Introduction: Peficitinib, a Janus kinase (JAK) inhibitor, is approved for clinical use in Japan, Korea, and Taiwan, but head-to-head comparisons versus other JAK inhibitors are lacking. We indirectly compared peficitinib, tofacitinib, and baricitinib for rheumatoid arthritis treatment. Methods: We searched MEDLINE, Embase, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, ClinicalTrials.gov, and congress archives up until February 12, 2019, for randomized controlled trials of peficitinib, tofacitinib, and baricitinib. Efficacy (American College of Rheumatology responses, disease activity scores, modified total Sharp score, Simplified Disease Activity Index [SDAI]) and safety outcomes were compared using a Bayesian network meta-analysis. The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) consensus was followed for reporting results. A network meta-regression assessed the impact on outcomes of proportions of patients receiving concomitant methotrexate or of Asian ethnicity. Results: The network meta-analysis included 21 randomized controlled trials. At 12 weeks, all evaluable efficacy outcomes were comparable or improved with peficitinib 150 mg and 100 mg once daily, versus baricitinib 2 and 4 mg once daily and tofacitinib 5 mg twice daily. At 24 weeks, efficacy outcomes were comparable or improved for each peficitinib dose versus baricitinib and tofacitinib. Risk of adverse events and serious adverse events at 12 weeks were similar with peficitinib 100 and 150 mg versus baricitinib and tofacitinib. The proportion of patients receiving concomitant methotrexate had no effect on any outcome analyzed, but Asian ethnicity had a positive effect on multiple efficacy outcomes. Conclusions: Peficitinib had comparable efficacy versus tofacitinib and baricitinib for reduction in disease activity as measured by SDAI, and for reduction in progression of joint damage as measured radiographically. No notable differences in safety outcomes were observed. Further studies are required to better characterize the impact of ethnicity on the efficacy of JAK inhibitors.
Objective: To evaluate the comparative efficacy and safety of Janus kinase (JAK) inhibitors and biological disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (bDMARDs) in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) and an inadequate response to at least one disease-modifying antirheumatic drug (DMARD). Methods: PubMed, Embase, Cochrane library and ClinicalTrials.gov were searched for relevant randomized controlled trials (RCTs) from inception to April 2020. The active drugs included three JAK inhibitors and eight bDMARDs while the control drugs included placebo or conventional synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (csDMARDs). Outcomes include American College of Rheumatology 20% response (ACR20), Disease Activity Score in 28 joints (DAS28), Health Assessment Questionnaire–Disability Index (HAQ-DI) and discontinuations for adverse events (AEs). We estimated summary odds ratios (ORs) and weighted mean differences (WMDs) using network meta-analysis with random effects. Results: Eighty-eight RCTs with 31,566 patients were included. All JAK inhibitors and bDMARDs were more effective than placebo in ACR20 (ORs ranging between 3.05 and 5.61), DAS28 (WMDs ranging between −1.91 and −0.80) and HAQ-DI (WMDs ranging between −0.34 and −0.21). Tocilizumab, certolizumab pegol and upadacitinib showed relatively good efficacy in these three outcomes according to their relative ranking. Notably, tocilizumab was more effective than other active drugs in DAS28 (WMDs ranging between −1.11 and −0.49). Compared with the lower recommended doses, increasing the doses of JAK inhibitors (baricitinib 4 mg versus 2 mg, tofacitinib 10 mg versus 5 mg and upadacitinib 30 mg versus 15 mg) cannot provide significant additional benefits. In terms of discontinuations for AEs, all active drugs showed no significant difference compared with placebo except certolizumab pegol [OR 1.65, 95% credible interval (CrI) 1.06–2.61] and rituximab (3.17, 1.11–10.80). Conclusions: Tocilizumab, certolizumab pegol and upadacitinib may have relatively good efficacy in patients with RA after treatment failure with csDMARDs. RA patients taking a JAK inhibitor may have a preference for a lower recommended dose.
OBJECTIVES: Review of efficacy and safety of Janus kinase (JAK) inhibition in immune-mediated inflammatory diseases (IMIDs).
METHODS: A systematic literature research (SLR) of all publications on JAK inhibitors (JAKi) treatment published until March 2019 using MEDLINE, EMBASE and the Cochrane Library. Efficacy and safety were assessed in randomised controlled trials (RCTs), integrating long-term extension periods additionally for safety evaluation.
RESULTS: 3454 abstracts were screened with 85 included in the final analysis (efficacy and RCT safety: n=72; safety only: n=13). Efficacy of RCTs investigating tofacitinib (TOFA, n=27), baricitinib (BARI, n=9), upadacitinib (UPA, n=14), filgotinib (FILGO, n=7), decernotinib (DEC, n=3) and peficitinib (PEF, n=7) was evaluated. Six head-to-head trials comparing JAKi with tumour necrosis factor inhibitors (TNFi) were included. Efficacy of JAKi was shown in rheumatoid arthritis (RA) for all agents, psoriatic arthritis (TOFA, FILGO), ankylosing spondylitis (TOFA, FILGO), systemic lupus erythematosus (BARI), chronic plaque psoriasis (TOFA, BARI, PEF), ulcerative colitis (TOFA, UPA), Crohn's disease (UPA, FILGO) and atopic dermatitis (TOFA, BARI, UPA). Safety analysis of 72 RCTs, one cohort study and 12 articles on long-term extension studies showed increased risks for infections, especially herpes zoster, serious infections and numerically higher rates of venous thromboembolic events. No increased malignancy rates or major adverse cardiac events were observed.
