Filgotinib versus placebo or adalimumab in patients with rheumatoid arthritis and inadequate response to methotrexate: a phase III randomised clinical trial

Comparative effectiveness of biological disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs and Janus kinase inhibitor monotherapy in rheumatoid arthritis

OBJECTIVES

The objective of this study was to examine the effectiveness and drug tolerability of biological DMARD (bDMARD) and Janus kinase inhibitor (JAKi) monotherapy in patients with RA in a multicentre cohort study.

METHODS

Patients with RA for whom bDMARD/JAKi monotherapy without conventional synthetic DMARDs has been initiated were included. Monotherapy regimens were categorized as IL-6 receptor inhibitors (IL-6Ris), cytotoxic T-lymphocyte-associated protein 4 immunoglobulin (CTLA4Ig), JAKis, or TNF inhibitors (TNFis). Multiple propensity score-based inverse probability weighting (IPW) was used to reduce selection bias. Linear mixed-effect models with IPW were used to examine changes in the DAS in 28 joints using ESR (DAS28)-ESR at 24 weeks, and drug retention was compared between monotherapy groups using IPW Cox proportional hazards models.

RESULTS

A total of 849 treatment courses were included, involving 635 patients (IL-6Ris, 218; CTLA4Ig, 183; JAKis, 92; TNFis, 356). The change in DAS28-ESR at week 24 as the primary outcome was -0.93 (95% CI: -1.20 to -0.66) lower in the IL-6Ri group than in the TNFi group, while those of the CTLA4Ig and JAKi groups were similar to that of the TNFi group [-0.20 (-0.48 to 0.08), -0.25 (-0.67 to 0.16), respectively]. IL-6Ri use was associated with significantly lower overall drug discontinuation than that for TNFi use [hazard ratio = 0.55 (0.39-0.78), P = 0.001]. Similar retention rates were identified for the CTLA4Ig and JAKi groups to that of the TNFi group.

CONCLUSION

In the analysis with IPW to reduce selection bias, IL-6Ri monotherapy was superior to TNFi monotherapy in terms of effectiveness and drug retention. No significant differences were identified between CTLA4Ig, JAKi and TNFi monotherapy.

Are seronegative patients with rheumatoid arthritis and clinically suspect arthralgia properly represented in randomized clinical trials?

Rheumatoid arthritis (RA) is a chronic immuno-inflammatory disease whose outcomes can vary greatly from one patient to another. One of the main prognostic factors is the presence of serum autoantibodies, such as rheumatoid factor (RF) and anti-citrullinated peptide antibodies (ACPA). Indeed, when seropositive, patients with RA are at higher risk of radiographic progression, disability, and increased mortality. Moreover, while the introduction of the 2010 American College of Rheumatology/European Alliance of Associations for Rheumatology (ACR/EULAR) classification criteria has allowed for an earlier diagnosis, studies on large early arthritis cohorts have also shown that these criteria are less capable of identifying seronegative patients, who are therefore at a higher risk of being diagnosed and treated late. In light of these, the major randomized controlled trials have mostly enrolled patients with autoantibody-positive disease. However, in recent years, it became evident that the two serotypes of RA differ significantly from many points of view. Alongside this, a greater understanding of the disease pathogenesis, particularly the presence of antibodies in patients' serum even before the onset of arthritis, has generated significant interest in exploring whether the disease could be prevented by treating patients in the pre-arthritis phases. Once again, emerging trials predominantly enroll subjects positive for RA autoantibodies, potentially overlooking seronegative individuals with arthralgia-at-risk.

Efficacy and safety of filgotinib in patients with rheumatoid arthritis: week 156 interim results from a long-term extension study

BACKGROUND

Janus kinase inhibitors are an effective option for achieving sustained remission or low disease activity in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) following inadequate response to conventional synthetic disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs. Filgotinib is a Janus kinase 1-preferential inhibitor available in two doses for moderate-to-severe RA. We report the long-term efficacy and safety of filgotinib.

METHODS

In the ongoing long-term extension study FINCH 4 (NCT03025308), patients continue filgotinib 200 mg or 100 mg from FINCH 1, 2 or 3 or receive filgotinib 200 mg or 100 mg de novo. Efficacy assessments up to week 156 include American College of Rheumatology 20% response (ACR20), Disease Activity Score 28 using C-reactive protein of <2.6, Clinical Disease Activity Index of ≤2.8, Simplified Disease Activity Index of ≤3.3 and Boolean remission (1.0 and 2.0) with non-responder imputation.

RESULTS

In patients with an inadequate response to methotrexate, 60.2% and 54.6% receiving de novo filgotinib 200 mg and 100 mg had an ACR20 at week 156, respectively, as did 67.3% and 59.5% of those who continued filgotinib 200 mg and 100 mg. At week 156, Boolean remission 1.0 was achieved by 18.8% and 15.4% of patients treated with de novo filgotinib 200 mg and 100 mg, respectively, and by 21.1% and 18.5% when Boolean 2.0 criteria were applied. Similar efficacy data were seen in patients from FINCH 2 and 3. Safety data were consistent with the known safety profile of filgotinib.

CONCLUSION

In FINCH 4, filgotinib 200 mg and 100 mg (continuous or de novo) demonstrated sustained efficacy up to week 156 in patients enrolled from FINCH 1, 2 or 3, with no unexpected safety results.

Systematic review and meta-analysis for the 2024 update of the Japan College of Rheumatology clinical practice guidelines for the management of rheumatoid arthritis

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this article is to update evidence on the efficacy and safety of disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs) and provide information to the taskforce for the 2024 update of the Japan College of Rheumatology clinical practice guidelines for the management of rheumatoid arthritis (RA).

METHODS

We searched various databases for randomised controlled trials on RA published until June 2022, with no language restriction. For each of the 15 clinical questions, two independent reviewers screened the articles, evaluated the core outcomes, and performed meta-analyses.

RESULTS

Subcutaneous injection of methotrexate (MTX) showed similar efficacy to oral MTX in MTX-naïve RA patients. Ozoralizumab combined with MTX improved drug efficacy compared to the placebo in RA patients with inadequate response (IR) to conventional synthetic DMARD (csDMARD). Rituximab with and without concomitant csDMARDs showed similar efficacy to other biological DMARDs (bDMARDs) in bDMARD-IR RA patients. Combined Janus kinase inhibitors and MTX achieved similar clinical responses and equal safety during a 4-year period compared to tumour necrosis factor inhibitors in MTX-IR RA patients. Biosimilars showed efficacy equivalent to that of the original bDMARDs in csDMARD-IR and bDMARD-IR RA patients.

CONCLUSIONS

This systematic review provides latest evidence for the 2024 update of the Japan College of Rheumatology clinical practice guidelines for RA management.

[Head-to-head trials in rheumatoid arthritis]

BACKGROUND

Head-to-head studies are important to select the optimal treatment in terms of efficacy and side effect profiles when several drugs are available.

AIM OF THE WORK

This article describes all studies comparing the use of disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARD) in rheumatoid arthritis (RA) in head-to-head studies or in which a DMARD was at least included in an active comparison arm.

RESULTS

A total of 23 studies comparing DMARDs were identified. These included comparisons of Janus kinase (JAK) inhibitors with methotrexate and with adalimumab as well as the oral surveillance study.

DISCUSSION

There are already an exceptionally large number of head-to-head studies in RA, both for comparisons of efficacy and safety of DMARDs. Nevertheless, more such comparative studies are needed, for example to clarify whether adverse events of tofacitinib observed in the oral surveillance study are specific to the JAK 1/JAK 3 inhibitor or are a class effect of all JAK inhibitors.

Update of the Consensus Statement of the Spanish Society of Rheumatology on the use of biological and synthetic targeted therapies in rheumatoid arthritis

OBJECTIVE

To update the consensus document of the Spanish Society of Rheumatology (SER) regarding the use of targeted biological and synthetic therapies in rheumatoid arthritis (RA) with the aim of assisting clinicians in their therapeutic decisions.

METHODS

A panel of 13 experts was assembled through an open call by SER. We employed a mixed adaptation-elaboration-update methodology starting from the 2015 Consensus Document of the Spanish Society of Rheumatology on the use of biological therapies in RA. Starting with systematic reviews (SR) of recommendations from EULAR 2019, American College of Rheumatology 2021, and GUIPCAR 2017, we updated the search strategies for the PICO questions of GUIPCAR. An additional SR was conducted on demyelinating disease in relation to targeted biological and synthetic therapies. Following the analysis of evidence by different panelists, consensus on the wording and level of agreement for each recommendation was reached in a face-to-face meeting.

RESULTS

The panel established 5 general principles and 15 recommendations on the management of RA. These encompassed crucial aspects such as the importance of early treatment, therapeutic goals in RA, monitoring frequency, the use of glucocorticoids, the application of conventional synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (csDMARDs), biological DMARDs (bDMARDs), and targeted synthetic DMARDs. Additionally, recommendations on dose reduction of these drugs in stable patients were included. This update also features recommendations on the use of bDMARDs and Janus Kinase inhibitors in some specific clinical situations, such as patients with lung disease, a history of cancer, heart failure, or demyelinating disease.

CONCLUSIONS

This update provides recommendations on key aspects in the management of RA using targeted biological and synthetic therapies.

