure to immunosuppressive medications.

RESULTS

Among 305 patients (47% male, 88% white), the median age at IBD diagnosis and cancer were 32 and 52 years, respectively. Index cancers were solid organ (46%), dermatologic (32%), gastrointestinal (13%), and hematologic (9%). During a median follow-up period of 4.8 years, 210 patients (69%) were exposed to immunosuppressive therapy and 46 patients (15%) developed incident cancers (25 new, 21 recurrent). In unadjusted analysis, the crude rate of incident cancer in unexposed patients was 2.58 per 100 person-years vs 4.78 per 100 person-years (relative risk, 1.85; 95% CI, 0.92-3.73) for immunosuppression-exposed patients. In a proportional hazards model adjusting for sex, smoking history, age and stage at index malignancy, and nonmelanoma skin cancer, no significant association was found between receipt of immunosuppression and incident cancer (adjusted hazard ratio, 1.41; 95% CI, 0.69-2.90), or with any major drug class.

CONCLUSIONS

In this interim analysis of patients with IBD and a history of cancer, despite numerically increased adjusted hazard ratios, we did not find a statistically significant association between subsequent exposure to immunosuppressive therapies and development of incident cancers.

Safety and efficacy of tofacitinib in 97 alopecia areata patients

BACKGROUND

Alopecia areata (AA) is a recurrent immune-mediated disorder causing hair loss without any scarring being present. It affects hairs on the head or other parts of the body and can occur at any age and in both genders. It seems that AA is associated with a higher rate of psychological disorders resulting from hair loss and the esthetic and social repercussions of it. Common treatments like corticosteroids do not work for every patient and recent treatment options focusing on the immunologic mechanisms like tofacitinib have shown some promising results.

METHODS

It's a retrospective study on patients with AA, AT, AU taking oral tofacitinib as a treatment for at least 6 months. Scalp hair loss was assessed before treatment and at each visit using the Severity of Alopecia Tool (SALT) score.

RESULTS

Of 97 cases, 69.1% demonstrated over 50% SALT score improvement, with 44.3% having 90% or more decrease in SALT score. Patients who suffered from patchy AA were more responsive compared to patients with AT and AU subtypes and had a greater percent change in SALT score. Tofacitinib was tolerated quite well and no significant adverse events were reported.

CONCLUSIONS

Tofacitinib should be taken into consideration as an efficacious treatment option for patients with AA, AT and AU.

Prevalence of Cardiovascular and Cancer Risk Factors Among Rheumatoid Arthritis Patients Prescribed Janus Kinase Inhibitors and Tumor Necrosis Factor Inhibitors: A Cross-Sectional Study

OBJECTIVE

The study was to determine the prevalence of baseline risk factors for cardiovascular outcomes and cancer among commercially-insured patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) during their first dispensed treatment for either tumor necrosis factor inhibitors (TNFi) or JAK inhibitors (JAKi).

METHODS

Patients with RA from August 16, 2019 to March 31, 2022 were identified in the Merative MarketScan Commercial and Medicare databases. The first date that a TNFi or JAKi was dispensed was the index date, and baseline risk factors were assessed among patients continuously eligible for 12 months before the index date. Patients who had the following were stratified into an elevated risk category: age ≥65 years, smoking, or a history of a major adverse cardiovascular event, venous thromboembolism, or cancer. The prevalence of modifiable risk factors was also reported: hypertension, hyperlipidemia, obesity, and diabetes. The crude prevalence and prevalence difference (PD) were reported.

RESULTS

A total of 12,673 patients (TNFi [n = 7,748; 61%] and JAKi [n = 4,925; 39%]) met inclusion criteria. The prevalence of elevated risk was the same for all patients using TNFi (n = 2,051; 26%) and JAKi (n = 1,262; 26%). Compared with patients having low risk, patients with an elevated risk also had a higher prevalence of at least one primary modifiable risk factor for both patients using JAKi (79% vs 58%; PD 21%, 95% confidence interval [CI] 18%-24%) and TNFi (81% vs 60%; PD 21%, 95% CI 19%-23%).

CONCLUSION

In recent years, JAKi and TNFi were used in similar proportions to treat RA among commercially-insured patients at elevated cardiovascular and cancer risk. Because uncontrolled disease, modifiable comorbidities, and treatment with JAKi are associated with these adverse events, future studies evaluating how practice patterns may be affected by the emergence of safety data will be of value.

Long-term safety of biologic and targeted synthetic disease modifying drugs in rheumatology

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The landscape for treatment of rheumatic diseases is ever evolving, with several new drugs recently approved across diseases and more in the pipeline. This timely review aims to highlight the latest literature on long-term safety profiles of salient established and emerging biologic (b) and targeted synthetic (ts) disease modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs).

RECENT FINDINGS

The risk of infection remains elevated with the use of most b and tsDMARDs, with specifically risk of hepatitis B reactivation with rituximab and zoster infection with JAK inhibitors (JAKi). The results of the ORAL surveillance trial led to new black box warnings for JAKi and evoked critical risk-benefit discussions surrounding JAKi and DMARDs overall.