CONCLUSION: JAKi provide good efficacy compared to placebo (and to TNFi in RA and Pso) across various IMIDs with an acceptable safety profile. This SLR informed the task force on points to consider for the treatment of IMIDs with JAKi with the available evidence.
BACKGROUND & AIMS: Inhibitors of Janus kinases (JAKs) are being developed for treatment of inflammatory bowel diseases and other immune-mediated diseases. Tofacitinib is effective in treatment of ulcerative colitis, but there are safety concerns. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to investigate the safety profile of tofacitinib, upadacitinib, filgotinib, and baricitinib in patients with rheumatoid arthritis, inflammatory bowel diseases, psoriasis, or ankylosing spondylitis.
METHODS: We searched the MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials from January 1, 1990 through July 1, 2019. We performed a manual review of conference databases from 2012 through 2018. The primary outcome was incidence rates of adverse events (AEs) and serious AEs. We also estimated incidence rates of serious infections, herpes zoster infection, non-melanoma skin cancer, other malignancies, major cardiovascular events, venous thromboembolism, and mortality. We performed a meta-analysis, which included controlled studies, to assess the relative risk of these events.
RESULTS: We identified 973 studies; of these 82 were included in the final analysis, comprising 66159 patients with immune-mediated diseases who were exposed to a JAK inhibitor. Two-thirds of the included studies were randomized controlled trials. The incidence rate of AEs was 42.65 per 100 person-years and of and serious AEs was 9.88 per 100 person-years. Incidence rates of serious infections, herpes zoster infection, malignancy, and major cardiovascular events were 2.81 per 100 person-years, 2.67 per 100 person-years, 0.89 per 100 person-years, and 0.48 per 100 person-years, respectively. Mortality was not increased in patients treated with JAK inhibitors compared to patients given placebo or active comparator (relative risk 0.72; 95% CI, 0.40-1.28). The meta-analysis showed a significant increase in risk of herpes zoster infection among patients who received JAK inhibitors (relative risk 1.57; 95% CI, 1.04-2.37).
CONCLUSIONS: In a systematic review and meta-analysis, we found an increased risk of herpes zoster infection among patients with immune-mediated diseases treated with JAK inhibitors. All other AEs were not increased among patients treated with JAK inhibitors.
Background: Objectives: Objetive: To assess the incidence of Herpes Zoster (HZ) infection in patients with Rheumatoid Arthritis (RA) treated with JAKi. Methods: Method: We conducted a systematic literature review searching in Medline, Embase and Cochrane. The final date was set on December 31, 2019, and only articles in English were included. See the following terms: rheumatoid arthritis, herpes zoster and the different JAK kinase inhibitors studied: tofacitinib, baricitinib, upadacitinib, filgotinib, peficitinib and decernotinib. Conference abstract, case series and clinical practice records were excluded. Only phase II and phase III clinical trials were included, as well as extension studies, with the following criteria:-Patients diagnosed with RA according to the American College of Rheumatology Criteria and /or EULAR criteria.-Drugs evaluated: tofacitinib, baricitinib, upadacitinib, filgotinib, peficitinib or decernotinib, all of them compared with placebo.-Safety data on HZ infection. The search included a total of 2521 publications of which 504 were duplicated, leaving 2017. After screening by title and abstract 1874 studies that did not meet the criteria were eliminated and there were 143 fully reviewed. At the end 42 papers were included in the review. The main objective of our study was the number of HZ infections depending on the doses of the drug administered, as well as with placebo. Data collected from each study was: Author and year of publication of the study, study design and population included, number of patients treated, treatment administered and percentage of patients treated for HZ in each treatment arm. Results: Results: In clinical trials of these drugs, a greater number of opportunistic infections due to varicella zoster virus have been identified compared to placebo, which leads to the appearance of HZ. The role of different JAKs in the immune response may suggest differences in safety profiles between these drugs, which could have clinical implications. Therefore, we analyze the results separately for each JAKi. Tofacitinib Of the 14 selected works, 4 are phase II, 8 phase III and 2 extension studies. We observe that the incidence of HZ ranges between 1% and 11%, the latter being the case of the Wollenhaupt extension study with a data collection period of nine and a half years. It is remarkable that in some of the studies included in this review there was no case of HZ and in others this information was not even collected. Baricitinib Two phase II studies, 6 phase III studies and one extension study were analyzed, with an incidence of HZ between 1% and 9%, data similar to those obtained with tofacitinib. Upadacitinib. An incidence of HZ between 1% and 4% was observed according to the 6 clinical trials (two phase II studies and four phase III studies) published as clinical product development. Filgotinib Data similar to upadacitinib, with frequencies between 1% and 4% of HZ according to the studies (three phase II studies and one phase III study). Peficitinib The incidence of HZ ranged between 4% and 7.5% (three phase II studies, two phase III studies, and one extension study). Decernotinib There are only published three phase II trials, of short duration and with only four cases collected from HZ. Conclusion: Conclusions: Opportunistic HZ infection have been reported between 1% and 11% in JAKi clinical trials. The results of the included studies seem to suggest that selective JAK1 inhibitors (Upadacitinib and Filgotinib) develop HZ as a treatment complication less frequently than other JAKi, but more studies are needed to support this conclusion.
