Efficacy and safety of tofacitinib for moderate-to-severe plaque psoriasis: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

Tofacitinib treatment for plaque psoriasis and psoriatic arthritis: A meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials

Objectives Tofacitinib is used as an oral Janus-associated kinase (JAK) inhibitor acting on JAK1 and JAK3, in treating psoriatic disease. However, there is still no consensus on the optimal dosage and duration of tofacitinib. In this study, we aimed to evaluate the effects of tofacitinib in treating psoriatic disease. Methods and Materials A literature search was done utilising Cochrane library, Medline, EMBASE, Wiley Online library, Web of Science and BIOSIS Previews through December 18, 2022. We performed a meta-analysis of published original studies to assess the impact of tofacitinib in plaque psoriasis or psoriatic arthritis therapy based on seven randomised controlled trials (RCTs) involving 2,672 patients (receiving tofacitinib) and 853 controls (receiving placebo). Results Compared with placebo, the treatment of 5 mg twice-daily (BID) tofacitinib for 12 weeks is sufficient to significantly alleviate the main clinical manifestations of psoriasis [≥75% decrease in Psoriasis Area and Severity Index score (PASI 75): Risk ratio (RR)=4.38 (95% Confidence interval (CI) 2.51 to 7.64); ≥90% decrease in PASI score (PASI 90): RR=21.68 (95% CI 4.20 to 111.85); Physician's Global Assessment of 'clear' or 'almost clear' (PGA 0/1): RR=3.93 (95%CI 3.03 to 5.09)]. Interestingly, there was no significant difference in improvement in PGA 0/1 with 5 mg BID tofacitinib given for 16 weeks when compared with 5 mg BID tofacitinib for 12 weeks [RR=1.11 (95%CI 0.98 to 1.25)]. Additionally, the 5 mg BID tofacitinib for 16 weeks treatment schedule significantly increased the incidence of upper respiratory tract infection (URTI) [RR=1.89 (95%CI 1.06 to 3.38)] as compared to 5 mg BID tofacitinib for 12 weeks treatment schedule [RR=1.15 (95%CI 0.60 to 2.20)]. Conclusion The 5 mg BID tofacitinib for 12 weeks treatment significantly improved psoriasis without causing too many specific adverse events. This indicated that tofacitinib is an effective treatment plan for psoriatic disease by reasonably controlling dosage and dosing time.

Risk of dyslipidemia and major adverse cardiac events with tofacitinib versus adalimumab in rheumatoid arthritis: a real-world cohort study from 7580 patients

Objective

To compare the effects of tofacitinib and adalimumab on the risk of adverse lipidaemia outcomes in patients with newly diagnosed rheumatoid arthritis (RA).

Methods

Data of adult patients newly diagnosed with RA who were treated with tofacitinib or adalimumab at least twice during a 3-year period from 1 January 2018 to 31 December 2020, were enrolled in the TriNetX US Collaborative Network. Patient demographics, comorbidities, medications, and laboratory data were matched by propensity score at baseline. Outcome measurements include incidental risk of dyslipidemia, major adverse cardiac events (MACE) and all-cause mortality.

Results

A total of 7,580 newly diagnosed patients with RA (1998 receiving tofacitinib, 5,582 receiving adalimumab) were screened. After propensity score matching, the risk of dyslipidaemia outcomes were higher in the tofacitinib cohort, compared with adalimumab cohort (hazard ratio [HR] with 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.250 [1.076-1.453]). However, there is no statistically significant differences between two cohorts on MACE (HR, 0.995 [0.760-1.303]) and all-cause mortality (HR, 1.402 [0.887-2.215]).

Conclusion

Tofacitinib use in patients with RA may increase the risk of dyslipidaemia to some extent compared to adalimumab. However, there is no differences on MACE and all-cause mortality.

The evaluation of JAK inhibitors on effect and safety in alopecia areata: a systematic review and meta-analysis of 2018 patients

Background

JAK inhibitors treat various autoimmune diseases, but an updated systematic review in treating alopecia areata is currently lacking.

Objective

Evaluate the specific efficacy and safety of JAK inhibitors in alopecia areata by systematic review and meta-analysis.

