Dataset Information

Biologic disease modifying antirheumatic drugs and Janus kinase inhibitors in paediatric rheumatology - what we know and what we do not know from randomized controlled trials.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Biologic disease modifying antirheumatic drugs (bDMARDs) and Janus Kinase (JAK) inhibitors are prescribed in adult and paediatric rheumatology. Due to age-dependent changes, disease course, and pharmacokinetic processes paediatric patients with inflammatory rheumatic diseases (PiRD) differ from adult rheumatology patients.

Methods

A systematic literature search for randomized clinical trials (RCTs) in PiRD treated with bDMARDs/JAK inhibitors was conducted on Medline, clinicaltrials.gov , clinicaltrialsregister.eu and conference abstracts as of July 2020. RCTs were included if (i) patients were aged ≤20 years, (ii) patients had a predefined rheumatic diagnosis and (iii) RCT reported predefined outcomes. Selected studies were excluded in case of (i) observational or single arm study or (ii) sample size ≤5 patients. Study characteristics were extracted.

Results

Out of 608 screened references, 65 references were selected, reporting 35 unique RCTs. All 35 RCTs reported efficacy while 34/3 provided safety outcomes and 16/35 provided pharmacokinetic data. The most common investigated treatments were TNF inhibitors (60%), IL-1 inhibitors (17%) and IL-6 inhibitors (9%). No RCTs with published results were identified for baricitinib, brodalumab, certolizumab pegol, guselkumab, risankizumab, rituximab, sarilumab, secukinumab, tildrakizumab, or upadacitinib. In patients with juvenile idiopathic arthritis (JIA) 25/35 RCTs were conducted. The remaining 10 RCTs were performed in non-JIA patients including plaque psoriasis, Kawasaki Disease, systemic lupus erythematosus and non-infectious uveitis. In JIA-RCTs, the control arm was mainly placebo and the concomitant treatments were either methotrexate, non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAID) or corticosteroids. Non-JIA patients mostly received NSAID. There are ongoing trials investigating abatacept, adalimumab, baricitinib, brodalumab, certolizumab pegol, etanercept, guselkumab, infliximab, risankizumab, secukinumab, tofacitinib and tildrakizumab.

Conclusion

Despite the FDA Modernization Act and support of major paediatric rheumatology networks, such as the Pediatric Rheumatology Collaborative Study Group (PRCSG) and the Paediatric Rheumatology International Trials Organization (PRINTO), which resulted in drug approval for PiRD indications, there are limited RCTs in PiRD patients. As therapy response is influenced by age-dependent changes, pharmacokinetic processes and disease course it is important to consider developmental changes in bDMARDs/JAK inhibitor use in PiRD patients. As such it is critical to collaborate and conduct international RCTs to appropriately investigate and characterize efficacy, safety and pharmacokinetics of bDMARDs/JAK inhibitors in paediatric rheumatology.

SUBMITTER: Welzel T

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7995584 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:ObjectiveTo evaluate the comparative efficacy and safety of Janus kinase (JAK) inhibitors and biological disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (bDMARDs) in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) and an inadequate response to at least one disease-modifying antirheumatic drug (DMARD).MethodsPubMed, Embase, Cochrane library and ClinicalTrials.gov were searched for relevant randomized controlled trials (RCTs) from inception to April 2020. The active drugs included three JAK inhibitors and eight bDMARDs while the control drugs included placebo or conventional synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (csDMARDs). Outcomes include American College of Rheumatology 20% response (ACR20), Disease Activity Score in 28 joints (DAS28), Health Assessment Questionnaire-Disability Index (HAQ-DI) and discontinuations for adverse events (AEs). We estimated summary odds ratios (ORs) and weighted mean differences (WMDs) using network meta-analysis with random effects.ResultsEighty-eight RCTs with 31,566 patients were included. All JAK inhibitors and bDMARDs were more effective than placebo in ACR20 (ORs ranging between 3.05 and 5.61), DAS28 (WMDs ranging between -1.91 and -0.80) and HAQ-DI (WMDs ranging between -0.34 and -0.21). Tocilizumab, certolizumab pegol and upadacitinib showed relatively good efficacy in these three outcomes according to their relative ranking. Notably, tocilizumab was more effective than other active drugs in DAS28 (WMDs ranging between -1.11 and -0.49). Compared with the lower recommended doses, increasing the doses of JAK inhibitors (baricitinib 4 mg versus 2 mg, tofacitinib 10 mg versus 5 mg and upadacitinib 30 mg versus 15 mg) cannot provide significant additional benefits. In terms of discontinuations for AEs, all active drugs showed no significant difference compared with placebo except certolizumab pegol [OR 1.65, 95% credible interval (CrI) 1.06-2.61] and rituximab (3.17, 1.11-10.80).ConclusionsTocilizumab, certolizumab pegol and upadacitinib may have relatively good efficacy in patients with RA after treatment failure with csDMARDs. RA patients taking a JAK inhibitor may have a preference for a lower recommended dose.

