Incidence of venous and arterial thromboembolic events reported in the tofacitinib rheumatoid arthritis, psoriasis and psoriatic arthritis development programmes and from real-world data.

OBJECTIVES: Tofacitinib is a Janus kinase inhibitor for the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis (RA), psoriatic arthritis (PsA) and ulcerative colitis, and has been investigated in psoriasis (PsO). Routine pharmacovigilance of an ongoing, open-label, blinded-endpoint, tofacitinib RA trial (Study A3921133; NCT02092467) in patients aged ≥50 years and with ≥1 cardiovascular risk factor identified a higher frequency of pulmonary embolism (PE) and all-cause mortality for patients receiving tofacitinib 10 mg twice daily versus those receiving tumour necrosis factor inhibitors and resulted in identification of a safety signal for tofacitinib. Here, we report the incidence of deep vein thrombosis (DVT), PE, venous thromboembolism (VTE; DVT or PE) and arterial thromboembolism (ATE) from the tofacitinib RA (excluding Study A3921133), PsA and PsO development programmes and observational studies. Data from an ad hoc safety analysis of Study A3921133 are reported separately within. METHODS: This post-hoc analysis used data from separate tofacitinib RA, PsO and PsA programmes. Incidence rates (IRs; patients with events per 100 patient-years' exposure) were calculated for DVT, PE, VTE and ATE, including for populations stratified by defined baseline cardiovascular or VTE risk factors. Observational data from the US Corrona registries (including cardiovascular risk factor stratification), IBM MarketScan research database and the US FDA Adverse Event Reporting System (FAERS) database were analysed. RESULTS: 12 410 tofacitinib-treated patients from the development programmes (RA: n=7964; PsO: n=3663; PsA: n=783) were included. IRs (95% CI) of thromboembolic events among the all tofacitinib cohorts' average tofacitinib 5 mg and 10 mg twice daily treated patients for RA, respectively, were: DVT (0.17 (0.09-0.27) and 0.15 (0.09-0.22)); PE (0.12 (0.06-0.22) and 0.13 (0.08-0.21)); ATE (0.32 (0.22-0.46) and 0.38 (0.28-0.49)). Among PsO patients, IRs were: DVT (0.06 (0.00-0.36) and 0.06 (0.02-0.15)); PE (0.13 (0.02-0.47) and 0.09 (0.04-0.19)); ATE (0.52 (0.22-1.02) and 0.22 (0.13-0.35)). Among PsA patients, IRs were: DVT (0.00 (0.00-0.28) and 0.13 (0.00-0.70)); PE (0.08 (0.00-0.43) and 0.00 (0.00-0.46)); ATE (0.31 (0.08-0.79) and 0.38 (0.08-1.11)). IRs were similar between tofacitinib doses and generally higher in patients with baseline cardiovascular or VTE risk factors. IRs from the overall Corrona populations and in Corrona RA patients (including tofacitinib-naïve/biologic disease-modifying antirheumatic drug-treated and tofacitinib-treated) with baseline cardiovascular risk factors were similar to IRs observed among the corresponding patients in the tofacitinib development programme. No signals of disproportionate reporting of DVT, PE or ATE with tofacitinib were identified in the FAERS database. CONCLUSIONS: DVT, PE and ATE IRs in the tofacitinib RA, PsO and PsA programmes were similar across tofacitinib doses, and generally consistent with observational data and published IRs of other treatments. As expected, IRs of thromboembolic events were elevated in patients with versus without baseline cardiovascular or VTE risk factors, and were broadly consistent with those observed in the Study A3921133 ad hoc safety analysis data, although the IR (95% CI) for PE was greater in patients treated with tofacitinib 10 mg twice daily in Study A3921133 (0.54 (0.32-0.87)), versus patients with baseline cardiovascular risk factors treated with tofacitinib 10 mg twice daily in the RA programme (0.24 (0.13-0.41)).

Methotrexate, Tofacitinib, and Biologic Disease-Modifying Antirheumatic Drug Safety and Effectiveness Among Patients with Rheumatoid Arthritis in Japan: CorEvitas Registry Observational Study.

