Switching between Janus kinase inhibitor upadacitinib and adalimumab following insufficient response: efficacy and safety in patients with rheumatoid arthritis

Long-term Efficacy and Safety Following Switch Between Upadacitinib and Adalimumab in Patients with Rheumatoid Arthritis: 5-Year Data from SELECT-COMPARE

INTRODUCTION

This study aimed to describe the long-term efficacy and safety of upadacitinib and adalimumab through 228 weeks following immediate switch to the alternate therapy with a different mechanism of action (MoA) in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) not achieving treatment goals with their initial randomized therapy in the ongoing phase 3 SELECT-COMPARE study.

METHODS

Patients with non-response or incomplete response to initially prescribed upadacitinib 15 mg once daily or adalimumab 40 mg every other week were switched to the alternate therapy by week 26. Efficacy was evaluated through 228 weeks post-switch using validated outcome measures, including Clinical Disease Activity Index (CDAI) low disease activity (LDA; ≤ 10)/remission (≤ 2.8); 28-joint Disease Activity Score based on C-reactive protein ≤ 3.2/< 2.6; ≥ 20%/50%/70% improvement in American College of Rheumatology (ACR) response criteria; and change from baseline in ACR core components. Data are reported as observed. Safety was assessed by treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) through week 264.

RESULTS

Of patients initially randomized to upadacitinib and adalimumab, 38.7% and 48.6%, respectively, switched to the alternate therapy by week 26. Clinically relevant improvements in all efficacy measures were observed through 228 weeks post-switch and were generally similar between groups, with small numeric differences mostly in favor of switching to upadacitinib. CDAI remission was achieved by 32.7% and 28.6% of initial non-responders, and 27.5% and 27.3% of incomplete responders, while CDAI LDA was achieved by 76.9% and 72.9% of non-responders, and 72.5% and 72.7% of incomplete responders switching to upadacitinib and to adalimumab, respectively. TEAE rates were similar between groups, although herpes zoster infection, lymphopenia, and creatine phosphokinase elevation were more frequent when switching to upadacitinib. No new safety signals were identified.

CONCLUSION

Switching to a different MoA may provide long-term benefit to patients with RA not achieving treatment goals with their initial therapy, with acceptable safety profiles.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

NCT02629159.

PERFECTRA: a pragmatic, multicentre, real-life study comparing treat-to-target strategies with baricitinib versus TNF inhibitors in patients with active rheumatoid arthritis after failure on csDMARDs

OBJECTIVE

To compare the effectiveness of a strategy administering baricitinib versus one using TNF-inhibitors (TNFi) in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) after conventional synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (csDMARDs) failure in a real-life treat-to-target (T2T) setting.

METHODS

Patients with biological and targeted synthetic DMARD (b/tsDMARD) naïve RA with disease duration ≤5 years without contraindications to b/tsDMARD were randomised to either TNFi or baricitinib when csDMARD failed to achieve disease control in a T2T setting. Changes in clinical and patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) were assessed at 12-week intervals for 48 weeks. The primary endpoint was non-inferiority, with testing for superiority if non-inferiority is demonstrated, of baricitinib strategy in the number of patients achieving American College of Rheumatology 50 (ACR50) response at 12 weeks. Secondary endpoints included 28-joint count Disease Activity Score with C reactive protein (DAS28-CRP) <2.6, changes in PROMs and radiographic progression.

RESULTS

A total of 199 patients (TNFi, n=102; baricitinib, n=97) were studied. Both study groups were similar. Baricitinib was both non-inferior and superior in achieving ACR50 response at week 12 (42% vs 20%). Moreover, 75% of baricitinib patients achieved DAS28-CRP <2.6 at week 12 compared with 46% of TNFi patients. On secondary outcomes throughout the duration of the study, the baricitinib strategy demonstrated comparable or better outcomes than TNFi strategy. Although not powered for safety, no unexpected safety signals were seen in this relatively small group of patients.

