Multicenter observational study on the efficacy of selective Janus Kinase-1 inhibitor upatacitinib in rheumatoid arthritis.

BACKGROUND: Upadacitinib (UPA) is a selective, reversible Janus kinase inhibitor (JAKi) approved for the treatment of RA. However, there is still no solid evidence on the long-term efficacy of UPA in treated patients. The purpose of this study was to determine the efficacy of UPA to obtain remission or low disease activity (LDA) in a series of UPA patients in patients with RA after 6 and 12 months of treatment in a real-world setting. METHODS: A series of 111 consecutive patients treated with UPA in 23 rheumatology centers were enrolled. Personal history, treatment history and disease activity at baseline, after 6 and 12 months were recorded. Intention-to-treat (ITT) and per-protocol (PP) analyses assessed achievement of remission or LDA or defined as DAS28 <2.6 and ≤3.2, respectively. Logistic regression analysis examined the role of several independent factors on the reduction of disease activity after 6 months of treatment. RESULTS: Of the initial group of 111 subjects at baseline, 86 and 29 participants completed clinical assessments at 6 and 12 months. According to ITT analysis, the rates of remission and LDA were 18% and 18% at 6 months and 31.5% and 12.5% at 12 months, respectively. PP analysis showed higher rates of remission and LDA at 6 (23.3% and 19.8%) and 12 months (55.2% and 20.7%). Results of multivariate logistic regression analysis indicated that a low DAS28 score (P=0.045) was the only predictor of achieving remission at 6 months. None of the baseline factors predicted remission/LDA at 6 months. CONCLUSIONS: RA patients treated with UPA achieved a significant rate of disease remission or LDA in a real-world setting. The 6-month response was found to depend only on the baseline value of DAS28, while it was not influenced by other factors such as disease duration, line of treatment or concomitant therapy with conventional synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (csDMARDs) or corticosteroids.

Influence of Safety Warnings on the Prescribing Attitude of JAK Inhibitors for Rheumatoid Arthritis in Italy.

Background/Objectives: The Janus kinase inhibitors (JAKi) tofacitinib (TOFA), baricitinib (BARI), upadacitinib (UPA), and filgotinib (FILGO) are effective drugs for the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis. However, the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) raised concerns about the safety of TOFA after its approval. This prompted the European Medicines Agency (EMA) to issue two safety warnings for limiting TOFA use, then extended a third warning to all JAKi in patients at high risk of developing serious adverse effects (SAE). These include thrombosis, major adverse cardiac events (MACE), and cancer. The purpose of this work was to analyze how the first two safety warnings from the EMA affected the prescribing of JAKi by rheumatologists in Italy. Methods: All patients with rheumatoid arthritis who had been prescribed JAKi for the first time in a 36-month period from 1 July 2019, to 30 June 2022 were considered. Data were obtained from the medical records of 29 Italian tertiary referral rheumatology centers. Patients were divided into three groups of 4 months each, depending on whether the JAKi prescription had occurred before the EMA's first safety alert (1 July-31 October 2019, Group 1), between the first and second alerts (1 November 2019-29 February 2020, Group 2), or between the second and third alerts (1 March 2021-30 June 2021, Group 3). The percentages and absolute changes in the patients prescribed the individual JAKi were analyzed. Differences among the three groups of patients regarding demographic and clinical characteristics were also assessed. Results: A total of 864 patients were prescribed a JAKi during the entire period considered. Of these, 343 were identified in Group 1, 233 in Group 2, and 288 in Group 3. An absolute reduction of 32% was observed in the number of patients prescribed a JAKi between Group 1 and Group 2 and 16% between Group 1 and Group 3. In contrast, there was a 19% increase in the prescription of a JAKi in patients between Group 2 and Group 3. In the first group, BARI was the most prescribed drug (227 prescriptions, 66.2% of the total), followed by TOFA (115, 33.5%) and UPA (1, 0.3%). In the second group, the most prescribed JAKi was BARI (147, 63.1%), followed by TOFA (65, 27.9%) and UPA (33, 11.5%). In the third group, BARI was still the most prescribed JAKi (104 prescriptions, 36.1%), followed by UPA (89, 30.9%), FILGO (89, 21.5%), and TOFA (33, 11.5%). The number of patients prescribed TOFA decreased significantly between Group 1 and Group 2 and between Group 2 and Group 3 (p ˂ 0.01). The number of patients who were prescribed BARI decreased significantly between Group 1 and Group 2 and between Group 2 and Group 3 (p ˂ 0.01). In contrast, the number of patients prescribed UPA increased between Group 2 and Group 3 (p ˂ 0.01). Conclusions: These data suggest that the warnings issued for TOFA were followed by a reduction in total JAKi prescriptions. However, the more selective JAKi (UPA and FILGO) were perceived by prescribers as favorable in terms of the risk/benefit ratio, and their use gradually increased at the expense of the other molecules.

Real life use of prostacyclin analog (iloprost), a multi-centric survey data from the Scleroderma study group Emilia Romagna (Sclero-RER) and review of the literature.

