Treatment outcomes in patients with seropositive versus seronegative rheumatoid arthritis in Phase III randomised clinical trials of tofacitinib

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.

A hierarchical cluster analysis for clinical profiling of tofacitinib treatment response in patients with rheumatoid arthritis

Tofacitinib is the first oral JAK inhibitor approved for treating rheumatoid arthritis (RA). To enhance our understanding of tofacitinib drug response, we used hierarchical clustering to analyse the profiles of patient who responded to the treatment in a real-world setting. Patients who commenced on tofacitinib treatment were selected from 12 major rheumatology centres in Malaysia. The aim was to assess their response to tofacitinib defined as achieving DAS28-CRP/ESR ≤ 3.2 and DAS28 improvement > 1.2 at 12 weeks. A hierarchical clustering analysis was performed using sociodemographic and clinical parameters at baseline. All 163 RA patients were divided into three clusters (Clusters 1, 2 and 3) based on specific clinical factors at baseline including bone erosion, antibody positivity, disease activity and anaemia status. Cluster 1 consisted of RA patients without bone erosion, antibody negative, low baseline disease activity measure and absence of anaemia. Cluster 2 comprised of patients without bone erosion, RF positivity, anti-CCP negativity, moderate to high baseline disease activity score and absence of anaemia. Cluster 3 patients had bone erosion, antibody positivity, high baseline disease activity and anaemia. The response rates to tofacitinib varied among the clusters: Cluster 1 had a 79% response rate, Cluster 2 had a 66% response rate, and Cluster 3 had a 36% response rate. The differences in response rates between the three clusters were found to be statistically significant. This cluster analysis study indicates that patients who are seronegative and have low disease activity, absence of bone erosion and no signs of anaemia may have a higher likelihood of benefiting from tofacitinib therapy. By identifying clinical profiles that respond to tofacitinib treatment, we can improve treatment stratification yielding significant benefits and better health outcomes for individuals with RA.

Towards Personalized Medicine in Rheumatoid Arthritis

Rheumatoid arthritis (RA) is a chronic, incurable, multisystem, inflammatory disease characterized by synovitis and extra-articular features. Although several advanced therapies targeting inflammatory mechanisms underlying the disease are available, no advanced therapy is universally effective. Therefore, a ceiling of treatment response is currently accepted where no advanced therapy is superior to another. The current challenge for medical research is the discovery and integration of predictive markers of drug response that can be used to personalize medicine so that the patient is started on "the right drug at the right time". This review article summarizes our current understanding of predicting response to anti-rheumatic drugs in RA, obstacles impeding the development of personalized medicine approaches and future research priorities to overcome these barriers.

Clinical Phenotypes, Serological Biomarkers, and Synovial Features Defining Seropositive and Seronegative Rheumatoid Arthritis: A Literature Review

Rheumatoid arthritis (RA) is a chronic autoimmune disorder which can lead to long-term joint damage and significantly reduced quality of life if not promptly diagnosed and adequately treated. Despite significant advances in treatment, about 40% of patients with RA do not respond to individual pharmacological agents and up to 20% do not respond to any of the available medications. To address this large unmet clinical need, several recent studies have focussed on an in-depth histological and molecular characterisation of the synovial tissue to drive the application of precision medicine to RA. Currently, RA patients are clinically divided into "seropositive" or "seronegative" RA, depending on the presence of routinely checked antibodies. Recent work has suggested that over the last two decades, long-term outcomes have improved significantly in seropositive RA but not in seronegative RA. Here, we present up-to-date differences in epidemiology, clinical features, and serological biomarkers in seronegative versus seropositive RA and discuss how histological and molecular synovial signatures, revealed by recent large synovial biopsy-based clinical trials, may be exploited to refine the classification of RA patients, especially in the seronegative group.

The gut-joint axis: Genetic evidence for a causal association between gut microbiota and seropositive rheumatoid arthritis and seronegative rheumatoid arthritis

This study aimed to assess the causal relationship between GM and RA (seropositive RA and seronegative RA). A two-sample Mendelian randomization (MR) analysis was performed to assess the causality of GM on seropositive RA and seronegative RA. GM's genome-wide association study (GWAS) was used as the exposure, whereas the GWAS datasets of seropositive RA and seronegative RA were the outcomes. The primary analysis approach was used as inverse-variance weighted (IVW), followed by 3 additional MR methods (MR-Egger, weighted median, and weighted mode). Cochran's Q test was used to identify heterogeneity. The MR-Egger intercept test and leave-one-out analyses were used to assess horizontal pleiotropy. All statistical analyses were performed in R software. We discovered that Alloprevotella (IVW OR 0.84, 95% CI 0.71-0.99, P = .04) and Christensenellaceae R 7 group (IVW OR 0.71, 95% CI 0.52-0.99, P = .04) were negatively correlated with seropositive RA, Ruminococcaceae UCG002 (IVW OR 1.30, 95% CI 1.10-1.54, P = .002) was positively associated with seropositive RA. Actinomyces (IVW OR 0.73, 95% CI 0.54-0.99, P = .04), Christensenellaceae R 7 group (IVW OR 0.62, 95% CI 0.39-0.97, P = .04), Terrisporobacter (IVW OR 0.64, 95% CI 0.44-0.93, P = .02), Lactobacillales (IVW OR 0.65, 95% CI 0.47-0.90, P = .01) were negatively correlated with seronegative RA. The present MR analysis showed a protective effect of Alloprevotella and Christensenellaceae R 7 group and a potentially anti-protective effect of Ruminococcaceae UCG002 on seropositive RA; and a protective effect of Actinomyces, Christensenellaceae R 7 group, Terrisporobacter, and Lactobacillales on seronegative RA. Further experimental studies and randomized controlled trials are needed to validate these findings.

