Upadacitinib in patients from China, Brazil, and South Korea with rheumatoid arthritis and an inadequate response to conventional therapy.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT: Aim
This study assessed the efficacy and safety of upadacitinib (UPA), in combination with conventional synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (csDMARDs), in Chinese, Brazilian, and South Korean patients with active rheumatoid arthritis (RA) and an inadequate response (IR) to csDMARDs.Methods
Patients on stable csDMARDs were randomized (1:1) to once-daily UPA 15 mg or matching placebo (PBO) for a 12-week, double-blind period. The primary endpoint was the proportion of patients achieving ≥20% improvement in American College of Rheumatology criteria (ACR20) at week 12.Results
In total, 338 patients were randomized and treated, of whom 310 (91.7%) completed the double-blind phase. The study met the primary endpoint of ACR20 at week 12 for UPA 15 mg vs PBO (71.6% vs 31.4%, P < .001), with a treatment difference observed as early as week 1. All ranked and other key secondary endpoints, including more stringent responses such as ACR50, ACR70 (≥50%/70% improvement in ACR criteria), and Disease Activity Score in 28 joints using C-reactive protein <2.6, were met for UPA 15 mg vs PBO. The incidence of serious infections (2.4% vs 0.6%) and herpes zoster (HZ: 1.8% vs 0.6%) was higher with UPA 15 mg vs PBO. There was one case of venous thromboembolism reported in the UPA group.Conclusion
UPA 15 mg in combination with csDMARDs demonstrated clinical and functional improvement and an acceptable safety profile over 12 weeks among patients from China, Brazil, and South Korea who had moderately to severely active RA and an IR to csDMARDs.
SUBMITTER: Zeng X
PROVIDER: S-EPMC9299142 | biostudies-literature |
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:BackgroundTo evaluate the effect of upadacitinib on patient-reported outcomes (PROs) in patients with RA who had an inadequate response to csDMARDs.MethodsPatients in SELECT-NEXT, a randomised controlled trial, were on a background of csDMARDs and received upadacitinib 15 mg and 30 mg or placebo daily for 12 weeks. PROs included Patient Global Assessment of Disease Activity (PtGA), pain, Health Assessment Questionnaire-Disability Index (HAQ-DI), Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy-Fatigue (FACIT-F), duration and severity of morning (AM) joint stiffness, Short Form 36 Health Survey (SF-36), and Work Instability Scale for RA (RA-WIS). Least squares mean (LSM) changes were based on mixed-effect repeated measure models. Percentages of patients reporting improvements ≥ minimum clinically important differences (MCIDs) and scores ≥ normative values and number needed to treat (NNT) were determined; group comparisons used chi-square tests.ResultsData from 661 patients were analysed. Compared with placebo, patients receiving upadacitinib reported statistically significant improvements (both doses, P < 0.05) in PtGA, pain, HAQ-DI, FACIT-F, duration and severity of AM stiffness, SF-36 (PCS and 6/8 domains), and RA-WIS at week 12. Significantly, more upadacitinib-treated patients (both doses, P < 0.05) reported improvements ≥ MCID in PtGA, pain, HAQ-DI, FACIT-F, AM stiffness, SF-36 (PCS and 4 or 7/8 domains), and RA-WIS and scores ≥ normative values in HAQ-DI, FACIT-F, and SF-36 (PCS and 4 or 5/8 domains). For most PROs, the incremental NNT with upadacitinib to report clinically meaningful improvement from baseline ranged from 4 to 8 patients.ConclusionsUpadacitinib 15 mg or 30 mg daily for 12 weeks resulted in significant and clinically meaningful improvements in global disease activity, pain, physical function, fatigue, duration and severity of AM stiffness, HRQOL, and work instability among csDMARD-IR patients with RA.Trial registrationClinicaltrials.gov, NCT02675426. Retrospectively registered 5 February 2016.
