Comparison of the efficacy and safety of tofacitinib and peficitinib in patients with active rheumatoid arthritis: A Bayesian network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

OBJECTIVES

The relative efficacy and safety of tofacitinib and peficitinib were assessed in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) with an inadequate response to disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs).

METHOD

We performed a Bayesian network meta-analysis to combine direct and indirect evidence from randomized controlled trials (RCTs) to examine the efficacy and safety of tofacitinib and peficitinib in combination with DMARDs in patients with an inadequate response to DMARDs.

RESULTS

Nine RCTs, including 3836 patients, met the inclusion criteria. Fifteen pairwise comparisons were performed, including six direct comparisons of seven interventions. Tofacitinib 10 mg+methotrexate (MTX) and peficitinib 150 mg+MTX were among the most effective treatments for patients with active RA with an inadequate DMARD response. The efficacy of tofacitinib 10 mg+MTX, peficitinib 150 mg+MTX or tofacitinib 5 mg+MTX tended to be higher than that of adalimumab+MTX. The ranking probability based on the surface under the cumulative ranking curve indicated that tofacitinib 10 mg+MTX had the greatest probability of being the best treatment to achieve the American College of Rheumatology 20 response rate, followed by peficitinib 150 mg+MTX, tofacitinib 5 mg+MTX, adalimumab+MTX, peficitinib 100 mg+MTX, and placebo+MTX. No significant differences were observed in the incidence of serious adverse events after treatment with tofacitinib+MTX, peficitinib+MTX, adalimumab+MTX, or placebo+MTX.

CONCLUSIONS

In patients with RA with an inadequate response to DMARDs, tofacitinib 10 mg+MTX and peficitinib 150 mg+MTX were the most efficacious interventions and were not associated with a significant risk of serious adverse events.

Comparison of the efficacy and safety of tofacitinib and baricitinib in patients with active rheumatoid arthritis: a Bayesian network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

OBJECTIVES

The relative efficacy and safety of tofacitinib and baricitinib were assessed in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) with an inadequate response to disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs (DMARDs) or biologics.

METHODS

We performed a Bayesian network meta-analysis to combine direct and indirect evidence from randomized controlled trials (RCTs) to examine the efficacy and safety of tofacitinib and baricitinib in combination with DMARDs in RA patients with an inadequate DMARD or biologic response.

RESULTS

Twelve RCTs including 5883 patients met the inclusion criteria. There were 15 pairwise comparisons including 10 direct comparisons of 6 interventions. Tofacitinib 10 mg + methotrexate (MTX) and baricitinib 4 mg + MTX were among the most effective treatments for active RA with an inadequate DMARD or biologic response, followed by baricitinib 2 mg + MTX, tofacitinib 5 mg + MTX, and adalimumab + MTX. The ranking probability based on the surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA) indicated that tofacitinib 10 mg + MTX had the highest probability of being the best treatment to achieve the ACR20 response rate (SUCRA = 0.865), followed by baricitinib 4 mg + MTX (SUCRA = 0.774), baricitinib 2 mg + MTX (SUCRA = 0.552), tofacitinib 5 mg + MTX (SUCRA = 0.512), adalimumab + MTX (SUCRA = 0.297), and placebo + MTX (SUCRA <0.001). No significant differences were observed in the incidence of serious adverse events after treatment with tofacitinib + MTX, baricitinib + MTX, adalimumab + MTX, or placebo + MTX.

CONCLUSIONS

In RA patients with an inadequate response to DMARDs or biologics, tofacitinib 10 mg + MTX and baricitinib 4 mg + MTX were the most efficacious interventions and were not associated with a significant risk of serious adverse events.

Comparison of the efficacy and safety of tofacitinib and upadacitinib in patients with active rheumatoid arthritis: A Bayesian network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

OBJECTIVES

The relative efficacy and safety of tofacitinib and upadacitinib were assessed in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) with an inadequate response to conventional synthetic (cs) or biologic (b) disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs (DMARDs).

METHOD

We performed a Bayesian network meta-analysis to combine direct and indirect evidence from randomized controlled trials (RCTs) to examine the efficacy and safety of tofacitinib and upadacitinib in combination with methotrexate (MTX) in RA patients with an inadequate cs- or b-DMARD response.

RESULTS

Nine RCTs including 5794 patients met the inclusion criteria. There were 15 pairwise comparisons including 10 direct comparisons of 6 interventions. Upadacitinib 15 mg + MTX and upadacitinib 30 mg + MTX were among the most effective treatments for active RA with an inadequate cs- or b-DMARD response, followed by tofacitinib 10 mg + MTX, tofacitinib 5 mg + MTX, and adalimumab + MTX. Ranking probability based on the surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA) indicated that upadacitinib 15 mg + MTX and upadacitinib 30 mg + MTX had the highest probability of being the best treatment in terms of the American College of Rheumatology 20 response rate (SUCRA = 0.820, 0.762), followed by tofacitinib 10 mg + MTX (SUCRA = 0.623), tofacitinib 5 mg + MTX (SUCRA = 0.424), adalimumab + MTX (SUCRA = 0.371), and placebo + MTX (SUCRA = 0.001). No significant differences were observed in the incidence of serious adverse events after treatment with tofacitinib + MTX, upadacitinib + MTX, adalimumab + MTX, or placebo + MTX.

CONCLUSIONS

In RA patients with an inadequate response to cs- or b-DMARDs, upadacitinib 15 mg + MTX and upadacitinib 30 mg + MTX were the most efficacious interventions and were not associated with significant risks of serious adverse events.