Anti-Peptidylarginine Deiminase 4 Autoantibodies and Disease Duration as Predictors of Treatment Response in Rheumatoid Arthritis

BACKGROUND

Given that autoantibodies to peptidylarginine deiminase 4 (PAD4) are associated with erosive disease in established rheumatoid arthritis (RA), this study was conducted to compare the clinical and prognostic use of anti-PAD4 antibodies in patients with early and established RA.

METHODS

Sera from patients with early (duration <2 years; n = 422) or established (duration ≥2 years; n = 359) RA from two randomized clinical trials of tofacitinib ± methotrexate compared with adalimumab + MTX or MTX alone were evaluated for the presence of anti-PAD4 and anti-PAD3/4 antibodies at baseline and posttreatment time points. Summary statistics were calculated for demographic, clinical, and serological characteristics, and generalized estimating equations were used to model clinical outcomes by disease duration according to anti-PAD4 status.

RESULTS

Anti-PAD4 antibodies were present in 22% and 40% of patients with early and established RA, respectively, stable following treatment, and associated with baseline joint damage only in established RA. In early RA, baseline anti-PAD4 antibodies were associated with a greater improvement in disease activity score 28-joint count using C-reactive protein levels after treatment compared with individuals with negative anti-PAD4 (P = 0.049). Tofacitinib ± MTX was more broadly efficacious than MTX alone at improving clinical outcomes in early and established RA, irrespective of anti-PAD4 status (P < 0.05 for all), whereas adalimumab + MTX exhibited differential benefits in achieving disease activity score remission in early RA (P = 0.036) and American College of Rheumatology 20 responses in established RA (P = 0.002).

CONCLUSION

Differences in prevalence, clinical associations, and treatment-response outcomes according to anti-PAD4 antibody status in early and established RA suggests the existence of a therapeutic window to prevent the accumulation of irreversible joint damage in early patients with RA with anti-PAD4 antibodies.

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.

Efficacy of pharmacological interventions: a systematic review informing the 2023 EULAR recommendations for the management of fatigue in people with inflammatory rheumatic and musculoskeletal diseases

OBJECTIVE

To identify the best evidence on the efficacy of pharmacological interventions in reducing fatigue in people with inflammatory rheumatic and musculoskeletal diseases (I-RMDs) and to summarise their safety in the identified studies to inform European Alliance of Associations for Rheumatology recommendations for the management of fatigue in people with I-RMDs.

METHODS

Systematic review of adults with I-RMDs conducted according to the Cochrane Handbook. Search strategy ran in Medline, Embase, Cochrane Library, CINAHL Complete, PEDro, OTseeker and PsycINFO. Only randomised controlled trials (RCTs) or controlled clinical trials were eligible. Assessment of risk of bias, data extraction and synthesis performed by two reviewers independently and in duplicate. Data pooled in statistical meta-analyses.

RESULTS

From 4151 records, 455 were selected for full-text review, 99 fulfilled the inclusion criteria and 19 RCTs were included in meta-analyses. Adalimumab was superior to placebo in reducing fatigue at 12 and 52 weeks in rheumatoid arthritis (RA) (n=3 and 2 RCTs; mean difference (MD)= -3.03, p<0.001; MD=-2.25, p=0.03, respectively). Golimumab (n=2 RCTs; 24 weeks: MD=-5.27, p<0.001), baricitinib (n=2 RCTs; 24 weeks: MD=-4.06, p<0.001), sarilumab (n=2 RCTs; 24 weeks: MD=-3.15, p<0.001), tocilizumab (n=3 RCTs; 24 weeks: MD=-3.69, p<0.001) and tofacitinib (n=3 RCTs; 12 weeks: MD=-4.44, p<0.001) were also superior to placebo in reducing fatigue in RA. A dose/effect relationship was observed for sarilumab, tocilizumab and tofacitinib. In spondyloarthritis (excluding psoriatic arthritis), secukinumab was superior to placebo in reducing fatigue at 16 weeks (n=2 RCTs; MD=-4.15, p<0.001), with a dose/effect relationship also observed. The narrative results of the RCTs not included in the meta-analysis indicated that several other pharmacological interventions were efficacious in reducing fatigue, with reassuring safety results.