INTRODUCTION: The evolution of disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs) for the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis (RA) has improved patient prognosis. However, more real-world safety/effectiveness data comparing methotrexate (MTX), tofacitinib, tumor necrosis factor inhibitors (TNFi), and non-TNFi biologic DMARDs (bDMARDs) are warranted. METHODS: The CorEvitas RA Japan registry was used to identify patients with rheumatologist-diagnosed RA who initiated MTX/tofacitinib/TNFi/non-TNFi bDMARDs. Safety outcomes included incidence of major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE), total cardiovascular disease, total serious infections, total herpes zoster, and total malignancies (excluding non-melanoma skin cancer). Effectiveness outcomes included change from baseline (Δ) in Clinical Disease Activity Index (CDAI) and proportion of patients achieving a minimum clinically important difference (MCID) in CDAI at month 6. Adjusted regression models were fit; marginal means were estimated. RESULTS: Overall, 1972 patients were included in the safety cohort: MTX (N = 298); tofacitinib (N = 253); TNFi (N = 663); non-TNFi (N = 758). Mean follow-up time was 3.8, 2.9, 3.0, and 2.9 years for MTX, tofacitinib, TNFi, and non-TNFi, respectively. Adjusted incidence rates (IRs, patients with events/100 patient-years [95% confidence intervals]) for MACE and total cardiovascular disease, respectively, were numerically lower for MTX (0.34 [0, 0.83]; 0.42 [0, 0.92]) and TNFi (0.09 [0, 0.27]; 0.61 [0.15, 1.07]) versus tofacitinib (0.48 [0, 1.20]; 2.30 [0.38, 4.22]) and non-TNFi (0.77 [0.35, 1.19]; 1.28 [0.73, 1.82]). Serious infections were numerically higher for non-TNFi (4.47 [3.38, 5.56]); herpes zoster was higher for tofacitinib (7.41 [4.52, 10.29]), versus other groups. IRs for malignancies were comparable between groups. Mean ΔCDAI and rates of achieving MCID in CDAI at month 6 were generally greater with tofacitinib versus other groups. CONCLUSION: Some variations in incidence of safety outcomes were observed between treatments, while certain effectiveness outcomes favored tofacitinib. Sample size variation between groups and low number of safety events limited the analysis. Further studies are warranted to investigate observed differences. CLINICALTRIALS: GOV: NCT05572567.

Postapproval Comparative Safety Study of Tofacitinib and Biological Disease-Modifying Antirheumatic Drugs: 5-Year Results from a United States-Based Rheumatoid Arthritis Registry.

OBJECTIVE: Tofacitinib is an oral Janus kinase inhibitor for the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis (RA). We compared 5-year adverse event (AE) incidence rates (IRs) between patients initiating tofacitinib and those initiating new biological disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (bDMARDs) within the United States (US) Corrona RA registry. METHODS: IRs (number of first events/100 patient-years) of major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE), serious infection events (SIEs), herpes zoster (HZ), malignancies, and death were estimated among tofacitinib and bDMARD initiators, regardless of dose/schedule, between November 6, 2012 (US Food and Drug Administration tofacitinib approval), and July 31, 2018 (follow-up through January 31, 2019). Propensity score (PS) methods were used to control for nonrandom prescribing practices. Hazard ratios (HRs) were calculated to compare rates using multivariable-adjusted Cox regression. Different risk windows were used for acute (MACE, SIEs, HZ, and venous thromboembolic events [VTEs]) and long-term (malignancy and death) events. VTEs were assessed descriptively. RESULTS: For MACE, SIEs, and HZ, 1999 (3152.1 patient-years) and 8358 (12 869.4 years) tofacitinib and bDMARD initiators were included, respectively; for malignancy/death, 1999 (4505.6 patient-years) and 6354 (16 670.8 patient-years) initiators were included, respectively. AE rates were similar across cohorts, except for HZ, which was significantly higher with tofacitinib versus bDMARDs (PS-trimmed adjusted HR 2.32; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.43-3.75). There were 45 (zero serious) and 88 (five serious) HZ events with tofacitinib and bDMARDs, respectively. Sensitivity analyses demonstrated similar results. VTE IRs (95% CI) were 0.29 (0.13-0.54) and 0.33 (0.24-0.45) for tofacitinib and bDMARDs, respectively. CONCLUSION: In this registry analysis, both cohorts had similar MACE, SIE, malignancy, death, and VTE rates; HZ rates were higher for tofacitinib initaitors than for bDMARD initiators.