SUMMARY

Such well conducted trials are needed to gather long term comparative safety data of DMARDs. In the interim, real world observational studies also have a role to play in our understanding of long-term drug safety, provided that detailed attention is paid to minimize biases inherent in observational studies.

JAK-Inhibitors - A Story of Success and Adverse Events

Rheumatoid arthritis (RA) is a systemic, chronic, immune-mediated inflammatory condition. Treatments options encompass conventional synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (csDMARDs), biologic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (bDMARDs) like tumor necrosis factor (TNF) inhibitors (TNFis) and targeted synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (tsDMARDs) including Janus Kinase inhibitors (JAKinibs). Orally administered JAKinibs have demonstrated comparable or, in specific cases, superior efficacy compared to bDMARDs in inflammatory conditions. However, the escalating clinical utilization has been accompanied by the emergence of serious adverse effects, including major adverse cardiac events (MACE), malignancies and venous thrombotic episodes (VTE), leading to regulatory restrictions imposed by health authorities in both the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and the European Medicines Agency (EMA).

Efficacy and safety of JAK inhibitors in rheumatoid arthritis: update for the practising clinician

Janus kinase (JAK) inhibitors, including tofacitinib, baricitinib, upadacitinib and filgotinib, are increasingly used in the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis (RA). There has been debate about their safety, particularly following the issuance of guidance by regulatory agencies advising caution in their use in certain patients. The registrational clinical trials and registry data of JAK inhibitors did not identify a difference in the risk of major adverse cardiovascular events (MACEs), venous thromboembolism, malignancies or infections (other than herpes zoster) with a JAK inhibitor versus a biologic DMARD. In the ORAL Surveillance trial, which enrolled patients >50 years of age with ≥1 cardiovascular risk factor, tofacitinib was statistically inferior to TNF inhibitors for the occurrence of MACEs and malignancy. Further post hoc analysis of the data revealed that an age of ≥65 years, a high baseline cardiovascular risk, a history of smoking, sustained inflammation, disease activity and suboptimal treatment of cardiovascular comorbidities all increase the risk of these outcomes. The guidance issued by regulatory agencies should be carefully considered to ensure appropriate and safe treatment of patients with RA without undertreatment of patients who might benefit from JAK inhibitor, as well as biologic, treatment. As always, the risks associated with the use of these agents, treatment goals, costs and patient preferences should be discussed with the patient.

Malignancy in the Upadacitinib Clinical Trials for Rheumatoid Arthritis, Psoriatic Arthritis, Ankylosing Spondylitis, and Non-radiographic Axial Spondyloarthritis

INTRODUCTION

This article aims to describe malignancies in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA), psoriatic arthritis (PsA), ankylosing spondylitis (AS), or non-radiographic axial spondyloarthritis (nr-axSpA) treated with upadacitinib (UPA) or active comparators.

METHODS

This integrated safety analysis includes data from 11 phase 3 UPA trials across RA (6 trials), PsA (2 trials), AS (2 trials; one phase 2b/3), and nr-axSpA (1 trial). Treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) were summarized for RA (pooled UPA 15 mg [UPA15], pooled UPA 30 mg [UPA30], adalimumab 40 mg [ADA], methotrexate monotherapy [MTX]), PsA (pooled UPA15, pooled UPA30, ADA), AS (pooled UPA15), and nr-axSpA (UPA15). TEAEs were reported as exposure-adjusted event rates (events/100 patient-years).

RESULTS

Median treatment duration ranged from 1.0 to 4.0 years (with a maximum of 6.6 years in RA). Across treatments and indications, rates of malignancy excluding nonmelanoma skin cancer (NMSC) ranged from 0.2 to 1.1, while NMSC ranged from 0.0 to 1.4. In RA, rates of malignancy excluding NMSC were generally similar between UPA15, UPA30, ADA, and MTX (breast and lung cancer were the most common). In RA and PsA, Kaplan-Meier analyses revealed no differences in event onset of malignancy excluding NMSC with UPA15 versus UPA30 over time. In RA, NMSC rates were higher with UPA30 than UPA15; both UPA15 and UPA30 were higher than ADA and MTX. In PsA, rates of malignancy excluding NMSC and NMSC were generally similar between UPA15, UPA30, and ADA. In AS and nr-axSpA, malignancies were reported infrequently. Few events of lymphoma were reported across the clinical programs.

CONCLUSION

Rates of malignancy excluding NMSC were generally similar between UPA15, UPA30, ADA, and MTX and were consistent across RA, PsA, AS, and nr-axSpA. A dose-dependent increased rate of NMSC was observed with UPA in RA.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicaTrials.gov identifier: NCT02706873, NCT02675426, NCT02629159, NCT02706951, NCT02706847, NCT03086343, NCT03104400, NCT03104374, NCT03178487, and NCT04169373.