Impact of Race on the Efficacy and Safety of Tofacitinib in Rheumatoid Arthritis: Post Hoc Analysis of Pooled Clinical Trials

INTRODUCTION

Racial disparities in disease activity, clinical outcomes, and treatment survival persist despite advancements in rheumatoid arthritis (RA) therapies and clinical management. In this post hoc analysis of pooled data from the tofacitinib global clinical program, we evaluated the impact of race on the efficacy and safety of tofacitinib in patients with RA.

METHODS

Data were pooled from 15 phase 2-3b/4 studies of patients with RA treated with tofacitinib 5 or 10 mg twice daily, adalimumab, or placebo. Outcomes were stratified by self-reported patient race (White/Black/Asian/Other). Efficacy outcomes to month 12 included: American College of Rheumatology (ACR)20/50/70 responses, Clinical Disease Activity Index (CDAI)/Disease Activity Score in 28 joints, erythrocyte sedimentation rate [DAS28-4(ESR)] low disease activity (LDA) rates, least squares (LS) mean change from baseline (∆) in CDAI, DAS28-4 (ESR), Health Assessment Questionnaire-Disability Index (HAQ-DI), and Pain [Visual Analog Scale (VAS)]. Odds ratios (ORs; 95% CI) versus placebo, and placebo-adjusted ∆LS means were calculated for active treatments using logistic regression model and mixed-effect model of repeated measurements, respectively. Safety outcomes were assessed throughout.

RESULTS

A total of 6355 patients were included (White, 4145; Black, 213; Asian, 1348; Other, 649). For tofacitinib-treated patients, ORs for ACR20/50/70 responses and CDAI/DAS28-4(ESR) LDA rates through month 3 were generally numerically higher for White/Asian/Other versus Black patients. Across active treatments, trends toward higher placebo-adjusted improvements from baseline in CDAI, DAS28-4 (ESR), HAQ-DI, and Pain (VAS) were observed in Asian/Other versus White/Black patients. Numerically higher placebo responses in Black versus White/Asian/Other patients were generally observed across outcomes through month 12. Safety outcomes were mostly similar across treatment/racial groups.

CONCLUSIONS

In patients with RA, tofacitinib was efficacious across racial groups with similar safety outcomes; observed racial differences potentially reflect patient demographics or regional practice disparities.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBERS

ClinicalTrials.gov identifiers: NCT00147498; NCT00413660; NCT00550446; NCT00603512; NCT00687193; NCT01164579; NCT00976599; NCT01359150; NCT00960440; NCT00847613; NCT00814307; NCT00856544; NCT00853385; NCT01039688; NCT02187055.

Patients with High Baseline Neutrophil-to-Lymphocyte Ratio Exhibit Better Response to Filgotinib as Treatment for Rheumatoid Arthritis

INTRODUCTION

High baseline neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR) in rheumatoid arthritis (RA) has been associated with positive responses to biologic tumor necrosis factor inhibition and negative responses to conventional synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drug (csDMARD) triple therapy. Datasets from three randomized clinical trials in patients with RA were used to test the hypothesis that baseline NLR is associated with improved clinical response to filgotinib in methotrexate (MTX)-naïve or MTX-experienced RA populations.

METHODS

Patients from FINCH 1 (inadequate response to MTX, MTX-IR; NCT02889796), FINCH 2 (inadequate response to biologic DMARDs; NCT02873936), and FINCH 3 (MTX-naïve; NCT02886728) were classified as baseline NLR-High or baseline NLR-Low based on a previously published cut point of 2.7. In total, 3365 patients were included across the three studies. Differences in clinical outcomes and patient-reported outcomes (PROs) were determined using linear-regression models.

RESULTS

Control-arm patients (placebo + MTX/placebo + csDMARD) classified as NLR-High exhibited worse continuous clinical and PRO responses at week 12 across clinical trials compared to NLR-Low patients. In contrast, NLR-High patients who received FIL 200 mg + MTX/csDMARD exhibited consistently better responses after 12 weeks compared to NLR-Low patients across clinical trials, clinical endpoints, and PROs. These trends were most prominent among the MTX-IR population.

CONCLUSION

The 2.7 baseline NLR cut point could be used to enrich for patients most likely to benefit from the addition of filgotinib to background MTX/csDMARD. Use of baseline NLR as part of therapeutic decision-making would not require additional diagnostics and could contribute to improved outcomes for patients with RA.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Clinicaltrials.gov: NCT02889796; NCT02873936; NCT02886728.

JAK inhibitor selectivity: new opportunities, better drugs?

Cytokines function as communication tools of the immune system, serving critical functions in many biological responses and shaping the immune response. When cytokine production or their biological activity goes awry, the homeostatic balance of the immune response is altered, leading to the development of several pathologies such as autoimmune and inflammatory disorders. Cytokines bind to specific receptors on cells, triggering the activation of intracellular enzymes known as Janus kinases (JAKs). The JAK family comprises four members, JAK1, JAK2, JAK3 and tyrosine kinase 2, which are critical for intracellular cytokine signalling. Since the mid-2010s multiple JAK inhibitors have been approved for inflammatory and haematological indications. Currently, approved JAK inhibitors have demonstrated clinical efficacy; however, improved selectivity for specific JAKs is likely to enhance safety profiles, and different strategies have been used to accomplish enhanced JAK selectivity. In this update, we discuss the background of JAK inhibitors, current approved indications and adverse effects, along with new developments in this field. We address the issue of JAK selectivity and its relevance in terms of efficacy, and describe new modalities of JAK targeting, as well as new aspects of JAK inhibitor action.

Considerations for the use of biological therapies in elderly patients with rheumatoid arthritis

INTRODUCTION

Rheumatoid arthritis (RA) is a chronic autoimmune inflammatory disease that primarily affects middle-aged individuals but is increasingly prevalent among the elderly due to longer life expectancies. Treating elderly onset RA (EORA) is challenging for clinicians because of unique disease characteristics, comorbidities, polypharmacy, age-related physiological changes, and limited studies on the safety and efficacy of biological therapies in this population. This review aims to evaluate the use of various biological therapies in elderly RA patients.

AREAS COVERED

This narrative review examines various aspects of RA in the elderly using published literature, randomized control trials, meta-analyses, and recommendations from the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) and The European Alliance of Associations for Rheumatology (EULAR).

EXPERT OPINION

In EORA patients, the initiation of biological therapy is often delayed. Methotrexate remains the first-line treatment for both EORA and young onset RA (YORA). The combination of methotrexate and biological treatment shows comparable safety and efficacy in both EORA and YORA, except for rituximab, which is less effective in patients over 75. For elderly RA patients, biological (b-) disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs) are preferred as the first advanced therapy over targeted synthetic (ts-) DMARDs due to their superior safety profile.

Effectiveness of JAK Inhibitors Compared With Biologic Disease-Modifying Antirheumatic Drugs on Pain Reduction in Rheumatoid Arthritis: Results From a Nationwide Swedish Cohort Study

OBJECTIVE

To compare the effectiveness of JAK inhibitors (JAKis) and biologic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (bDMARDs) on pain in patients with rheumatoid arthritis.

METHODS

In this retrospective study, we investigated patients with a diagnosis of rheumatoid arthritis, starting treatment with a JAKi (n = 1,827), a tumor necrosis factor inhibitor (TNFi; n = 6,422), an interleukin-6 inhibitor (n = 887), abatacept (n = 1,102), or rituximab (n = 1,149) in 2017 to 2019, using data from several linked Swedish national registers. Differences in change in pain, assessed with a visual analogue scale (0-100 mm), from baseline to 3 months, as well as proportions of patients remaining on initial treatment with low pain (visual analogue scale pain <20) at 12 months, were compared between treatments. Comparisons of treatment responses between JAKis and bDMARDs were evaluated using multivariable linear regression, adjusted for patient characteristics, comorbidities, current comedication, and previous treatment.

RESULTS

JAKi treatment was associated with a greater decrease in pain at 3 months compared with TNFi treatment (adjusted mean additional decrease 4.0 mm; 95% confidence interval 1.6-6.3), with similar trends in comparisons with non-TNFi bDMARDs. More patients achieved low pain at 12 months on JAKis compared with TNFis, in particular among those previously treated with at least two bDMARDs (adjusted change contrast 5.3 percentage points; 95% confidence interval 1.0-9.6).

CONCLUSION

JAKis had a slightly better effect on pain outcomes at 3 and 12 months compared with TNFis, with significantly greater differences in patients previously treated with at least two bDMARDs. The effect of JAKis on pain reduction was at least similar to that of non-TNFi bDMARDs.

Filgotinib in Active Noninfectious Uveitis: The HUMBOLDT Randomized Clinical Trial

Importance

Noninfectious uveitis is a leading cause of visual impairment with an unmet need for additional treatment options.

Objective

To assess the efficacy and safety of filgotinib, a Janus kinase 1 (JAK1) preferential inhibitor, for the treatment of noninfectious uveitis.

Design, Setting, and Participants

The HUMBOLDT trial was a double-masked, placebo-controlled, phase 2, randomized clinical trial conducted from July 2017 to April 2021 at 26 centers in 7 countries. Eligible participants (aged ≥18 years) had active noninfectious intermediate uveitis, posterior uveitis, or panuveitis despite at least 2 weeks of treatment with oral prednisone (10-60 mg per day).

Interventions

Participants were randomly assigned 1:1 to receive filgotinib, 200 mg, or placebo orally once daily for up to 52 weeks.

Main Outcomes and Measures

The primary end point was the proportion of participants experiencing treatment failure by week 24. Treatment failure was a composite end point represented by assessment of the presence of chorioretinal and/or retinal vascular lesions, best-corrected visual acuity, and anterior chamber cell and vitreous haze grades. Safety was assessed in participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug or placebo.

