Effects of tofacitinib on lymphocyte sub-populations, CMV and EBV viral load in patients with plaque psoriasis

Phase 2 Trial of Deucravacitinib in Psoriatic Arthritis: Biomarkers Associated With Disease Activity, Pharmacodynamics, and Clinical Responses

OBJECTIVE

Our objective was to evaluate the association of serum biomarkers with baseline psoriatic arthritis (PsA) disease activity, pharmacodynamic effects of deucravacitinib on biomarker levels, and the relationship between biomarkers and clinical responses to deucravacitinib.

METHODS

The phase 2 trial (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT03881059) randomly assigned 203 patients with PsA 1:1:1 to placebo, deucravacitinib at 6 mg once daily (QD), or deucravacitinib at 12 mg QD. Serum biomarkers associated with the interleukin 23 (IL-23) pathway (IL-17A, β-defensin [BD-2], and IL-19), type I interferon pathway, inflammation, and collagen matrix turnover were measured by immunoassay. Clinical responses (≥75% improvement from baseline in the Psoriasis Area and Severity Index [PASI75] and ≥20% improvement from baseline in American College of Rheumatology criteria [ACR20] responses) were measured at week 16. Hematologic variables were also assessed.

RESULTS

IL-17A, BD-2, and IL-19 had a modest association with PASI scores (r = 0.4, r = 0.56, and r = 0.5, respectively) at baseline. In deucravacitinib groups, IL-17A, BD-2, IL-19, C-X-C motif ligand 9 (CXCL9), CXCL10, C-reactive protein, matrix metalloproteinase 3, and collagen type 4 degradation marker levels were significantly reduced at week 16 versus baseline (P < 0.01); higher levels of IL-23 pathway-associated biomarkers predicted higher PASI75 and ACR20 response rates in deucravacitinib-treated patients. Significantly higher PASI75 response rates were seen in patients with high baseline IL-17A (odds ratio 15.76) and BD-2 levels (odds ratio 15.41) versus low baseline IL-17A and BD-2 levels. Changes in hematologic variables that are characteristic of JAK inhibition were not observed with deucravacitinib.

CONCLUSION

Deucravacitinib significantly impacted biomarkers associated with Tyk2 signaling pathways of key inflammatory cytokines, including IL-23 and type I interferon, and those related to collagen matrix turnover. These biomarkers may predict treatment responses to deucravacitinib.

Decreased Serum Tryptophan and Severe Ulcerative Damage of Colon Mucosa Identify Inflammatory Bowel Disease Patients With High Risk of Cytomegalovirus Colitis

INTRODUCTION

Patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) are predisposed to the reactivation of viral infections such as cytomegalovirus (CMV). Clinical discrimination of disease flares and colonic CMV reactivation is difficult in patients with established diagnosis of IBD, and there are no reliable noninvasive diagnostic tools yet. Furthermore, the influence of novel therapeutics including biologicals and Janus kinase inhibitors on the risk of CMV colitis is unclear. The goal of this study was to identify risk factors and clinical determinants of CMV colitis that could serve as minimally invasive markers both for active CMV colitis and relapse.

METHODS

To this end, a retrospective analysis of 376 patients with suspected or confirmed CMV colitis 2016-2023 was performed.

RESULTS

Previous administration of systemic steroids increased the odds of CMV colitis to OR 4.6. Biologicals did not change the incidence of CMV colitis but decreased the OR of a relapse to 0.13. Clinical parameters such as severely bloody diarrhea, intense microscopic ulcerative damage, and decreased serum tryptophan correlated with detection of CMV. Importantly, persistent decrease of tryptophan was observed in patients with CMV relapse. Furthermore, tryptophan degradation through the kynurenine pathway was increased in CMV-positive patients.

DISCUSSION

Taken together, we identify decreased serum tryptophan as a novel potential minimally invasive marker to aid identification of IBD patients with active CMV colitis and at high risk for relapse.

Inhibition of the JAK-STAT Pathway in the Treatment of Psoriasis: A Review of the Literature

Psoriasis is a highly prevalent dermatological disease associated with an increased systemic inflammatory response. In addition, joint involvement is also present in around 20% of patients. Therefore, treatment modalities used in this condition should be simultaneously effective at improving skin manifestations, reducing inflammation, and addressing psoriatic arthritis when present. Twenty years ago, the introduction of biologic treatments for psoriasis was a turning point in the management of this condition, offering an effective and reasonably safe option for patients whose disease could not be adequately controlled with conventional therapies. At the moment, Janus Kinase inhibitors (JAKis) are a new class of promising molecules in the management of psoriasis. They are orally administered and can show benefits in patients who failed biologic therapy. We conducted a scoping review in order to identify randomized-controlled trials that investigated different JAKis in patients with plaque psoriasis and psoriatic arthritis, with an emphasis on molecules that have been approved by the European Medicines Agency and the Food and Drug Administration. The added value of this study is that it collected information about JAKis approved for two different indications, plaque psoriasis and psoriatic arthritis, in order to provide an integrated understanding of the range of effects that JAKis have on the whole spectrum of psoriasis manifestations.

Tofacitinib in Steroid-Refractory Acute Severe Ulcerative Colitis: A Retrospective Analysis

INTRODUCTION

Steroid-refractory acute severe ulcerative colitis (ASUC) patients are at the highest risk of colectomy. Among the available options, cyclosporine and infliximab have similar efficacy but infliximab is a costly drug and cyclosporine has multiple side effects like kidney injury, neurotoxicity, and dyselectrolytemia. Surgical management is often associated with higher morbidity. Newer oral small molecules like Janus kinase inhibitors are the ideal molecules to bridge the gap. Tofacitinib has already been extensively evaluated in patients with moderate to severe UC; however, data on ASUC treated by tofacitinib are limited.

METHODS

We retrospectively analyzed the data of patients with ASUC who were admitted to our hospital's luminal gastroenterology unit between January 2021 and July 2023. Patients with ASUC who were managed with tofacitinib were included in the study.

RESULTS

Eight patients with ASUC were identified who did not respond to intravenous hydrocortisone and were treated with tofacitinib. The mean age was 39 ± 15 years and 87.5% were female. The median duration of illness was 24 months (interquartile range (IQR): 12-120 months). Seven of eight patients (87.5%) responded to oral tofacitinib 10 mg twice a day by the fifth day of treatment. The median follow-up period was six months (IQR: 1-12 months). One patient required colectomy and one patient had varicella zoster reactivation requiring treatment discontinuation.

CONCLUSION

Tofacitinib is an attractive alternative to the currently available salvage therapy for steroid-refractory ASUC; however, long-term efficacy and risk remain to be explored.

Systemic pharmacological treatments for chronic plaque psoriasis: a network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Psoriasis is an immune-mediated disease with either skin or joints manifestations, or both, and it has a major impact on quality of life. Although there is currently no cure for psoriasis, various treatment strategies allow sustained control of disease signs and symptoms. The relative benefit of these treatments remains unclear due to the limited number of trials comparing them directly head-to-head, which is why we chose to conduct a network meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVES

To compare the benefits and harms of non-biological systemic agents, small molecules, and biologics for people with moderate-to-severe psoriasis using a network meta-analysis, and to provide a ranking of these treatments according to their benefits and harms.

SEARCH METHODS

For this update of the living systematic review, we updated our searches of the following databases monthly to October 2022: the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, and Embase.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of systemic treatments in adults over 18 years with moderate-to-severe plaque psoriasis, at any stage of treatment, compared to placebo or another active agent. The primary outcomes were: proportion of participants who achieved clear or almost clear skin, that is, at least Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI) 90; proportion of participants with serious adverse events (SAEs) at induction phase (8 to 24 weeks after randomisation).