| S-EPMC6902348 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ImportanceDepression is among the most common comorbidities in rheumatoid arthritis (RA). There is a lack of data regarding the association of RA seropositivity and biologic agents with depression risk among individuals with RA.ObjectiveTo investigate the risk of depression following RA diagnosis among patients in South Korea.Design, setting, and participantsThis retrospective cohort study included 38 487 patients with RA and a comparison group of 192 435 individuals matched 1:5 for age, sex, and index date. Data were from the Korean National Health Insurance Service database. Participants were enrolled from 2010 to 2017 and were followed up until 2019. Participants who had previously been diagnosed with depression or were diagnosed with depression within 1 year after the index date were excluded. Statistical analysis was performed in May 2023.ExposuresSeropositive RA (SPRA) was defined with the International Statistical Classification of Diseases and Related Health Problems, Tenth Revision (ICD-10) codes M05 and enrollment in the Korean Rare and Intractable Diseases program. Seronegative RA (SNRA) was defined with ICD-10 codes M06 (excluding M06.1 and M06.4) and a prescription of any disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs) for 270 days or more.Main outcomes and measuresNewly diagnosed depression (ICD-10 codes F32 or F33).ResultsThe mean (SD) age of the total study population was 54.6 (12.1) years, and 163 926 individuals (71.0%) were female. During a median (IQR) follow-up of 4.1 (2.4-6.2) years, 27 063 participants (20 641 controls and 6422 with RA) developed depression. Participants with RA had a 1.66-fold higher risk of depression compared with controls (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR], 1.66 [95% CI, 1.61-1.71]). The SPRA group (aHR, 1.64 [95% CI, 1.58-1.69]) and the SNRA group (aHR, 1.73 [95% CI, 1.65-1.81]) were associated with an increased risk of depression compared with controls. Patients with RA who used biologic or targeted synthetic DMARDs (aHR, 1.33 [95% CI, 1.20-1.47]) had a lower risk of depression compared with patients with RA who did not use these medications (aHR, 1.69 [95% CI, 1.64-1.74]).Conclusions and relevanceThis nationwide cohort study found that both SPRA and SNRA were associated with a significantly higher risk of depression. These results suggest the importance of early screening and intervention for mental health in patients with RA.
| S-EPMC10915683 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Anti-tumour necrosis factors (anti-TNFs) are established as first-line biological therapy for rheumatoid arthritis (RA) with over two decades of accumulated clinical experience. Anti-TNFs have well established efficacy/safety profiles along with additional benefits on various comorbidities. However, up to 40% of patients may respond inadequately to an initial anti-TNF treatment because of primary non-response, loss of response, or intolerance. Following inadequate response (IR) to anti-TNF treatment, clinicians can consider switching to an alternative anti-TNF (cycling) or to another class of targeted drug with a different mechanism of action, such as Janus kinase inhibitors, interleukin-6 receptor blockers, B-cell depletion agents, and co-stimulation inhibitors (swapping). While European League Against Rheumatism recommendations for pharmacotherapeutic management of RA, published in 2020, are widely regarded as helpful guides to clinical practice, they do not provide any clear recommendations on therapeutic choices following an IR to first-line anti-TNF. This suggests that both cycling and swapping treatment strategies are of equal value, but that the treating physician must take the patient’s individual characteristics into account. This article considers which patient characteristics influence clinical decision-making processes, including the reason for treatment failure, previous therapies, comorbidities, extra-articular manifestations, pregnancy, patient preference and cost-effectiveness, and what evidence is available to support decisions made by the physician.