Results

Between July 26, 2017, and April 22, 2021, 116 participants were screened, and 74 (mean [SD] age, 46 [16] years; 43 female [59.7%] of 72 participants, as 2 participants did not receive treatment doses) were randomly assigned to receive filgotinib (n = 38) or placebo (n = 36). Despite early termination of the trial for business reasons ahead of meeting enrollment targets, a significantly reduced proportion of participants who received filgotinib experienced treatment failure by week 24 vs placebo (12 of 32 participants [37.5%] vs 23 of 34 participants [67.6%]; difference vs placebo -30.1%; 95% CI, -56.2% to -4.1%; P = .006). Business reasons were unrelated to efficacy or safety. Adverse events were reported in 30 of 37 participants (81.1%) who received filgotinib and in 24 of 35 participants (68.6%) who received placebo. Serious adverse events were reported in 5 of 37 participants (13.5%) in the filgotinib group and in 2 of 35 participants (5.7%) in the placebo group. No deaths were reported during the trial.

Conclusions and Relevance

Results of this randomized clinical trial show that filgotinib lowered the risk of treatment failure in participants with active noninfectious intermediate uveitis, posterior uveitis, or panuveitis vs placebo. Although the HUMBOLDT trial provided evidence supporting the efficacy of filgotinib in patients with active noninfectious uveitis, the premature termination of the trial prevented collection of additional safety or efficacy information of this JAK1 preferential inhibitor.

Trial Registration

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03207815.

Comparison of creatine kinase elevation caused by Janus kinase inhibitors and interleukin-6 inhibitors in patients with rheumatoid arthritis: A propensity score-matched study

Objectives

This study aimed to examine whether creatine kinase (CK) elevation occurs with interleukin (IL)-6 inhibitors, as in Janus kinase (JAK) inhibitors, which are reported to increase CK levels in rheumatoid arthritis.

Patients and methods

A multicenter database of JAK inhibitor and IL-6 inhibitor treatment was retrospectively searched between January 2016 to December 2022; 142 cases (117 females, 25 males, mean age: 63.8±13.0 years; range, 20 to 85 years), with 71 cases in each group, were extracted by propensity score matching using age, sex, body mass index, and CK at 0 weeks. The outlier rate was compared. Patients' background characteristics related to elevated CK levels at 24 weeks were investigated by univariate and multivariate analyses.

Results

Creatine kinase levels at 4 and 12 weeks were significantly higher with JAK inhibitors than with IL-6 inhibitors (four weeks, 72 vs. 87.5 IU/mL, p=0.016; 12 weeks, 71 vs. 95.5 IU/mL, p=0.028). The outlier rate (Grade 1) with JAK inhibitors increased significantly over time (0 weeks, 4.2%; four weeks, 18.1%; 12 weeks, 21.7%; 24 weeks, 18.3%; p=0.015), whereas that with IL-6 inhibitors increased slightly (0 weeks, 5.6%; four weeks, 9.2%; 12 weeks, 8.6%; 24 weeks, 8.5%; p=0.745), with a significant difference between the groups (p=0.035). No patients discontinued treatment due to myalgia or renal dysfunction. The factors significantly positively related to elevated CK levels at 24 weeks were male sex and creatinine. Those significantly negatively related were Steinbrocker stage and class, modified health assessment questionnaire scores, estimated glomerular filtration rate, and glucocorticoid dose.

Conclusion

Mild CK elevations with JAK inhibitors are not a particular clinical problem. CK elevation might be specific to JAK inhibitors.

Risk of Gastrointestinal Perforation in Patients With Rheumatic Diseases Exposed to Janus Kinase Inhibitors Versus Adalimumab: A Nationwide Cohort Study

OBJECTIVE

To compare the risk of gastrointestinal perforation (GIP), a rare but serious adverse event, in patients who a JAK inhibitor (JAKi; tofacitinib, baricitinib, upadacitinib, or filgotinib) versus adalimumab (tumor necrosis factor inhibitor) among a comprehensive real-world population of patients with rheumatic diseases.

METHODS

We conducted a nationwide population-based cohort study of the French national health data system, the exposed group that received a JAKi and the comparison group adalimumab. We included all individuals with a rheumatic disease who had their first dispensation of these treatments from July 2017 to December 2021. The primary endpoint was the occurrence of GIP (end of follow-up May 2022). Weighted hazard ratios (wHRs) were estimated with the inverse probability of treatment weighting method to account for confounding factors. Concomitant administration of systemic glucocorticoids, nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, and proton-pump inhibitors were time-varying variables.

RESULTS

The cohort included 39,758 patients: 12,335 and 27,423 in the groups that received a JAKi and adalimumab (mean age 58.2 and 47.3 years; female 76% and 58%; rheumatoid arthritis 85.3% and 27.3%, and psoriatic arthritis/axial spondyloarthritis 14.7% and 72.7%), respectively. During follow-up, 38 and 42 GIPs occurred in the groups that received a JAKi and adalimumab groups; incidence rates were 2.1 (95% confidence interval [CI] 1.5-2.8) and 1.1 (95% CI 0.8-1.5) per 1,000 person-years, respectively. Rates of GIP did not differ between the groups that received a JAKi and adalimumab: wHR 1.1 (95% CI 0.7-1.9; P = 0.65). Despite the lack of power in some subgroup analyses, results were consistent whatever the subgroup of a type of JAKi received or subgroup with a type of rheumatic disease.

CONCLUSION

In this nationwide cohort study, the rates of GIPs did not differ between groups of patients who received JAKi and adalimumab treatment. These results need to be confirmed in other observational studies.

Cellular spermine targets JAK signaling to restrain cytokine-mediated autoimmunity

Prolonged activation of the type I interferon (IFN-I) pathway leads to autoimmune diseases such as systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE). Metabolic regulation of cytokine signaling is critical for cellular homeostasis. Through metabolomics analyses of IFN-β-activated macrophages and an IFN-stimulated-response-element reporter screening, we identified spermine as a metabolite brake for Janus kinase (JAK) signaling. Spermine directly bound to the FERM and SH2 domains of JAK1 to impair JAK1-cytokine receptor interaction, thus broadly suppressing JAK1 phosphorylation triggered by cytokines IFN-I, IFN-II, interleukin (IL)-2, and IL-6. Peripheral blood mononuclear cells (PBMCs) from individuals with SLE showing decreased spermine concentrations exhibited enhanced IFN-I and lupus gene signatures. Spermine treatment attenuated autoimmune pathogenesis in SLE and psoriasis mice and reduced IFN-I signaling in monocytes from individuals with SLE. We synthesized a spermine derivative (spermine derivative 1 [SD1]) and showed that it had a potent immunosuppressive function. Our findings reveal spermine as a metabolic checkpoint for cellular homeostasis and a potential immunosuppressive molecule for controlling autoimmune disease.

Therapeutic Maintenance of Janus Kinase Inhibitors in Real Life for Rheumatoid Arthritis: Retrospective Study

Background/Objectives: Janus kinase inhibitors (JAKis) belong to a new class of targeted oral drugs that have been added to the therapeutic arsenal for rheumatoid arthritis (RA). The aim of this study was to evaluate the efficacy and safety profiles of these four available molecules (tofacitinib, baricitinib, filgotinib, and upadacitinib) in real life. Methods: A retrospective, single-center observational study including all patients treated with JAKis for RA from 1 October 2017 to 1 December 2023. We assessed the maintenance rate at 24 months, which is an indirect reflection of the clinical and biological safety and efficacy profiles. Results: The 76 patients in our study were thus treated for the first time with anti-JAK, including 55 patients with baricitinib (BAR), 9 patients with tofacitinib (TOF), 4 patients with upadacitinib (UPA), and 8 patients with filgotinib (FIL). The majority of our patients had BAR introduced as the first intention. The therapeutic maintenance at 2 years for all our patients was 50%. The average maintenance duration was 8.6 months and was similar in all the groups. Of the 76 patients included in this study treated with Baricitinib (72.3%), 38 (50%) discontinued their treatment after two years of follow-up. Conclusions: Although this retrospective study is subject to various biases, it shows that the persistence rates of the four JAKi molecules in daily practice did not differ significantly, thus confirming the long-term efficacy of these drugs.

Biologics or Janus Kinase Inhibitors in Rheumatoid Arthritis Patients Who are Insufficient Responders to Conventional Anti-Rheumatic Drugs

Rheumatoid arthritis (RA) is a chronic immune-mediated inflammatory disease which can induce progressive disability if not properly treated early. Over the last 20 years, the improvement of knowledge on the pathogenesis of the disease has made available several drugs targeting key elements of the pathogenetic process, which now represent the preferred treatment option after the failure of first-line therapy with conventional drugs such as methotrexate (MTX). To this category of targeted drugs belong anti-cytokine or cell-targeted biological agents and more recently also Janus kinase inhibitors (JAKis). In the absence to date of specific biomarkers to guide the therapeutic choice in the context of true precision medicine, the choice of the first targeted drug after MTX failure is guided by treatment cost (especially after the marketing of biosimilar products) and by the clinical characteristics of the patient (age, sex, comorbidities and compliance) and the disease (presence or absence of autoantibodies and systemic or extra-articular manifestations), which may influence the efficacy and safety profile of the available products. This viewpoint focuses on the decision-making process underlying the personalized approach to RA therapy and will analyse the evidence in the literature supporting the choice of individual products and in particular the differential choice between biological drugs and JAKis.