Therapeutic advances in rheumatoid arthritis

Rheumatoid arthritis (RA) is one of the most common immune mediated inflammatory diseases. People with rheumatoid arthritis present with pain, swelling, and stiffness that typically affects symmetrically distributed small and large joints. Without effective treatment, significant joint damage, disability, and work loss develop, owing to chronic inflammation of the joint lining (synovium). Over the past 25 years, the management of this condition has been revolutionized, resulting in substantially higher levels of disease remission and better long term outcomes. This improvement reflects a paradigm shift towards early and aggressive pharmacological intervention coupled with a proliferation in treatment choice, in turn related to enhanced pathobiological understanding and the advent of new drugs for rheumatoid arthritis. Following an overview of these developments from a historical perspective, and with a general audience in mind, this review focuses on newer, targeted treatments in an ever evolving landscape. The review highlights ongoing areas of debate and unmet need, including the proportion of patients with persistent, difficult-to-treat disease, despite recent advances. Also discussed are personalized, strategic approaches to individual patients, the role for imaging in clinical decision making, and the goal of sustained, drug free remission and disease prevention in the future.

Cancer risk in patients with rheumatoid arthritis treated with janus kinase inhibitors: a nationwide Danish register-based cohort study

OBJECTIVES

We aimed to investigate the risk of first primary cancer in patients with RA treated with janus kinase inhibitors (JAKi) compared with those who received biologic DMARDs (bDMARDs) in a real-world setting.

METHODS

We performed an observational cohort study using the nationwide registers in Denmark. Patients with RA aged 18+ years, without a previous cancer diagnosis, and who initiated treatment with JAKi or bDMARDs from 1 January 2017 to 31 December 2020 were followed for any cancer (except non-melanoma skin cancer). We applied inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) to account for covariate differences between treatment groups. IPTW-generated weights were used with cause-specific Cox (CSC) models to calculate hazard ratios (HRs) for cancer incidence in JAKi-treated compared with bDMARD-treated patients with RA.

RESULTS

We identified 875 and 4247 RA patients treated with JAKi and bDMARDs, respectively. The JAKi group contributed 1315 person years (PYRS) and 19 cancers, the bDMARD group contributed 8597 PYRS and 111 cancers, with corresponding crude incidence rates per 1000 PYRS of 14.4 and 12.9. Comparing the two groups using weighted CSC models, a HR of 1.41 (95% CI 0.76, 2.37, 95% CIs) was seen for JAKi- vs bDMARD-treated patients with RA.

CONCLUSION

JAKi treatment in real-world patients with RA was not associated with a statistically significant increased risk of first primary cancer compared with those who received bDMARDs. However, several numerically increased risk estimates were detected, and a clinically important excess risk of cancer among JAKi recipients cannot be dismissed.

Are JAKis more effective among elderly patients with RA, smokers and those with higher cardiovascular risk? A comparative effectiveness study of b/tsDMARDs in Sweden

OBJECTIVES

To investigate whether the relative effectiveness of janus kinase inhibitors (JAKis) versus tumour necrosis factor inhibitors (TNFi) or other biological disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs in rheumatoid arthritis differ by the presence or absence of risk factors for cardiovascular (CV) disease, age, sex and smoking.

METHODS

Through Swedish registers, we identified 13 493 individuals with 3166 JAKi, 5575 non-TNFi and 11 286 TNFi treatment initiations 2016-2022. All lines of therapy were included, with the majority in second line or higher. Treatment response was defined as the proportion reaching European Alliance of Associations for Rheumatology (EULAR) good response and Clinical Disease Activity Index (CDAI) remission, respectively, within 6 months. Crude percentage point differences in these proportions (JAKis, and non-TNFis, vs TNFis) overall and by risk factors were observed, and adjusted for confounders using linear regression models. Predicted probabilities of response and remission were estimated from adjusted Poisson models, and presented across CV risk and age.

RESULTS

Overall, adjusted percentage point differences indicated higher response (+5.0%, 95% CI 2.2% to 7.9%) and remission (+5.8%, 95% CI 3.2% to 8.5%) with JAKis versus TNFis. The adjusted percentage point differences for response in those above 65, at elevated CV risk, and smokers were +5.9% (95% CI 2.7% to 9.0%), +8.3% (95% CI 5.3% to 11.4%) and +6.0% (95% CI 3.3% to 8.7%), respectively. The corresponding estimates for remission were +8.0% (95% CI 5.3% to 10.8%), +5.6% (95% CI 3.0% to 8.2%) and +7.6% (95% CI 5.5% to 9.7%).

CONCLUSIONS

As used in clinical practice, response and remission at 6 months with JAKis are higher than with TNFi. Among patients with risk factors of concern, effectiveness is similar or numerically further increased. For individualised benefit-to-risk ratios to guide treatment choice, safety and effectiveness in specific patient segments should be considered.

Recommendations by the Spanish Society of Rheumatology on risk management of biological treatment and JAK inhibitors in patients with rheumatoid arthritis

OBJECTIVE

To present recommendations based on the available evidence and the consensus of experts, for risk management of biological treatment and JAK inhibitors in patients with rheumatoid arthritis.

METHODS

Clinical research questions relevant to the purpose of the document were identified. These questions were reformulated in PICO format (patient, intervention, comparison, outcome or outcome) by a panel of experts, selected based on their experience in the area. A systematic review of the evidence was carried out, grading according to the GRADE criteria (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation). Specific recommendations were then formulated.