CONCLUSION

Up to present, in a T2T setting, patients with RA failing csDMARDs have two main strategies to consider, Janus Kinases inhibitor versus bDMARDs (in clinical practice, predominantly TNFi). The PERFECTRA study suggested that starting with baricitinib was superior over TNFi in achieving response at 12 weeks and resulted in improved outcomes across all studied clinical measures and PROMs throughout the study duration in these patients.

Patterns and determinants of response to novel therapies in juvenile and adult-onset polyarthritis

Biologic and targeted synthetic DMARDs (b/tsDMARDs) have revolutionized the management of multiple rheumatic inflammatory conditions. Among these, polyarticular JIA (pJIA) and RA display similarities in terms of disease pathophysiology and response pattern to b/tsDMARDs. Indeed, the therapeutic efficacy of novel targeted drugs is variable among individual patients, in both RA and pJIA. The mechanisms and determinants of this heterogeneous response are diverse and complex, such that the development of true 'precision'-medicine strategies has proven highly challenging. In this review, we will discuss pathophysiological, patient-specific, drug-specific and environmental factors contributing to individual therapeutic response in pJIA in comparison with what is known in RA. Although some biomarkers have been identified that stratify with respect to the likelihood of either therapeutic response or non-response, few have proved useful in clinical practice so far, likely due to the complexity of treatment-response mechanisms. Consequently, we propose a pragmatic, patient-centred and clinically based approach, i.e. personalized instead of biomarker-based precision medicine in JIA.

Clinical Outcomes in Patients with Rheumatoid Arthritis After Switching Between Interleukin-6-Receptor Inhibitors and Janus Kinase Inhibitors: Findings from an Observational Study

INTRODUCTION

This observational study evaluated response in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) who switched from an interleukin-6 receptor inhibitor (IL-6Ri) to a Janus kinase inhibitor (JAKi) and vice versa.

METHODS

Adult patients with RA, who initiated IL-6Ri or JAKi (following discontinuation of JAKi or IL-6Ri, respectively) during/after December 2012 and had a 6-month follow-up visit were enrolled. Clinical outcomes were evaluated at baseline and the follow-up visit. Continuous outcomes included Clinical Disease Activity Index (CDAI), Health Assessment Questionnaire (HAQ), pain, fatigue, tender joint count, swollen joint count, Physician Global Assessment (MDGA), Patient Global Assessment (PtGA), and morning stiffness duration. Categorical outcomes included the proportion of patients achieving CDAI low disease activity (LDA), remission, and minimal clinically important differences (MCIDs) for HAQ, pain, fatigue, MDGA, and PtGA. Continuous outcomes were summarized as mean changes from baseline, and categorical outcomes as response rates. Differences in the outcome measures between groups were evaluated using linear and logistic regression models.

RESULTS

Between IL-6Ri (n = 100) and JAKi initiators (n = 129), no significant differences were noted for continuous outcomes. Within both groups, a significant proportion of patients achieved LDA, remission, and MCIDs for other measures, although the odds of achieving LDA were higher among IL-6Ri (vs. JAKi) initiators with moderate-to-severe disease (adjusted odds ratio: 3.30 [1.01, 10.78]).

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with RA can achieve improvement in response when switching between IL-6Ri and JAKi. Although both therapies affect the IL-6 pathway, there are distinct mechanisms of action, which likely contribute to their clinical improvement, when reciprocally switched as follow-on treatments.

Allosteric TYK2 inhibition: redefining autoimmune disease therapy beyond JAK1-3 inhibitors

JAK inhibitors impact multiple cytokine pathways simultaneously, enabling high efficacy in treating complex diseases such as cancers and immune-mediated disorders. However, their broad reach also poses safety concerns, which have fuelled a demand for increasingly selective JAK inhibitors. Deucravacitinib, a first-in-class allosteric TYK2 inhibitor, represents a remarkable advancement in the field. Rather than competing at kinase domain catalytic sites as classical JAK1-3 inhibitors, deucravacitinib targets the regulatory pseudokinase domain of TYK2. It strikingly mirrors the functional effect of an evolutionary conserved naturally occurring TYK2 variant, P1104A, known to protect against multiple autoimmune diseases yet provide sufficient TYK2-mediated cytokine signalling required to prevent immune deficiency. The unprecedentedly high functional selectivity and efficacy-safety profile of deucravacitinib, initially demonstrated in psoriasis, combined with genetic support, and promising outcomes in early SLE clinical trials make this inhibitor ripe for exploration in other autoimmune diseases for which better, safe, and efficacious treatments are urgently needed.

