Publications

Goldman, et al. conducted a pharmacovigilance study to evaluate the cardiovascular safety of JAK inhibitors in RA patients. The study demonstrated an increase in the reporting of VTE, stroke, and ischemic heart disease in patients treated with JAK inhibitor compared to bDMARDs, especially within the first year of treatment. This suggests a class effect of JAK inhibitors on cardiovascular risk, emphasising the need for ongoing surveillance and proactive cardiovascular risk management.

Crude gastrointestinal perforation (GIP) incidence rate was higher for the JAKi group compared with those receiving adalimumab, however rates of GIP did not differ between JAKi and adalimumab groups in the weighted and adjusted model. Hoisnard et al compared the risk of GIP in patients initiating treatment with JAKis or adalimumab among real-world patients with rheumatic disease.

Risk of composite CV endpoints combining all ischaemic CV events and heart failure were similar for individual and combined TOF doses versus TNFi. The totality of CV risk (MACE-8 plus VTE) was higher with TOF 10mg twice daily versus TNFi. Buch et al conducted a post-hoc analysis on the ORAL Surveillance trial to assess risk across extended MACE endpoints in RA patients treated with either TOF 5mg, TOF 10mg, or TNFi.

This study by Goswami, et al. found that tofacitinib showed comparable effectiveness with adalimumab in axSpA patients at the sixth month.

Unadjusted time to all-cause discontinuation was significantly longer with baricitinib treatment versus TNFi (estimated median prescription survival time of 704 days versus 448 days; log-rank P<0.01). This difference increased when only comparing differences for b/tsDMARD-naïve patients treated with baricitinib versus tofacitinib.

This post hoc analysis of ORAL Surveillance showed that incidence of venous thromboembolism (VTE) events was higher in patients with RA treated with tofacitinib (10>5mg BID) versus TNFi. Across treatments, VTE risk factors (age, BMI, and VTE history) were aligned with previous studies in the general RA population.

This study by Cho, et al. did not find any significant differences in remission rates in South Korean patients with RA that were treated with tofacitinib versus TNFi in a real-world setting. Remission rates were significantly higher for patients naïve to both JAKi and bDMARDs treated with tofacitinib versus TNFi.

The observed benefit:risk ratio strongly favours JAKi use in the majority of patients, and HCPs should consider and adhere to guidance on high-risk patients where applicable. Szekanecz et al summarised the safety and efficacy of approved JAKis tofacitinib, baricitinib, upadacitinib, and filgotinib to aid in clinical decision making.

Tofacitinib treatment resulted in a significant simultaneous improvement of both metabolic and inflammatory parameters in RA patients with T2D. Due to increasing evidence for a link between RA, insulin resistance and T2D Di Muzio et al. investigated if consecutively recruited RA patients on tofacitinib therapy showed improvement in HOMA2-IR values over 6 months.