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We conducted duplicate study selection, data extraction, risk of bias assessment, and analyses. We synthesised data using pairwise and network meta-analysis (NMA) to compare treatments and rank them according to effectiveness (PASI 90 score) and acceptability (inverse of SAEs). We assessed the certainty of NMA evidence for the two primary outcomes and all comparisons using CINeMA, as very low, low, moderate, or high. We contacted study authors when data were unclear or missing. We used the surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA) to infer treatment hierarchy, from 0% (worst for effectiveness or safety) to 100% (best for effectiveness or safety).

MAIN RESULTS

This update includes an additional 12 studies, taking the total number of included studies to 179, and randomised participants to 62,339, 67.1% men, mainly recruited from hospitals. Average age was 44.6 years, mean PASI score at baseline was 20.4 (range: 9.5 to 39). Most studies were placebo-controlled (56%). We assessed a total of 20 treatments. Most (152) trials were multicentric (two to 231 centres). One-third of the studies (65/179) had high risk of bias, 24 unclear risk, and most (90) low risk. Most studies (138/179) declared funding by a pharmaceutical company, and 24 studies did not report a funding source. Network meta-analysis at class level showed that all interventions (non-biological systemic agents, small molecules, and biological treatments) showed a higher proportion of patients reaching PASI 90 than placebo. Anti-IL17 treatment showed a higher proportion of patients reaching PASI 90 compared to all the interventions. Biologic treatments anti-IL17, anti-IL12/23, anti-IL23, and anti-TNF alpha showed a higher proportion of patients reaching PASI 90 than the non-biological systemic agents. For reaching PASI 90, the most effective drugs when compared to placebo were (SUCRA rank order, all high-certainty evidence): infliximab (risk ratio (RR) 49.16, 95% CI 20.49 to 117.95), bimekizumab (RR 27.86, 95% CI 23.56 to 32.94), ixekizumab (RR 27.35, 95% CI 23.15 to 32.29), risankizumab (RR 26.16, 95% CI 22.03 to 31.07). Clinical effectiveness of these drugs was similar when compared against each other. Bimekizumab and ixekizumab were significantly more likely to reach PASI 90 than secukinumab. Bimekizumab, ixekizumab, and risankizumab were significantly more likely to reach PASI 90 than brodalumab and guselkumab. Infliximab, anti-IL17 drugs (bimekizumab, ixekizumab, secukinumab, and brodalumab), and anti-IL23 drugs except tildrakizumab were significantly more likely to reach PASI 90 than ustekinumab, three anti-TNF alpha agents, and deucravacitinib. Ustekinumab was superior to certolizumab. Adalimumab, tildrakizumab, and ustekinumab were superior to etanercept. No significant difference was shown between apremilast and two non-biological drugs: ciclosporin and methotrexate. We found no significant difference between any of the interventions and the placebo for the risk of SAEs. The risk of SAEs was significantly lower for participants on methotrexate compared with most of the interventions. Nevertheless, the SAE analyses were based on a very low number of events with very low- to moderate-certainty evidence for all the comparisons. The findings therefore have to be viewed with caution. For other efficacy outcomes (PASI 75 and Physician Global Assessment (PGA) 0/1), the results were similar to the results for PASI 90. Information on quality of life was often poorly reported and was absent for several of the interventions.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Our review shows that, compared to placebo, the biologics infliximab, bimekizumab, ixekizumab, and risankizumab were the most effective treatments for achieving PASI 90 in people with moderate-to-severe psoriasis on the basis of high-certainty evidence. This NMA evidence is limited to induction therapy (outcomes measured from 8 to 24 weeks after randomisation), and is not sufficient for evaluating longer-term outcomes in this chronic disease. Moreover, we found low numbers of studies for some of the interventions, and the young age (mean 44.6 years) and high level of disease severity (PASI 20.4 at baseline) may not be typical of patients seen in daily clinical practice. We found no significant difference in the assessed interventions and placebo in terms of SAEs, and the safety evidence for most interventions was very low to moderate quality. More randomised trials directly comparing active agents are needed, and these should include systematic subgroup analyses (sex, age, ethnicity, comorbidities, psoriatic arthritis). To provide long-term information on the safety of treatments included in this review, an evaluation of non-randomised studies is needed. Editorial note: This is a living systematic review. Living systematic reviews offer a new approach to review updating, in which the review is continually updated, incorporating relevant new evidence as it becomes available. Please refer to the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews for the current status of this review.

Systemic pharmacological treatments for chronic plaque psoriasis: a network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Psoriasis is an immune-mediated disease with either skin or joints manifestations, or both, and it has a major impact on quality of life. Although there is currently no cure for psoriasis, various treatment strategies allow sustained control of disease signs and symptoms. The relative benefit of these treatments remains unclear due to the limited number of trials comparing them directly head-to-head, which is why we chose to conduct a network meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVES

To compare the efficacy and safety of non-biological systemic agents, small molecules, and biologics for people with moderate-to-severe psoriasis using a network meta-analysis, and to provide a ranking of these treatments according to their efficacy and safety.

SEARCH METHODS

For this update of the living systematic review, we updated our searches of the following databases monthly to October 2021: the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, and Embase.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of systemic treatments in adults over 18 years with moderate-to-severe plaque psoriasis, at any stage of treatment, compared to placebo or another active agent. The primary outcomes were: proportion of participants who achieved clear or almost clear skin, that is, at least Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI) 90; proportion of participants with serious adverse events (SAEs) at induction phase (8 to 24 weeks after randomisation).

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We conducted duplicate study selection, data extraction, risk of bias assessment and analyses. We synthesised data using pairwise and network meta-analysis (NMA) to compare treatments and rank them according to effectiveness (PASI 90 score) and acceptability (inverse of SAEs). We assessed the certainty of NMA evidence for the two primary outcomes and all comparisons using CINeMA, as very low, low, moderate, or high. We contacted study authors when data were unclear or missing. We used the surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA) to infer treatment hierarchy, from 0% (worst for effectiveness or safety) to 100% (best for effectiveness or safety).