OBJECTIVES: To investigate the effect of Janus kinase inhibitors (Jakinibs) on cardiovascular risk in adult patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) via a meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials (RCTs).
METHODS: PubMed, Embase and Cochrane library were thoroughly searched for RCTs reporting safety issues in patients with RA receiving Jakinibs, from inception to October 2018. The primary and secondary outcomes were all cardiovascular events (CVEs) and major adverse cardiovascular events (MACEs)/venous thromboembolism events (VTEs). OR and 95% CI were calculated using the Mantel-Haenszel fixed-effect method.
RESULTS: 26 RCTs randomising 11 799 patients were included. No significant difference was observed regarding all CVEs risk following Jakinibs usage in general (OR 1.04 (0.61 to 1.76), p = 0.89), tofacitinib (OR 0.63 (0.26 to 1.54), p = 0.31), baricitinib (OR 1.21 (0.51 to 2.83), p = 0.66), upadacitinib (OR 3.29 (0.59 to 18.44), p = 0.18), peficitinib (OR 0.43 (0.07 to 2.54), p = 0.35) or decernotinib (OR 1.12 (0.13 to 10.11), p = 0.92). Likewise, there was no significant difference for Jakinibs treatment overall regarding occurrence of MACEs (OR 0.80 (0.36 to 1.75), p = 0.57) or VTEs (OR 1.16 (0.48 to 2.81), p = 0.74). Dose-dependent impact of Jakinibs on the risks of all CVEs, MACEs and VTEs was not observed in tofacitinib (5 mg vs 10 mg), upadacitinib (15 mg vs 30 mg), whereas baricitinib at 2 mg was found to be safer than 4 mg in all CVEs incidence (OR 0.19 (0.04 to 0.88), p = 0.03).
CONCLUSION: The existing evidence from RCTs indicated no significant change in cardiovascular risk for Jakinib-treated patients with RA in a short-term perspective, but postmarketing data are sorely needed to ascertain their cardiovascular safety, especially at the higher dose, due to increased risk of thromboembolism events for both tofacitinib and baricitinib at higher dosage.
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.
OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the risk of serious infection (SI) and herpes zoster (HZ) in rheumatoid arthritis patients receiving JAK inhibitors.
METHODS: We conducted a systematic literature review and meta-analysis of phase II and III randomized controlled trials of tofacitinib (5 mg bid), baricitinib (4 mg od) and upadacitinib (15 mg od). Patient-exposure years were calculated. A per-protocol analysis was applied, incorporating follow-up time from patients randomized to placebo who cross into the treatment arm. Pooled incidence rates per 100 person-years of SI and HZ were calculated. Incidence rate ratios (IRRs) of drug vs placebo were compared using a meta-synthesis approach.
RESULTS: Twenty-one studies were included in the meta-analysis; 11 tofacitinib (5888 patients), six baricitinib (3520 patients) and four upadacitinib studies (1736 patients). For SI, the incidence rates were 1.97 (95% CI: 1.41, 2.68), 3.16 (95% CI: 2.07, 4.63) and 3.02 (95% CI: 0.98, 7.04), respectively. The IRRs comparing treatment arm to placebo were statistically non-significant: 1.22 (95% CI: 0.60, 2.45), 0.80 (95% CI: 0.46, 1.38) and 1.14 (95% CI: 0.24, 5.43), respectively. For HZ, the incidence rates were 2.51 (95% CI: 1.87, 3.30), 3.16 (95% CI: 2.07, 4.63) and 2.41 (95% CI: 0.66, 6.18), respectively. The IRR of HZ comparing baricitinib with placebo was 2.86 (95% CI: 1.26, 6.50). Non-significant IRRs were seen with tofacitinib and upadacitinib: 1.38 (95% CI: 0.66, 2.88) and 0.78 (95% CI: 0.19, 3.22), respectively. Indicator opportunistic infections excluding HZ were too rare to provide meaningful incidence rates.
CONCLUSION: The absolute SI rates were low. However across the JAK inhibitors, the incidence of HZ is higher than expected for the population (3.23 per 100 patient-years). While the risk was numerically greatest with baricitinib, indirect comparisons between the drugs did not demonstrate any significant difference in risk.
SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION NUMBER: Prospero 2017 CRD4201707879.
