Patient-reported outcomes of upadacitinib versus abatacept in patients with rheumatoid arthritis and an inadequate response to biologic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs: 12- and 24-week results of a phase 3 trial

Impact of Biological Therapies on Quality of Life in Rheumatoid Arthritis: A Narrative Review

Rheumatoid arthritis (RA) is a chronic inflammatory disease that causes joint damage, pain, and disability, leading to significant impairments in patients' physical, mental, and social well-being. While biological disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (bDMARDs) such as tumor necrosis factor (TNF) inhibitors, interleukin-6 (IL-6) inhibitors, and Janus kinase (JAK) inhibitors have revolutionized the treatment of RA by effectively controlling disease activity, their influence on patients' quality of life (QoL) is crucial but not fully understood. The aim of this review is to evaluate the impact of bDMARDs on QoL in RA patients, particularly focusing on domains such as physical functioning, pain, fatigue, mental health, and social participation. A comprehensive literature search was conducted in databases such as PubMed and the Cochrane Library, including randomized controlled trials, cohort studies, and surveys assessing QoL outcomes in RA patients receiving bDMARD therapy. The review includes studies that utilized the Health Assessment Questionnaire (HAQ), EuroQol-5 Dimension (EQ-5D), and Short Form-36 (SF-36), Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy-Fatigue (FACIT-F), Fatigue Severity Scale (FSS), and Patient Global Assessment (PtGA) QoL questionnaires, among others, to assess patient-reported outcomes. The findings of the current review suggest that bDMARDs significantly improve QoL in RA patients by reducing pain, fatigue, and disability while enhancing physical function and mental well-being. However, variability in patient responses, side effects, and the long-term impact of these therapies remain key concerns. Future studies with standardized QoL assessments and longer follow-up periods are needed to provide a more comprehensive understanding of the sustained effects of bDMARD therapy on RA patients' overall well-being.

Effectiveness of JAK Inhibitors Compared With Biologic Disease-Modifying Antirheumatic Drugs on Pain Reduction in Rheumatoid Arthritis: Results From a Nationwide Swedish Cohort Study

OBJECTIVE

To compare the effectiveness of JAK inhibitors (JAKis) and biologic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (bDMARDs) on pain in patients with rheumatoid arthritis.

METHODS

In this retrospective study, we investigated patients with a diagnosis of rheumatoid arthritis, starting treatment with a JAKi (n = 1,827), a tumor necrosis factor inhibitor (TNFi; n = 6,422), an interleukin-6 inhibitor (n = 887), abatacept (n = 1,102), or rituximab (n = 1,149) in 2017 to 2019, using data from several linked Swedish national registers. Differences in change in pain, assessed with a visual analog scale (0-100 mm), from baseline to 3 months, as well as proportions of patients remaining on initial treatment with low pain (visual analog scale pain <20) at 12 months, were compared between treatments. Comparisons of treatment responses between JAKis and bDMARDs were evaluated using multivariable linear regression, adjusted for patient characteristics, comorbidities, current comedication, and previous treatment.

RESULTS

JAKi treatment was associated with a greater decrease in pain at 3 months compared with TNFi treatment (adjusted mean additional decrease 4.0 mm; 95% confidence interval 1.6-6.3), with similar trends in comparisons with non-TNFi bDMARDs. More patients achieved low pain at 12 months on JAKis compared with TNFis, in particular among those previously treated with at least two bDMARDs (adjusted change contrast 5.3 percentage points; 95% confidence interval 1.0-9.6).

CONCLUSION

JAKis had a slightly better effect on pain outcomes at 3 and 12 months compared with TNFis, with significantly greater differences in patients previously treated with at least two bDMARDs. The effect of JAKis on pain reduction was at least similar to that of non-TNFi bDMARDs.

Safety and Efficacy of Upadacitinib in Patients with Rheumatoid Arthritis Refractory to Biologic DMARDs: Results Through Week 216 from the SELECT-CHOICE Study

INTRODUCTION

The safety and efficacy of upadacitinib 15 mg (UPA15) through week 216 was evaluated in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) from the long-term extension (LTE) of the phase 3 SELECT-CHOICE study.

METHODS

Patients with RA refractory to biologic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (bDMARDs) were randomized to UPA15 or abatacept (ABA) for 24 weeks. During the open-label LTE, patients on ABA switched to UPA15 at week 24, and those on UPA15 continued treatment. The safety and efficacy of continuous UPA15, and ABA to UPA15, are summarized through week 216.

