Publications

Heutz et al. found that patients requiring bDMARDs rarely achieved DMARD-free remission, while 15–37% of those on non-bDMARDs reached this milestone, underscoring significant differences based on treatment type. This suggests the EULAR recommendation against DMARD cessation may be too generalised.

Delcourt et al. conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis revealing that both pharmacological (DMARDs) and non-pharmacological interventions reduce fatigue in axSpA patients over short and medium terms, with greater efficacy seen when combined.

Fleischmann et al. evaluated the long-term efficacy and safety of upadacitinib in rheumatoid arthritis patients with inadequate response or intolerance to bDMARDs over five years. The study demonstrated that upadacitinib 15 mg and 30 mg were effective in maintaining disease control, with >75% of patients achieving CDAI LDA by week 260. The safety profile remained consistent with no new issues identified.

Adami et al. conducted a retrospective analysis to evaluate the GC sparing effects of JAKi versus bDMARDs in rheumatoid arthritis patients. They found that JAKi therapy was associated with a significant reduction in GC dose compared with bDMARDs. This suggests that JAKi could be more effective in reducing long-term GC exposure in RA patients.

Patients classified as having a high neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR-High) who received filgotinib 200mg + MTX/csDMARDs exhibited consistently better responses after 12 weeks across clinical trials, clinical endpoints, and PROs, compared with NLR-Low patients. Taylor et al. analysed data from the 3 FINCH trials to investigate the potential association of baseline NLR with improved clinical response to filgotinib in MTX-naïve or MTX-experienced RA populations.

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.

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 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.

Kwon, et al. found that adalimumab exposure significantly reduced risk of incident and recurrent acute anterior uveitis (AAU) versus etanercept exposure and bDMARD non-exposure. Furthermore, exposure to etanercept significantly increased risk of incident and recurrent AAU versus bDMARD non-exposure.