BACKGROUND AND AIM: Iloprost is recommend worldwide for the treatment of RP and the healing of DUs. The aim of this study is to report the regimens of Iloprost administered in different rheumatological centers within the same regional Health System Methods: A questionnaire exploring different items related to the use of Iloprost was developed and reviewed by three expert rheumatologists. The questionnaire was distributed as an online survey to all local SSc referral centers in Emilia-Romagna (Italy). Data are reported as percentage or median with interquartile range (IQR), as appropriate. An updated review of world literature on this topic was also carried out. RESULTS: All the invited centers completed the survey. There were both local (8) and university hospitals (4). The majority (58%) had a rheumatologist as head physician. All centers used Iloprost: a single monthly administration was the most common treatment (75%). The cycle lasted 1 [IQR 1-2] days with a 0.5-2.0 ng/Kg/min dose according to the drug tolerance of the patients. There were overall 68 spots (beds, reclining armchair, or simple armchair); 2.0 [1.5-4.0] patients were able to receive Iloprost at the same time. University Hospitals had more physicians at their disposal than local hospitals but less paramedic personnel (respectively: 1.8 vs 1.2 physicians, 1.5 vs 2.1 nurses). CONCLUSIONS: These observations were in line with the majority of previous studies reporting different regimens, comparing similar (but not identical) dose and schedule administration, however, despite differences being at times substantial, no standard infusion method is yet available.

Long-Term Retention Rate of Tofacitinib in Rheumatoid Arthritis: An Italian Multicenter Retrospective Cohort Study.

Background: Tofacitinib (TOFA) was the first Janus kinase inhibitor (JAKi) to be approved for the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis (RA). However, data on the retention rate of TOFA therapy are still far from definitive. Objective: The goal of this study is to add new real-world data on the TOFA retention rate in a cohort of RA patients followed for a long period of time. Methods: A multicenter retrospective study of RA subjects treated with TOFA as monotherapy or in combination with conventional synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (csDMARDs) was conducted in 23 Italian tertiary rheumatology centers. The study considered a treatment period of up to 48 months for all included patients. The TOFA retention rate was assessed with the Kaplan-Meier method. Hazard ratios (HRs) for TOFA discontinuation were obtained using Cox regression analysis. Results: We enrolled a total of 213 patients. Data analysis revealed that the TOFA retention rate was 86.5% (95% CI: 81.8-91.5%) at month 12, 78.8% (95% CI: 78.8-85.2%) at month 24, 63.8% (95% CI: 55.1-73.8%) at month 36, and 59.9% (95% CI: 55.1-73.8%) at month 48 after starting treatment. None of the factors analyzed, including the number of previous treatments received, disease activity or duration, presence of rheumatoid factor and/or anti-citrullinated protein antibody, and presence of comorbidities, were predictive of the TOFA retention rate. Safety data were comparable to those reported in the registration studies. Conclusions: TOFA demonstrated a long retention rate in RA in a real-world setting. This result, together with the safety data obtained, underscores that TOFA is a viable alternative for patients who have failed treatment with csDMARD and/or biologic DMARDs (bDMARDs). Further large, long-term observational studies are urgently needed to confirm these results.

Diagnosis and treatment of rheumatoid arthritis in the Emilia Romagna region: a prospective population-based study.

OBJECTIVES: To perform a population-based study in rheumatoid arthritis (RA) patients, in order to evaluate the efficacy and safety of pharmacologic treatments. METHODS: 1087 patients with RA were enrolled; inclusion criteria were: newly diagnosed RA, already diagnosed RA with high disease activity (HDA) (DAS28≥4.2) starting biologic DMARDs (bDMARDs), already diagnosed RA with HDA continuing with conventional DMARDs (cDMARDs). The following data were collected: demographics, clinical and laboratory features, imaging and prescribed drugs. All parameters except immunology and imaging (performed yearly) were repeated at each follow-up evaluations (after 3, 6 and 12 months, and thereafter every 12 months). In order to evaluate clinical response, the EULAR response criteria were used as the gold standard. RESULTS: 414 (38.1%) newly diagnosed patients with RA, 477 (43.9%) RA patients who started bDMARDs and 196 (18.0%) RA patients who continued with cDMARDs were enrolled from April 2012 to March 2015 at 12 Rheumatology Centres in the Emilia Romagna Region. Statistical analyses showed a relative risk ratio (RRR) for moderate response of 1.65 in RA patients who started bDMARDs (p=0.16) and 2.49 for newly diagnosed RA (p=0.01). Sex, age and Health Assessment Questionnaire were not statistically significant. A RRR of 2.00 has been confirmed for RA patients who started bDMARDs (p<0.0005) for a good response as well as 2.20 for newly diagnosed RA (p<0.0005). An increase in adverse events among bDMARDs was found, but when looking at infections or neoplasia, no differences were highlighted between RA which started bDMARDs and RA who continued with cDMARDs. CONCLUSIONS: Our results are in line with already published papers from British and Swedish Registries: a greater likelihood to have a good response is demonstrated for not longstanding RA starting cDMARDs or RA with HDA when a bDMARD is started. Also a good safety profile is demonstrated.