Methods

Eligible studies in PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and Clinical Trials up to May 30, 2022, were searched. We enrolled in randomized controlled trials and observational studies of applying JAK inhibitors in alopecia areata.

Results

6 randomized controlled trials with 1455 patients exhibited SALT₅₀ (odd ratio [OR], 5.08; 95% confidence interval [CI], 3.49-7.38), SALT₉₀ (OR, 7.40; 95% CI, 4.34-12.67) and change in SALT score (weighted mean difference [WSD], 5.55; 95% CI, 2.60-8.50) compared to the placebo. The proportion of 26 observational studies with 563 patients of SALT₅ was 0.71(95% CI, 0.65-0.78), SALT₅₀ was 0.54(95% CI 0.46-0.63), SALT₉₀ was 0.33(95% CI, 0.24-0.42), and SALT score (WSD, -2.18; 95% CI, -3.12 to -1.23) compared with baseline. Any adverse effects occurred in 921 of 1508 patients; a total of 30 patients discontinued the trial owing to adverse reactions.

Limitations

Few randomized controlled trials met the inclusion criteria and insufficiency of eligible data.

Conclusion

JAK inhibitors are effective in alopecia areata, although associated with an increased risk.

Efficacy and safety of JAK inhibitors in the treatment of psoriasis and psoriatic arthritis: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Background

JAK inhibitors are a relatively new class of medications that may be useful in the treatment of moderate-to-severe psoriasis and psoriatic arthritis (PsA). The objective of this study was to determine the efficacy of several JAK inhibitors in treating psoriasis and PsA and examine safety concerns.

Methods

MEDLINE, Cochrane and EMBASE were searched for randomized controlled trials and observational studies comparing any JAK inhibitor to placebo. The primary outcomes were a 75% improvement in the Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI75) and a 20% improvement in the American College of Rheumatology composite score (ACR20). A secondary outcome was the proportion of patients achieving a “0” or “1” on the static Physician Global Assessment scale. Odds ratios were used to compare the proportion of patients reaching these targets in the max dose intervention group vs. the placebo group. A random effects model was used to account for heterogeneity.

Results

In total, 15 RCTs were included in the study and no observational studies. This encompassed 6757 patients in total. When the results were combined, the calculated odds ratio for PASI75 amongst tofacitinib vs. placebo was OR 14.35 [95%CI 7.65, 26.90], for PASI75 amongst non-tofacitinib JAK inhibitors vs. placebo it was OR 6.42 [95%CI 4.89, 8.43], for ACR20 amongst all JAK inhibitors versus placebo was OR 5.87 [95%CI 4.39, 7.85]. There was no significant difference in prevalence of serious adverse events between intervention and control in any of these studies.

Conclusion

JAK inhibitors show promise for safely treating moderate-to-severe psoriasis and psoriatic arthritis.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s41927-022-00287-7.

Pharmacological management of severe plaque psoriasis in patients with cardiovascular disease

INTRODUCTION

There is compelling evidence about the independent association between psoriasis and an increased risk of cardiovascular diseases, in particular myocardial infarction, chronic heart failure and cardiac arrythmia. This is due to both the higher prevalence of traditional cardiovascular risk factors (including hypertension, diabetes, hyperlipidemia, obesity, and smoking) and an independent contribution of chronic systemic inflammation associated with psoriasis. Inflammation is not only important in atherosclerosis, but also is increasingly recognized as a contributing factor to heart failure and arrythmia through microvascular dysfunction and myocardial fibrosis. When treating a patient with severe psoriasis, it is recommended to take into consideration this enhanced cardiovascular risk. Moreover, the use of a systemic treatment in a patient with already existing cardiovascular comorbidities should always be considered with caution, assessing the pro and cons of these drugs.

AREAS COVERED

Herein, the authors review the pharmacological management of severe plaque psoriasis in patients with cardiovascular disease, providing their expert opinion and future perspectives on the subject.

EXPERT OPINION

Theoretically, anti-inflammatory drugs may not only dampen the systemic burden associated with psoriasis, but also potentially contribute to prevent long-term cardiovascular events in psoriasis. On the other hand, some treatments may also induce negative effects on the cardiovascular system.