Evolving cognition of the JAK-STAT signaling pathway: autoimmune disorders and cancer

The Janus kinase (JAK) signal transducer and activator of transcription (JAK-STAT) pathway is an evolutionarily conserved mechanism of transmembrane signal transduction that enables cells to communicate with the exterior environment. Various cytokines, interferons, growth factors, and other specific molecules activate JAK-STAT signaling to drive a series of physiological and pathological processes, including proliferation, metabolism, immune response, inflammation, and malignancy. Dysregulated JAK-STAT signaling and related genetic mutations are strongly associated with immune activation and cancer progression. Insights into the structures and functions of the JAK-STAT pathway have led to the development and approval of diverse drugs for the clinical treatment of diseases. Currently, drugs have been developed to mainly target the JAK-STAT pathway and are commonly divided into three subtypes: cytokine or receptor antibodies, JAK inhibitors, and STAT inhibitors. And novel agents also continue to be developed and tested in preclinical and clinical studies. The effectiveness and safety of each kind of drug also warrant further scientific trials before put into being clinical applications. Here, we review the current understanding of the fundamental composition and function of the JAK-STAT signaling pathway. We also discuss advancements in the understanding of JAK-STAT-related pathogenic mechanisms; targeted JAK-STAT therapies for various diseases, especially immune disorders, and cancers; newly developed JAK inhibitors; and current challenges and directions in the field.

Nanomedicine is more than a supporting role in rheumatoid arthritis therapy

Rheumatoid arthritis(RA) is an autoimmune disorder that affects the joints. Various medications successfully alleviate the symptoms of RA in clinical. Still, few therapy strategies can cure RA, especially when joint destruction begins, and there is currently no effective bone-protective treatment to reverse the articular damage. Furthermore, the RA medications now used in clinical practice accompany various adverse side effects. Nanotechnology can improve the pharmacokinetics of traditional anti-RA drugs and therapeutic precision through targeting modification. Although the clinical application of nanomedicines for RA is in its infancy, preclinical research is rising. Current anti-RA nano-drug studies mainly focus on the following: drug delivery systems, nanomedicines with anti-inflammatory and anti-arthritic properties, biomimetic design with better biocompatibility and therapeutic features, and nanoparticle-dominated energy conversion therapies. These therapies have shown promising therapeutic benefits in animal models, indicating that nanomedicines are a potential solution to the current bottleneck in RA treatment. This review will summarize the present state of anti-RA nano-drug research.

Safety of synthetic and biological DMARDs: a systematic literature review informing the 2022 update of the EULAR recommendations for the management of rheumatoid arthritis

OBJECTIVES

To perform a systematic literature review (SLR) concerning the safety of synthetic(s) and biological (b) disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs) to inform the 2022 update of the EULAR recommendations for the management of rheumatoid arthritis (RA).

METHODS

SLR of observational studies comparing safety outcomes of any DMARD with another intervention in RA. A comparator group was required for inclusion. For treatments yet without, or limited, registry data, randomised controlled trials (RCTs) were used.

