Monotherapy or combination therapy in PsA: current aspects.

Psoriatic arthritis (PsA) is an immune-mediated inflammatory disease with heterogeneity regarding its clinical features, mainly affecting the skin and the musculoskeletal system; additionally, extra-musculoskeletal manifestations and comorbidities are common, adding complexity to its treatment. In the last decades, a plethora of therapeutic options have been available, including conventional synthetic disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs (DMARDs), biological DMARDs (bDMARDs), and targeted synthetic DMARDs (tsDMARDs), and many recommendations have been published regarding the proper use of them in patients with PsA. In rheumatoid arthritis, the combination of conventional with bDMARDs or tsDMARDs is a common and recommended practice, whereas in PsA there is scarce data about the benefit of this combination. This review summarizes all the available data from randomized clinical trials, observational studies, and registries about the value of this therapeutic strategy.

Use of b/tsDMARDs in PsA: with or without csDMARDs Over the last years, many different b/ts DMARDs have been porven to be efficacious in psoriatic arthritis (PsA). Although in rheumatoid arthritis, it is established that most of these drugs work better in combination with conventional synthetic DMARDs (e.g methotrexate), this seems to be slightly different in PsA. Herein, we review the current literature about the combination therapy versus monotherapy of b/ts DMARDs in PsA. We present the results of this narrative review in a structured (per drug category) way, so that it is easier for the reader to find relevant information. There is no doubt that the currently available treatment options in PsA have changed the course of the disease and improved the functional status of the patients. However, as there is still a substantial proportion of patients who do not achieve remission or low disease activity, the need to find effective therapeutic regimens or follow different strategies is growing. In this direction, the combination of a conventional synthetic with biological or targeted synthetic DMARD does not seem to be more effective than the monotherapy of the latter. This seems to be more pronounced in the newer drug categories (anti-IL-17, anti-IL23 and JAKi) compared to the TNFi, where the co-administration of a csDMARD improves their survival.

Risk of Major Adverse Cardiovascular Events and Venous Thromboembolism with JAK Inhibitors versus TNF Inhibitors in Rheumatoid Arthritis Patients: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Objective: The aim of this study was to compare the risk of major cardiovascular events (MACE) and venous thromboembolic events (VTE) between tumour necrosis factor (TNF) and Janus kinase (JAK) inhibitors in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA). Methods: We researched PubMed, Scopus, Cochrane Library, and clinicaltrials.gov until December of 2023 for randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and observational studies. The outcomes studied were MACE (stroke, heart attack, myocardial infarction, sudden cardiac death) and VTE (deep vein thrombosis, pulmonary embolism). We pooled data using random effects model. Risk for the reported outcomes was expressed as odds ratio (OR) with a 95% confidential interval (CI). We performed a subgroup analysis based on study design. Results: We identified 23 studies, 20 of which compared the odds for MACE and 14 the odds for VTE between JAK and TNF inhibitors in RA patients. Ten studies were RCTs and the rest were observational. Regarding MACE risk we pooled data from a total of 215,278 patients (52,243 were treated with JAK inhibitors, while the rest 163,035 were under TNF inhibitors). Compared with TNF inhibitors, the OR for JAK inhibitors in regards with MACE risk was 0.87 (0.64-1.17, p<0.01). Regarding VTE, a total of 176,951 patients were analysed (41,375 JAK inhibitors users and 135,576 TNF inhibitors users). The OR for VTE for JAK inhibitors compared with TNF inhibitors was 1.28 (0.89-1.84, p<0.01). Conclusion: According to our results, there is no statistically significant difference for MACE or VTE in RA patients who receive either JAK or TNF inhibitors.

Focus on Filgotinib in Rheumatoid Arthritis: A Trial-Based Review.

Janus kinases (JAK)/Signal Transducer and Activator of Transcription (STAT) pathway is involved in pathophysiologic cascade of a notable number of rheumatic diseases. The development of JAK inhibitors has expanded treatment choices in rheumatoid arthritis (RA) with a sustained class-effect efficacy. Filgotinib is a novel selective inhibitor of JAK1 isoform licensed for use in RA and ulcerative colitis. In this review we aim to present an analysis of filgotinib's efficacy and drug-specific safety warnings. Patients with RA with or without concomitant conventional synthetic Disease-Modifying Antirheumatic Drugs (csDMARDs) (naïve or experienced) and those who have failed biologic Disease-Modifying Antirheumatic Drugs (bDMARDs) were examined in randomised clinical trials. Filgotinib was also tested against placebo, methotrexate, or adalimumab. Long-term extension trials provide insights for up to four years of continuous filgotinib administration. Beneficial effects are depicted in both disease activity parameters and quality of life indexes in moderate or severe RA with a longitudinal efficacy. In head-to-head comparison with adalimumab, filgotinib 200 mg was non-inferior. Adverse effects alerts are marked by the elevated risk of infectious adverse effects with the exception of herpes zoster infection, which has a low incidence.

Dysregulation of Plasma miR-146a and miR-155 Expression Profile in Mycosis Fungoides Is Associated with rs2910164 and rs767649 Polymorphisms.

Diagnosis of Mycosis Fungoides (MF) may be challenging, due to its polymorphic nature. The use of miRNAs as biomarkers to assist in diagnosis has been investigated, mainly in skin lesion biopsies. The purpose of this study is to evaluate the plasma levels of miR-146a and miR-155 in MF patients and to investigate their association with SNPs of their genes. Plasma miRNAs were quantified by RT-qPCR. Genomic DNA was used for SNPs' genotyping by Sanger sequencing. Plasma levels of miR-146a and miR-155 were significantly higher in patients vs. controls, in early MF patients vs. controls, and in advanced vs. early MF patients. Both miRNAs' levels were significantly higher in stage IIB vs. early-stage patients. miR-155 plasma levels were significantly higher in patients with skin tumors or erythroderma. CC genotype (rs2910164 C>G) was significantly more frequent in healthy controls and associated with lower MF risk and lower miR-146a levels. The AA genotype (rs767649 T>A) was significantly more frequent in patients and correlated with increased MF risk and increased miR-155 levels. The combination of GG+AA was only detected in patients and was correlated with higher MF susceptibility. Increased mir-146a and mir-155 plasma levels in MF is an important finding to establish putative noninvasive biomarkers. The presence of SNPs is closely associated with miRs' expression, and possibly with disease susceptibility.