Whether findings from observational studies or ones evaluating surrogates of cardiovascular risk translate into reductions in cardiovascular events needs to be investigated by long-term clinical trials with clinically meaningful endpoints.

The Use of Janus Kinase Inhibitors in Axial Spondyloarthritis: Current Insights

Current pharmacological treatments of axial spondyloarthritis (axSpA) are limited to non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) and biological agents, including TNFα inhibitors and IL-17 inhibitors. Despite the availability of these agents, many patients either fail to respond adequately, lose their initial therapeutic response over time, or develop undesirable side effects, thus highlighting the need for new treatment options. Janus kinase (JAK) and signal transducers and activators of transcription (STAT) are a group of intracellular kinases that play a role in the signaling pathway induced by cytokines and certain growth factors associated with the inflammatory process of axSpA. There are several lines of evidence implicating the JAK–STAT pathway in the pathophysiological process of axSpA, including genetic data, the use of certain JAK in the intracellular signal of specific cytokines involved in axSpA (IL-23, IL-22, and IL-6), and data from experimental models of SpA. This provides a rationale for the assessment of JAK inhibitors (JAKi) in clinical trials with patients with axSpA. In this review, we examine the role of JAK–STAT signaling in the pathogenesis of axSpA and summarize the results from recent clinical trials of JAKi (tofacitinib, upadacitinib, and filgotinib) in patients with axSpA.

Efficacy and Safety of Janus Kinase Inhibitors for the Treatment of Atopic Dermatitis: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND

Current therapeutic options for atopic dermatitis (AD) are limited. Janus kinase (JAK) inhibitors may be viable alternatives.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the efficacy and safety of JAK inhibitors for AD treatment.

METHODS

We searched PubMed, Embase, the Cochrane Controlled Register of Trials, Web of Science, Global Resource of Eczema Trials database, and ClinicalTrials.gov from inception to September 1, 2020. Randomized clinical trials (RCTs) comparing JAK inhibitors with placebo/vehicle treatment for AD patients were included. The primary study outcomes included (1) the change (%) from the Eczema Area and Severity Index (EASI) baseline expressed as weighted mean difference (WMD) and 95% confidence interval (95% CI), and (2) the Investigator's Global Assessment (IGA) response and safety outcomes expressed as relative risk (RR) and 95% CI.

RESULTS

We included 14 RCTs published in 13 studies (3,822 patients). Treatment with JAK inhibitors significantly improved IGA response (RR 2.83, 95% CI 2.25-3.56, p < 0.001) and EASI score (WMD -28.82, 95% CI -34.48 to -23.16, p < 0.001). JAK inhibitor treatment achieved the largest improvement in both IGA response (RR 3.59, 95% CI 2.66-4.84, p < 0.001) and EASI score (WMD -42.00, 95% CI -48.64 to -35.36, p < 0.001) by week 4 of treatment. Topical JAK inhibitors were significantly more efficacious than oral inhibitors. Upadacitinib treatment for 4 weeks was most effective in reducing EASI score (WMD -53.92, 95% CI -69.26 to -38.58, p < 0.001), while abrocitinib for 4 weeks led to the most effective IGA response (RR 5.47, 95% CI 2.74-10.93, p < 0.001). There was no difference in the frequency of adverse events (AEs) leading to discontinuation; however, JAK inhibitors use, especially abrocitinib, led to a higher incidence of treatment-emergent AEs (RR 1.25, 95% CI 1.10-1.42, p = 0.001).

CONCLUSION

Our results imply that JAK inhibitors are an effective and safe AD treatment. Nevertheless, further trials with longer duration and head-to-head comparisons of different JAK inhibitors are needed.