RESULTS

6 PICO questions were proposed by the panel of experts based on their clinical relevance and the existence of recent information regarding the risk of occurrence of serious infections, the risk of reactivation of the hepatitis B virus, the risk of reactivation of the virus varicella-zoster, the risk of appearance of skin (melanoma and non-melanoma) or haematological cancer, the risk of appearance of thromboembolic disease and the risk of progression of the human papilloma virus. A total of 28 recommendations were formulated, structured by question, based on the evidence found and the consensus of the experts.

CONCLUSIONS

The SER recommendations on risk management of treatment with biologic therapies and JAK inhibitors in rheumatoid arthritis are presented.

Managing Cardiovascular and Cancer Risk Associated with JAK Inhibitors

Janus kinase inhibitors (JAKi) have enormous appeal as immune-modulating therapies across many chronic inflammatory diseases, but recently this promise has been overshadowed by questions regarding associated cardiovascular and cancer risk emerging from the ORAL Surveillance phase 3b/4 post-marketing requirement randomized controlled trial. In that study of patients with rheumatoid arthritis with existing cardiovascular risk, tofacitinib, the first JAKi registered for chronic inflammatory disease, failed to meet non-inferiority thresholds when compared with tumor necrosis factor inhibitors for both incident major adverse cardiovascular events and incident cancer. While this result was unexpected by many, subsequently published observational data have also supported this finding. Notably, however, such a risk has largely not yet been demonstrated in patients outside the specific clinical situation examined in the trial, even in the face of many studies examining this. Nevertheless, this signal has practically re-aligned approaches to both tofacitinib and other JAKi to varying extents, in other patient populations and contexts: within rheumatoid arthritis, but also in psoriatic arthritis, axial spondyloarthritis, inflammatory bowel disease, atopic dermatitis, and beyond. Application to individual patients can be more challenging but remains important to harness the substantive potential of JAKi to the maximum extent safely possible. This review not only explores the evolution of the regulatory response to the signal, its informing data, biological plausibility, and its impact on guidelines, but also the many factors that clinicians must consider in navigating cardiovascular and cancer risk for their patients considering JAKi as immune-modulating therapy.

Safety of JAK and IL-6 inhibitors in patients with rheumatoid arthritis: a multicenter cohort study

Background

The ORAL Surveillance trial showed a potentially higher incidence of malignancy and major adverse cardiovascular events (MACEs) associated with tofacitinib than those associated with tumor necrosis factor (TNF) inhibitors (TNFis). However, few studies have compared the safety of non-TNFis or other Janus kinase (JAK) inhibitors (JAKis). This study was aimed at comparing the incidence rates (IRs) of malignancies and MACEs in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) treated using interleukin-6 (IL-6) inhibitors (IL-6is) or JAKis.

Methods

We retrospectively analyzed 427 patients with RA who were treated using an IL-6i (n = 273) or a JAKi (n = 154). We determined the IRs of malignancy and MACEs, and the standardized incidence ratio (SIR) of malignancies and investigated factors related to malignancy and MACEs. After adjusting the clinical characteristic imbalance by propensity score matching (PSM), we compared the IRs of adverse events between the JAKi and IL-6i groups.

Results

After PSM, the observational period was determined to be 605.27 patient-years (PY), and the median observational period was determined to be 2.28 years. We identified seven cases of malignancy (IR: 2.94 per 100 PY) in the JAKi-treated group and five cases (IR: 1.36 per 100 PY) in the IL-6i-treated group after PSM. The IR of MACEs was 2.56 and 0.83 (per 100 PY) in the JAKi- and IL-6i-treated groups. The IRRs of JAKi-treated patients versus IL-6i-treated patients were 2.13 (95% confidence interval (CI): 0.67-7.42) for malignancy and 3.03 (95% CI: 0.77-15.21) for MACE. There were no significant differences in IRR for malignancy and MACE between both groups after PSM. Univariate and multivariable Cox regression analyses revealed that older age and JAKi use were independent risk factors for malignancy, while older age, hypertension, and JAKi use were independent risk factors for MACEs. The overall malignancy SIR was significantly higher in the JAKi-treated group compared to the general population (2.10/100 PY, 95% CI: 1.23-2.97).

Conclusion

The IRs of malignancy and MACE in patients with RA after PSM were comparable between IL-6i-treated and JAKi-treated patients. However, the SIR of malignancy in JAKi treatment was significantly higher than in the general population; therefore, further safety studies comparing JAKi to non-TNFi biologic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (bDMARDs) are needed.

Post-Marketing Safety Surveillance of Tofacitinib over 9 Years in Patients with Psoriatic Arthritis and Rheumatoid Arthritis

INTRODUCTION

The safety of tofacitinib in psoriatic arthritis (PsA) and rheumatoid arthritis (RA) has been demonstrated in clinical studies of ≤ 4 and 9.5 years, respectively. Post-marketing surveillance (PMS) data for tofacitinib from spontaneous and voluntary adverse event (AE) reports have been published for RA, but not PsA. To inform the real-world safety profile of tofacitinib in PsA, we evaluated AE reports submitted to the Pfizer safety database (including RA data for context).