RESULTS

Fifty-nine observational studies addressed the safety of DMARDs. Two studies (unclear risk of bias (RoB)) showed an increased risk of serious infections with bDMARDs compared with conventional synthetic (cs)DMARDs. Herpes zoster infections occurred more with JAKi than csDMARDs (adjusted HR (aHR): 3.66) and bDMARDs (aHR: 1.9-2.3) (four studies, two low RoB). The risk of malignancies was similar across bDMARDs (five studies) and with tofacitinib compared with bDMARDs (one study, low RoB). The risk of major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) was similar with bDMARDs and tofacitinib (two studies, one low RoB). Thirty studies reported safety from RCTs, with one, designed to evaluate safety, showing that malignancies (HR (95% CI): 1.48 (1.04 to 2.09)) and MACE (HR (95% CI): 1.33 (0.91 to 1.94)) occurred numerically more frequently with tofacitinib (5 mg and 10 mg doses combined) than with TNFi in patients with cardiovascular risk factors. In this study, the risk of venous thromboembolism (VTE) was higher with tofacitinib 10 mg than with TNFi.

CONCLUSION

The safety profile of bDMARDs was further demonstrated. Whether the difference in incidence of malignancies, MACE and VTE between tofacitinib and TNFi applies to other JAKi needs further evaluation.

Comparison of drug retention of TNF inhibitors, other biologics and JAK inhibitors in RA patients who discontinued JAK inhibitor therapy

OBJECTIVES

JAK Inhibitors (JAKi) are recommended DMARDs for patients with moderate-to-severe RA who failed first-line therapy with methotrexate. There is a lack of data allowing an evidence-based choice of subsequent DMARD therapy for patients who had discontinued JAKi treatment. We aimed to compare the effectiveness of TNF inhibitor (TNFi) therapy vs JAKi vs other mode of action (OMA) biologic DMARD (bDMARD) in RA patients who were previously treated with a JAKi.

METHODS

RA patients who discontinued JAKi treatment within the Swiss RA registry SCQM were included for this observational prospective cohort study. The primary outcome was drug retention for either TNFi, OMA bDMARD or JAKi. The hazard ratio for treatment discontinuation was calculated adjusting for potential confounders. A descriptive analysis of the reasons for discontinuation was performed.

RESULTS

Four hundred treatment courses of JAKi were included, with a subsequent switch to either JAKi, TNFi or OMA bDMARD. The crude overall drug retention was higher in patients switching to another JAKi as compared with TNFi and comparable to OMA. A significant difference of JAKi vs TNFi persisted after adjusting for potential confounders.

CONCLUSION

In a real-world population of RA patients who discontinued treatment with a JAKi, switching to another JAKi resulted in a higher drug retention than switching to a TNFi. A switch to a second JAKi seems an effective therapeutic option.

Impact of switching to infliximab biosimilars on treatment patterns among US veterans receiving innovator infliximab

OBJECTIVE

To compare treatment patterns of United States (US) veterans stable on innovator infliximab (IFX) who switched to an IFX biosimilar (switchers) or remained on innovator IFX (continuers).

METHODS

US Veterans Healthcare Administration data (01/2012-12/2019) were used to identify adults with rheumatoid arthritis (RA), psoriatic arthritis (PsA), plaque psoriasis (PsO), ankylosing spondylitis (AS), or Crohn's disease and ulcerative colitis (i.e. inflammatory bowel disease [IBD]), treated with innovator or biosimilar IFX. Index date was the first IFX biosimilar administration for switchers or a random innovator IFX administration for continuers. Patients were required to have ≥5 innovator IFX administrations during the 12 months pre-index (prevalent population). Patients with ≥12 months of observation prior to the first innovator IFX administration were analyzed as the primary population (incident population), and data were assessed from start of innovator IFX. Inverse probability of treatment weighting was used to balance baseline characteristics between cohorts. Treatment patterns were evaluated post-index; continuers were censored before switching to IFX biosimilar. Discontinuation was defined as switching to another biologic (including innovator IFX) or having ≥120 days between 2 consecutive index treatment records.

RESULTS

In the incident population, mean [median] duration of follow-up was 737 [796] days among switchers (N = 838) and 479 [337] days among continuers (N = 849). Compared to continuers, switchers were 2.88-times more likely to discontinue index therapy (hazard ratio [HR] = 2.88, p < .001) and 4.99-times more likely to switch to another innovator biologic (HR = 4.99, p < .001). Of 653 switchers switching to another innovator biologic, 594 (91.0%) switched back to innovator IFX. Results were similar among the prevalent population and RA and IBD subgroups.