Regulation of bone homeostasis: signaling pathways and therapeutic targets

As a highly dynamic tissue, bone is continuously rebuilt throughout life. Both bone formation by osteoblasts and bone resorption by osteoclasts constitute bone reconstruction homeostasis. The equilibrium of bone homeostasis is governed by many complicated signaling pathways that weave together to form an intricate network. These pathways coordinate the meticulous processes of bone formation and resorption, ensuring the structural integrity and dynamic vitality of the skeletal system. Dysregulation of the bone homeostatic regulatory signaling network contributes to the development and progression of many skeletal diseases. Significantly, imbalanced bone homeostasis further disrupts the signaling network and triggers a cascade reaction that exacerbates disease progression and engenders a deleterious cycle. Here, we summarize the influence of signaling pathways on bone homeostasis, elucidating the interplay and crosstalk among them. Additionally, we review the mechanisms underpinning bone homeostatic imbalances across diverse disease landscapes, highlighting current and prospective therapeutic targets and clinical drugs. We hope that this review will contribute to a holistic understanding of the signaling pathways and molecular mechanisms sustaining bone homeostasis, which are promising to contribute to further research on bone homeostasis and shed light on the development of targeted drugs.

Cumulative incidence and risk of infection in patients with rheumatoid arthritis treated with janus kinase inhibitors: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) who receive immunosuppressive medications have a heightened risk of infection. The goal of our study was to calculate the pooled cumulative incidence and risk of infection in patients with RA treated with Janus kinase inhibitors (JAKi). The PubMed and EMBASE databases were queried for randomized controlled trials comparing patients with RA treated with JAKi (upadacitinib, baricitinib, tofacitinib, peficitinib, or filgotinib), defined as the treatment group, compared with control subjects, defined as participants receiving placebo or treatment regimen that was similar to that of participants in the treatment group, with the exception of JAKi. The primary study endpoint was the relative risk (RR) of any-grade and severe infection. The secondary endpoints were RR and cumulative incidence of opportunistic infections, herpes zoster, and pneumonia. The Stata v17 software was used for all data analysis. Results showed that treatment with baricitinib was associated with an increased risk of any-grade (RR 1.34; 95% CI: 1.19-1.52) and opportunistic (RR 2.69; 95% CI: 1.22-5.94) infection, whereas treatment with filgotinib (RR 1.21; 95% CI: 1.05-1.39), peficitinib (RR 1.40; 95% CI: 1.05-1.86) and upadacitinib (RR 1.30; 95% CI: 1.09-1.56) was associated with increased risk of any-grade infection only. Analysis based on type of infection showed a pooled cumulative incidence of 32.44% for any-grade infections, 2.02% for severe infections, 1.74% for opportunistic infections, 1.56% for herpes zoster, and 0.49% for pneumonia in patients treated with any JAKi during the follow-up period. Treatment with specific JAKi in patients with RA is associated with an increased risk of any-grade and opportunistic infections but not severe infection. Close clinical monitoring of patients with RA treated with JAKi is required to establish the long-term infection risk profile of these agents.

JAK Inhibitors in Rheumatoid Arthritis: Immunomodulatory Properties and Clinical Efficacy

Rheumatoid arthritis (RA) is a highly prevalent autoimmune disorder. The pathogenesis of the disease is complex and involves various cellular populations, including fibroblast-like synoviocytes, macrophages, and T cells, among others. Identification of signalling pathways and molecules that actively contribute to the development of the disease is crucial to understanding the mechanisms involved in the chronic inflammatory environment present in affected joints. Recent studies have demonstrated that the Janus kinase/signal transducer and activator of transcription (JAK/STAT) pathway regulates the behaviour of immune cells and contributes to the progression of RA. Several JAK inhibitors, such as tofacitinib, baricitinib, upadacitinib, and filgocitinib, have been developed, and their efficacy and safety in patients with RA have been comprehensively investigated in a number of clinical trials. Consequently, JAK inhibitors have been approved and registered as a treatment for patients with RA. In this review, we discuss the involvement of JAK/STAT signalling in the pathogenesis of RA and summarise the potential beneficial effects of JAK inhibitors in cells implicated in the pathogenesis of the disease. Moreover, we present the most important phase 3 clinical trials that evaluated the use of these agents in patients.

Efficacy and Safety of Filgotinib in Rheumatoid Arthritis Patients Aged over and under 65 Years (ENANTIA-65)

BACKGROUND

According to recent data, the age of patients could represent an important risk factor for MACE (major cardiovascular events), cancer, and VTE (venous thromboembolism) during treatment with JAK inhibitors in rheumatoid arthritis. We decided to analyze the population involved in the ReLiFiRa study by identifying two groups of patients: 65 years or more and less than 65 years of age, evaluating the efficacy and tolerability of 200 mg of Filgotinib daily.

METHODS

Of the 120 ReLiFiRa patients, 54 were younger than 65 years old and 66 patients were 65 years old or older. The data of efficacy and tolerability of treatment with FIL 200 mg daily for 6 months were evaluated.

RESULTS

After six months of treatment, FIL was effective in both age groups. In both groups, the median values of steroid DAS28, CDAI, ERS, PCR, tender joints, swollen joints, VAS, HAQ, PGA patients, and PGA physicians were reduced with a statistically significant difference comparing these values with the baseline values. The difference in age did not impact the effectiveness of the drug. The lipid profile data also did not demonstrate significant differences between the two age groups; however, the comparison between younger vs. older patients' populations regarding the total cholesterol/HDL ratio and LDL/HDL ratio shows a statistically significant difference: total cholesterol/HDL 3.4 (2.12-3.66) vs. 3.64 (3.36-4.13) p = 0.0004, LDL/HDL 1.9 (0.98-2.25) vs. 2.41 (2.04-2.73) p = 0.0002. There are no differences regarding the atherogenic index (LDL-C/HDL-C) and coronary risk index (TC/HDL-C) compared to baseline.

CONCLUSIONS

After six months of treatment with FIL, the older population group showed a higher level of LDL and a lower level of HDL compared to younger patients. The atherogenic index and coronary risk index are higher in patients aged ≥ 65 years, but interestingly, there were no differences when comparing the 6-month data to baseline values. This condition highlights the impact of typical risk factors that act independently of treatment with Filgotinib.

JAK/STAT signaling in rheumatoid arthritis leukocytes is uncoupled from serum cytokines in a subset of patients

OBJECTIVE

Rheumatoid Arthritis (RA) is a systemic autoimmune disease involving pro-inflammatory cytokines that can be therapeutically targeted by antibodies or kinase inhibitors. Nevertheless, these drugs fail in a subset of patients independent of the abundance of the targeted cytokines. We aim to explore the cellular basis of this phenomenon by analyzing the relation of cytokine abundance and activation of downstream signaling pathways in RA.

METHODS

The study included 62 RA patients and 9 healthy controls (HC). Phosphorylation of STAT 1-6 in various immune cell subsets was determined ex vivo using a novel robust flow cytometry-based protocol. Serum concentrations of IL-6, IL-10, IL-12p70, IL-17 A, interferon gamma, and TNFα in the same samples were measured using highly sensitive single molecule array (SIMOA).

RESULTS

We found an increase in circulating cytokines in RA patients, while STAT activity was lower in RA patients compared to HC. Based on STAT activity we determined three endotypes in active RA patients (cDAI>10, n = 28): 1) those with active STAT5a/b signaling in T cells (n = 7/28), 2) those with a low STAT activity in all assessed cell types (n = 14/28), and 3) those with active STAT1 and STAT3 signaling mainly in myeloid cells (n = 7/28). Integrating intracellular STAT activation and cytokine analysis revealed diminished JAK/STAT signaling in a subset of patients (n = 8/20) despite elevated serum cytokine concentrations.

CONCLUSION

Diminished JAK/STAT signaling in active RA may partly explain unresponsiveness to therapy targeting cytokine signaling. Analysis of JAK/STAT phosphorylation may identify patients at risk for non-response to these therapies.

The efficacy and safety of different Janus kinase inhibitors as monotherapy in rheumatoid arthritis: A Bayesian network meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

This study aims to evaluate the efficacy and safety of JAK inhibitors in the treatment of patients with RA.

METHODS

The databases CNKI, VIP, Wanfang, CBM, and PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library and Web of Science were searched to identify relevant randomized controlled trials (RCTs), all from the time of database creation to April 2024. Screening, data extraction, and risk of bias assessment (using Review Manager-5.3 software) were independently performed by at least two authors. The network meta-analysis was conducted using R 4.1.3 software. PROSPERO registration number: CRD42022370444.

RESULTS

Thirty-three RCTs included 15,961 patients The experimental groups involved six JAK inhibitors (filgotinib, tofacitinib, decernotinib, baricitinib, upadacitinib and peficitinib) and 12 interventions (different doses of the six JAK inhibitors), and the control group involved adalimumab (ADA) and placebo. Compared with placebo, all JAK inhibitors showed a significant increase in efficacy measures (ACR20/50/70). Compared with ADA, only tofacitinib, low-dose decernotinib, and high-dose peficitinib showed a significant increase in ACR20/50/70. Decernotinib ranked first in the SUCRA ranking of ACR20/50/70. In terms of safety indicators, only those differences between low-dose filgotinib and high-dose upadacitinib, low-dose tofacitinib and high-dose upadacitinib were statistically significant. Low-dose filgotinib ranked first in the SUCRA ranking with adverse events as safety indicators. Only the efficacy and safety of tofacitinib ranked higher among different SUCRA rankings.