MAIN RESULTS

This update includes an additional 19 studies, taking the total number of included studies to 167, and randomised participants to 58,912, 67.2% men, mainly recruited from hospitals. Average age was 44.5 years, mean PASI score at baseline was 20.4 (range: 9.5 to 39). Most studies were placebo-controlled (57%). We assessed a total of 20 treatments. Most (140) trials were multicentric (two to 231 centres). One-third of the studies (57/167) had high risk of bias; 23 unclear risk, and most (87) low risk. Most studies (127/167) declared funding by a pharmaceutical company, and 24 studies did not report a funding source. Network meta-analysis at class level showed that all interventions (non-biological systemic agents, small molecules, and biological treatments) showed a higher proportion of patients reaching PASI 90 than placebo. Anti-IL17 treatment showed a higher proportion of patients reaching PASI 90 compared to all the interventions, except anti-IL23. Biologic treatments anti-IL17, anti-IL12/23, anti-IL23 and anti-TNF alpha showed a higher proportion of patients reaching PASI 90 than the non-biological systemic agents. For reaching PASI 90, the most effective drugs when compared to placebo were (SUCRA rank order, all high-certainty evidence): infliximab (risk ratio (RR) 50.19, 95% CI 20.92 to 120.45), bimekizumab (RR 30.27, 95% CI 25.45 to 36.01), ixekizumab (RR 30.19, 95% CI 25.38 to 35.93), risankizumab (RR 28.75, 95% CI 24.03 to 34.39). Clinical effectiveness of these drugs was similar when compared against each other. Bimekizumab, ixekizumab and risankizumab showed a higher proportion of patients reaching PASI 90 than other anti-IL17 drugs (secukinumab and brodalumab) and guselkumab. Infliximab, anti-IL17 drugs (bimekizumab, ixekizumab, secukinumab and brodalumab) and anti-IL23 drugs (risankizumab and guselkumab) except tildrakizumab showed a higher proportion of patients reaching PASI 90 than ustekinumab and three anti-TNF alpha agents (adalimumab, certolizumab and etanercept). Ustekinumab was superior to certolizumab; adalimumab and ustekinumab were superior to etanercept. No significant difference was shown between apremilast and two non-biological drugs: ciclosporin and methotrexate. We found no significant difference between any of the interventions and the placebo for the risk of SAEs. The risk of SAEs was significantly lower for participants on methotrexate compared with most of the interventions. Nevertheless, the SAE analyses were based on a very low number of events with low- to moderate-certainty for all the comparisons (except methotrexate versus placebo, which was high-certainty). The findings therefore have to be viewed with caution. For other efficacy outcomes (PASI 75 and Physician Global Assessment (PGA) 0/1), the results were similar to the results for PASI 90. Information on quality of life was often poorly reported and was absent for several of the interventions.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Our review shows that, compared to placebo, the biologics infliximab, bimekizumab, ixekizumab, and risankizumab were the most effective treatments for achieving PASI 90 in people with moderate-to-severe psoriasis on the basis of high-certainty evidence. This NMA evidence is limited to induction therapy (outcomes measured from 8 to 24 weeks after randomisation), and is not sufficient for evaluating longer-term outcomes in this chronic disease. Moreover, we found low numbers of studies for some of the interventions, and the young age (mean 44.5 years) and high level of disease severity (PASI 20.4 at baseline) may not be typical of patients seen in daily clinical practice. We found no significant difference in the assessed interventions and placebo in terms of SAEs, and the safety evidence for most interventions was low to moderate quality. More randomised trials directly comparing active agents are needed, and these should include systematic subgroup analyses (sex, age, ethnicity, comorbidities, psoriatic arthritis). To provide long-term information on the safety of treatments included in this review, an evaluation of non-randomised studies and postmarketing reports from regulatory agencies is needed. Editorial note: This is a living systematic review. Living systematic reviews offer a new approach to review updating, in which the review is continually updated, incorporating relevant new evidence as it becomes available. Please refer to the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews for the current status of this review.

Clinical and immunological study of Tofacitinib and Baricitinib in refractory Blau syndrome: case report and literature review

Blau syndrome (BS) is an autoinflammatory disorder characterized by non-caseating granulomatous dermatitis, arthritis, and uveitis. We present a case of refractory and severe BS that was treated with the Janus kinase inhibitors (JAKINIBS), Tofacitinib (TOFA) and then Baricitinib (BARI). Our aim was to describe the clinical and immunological outcomes after treatment with JAKINIBS. Blood tests and serum samples were obtained during follow-up with TOFA and BARI. We assessed their effects on clinical outcomes, acute phase reactants, absolute lymphocyte counts (ALCs), lymphocyte subset counts, immunoglobulins, and cytokine levels. A review of the literature on the use of JAKINIBS for the treatment of uveitis and sarcoidosis was also conducted. TOFA led to a rapid and maintained disease control and a steroid-sparing effect. A decrease from baseline was observed in ALC, CD3+, CD4+, CD8+, and natural killer (NK) cell counts. B-cells were stable. Serum levels of interleukin (IL)-4 and tumor necrosis factor alpha (TNF-α) increased, whereas IL-2, IL-6, IL-10, and IL-17 maintained stable. TOFA was discontinued after 19 months due to significant lymphopenia. The initiation of BARI allowed maintaining adequate control of disease activity with an adequate safety profile. The literature review showed seven patients with uveitis and five with sarcoidosis treated with JAKINIBS. No cases of BS treated with JAKINIBS were found. We report the successful use of JAKINIBS in a patient with refractory and severe BS.

Systemic pharmacological treatments for chronic plaque psoriasis: a network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Psoriasis is an immune-mediated disease for which some people have a genetic predisposition. The condition manifests in inflammatory effects on either the skin or joints, or both, and it has a major impact on quality of life. Although there is currently no cure for psoriasis, various treatment strategies allow sustained control of disease signs and symptoms. Several randomised controlled trials (RCTs) have compared the efficacy of the different systemic treatments in psoriasis against placebo. However, the relative benefit of these treatments remains unclear due to the limited number of trials comparing them directly head-to-head, which is why we chose to conduct a network meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVES

To compare the efficacy and safety of non-biological systemic agents, small molecules, and biologics for people with moderate-to-severe psoriasis using a network meta-analysis, and to provide a ranking of these treatments according to their efficacy and safety.

SEARCH METHODS

For this living systematic review we updated our searches of the following databases monthly to September 2020: the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, and Embase. We searched two trials registers to the same date. We checked the reference lists of included studies and relevant systematic reviews for further references to eligible RCTs.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of systemic treatments in adults (over 18 years of age) with moderate-to-severe plaque psoriasis or psoriatic arthritis whose skin had been clinically diagnosed with moderate-to-severe psoriasis, at any stage of treatment, in comparison to placebo or another active agent. The primary outcomes of this review were: the proportion of participants who achieved clear or almost clear skin, that is, at least Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI) 90 at induction phase (from 8 to 24 weeks after the randomisation), and the proportion of participants with serious adverse events (SAEs) at induction phase. We did not evaluate differences in specific adverse events.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Several groups of two review authors independently undertook study selection, data extraction, 'Risk of bias' assessment, and analyses. We synthesised the data using pair-wise and network meta-analysis (NMA) to compare the treatments of interest and rank them according to their effectiveness (as measured by the PASI 90 score) and acceptability (the inverse of serious adverse events). We assessed the certainty of the body of evidence from the NMA for the two primary outcomes and all comparisons, according to CINeMA, as either very low, low, moderate, or high. We contacted study authors when data were unclear or missing. We used the surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA) to infer on treatment hierarchy: 0% (treatment is the worst for effectiveness or safety) to 100% (treatment is the best for effectiveness or safety).