The Risk of Systemic Diseases in Those with Psoriasis and Psoriatic Arthritis: From Mechanisms to Clinic

Psoriasis and psoriatic arthritis (PsA) have been recently considered as chronic systemic inflammatory disorders. Over the past decades, enormous evidence indicates that patients with psoriasis and PsA have a higher risk of developing various comorbidities including cardiovascular disease, metabolic disease, cancers, infections, autoimmune disease, and psychiatric diseases. However, reported risks of some comorbidities in those with psoriasis and PsA are somewhat different according to the research design. Moreover, pathomechanisms underlying comorbidities of those with psoriasis and PsA remain poorly elucidated. The purpose of this review is to provide the most updated comprehensive view of the risk of systemic comorbidities in those with psoriasis and PsA. Molecular mechanisms associated with the development of various comorbidities in those with psoriasis and PsA are also reviewed based on recent laboratory and clinical investigations. Identifying the risk of systemic comorbidities and its associated pathomechanisms in those with psoriasis and PsA could provide a sufficient basis to use a multi-disciplinary approach for treating patients with psoriasis and PsA.

Effects of fish oil supplement on psoriasis: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

BACKGROUND

Fish oils, which contain omega-3 polyunsaturated fatty acids as the active ingredients, possess anti-inflammatory activities and may have therapeutic potential in diseases with an inflammatory etiology. Fish oil supplement has been advocated for treating psoriasis which is a chronic inflammatory dermatosis.

OBJECTIVE

We aimed to investigate the effects of fish oil supplement on psoriasis.

METHODS

We searched CENTRAL, Embase and MEDLINE on 24 January 2018 for randomized control trials (RCTs) on the effects of fish oil supplement in treating psoriasis. The Cochrane Collaboration's tool was used to assess the risk of bias of included RCTs. We performed a random-effects model meta-analysis to obtain the pooled treatment effect estimates.

RESULTS

We included 13 RCTs with 625 participants. Three RCTs involving 337 participants provided usable data for meta-analysis. Fish oil supplement did not significantly reduce the severity of psoriasis when assessed by Psoriasis Area and Severity Index score (mean difference - 0.28; 95% confidence interval - 1.74 to 1.19).

CONCLUSION

The current evidence does not support the use of fish oil supplement in treating psoriasis.

Bedside to bench: defining the immunopathogenesis of psoriatic arthritis

Psoriatic arthritis (PsA) is an immune-mediated, systemic inflammatory disorder. PsA can present with heterogeneous clinical features. Advances in understanding the immunopathogenesis of PsA have helped to facilitate the development of agents targeting specific components of the dysregulated inflammatory and immune responses relevant to PsA. Interestingly, agents with distinct mechanisms of action have shown differential responses across the various disease domains of PsA, counter to what might have been expected from basic science investigations. Here, we review data utilizing various novel targeted therapies for PsA, focusing on biologic and targeted synthetic therapies. These data might support the idea of a 'bedside to bench' concept, whereby results from clinical trials of specific targeted therapies inform our understanding of the immunopathogenesis of PsA. For example, TNF inhibition confers substantial and comparable benefit for all domains of PsA, supporting the view that TNF is a central pro-inflammatory cytokine across diverse areas of disease involvement. On the other hand, inhibition of IL-12-IL-23, as compared with inhibition of TNF, has greater efficacy for psoriasis, comparable efficacy for peripheral arthritis, but was ineffective in studies of axial spondyloarthritis. Data from studies of agents with distinct mechanisms of action will help to further refine our understanding of the immunopathogenesis of PsA.

Tofacitinib in the management of active psoriatic arthritis: patient selection and perspectives

Tofacitinib is an oral Janus kinase inhibitor approved for the treatment of psoriatic arthritis (PsA). It provides an alternative option for patients who have had an inadequate response and tolerance to other disease modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs). It has demonstrated comparable efficacy to biologics, is effective in the management of treatment resistant disease, and is reported to improve enthesitis, dactylitis, and radiographic progression. Tofacitinib is also associated with an increased risk of serious infections, malignancy, and laboratory abnormalities. There is currently a large armamentarium of therapies for psoriatic arthritis, and choosing among treatments can be challenging. Due to this wide selection, a thorough assessment of psoriatic disease phenotype, patient preference, disease presentation, and comorbidities is critical. This review addresses key considerations in patient selection for the treatment of PsA with tofacitinib.

Association Between Psoriasis and Vitiligo: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND

The relationship between psoriasis and vitiligo has not been previously confirmed, and we therefore aimed to investigate this association.