CONCLUSIONS

Several pharmacological interventions are efficacious and generally safe for managing fatigue in people with I-RMDs.

Autoantibody-negative rheumatoid arthritis: still a challenge for the rheumatologist

Increased research over the past 30 years has greatly improved the understanding of the pathophysiological mechanisms and clinical aspects of autoantibody-positive rheumatoid arthritis, resulting in improved management and outcomes. In contrast, the subset of rheumatoid arthritis that does not have autoantibodies (such as rheumatoid factor and anti-citrullinated protein autoantibodies) remains less well defined in its pathogenic mechanisms. Autoantibody-negative rheumatoid arthritis continues to pose diagnostic challenges, might respond differently to therapies, and appears to be burdened with different comorbidities and outcomes. The clear separation of rheumatoid arthritis according to serotypes is still a subject of uncertainty and controversy, and studies specifically focused on comparing rheumatoid arthritis and rheumatoid arthritis-like arthritides that do not have autoantibodies remain scarce. The purpose of this Review is to summarise the peculiarities that make autoantibody-negative rheumatoid arthritis different from its autoantibody-positive counterpart, with the aim of generating debate and stimulating further research on this challenging condition.

Real-World Treatment Effectiveness of Disease-Modifying Antirheumatic Drugs by Serostatus Among Patients With Rheumatoid Arthritis

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this study was to compare the clinical effectiveness of biologic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (bDMARDs) or Janus kinase inhibitors (JAKi) among seropositive versus seronegative patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) in a real-world setting.

METHODS

We used Optum's deidentified Clinformatics Data Mart Database (January 1, 2004, to March 31, 2021) linked with outpatient laboratory test results. The study population was adult patients with RA who initiated a bDMARD or JAKi. The index date was the dispensing of the first-ever study drug. At least 1-year continuous enrollment before and after the index date was required. Disenrollment due to death after the index date was allowed. Serostatus was defined using laboratory test results or the International Classification of Diseases, 10th Revision code M05x or M06.0x any time prior to the index date. Treatment effectiveness was measured based on a claims-based composite endpoint at 1-year post index, including nonoccurrence of any of the following: addition of conventional synthetic DMARDs, addition of or switching to new bDMARDs/JAKi, initiation of glucocorticoids, increased glucocorticoid dose, or death. Log-binomial regression models were constructed to estimate the risk ratio (RR) with 95% confidence interval (CI) comparing seropositive patients with seronegative patients, adjusting for more than 60 baseline covariates.

RESULTS

We identified a total of 7813 seropositive patients and 4202 seronegative patients. The mean (±SD) age was 56.7 (±14.0) years; 77.9% were female. The risk of 1-year treatment effectiveness was 70.2% among seropositive patients and 69.8% among seronegative patients. The adjusted RR (95% CI) was 1.00 (0.98-1.02).

CONCLUSION

In this real-world cohort study, seropositive and seronegative patients with RA had similar 1-year treatment effectiveness after initiating a bDMARD/JAKi.

When Autoantibodies Are Missing: The Challenge of Seronegative Rheumatoid Arthritis

Seronegative rheumatoid arthritis (SNRA) is characterized by the absence of both rheumatoid factor (RF) and antibodies against the cyclic citrullinated protein (ACPA) in serum. However, the differences between the two forms of RA are more complex and have not yet been definitively characterized. Several lines of evidences support the idea that there are specific elements of the two forms, including genetic background, epidemiology, pathogenesis, severity of progression over time, and response to therapy. Clinical features that may differentiate SNRA from SPRA are also suggested by data obtained from classical radiology and newer imaging techniques. Although new evidence seems to provide additional help in differentiating the two forms of RA, their distinguishing features remain largely elusive. It should also be emphasized that the distinctive features of RA forms, if not properly recognized, can lead to the underdiagnosis of SNRA, potentially missing the period called the "window of opportunity" that is critical for early diagnosis, timely treatment, and better prognosis. This review aims to summarize the data provided in the scientific literature with the goal of helping clinicians diagnose SNRA as accurately as possible, with emphasis on the most recent findings available.

Add-on effectiveness of methotrexate or iguratimod in patients with rheumatoid arthritis exhibiting an inadequate response to Janus kinase inhibitors: The ANSWER cohort study

OBJECTIVES

This multicenter, retrospective study evaluated the effectiveness of add-on methotrexate (MTX) or iguratimod (IGU) in patients with rheumatoid arthritis exhibiting an inadequate response to Janus kinase inhibitors (JAKis).

METHODS

Forty-five patients were treated with new additional MTX (n = 22) or IGU (n = 23) and followed for 6 months. Patients' background is as follows: age, 59.2 years; disease activity score of 28 joints with C-reactive protein (DAS28-CRP), 3.4; clinical disease activity index, 15.7; biological disease-modifying antirheumatic drug (DMARD)-switched cases, 77.8%; first JAKi cases, 95.6%; and JAKi treatment: tofacitinib (n = 25), baricitinib (n = 17), upadacitinib (n = 2), and peficitinib (n = 1) for 9.6 months.