MAIN RESULTS

We included 158 studies (18 new studies for the update) in our review (57,831 randomised participants, 67.2% men, mainly recruited from hospitals). The overall average age was 45 years; the overall mean PASI score at baseline was 20 (range: 9.5 to 39). Most of these studies were placebo-controlled (58%), 30% were head-to-head studies, and 11% were multi-armed studies with both an active comparator and a placebo. We have assessed a total of 20 treatments. In all, 133 trials were multicentric (two to 231 centres). All but two of the outcomes included in this review were limited to the induction phase (assessment from 8 to 24 weeks after randomisation). We assessed many studies (53/158) as being at high risk of bias; 25 were at an unclear risk, and 80 at low risk. Most studies (123/158) declared funding by a pharmaceutical company, and 22 studies did not report their source of funding. Network meta-analysis at class level showed that all of the interventions (non-biological systemic agents, small molecules, and biological treatments) were significantly more effective than placebo in reaching PASI 90. At class level, in reaching PASI 90, the biologic treatments anti-IL17, anti-IL12/23, anti-IL23, and anti-TNF alpha were significantly more effective than the small molecules and the non-biological systemic agents. At drug level, infliximab, ixekizumab, secukinumab, brodalumab, risankizumab and guselkumab were significantly more effective in reaching PASI 90 than ustekinumab and three anti-TNF alpha agents: adalimumab, certolizumab, and etanercept. Ustekinumab and adalimumab were significantly more effective in reaching PASI 90 than etanercept; ustekinumab was more effective than certolizumab, and the clinical effectiveness of ustekinumab and adalimumab was similar. There was no significant difference between tofacitinib or apremilast and three non-biological drugs: fumaric acid esters (FAEs), ciclosporin and methotrexate. Network meta-analysis also showed that infliximab, ixekizumab, risankizumab, bimekizumab, secukinumab, guselkumab, and brodalumab outperformed other drugs when compared to placebo in reaching PASI 90. The clinical effectiveness of these drugs was similar, except for ixekizumab which had a better chance of reaching PASI 90 compared with secukinumab, guselkumab and brodalumab. The clinical effectiveness of these seven drugs was: infliximab (versus placebo): risk ratio (RR) 50.29, 95% confidence interval (CI) 20.96 to 120.67, SUCRA = 93.6; high-certainty evidence; ixekizumab (versus placebo): RR 32.48, 95% CI 27.13 to 38.87; SUCRA = 90.5; high-certainty evidence; risankizumab (versus placebo): RR 28.76, 95% CI 23.96 to 34.54; SUCRA = 84.6; high-certainty evidence; bimekizumab (versus placebo): RR 58.64, 95% CI 3.72 to 923.86; SUCRA = 81.4; high-certainty evidence; secukinumab (versus placebo): RR 25.79, 95% CI 21.61 to 30.78; SUCRA = 76.2; high-certainty evidence; guselkumab (versus placebo): RR 25.52, 95% CI 21.25 to 30.64; SUCRA = 75; high-certainty evidence; and brodalumab (versus placebo): RR 23.55, 95% CI 19.48 to 28.48; SUCRA = 68.4; moderate-certainty evidence. Conservative interpretation is warranted for the results for bimekizumab (as well as mirikizumab, tyrosine kinase 2 inhibitor, acitretin, ciclosporin, fumaric acid esters, and methotrexate), as these drugs, in the NMA, have been evaluated in few trials. We found no significant difference between any of the interventions and the placebo for the risk of SAEs. Nevertheless, the SAE analyses were based on a very low number of events with low to moderate certainty for all the comparisons. Thus, the results have to be viewed with caution and we cannot be sure of the ranking. For other efficacy outcomes (PASI 75 and Physician Global Assessment (PGA) 0/1) the results were similar to the results for PASI 90. Information on quality of life was often poorly reported and was absent for several of the interventions.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Our review shows that compared to placebo, the biologics infliximab, ixekizumab, risankizumab, bimekizumab, secukinumab, guselkumab and brodalumab were the most effective treatments for achieving PASI 90 in people with moderate-to-severe psoriasis on the basis of moderate- to high-certainty evidence. This NMA evidence is limited to induction therapy (outcomes were measured from 8 to 24 weeks after randomisation) and is not sufficient for evaluation of longer-term outcomes in this chronic disease. Moreover, we found low numbers of studies for some of the interventions, and the young age (mean age of 45 years) and high level of disease severity (PASI 20 at baseline) may not be typical of patients seen in daily clinical practice. Another major concern is that short-term trials provide scanty and sometimes poorly-reported safety data and thus do not provide useful evidence to create a reliable risk profile of treatments. We found no significant difference in the assessed interventions and placebo in terms of SAEs, and the evidence for all the interventions was of low to moderate quality. In order to provide long-term information on the safety of the treatments included in this review, it will also be necessary to evaluate non-randomised studies and postmarketing reports released from regulatory agencies. In terms of future research, randomised trials directly comparing active agents are necessary once high-quality evidence of benefit against placebo is established, including head-to-head trials amongst and between non-biological systemic agents and small molecules, and between biological agents (anti-IL17 versus anti-IL23, anti-IL23 versus anti-IL12/23, anti-TNF alpha versus anti-IL12/23). Future trials should also undertake systematic subgroup analyses (e.g. assessing biological-naïve participants, baseline psoriasis severity, presence of psoriatic arthritis, etc.). Finally, outcome measure harmonisation is needed in psoriasis trials, and researchers should look at the medium- and long-term benefit and safety of the interventions and the comparative safety of different agents. Editorial note: This is a living systematic review. Living systematic reviews offer a new approach to review updating, in which the review is continually updated, incorporating relevant new evidence as it becomes available. Please refer to the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews for the current status of this review.

Herpes Zoster in rheumatoid arthritis patients receiving tofacitinib, a single center experience from Taiwan

In clinical trials of tofacitinib for rheumatoid arthritis (RA), Japanese and Korean patients had higher incidence of herpes zoster (HZ) than subjects from elsewhere; however, post-market data from Asia are lacking. Hence, we investigated the incidence of HZ and its risk factors in Taiwanese RA patients receiving tofacitinib. At a medical center in Taichung, Taiwan, we enrolled patients with active RA treated with tofacitinib between January 4, 2015 and December 9, 2017, following unsuccessful methotrexate therapy and no tofacitinib exposure RA patients as a control group. Demographic characteristics, interferon-gamma levels, and lymphocyte counts were compared. Among 125 tofacitinib-treated RA patients, 7 developed HZ, an incidence rate of 3.6/100 person-years. Patients with HZ had shorter disease duration than those without, but higher frequency of prior HZ. Baseline interferon-gamma levels and HLA-DR activated T cell counts were positively correlated and significantly lower in patients with HZ than without. Strikingly, 5/7 HZ cases occurred within 4 months of starting tofacitinib therapy. Incidence of HZ in tofacitinib-treated Taiwanese RA patients is lower than rates in Japan or Korea, and commensurate with the global average. HZ may occur soon after commencing tofacitinib therapy. The role of interferon-gamma and activated T cells in tofacitinib-related HZ deserves further investigation.

Safety of Janus Kinase Inhibitors in Older Patients: A Focus on the Thromboembolic Risk

The Janus kinase (JAK)-signal transducer and activator of transcription (STAT) pathway is a membrane-to-nucleus signaling cascade that effects activation of gene transcription. JAK inhibitors have demonstrated effectiveness in autoimmune diseases such as rheumatoid arthritis. An increased risk of infection, mainly varicella-zoster reactivation, with these new agents is of concern. Comorbid conditions, along with pharmacokinetic variations in drug metabolism in the older population, further increase the risk of adverse outcomes. Newly raised concerns for potential adverse effects such as deep vein thrombosis and pulmonary embolism are essential considerations for clinicians. Older patients are at increased risk because of multiple comorbid conditions and pharmacokinetic changes related to drug metabolism and excretion. Both the US FDA and the European Medicines Agency have issued warnings regarding this risk. These warnings highlight individuals aged > 50 years with concomitant cardiovascular risk factors. Furthermore, the FDA released a black box warning for increased thromboembolic risk associated with JAK inhibitors. As the use of these drugs increases, a solid understanding of adverse effects and risks is critical to those treating older adults.