| S-EPMC9386864 | biostudies-literature
Project description:IntroductionUpadacitinib is a Janus kinase inhibitor with demonstrated efficacy in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA).ObjectiveThe aim of this study was to assess the long-term safety of upadacitinib in patients with active RA from Japan compared with global clinical trial populations.MethodsPooled data in patients enrolled from Japan (the 'Japanese population'; SELECT-SUNRISE, SELECT-EARLY, and SELECT-MONOTHERAPY) were compared with that from global (Japan and ex-Japan) upadacitinib clinical trial populations and summarized descriptively.ResultsThe Japanese population (mean age 57.0 years; mean RA duration 6.1 years) received upadacitinib 7.5 mg (n = 121), 15 mg (n = 126), and 30 mg (n = 124) once daily, while the global population (mean age 54.8 years; mean RA duration 9.1 years) received upadacitinib 6 mg twice daily/15 mg once daily (n = 2883) and 12 mg twice daily/30 mg once daily (n = 1375). Most patients were female (79.3%). The exposure-adjusted incidence rates (EAIRs) of serious adverse events in the Japanese population were 11.5, 12.2, and 21.2 per 100 patient-years (PY) with upadacitinib 7.5, 15, and 30 mg, respectively. Herpes zoster rates were higher in the Japanese population (7.8, 12.4, and 16.7 per 100 PY with 7.5, 15, and 30 mg, respectively) versus global populations (3.7 and 7.0 per 100 PY with 15 and 30 mg, respectively). Prior herpes zoster was a significant risk factor for herpes zoster.ConclusionsThe safety profile of upadacitinib was generally similar between Japanese and global RA populations, except for higher EAIRs for serious adverse events and infections, including herpes zoster, in the Japanese population.Trial registration numbersSELECT-EARLY: NCT02706873; SELECT-NEXT: NCT02675426; SELECT-COMPARE: NCT02629159; SELECT-MONOTHERAPY: NCT02706951; SELECT-BEYOND: NCT02706847; SELECT-SUNRISE: NCT02720523; BALANCE I: NCT01960855; BALANCE II: NCT02066389.
| S-EPMC8184701 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Treating to a target of clinical remission or low disease activity is an important principle for managing rheumatoid arthritis (RA). Despite the availability of biologic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (bDMARDs), a substantial proportion of patients with RA do not achieve these treatment targets. Upadacitinib is a once-daily, oral Janus kinase (JAK) inhibitor with increased selectivity for JAK1 over JAK2, JAK3, and tyrosine kinase 2. The SELECT phase III upadacitinib clinical program comprised five pivotal trials of approximately 4400 patients with RA, including inadequate responders (IR) to conventional synthetic (cs)DMARDs or bDMARDs. This review aims to provide insights into the benefit-risk profile of upadacitinib in patients with RA. Upadacitinib 15 mg once daily, in combination with csDMARDs or as monotherapy, achieved all primary and ranked secondary endpoints in the five pivotal trials across csDMARD-naïve, csDMARD-IR, and bDMARD-IR populations. Upadacitinib 15 mg also demonstrated significantly higher rates of remission and low disease activity in all five pivotal trials, compared with placebo, methotrexate, or adalimumab. Labeled warnings of JAK inhibitors include serious infections, herpes zoster, malignancies, major cardiovascular events, and venous thromboembolic events. Short- and long-term integrated analyses showed that upadacitinib 15 mg was associated with increased risk of herpes zoster and creatine phosphokinase elevations compared with methotrexate and adalimumab but otherwise had comparable safety with these active comparators. This review suggests that upadacitinib 15 mg had a favorable benefit-risk profile. The safety of upadacitinib will continue to be monitored in long-term extensions and post-marketing studies.