CONCLUSION

Six JAK inhibitors have better efficacy than placebo. The superior efficacy of decernotinib and safety of low-dose filgotinib can be found in the SUCRA. However, there are no significant differences in safety between the different JAK inhibitors. Head-to-head trials, directly comparing one against each other, are required to provide more certain evidence.

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.

A Machine Learning Approach for Prediction of CDAI Remission with TNF Inhibitors: A Concept of Precision Medicine from the FIRST Registry

INTRODUCTION

This study aimed to develop low-cost models using machine learning approaches predicting the achievement of Clinical Disease Activity Index (CDAI) remission 6 months after initiation of tumor necrosis factor inhibitors (TNFi) as primary biologic/targeted synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (b/tsDMARDs) for rheumatoid arthritis (RA).

METHODS

Data of patients with RA initiating TNFi as first b/tsDMARD after unsuccessful methotrexate treatment were collected from the FIRST registry (August 2003 to October 2022). Baseline characteristics and 6-month CDAI were collected. The analysis used various machine learning approaches including logistic regression with stepwise variable selection, decision tree, support vector machine, and lasso logistic regression (Lasso), with 48 factors accessible in routine clinical practice for the prediction model. Robustness was ensured by k-fold cross validation.

RESULTS

Among the approaches tested, Lasso showed the advantages in predicting CDAI remission: with a mean area under the curve 0.704, sensitivity 61.7%, and specificity 69.9%. Predicted TNFi responders achieved CDAI remission at an average rate of 53.2%, while only 26.4% of predicted TNFi non-responders achieved remission. Encouragingly, the models generated relied solely on patient-reported outcomes and quantitative parameters, excluding subjective physician input.

CONCLUSIONS

While external cohort validation is warranted for broader applicability, this study highlights the potential for a low-cost predictive model to predict CDAI remission following TNFi treatment. The approach of the study using only baseline data and 6-month CDAI measures, suggests the feasibility of establishing regional cohorts to generate low-cost models tailored to specific regions or institutions. This may facilitate the application of regional/in-house precision medicine strategies in RA management.

PERFECTRA: a pragmatic, multicentre, real-life study comparing treat-to-target strategies with baricitinib versus TNF inhibitors in patients with active rheumatoid arthritis after failure on csDMARDs

OBJECTIVE

To compare the effectiveness of a strategy administering baricitinib versus one using TNF-inhibitors (TNFi) in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) after conventional synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (csDMARDs) failure in a real-life treat-to-target (T2T) setting.

METHODS

Patients with biological and targeted synthetic DMARD (b/tsDMARD) naïve RA with disease duration ≤5 years without contraindications to b/tsDMARD were randomised to either TNFi or baricitinib when csDMARD failed to achieve disease control in a T2T setting. Changes in clinical and patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) were assessed at 12-week intervals for 48 weeks. The primary endpoint was non-inferiority, with testing for superiority if non-inferiority is demonstrated, of baricitinib strategy in the number of patients achieving American College of Rheumatology 50 (ACR50) response at 12 weeks. Secondary endpoints included 28-joint count Disease Activity Score with C reactive protein (DAS28-CRP) <2.6, changes in PROMs and radiographic progression.

RESULTS

A total of 199 patients (TNFi, n=102; baricitinib, n=97) were studied. Both study groups were similar. Baricitinib was both non-inferior and superior in achieving ACR50 response at week 12 (42% vs 20%). Moreover, 75% of baricitinib patients achieved DAS28-CRP <2.6 at week 12 compared with 46% of TNFi patients. On secondary outcomes throughout the duration of the study, the baricitinib strategy demonstrated comparable or better outcomes than TNFi strategy. Although not powered for safety, no unexpected safety signals were seen in this relatively small group of patients.

CONCLUSION

Up to present, in a T2T setting, patients with RA failing csDMARDs have two main strategies to consider, Janus Kinases inhibitor versus bDMARDs (in clinical practice, predominantly TNFi). The PERFECTRA study suggested that starting with baricitinib was superior over TNFi in achieving response at 12 weeks and resulted in improved outcomes across all studied clinical measures and PROMs throughout the study duration in these patients.

Long-term safety and efficacy of upadacitinib versus adalimumab in patients with rheumatoid arthritis: 5-year data from the phase 3, randomised SELECT-COMPARE study

OBJECTIVES

To assess the safety and efficacy of upadacitinib versus adalimumab from SELECT-COMPARE over 5 years.

METHODS

Patients with rheumatoid arthritis and inadequate response to methotrexate were randomised to receive upadacitinib 15 mg once daily, placebo or adalimumab 40 mg every other week, all with concomitant methotrexate. By week 26, patients with insufficient response to randomised treatment were rescued; patients remaining on placebo switched to upadacitinib. Patients completing the 48-week double-blind period could enter a long-term extension. Safety and efficacy were assessed through week 264, with radiographic progression analysed through week 192. Safety was assessed by treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs). Efficacy was analysed by randomised group (non-responder imputation (NRI)) or treatment sequence (as observed).

RESULTS

Rates of TEAEs were generally similar with upadacitinib versus adalimumab, although numerically higher rates of herpes zoster, lymphopenia, creatine phosphokinase elevation, hepatic disorder and non-melanoma skin cancer were reported with upadacitinib. Numerically greater proportions of patients randomised to upadacitinib versus adalimumab achieved clinical responses (NRI); Clinical Disease Activity Index remission (≤2.8) and Disease Activity Score based on C reactive protein <2.6 were achieved by 24.6% vs 18.7% (nominal p=0.042) and 31.8% vs 23.2% (nominal p=0.006), respectively. Radiographic progression was numerically lower with continuous upadacitinib versus adalimumab at week 192.

CONCLUSION

The safety profile of upadacitinib through 5 years was consistent with the known safety profile of upadacitinib, with no new safety risks. Clinical responses were numerically higher with upadacitinib versus adalimumab at 5 years. Upadacitinib demonstrates a favourable benefit-risk profile for long-term rheumatoid arthritis treatment.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT02629159.

Population pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic modeling of H018, a selective JAK1 inhibitor, in healthy Chinese volunteers

H018 is an orally administered, selective, small-molecule inhibitor of Janus kinase 1 (JAK1) made for the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis. A population pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic analysis was conducted to characterize the pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic profile of H018 and its active metabolite using data from 48 healthy Chinese volunteers who received a single dose of 10-160 mg of H018 in a phase I clinical study. A two-compartment model with delayed absorption and linear elimination adequately described the pharmacokinetic data of H018. The apparent clearance of H018 was estimated to be 39.0 L/h, and triglyceride was identified as a covariate on it. Pharmacokinetic data of the active metabolite could be well described by a two-compartment model with linear elimination. The exposure-effect relationships in terms of pSTAT1 inhibition were well described by a direct response model, with exposure captured by an active moiety that consisted of H018 and its metabolite, weighted by the ratio of in vitro JAK1 inhibitory activity (1.13). The estimated EC50 value for the active moiety is 601 nM. In the simulation using the final model, the inhibitory effect appeared to have reached a plateau in the high-dose groups, with max inhibition rates of 81.42 %, 88.42 %, and 91.89 % for 80, 120, and 160 mg dose groups, respectively. Taken together, this study will provide an instructive reference of dose selection for subsequent clinical trials.

Risk of Major Adverse Cardiovascular Events in Immune-Mediated Inflammatory Disorders on Biologics and Small Molecules: Network Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Recent studies raise concern for increased risk of major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) with Janus kinase (JAK) inhibitors used to treat immune-mediated inflammatory disorders (IMIDs). We aimed to examine MACE risk with licensed biologics and small molecules used commonly between IMIDs: inflammatory bowel disease, rheumatoid arthritis, psoriasis/psoriatic arthritis, and ankylosing spondylitis.

METHODS

Data were obtained from systematic searches (from inception to May 31, 2022) in PubMed, Embase, Ovid Medline, Scopus, Cochrane Central, and ClinicalTrials.gov. Studies that assessed a predefined MACE (myocardial infarction, cerebrovascular accident, unstable angina, cardiovascular death, or heart failure) risk in those ≥18 years of age with IMIDs treated with anti-interleukin (IL)-23 antibodies, anti-IL-12/23, anti-tumor necrosis factor α antibodies (anti-TNF-α), or JAK inhibitors were included in a network meta-analysis using a random-effects model with pooled odds ratios (ORs) reported with 95% credible intervals (CrIs) by drug class and disease state.

RESULTS

Among 3528 studies identified, 40 (36 randomized controlled trials and 4 cohort studies) were included in the systematic review, comprising 126,961 patients with IMIDs. Based on network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials, regardless of disease state, anti-TNF-α (OR, 2.49; 95% CrI, 1.14-5.62), JAK inhibitors (OR, 2.64; 95% CrI, 1.26-5.99), and anti-IL-12/23 (OR, 3.15; 95% CrI, 1.01-13.35) were associated with increased MACE risk compared with placebo. There was no significant difference in the magnitude of the MACE risk between classes or based on IMID type.

CONCLUSIONS

Anti-IL-12/23, JAK inhibitors, and anti-TNF-α were associated with higher risk of MACE compared with placebo. The magnitude of the increased MACE risk was not different by IMID type. These results require confirmation in larger prospective studies.

Real-world experience with filgotinib for rheumatoid arthritis in Germany : A retrospective chart review

BACKGROUND

Real-world data for filgotinib, a Janus kinase (JAK)1 inhibitor, are limited in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA).

