Impact of age on the efficacy and safety of peficitinib (ASP015K) for the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis

Systematic review for the treatment of older rheumatoid arthritis patients informing the 2024 update of the Japan College of Rheumatology clinical practice guidelines for the management of rheumatoid arthritis

OBJECTIVES

To update an evidence base informing the 2024 Japan College of Rheumatology clinical practice guidelines for the management of rheumatoid arthritis (RA) in older adults.

METHODS

Four clinical questions (CQs) regarding efficacy and safety of drug treatment were evaluated, with CQ1 addressing methotrexate (MTX), CQ2 biological disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs, CQ3 Janus kinase (JAK) inhibitors, and CQ4 glucocorticoids (GCs). Quality of the evidence was assessed using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation system.

RESULTS

Observational studies confirmed a pivotal role of methotrexate in the treatment of older RA patients. The meta-analysis showed that tumour necrosis factor inhibitors and JAK inhibitors were unequivocally effective in older RA patients. No data indicated that biological disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs were unsafe for older patients. No safety data for JAK inhibitor use in older patients were available. One randomized controlled trial demonstrated that long-term treatment with low-dose GCs increased risks of GC-associated adverse events. The certainty of overall evidence was very low for all CQs.

CONCLUSIONS

This systematic review provides the necessary evidence for developing 2024 Japan College of Rheumatology clinical practice guidelines for managing older patients with RA. Continued updates on the evidence of JAK inhibitors and GC are desired.

Low-Dose Glucocorticoids in Older Patients with Rheumatoid Arthritis: What Does the Evidence Say?

The short-term use of glucocorticoids (GCs) in combination with methotrexate was recommended for the initial treatment of rheumatoid arthritis by the European League Against Rheumatism. A randomized controlled trial (GLORIA) showed that treatment of older patients with low-dose GCs in combination with disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs was more efficacious than disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs plus placebo in terms of disease activity control and prevention of joint destruction. Glucocorticoid-related adverse events were likely to increase relative to placebo, with no increase in serious adverse events and fractures over 2 years. Observational studies showed an increased risk of serious infections, cardiovascular events, and fractures associated with long-term continuation of GCs in older patients, but the adverse events may be associated not only with GC toxicity but also with poor disease control of rheumatoid arthritis. In the GLORIA study, low-dose GCs during 2 years could be tapered off safely, but many patients had a flare of disease activity after discontinuation of GCs. In the two representative large Japanese registries (IORRA and NinJa), the proportion of patients using GCs and non-tumor necrosis factor inhibitors increased with increasing age at disease onset, with a decreasing trend in methotrexate use. The proportion of patients in remission with GC treatment also increased with increasing age at onset. These suggested that it is not easy to discontinue GCs in older patients. If GCs cannot be terminated in the short term, it may be acceptable to use GCs to control disease activity for up to 2 years.

Comparative efficacy of five approved Janus kinase inhibitors as monotherapy and combination therapy in patients with moderate-to-severe active rheumatoid arthritis: a systematic review and network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

Background

The European League of Rheumatology(EULAR)guidelines recommend Janus kinase (JAK) inhibitors for patients with moderate to severe rheumatoid arthritis (RA) who are insensitive or under-responsive to conventional synthetic disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs (csDMARDs). But there was no recommendation for which one was preferred in five currently approved JAK inhibitors. The objective of this network meta-analysis study was to evaluate the efficacy of five JAK inhibitors as monotherapy and combination therapy in patients with moderate-to-severe active rheumatoid arthritis.

Methods

The randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of tofacitinib, baricitinib, upadacitinib, filgotinib and peficitinib as monotherapy or combined with csDMARD in the treatment of active RA were searched in database of PubMed, Embase, Web of Science and Cochrane Library, up to December 2023. The control group included placebo or csDMARD. Outcome indicators included American College of Rheumatology 20% response (ACR20), ACR50, ACR70 and the percentage of patients achieving 28-joint disease activity score using C-reactive protein (DAS28(CRP))<2.6 at 12 weeks and 24 weeks. The statistical analysis was performed by Stata14 and RevMan5.4. Data processing, network evidence plots, surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA) ranking, league plots and funnel plots were generated. Risk ratio (RR) and 95% confidence interval (95%CI) as effect sizes to analyze the statistics.