Prevalence of cardiovascular disease and major risk factors in patients with rheumatoid arthritis: a multinational cross-sectional study.

To compare the prevalence of cardiovascular disease (CVD) and major CVD risk factors among rheumatoid arthritis (RA) patients enrolled in a large US and multinational registry. We compared CVD and CVD risk factor prevalence from 11 countries enrolled in the CORRONA US and CORRONA International registries; patients from the 10 ex-US participating countries were grouped by region (Eastern Europe, Latin America, and India). Unadjusted summary data were presented for demographics and disease characteristics; comparisons for prevalence of CVD risk factors and CVD were age/gender standardized to the age/gender distribution of the US enrolled patients. Overall, 25,987 patients were included in this analysis. Compared to patients from the ex-US regions, US participants had longer disease duration and lower disease activity, yet were more likely to receive a biologic agent. Additionally, CORRONA US participants had the highest body mass index (BMI). Enrolled patients in India had the lowest BMI, were more rarely smokers, and had a low prevalence of hyperlipidemia, hypertension, and prior CVD compared to the US and other ex-US regions. Participants from Eastern Europe had a higher prevalence of hypertension and hyperlipidemia and highest prevalence of all manifestations of CVD. Differences in the prevalence of both CVD and major CVD risk factors were observed across the four regions investigated. Observed differences may be influenced by variations in both non-modifiable/modifiable characteristics of patient populations, and may contribute to heterogeneity on the observed safety of investigational and approved therapies in studies involving RA patients from different origins.

Functional improvement after patients with rheumatoid arthritis start a new disease modifying antirheumatic drug (DMARD) associated with frequent changes in DMARD: the CORRONA database.

OBJECTIVE: We examined the relationships of rheumatoid arthritis (RA), disease duration (DD), number of previous disease modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARD), and frequency of DMARD changes, with regard to changes in function in patients with RA evaluated by modified Health Assessment Questionnaire (mHAQ) after the start of a new DMARD. METHODS: In total, 889 patients with active RA from the CORRONA database [patients had mHAQ>or=0.5 and/or Disease Activity Score 28-joint count (DAS28)>or=1.6] started a new DMARD (baseline) and had at least one followup visit 6-12 mo later. Change in mHAQ from baseline to followup visit was modeled using univariate/multivariate linear regression analysis. Due to colinearity, separate multivariate regression models were performed including/excluding the predictors disease duration, number of prior DMARD, and frequency of DMARD changes. RESULTS: Baseline age, mHAQ, erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR), DAS28, and number of prior DMARD differed across DD groups. The univariate linear regression model showed that higher baseline values of mHAQ, DAS28, swollen joint count (SJC), tender joint count (TJC), Clinical Disease Activity Index (CDAI), ESR, physician global assessment, prednisone use, and subsequent addition/discontinuation of DMARD were associated with improvement of the mHAQ at followup (p=0.05). Multivariate linear regression models showed that mHAQ improvement was associated with shorter DD, higher baseline mHAQ, addition of subsequent DMARD, and the DMARD frequency index (no. previous DMARD/yrs of DD) (p<0.05). Number of DMARD patients used previously was not associated with change of mHAQ in either model. CONCLUSION: Our study demonstrates that in clinical rheumatologic practices, more frequent changes in DMARD are associated with greater improvement in function (by mHAQ). It does not support the idea that number of previous DMARD used predicts response. Indirectly, these data support the concept that DMARD should be changed if optimal responses are not achieved within a specified time.