OBJECTIVES

To explore real-world filgotinib use in patients with RA in Germany.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This retrospective chart review included patients aged ≥ 18 years with confirmed moderate to severe RA who initiated filgotinib before December 1, 2021, with ≥ 6 months of medical records available prior to filgotinib initiation or after initial diagnosis. Patient characteristics, prior treatments, reasons for initiating/discontinuing filgotinib, disease activity, dose adjustments and concomitant treatments were recorded.

RESULTS

In total, 301 patients from 20 German rheumatology outpatient units were included. One-third were aged ≥ 65 years and almost half had ≥ 1 cardiovascular (CV) risk factor. Most patients initiated filgotinib as monotherapy (83.7%; 12.7% of whom with glucocorticoids) and at the 200 mg dose (84.7%); higher proportions of those initiating the 100 versus 200 mg dose were aged ≥ 65 years and had renal impairment or ≥ 1 CV risk factor. Oral administration (78.4%), fast onset of action (66.8%) and administration as monotherapy (65.4%) were the most common reasons for initiating filgotinib. At 12 months, 41 (18.4%) patients had discontinued filgotinib, most commonly due to lack of effectiveness. After 6‑months of follow-up, 36.8% of patients had achieved Clinical Disease Activity Index (CDAI) remission and 45.6% had achieved CDAI low disease activity.

CONCLUSIONS

In clinical practice in Germany, reasons for initiating filgotinib in patients with RA were related to dosing flexibility and general JAK inhibitor attributes. Filgotinib was used predominantly as monotherapy and was effective and generally well tolerated; however, longer-term data in larger, prospective cohorts are needed.

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.

Drug survival and change of disease activity using a second janus kinase inhibitor in patients with difficult-to-treat rheumatoid arthritis who failed to a janus kinase inhibitor and subsequent biologics

BACKGROUND

To assess the drug survival and change of disease activity using a second Janus kinase inhibitor (JAKi) after failure to a JAKi and subsequent biologic disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs (bDMARDs) in patients with difficult-to-treat rheumatoid arthritis (RA).

METHODS

This retrospective cohort study included 32 patients with difficult-to-treat RA who failed to a JAKi and subsequently to one or more bDMARDs and then switched to a second JAKi. To assess drug survival, electronic medical records of each patient were reviewed. Data on whether the second JAKi was discontinued, and the reasons for discontinuation were collected. The change of disease activity was assessed by analyzing changes in tender joint count (TJC), swollen joint count (SJC), patient's global assessment of disease activity on a visual-analogue scale (VAS), erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR), C-reactive protein (CRP), Disease Activity Score for 28 joints with ESR (DAS28-ESR), and DAS28-CRP from baseline to that at six months from initiation of the second JAKi.

RESULTS

Overall, discontinuation of the second JAKi occurred in 20 (62.5%) patients. Primary failure, secondary failure, adverse events, and insurance coverage issues were the reasons for discontinuation in 9 (45.0%), 5 (25.0%), 2 (10.0%), and 4 (20.0%) patients, respectively. The estimated 2-year drug survival rate was 39.3%. In terms of change of disease activity, the second JAKi significantly improved TJC (p < 0.001), SJC (p < 0.001), VAS (p < 0.001), CRP (p = 0.026), DAS28-ESR (p < 0.001), and DAS28-CRP (p < 0.001) at 6-month compared with that at the baseline.

CONCLUSIONS

Second JAKi could be a therapeutic option in patients with difficult-to-treat RA who have failed to a JAKi and subsequent bDMARDs.

Impact of age and cardiovascular risk factors on the incidence of adverse events in patients with rheumatoid arthritis treated with Janus Kinase inhibitors: data from a real-life multicentric cohort

Inhibiting Janus Kinases (JAK) is a crucial therapeutic strategy in rheumatoid arthritis (RA). However, the use of JAK inhibitors has recently raised serious safety concerns. The study aims to evaluate the safety profile of JAKi in patients with RA and identify potential risk factors (RFs) for adverse events (AEs). Data of RA patients treated with JAKi in three Italian centers from January 2017 to December 2022 were retrospectively analyzed. 182 subjects (F:117, 64.3%) underwent 193 treatment courses. 78.6% had at least one RF, including age ≥ 65 years, obesity, smoking habit, hypertension, dyslipidemia, hyperuricemia, diabetes, previous VTE or cancer, and severe mobility impairment. We identified 70 AEs (28/100 patients/year), among which 15 were serious (6/100 patients/year). A high disease activity was associated with AEs occurrence (p = 0.03 for CDAI at T0 and T6; p = 0.04 for SDAI at T0 and T6; p = 0.01 and p = 0.04 for DAS28ESR at T6 and T12, respectively). No significant differences in AEs occurrence were observed after stratification by JAKi molecules (p = 0.44), age groups (p = 0.08) nor presence of RFs (p > 0.05 for all of them). Neither the presence of any RFs, nor the cumulative number of RFs shown by the patient, nor age ≥ 65 did predict AEs occurrence. Although limited by the small sample size and the limited number of cardiovascular events, our data do not support the correlation between cardiovascular RFs-including age-and a higher incidence of AEs during JAKi therapy. The role of uncontrolled disease activity in AEs occurrence should by emphasized.

Novel and potential future therapeutic options in systemic autoimmune diseases

Autoimmune inflammation is caused by the loss of tolerance to specific self-antigens and can result in organ-specific or systemic disorders. Systemic autoimmune diseases affect a significant portion of the population with an increasing rate of incidence, which means that is essential to have effective therapies to control these chronic disorders. Unfortunately, several patients with systemic autoimmune diseases do not respond at all or just partially respond to available conventional synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs and targeted therapies. However, during the past few years, some new medications have been approved and can be used in real-life clinical settings. Meanwhile, several new candidates appeared and can offer promising novel treatment options in the future. Here, we summarize the newly available medications and the most encouraging drug candidates in the treatment of systemic lupus erythematosus, rheumatoid arthritis, Sjögren's disease, systemic sclerosis, systemic vasculitis, and autoimmune myositis.

Impact of filgotinib on pain control in the phase 3 FINCH studies

OBJECTIVE

This post hoc analysis of the FINCH 1-3 (NCT02889796, NCT02873936 and NCT02886728) studies assessed specific effects of filgotinib on pain control and their relationship with other aspects of efficacy in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA).

METHODS

Assessments included: residual pain responses of ≤10 and ≤20 mm on a 100 mm visual analogue scale (VAS); the proportion of patients who achieved VAS pain responses in addition to remission or low disease activity by Disease Activity Score-28 with C-reactive protein (DAS28-CRP) or Clinical Disease Activity Index (CDAI) criteria.

RESULTS

Across studies, filgotinib reduced pain from week 2, with responses sustained throughout the studies. In FINCH 1, at week 24, 35.8%, 25.0%, 24.6% and 11.6% of patients in the filgotinib 200 mg, filgotinib 100 mg, adalimumab and placebo arms (each plus methotrexate) achieved VAS pain ≤20 mm in addition to DAS28-CRP remission; 26.3%, 17.9%, 17.2% and 7.6% achieved VAS pain ≤10 mm in addition to DAS28-CRP remission. A similar pattern was seen for CDAI remission. Time during which VAS pain was ≤10 or ≤20 mm was longest with filgotinib 200 mg and comparable between adalimumab and filgotinib 100 mg. Similar findings were reported for filgotinib in FINCH 2 and 3.

CONCLUSION

In all RA populations studied, pain improvements occurred from week 2 and were sustained over time. In FINCH 1, filgotinib 100 mg provided similar pain amelioration to adalimumab, whereas filgotinib 200 mg resulted in greater pain improvement and higher proportion of patients with residual pain ≤10 or ≤20 mm and meeting DAS28-CRP remission criteria.

Risk of Major Adverse Cardiovascular Events and Venous Thromboembolism with JAK Inhibitors versus TNF Inhibitors in Rheumatoid Arthritis Patients: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Objective

The aim of this study was to compare the risk of major cardiovascular events (MACE) and venous thromboembolic events (VTE) between tumour necrosis factor (TNF) and Janus kinase (JAK) inhibitors in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA).

Methods

We researched PubMed, Scopus, Cochrane Library, and clinicaltrials.gov until December of 2023 for randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and observational studies. The outcomes studied were MACE (stroke, heart attack, myocardial infarction, sudden cardiac death) and VTE (deep vein thrombosis, pulmonary embolism). We pooled data using random effects model. Risk for the reported outcomes was expressed as odds ratio (OR) with a 95% confidential interval (CI). We performed a subgroup analysis based on study design.

Results

We identified 23 studies, 20 of which compared the odds for MACE and 14 the odds for VTE between JAK and TNF inhibitors in RA patients. Ten studies were RCTs and the rest were observational. Regarding MACE risk we pooled data from a total of 215,278 patients (52,243 were treated with JAK inhibitors, while the rest 163,035 were under TNF inhibitors). Compared with TNF inhibitors, the OR for JAK inhibitors in regards with MACE risk was 0.87 (0.64-1.17, p<0.01). Regarding VTE, a total of 176,951 patients were analysed (41,375 JAK inhibitors users and 135,576 TNF inhibitors users). The OR for VTE for JAK inhibitors compared with TNF inhibitors was 1.28 (0.89-1.84, p<0.01).

Conclusion

According to our results, there is no statistically significant difference for MACE or VTE in RA patients who receive either JAK or TNF inhibitors.

