Comparative risk of infections between JAK inhibitors versus TNF inhibitors among patients with rheumatoid arthritis: a cohort study

Biologics Versus JAK Inhibitors. Part II: Risk of Infections. A Narrative Review

INTRODUCTION

The risk of infections associated with biological drugs (BD) and Janus kinase inhibitors (JAKi) has been extensively explored in the literature. However, there is a dearth of studies that evaluate both pharmacological groups together and, furthermore, compare them. Here, we review the risk of infections associated with BD and JAKi used in dermatology.

METHODS

A narrative review was performed. All relevant articles evaluating the risk of infection and opportunistic infections with BD and JAKi between January 2010 and February 2024 were selected.

RESULTS

Overall, the incidence of infections, serious infections, and opportunistic infections associated with BD and JAKi is low, but higher than in the general population. JAKi approved for dermatological disorders (abrocitinib, baricitinib, deucravacitinib, upadacitinib, ritlecitinib, and topical ruxolitinib) have been shown to be safe, and present a low rate of infections. We found an elevated risk, especially with anti-tumor necrosis factor (anti-TNF) agents, rituximab, and JAKi (particularly tofacitinib at high doses). Specific associations with infections include tuberculosis and tuberculosis reactivation with anti-TNF agents and tocilizumab; candidiasis with anti-interleukin (IL) 17 agents; hepatitis B virus reactivation with rituximab, anti-TNF, and JAKi; and herpes simplex and herpes zoster infections with JAKi (especially tofacitinib and upadacitinib at high doses). The incidence of infections with ustekinumab and anti-IL-23 was very low. Anti-IL-1, nemolizumab, tralokinumab, and omalizumab were not associated with an increased risk of infections. Dupilumab could decrease the incidence of cutaneous infections.

CONCLUSIONS

Anti-TNF agents, rituximab, and JAKi (particularly tofacitinib) can increase the risk of infections. Close monitoring of patients undergoing these therapies is recommended. Prospective studies with long-term follow-up are needed to comparatively evaluate the risks of infection deriving from treatment with BD and JAKi.

Comparison of active tuberculosis occurrence associated with Janus kinase inhibitors and biological DMARDs in rheumatoid arthritis

OBJECTIVES

This study aimed to evaluate the risk of tuberculosis associated with the use of Janus kinase (JAK) inhibitors or biological disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (bDMARDs) in patients diagnosed with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) in South Korea.

METHODS

In this nationwide matched-cohort study, we retrospectively identified adult patients with new-onset RA from the National Health Insurance Service database who were prescribed bDMARDs or JAK inhibitors and recently underwent latent tuberculosis infection (LTBI) screening during 2012‒2021, and followed them up until the end of 2022 for the development of active tuberculosis. HRs were estimated using Cox proportional hazards regression in a propensity score-matched cohort.

RESULTS

Among 16 760 matched patients with RA (3352 JAK inhibitor users and 13 408 bDMARD users), 18.8% received tuberculosis preventive therapy for LTBI. Overall, JAK inhibitor users had a significantly lower risk of tuberculosis than bDMARD users (HR (95% CI)=0.37 (0.22 to 0.62)). Among the patients treated for LTBI, patients with low treatment adherence had a significantly higher risk than those without LTBI (HR (95% CI)=2.78 (1.74 to 4.44)). Patients without LTBI and using JAK inhibitors had a significantly lower risk of tuberculosis across all ages and sexes compared with bDMARD users.

CONCLUSION

Patients with RA using JAK inhibitors have a significantly lower risk of active tuberculosis than bDMARD users in South Korea; however, patients with RA having LTBI are equally at risk regardless of the treatment received (JAK inhibitor vs bDMARD). Therefore, vigilant tuberculosis monitoring, especially in patients with low adherence to tuberculosis preventive therapy, is essential.

Time to talk to adults with rheumatic diseases about herpes zoster vaccination

The 2019 European Alliance of Associations for Rheumatology (EULAR) recommendations on herpes zoster vaccination for adult patients with rheumatic immune-mediated inflammatory diseases stated that these patients are at increased risk of herpes zoster compared with the general population. However, these recommendations lack clarity and specificity and are cautiously phrased, which might cause physicians to underestimate the importance of herpes zoster vaccination for these patients, potentially resulting in suboptimal protection. Since the formulation of the 2019 EULAR guidelines, new data on herpes zoster in patients with immune-mediated inflammatory diseases have been published. Moreover, a recombinant herpes zoster vaccine (Shingrix) has become available that can be given to these patients in a more accessible manner than the original live-attenuated vaccine (Zostavax). Here, we evaluate existing evidence on risk factors for herpes zoster and the safety and efficacy of the recombinant vaccine in patients with rheumatic immune-mediated inflammatory diseases and discuss the necessity of herpes zoster vaccination for these patients.

Selective JAK-Inhibitors in Spondyloarthritis

As our research interest and knowledge increases in the field of Spondyloarthritis, new aspects also emerge as regards to their therapeutic approach. JAK inhibitors (JAKi) are a relatively new treatment option, aiming molecules in the JAK-STAT pathway, which has a leading role in the pathophysiology of both Psoriatic Arthritis and Axial Spondyloarthritis. JAKi exhibit different selectivity towards the four different members of the JAK family (namely JAK1, JAK2, JAK3, and TYK2), possibly reflecting different efficacy and safety profile. Although knowledge is more consolidated for rheumatoid arthritis in which JAKi are being used for more than 10 years, data are still accumulating for PsA/SpA. In this review we aim to present and assess current knowledge about the efficacy of JAKi (with a focus on selective JAKi) in the treatment of patients with SpA and evaluate their safety profile as some concerns may arise around this therapeutic option.