RESULTS

The LTE was comprised of 91.4% (n = 277/303) of patients that initially received UPA15, and 89.6% (n = 277/309) that initially received ABA. Of patients on UPA15 in the LTE (n = 547), 28.3% (n = 155/547) discontinued the study drug by week 216. Relative to other adverse events of special interest, and largely consistent with previous findings at week 24, higher rates of serious infection, COVID-19, herpes zoster, and elevated creatine phosphokinase were reported, while rates of malignancy excluding nonmelanoma skin cancer (NMSC), NMSC, major adverse cardiovascular event (MACE), and venous thromboembolism (VTE) were low. Long-term safety data with UPA through week 216 aligned with previous observations and no new safety risks were identified, including in patients who switched from ABA to UPA15. Proportions of patients achieving 28-joint disease activity score based on C-reactive protein (DAS28[CRP]) < 2.6/ ≤ 3.2, clinical disease activity index (CDAI) and simple disease activity index (SDAI) low disease activity/remission, ≥ 20%/50%/70% improvement in the American College of Rheumatology (ACR20/50/70) response criteria, and Boolean remission were maintained or improved with UPA15 through week 216. Improvements in the Health Assessment Questionnaire-Disability Index (HAQ-DI), patient's assessment of pain, and Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy-Fatigue (FACIT-F) were also maintained or improved with UPA15 through week 216. Across all efficacy endpoints, similar results were observed in patients who switched from ABA to UPA15 versus continuous UPA15. Patients with an inadequate response to ≥ 1 prior tumor necrosis factor (TNF) inhibitor (UPA15: n = 263/303, 86.8%; ABA to UPA15: n = 273/309, 88.3%) showed similar responses to the total population.

CONCLUSIONS

The long-term safety profile of UPA was consistent with previous findings and the broader RA clinical program. Compared to the primary analyses at week 24, efficacy responses were maintained or further improved with UPA15 through week 216 in patients with RA. Trial registration, ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT03086343.

Impact of filgotinib on pain control in the phase 3 FINCH studies

OBJECTIVE

This post hoc analysis of the FINCH 1-3 (NCT02889796, NCT02873936 and NCT02886728) studies assessed specific effects of filgotinib on pain control and their relationship with other aspects of efficacy in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA).

METHODS

Assessments included: residual pain responses of ≤10 and ≤20 mm on a 100 mm visual analogue scale (VAS); the proportion of patients who achieved VAS pain responses in addition to remission or low disease activity by Disease Activity Score-28 with C-reactive protein (DAS28-CRP) or Clinical Disease Activity Index (CDAI) criteria.

RESULTS

Across studies, filgotinib reduced pain from week 2, with responses sustained throughout the studies. In FINCH 1, at week 24, 35.8%, 25.0%, 24.6% and 11.6% of patients in the filgotinib 200 mg, filgotinib 100 mg, adalimumab and placebo arms (each plus methotrexate) achieved VAS pain ≤20 mm in addition to DAS28-CRP remission; 26.3%, 17.9%, 17.2% and 7.6% achieved VAS pain ≤10 mm in addition to DAS28-CRP remission. A similar pattern was seen for CDAI remission. Time during which VAS pain was ≤10 or ≤20 mm was longest with filgotinib 200 mg and comparable between adalimumab and filgotinib 100 mg. Similar findings were reported for filgotinib in FINCH 2 and 3.

CONCLUSION

In all RA populations studied, pain improvements occurred from week 2 and were sustained over time. In FINCH 1, filgotinib 100 mg provided similar pain amelioration to adalimumab, whereas filgotinib 200 mg resulted in greater pain improvement and higher proportion of patients with residual pain ≤10 or ≤20 mm and meeting DAS28-CRP remission criteria.

Pain in the joints and beyond; the challenge of rheumatoid arthritis

Pain is a common and often debilitating symptom for people living with rheumatoid arthritis. Although pain is a generic feature of inflammation and often improves with successful treatment that targets inflammatory pathways, pain experience can persist. Emerging data suggest that the magnitude of pain relief might vary according to the therapeutic target of pharmacological intervention within the inflammatory cascade. Both inflammatory and non-inflammatory causes contribute to the pain experience, which depends on tissue origin, peripheral sensory mechanisms and their transmission, integration, and interpretation within the nervous system. Contemporary neuroimaging is transforming our understanding of these mechanisms and the role of sensory, emotional, and cognitive contributions to the experience of pain. This understanding paves the way for therapeutic approaches that recognise the existence of multiple, cognitively driven, supraspinal mechanisms for pain modulation and could complement pharmacological inflammation suppression. Such approaches include neuropsychological interventions that have the potential to modify human brain cortical structure and reduce suffering that is often associated with pain experience.

The Biology of Pain: Through the Rheumatology Lens

Chronic pain is a major socioeconomic burden globally. The most frequent origin of chronic pain is musculoskeletal. In inflammatory musculoskeletal diseases such as rheumatoid arthritis (RA), chronic pain is a primary determinant of deleterious quality of life. The pivotal role of peripheral inflammation in the initiation and perpetuation of nociceptive pain is well-established among patients with musculoskeletal diseases. However, the persistence of pain, even after the apparent resolution of peripheral inflammation, alludes to the coexistence of different pain states. Recent advances in neurobiology have highlighted the importance of nociplastic pain mechanisms. In this review we aimed to explore the biology of pain with a particular focus on nociplastic pain in RA.