New insights into IFN-γ in rheumatoid arthritis: role in the era of JAK inhibitors

The treatment of rheumatoid arthritis (RA) is now entering a new era, the era of Janus kinase (JAK) inhibitors. JAK inhibitors target multiple cytokines including IL-6 and exhibit a beneficial treatment effect in patients with RA and inadequate response to conventional synthetic or biologic disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs. Since the treatment effect of JAK inhibitors is promising even for patients refractory to anti-IL-6 therapy, it needs to be considered how multiple cytokines play roles in the pathogenesis of RA. It is also worth noting that an increased risk of herpes zoster is specifically related to the use of JAK inhibitors. Among cytokines targeted by JAK inhibitors, the current review focuses on IFN-γ, particularly on its role in synovial biology, autoimmunity, bone metabolism, pain, and varicella zoster virus infection. Recent studies provided new insights into IFN-γ in the pathogenesis of RA, which may account for the efficacy of JAK inhibitors.

Reactivation of Epstein-Barr Virus Presenting as Massive Splenomegaly after Initiation of Golimumab Treatment

Epstein–Barr virus infection is most commonly asymptomatic in the acute setting, where the end result of infection is the adoption of a viral latency phenotype. The virus can reactivate later in life leading to the abnormal proliferation of the infected B, T, or NK cells. Hereby, we report a 71-year-old female with seronegative rheumatoid arthritis who presented with massive splenomegaly, pancytopenia, and positivization of antibodies against double-stranded deoxyribonucleic acid (dsDNA) after initiation of the anti-tumor necrosis factor (TNF) golimumab. The diagnosis of EBV-associated lymphoproliferative disorder (LPD) was demonstrated by elevation of the plasmatic EBV viral load. Withdrawal of the anti-TNF and treatment with the anti-CD20 antibody rituximab were able to revert the clinical abnormalities. EBV-associated LPDs are described after initiation of other anti-TNF agents, such as infliximab, but no reports of golimumab-associated EBV LPD are found in the literature. The mechanisms for this occurrence are not clear, but these are known to involve expression of a panel of viral proteins specific to the viral latency phenotypes.

Systemic Treatment of Psoriasis with JAK Inhibitors: A Review

Psoriasis is a prevalent chronic inflammatory disease. The inflammatory response is driven by T cells and mediated by multiple cytokines such as tumor necrosis factor and the interleukins IL-17 and IL-23. Moderate-to-severe psoriasis is treated systemically, using either biologics or conventional treatments with small-molecule drugs. The newer biologics are very effective and well tolerated, but not all patients respond to treatment with biologics, so there is a need for new treatment options for psoriasis. Janus kinase (JAK) inhibitors are a new drug class that may be of use in this respect. These inhibitors are already on the market for rheumatoid arthritis, psoriatic arthritis, and ulcerative colitis. They block the intracellular signal pathway mediated by JAK and signal transducer and activator of transcription (STAT) proteins, thereby inhibiting gene transcription of proinflammatory cytokines. JAK inhibitors are currently being tested as potential treatments for psoriasis. They have shown clinical efficacy as measured by the Psoriasis Area and Severity Index 75 response in both phase 2 and 3 trials, and appear to be well tolerated overall. This review provides an overview of the mechanisms underlying the actions of JAK inhibitors in psoriasis, together with the results of clinical trials testing their efficacies when used to treat the disease.

Systemic pharmacological treatments for chronic plaque psoriasis: a network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Psoriasis is an immune-mediated disease for which some people have a genetic predisposition. The condition manifests in inflammatory effects on either the skin or joints, or both, and it has a major impact on quality of life. Although there is currently no cure for psoriasis, various treatment strategies allow sustained control of disease signs and symptoms. Several randomised controlled trials (RCTs) have compared the efficacy of the different systemic treatments in psoriasis against placebo. However, the relative benefit of these treatments remains unclear due to the limited number of trials comparing them directly head-to-head, which is why we chose to conduct a network meta-analysis. This is the baseline update of a Cochrane Review first published in 2017, in preparation for this Cochrane Review becoming a living systematic review.

OBJECTIVES

To compare the efficacy and safety of conventional systemic agents, small molecules, and biologics for people with moderate-to-severe psoriasis, and to provide a ranking of these treatments according to their efficacy and safety.

SEARCH METHODS

We updated our research using the following databases to January 2019: the Cochrane Skin Specialised Register, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, Embase, LILACS and the conference proceedings of a number of dermatology meetings. We also searched five trials registers and the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and European Medicines Agency (EMA) reports (until June 2019). We checked the reference lists of included and excluded studies for further references to relevant RCTs.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of systemic treatments in adults (over 18 years of age) with moderate-to-severe plaque psoriasis or psoriatic arthritis whose skin had been clinically diagnosed with moderate-to-severe psoriasis, at any stage of treatment, in comparison to placebo or another active agent. The primary outcomes of this review were: the proportion of participants who achieved clear or almost clear skin, that is, at least Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI) 90 at induction phase (from 8 to 24 weeks after the randomisation), and the proportion of participants with serious adverse effects (SAEs) at induction phase. We did not evaluate differences in specific adverse effects.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Several groups of two review authors independently undertook study selection, data extraction, 'Risk of bias' assessment, and analyses. We synthesised the data using pair-wise and network meta-analysis (NMA) to compare the treatments of interest and rank them according to their effectiveness (as measured by the PASI 90 score) and acceptability (the inverse of serious adverse effects). We assessed the certainty of the body of evidence from the NMA for the two primary outcomes, according to GRADE, as either very low, low, moderate, or high. We contacted study authors when data were unclear or missing.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 140 studies (31 new studies for the update) in our review (51,749 randomised participants, 68% men, mainly recruited from hospitals). The overall average age was 45 years; the overall mean PASI score at baseline was 20 (range: 9.5 to 39). Most of these studies were placebo-controlled (59%), 30% were head-to-head studies, and 11% were multi-armed studies with both an active comparator and a placebo. We have assessed a total of 19 treatments. In all, 117 trials were multicentric (two to 231 centres). All but two of the outcomes included in this review were limited to the induction phase (assessment from 8 to 24 weeks after randomisation). We assessed many studies (57/140) as being at high risk of bias; 42 were at an unclear risk, and 41 at low risk. Most studies (107/140) declared funding by a pharmaceutical company, and 22 studies did not report the source of funding. Network meta-analysis at class level showed that all of the interventions (conventional systemic agents, small molecules, and biological treatments) were significantly more effective than placebo in terms of reaching PASI 90. At class level, in terms of reaching PASI 90, the biologic treatments anti-IL17, anti-IL12/23, anti-IL23, and anti-TNF alpha were significantly more effective than the small molecules and the conventional systemic agents. At drug level, in terms of reaching PASI 90, infliximab, all of the anti-IL17 drugs (ixekizumab, secukinumab, bimekizumab and brodalumab) and the anti-IL23 drugs (risankizumab and guselkumab, but not tildrakizumab) were significantly more effective in reaching PASI 90 than ustekinumab and 3 anti-TNF alpha agents: adalimumab, certolizumab and etanercept. Adalimumab and ustekinumab were significantly more effective in reaching PASI 90 than certolizumab and etanercept. There was no significant difference between tofacitinib or apremilast and between two conventional drugs: ciclosporin and methotrexate. Network meta-analysis also showed that infliximab, ixekizumab, risankizumab, bimekizumab, guselkumab, secukinumab and brodalumab outperformed other drugs when compared to placebo in reaching PASI 90. The clinical effectiveness for these seven drugs was similar: infliximab (versus placebo): risk ratio (RR) 29.52, 95% confidence interval (CI) 19.94 to 43.70, Surface Under the Cumulative Ranking (SUCRA) = 88.5; moderate-certainty evidence; ixekizumab (versus placebo): RR 28.12, 95% CI 23.17 to 34.12, SUCRA = 88.3, moderate-certainty evidence; risankizumab (versus placebo): RR 27.67, 95% CI 22.86 to 33.49, SUCRA = 87.5, high-certainty evidence; bimekizumab (versus placebo): RR 58.64, 95% CI 3.72 to 923.86, SUCRA = 83.5, low-certainty evidence; guselkumab (versus placebo): RR 25.84, 95% CI 20.90 to 31.95; SUCRA = 81; moderate-certainty evidence; secukinumab (versus placebo): RR 23.97, 95% CI 20.03 to 28.70, SUCRA = 75.4; high-certainty evidence; and brodalumab (versus placebo): RR 21.96, 95% CI 18.17 to 26.53, SUCRA = 68.7; moderate-certainty evidence. Conservative interpretation is warranted for the results for bimekizumab (as well as tyrosine kinase 2 inhibitor, acitretin, ciclosporin, fumaric acid esters, and methotrexate), as these drugs, in the NMA, have been evaluated in few trials. We found no significant difference between any of the interventions and the placebo for the risk of SAEs. Nevertheless, the SAE analyses were based on a very low number of events with low to very low certainty for just under half of the treatment estimates in total, and moderate for the others. Thus, the results have to be viewed with caution and we cannot be sure of the ranking. For other efficacy outcomes (PASI 75 and Physician Global Assessment (PGA) 0/1) the results were very similar to the results for PASI 90. Information on quality of life was often poorly reported and was absent for several of the interventions.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Our review shows that compared to placebo, the biologics infliximab, ixekizumab, risankizumab, bimekizumab, guselkumab, secukinumab and brodalumab were the best choices for achieving PASI 90 in people with moderate-to-severe psoriasis on the basis of moderate- to high-certainty evidence (low-certainty evidence for bimekizumab). This NMA evidence is limited to induction therapy (outcomes were measured from 8 to 24 weeks after randomisation) and is not sufficient for evaluation of longer-term outcomes in this chronic disease. Moreover, we found low numbers of studies for some of the interventions, and the young age (mean age of 45 years) and high level of disease severity (PASI 20 at baseline) may not be typical of patients seen in daily clinical practice. Another major concern is that short-term trials provide scanty and sometimes poorly-reported safety data and thus do not provide useful evidence to create a reliable risk profile of treatments. Indeed, we found no significant difference in the assessed interventions and placebo in terms of SAEs, but the evidence for all the interventions was of very low to moderate quality. In order to provide long-term information on the safety of the treatments included in this review, it will also be necessary to evaluate non-randomised studies and postmarketing reports released from regulatory agencies. In terms of future research, randomised trials comparing directly active agents are necessary once high-quality evidence of benefit against placebo is established, including head-to-head trials amongst and between conventional systemic and small molecules, and between biological agents (anti-IL17 versus anti-IL23, anti-IL23 versus anti-IL12/23, anti-TNF alpha versus anti-IL12/23). Future trials should also undertake systematic subgroup analyses (e.g. assessing biological-naïve participants, baseline psoriasis severity, presence of psoriatic arthritis, etc.). Finally, outcome measure harmonisation is needed in psoriasis trials, and researchers should look at the medium- and long-term benefit and safety of the interventions and the comparative safety of different agents. Editorial note: This is a living systematic review. Living systematic reviews offer a new approach to review updating, in which the review is continually updated, incorporating relevant new evidence as it becomes available. Please refer to the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews for the current status of this review.