Osteoclast differentiation in rheumatoid arthritis

Osteoclasts, derived from the monocyte/macrophage line of bone marrow hematopoietic stem cell progenitors, are the sole bone-resorbing cells of the body. Conventional osteoclast differentiation requires macrophage colony-stimulating factor and receptor activator of nuclear factor kappa-B ligand (RANKL) signaling. Rheumatoid arthritis (RA) is the most prevalent systemic autoimmune disease and inflammatory arthritis characterized by bone destruction. Increased levels of proinflammatory cytokines, such as tumor necrosis factor alpha (TNF-α) and interleukin-6 (IL-6), in the serum and joints, cause excessive bone destruction. We have recently reported that stimulation of human peripheral blood monocytes with TNF-α and IL-6 induces the differentiation of osteoclasts with bone resorption activity. This review presents the functional differences between representative osteoclasts, conventional RANKL-induced osteoclasts, and recently identified proinflammatory cytokine (TNF-α and IL-6)-induced osteoclasts in RA patients. We believe novel pathological osteoclasts associated with RA will be identified, and new therapeutic strategies will be developed to target these osteoclasts and prevent the progression of bone destruction.

Focus on Filgotinib in Rheumatoid Arthritis: A Trial-Based Review

Janus kinases (JAK)/Signal Transducer and Activator of Transcription (STAT) pathway is involved in pathophysiologic cascade of a notable number of rheumatic diseases. The development of JAK inhibitors has expanded treatment choices in rheumatoid arthritis (RA) with a sustained class-effect efficacy. Filgotinib is a novel selective inhibitor of JAK1 isoform licensed for use in RA and ulcerative colitis. In this review we aim to present an analysis of filgotinib's efficacy and drug-specific safety warnings. Patients with RA with or without concomitant conventional synthetic Disease-Modifying Antirheumatic Drugs (csDMARDs) (naïve or experienced) and those who have failed biologic Disease-Modifying Antirheumatic Drugs (bDMARDs) were examined in randomised clinical trials. Filgotinib was also tested against placebo, methotrexate, or adalimumab. Long-term extension trials provide insights for up to four years of continuous filgotinib administration. Beneficial effects are depicted in both disease activity parameters and quality of life indexes in moderate or severe RA with a longitudinal efficacy. In head-to-head comparison with adalimumab, filgotinib 200 mg was non-inferior. Adverse effects alerts are marked by the elevated risk of infectious adverse effects with the exception of herpes zoster infection, which has a low incidence.

Filgotinib Demonstrates Efficacy in Rheumatoid Arthritis Independent of Smoking Status: Post Hoc Analysis of Phase 3 Trials and Claims-Based Analysis

OBJECTIVES

To assess cigarette smoking's effects on efficacy of the preferential Janus kinase (JAK) 1 inhibitor filgotinib and drug persistence in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA).

METHODS

Efficacy in non-smokers, former smokers, and current smokers from phase 3 filgotinib trials was analyzed, including patients with inadequate response (IR) to methotrexate (MTX) or biologic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (bDMARDs) or who were MTX-naïve. Proportions achieving Disease Activity Score in 28 joints with C-reactive protein (DAS28[CRP]) ≤ 3.2 were compared using logistic regression. Retrospective claims-based switching data were reviewed.

RESULTS

Week 12 (W12) DAS28(CRP) ≤ 3.2 was achieved by 50, 61, and 62% of MTX-IR non-smokers, former smokers, and current smokers taking filgotinib 200 mg (FIL200) + MTX vs. 23, 16, and 32% taking placebo + MTX (p < 0.001, < 0.001, and 0.001) and 50, 34, and 33% taking adalimumab + MTX (p = 0.97, 0.013, and 0.006 vs. FIL200 + MTX). W12 DAS28(CRP) ≤ 3.2 was achieved by 46, 48, and 32% of bDMARD-IR non-smokers, former smokers, and current smokers taking FIL200 + conventional synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (csDMARDs) vs. 16, 23, and 5% taking placebo + csDMARD (p < 0.001, 0.077, and 0.051); 57, 58, and 59% of respective MTX-naïve smoking groups achieved W12 DAS28(CRP) ≤ 3.2 with FIL200 + MTX vs. 28, 37, and 18% with MTX (p < 0.001, 0.026, and < 0.001). Claims data showed former/current smokers were likelier than non-smokers to switch from adalimumab to other biologics or JAK inhibitors.

CONCLUSIONS

Greater proportions of MTX-IR current/former smokers responded to FIL200 + MTX vs. adalimumab + MTX. In non-smoking MTX-IR, bDMARD-IR, and MTX-naïve patients with RA, FIL200 + MTX demonstrated increased response vs. controls. Current/former smokers were likelier to discontinue adalimumab vs. non-smokers in real-world clinical settings.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

NCT02889796, NCT02873936, NCT02886728.

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.

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.

Selectivity, efficacy and safety of JAKinibs: new evidence for a still evolving story

Fundamental insight gained over the last decades led to the discovery of cytokines as pivotal drivers of inflammatory diseases such as rheumatoid arthritis, psoriasis/psoriasis arthritis, inflammatory bowel diseases, atopic dermatitis and spondylarthritis. A deeper understanding of the pro-inflammatory and anti-inflammatory effects of various cytokines has prompted new cytokine-targeting therapies, which revolutionised the treatment options in the last years for patients with inflammatory disorders. Disease-associated immune responses typically involve a complex interplay of multiple cytokines. Therefore, blockade of one single cytokine does not necessarily lead to a persistent remission in all patients with inflammatory disorders and fostered new therapeutic strategies targeting intracellular pathways shared by multiple cytokines. By inhibiting JAK-STAT signalling pathways common to families of cytokines, JAK-inhibitors (JAKinibs) have created a new paradigm for the treatment of inflammatory diseases. Multiple agents have been approved for various disorders and more are being investigated for several new indications. Second-generation selective JAKinibs have been devised with the aim to achieve an increased selectivity and a possible reduced risk of side effects. In the current review, we will summarise the current body of evidence of pan versus selective JAKinibs and the most recent insights on new side effects and indications, including COVID-19.

Patient-related factors influencing the effectiveness and safety of Janus Kinase inhibitors in rheumatoid arthritis: a real-world study

In real-world scenarios, Janus Kinase (JAK) inhibitors are often offered to "difficult-to-treat" rheumatoid arthritis patients, quite different from those included in randomized controlled trials. Our study aimed to evaluate the influence of patient-related factors on the effectiveness and safety of JAK inhibitors in real-world clinical practice. This observational retrospective study involved rheumatoid arthritis patients who received treatment with either tofacitinib, baricitinib, upadacitinib, or filgotinib. At 12 months of treatment, reasons for and rates of JAK inhibitor treatment discontinuation were examined. Treatment retentions were analyzed through Cox proportional hazard regression models and Kaplan-Meier estimates. Patient-related factors that could influence treatment retention were evaluated for the discontinuation reasons of lack of effectiveness and adverse events. At 12 months of treatment, discontinuation rates for 189 JAK inhibitor treatments were: lack of effectiveness (24.3%), adverse events (20.6%), and other reasons (3.7%). The remaining 51.4% represents the treatment continuation rate. No patient-related factors evaluated had an influence on treatment discontinuation due to lack of effectiveness. Ae significantly increased the risk of treatment discontinuation due to adverse events (p = 0.030). In terms of age, at 12 month of treatment, discontinuation rates due to adverse events were: < 65 years, 14.4% vs. 65 years or older, 26.3% (p = 0.019). Rheumatoid arthritis patients aged 65 years or older showed an increased risk of JAK inhibitor treatment discontinuation due to adverse events. Factors not related to treatment discontinuation were: sex, rheumatoid arthritis disease duration, rheumatoid arthritis disease activity, seropositivity for rheumatoid factor, seropositivity for anti-cyclic citrullinated peptides, number of prior biologic treatments, number of prior JAK inhibitor treatments, concomitant use of glucocorticoids, and concomitant use of conventional synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs.

Start RA treatment - Biologics or JAK-inhibitors?

Janus Kinase inhibitors (JAKi) have been approved for the treatment of Rheumatoid Arthritis (RA) for several years. They are the first oral advanced treatment with efficacy similar to, if not greater than, biologic agents. Recently, concerns over their safety was raised by the results from Oral Surveillance trial suggesting that tofacitinib, one of the JAKi, was associated with higher cardiovascular adverse events and malignancies than TNF inhibitors (TNFi). Since then, regulatory authorities have added warnings to the labels of JAKi. On this purpose, whether rheumatologists should use JAKi as first line advance treatment has become a controversial topic. Some rheumatologists have argued that biologics should be first line advance treatment since there are extensive effectiveness and safety data. In addition, with the advent of biosimilar drugs, they are the most cost-effective treatment. On the other hand, JAKi are very efficacious and are generally safe apart from older and high-risk patients. When TNFi are contraindicated and in certain RA patients ,especially when an oral drug is preferable, JAKi have significant advantage providing patients are involved in the decision-making process.