| S-EPMC8053169 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Objectives.To analyze the budget impact of upadacitinib (UPA) 15 mg + methotrexate (MTX) for the treatment of moderate-to-severe rheumatoid arthritis (RA) in patients with an inadequate response to conventional disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (cDMARD-IR) from the perspective of social security and the private health sector in Argentina.Materials and methods.A budget impact analysis model was developed for a hypothetical cohort of 100,000 adults with health insurance coverage who were diagnosed with RA over a 5-year time horizon. The model parameters were obtained through literature review and validated by local experts. The costs are expressed in 2024 US dollars (USD).Results.The introduction of UPA 15 mg + MTX for the treatment of moderate-to-severe RA and cDMARD-IR resulted in minimal increase, with a five-year total cumulative incremental cost of USD 1,855 for social security and USD 1,812 for the private health sector, representing 2% of the total budget. The acquisition cost of UPA was the most influential variable in the sensitivity analysis.Conclusions.The introduction of UPA 15 mg + MTX for the treatment of moderate-to-severe RA and cDMARD-IR can provide an effective treatment option with a minimal increase in costs for the healthcare system in Argentina, which is especially important in developing countries where health system budgets are more limited. Providing evidence-based estimates is a valuable tool for informing healthcare policies and can help policymakers make informed decisions about the allocation of healthcare resources to improve patient outcomes while also managing costs.Motivation for the study. Rheumatoid arthritis (RA) is a disease that hasn’t cure, so it’s important to know the budget impact of treatment with upadacitinib (UPA) 15 mg + methotrexate (MTX) in patients with moderate to severe RA who didn’t respond well to conventional antirheumatic drugs. Main findings. UPA + MTX would entail a minimal increase in costs for the healthcare system in Argentina, potentially making this effective treatment option more accessible to patients with RA. Access to this treatment can improve the outcome of patients with RA. Public health implications. In resource-constrained settings such as Argentina, providing evidence-based cost estimates can help healthcare managers allocate resources efficiently while improving patient outcomes. This study provides evidence to inform healthcare policies and decisions regarding the inclusion of UPA + MTX in treatment guidelines or formularies for RA management.
| S-EPMC11300694 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Pharmacogenomics of Rheumatoid Arthritis Therapy
| PRJNA294477 | ENA
Project description:IntroductionThis article aims to describe malignancies in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA), psoriatic arthritis (PsA), ankylosing spondylitis (AS), or non-radiographic axial spondyloarthritis (nr-axSpA) treated with upadacitinib (UPA) or active comparators.MethodsThis integrated safety analysis includes data from 11 phase 3 UPA trials across RA (6 trials), PsA (2 trials), AS (2 trials; one phase 2b/3), and nr-axSpA (1 trial). Treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) were summarized for RA (pooled UPA 15 mg [UPA15], pooled UPA 30 mg [UPA30], adalimumab 40 mg [ADA], methotrexate monotherapy [MTX]), PsA (pooled UPA15, pooled UPA30, ADA), AS (pooled UPA15), and nr-axSpA (UPA15). TEAEs were reported as exposure-adjusted event rates (events/100 patient-years).ResultsMedian treatment duration ranged from 1.0 to 4.0 years (with a maximum of 6.6 years in RA). Across treatments and indications, rates of malignancy excluding nonmelanoma skin cancer (NMSC) ranged from 0.2 to 1.1, while NMSC ranged from 0.0 to 1.4. In RA, rates of malignancy excluding NMSC were generally similar between UPA15, UPA30, ADA, and MTX (breast and lung cancer were the most common). In RA and PsA, Kaplan-Meier analyses revealed no differences in event onset of malignancy excluding NMSC with UPA15 versus UPA30 over time. In RA, NMSC rates were higher with UPA30 than UPA15; both UPA15 and UPA30 were higher than ADA and MTX. In PsA, rates of malignancy excluding NMSC and NMSC were generally similar between UPA15, UPA30, and ADA. In AS and nr-axSpA, malignancies were reported infrequently. Few events of lymphoma were reported across the clinical programs.ConclusionRates of malignancy excluding NMSC were generally similar between UPA15, UPA30, ADA, and MTX and were consistent across RA, PsA, AS, and nr-axSpA. A dose-dependent increased rate of NMSC was observed with UPA in RA.Trial registrationClinicaTrials.gov identifier: NCT02706873, NCT02675426, NCT02629159, NCT02706951, NCT02706847, NCT03086343, NCT03104400, NCT03104374, NCT03178487, and NCT04169373.