JAK Inhibition Differentially Affects NK Cell and ILC1 Homeostasis

Janus kinase (JAK) inhibitors are widely used in the treatment of multiple autoimmune and inflammatory diseases. Immunologic and transcriptomic profiling have revealed major alterations on natural killer (NK) cell homeostasis associated with JAK inhibitions, while information on other innate lymphoid cells (ILCs) is still lacking. Herein, we observed that, in mice, the homeostatic pool of liver ILC1 was less affected by JAK inhibitors compared to the pool of NK cells present in the liver, spleen and bone marrow. JAK inhibition had overlapping effects on the transcriptome of both subsets, mainly affecting genes regulating cell cycle and apoptosis. However, the differential impact of JAK inhibition was linked to the high levels of the antiapoptotic gene Bcl2 expressed by ILC1. Our findings provide mechanistic explanations for the effects of JAK inhibitors on NK cells and ILC1 which could be of major clinically relevance.

JAK/STAT signaling in regulation of innate lymphoid cells: The gods before the guardians

Immunity to pathogens is ensured through integration of early responses mediated by innate cells and late effector functions taking place after terminal differentiation of adaptive lymphocytes. In this context, innate lymphoid cells (ILCs) and adaptive T cells represent a clear example of how prototypical effector functions, including polarized expression of cytokines and/or cytotoxic activity, can occur with overlapping modalities but different timing. The ability of ILCs to provide early protection relies on their poised epigenetic state, which determines their propensity to quickly respond to cytokines and to activate specific patterns of signal-dependent transcription factors. Cytokines activating the Janus kinases (JAKs) and members of the signal transducer and activator of transcription (STAT) pathway are key regulators of lymphoid development and sustain the processes underlying T-cell activation and differentiation. The role of the JAK/STAT pathway has been recently extended to several aspects of ILC biology. Here, we discuss how JAK/STAT signals affect ILC development and effector functions in the context of immune responses, highlighting the molecular mechanisms involved in regulation of gene expression as well as the potential of targeting the JAK/STAT pathway in inflammatory pathologies.

Herpes Zoster in Patients Receiving JAK Inhibitors For Ulcerative Colitis: Mechanism, Epidemiology, Management, and Prevention

Increased risk of herpes zoster (HZ) has been observed in patients with immune-mediated diseases, including rheumatoid arthritis (RA), psoriasis (PsO), and inflammatory bowel disease; this risk can be further increased by the use of immunosuppressive therapy. One advancing modality of therapy for these diseases is Janus kinase (JAK) inhibition. Tofacitinib is an oral JAK inhibitor for the treatment of RA and psoriatic arthritis, which is currently under investigation for the treatment of ulcerative colitis (UC) and was previously investigated for psoriasis. JAK inhibitors have been associated with HZ events in patients across a number of indications. The pathogenesis underlying this risk of HZ is currently unknown. An increased risk of HZ has been noted in patients receiving immunosuppressive therapies for UC, including tofacitinib. In clinical trials, there was a dose-dependent risk of HZ (higher dose linked with increased risk). However, the majority of HZ cases are nonserious and noncomplicated, mild to moderate in severity, and manageable without permanent discontinuation of treatment. This review will discuss HZ risk in patients receiving JAK inhibitors, focusing on tofacitinib with respect to the potential mechanisms and epidemiology of HZ. Current guidelines for the prevention of HZ will be highlighted, and proposed management reviewed.

Immunologic effects of chronic administration of tofacitinib, a Janus kinase inhibitor, in cynomolgus monkeys and rats - Comparison of juvenile and adult responses

Tofacitinib, an oral Janus kinase (JAK) inhibitor for treatment of rheumatoid arthritis, targets JAK1, JAK3, and to a lesser extent JAK2 and TYK2. JAK1/3 inhibition impairs gamma common chain cytokine receptor signaling, important in lymphocyte development, homeostasis and function. Adult and juvenile cynomolgus monkey and rat studies were conducted and the impact of tofacitinib on immune parameters (lymphoid tissues and lymphocyte subsets) and function (T-dependent antibody response (TDAR), mitogen-induced T cell proliferation) assessed. Tofacitinib administration decreased circulating T cells and NK cells in juvenile and adult animals of both species. B cell decreases were observed only in rats. These changes and decreased lymphoid tissue cellularity are consistent with the expected pharmacology of tofacitinib. No differences were observed between juvenile and adult animals, either in terms of doses at which effects were observed or differential effects on immune endpoints. Lymphomas were observed in three adult monkeys. Tofacitinib impaired the primary TDAR in juvenile monkeys, although a recall response was generated. Complete or partial reversal of the effects on the immune system was observed.