RESULTS

Thirty-five patients continued the combination therapy for 6 months without a significant change in concomitant glucocorticoid or other conventional synthetic DMARDs. DAS28-CRP (MTX, 3.6 to 2.6, p < 0.05; IGU, 3.3 to 2.1, p < 0.001) and clinical disease activity index (MTX, 16.7 to 8.8, p < 0.05; IGU, 14.6 to 6.5, p < 0.01) improved significantly from baseline. Using the 2019 European League Against Rheumatism criteria, 45.4% (MTX) and 39.1% (IGU) achieved moderate or good response and 40.9% (MTX) and 39.1% (IGU) achieved American College of Rheumatology 20% improvement criteria.

CONCLUSIONS

Adding MTX or IGU to inadequate responders of JAKi can be considered as a complementary treatment.

Clinical scenarios-based guide for tofacitinib in rheumatoid arthritis

Tofacitinib was the first Janus kinase inhibitor to be approved for the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis (RA), and there is a large body of data to inform the efficacy and safety of this drug for patients at different places in their treatment journeys and with diverse demographics and characteristics. Here, we summarize tofacitinib clinical efficacy and safety data from some clinical trials, post hoc analyses, and real-world studies, which provide evidence of the efficacy of tofacitinib in treating patients with RA at various stages of their treatment journeys, and with differentiating baseline characteristics, such as age, gender, race, and body mass index. In addition, we review the safety data available from different patient subpopulations in the tofacitinib clinical development program, real-world data, and findings from the ORAL Surveillance post-marketing safety study that included patients aged ⩾50 years with pre-existing cardiovascular risk factors. The available efficacy and safety data in these subpopulations can enable better discussions between clinicians and patients to guide informed decision-making and individualized patient care.

Tailored therapeutic decision of rheumatoid arthritis using proteomic strategies: how to start and when to stop?

Unpredictable treatment responses have been an obstacle for the successful management of rheumatoid arthritis. Although numerous serum proteins have been proposed, there is a lack of integrative survey to compare their relevance in predicting treatment outcomes in rheumatoid arthritis. Also, little is known about their applications in various treatment stages, such as dose modification, drug switching or withdrawal. Here we present an in-depth exploration of the potential usefulness of serum proteins in clinical decision-making and unveil the spectrum of immunopathology underlying responders to different drugs. Patients with robust autoimmunity and inflammation are more responsive to biological treatments and prone to relapse during treatment de-escalation. Moreover, the concentration changes of serum proteins at the beginning of the treatments possibly assist early recognition of treatment responders. With a better understanding of the relationship between the serum proteome and treatment responses, personalized medicine in rheumatoid arthritis will be more achievable in the near future.

Efficacy of Janus kinase inhibitors in rheumatoid arthritis

BACKGROUND

Janus kinase inhibitors (JAKis) is a new therapeutic class in autoimmune and inflammatory diseases. Four molecules are approved in rheumatoid arthritis (RA) in Europe. Recently, questions have raised about adverse events. In this context, a synthesis of the efficacy data of JAKis in RA is of use.

METHOD

We performed a literature review based on published articles about efficacy of JAKis in RA, including clinical trials, registries, retrospective and prospective cohorts as well as database analysis.

RESULTS

Based on the phase III clinical trials, JAKis are effective in comparison to placebo, methotrexate and tumour necrosis factor inhibitors. Based on registries, cohorts and post hoc analysis of phase III clinical trials, several parameters might modulate the efficacy of JAKis: the serological status, a short duration of the disease or the presence of poor prognostic factors. Preliminary data suggest that early ultrasonographic evaluation might help to predict the medium-term progression.

CONCLUSION

Some clinical, biological and imaging parameters seem to influence the response to JAKis and should be evaluated in larger studies. In addition to factors that might influence the efficacy of JAKis, the safety profile and risk factors should be considered before initiating JAKis in a patient.

Comparative Effectiveness of Abatacept vs. Tofacitinib in Rheumatoid Arthritis Patients who are CCP

INTRODUCTION

Currently there is limited data to drive clinical decision making regarding  the choice of biologic/targeted synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARD); thus, head-to-head comparisons are needed to help guide prescribing. In recent years, significant advancements have helped clarify the mechanistic basis of the clinical associations of autoantibodies in rheumatoid arthritis (RA). This study evaluated the effectiveness of abatacept versus tofacitinib in anti-cyclic citrullinated peptide (CCP+) patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA).

METHODS

CorEvitas (formerly known as CORRONA) Registry patients aged ≥ 18 years, who were CCP+ before initiating abatacept or tofacitinib (December 2012 onwards through October 2019), had 6-month follow-up data (baseline and 6-month Clinical Disease Activity Index [CDAI]), and were not in remission at index were included. Patients were frequency matched 1:1 by prior biologic use before propensity score matching (PSM). Primary (mean change [D] in CDAI) and secondary outcomes 6 months after index were compared using mixed-effects models adjusted for variables that remained unbalanced after PSM.