| S-EPMC10796874 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundPatient-reported outcomes (PROs) are important when evaluating treatment benefits in rheumatoid arthritis (RA). We compared upadacitinib, an oral, selective JAK-1 inhibitor, with placebo to assess clinically meaningful improvements in PROs in patients with RA who have had inadequate responses to biologic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (bDMARD-IR).MethodsPRO responses between upadacitinib 15 mg or 30 mg and placebo were evaluated at week 12 from the SELECT-BEYOND trial. Improvement was determined by measuring Patient Global Assessment of Disease Activity (PtGA), pain, Health Assessment Questionnaire Disability Index (HAQ-DI), Short Form-36 Health Survey (SF-36), duration and severity of morning (AM) stiffness, and Insomnia Severity Index (ISI). Least squares mean changes and percentage of patients reporting improvements ≥ minimum clinically important differences (MCID) and scores greater than or equal to normative values were determined. The number needed to treat (NNT) to achieve clinically meaningful improvements was calculated.ResultsIn 498 patients, both upadacitinib doses resulted in statistically significant changes from baseline versus placebo in PtGA, pain, HAQ-DI, SF-36 Physical Component Summary (PCS), 7 of 8 SF-36 domains (15 mg), 6 of 8 SF-36 domains (30 mg), and AM stiffness duration and severity. Compared with placebo, more upadacitinib-treated patients reported improvements ≥ MCID in PtGA, pain, HAQ-DI, SF-36 PCS, 7 of 8 SF-36 domains (15 mg), 5 of 8 SF-36 domains (30 mg), AM stiffness duration and severity, and ISI (30 mg) and scores ≥ normative values in HAQ-DI and SF-36 domains. Across most PROs, NNTs to achieve MCID with upadacitinib ranged from 4 to 7 patients.ConclusionsIn bDMARD-IR RA patients, upadacitinib (15 mg or 30 mg) improved multiple aspects of quality of life, and more patients reached clinically meaningful improvements approaching normative values compared with placebo.Trial registrationThe trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT02706847), registered 6 March 2016.
| S-EPMC6889334 | biostudies-literature
Project description:INTRODUCTION:To evaluate the comparative efficacy and safety of subcutaneous sarilumab 200 mg monotherapy administered every 2 weeks (q2w) versus other monotherapies of biologic, targeted and conventional synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (bDMARDs, tsDMARDs, csDMARDs) at recommended doses for treatment of rheumatoid arthritis in patients who are intolerant of or inadequate responders to csDMARDs (csDMARD-IR). METHODS:A systematic literature review and network meta-analysis (NMA) were conducted on 24-week efficacy outcomes: Health Assessment Questionnaire Disability Index (HAQ-DI) score, American College of Rheumatology (ACR) 20/50/70 criteria, and European League Against Rheumatism Disease Activity Score 28-joint count erythrocyte sedimentation rate (DAS28) <?2.6. In addition, serious infections and serious adverse events (SI/SAE) were examined at 24 weeks. RESULTS:Nine trials were selected for the NMA. Sarilumab 200 mg showed superiority versus adalimumab monotherapy on all efficacy outcomes and versus tofacitinib monotherapy on ACR20. Compared with csDMARDs, sarilumab 200 mg showed superiority on ACR 20/50/70 criteria and DAS28 <?2.6 but had similar efficacy on HAQ-DI. Efficacy of sarilumab 200 mg was similar versus certolizumab, etanercept, tofacitinib and tocilizumab 8 mg/kg monotherapy across all efficacy outcomes. SI/SAE appeared similar for sarilumab 200 mg versus all comparators. CONCLUSION:In csDMARD-IR patients, sarilumab 200 mg monotherapy has superior efficacy and similar safety versus csDMARDs, superior efficacy and similar safety versus adalimumab, and similar efficacy and safety versus bDMARDs and tsDMARDs. FUNDING:Sanofi and Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Inc.
| S-EPMC6824353 | biostudies-literature