Tumor Necrosis Factor Alpha Inhibitors and Cardiovascular Risk in Rheumatoid Arthritis

Rheumatoid arthritis (RA) is a chronic inflammatory disease characterized by an increased risk of cardiovascular events, due to the complex interplay between traditional and disease-related risk factors. Chronic inflammation and persistent disease activity are the key determinants of this risk, but despite great improvement in the disease management and prognosis, cardiovascular events are still the main cause of morbidity and mortality in RA cohorts1. In the last decades, the advent of new biological and targeted-synthetic DMARDs was accompanied by an improvement in disease activity control, but the role of each class of drugs on CVD risk is still a matter a debate. Since their approval for RA treatment, tumor necrosis factor alpha (TNFα) inhibitors have been widely investigated to better understand their effects on cardiovascular outcomes. The hypothesis that the reduction of chronic inflammation with any treatment may reduce the cardiovascular risk has been recently confuted by the direct comparison of TNFα-inhibitors and JAK inhibitors in patients with RA and coexisting risk factors for cardiovascular disease. The aim of this literature review is to add to the available evidence to analyze the relationship between TNFα-inhibitors and CVD risk in patients with RA and also provide some clinical scenarios to better explain the treatment dilemmas. In particular, while data on major cardiovascular events and thromboembolism seem consistent with an inflammation-mediated benefit with TNFα-inhibitors, there remain concerns about the use of this class of bDMARDs in patients with chronic heart failure.

Are all JAK inhibitors for the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis equivalent? An adjusted indirect comparison of the efficacy of tofacitinib, baricitinib, upadacitinib, and filgotinib

INTRODUCTION

Comparisons of Janus kinase inhibitors (JAKi) for treatment of rheumatoid arthritis in patients with inadequate response to biologic disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs are lacking. We assessed the relative efficacy and safety of four JAKi (tofacitinib, baricitinib, upadacitinib, and filgotinib) in this context.

METHOD

We performed an adjusted indirect comparison (IC) of randomized clinical trials using Bucher's method with an IC and mixed calculator. Endpoints were Disease Activity Score C-reactive protein (DAS28-CRP) and American College of Rheumatology-20 (ACR20). Equivalence was assessed using the equivalent therapeutic alternatives (ETA) guidelines.

RESULTS

We included four of 133 potentially relevant studies. IC showed no statistically significant differences between the four JAKi regarding DAS28-CRP < 3.2. Results were similar in terms of ACR20 except for tofacitinib showing lower efficacy than upadacitinib (RAR -18.4% [IC95% -33.4 to -3.5], p=0.0157). Statistically significant differences were related to the relevant difference for tofacitinib in both endpoints. Despite no statistical differences for baricitinib, we observed a probably clinically relevant difference regarding DAS28-CRP. Probably clinically relevant differences were found for tofacitinib vs. upadacitinib in both endpoints, and for baricitinib vs. upadacitinib in DAS28-CRP. Safety, drug-drug interactions, and convenience considerations did not modify the result of therapeutic equivalence assessment based on efficacy data.

CONCLUSIONS

In conclusion, our results show that filgotinib and upadacitinib are ETA. Baricitinib and upadacitinib are also ETA due to a lack of clear differences and for showing superiority over placebo. The results for tofacitinib and upadacitinib show some inconsistency and more data are needed. Key Points • To date, neither a head-to-head comparison nor an indirect comparison between the Janus kinase inhibitors has been performed in patients with rheumatoid arthritis and an inadequate response to biologic disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs. • We performed an adjusted indirect comparison that included randomized clinical trials of tofacitinib, baricitinib, upadacitinib, and filgotinib to assess their equivalence in this scenario. • Our results show that baricitinib and filgotinib are equivalent therapeutic alternatives compared to upadacitinib. However, there is some inconsistency in the results of tofacitinib in front of upadacitinib.

Prevention of Radiographic Progression in Higher-Risk Patients with Rheumatoid Arthritis Using Filgotinib in Phase III Studies: Narrative Review of Post Hoc Analyses

Filgotinib is an oral preferential Janus kinase 1 inhibitor that demonstrated significant reductions in radiographic progression, with an acceptable tolerability and safety profile, vs placebo in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) and an inadequate response to methotrexate (MTX-IR; FINCH 1) and vs MTX in MTX-naïve patients with RA (FINCH 3). International treatment guidelines identify multiple poor prognostic factors (PPFs) associated with worse disease outcomes among patients with RA. However, questions remain both about the clinical utility of considering PPFs and about which PPFs should drive treatment decisions. Additionally, the role of radiographic findings in clinical practice continues to be discussed and to evolve. This review examines radiographic results from post hoc analyses of phase 3 trials of filgotinib that examined subgroups with 4 PPFs or with baseline estimated rapid radiographic progression (e-RRP). In MTX groups, there were trends toward greater progression among patients with 4 PPFs or e-RRP, suggesting these subgroups may comprise a higher-risk population. Results show general consistency for the efficacy of filgotinib 200 mg plus MTX vs placebo plus MTX/MTX monotherapy on radiographic assessments, including change from baseline in modified total Sharp score and proportions without radiographic progression, even among MTX-IR or MTX-naïve patients with 4 PPFs or e-RRP who may be at higher risk of bone damage. Multivariate analysis identified multiple factors associated with baseline e-RRP status. This summary of the current understanding of benefits associated with filgotinib on radiographic progression and the relevance of baseline factors to these benefits may help inform treatment decisions for patients facing high risk of radiographic progression.

Effect of Filgotinib on Body Mass Index (BMI) and Effect of Baseline BMI on the Efficacy and Safety of Filgotinib in Rheumatoid Arthritis

INTRODUCTION

This post hoc analysis of the phase 3 rheumatoid arthritis (RA) filgotinib clinical trial program assessed the effect of filgotinib on body mass index (BMI) in patients with RA and the impact of BMI on the efficacy and safety of filgotinib.

METHODS

FINCH 1-3 were randomized, double-blind, active- or placebo-controlled phase 3 trials of filgotinib 100 and 200 mg in patients with RA (N = 3452). BMI assessments included the mean change from baseline in BMI and the proportion of patients whose BMI increased by incremental thresholds. Efficacy measures included American College of Rheumatology (ACR) 20/50/70 response and low disease activity/remission according to Disease Activity Score 28 using C-reactive protein. The exposure-adjusted incident rate (EAIR) of adverse events (AEs) was assessed by baseline BMI, using integrated data from the FINCH 1-4 and the phase 2 DARWIN 1-3 studies (total filgotinib exposure = 8085 patient-years).

RESULTS

Mean change from baseline in BMI over time was similar across treatment arms. In most patients, BMI increased by ≤ 1 or 2 kg/m2 at both weeks 12 and 24, regardless of treatment group or baseline BMI; few patients had increases of ≥ 4 kg/m2. For most efficacy measures, filgotinib 200 mg was more efficacious than filgotinib 100 mg or active comparators or placebo across BMI subgroups. For the higher filgotinib dose, the EAIR of serious treatment-emergent AEs, venous thrombotic and embolic events, and major adverse cardiovascular events increased with increasing BMI.

CONCLUSIONS

Filgotinib did not lead to substantial changes in BMI, and BMI did not appear to affect the efficacy of filgotinib.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov identifiers: NCT02889796, NCT02873936, NCT02886728, NCT03025308, NCT01888874, NCT01894516, NCT02065700.

How to Use Janus Kinase Inhibitors in the Treatment of Rheumatoid Arthritis? A Clinical Assessment of Risks and Benefits

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

To provide an updated understanding of risks and benefits of Janus kinase inhibitors (JAKi) versus biologic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (bDMARDs) in the management of rheumatoid arthritis (RA).

RECENT FINDINGS

Shared decision-making is needed in choosing between JAKi and bDMARDs. Cardiovascular disease, malignancy, and thromboembolic events guide this choice. In patients with active RA despite methotrexate use, tumor necrosis factor inhibitor is conditionally favored over JAKi for low-cardiovascular-risk patients and strongly favored in those with pre-existing cardiovascular disease or multiple cardiovascular risk factors. Suboptimal treatment of treatment-refractory RA patients may pose a greater absolute cardiovascular risk than with JAKi use. Use of aspirin and statin may be considered to reduce cardiovascular risk. New safety data on JAKi has redefined the treatment approach in RA. JAKi remains an important oral medication option in active RA despite treatment with bDMARDs, especially in those with low cardiovascular risk.

Examining the Safety Profile of Janus Kinase (JAK) Inhibitors in the Management of Immune-Mediated Diseases: A Comprehensive Review

Janus kinase (JAK) inhibitors have heralded a paradigm shift in the management of immune-mediated diseases. While their efficacy is well-established, the safety concerns associated with these agents, particularly regarding thromboembolic events (TE), remain a focus of extensive research and clinical scrutiny. This comprehensive literature review embarks on an exploration of the multifaceted landscape of JAK inhibitors, providing insights into their safety profiles across diverse immune-mediated diseases. The introduction highlights the transformative influence of JAK inhibitors in the treatment of immune-mediated diseases. Historically, the therapeutic arsenal for these conditions included corticosteroids, disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs), and biologics. The advent of JAK inhibitors has revolutionized this landscape, although concerns about their safety persist. This review strives to comprehensively evaluate their safety, amalgamating knowledge from multiple studies and trials. The subsequent sections delve into the safety of specific JAK inhibitors in the context of rheumatoid arthritis, inflammatory bowel diseases, and dermatologic conditions and their associations with venous thromboembolism. The evolving understanding of TE risk, particularly the intricate relationship between these agents and immune-mediated diseases, is meticulously unravelled. The concluding remarks underscore the dynamic nature of TE risk assessment with regard to immune-mediated diseases involving JAK inhibitors. It underscores that risk assessment is multifactorial, influenced not only by the choice of JAK inhibitor but also by the nuances of the underlying immune-mediated disease and the unique patient characteristics. This review offers a holistic perspective on TE risks associated with JAK inhibitors and contributes to the ongoing dialogue regarding their safety in the realm of immune-mediated diseases.