RESULTS

Following PSM, most baseline characteristics for 291 patient pairs were well balanced between treatments, although fewer patients initiating abatacept versus tofacitinib received prior non-TNFi biologic DMARDs, and patients initiating abatacept versus tofacitinib had a higher physician global assessment score, patient-reported fatigue, and modified Health Assessment Questionnaire (mHAQ). In adjusted analyses, there were no significant differences in mean [D] from baseline in CDAI at 6 months with abatacept versus tofacitinib (P = 0.936). Patients naïve for b/tsDMARDs initiating abatacept had a numerically greater mean [D] in CDAI at 6 months versus tofacitinib, although this difference was not statistically significant (P = 0.662). There were no significant differences for any secondary outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS

In adjusted analyses, CCP+ patients with RA initiating treatment with abatacept versus tofacitinib did not show a statistically significant difference in reducing disease activity or improving patient-reported outcomes.

Real-world Effectiveness and Safety of JAK Inhibitors in Rheumatoid Arthritis: A Single-centre Study

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVE

To assess the effectiveness and safety of Baricitinib and Tofacitinib in rheumatoid arthritis (RA) patients in "real world" conditions.

METHODS

A single centre retrospective study was performed including RA patients who had initiated treatment with Baricitinib or Tofacitinib from September-2017 to January-2020. Demographic, clinical, laboratory, efficacy and safety variables were collected from baseline and at months 1, 3, 6, 12, 18 and 24. Effectiveness was evaluated by changes from the baseline in DAS28, SDAI, HAQ and acute phase reactants. Safety analysis included adverse events due to any cause, including infection or intolerance. Infection was considered severe if it implied hospitalization. Statistical analysis consisted in Bayesian mixed ordinal regression models including the monotonic effect of each visit and Kaplan-Meier survival curves.

RESULTS

Overall, 98 patients were included. A significant reduction of disease activity scores was noted in both groups. No difference between either treatment was detected in terms of effectiveness even in first line, after bDMARD failure, in monotherapy nor combined therapy. A total of 54 adverse events were recorded of which 18 were considered relevant. The incidence of infection, including Herpes Zoster, was similar in both groups. No patients in either group suffered any tuberculosis, thromboembolic event, malignancy, death or cardiovascular adverse events. Survival analysis did not show any difference between groups.

CONCLUSION

Baricitinib and Tofacitinib are both comparable in terms of effectiveness and safety in real world conditions.

The Role of Autoantibody Testing in Modern Personalized Medicine

Personalized medicine (PM) aims individualized approach to prevention, diagnosis, and treatment. Precision Medicine applies the paradigm of PM by defining groups of individuals with akin characteristics. Often the two terms have been used interchangeably. The quest for PM has been advancing for centuries as traditional nosology classification defines groups of clinical conditions with relatively similar prognoses and treatment options. However, any individual is characterized by a unique set of multiple characteristics and therefore the achievement of PM implies the determination of myriad demographic, epidemiological, clinical, laboratory, and imaging parameters. The accelerated identification of numerous biological variables associated with diverse health conditions contributes to the fulfillment of one of the pre-requisites for PM. The advent of multiplex analytical platforms contributes to the determination of thousands of biological parameters using minute amounts of serum or other biological matrixes. Finally, big data analysis and machine learning contribute to the processing and integration of the multiplexed data at the individual level, allowing for the personalized definition of susceptibility, diagnosis, prognosis, prevention, and treatment. Autoantibodies are traditional biomarkers for autoimmune diseases and can contribute to PM in many aspects, including identification of individuals at risk, early diagnosis, disease sub-phenotyping, definition of prognosis, and treatment, as well as monitoring disease activity. Herein we address how autoantibodies can promote PM in autoimmune diseases using the examples of systemic lupus erythematosus, antiphospholipid syndrome, rheumatoid arthritis, Sjögren syndrome, systemic sclerosis, idiopathic inflammatory myopathies, autoimmune hepatitis, primary biliary cholangitis, and autoimmune neurologic diseases.

Baseline Anti-Citrullinated Protein Antibody Status and Response to Abatacept or Non-TNFi Biologic/Targeted-Synthetic DMARDs: US Observational Study of Patients with RA

INTRODUCTION

Patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) may respond to treatments differently based on their underlying serology and biomarker status, but real-world data comparing treatment responses to abatacept versus other non-TNFi biologic or targeted-synthetic DMARDs by anti-citrullinated protein antibody (ACPA) status remain limited. We assessed the association between ACPA status and response to treatment in patients with RA.