METHODS

Endpoints included AEs, serious AEs (SAEs), AEs of special interest (AESIs; serious infections, herpes zoster, cardiovascular events, malignancies, venous thromboembolism), and fatal cases. Exposure was estimated using IQVIA global commercial sales data. Number, frequency, and reporting rates (RRs; number of events/100 patient-years' [PY] exposure) were summarized by indication and formulation (immediate release [IR] 5 or 10 mg twice daily], modified release [MR] 11 mg once daily, or all tofacitinib). The data-collection period differed by indication (PsA: 14 December 2017 [US approval, IR/MR] to 6 November 2021; RA: 6 November 2012 [US approval, IR] to 6 November 2021; MR approval, 24 February 2016).

RESULTS

A total of 73,525 case reports were reviewed (PsA = 5394/RA = 68,131), with 20,706/439,370 PY (PsA/RA) of exposure. More AEs were reported for IR versus MR (IR/MR: PsA = 8349/7602; RA = 137,476/82,153). RRs for AEs (IR/MR: PsA = 59.6/113.4; RA = 44.0/64.8) and SAEs (PsA = 8.1/13.6; RA = 8.0/9.5) were higher with MR versus IR. AE RRs (RA) in the first 4 years after IR approval were 95.9 (IR; 49,439 PY) and 147.0 (MR; 2000 PY). Frequency of SAEs, AESIs, and fatal cases was mostly similar across formulations and indications. The most frequently-reported AE Preferred Terms (PsA/RA) included drug ineffective (20.0%/17.8%), pain (9.7%/10.6%), condition aggravated (9.9%/10.5%), headache (8.8%/7.9%) and, for PsA, off-label use (10.5%/3.4%).

CONCLUSIONS

Tofacitinib PMS safety data from submitted AE reports were consistent between PsA and RA, and aligned with its known safety profile. Exposure data (lower MR versus IR; estimation from commercial sales data), reporting bias, reporter identity, and regional differences in formulation use limit interpretation.

The role of upadacitinib for the treatment of axial spondyloarthritis

Janus kinase inhibitors were recently approved for treatment of axial spondyloarthritis following clinical trials demonstrating benefit for symptom control. Upadacitinib treatment resulted in Assessment of SpondyloArthritis International Society 40 response improvement (defined as at least 40% improvement and an absolute improvement in global assessment of disease activity, patient assessment of back pain and other indices) in 45-52% of trial participants with axial spondyloarthritis. We review the data for efficacy and safety of upadacitinib in this patient population.

Reporting of Observational Studies Explicitly Aiming to Emulate Randomized Trials: A Systematic Review

Importance

Observational (nonexperimental) studies that aim to emulate a randomized trial (ie, the target trial) are increasingly informing medical and policy decision-making, but it is unclear how these studies are reported in the literature. Consistent reporting is essential for quality appraisal, evidence synthesis, and translation of evidence to policy and practice.

Objective

To assess the reporting of observational studies that explicitly aimed to emulate a target trial.

Evidence Review

We searched Medline, Embase, PsycINFO, and Web of Science for observational studies published between March 2012 and October 2022 that explicitly aimed to emulate a target trial of a health or medical intervention. Two reviewers double-screened and -extracted data on study characteristics, key predefined components of the target trial protocol and its emulation (eligibility criteria, treatment strategies, treatment assignment, outcome[s], follow-up, causal contrast[s], and analysis plan), and other items related to the target trial emulation.

Findings

A total of 200 studies that explicitly aimed to emulate a target trial were included. These studies included 26 subfields of medicine, and 168 (84%) were published from January 2020 to October 2022. The aim to emulate a target trial was explicit in 70 study titles (35%). Forty-three studies (22%) reported use of a published reporting guideline (eg, Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology). Eighty-five studies (43%) did not describe all key items of how the target trial was emulated and 113 (57%) did not describe the protocol of the target trial and its emulation.

Conclusion and Relevance

In this systematic review of 200 studies that explicitly aimed to emulate a target trial, reporting of how the target trial was emulated was inconsistent. A reporting guideline for studies explicitly aiming to emulate a target trial may improve the reporting of the target trial protocols and other aspects of these emulation attempts.

Preparation and evaluation of dissolving tofacitinib microneedles for effective management of rheumatoid arthritis

Dissolving microneedles have become a focal point in transdermal drug delivery. They have the advantages of painless, rapid drug delivery and high drug utilization. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the efficacy of Tofacitinib citrate microneedles in arthritis treatment, assess the dose-effect relationship, and determine the cumulative penetration during percutaneous injection. In this study, block copolymer was utilized to prepare the dissolving microneedles. The microneedles were characterized through skin permeation tests, dissolution tests, treatment effect evaluations, and Western blot experiments. In vivo dissolution experiments revealed that the soluble microneedles completely dissolved within 2.5 min, while in vitro skin permeation experiments demonstrated the highest unit area of skin permeation of the microneedles reached 2118.13 mg/cm2. The inhibition of Tofacitinib microneedle on joint swelling in rats with Rheumatoid arthritis was better than Ketoprofen and close to that of oral Tofacitinib. Western-blot experiment comfirmed the Tofacitinib microneedle's inhibitory effect on the JAK-STAT3 pathway in rats with Rheumatoid arthritis. In conclusion, Tofacitinib microneedles effectively inhibited arthritis in rats, demonstrating potential for Rheumatoid arthritis treatment.