METHODS

We conducted a search of the MEDLINE and EMBASE electronic databases on 22 January 2018 for case-control, cross-sectional, and cohort studies examining the association between psoriasis and vitiligo. A customized Newcastle-Ottawa Scale was used to assess the risk of bias of the included studies. We performed a random effects meta-analysis to calculate pooled odds ratios (ORs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for case-control and cross-sectional studies.

RESULTS

Of 2453 citations identified from the literature search, 10 case-control/cross-sectional studies with a total of 120,866 psoriasis cases and 79,907 vitiligo cases were included in our study. Four of these studies were rated as high risk of bias. We found a significantly increased odds for vitiligo in psoriasis patients (summary OR 2.29, 95% CI 1.56-3.37, studies = 7), as well as a significantly elevated odds for psoriasis in vitiligo patients (summary OR 3.43, 95% CI 1.86-6.33, studies = 4).

CONCLUSIONS

Our meta-analysis showed that psoriasis and vitiligo are associated with each other. Several studies had a high risk of bias, and further investigation is needed to confirm this association and amplify treatment options.

Special Article: 2018 American College of Rheumatology/National Psoriasis Foundation Guideline for the Treatment of Psoriatic Arthritis

OBJECTIVE

To develop an evidence-based guideline for the pharmacologic and nonpharmacologic treatment of psoriatic arthritis (PsA), as a collaboration between the American College of Rheumatology (ACR) and the National Psoriasis Foundation (NPF).

METHODS

We identified critical outcomes in PsA and clinically relevant PICO (population/intervention/comparator/outcomes) questions. A Literature Review Team performed a systematic literature review to summarize evidence supporting the benefits and harms of available pharmacologic and nonpharmacologic therapies for PsA. GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation) methodology was used to rate the quality of the evidence. A voting panel, including rheumatologists, dermatologists, other health professionals, and patients, achieved consensus on the direction and the strength of the recommendations.

RESULTS

The guideline covers the management of active PsA in patients who are treatment-naive and those who continue to have active PsA despite treatment, and addresses the use of oral small molecules, tumor necrosis factor inhibitors, interleukin-12/23 inhibitors (IL-12/23i), IL-17 inhibitors, CTLA4-Ig (abatacept), and a JAK inhibitor (tofacitinib). We also developed recommendations for psoriatic spondylitis, predominant enthesitis, and treatment in the presence of concomitant inflammatory bowel disease, diabetes, or serious infections. We formulated recommendations for a treat-to-target strategy, vaccinations, and nonpharmacologic therapies. Six percent of the recommendations were strong and 94% conditional, indicating the importance of active discussion between the health care provider and the patient to choose the optimal treatment.

CONCLUSION

The 2018 ACR/NPF PsA guideline serves as a tool for health care providers and patients in the selection of appropriate therapy in common clinical scenarios. Best treatment decisions consider each individual patient situation. The guideline is not meant to be proscriptive and should not be used to limit treatment options for patients with PsA.

2018 American College of Rheumatology/National Psoriasis Foundation Guideline for the Treatment of Psoriatic Arthritis

Objective:

To develop an evidence-based guideline for the pharmacologic and nonpharmacologic treatment of psoriatic arthritis (PsA), as a collaboration between the American College of Rheumatology (ACR) and the National Psoriasis Foundation (NPF).

Methods:

We identified critical outcomes in PsA and clinically relevant PICO (population/intervention/comparator/outcomes) questions. A Literature Review Team performed a systematic literature review to summarize evidence supporting the benefits and harms of available pharmacologic and nonpharmacologic therapies for PsA. GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation) methodology was used to rate the quality of the evidence. A voting panel, including rheumatologists, dermatologists, other health professionals, and patients, achieved consensus on the direction and the strength of the recommendations.

Results:

The guideline covers the management of active PsA in patients who are treatment-naive and those who continue to have active PsA despite treatment, and addresses the use of oral small molecules, tumor necrosis factor inhibitors, interleukin-12/23 inhibitors (IL-12/23i), IL-17 inhibitors, CTLA4-Ig (abatacept), and a JAK inhibitor (tofacitinib). We also developed recommendations for psoriatic spondylitis, predominant enthesitis, and treatment in the presence of concomitant inflammatory bowel disease, diabetes, or serious infections. We formulated recommendations for a treat-to-target strategy, vaccinations, and nonpharmacologic therapies. Six percent of the recommendations were strong and 94% conditional, indicating the importance of active discussion between the health care provider and the patient to choose the optimal treatment.