Systemic pharmacological treatments for chronic plaque psoriasis: a network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Psoriasis is an immune-mediated disease for which some people have a genetic predisposition. The condition manifests in inflammatory effects on either the skin or joints, or both, and it has a major impact on quality of life. Although there is currently no cure for psoriasis, various treatment strategies allow sustained control of disease signs and symptoms. Several randomised controlled trials (RCTs) have compared the efficacy of the different systemic treatments in psoriasis against placebo. However, the relative benefit of these treatments remains unclear due to the limited number of trials comparing them directly head to head, which is why we chose to conduct a network meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVES

To compare the efficacy and safety of conventional systemic agents (acitretin, ciclosporin, fumaric acid esters, methotrexate), small molecules (apremilast, tofacitinib, ponesimod), anti-TNF alpha (etanercept, infliximab, adalimumab, certolizumab), anti-IL12/23 (ustekinumab), anti-IL17 (secukinumab, ixekizumab, brodalumab), anti-IL23 (guselkumab, tildrakizumab), and other biologics (alefacept, itolizumab) for patients with moderate to severe psoriasis and to provide a ranking of these treatments according to their efficacy and safety.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the following databases to December 2016: the Cochrane Skin Specialised Register, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, Embase, and LILACS. We also searched five trials registers and the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and European Medicines Agency (EMA) reports. We checked the reference lists of included and excluded studies for further references to relevant RCTs. We searched the trial results databases of a number of pharmaceutical companies and handsearched the conference proceedings of a number of dermatology meetings.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of systemic and biological treatments in adults (over 18 years of age) with moderate to severe plaque psoriasis or psoriatic arthritis whose skin had been clinically diagnosed with moderate to severe psoriasis, at any stage of treatment, in comparison to placebo or another active agent.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Three groups of two review authors independently undertook study selection, data extraction, 'Risk of bias' assessment, and analyses. We synthesised the data using pair-wise and network meta-analysis (NMA) to compare the treatments of interest and rank them according to their effectiveness (as measured by the Psoriasis Area and Severity Index score (PASI) 90) and acceptability (the inverse of serious adverse effects). We assessed the certainty of the body of evidence from the NMA for the two primary outcomes, according to GRADE; we evaluated evidence as either very low, low, moderate, or high. We contacted study authors when data were unclear or missing.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 109 studies in our review (39,882 randomised participants, 68% men, all recruited from a hospital). The overall average age was 44 years; the overall mean PASI score at baseline was 20 (range: 9.5 to 39). Most of these studies were placebo controlled (67%), 23% were head-to-head studies, and 10% were multi-armed studies with both an active comparator and placebo. We have assessed all treatments listed in the objectives (19 in total). In all, 86 trials were multicentric trials (two to 231 centres). All of the trials included in this review were limited to the induction phase (assessment at less than 24 weeks after randomisation); in fact, all trials included in the network meta-analysis were measured between 12 and 16 weeks after randomisation. We assessed the majority of studies (48/109) as being at high risk of bias; 38 were assessed as at an unclear risk, and 23, low risk.Network meta-analysis at class level showed that all of the interventions (conventional systemic agents, small molecules, and biological treatments) were significantly more effective than placebo in terms of reaching PASI 90.In terms of reaching PASI 90, the biologic treatments anti-IL17, anti-IL12/23, anti-IL23, and anti-TNF alpha were significantly more effective than the small molecules and the conventional systemic agents. Small molecules were associated with a higher chance of reaching PASI 90 compared to conventional systemic agents.At drug level, in terms of reaching PASI 90, all of the anti-IL17 agents and guselkumab (an anti-IL23 drug) were significantly more effective than the anti-TNF alpha agents infliximab, adalimumab, and etanercept, but not certolizumab. Ustekinumab was superior to etanercept. No clear difference was shown between infliximab, adalimumab, and etanercept. Only one trial assessed the efficacy of infliximab in this network; thus, these results have to be interpreted with caution. Tofacitinib was significantly superior to methotrexate, and no clear difference was shown between any of the other small molecules versus conventional treatments.Network meta-analysis also showed that ixekizumab, secukinumab, brodalumab, guselkumab, certolizumab, and ustekinumab outperformed other drugs when compared to placebo in terms of reaching PASI 90: the most effective drug was ixekizumab (risk ratio (RR) 32.45, 95% confidence interval (CI) 23.61 to 44.60; Surface Under the Cumulative Ranking (SUCRA) = 94.3; high-certainty evidence), followed by secukinumab (RR 26.55, 95% CI 20.32 to 34.69; SUCRA = 86.5; high-certainty evidence), brodalumab (RR 25.45, 95% CI 18.74 to 34.57; SUCRA = 84.3; moderate-certainty evidence), guselkumab (RR 21.03, 95% CI 14.56 to 30.38; SUCRA = 77; moderate-certainty evidence), certolizumab (RR 24.58, 95% CI 3.46 to 174.73; SUCRA = 75.7; moderate-certainty evidence), and ustekinumab (RR 19.91, 95% CI 15.11 to 26.23; SUCRA = 72.6; high-certainty evidence).We found no significant difference between all of the interventions and the placebo regarding the risk of serious adverse effects (SAEs): the relative ranking strongly suggested that methotrexate was associated with the best safety profile regarding all of the SAEs (RR 0.23, 95% CI 0.05 to 0.99; SUCRA = 90.7; moderate-certainty evidence), followed by ciclosporin (RR 0.23, 95% CI 0.01 to 5.10; SUCRA = 78.2; very low-certainty evidence), certolizumab (RR 0.49, 95% CI 0.10 to 2.36; SUCRA = 70.9; moderate-certainty evidence), infliximab (RR 0.56, 95% CI 0.10 to 3.00; SUCRA = 64.4; very low-certainty evidence), alefacept (RR 0.72, 95% CI 0.34 to 1.55; SUCRA = 62.6; low-certainty evidence), and fumaric acid esters (RR 0.77, 95% CI 0.30 to 1.99; SUCRA = 57.7; very low-certainty evidence). Major adverse cardiac events, serious infections, or malignancies were reported in both the placebo and intervention groups. Nevertheless, the SAEs analyses were based on a very low number of events with low to very low certainty for just over half of the treatment estimates in total, moderate for the others. Thus, the results have to be considered with caution.Considering both efficacy (PASI 90 outcome) and acceptability (SAEs outcome), highly effective treatments also had more SAEs compared to the other treatments, and ustekinumab, infliximab, and certolizumab appeared to have the better trade-off between efficacy and acceptability.Regarding the other efficacy outcomes, PASI 75 and Physician Global Assessment (PGA) 0/1, the results were very similar to the results for PASI 90.Information on quality of life was often poorly reported and was absent for a third of the interventions.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Our review shows that compared to placebo, the biologics ixekizumab, secukinumab, brodalumab, guselkumab, certolizumab, and ustekinumab are the best choices for achieving PASI 90 in people with moderate to severe psoriasis on the basis of moderate- to high-certainty evidence. At class level, the biologic treatments anti-IL17, anti-IL12/23, anti-IL23, and anti-TNF alpha were significantly more effective than the small molecules and the conventional systemic agents, too. This NMA evidence is limited to induction therapy (outcomes were measured between 12 to 16 weeks after randomisation) and is not sufficiently relevant for a chronic disease. Moreover, low numbers of studies were found for some of the interventions, and the young age (mean age of 44 years) and high level of disease severity (PASI 20 at baseline) may not be typical of patients seen in daily clinical practice.Another major concern is that short-term trials provide scanty and sometimes poorly reported safety data and thus do not provide useful evidence to create a reliable risk profile of treatments. Indeed, we found no significant difference in the assessed interventions and placebo in terms of SAEs. Methotrexate appeared to have the best safety profile, but as the evidence was of very low to moderate quality, we cannot be sure of the ranking. In order to provide long-term information on the safety of the treatments included in this review, it will be necessary to evaluate non-randomised studies and postmarketing reports released from regulatory agencies as well.In terms of future research, randomised trials comparing directly active agents are necessary once high-quality evidence of benefit against placebo is established, including head-to-head trials amongst and between conventional systemic and small molecules, and between biological agents (anti-IL17 versus anti-IL23, anti-IL23 versus anti-IL12/23, anti-TNF alpha versus anti-IL12/23). Future trials should also undertake systematic subgroup analyses (e.g. assessing biological-naïve patients, baseline psoriasis severity, presence of psoriatic arthritis, etc.). Finally, outcome measure harmonisation is needed in psoriasis trials, and researchers should look at the medium- and long-term benefit and safety of the interventions and the comparative safety of different agents.