METHODS

Adults from CorEvitas' RA Registry were identified who initiated abatacept, rituximab, tocilizumab, or tofacitinib, and had ACPA measured at/prior to treatment initiation and at the 6-month follow-up visit. Three cohorts were included: abatacept/rituximab (2006-2019), abatacept/tocilizumab (2010-2019), and abatacept/tofacitinib (2012-2019). Patient characteristics at initiation were compared by ACPA status (positive [+], anti-cyclic citrullinated peptide-2 [anti-CCP2] ≥ 20 U/ml; negative [-], anti-CCP2 < 20 U/ml). Outcomes over 6 months: changes in Clinical Disease Activity Index (CDAI), modified Health Assessment Questionnaire (mHAQ), patient global assessment (PGA) scores, and proportion of patients achieving a clinical response. Adjusted mean differences and odds ratios were estimated using mixed-effects linear regression models.

RESULTS

Overall, 982 abatacept, 246 rituximab, 404 tocilizumab, and 429 tofacitinib initiators were identified. ACPA+ (vs. ACPA-) patients had longer disease duration and more erosive disease. During most time periods adjusted mean changes in CDAI, mHAQ, and PGA scores and the proportion of patients achieving a clinical response were significantly higher for ACPA+ versus ACPA- patients initiating abatacept. Adjusted mean change in PGA score and patient fatigue were significantly higher for ACPA+ versus ACPA- patients initiating rituximab. No significant differences were seen by ACPA status for patients initiating tocilizumab or tofacitinib.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients who initiated abatacept or rituximab and were ACPA+ had a greater clinical response at 6-month follow-up post index compared to patients who were ACPA- treated with the same biologic.

Autoantibodies in Rheumatoid Arthritis: Historical Background and Novel Findings

Autoantibodies represent a hallmark of rheumatoid arthritis (RA), with the rheumatoid factor (RF) and antibodies against citrullinated proteins (ACPA) being the most acknowledged ones. RA patients who are positive for RF and/or ACPA ("seropositive") in general display a different etiology and disease course compared to so-called "seronegative" patients. Still, the seronegative patient population is very heterogeneous and not well characterized. Due to the identification of new autoantibodies and advancements in the diagnosis of rheumatic diseases in the last years, the group of seronegative patients is constantly shrinking. Aside from antibodies towards various post-translational modifications, recent studies describe autoantibodies targeting some native proteins, further broadening the spectrum of recognized antigens. Next to the detection of new autoantibody groups, much research has been done to answer the question if and how autoantibodies contribute to the pathogenesis of RA. Since autoantibodies can be detected years prior to RA onset, it is a matter of debate whether their presence alone is sufficient to trigger the disease. Nevertheless, there is gathering evidence of direct autoantibody effector functions, such as stimulation of osteoclastogenesis and synovial fibroblast migration in in vitro experiments. In addition, autoantibody positive patients display a worse clinical course and stronger radiographic progression. In this review, we discuss current findings regarding different autoantibody types, the underlying disease-driving mechanisms, the role of Fab and Fc glycosylation and clinical implications.

Tailored first-line biologic and targeted synthetic disease modifying anti-rheumatic drugs therapy in patients with rheumatoid arthritis: 2021 updated ITABIO statements

INTRODUCTION

In 2015, the Italian board for the TAilored BIOlogic therapy (ITABIO) proposed evidence-based decisional statements for first-line tailored biologic therapy in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA). Taking into account the new licensed drugs, the aim of the present review was to update the previous statements.

AREAS COVERED

A narrative review of the most recent evidence on the efficacy and safety of old and newly licensed drugs for the treatment of articular and extra-articular RA was performed. In addition, host-related variables potentially driving the therapy choice, such as the infection risk, the cardiovascular risk, the risk of deep vein thrombosis, thromboembolism, pregnancy, and obesity were analyzed. Consequently, several statements for personalized therapy were formulated, thus providing a decisional algorithm useful for proper personalized therapy of RA patients in clinical practice.

EXPERT OPINION

Several clinical variables related to specific drug and host characteristics may drive the choice toward anti-TNF and non-anti-TNF biologics, or anti-JAKs, thus allowing to personalize the therapy. Consequently, the right therapy for the right patient would ensure a successful therapeutic intervention.

Autoantibodies in Rheumatoid Arthritis - Laboratory and Clinical Perspectives

Measurement of two groups of autoantibodies, rheumatoid factor (RF) and anti-citrullinated protein/peptide antibodies (ACPA) have gained increasing significance in the diagnosis and classification of rheumatoid arthritis (RA) over the last 65 years. Despite this rising importance of autoimmune serology in RA, there is a palpable lack of harmonization between different commercial RF and ACPA tests. While a minimal diagnostic specificity has been defined for RF tests, which almost always are related to an international reference preparation, neither of this applies to ACPA. Especially assays with low diagnostic specificity are associated with very low positive predictive values or post-test probabilities in real world settings. In this review we focus on issues of practical bearing for the clinical physician diagnosing patients who potentially have RA, or treating patients diagnosed with RA. We advocate that all clinically used assays for RF and ACPA should be aligned to a common diagnostic specificity of 98-99% compared to healthy controls. This high and rather narrow interval corresponds to the diagnostic specificity seen for many commercial ACPA tests, and represents a specificity that is higher than what is customary for most RF assays. Data on antibody occurrence harmonized in this way should be accompanied by test result-specific likelihood ratios for the target diagnosis RA on an ordinal or interval scale, which will provide the clinical physician with more granular and richer information than merely relating numerical values to a single cut-off point. As many physicians today are used to evaluate autoantibodies as positive or negative on a nominal scale, the introduction of test result-specific likelihood ratios will require a change in clinical mindset. We also discuss the use of autoantibodies to prognosticate future arthritis development in at-risk patients as well as predict severe disease course and outcome of pharmacological treatment.