Long-Term Retention Rate of Tofacitinib in Rheumatoid Arthritis: An Italian Multicenter Retrospective Cohort Study

Background: Tofacitinib (TOFA) was the first Janus kinase inhibitor (JAKi) to be approved for the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis (RA). However, data on the retention rate of TOFA therapy are still far from definitive. Objective: The goal of this study is to add new real-world data on the TOFA retention rate in a cohort of RA patients followed for a long period of time. Methods: A multicenter retrospective study of RA subjects treated with TOFA as monotherapy or in combination with conventional synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (csDMARDs) was conducted in 23 Italian tertiary rheumatology centers. The study considered a treatment period of up to 48 months for all included patients. The TOFA retention rate was assessed with the Kaplan-Meier method. Hazard ratios (HRs) for TOFA discontinuation were obtained using Cox regression analysis. Results: We enrolled a total of 213 patients. Data analysis revealed that the TOFA retention rate was 86.5% (95% CI: 81.8-91.5%) at month 12, 78.8% (95% CI: 78.8-85.2%) at month 24, 63.8% (95% CI: 55.1-73.8%) at month 36, and 59.9% (95% CI: 55.1-73.8%) at month 48 after starting treatment. None of the factors analyzed, including the number of previous treatments received, disease activity or duration, presence of rheumatoid factor and/or anti-citrullinated protein antibody, and presence of comorbidities, were predictive of the TOFA retention rate. Safety data were comparable to those reported in the registration studies. Conclusions: TOFA demonstrated a long retention rate in RA in a real-world setting. This result, together with the safety data obtained, underscores that TOFA is a viable alternative for patients who have failed treatment with csDMARD and/or biologic DMARDs (bDMARDs). Further large, long-term observational studies are urgently needed to confirm these results.

JAK inhibitors and the risk of malignancy: a meta-analysis across disease indications

OBJECTIVES

To estimate the association of Janus kinase inhibitors (JAKi) with the incidence of malignancy, compared with placebo, tumour necrosis factor (TNF)-α inhibitors (TNFi) and methotrexate.

METHODS

Systematic searches of databases were performed, to December 2022, to identify phase II/III/IV randomised clinical trials (RCTs) and long-term extension (LTE) studies of JAKi (tofacitinib, baricitinib, upadacitinib, filgotinib, peficitinib) compared with placebo, TNFi or methotrexate, in adults with rheumatoid arthritis, psoriatic arthritis, psoriasis, axial spondyloarthritis, inflammatory bowel disease or atopic dermatitis. Network and pairwise meta-analyses were performed to estimate incidence rate ratios (IRRs) for malignancy between JAKi and comparators. Bias was assessed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias-2 tool.

RESULTS

In 62 eligible RCTs and 16 LTE studies, there were 82 366 person-years of exposure to JAKi, 2924 to placebo, 7909 to TNFi and 1074 to methotrexate. The overall malignancy incidence rate was 1.15 per 100 person-years in RCTs, and 1.26 per 100 person-years across combined RCT and LTE data. In network meta-analyses, the incidence of all malignancies including non-melanomatous skin cancers (NMSCs) was not significantly different between JAKi and placebo (IRR 0.71; 95% CI 0.44 to 1.15) or between JAKi and methotrexate (IRR 0.77; 95% CI 0.35 to 1.68). Compared with TNFi, however, JAKi were associated with an increased incidence of malignancy (IRR 1.50; 95% CI 1.16 to 1.94). Findings were consistent when analysing NMSC only and when analysing combined RCT/LTE data.

CONCLUSIONS

JAKi were associated with a higher incidence of malignancy compared with TNFi but not placebo or methotrexate. Cancers were rare events in all comparisons.

PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER

CRD42022362630.

A JAK Inhibitor for Treatment of Rheumatoid Arthritis: The Baricitinib Experience

Baricitinib, an oral selective Janus kinase (JAK)1/JAK2 inhibitor, is approved as monotherapy or in combination with methotrexate for treating adults with moderate-to-severe active rheumatoid arthritis (RA) and provides improvements in clinical signs, symptoms and patient-reported outcomes. Currently, baricitinib is approved for treating RA in more than 75 countries. In several pivotal Phase II and III RA trials (RA-BALANCE, RA-BEGIN, RA-BEAM, RA-BUILD, RA-BEACON, RA-BEYOND), up to seven years of baricitinib treatment was well tolerated and provided rapid and sustained efficacy, which was confirmed in real-world settings. Safety signals for another JAK inhibitor, tofacitinib, have emerged, as observed in the post-marketing Phase IIIb/IV trial Oral Rheumatoid Arthritis Trial (ORAL) Surveillance; safety signals were subsequently highlighted in a retrospective study of baricitinib and consequently new recommendations and warnings and precautions for all JAK inhibitors have been issued. Ongoing studies to further characterise and clarify the benefit:risk of JAK inhibitors include registries and controlled trials. This capstone review summarises clinical and real-world data outlining the benefit:risk profile of baricitinib, confirming that the improved disease activity and physical function of patients with RA treated with this JAK inhibitor observed in clinical trials is translated into effectiveness in clinical practice, with a low rate of discontinuations.