Results

This study included thirty-six RCTs with 16,713 patients. All JAK inhibitors were more effective than placebo in ACR20 (RRs ranging between 1.74 and 3.08), ACR50 (RRs ranging between 2.02 and 7.47), ACR70 (RRs ranging between 2.68 and 18.13), DAS28(CRP) < 2.6 (RRs ranging between 2.70 and 7.09) at 12 weeks. Upadacitinib 30 mg and upadacitinib 15 mg showed relatively good efficacy according to their relative SUCRA ranking. All JAK inhibitors were more effective than csDMARD or placebo in ACR20 (RRs ranging between 1.16 and 1.86), ACR50 (RRs ranging between 1.69 and 2.84), ACR70 (RRs ranging between 1.50 and 4.47), DAS28(CRP) < 2.6 (RRs ranging between 2.28 and 7.56) at 24 weeks. Upadacitinib 15 mg + csDMARD and baricitinib 4 mg + csDMARD showed relatively good efficacy according to their relative SUCRA ranking. The safety analysis results such as serious infection, malignancy, major adverse cardiovascular event (MACE), and venous thromboembolic events (VTE) showed no statistical difference.

Conclusion

This NMA study indicated that all JAK inhibitors performed better than placebo. Based on the results of this study, upadacitinib 30 mg, upadacitinib 15 mg, upadacitinib 15 mg + csDMARD and baricitinib 4 mg + csDMARD were recommended treatment options with relatively good efficacy and safety. However, attention should be paid to monitoring the occurrence of adverse events in high-risk RA patients with medication. Combination therapy with csDMARD might be more suitable for the maintenance of long-term efficacy. However, in clinical practice, it is still necessary to select the appropriate therapeutic regimen based on the actual clinical situation.

Effectiveness and safety of treat-to-target strategy for methotrexate-naïve rheumatoid arthritis patients >75 years of age

Objectives

To identify differences in effectiveness and safety of a treat-to-target (T2T) strategy comparing late-onset MTX-naïve RA patients (LORA) ≥75 or <75 years of age.

Methods

Treatment was adjusted to target low disease activity with conventional synthetic DMARDs followed by biologic DMARDs (bDMARDs) in LORA ≥75 years (n = 98, mean age 80.0 years) and LORA <75 years (n = 99) with moderate-high disease activity. Achievement of Simplified Disease Activity Index (SDAI) remission at week 156 by non-responder imputation analysis was evaluated as a primary outcome.

Results

LORA ≥75 years had more comorbidities than LORA <75 years, but SDAI and ACPA positivity were similar at baseline. Of the LORA ≥75 years, 70.4% started MTX and 34.1% and 37.1% received a bDMARD at week 52 and 156, respectively (very similar to the LORA <75 years). Glucocorticoid use was more frequent in the LORA ≥75 years than in the LORA <75 years. Comorbidities/adverse events more frequently contributed to the reasons for non-adherence to T2T in the LORA ≥75 than in the LORA <75. At week 156, 32.7% of the LORA ≥75 and 66.7% of the LORA <75 achieved SDAI remission (P < 0.001). The cumulative incidence of serious adverse events (SAEs) over 156 weeks was 42.8% in the LORA ≥75 and 22.1% in the LORA <75. Multivariable analysis indicated an increased risk of SDAI non-remission at week 156 in the LORA ≥75 [odds ratio 2.82 (95% CI 1.29. 6.14)] after adjusting for comorbidities at baseline, non-adherence to T2T and SAEs.

Conclusions

It was more difficult to achieve remission in the LORA ≥75 patients than in the LORA <75 patients due to both poor treatment response and safety issues.