Predictors of drug survival for biologic and targeted synthetic DMARDs in rheumatoid arthritis: Analysis from the TRA Clinical Electronic Registry

In this study we aimed to identify the predictors of drug survival for biologic and targeted synthetic DMARDs (bDMARDs and tsDMARDs) among patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) in a real-world setting. Data from RA patients receiving bDMARDs and tsDMARDs between 2007 and 2019 were extracted from the Taiwan Rheumatology Association Clinical Electronic Registry (TRACER). Patients were categorized into tumor necrosis factor-alpha (TNF-α) inhibitors, non-TNF-α inhibitors, and tofacitinib groups. The primary outcome was 3-year drug retention and the causes of bDMARDs and tsDMARDs discontinuation were recorded. Baseline demographic data before the initiation of bDMARDs and tsDMARDs treatment were analyzed to identify the predictors of 3-year drug survival. A total of 1,270 RA patients were recruited (TNF-α inhibitors: 584; non-TNF-α inhibitors: 535; tofacitinib: 151). The independent protective factors for 3-year drug survival were positive rheumatoid factor (RF) (HR: 0.48, 95% CI: 0.27–0.85, p = 0.013) and biologics-naïve RA (HR: 0.61, 95% CI: 0.39–0.94, p = 0.024). In contrast, positive anti-citrullinated protein antibody (ACPA) (HR: 2.24, 95% CI: 1.32–3.79, p = 0.003) and pre-existing latent tuberculosis (HR: 2.90, 95% CI: 2.06–4.09, p<0.001) were associated with drug discontinuation. RA patients treated with TNF-α inhibitors exhibited better drug retention, especially in the biologics-naïve subgroup (p = 0.037). TNF-α inhibitors were associated with lower cumulative incidence of discontinuation due to inefficacy and adverse events (both p<0.001). Baseline RF and ACPA positivity in abatacept-treated patients were associated with a better 3-year drug survival. However, negative ACPA levels predicted superior drug survival of TNF-α inhibitors and tofacitinib. In conclusion, bio-naïve status predicted better drug survival in TNF-α inhibitors-treated RA patients. RF and ACPA positivity predicted better abatacept drug survival. In contrast, ACPA negativity was associated with superior TNF-α inhibitors and tofacitinib survival.

The impact of seropositivity on the effectiveness of biologic anti-rheumatic agents: results from a collaboration of 16 registries

OBJECTIVES

RF and ACPA are used as diagnostic tools and their presence has been associated with clinical response to some biologic DMARDs (bDMARDs) in RA. This study compared the impact of seropositivity on drug discontinuation and effectiveness of bDMARDs in patients with RA, using head-to-head comparisons in a real-world setting.

METHODS

We conducted a pooled analysis of 16 observational RA registries. Inclusion criteria were a diagnosis of RA, initiation of treatment with rituximab (RTX), abatacept (ABA), tocilizumab (TCZ) or TNF inhibitors (TNFis) and available information on RF and/or ACPA status. Drug discontinuation was analysed using Cox regression, including drug, seropositivity, their interaction, adjusting for concomitant and past treatments and patient and disease characteristics and accounting for country and calendar year of bDMARD initiation. Effectiveness was analysed using the Clinical Disease Activity Index evolution over time.

RESULTS

Among the 27 583 eligible patients, the association of seropositivity with drug discontinuation differed across bDMARDs (P for interaction <0.001). The adjusted hazard ratios for seropositive compared with seronegative patients were 1.01 (95% CI 0.95, 1.07) for TNFis, 0.89 (0.78, 1.02)] for TCZ, 0.80 (0.72, 0.88) for ABA and 0.70 (0.59, 0.84) for RTX. Adjusted differences in remission and low disease activity rates between seropositive and seronegative patients followed the same pattern, with no difference in TNFis, a small difference in TCZ, a larger difference in ABA and the largest difference in RTX (Lundex remission difference +5.9%, low disease activity difference +11.6%).

CONCLUSION

Seropositivity was associated with increased effectiveness of non-TNFi bDMARDs, especially RTX and ABA, but not TNFis.

Efficacy, retention, and safety of tofacitinib in real-life: Hur-bio monocentric experience

Background/aim

To assess the real-life efficacy, retention rate, and safety data of tofacitinib in rheumatoid arthritis (RA) patients.

