Prescribing Patterns and Impact of Factors Associated with Time to Initial Biologic Therapy among Children with Non-systemic Juvenile Idiopathic Arthritis

Comparative efficacy and safety of different drugs in patients with systemic juvenile idiopathic arthritis: A systematic review and network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

The goal of this study was to estimate the relative efficacy and safety of different biological agents (infliximab, canakinumab, baricitinib, anakinra, adalimumab, tofacitinib, tocilizumab, and rilonacept) compared with placebo for systemic juvenile idiopathic arthritis (JIA) patients, through a network meta-analysis.

METHODS

Pubmed, Embase, and Cochrane Library were searched from database inception to July 2023 for randomized controlled trials comparing different biological agents (infliximab, canakinumab, baricitinib, anakinra, adalimumab, tofacitinib, tocilizumab, and rilonacept) or placebo directly or indirectly in JIA. Bayesian network meta-analyses were conducted. Data was extracted and analyzed by R with gemtc package. The treatment options were ranked using the surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA) value.

RESULTS

We identified 10 randomized controlled trials and analyzed 898 participants. Canakinumab (odds ratio 55.0, 95% credible intervals 2.4-67.0) was more effective than the placebo, and the difference was statistically significant. However, there was no statistical significance between other drugs versus placebo in terms of the modified ACRpedi30 (P > .05). The SUCRA shows that canakinumab ranked first (SUCRA, 86.9%), anakinra ranked second (SUCRA, 77.7%), adalimumab ranked third (SUCRA, 61.9%), and placebo ranked the last (SUCRA, 6.3%). Nevertheless, there were no notable discrepancies in the occurrence of adverse events, hepatic-related adverse events, infectious adverse event, serious adverse events, and serious infection following treatment with canakinumab, anakinra, tocilizumab, rilonacept, or the placebo. Based on the clustergram of modified ACRpedi30 and adverse events, canakinumab is suggested for JIA according to the surface under SUCRAs considering the symptom and adverse events simultaneously.

CONCLUSIONS

Among patients with JIA, canakinumab exhibited the highest likelihood of being the optimal treatment for achieving the modified ACRpedi30 response rate, and neither of the tested biological agents carried a significant risk of serious adverse events.

Existing and Emerging Targeted Therapies in Juvenile Psoriatic Arthritis: Challenges and Unmet Needs

Juvenile psoriatic arthritis (JPsA) is a heterogeneous type of non-systemic chronic inflammatory arthritis affecting children and young people. This review focuses on highlighting challenges in harmonising recommendations for the use of available therapies in JPsA, according to its distinct clinical phenotypes, and explores the similarities and differences between the disease classification and management across age. We further explore the emerging therapeutic landscape, summarising the recently completed clinical trials in JPsA, and ongoing studies in both JPsA and adults with psoriatic arthritis, highlighting unmet needs and barriers for translational research in JPsA. The novel therapeutic agents in clinical development in JPsA range from monoclonal antibodies targeting interleukin (IL)-17, IL-12/23 and IL-23 blockades to synthetic small molecules targeting Janus kinase and tyrosine kinase and phosphodiesterase-4 inhibition. In addition, there are head-to-head clinical trials comparing tumour necrosis factor-α blockade with both IL-17 and IL-23 inhibition. Most of these new therapies have been tested in adults with psoriatic arthritis and have advanced to the phase III stage of drug development or received license for use, suggesting promising signals for efficacy and potentially acceptable safety and tolerability for JPsA. Further translational research in JPsA is required to improve our understanding of the impact of age at onset on treatment efficacy, as well as to provide opportunities for better management of refractory disease and improved long-term outcomes in JPsA, for ultimate patient benefit.

Influence of the timing of biological treatment initiation on Juvenile Idiopathic Arthritis long-term outcomes

BACKGROUND

Juvenile idiopathic arthritis (JIA) treatment is aimed at inducing remission to prevent joint destruction and disability. However, it is unclear what is the long-term impact on health-related outcomes of the timing of biological disease-modifying antirheumatic drug (bDMARD) initiation in JIA. Our aim was to evaluate the long-term impact of the time between JIA onset and the initiation of a bDMARD in achieving clinical remission, on physical disability and health-related quality of life (HRQoL).

METHODS

Adult JIA patients registered in the Rheumatic Diseases Portuguese Register (Reuma.pt) and ever treated with bDMARD were included. Data regarding socio-demographic, JIA-related characteristics, disease activity, physical disability (HAQ-DI), HRQoL (SF-36), and treatments were collected at the last visit. Patients were divided into 3 groups (≤ 2 years, 2-5 years, or > 5 years), according to the time from disease onset to bDMARD initiation. Regression models were obtained considering remission on/off medication, HAQ-DI, SF-36, and joint surgeries as outcomes and time from disease onset to bDMARD start as an independent variable.

RESULTS

Three hundred sixty-one adult JIA patients were evaluated, with a median disease duration of 20.3 years (IQR 12.1; 30.2). 40.4% had active disease, 35.1% were in remission on medication, and 24.4% were in drug-free remission; 71% reported some degree of physical disability. Starting a bDMARD > 5 years after disease onset decreased the chance of achieving remission off medication (OR 0.24; 95% CI 0.06, 0.92; p = 0.038). Patients who started a bDMARD after 5 years of disease onset had a higher HAQ and worse scores in the physical component, vitality, and social function domains of SF-36, and more joint surgeries when compared to an earlier start.

CONCLUSION

Later initiation of bDMARDs in JIA is associated with a greater physical disability, worse HRQoL, and lower chance of drug-free remission in adulthood.

