Wieczorek et al. present the first evidence supporting the use of a dual JAK and ROCK inhibitor as a potential treatment option for patients with RA who have inadequate response to MTX. Wieczorek et al. conducted a randomised, Phase 2 study of CPL’116 in patients with RA with inadequate response to MTX, to evaluate dose-dependent effects on disease control and pharmacokinetics, and its effect on laboratory abnormalities among other safety assessments.

Schaefer et al. showed that treatment with JAKis (predominantly BARI and TOF) was associated with an increased HR of malignancies compared to treatment with bDMARDs in the overall study cohort, consistent with results from the ORAL surveillance trial. To better understand the complex role of JAKis in cancer development in RA patients, Schaefer et al. estimated the effects of JAKis compared to bDMARDs on the risk of malignancy (excluding NMSC) in patients with RA.

The SELECT-MONOTHERAPY study evaluated the safety and efficacy of UPA monotherapy through 260 weeks of treatment, in patients with RA who had prior inadequate response to MTX. No new safety signals were observed with long-term exposure to UPA, and results were consistent with prior findings and the established safety profile of UPA across indications. These data support the potential of UPA as a treatment option for patients with moderate to severe active RA who have responded inadequately to MTX.

Silvagni et al. aimed to comparatively assess the risk of cardiovascular events (CVE) in RA patients treated with JAKis or TNFis and to explore the interactions with patient profiles [including age, baseline cardio-cerebrovascular (CV) risk, and frailty, which is a state of decreased physiological reserve, assessed using a validated frailty index for Administrative Heathcare Databases (AHD)]. This AHD-based study highlighted no significantly increased risk of CVEs or MACEs for JAKis with respect to TNFis. The CV risk remains mainly driven by the patient profiles. The frailty, in parallel with baseline CV risk, emerged as an important determinant of CVEs, MACEs, and thromboembolic events (TEs). Frailty and baseline CV risk are key predictors of CVEs, MACEs, and TEs, and should be considered in both clinical assessment and trial design for RA patients on ts/b-DMARDs.

Poddubnyy et al. identified no apparent increase in the risk of developing extramusculoskeletal manifestations (EMMs) in patients with PsA, r-axSpA, and nr-axSpA receiving 15mg UPA in the SELECT trials. Majority of patients did not report a history of EMMs at baseline, regardless of disease indication or study treatment.

Haddad et al. used real-world data from Israel’s largest health maintenance organisation to investigate predictors and patterns of biologic therapy switching in PsA, reporting that nearly half of biologic users switched therapy at least once. Cross-class switching, particularly from anti-TNF to IL-17 therapies, was frequent and consistent across two decades of treatment data.

Phase 2 study data show that zimlovisertib + tofacitinib was more effective than tofacitinib alone, in patients with moderate-to-severe RA and an inadequate response to MTX.

Data from an international collaboration of registries show no evidence of an increase in CV events during the first 2 years of use with JAKi, compared to TNFi, in the general RA population.

Mariette et al. investigated the long-term safety of filgotinib with regard to MACE, VTE and malignancy across RA and UC clinical trial populations. Rates of these events remained low overall, with some increases observed in patients aged 65 years and older.