Project description:Background:Tofacitinib and other new treatments approved for use in psoriatic arthritis have only recently been included in psoriatic arthritis treatment guidelines, and studies evaluating the relative efficacy of available therapies are important to inform treatment decisions by healthcare professionals. Objective:To perform a network meta-analysis to evaluate the efficacy and safety profiles of tofacitinib, biologic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (bDMARDs), and apremilast in patients with psoriatic arthritis naïve to tumor necrosis factor inhibitor therapy (TNFi-naïve) or with an inadequate response (TNFi-IR). Methods:A systematic literature review used searches of MEDLINE, Embase, and The Cochrane Library on October 9, 2017. Randomized controlled trials including adult patients with psoriatic arthritis receiving treatment administered as monotherapy or with conventional synthetic DMARDs were selected. Efficacy outcomes included American College of Rheumatology 20 response, change from baseline in Health Assessment Questionnaire-Disability Index, ?75% improvement in Psoriasis Area and Severity Index, and change from baseline in Dactylitis Severity Score and Leeds Enthesitis Index. Treatment effects were evaluated during placebo-controlled phases, using a binomial logit model for binary outcomes and a normal identify link model for other outcomes. Discontinuations due to adverse events and serious infection events were assessed as safety outcomes. Results:The network meta-analysis included 24 published randomized controlled trials, of which 13 enrolled TNFi-naïve patients only, 3 enrolled TNFi-IR patients only, and 8 enrolled both TNFi-naïve and TNFi-IR patients. Placebo-controlled treatment durations ranged from 12 to 24 weeks. Indirect comparisons showed tofacitinib 5 and 10 mg BID to have similar efficacy compared with most bDMARDs and apremilast in improving joint symptoms (based on American College of Rheumatology 20 response), and with some bDMARDs in improving skin symptoms (based on Psoriasis Area and Severity Index) (tofacitinib 10 mg BID only in TNFi-IR) in patients with psoriatic arthritis who were TNFi-naïve or TNFi-IR. Results also showed that, compared with placebo, the improvement in physical functioning (based on Health Assessment Questionnaire-Disability Index) with tofacitinib 5 and 10 mg BID was similar to that observed with most bDMARDs and apremilast in TNFi-naïve patients, and similar to that observed with all bDMARDs with available data in the TNFi-IR population. Improvements in Dactylitis Severity Score and Leeds Enthesitis Index scores were comparable between treatments. Tofacitinib 5 and 10 mg BID were median-ranked 8 and 15, respectively, for discontinuation due to any adverse events, and 5 and 16, respectively, for a serious infection event out of a total of 20 treatments in the network (lower numbers are more favorable). Conclusions:Tofacitinib provides an additional treatment option for patients with psoriatic arthritis, both in patients naïve to TNFi and in those with TNFi-IR. (Curr Ther Res Clin Exp. 2020; 81:XXX-XXX).

Project description:ObjectiveThe objective of this study was to compare the incidence rate of nonvertebral osteoporotic fractures (NVFs) in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) initiating one of the nine biologic or targeted synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (b/tsDMARDs).MethodsWe analyzed claims data from Optum (2008 to March 2019), Medicare, and MarketScan (2008-2017) to identify adults with RA who newly initiated b/tsDMARDs. Adalimumab was the most frequently used and was thus selected as a reference. The primary outcome was a composite of incident NVFs, including hip, humerus, pelvis, and wrist fractures, based on validated algorithms. We adjusted for greater than 70 potential confounders in each database through propensity score-based inverse probability treatment weighting. Follow-up time started the day after cohort entry until the first occurrence of one of the following: outcome, treatment discontinuation, switching, nursing home admission, death, disenrollment, or end of study period. For each drug comparison, weighted Cox proportional hazards models estimated the hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Secondary analyses were conducted in patients switching from a tumor necrosis factor inhibitor to a different b/tsDMARD.ResultsA total of 134,693 b/tsDMARD initiators were identified across three databases. The adjusted HRs showed similar risk of composite NVFs in all b/tsDMARD exposures compared with adalimumab: abatacept, HR 1.03 (95% CI 0.82-1.30); certolizumab, HR 1.08 (95% CI 0.79-1.49); etanercept, HR 1.12 (95% CI 0.89-1.40); golimumab, HR 0.91 (95% CI 0.59-1.39); infliximab, HR 1.03 (95% CI 0.84-1.28); rituximab, HR 1.07 (95% CI 0.74-1.55); tocilizumab, HR 1.24 (95% CI 0.71-2.17); and tofacitinib, HR 1.07 (95% CI 0.69-1.64). Secondary analyses showed similar results.ConclusionThis multidatabase cohort study found no differences in the risk of NVFs across individual b/tsDMARDs for RA, which provides reassurance to physicians prescribing b/tsDMARDs, especially to patients at high risk of developing NVFs.