Biologic Disease-Modifying and Other Anti-Rheumatic Drugs Use in Patients with Moderate-to-Severe Juvenile Idiopathic Arthritis Based on a Japanese Nationwide Claims Database

Purpose

Biologic disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs (bDMARDs) are highly effective and safe against juvenile idiopathic arthritis (JIA), which is classified into systemic JIA (sJIA) and the other JIA categories (non-sJIA) according to differences in clinical symptoms and pathophysiology. The purpose of the current study was to investigate trends in patterns of prescribing bDMARDs for moderate-to-severe JIA using a relatively large sample size in Japan.

Patients and Methods

A descriptive epidemiological study based on a nationwide claims database in Japan was conducted from 2012 to 2018 using the “JMDC Claims Database” to explain annual changes based on the number of patients prescribed bDMARDs. Study drugs were identified based on the Anatomical Therapeutic Chemical codes, such as methotrexate, glucocorticoids, non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, and bDMARDs.

Results

From a database of 6,862,244 patients, the following exclusion criteria were applied: aged ≥16 years, without “M08” in their ICD-10 code as disease, and missing the information of prescription date in the database during the study period, resulting in a final number of 111 JIA patients. We found an increasing trend for adalimumab and tocilizumab and a decreasing trend for methotrexate. Differences in medication use between sJIA and non-sJIA patients were also evident, being consistent with national and international guidelines.

Conclusion

Although the introduction of bDMARDs has markedly improved the efficacy of JIA therapy, there are still many short- and long-term safety issues to be examined, including the risk of infection and potential risk of associated malignancy. Future studies are needed to clarify these issues.

Research progress in drug therapy of juvenile idiopathic arthritis

BACKGROUND

Juvenile idiopathic arthritis (JIA) is the most common chronic rheumatic disease in children. With the gradual expansion of the incidence of JIA in the population, the pathogenesis and treatment of JIA were further explored and analyzed, and JIA has achieved some success in drug therapy.

DATA SOURCES

A systemic literature search was conducted on PubMed, Cochrane Library, EMBASE, ISI Web of Science, the US National Institutes of Health Ongoing Trials Register, and the EU Clinical Trials Register. Through the searching of clinical trials of JIA in recent years, we summarized the progress of the clinical treatment of JIA.

RESULTS

The main treatment drugs for JIA include non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, glucocorticoids, disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs and biological agents. So far, a variety of biological agents targeting the cytokines and receptors involved in its pathogenesis have been gradually approved for JIA in many countries. The application of biological agents in JIA showed good efficacy and safety, bringing unprecedented experience to children and adolescents with JIA.

CONCLUSIONS

The potential and advantages of biologic agents in the treatment of JIA are significant, and the application of biologic agents in the treatment of JIA will be more and more common.

Analysis of the Immunogenicity from Abatacept-Treated Pediatric Patients With Polyarticular-Course Juvenile Idiopathic Arthritis: Findings From Two Phase III Clinical Trials

Objective

The goal of this article is to present the analysis of anti‐abatacept antibody data from children with polyarticular‐course juvenile idiopathic arthritis (pJIA), treated with abatacept. The data are from 395 participants with pJIA from two abatacept registrational trials.

Methods

We analyzed immunogenicity data according to age groups, administration route (intravenous [IV] or subcutaneous [SC]), drug treatment interruption, and co‐medications (with or without methotrexate [MTX]) to assess impact on the incidence of anti‐abatacept antibodies.

Results

The overall immunogenicity incidences observed in both JIA trials ranged between 4.7% and 23.3%. There was a slightly higher immunogenicity incidence in the 2–5‐year‐old participants (15.2%) compared with 6–17‐year‐old participants (4.7%). In the study with SC dosing, the overall incidence on treatment was 2.3% (3% if co‐dosed with MTX), similar to the incidence for Period A of the IV study (similar duration of treatment as the SC study), which was 2.1% (1.4% if co‐dosed with MTX). In the IV study, the period following a 6‐month interruption in treatment had comparable immunogenicity incidences (22.9% with interruption vs. 18.2% without interruption, both co‐dosed with MTX and 0% for both not co‐dosed with MTX). In most cases, participants co‐dosed with MTX had higher immunogenicity incidences than those on abatacept alone.

Conclusion

Although some trends were noted in terms of incidence according to age and MTX co‐dosing, none where conclusive owing to differences in population size. Drug holiday had no impact on immunogenicity incidence once treatment was resumed, and incidences across SC and IV dosing were comparable. There was no impact of immunogenicity on pharmacokinetics, safety, and efficacy.

Off-label medication use in rare pediatric diseases in the United States

Many pediatric patients with rare diseases use drugs off-label due to limited data in pediatric patients. Off-label treatment remains an important public health issue for neonates, infants, children, and adolescents, especially for pediatric patients with rare diseases. For patients with rare diseases, the majority of medications have no or limited information in labelling for pediatric use. Children present unique considerations in clinical trials due to ethical and clinical concerns, which have limited and even discouraged testing of drugs in the pediatric population. Numerous legislative measures have been enacted to address barriers in pediatric drug testing. This research reviewed off-label medication use in rare pediatric diseases, evaluated recent medication uses in pediatric clinical practice, discussed key regulations for rare pediatric diseases, and summarized recent drug approvals for rare pediatric diseases. This study demonstrates the ongoing medical need for newly approved medications to treat pediatric rare diseases and revealed the positive impact of regulations from the Orphan Drug Act of 1983 to the Research to Accelerate Cures and Equity (RACE) for Children Act on drug development and off-label medication practice in rare pediatric disease management. This article provides informative historical background and current considerations of off-label use of medications in neonates, infants, children, and adolescents with rare diseases.