Conclusion:

The 2018 ACR/NPF PsA guideline serves as a tool for health care providers and patients in the selection of appropriate therapy in common clinical scenarios. Best treatment decisions consider each individual patient situation. The guideline is not meant to be proscriptive and should not be used to limit treatment options for patients with PsA.

Special Article: 2018 American College of Rheumatology/National Psoriasis Foundation Guideline for the Treatment of Psoriatic Arthritis

OBJECTIVE

To develop an evidence-based guideline for the pharmacologic and nonpharmacologic treatment of psoriatic arthritis (PsA), as a collaboration between the American College of Rheumatology (ACR) and the National Psoriasis Foundation (NPF).

METHODS

We identified critical outcomes in PsA and clinically relevant PICO (population/intervention/comparator/outcomes) questions. A Literature Review Team performed a systematic literature review to summarize evidence supporting the benefits and harms of available pharmacologic and nonpharmacologic therapies for PsA. GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation) methodology was used to rate the quality of the evidence. A voting panel, including rheumatologists, dermatologists, other health professionals, and patients, achieved consensus on the direction and the strength of the recommendations.

RESULTS

The guideline covers the management of active PsA in patients who are treatment-naive and those who continue to have active PsA despite treatment, and addresses the use of oral small molecules, tumor necrosis factor inhibitors, interleukin-12/23 inhibitors (IL-12/23i), IL-17 inhibitors, CTLA4-Ig (abatacept), and a JAK inhibitor (tofacitinib). We also developed recommendations for psoriatic spondylitis, predominant enthesitis, and treatment in the presence of concomitant inflammatory bowel disease, diabetes, or serious infections. We formulated recommendations for a treat-to-target strategy, vaccinations, and nonpharmacologic therapies. Six percent of the recommendations were strong and 94% conditional, indicating the importance of active discussion between the health care provider and the patient to choose the optimal treatment.

CONCLUSION

The 2018 ACR/NPF PsA guideline serves as a tool for health care providers and patients in the selection of appropriate therapy in common clinical scenarios. Best treatment decisions consider each individual patient situation. The guideline is not meant to be proscriptive and should not be used to limit treatment options for patients with PsA.

Chemical modulation of transcription factors

Transcription factors (TFs) constitute a diverse class of sequence-specific DNA-binding proteins, which are key to the modulation of gene expression. TFs have been associated with human diseases, including cancer, Alzheimer's and other neurodegenerative diseases, which makes this class of proteins attractive targets for chemical biology and medicinal chemistry research. Since TFs lack a common binding site or structural similarity, the development of small molecules to efficiently modulate TF biology in cells and in vivo is a challenging task. This review highlights various strategies that are currently being explored for the identification and development of modulators of Myc, p53, Stat, Nrf2, CREB, ER, AR, HIF, NF-κB, and BET proteins.

Role of janus kinase inhibitors in the treatment of alopecia areata

Alopecia areata (AA) is a common hair loss disorder worldwide with characteristic exclamation mark hairs. Although AA is self-limited, it can last for several months or even years in some patients. Currently, there is no US Food and Drug Administration-approved treatment for AA. Many off-label treatments are available but with limited efficacy. Through a better understanding of molecular biology, many targeted therapies have emerged as new alternatives for various autoimmune diseases. Various janus kinase (JAK) and signal transducer and activator of transcription (STAT) proteins form signaling pathways, which transmit extracellular cytokine signals to the nucleus and induce DNA transcriptions. By inhibiting JAK, T-cell-mediated inflammatory responses are suppressed. Increasing evidence suggests that JAK inhibitors (JAKis) are effective in the treatment of many autoimmune diseases, including AA. Among these, several studies on tofacitinib, ruxolitinib, and baricitinib in AA had been published, demonstrating promising outcomes of these agents. Unlike oral formulations, efficacy of topical forms of tofacitinib and ruxolitinib reported in these studies is still unsatisfactory and requires improvement. This review aims to summarize evidence of the efficacy and safety of JAKis in the treatment of AA.