Frontiers in Drug Research and Development for Inflammatory Bowel Disease

Inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) is idiopathic, lifelong, immune-mediated diseases, for which curative therapies are not yet available. In the last 15 years, the introduction of monoclonal antibodies targeting tumor necrosis factor-α, a cytokine playing a key role in bowel inflammation, has revolutionized treatment paradigms for IBD. Despite their proven long-term efficacy, however, many patients do not respond or progressively lose response to these drugs. Major advances of knowledge in immunology and pathophysiology of intestinal inflammatory processes have made possible the identification of new molecular targets for drugs, thus opening several new potential therapeutic opportunities for IBD. The abnormal response of intestinal immunity to unknown antigens leads to the activation of T helper lymphocytes and triggers the inflammatory cascade. Sphingosine 1-phosphate receptor agonists negatively modulate the egress of lymphocytes, inducted by antigen-presenting cells, from secondary lymphoid tissues to intestinal wall. Leukocyte adhesion inhibitors (both anti-integrin and anti-Mucosal Vascular Addressin Cell Adhesion Molecule 1) interfere with the tissue homing processes. Activated T helper lymphocytes increase the levels of pro-inflammatory cytokines, such as interleukin 12, 23, and 6, offering several potential pharmacological interventions. The Janus kinases, intracellular enzymes mediating the transduction of several cytokine signals, are other explored targets for treating immune-mediated diseases. Finally, the impact of modulating Smad7 pathway, which is responsible for the down-regulation of the immunosuppressive cytokine transforming growth factor-β signaling, is currently under investigation. The purpose of this review is to discuss the most promising molecules in late-stage clinical development, with a special emphasis on pharmacological properties.

Tofacitinib for the treatment of psoriasis

INTRODUCTION

The identification of a number of psoriasis-susceptibility genes and a better understanding of the pathogenesis of the intracellular metabolic pathways, have generated new perspectives on psoriasis treatment, in particular new compounds that inhibit certain intracellular proteins involved in the immune response. In contrast to biologic agents, these compounds block intracellular targets such as transcriptional factors or enzymes.

AREAS COVERED

Tofacitinib is a small molecule that acts as a reversible, competitive inhibitor of ATP in the ATP binding site of JAK proteins, determining their inactivation, thus prevents the downstream activation of the STAT proteins, which are then unable to up-regulate the pro-inflammatory genes implicated in psoriasis. The authors present an overview of Phases I - III clinical trials of tofacitinib for psoriasis based on peer-reviewed literature.

EXPERT OPINION

In clinical practice, it is important to assess the response of psoriasis to tofacitinib and identify possible clinical, genetic, and immune biomarkers to predict the response. Comorbidities associated with psoriasis, in particular metabolic syndrome and obesity, are also an important aspect of using tofacitinib in clinical practice. There are some evidences that a drug such as tofacitinib could be used to improve not only psoriasis, but also some of its important comorbidities.

Network pharmacology of JAK inhibitors

Small-molecule inhibitors of the Janus kinase family (JAKis) are clinically efficacious in multiple autoimmune diseases, albeit with increased risk of certain infections. Their precise mechanism of action is unclear, with JAKs being signaling hubs for several cytokines. We assessed the in vivo impact of pan- and isoform-specific JAKi in mice by immunologic and genomic profiling. Effects were broad across the immunogenomic network, with overlap between inhibitors. Natural killer (NK) cell and macrophage homeostasis were most immediately perturbed, with network-level analysis revealing a rewiring of coregulated modules of NK cell transcripts. The repression of IFN signature genes after repeated JAKi treatment continued even after drug clearance, with persistent changes in chromatin accessibility and phospho-STAT responsiveness to IFN. Thus, clinical use and future development of JAKi might need to balance effects on immunological networks, rather than expect that JAKis affect a particular cytokine response and be cued to long-lasting epigenomic modifications rather than by short-term pharmacokinetics.

Oral tofacitinib for the treatment of adults with moderate to severe chronic plaque psoriasis

New treatments for psoriasis have been developed based on increasing knowledge of the underlying pathogenesis of the disease. The development of very safe and highly effective biologics has revolutionized the treatment of moderate-to-severe psoriasis. Biologics are not perfect, however, as they are delivered parenterally, immunogenic, and costly. Small molecule agents, with molecular weights of less than 1 kDa, are being developed and hold the advantage of being administered orally. Tofacitinib is an oral Janus kinase inhibitor that has been developed to disrupt the aberrant JAK-STAT pathway that contributes to the pathogenesis of psoriasis. Phase II and Phase III clinical trial results for tofacitinib are encouraging, demonstrating substantial efficacy and satisfactory safety in the treatment of patients with moderate-to-severe chronic plaque psoriasis. An effective oral treatment without the organ toxicities of methotrexate and cyclosporine, tofacitinib is a promising alternative to biologics in the treatment of moderate-to-severe psoriasis.

Type I/II cytokines, JAKs, and new strategies for treating autoimmune diseases

Cytokines are major drivers of autoimmunity, and biologic agents targeting cytokines have revolutionized the treatment of immune-mediated diseases. Despite the effectiveness of these drugs, they do not induce complete remission in all patients, prompting the development of alternative strategies - including targeting of intracellular signal transduction pathways downstream of cytokines. Many cytokines that bind type I and type II cytokine receptors are critical regulators of immune-mediated diseases and employ the Janus kinase (JAK) and signal transducer and activator of transcription (STAT) pathway to exert their effect. Pharmacological inhibition of JAKs blocks the actions of type I/II cytokines, and within the past 3 years therapeutic JAK inhibitors, or Jakinibs, have become available to rheumatologists. Jakinibs have proven effective for the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis and other inflammatory diseases. Adverse effects of these agents are largely related to their mode of action and include infections and hyperlipidemia. Jakinibs are currently being investigated for a number of new indications, and second-generation selective Jakinibs are being developed and tested. Targeting STATs could be a future avenue for the treatment of rheumatologic diseases, although substantial challenges remain. Nonetheless, the ability to therapeutically target intracellular signalling pathways has already created a new paradigm for the treatment of rheumatologic disease.