CONCLUSION

Patients switching from innovator to biosimilar IFX were more likely to discontinue treatment and switch to another innovator biologic (notably back to innovator IFX) than those remaining on innovator IFX; however, reasons for discontinuation and switching are unknown.

Toward Overcoming Treatment Failure in Rheumatoid Arthritis

Rheumatoid arthritis (RA) is an autoimmune disorder characterized by inflammation and bone erosion. The exact mechanism of RA is still unknown, but various immune cytokines, signaling pathways and effector cells are involved. Disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs) are commonly used in RA treatment and classified into different categories. Nevertheless, RA treatment is based on a "trial-and-error" approach, and a substantial proportion of patients show failed therapy for each DMARD. Over the past decades, great efforts have been made to overcome treatment failure, including identification of biomarkers, exploration of the reasons for loss of efficacy, development of sequential or combinational DMARDs strategies and approval of new DMARDs. Here, we summarize these efforts, which would provide valuable insights for accurate RA clinical medication. While gratifying, researchers realize that these efforts are still far from enough to recommend specific DMARDs for individual patients. Precision medicine is an emerging medical model that proposes a highly individualized and tailored approach for disease management. In this review, we also discuss the potential of precision medicine for overcoming RA treatment failure, with the introduction of various cutting-edge technologies and big data.

A Decade of JAK Inhibitors: What Have We Learned and What May Be the Future?

The discovery of cytokines and their role in immune and inflammatory disease led to the development of a plethora of targeted biologic therapies. Later, efforts to understand mechanisms of cytokine signal transduction led to the discovery of JAKs, which themselves were quickly identified as therapeutic targets. It has been a decade since the first JAK inhibitors (jakinibs) were approved, and there are now 9 jakinibs approved for the treatment of rheumatic, dermatologic, hematologic, and gastrointestinal indications, along with emergency authorization for COVID-19. In this review, we will summarize relevant discoveries that led to first-generation jakinibs and review their efficacy and safety as demonstrated in pivotal clinical studies. We will discuss the next generation of more selective jakinibs, along with agents that target kinase families beyond JAKs. Finally, we will reflect on both the opportunities and challenges ahead as we enter the second decade of the clinical use of jakinibs.

Incidence and risk factors for herpes zoster in patients with rheumatoid arthritis receiving upadacitinib: a pooled analysis of six phase III clinical trials

Background

Upadacitinib (UPA) is an oral Janus kinase (JAK) inhibitor approved for the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis (RA). JAK inhibitors have been associated with an increased risk of herpes zoster (HZ) in patients with RA.

Objectives

To evaluate the incidence and risk factors for HZ in UPA-treated patients with RA from the UPA phase III clinical trial programme.

Methods

Exposure-adjusted incidence/event rates for HZ were determined in patients receiving UPA (monotherapy or combination therapy) in six randomised phase III trials (data cut-off on 30 June 2020). HZ incidence and event rates were also determined in patients receiving methotrexate (MTX) monotherapy or adalimumab (ADA) + MTX. Multivariable Cox regression analysis was used to identify HZ risk factors in UPA-treated patients.

Results

A total of 5306 patients were included in this analysis. The incidence rate of HZ/100 patient-years (95% CI) was 0.8 (0.3 to 1.9), 1.1 (0.5 to 1.9), 3.0 (2.6 to 3.5) and 5.3 (4.5 to 6.2), in the MTX monotherapy, ADA + MTX, UPA 15 mg and UPA 30 mg groups, respectively. The majority of HZ cases with UPA (71%) involved a single dermatome. Prior history of HZ and Asian region were HZ risk factors in UPA-treated patients.

Conclusion

In the UPA phase III RA clinical programme, HZ incidence and event rates were higher with UPA versus ADA + MTX or MTX monotherapy, and higher with the 30 mg versus 15 mg dose. Patients from Asia and those with a history of HZ may be at increased risk of HZ while receiving UPA.