Materials and methods

We analyzed all patients registered in the HURBİO database who received at least 1 dose of tofacitinib. Patients who received at least one dose were included in retention analysis; patients with at least 1 control visit were included in efficacy and safety analysis. Factors predicting good response at the last follow-up visit were analyzed by logistic regression analysis. Drug retention rates were calculated using the Kaplan–Meier method and predictors of drug retention were determined by Cox proportional hazard model. Adverse events, reasons for switching, and discontinuation were also determined.

Results

Two hundred and forty-seven (210, 85.0% female) patients were included in the study. The median duration of tofacitinib treatment was 10.2 (20.2) [med, (IQR)] months. Two hundred and four (82.6%) patients were included in safety and efficacy analysis; 45.6% of patients were in low-disease activity (LDA) state (DAS28-CRP ≤ 3.2). Predictors of LDA were being biologic-naïve [aOR 2.53 (1.31–4.88); 95% CI] and RF negativity [aOR 2.14 (1.12–4.07); 95% CI]. At 1 year, the overall tofacitinib retention rate was 63.9% with no relevant predicting factor. Response and retention rates of tofacitinib were similar in patients with and without concomitant csDMARDs. Treatment failure was the most common cause of discontinuation. The most common infectious and laboratory adverse events were herpes zoster infection (3.9 per 100 patient-years) and elevation in ALT (x3UNL: 9.7 per 100 patient-years), respectively.

Conclusion

Tofacitinib is effective as monotherapy or in combination with csDMARDs. It is a well-tolerated treatment option in Turkish RA patients.

From Rheumatoid Factor to Anti-Citrullinated Protein Antibodies and Anti-Carbamylated Protein Antibodies for Diagnosis and Prognosis Prediction in Patients with Rheumatoid Arthritis

Rheumatoid arthritis (RA) is a chronic systemic inflammatory disease mainly involving synovial inflammation and articular bone destruction. RA is a heterogeneous disease with diverse clinical presentations, prognoses and therapeutic responses. Following the first discovery of rheumatoid factors (RFs) 80 years ago, the identification of both anti-citrullinated protein antibodies (ACPAs) and anti-carbamylated protein antibodies (anti-CarP Abs) has greatly facilitated approaches toward RA, especially in the fields of early diagnosis and prognosis prediction of the disease. Although these antibodies share many common features and can function synergistically to promote disease progression, they differ mechanistically and have unique clinical relevance. Specifically, these three RA associating auto-antibodies (autoAbs) all precede the development of RA by years. However, while the current evidence suggests a synergic effect of RF and ACPA in predicting the development of RA and an erosive phenotype, controversies exist regarding the additive value of anti-CarP Abs. In the present review, we critically summarize the characteristics of these autoantibodies and focus on their distinct clinical applications in the early identification, clinical manifestations and prognosis prediction of RA. With the advancement of treatment options in the era of biologics, we also discuss the relevance of these autoantibodies in association with RA patient response to therapy.

Cytokines, JAK-STAT Signaling and Radiation-Induced DNA Repair in Solid Tumors: Novel Opportunities for Radiation Therapy

A number of solid tumors are treated with radiation therapy (RT) as a curative modality. At the same time, for certain types of cancers the applicable doses of RT are not high enough to result in a successful eradication of cancer cells. This is often caused by limited pharmacological tools and strategies to selectively sensitize tumors to RT while simultaneously sparing normal tissues from RT. We present an outline of a novel strategy for RT sensitization of solid tumors utilizing Jak inhibitors. Here, recently published pre-clinical data are reviewed which demonstrate the promising role of Jak inhibition in sensitization of tumors to RT. A wide number of currently approved Jak inhibitors for non-malignant conditions are summarized including Jak inhibitors currently in clinical development. Finally, intersection between Jak/Stat and the levels of serum cytokines are presented and discussed as they relate to susceptibility to RT.

The new entries in the therapeutic armamentarium: The small molecule JAK inhibitors

The past decade has witnessed an explosion in trial data on JAK inhibitors (JAKi). These small molecules target the Janus kinase - signal transducer and activator of transcription (JAK-STAT) pathway, blocking crucial cytokines across a septum of rheumatic diseases. As a class, JAKi are beginning to demonstrate efficacy on par, if not superior to biologics. Two first generation JAKi are licensed for use in inflammatory arthritis; tofacitinib and baricitinib. Next-generation JAKi have been designed with selective affinity for one JAK enzymes, the aim to reduce unwanted adverse effects without declining clinical efficacy. Emerging data with selective JAK1 inhibitors upadacitinib and filgotinib looks very promising. Despite differences in selectivity between JAKi, an overlap exists in their safety profiles. Across the class, a characteristic safety signal is emerging with viral opportunistic infections, particularly herpes zoster. Post marketing drug surveillance will be essential in evaluating the long-term risk with these agents.