Efficacy and Safety of Biological Therapies and JAK Inhibitors in Older Patients with Inflammatory Bowel Disease

With the introduction of more and more monoclonal antibodies selectively targeting various mediators of the immune system, together with Janus-Kinase (JAK)-inhibitors with variable affinities towards different JAK subtypes, the available therapeutic options for the treatment of inflammatory bowel diseases (IBD) have undergone an acceleration in the last five years. On the other hand, the prevalence of IBD patients over 65-years-old is steadily increasing, and, with this, there is a large population of patients that presents more comorbidities, polypharmacy, and, more frequently, frailty compared to younger patients, exposing them to potentially major risks for adverse events deriving from newer therapies, e.g., infections, cardiovascular risks, and malignancies. Unfortunately, pivotal trials for the commercialization of new therapies rarely include older IBD patients, and those with serious comorbidities are virtually excluded. In the present review, we focus on existing literature from pivotal trials and real-world studies, analyzing data on efficacy/effectiveness and safety of newer therapies in older IBD patients with special emphasis on comorbidities and frailty, two distinct but intercorrelated aspects of the older population since age by itself seems to be of minor importance.

JAK Inhibitors for the Treatment of Axial Spondyloarthritis

Axial spondyloarthritis (axSpA) is a chronic disease characterized by inflammation and new bone formation that causes pain and results in functional impairment and long-term disability. Biologic agents targeting TNFα or IL-17 have been the mainstay of treatment for patients with axSpA and an inadequate response to nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs. However, a proportion of axSpA patients do not respond adequately to those drugs either, creating the need to target alternative disease pathways. Janus kinase (JAK) inhibitors (JAKis) are a group of targeted synthetic disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs that block the intracellular signalling pathway of several proinflammatory cytokines. Given their efficacy in the management of rheumatoid arthritis and that JAKs mediate the signalling of cytokines involved in the pathogenesis of axSpA as well, JAKis have been successfully tested in a number of clinical trials in axSpA, which has led to the approval of two compounds, tofacitinib and upadacitinib for the treatment of the disease. Data from new clinical trials, long-term extensions of completed trials, and real-life observational studies that continuously emerge will shape the efficacy and safety profile and ultimately the place of JAKis in the treatment of AxSpA.

Evolving cognition of the JAK-STAT signaling pathway: autoimmune disorders and cancer

The Janus kinase (JAK) signal transducer and activator of transcription (JAK-STAT) pathway is an evolutionarily conserved mechanism of transmembrane signal transduction that enables cells to communicate with the exterior environment. Various cytokines, interferons, growth factors, and other specific molecules activate JAK-STAT signaling to drive a series of physiological and pathological processes, including proliferation, metabolism, immune response, inflammation, and malignancy. Dysregulated JAK-STAT signaling and related genetic mutations are strongly associated with immune activation and cancer progression. Insights into the structures and functions of the JAK-STAT pathway have led to the development and approval of diverse drugs for the clinical treatment of diseases. Currently, drugs have been developed to mainly target the JAK-STAT pathway and are commonly divided into three subtypes: cytokine or receptor antibodies, JAK inhibitors, and STAT inhibitors. And novel agents also continue to be developed and tested in preclinical and clinical studies. The effectiveness and safety of each kind of drug also warrant further scientific trials before put into being clinical applications. Here, we review the current understanding of the fundamental composition and function of the JAK-STAT signaling pathway. We also discuss advancements in the understanding of JAK-STAT-related pathogenic mechanisms; targeted JAK-STAT therapies for various diseases, especially immune disorders, and cancers; newly developed JAK inhibitors; and current challenges and directions in the field.

Cancer Risk in Patients Treated with the JAK Inhibitor Tofacitinib: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Tofacitinib is approved for several immune-mediated inflammatory diseases, but safety concerns have recently been raised. We searched PubMed (accessed on 27 February 2023) for original articles regarding tofacitinib's cancer risk when used for rheumatoid arthritis, ulcerative colitis, Crohn's disease, psoriatic arthritis, and ankylosing spondylitis. Of the 2047 initial records, 22 articles describing 26 controlled studies (including 22 randomized controlled trials) were selected. In the comparison between tofacitinib and any control treatment, the relative risk (RR) for any cancer was 1.06 (95% CI, 0.86-1.31; p = 0.95). In separate comparisons between tofacitinib and either a placebo or biological therapy, no difference was found in the overall cancer risk (vs. placebo, RR = 1.04; 95% CI, 0.44-2.48; p = 0.95; vs. biological drugs, RR = 1.06; 95% CI, 0.86-1.31; p = 0.58). When tofacitinib was compared to tumor necrosis factor (TNF) inhibitors, the overall cancer RR was 1.40 (95% CI, 1.06-2.08; p = 0.02). Similarly, significant results were obtained for all cancers, except for non-melanoma skin cancer (RR = 1.47; 95% CI, 1.05-2.06; p = 0.03), and for this skin cancer alone (RR = 1.30; 95% CI, 0.22-5.83; p = 0.88). In conclusion, no difference in the overall cancer risk was found between tofacitinib and either a placebo or biological drugs, while a slightly higher risk was found in patients treated with tofacitinib than anti-TNF agents. Further studies are needed to better define the cancer risk of tofacitinib therapy.

Malignancy risk with tofacitinib versus TNF inhibitors in rheumatoid arthritis: results from the open-label, randomised controlled ORAL Surveillance trial

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate malignancies and their associations with baseline risk factors and cardiovascular risk scores with tofacitinib versus tumour necrosis factor inhibitors (TNFi) in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA).

METHODS

In an open-label, randomised controlled trial (ORAL Surveillance; NCT02092467), 4362 patients with RA aged ≥50 years with ≥1 additional cardiovascular risk factor received tofacitinib 5 (N=1455) or 10 mg two times per day (N=1456) or TNFi (N=1451). Incidence rates (IRs; patients with first events/100 patient-years) and HRs were calculated for adjudicated malignancies excluding non-melanoma skin cancer (NMSC), NMSC and subtypes. Post hoc analyses for malignancies excluding NMSC, lung cancer and NMSC included risk factors identified via simple/multivariable Cox models and IRs/HRs categorised by baseline risk factors, history of atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (HxASCVD) and cardiovascular risk scores.

RESULTS

IRs for malignancies excluding NMSC and NMSC were higher with tofacitinib (combined and individual doses) versus TNFi. Risk of lung cancer (most common subtype with tofacitinib) was higher with tofacitinib 10 mg two times per day versus TNFi. In the overall study population, the risk of malignancies excluding NMSC was similar between both tofacitinib doses and TNFi until month 18 and diverged from month 18 onwards (HR (95% CIs) for combined tofacitinib doses: 0.93 (0.53 to 1.62) from baseline to month 18 vs 1.93 (1.22 to 3.06) from month 18 onwards, interaction p=0.0469). Cox analyses identified baseline risk factors across treatment groups for malignancies excluding NMSC, lung cancer and NMSC; interaction analyses generally did not show statistical evidence of interaction between treatment groups and risk factors. HxASCVD or increasing cardiovascular risk scores were associated with higher malignancy IRs across treatments.

CONCLUSIONS

Risk of malignancies was increased with tofacitinib versus TNFi, and incidence was highest in patients with HxASCVD or increasing cardiovascular risk. This may be due to shared risk factors for cardiovascular risk and cancer.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBERS

NCT02092467, NCT01262118, NCT01484561, NCT00147498, NCT00413660, NCT00550446, NCT00603512, NCT00687193, NCT01164579, NCT00976599, NCT01059864, NCT01359150, NCT02147587, NCT00960440, NCT00847613, NCT00814307, NCT00856544, NCT00853385, NCT01039688, NCT02281552, NCT02187055, NCT02831855, NCT00413699, NCT00661661.

Management of Inflammatory Bowel Disease in Patients with Current or Past Malignancy

Immunomodulators, conventional immunosuppressants, and/or biologics are used more often, earlier, and longer than before in patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD). Along with this, the lifetime risk for cancer is estimated to be 33% in the general population in Europe. Thus, physicians face therapeutic choices in an increasing number of IBD patients with current or past malignancy. Few data are available so far for managing this IBD subpopulation and this clinical concern still remains a critical situation for four reasons: (i) risk of reactivation of dormant micrometastasis with immunomodulators is of major concern, (ii) there is a knowledge gap about the safety of the most recent molecules, (iii) current guidelines do not recommend the use of immunomodulators within 2-5 years after a diagnosis of cancer, (iv) patients with previous cancers are excluded from clinical trials. There is a lack of scientific evidence supporting the non-use of immunomodulators in IBD patients with previous cancer. Indeed, accumulative data suggest that the risk for recurrent and new cancer in patients with a history of cancer is not increased by thiopurines and anti-TNF agents. Most recently, cohort studies have found no differences in incident cancer rates in IBD patients with prior malignancy treated with vedolizumab or ustekinumab compared to those treated with anti-TNF agents. Therefore, decisions should be shared by the oncologist and the patient, considering the natural history of cancer, the time elapsed since cancer diagnosis, and IBD prognosis.

Malignancies in systemic rheumatic diseases: A mini review

There is an increased risk of malignancies in patients with many systemic rheumatic diseases, which negatively impact on their quality of life. The risk and types of malignancies can differ by the type of rheumatic diseases. Possible mechanisms linking them are dynamic and complicated, including chronic inflammation and damage in rheumatic disease, inability to clear oncogenic infections, shared etiology and some anti-rheumatic therapies. Although certain disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs (DMARDs) have been proved to be potentially carcinogenic, the majority of them were not associated with increased risk of most malignancies in patients with systemic rheumatic diseases.