Factors associated with disease flare following SARS-CoV-2 vaccination in people with inflammatory rheumatic and musculoskeletal diseases: results from the physician-reported EULAR Coronavirus Vaccine (COVAX) Registry.

OBJECTIVES: To investigate the frequency and factors associated with disease flare following vaccination against SARS-CoV-2 in people with inflammatory/autoimmune rheumatic and musculoskeletal diseases (I-RMDs). METHODS: Data from the European Alliance of Associations for Rheumatology Coronavirus Vaccine physician-reported registry were used. Factors associated with flare in patients with I-RMDs were investigated using multivariable logistic regression adjusted for demographic and clinical factors. RESULTS: The study included 7336 patients with I-RMD, with 272 of 7336 (3.7%) experiencing flares and 121 of 7336 (1.6%) experiencing flares requiring starting a new medication or increasing the dosage of an existing medication. Factors independently associated with increased odds of flare were: female sex (OR=1.40, 95% CI=1.05 to 1.87), active disease at the time of vaccination (low disease activity (LDA), OR=1.45, 95% CI=1.08 to 1.94; moderate/high disease activity (M/HDA), OR=1.37, 95% CI=0.97 to 1.95; vs remission), and cessation/reduction of antirheumatic medication before or after vaccination (OR=4.76, 95% CI=3.44 to 6.58); factors associated with decreased odds of flare were: higher age (OR=0.90, 95% CI=0.83 to 0.98), non-Pfizer/AstraZeneca/Moderna vaccines (OR=0.10, 95% CI=0.01 to 0.74; vs Pfizer), and exposure to methotrexate (OR=0.57, 95% CI=0.37 to 0.90), tumour necrosis factor inhibitors (OR=0.55, 95% CI=0.36 to 0.85) or rituximab (OR=0.27, 95% CI=0.11 to 0.66), versus no antirheumatic treatment. In a multivariable model using new medication or dosage increase due to flare as the dependent variable, only the following independent associations were observed: active disease (LDA, OR=1.47, 95% CI=0.94 to 2.29; M/HDA, OR=3.08, 95% CI=1.91 to 4.97; vs remission), cessation/reduction of antirheumatic medication before or after vaccination (OR=2.24, 95% CI=1.33 to 3.78), and exposure to methotrexate (OR=0.48, 95% CI=0.26 to 0.89) or rituximab (OR=0.10, 95% CI=0.01 to 0.77), versus no antirheumatic treatment. CONCLUSION: I-RMD flares following SARS-CoV-2 vaccination were uncommon. Factors associated with flares were identified, namely higher disease activity and cessation/reduction of antirheumatic medications before or after vaccination.

Integrated safety analysis of filgotinib in patients with moderate-to-severe rheumatoid arthritis over a treatment duration of up to 8.3 years.

OBJECTIVES: To update the long-term safety profile of filgotinib, a Janus kinase-1 preferential inhibitor, in patients with moderate-to-severe rheumatoid arthritis. METHODS: Data from seven trials were integrated (NCT01888874, NCT01894516, NCT02889796, NCT02873936, NCT02886728, NCT02065700 and NCT03025308). Patients received once-daily filgotinib 100 mg or 200 mg. Exposure-adjusted incidence rates (EAIRs)/100 patient-years of exposure (PYE) were calculated for treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs). Post hoc analyses assessed patients aged <65 and ≥65 years. RESULTS: Patients (N=3691) received filgotinib for a median (maximum) of 3.8 (8.3) years (12 541 PYE). Rates of TEAEs of interest: serious infections, malignancies, major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) and venous thromboembolism were stable over time and comparable between doses. In the overall population, numerically lower EAIR (95% CI)/100 PYE of herpes zoster was observed for filgotinib 100 mg versus 200 mg (1.1 (0.8 to 1.5) vs 1.5 (1.2 to 1.8)). Incidence of serious infections, herpes zoster, MACE, malignancies and all-cause mortality was higher in patients aged ≥65 versus <65 years. In patients aged ≥65 years, EAIRs (95% CI)/100 PYE for non-melanoma skin cancer (NMSC) (0.4 (0.1 to 1.1) vs 1.4 (0.8 to 2.2)), malignancies excluding NMSC (1.0 (0.5 to 1.9) vs 2.0 (1.3 to 2.9)) and all-cause mortality (1.3 (0.7 to 2.2) vs 1.6 (1.0 to 2.5)) were numerically lower for filgotinib 100 mg versus 200 mg. CONCLUSIONS: In the overall population, TEAEs of interest were stable over time and similar between filgotinib 100 mg and 200 mg dose groups, except for herpes zoster. A dose-dependent relationship between malignancies and all-cause mortality was suggested in patients ≥65 years old.

Upadacitinib in Rheumatoid Arthritis and Inadequate Response to Conventional Synthetic Disease-Modifying Antirheumatic Drugs: Efficacy and Safety Through 5 Years (SELECT-NEXT).

OBJECTIVE: To report 5-year efficacy and safety of upadacitinib (UPA) in rheumatoid arthritis (RA) from the phase III long-term extension (LTE) of SELECT-NEXT. METHODS: Patients on stable conventional synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs were randomized to UPA 15 mg once daily (QD), UPA 30 mg QD, or placebo for 12 weeks. Following this, placebo-randomized patients were switched to UPA 15 mg QD or UPA 30 mg QD in the LTE; UPA-randomized patients continued their original dose. Blinding remained until dose switching from UPA 30 mg QD to UPA 15 mg QD because of approval of UPA 15 mg QD; the earliest switch occurred at week 168. Efficacy (as observed) and treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) are reported through 5 years. RESULTS: Overall, 611 (92%) randomized patients entered the LTE; 271 (44%) discontinued the study drug by 5 years, primarily because of adverse events (16%). Clinical outcomes improved or were maintained at 5 years; 51% and 43% of patients achieved Clinical Disease Activity Index remission and 75% and 66% achieved Disease Activity Score in 28 joints based on C-reactive protein < 2.6 among those initially randomized to UPA 15 mg QD and UPA 30 mg QD, respectively. Proportions of patients achieving ≥ 20%/50%/70% improvement in American College of Rheumatology criteria responses increased from week 60 through 5 years. Results were similar regardless of initial randomization to UPA or placebo. TEAEs, including TEAEs of special interest, were consistent with earlier analyses and other SELECT studies. Malignancies (excluding nonmelanoma skin cancer), major adverse cardiovascular events, and venous thromboembolic events were reported infrequently. No new safety signals were observed. CONCLUSION: The 5-year benefit-risk profile for UPA in RA remains favorable. (SELECT-NEXT; ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT02675426).

Safety Profile of Upadacitinib up to 5 Years in Psoriatic Arthritis, Ankylosing Spondylitis, and Non-radiographic Axial Spondyloarthritis: An Integrated Analysis of Clinical Trials.

INTRODUCTION: This integrated analysis of the phase 2/3 and phase 3 SELECT trials describes the safety profile of upadacitinib, an oral Janus kinase inhibitor, for up to 5 years of exposure across psoriatic arthritis (PsA), ankylosing spondylitis (AS), and non-radiographic axial spondyloarthritis (nr-axSpA) (including pooled axial spondyloarthritis [axSpA]). METHODS: Safety data from five trials of upadacitinib in PsA (2 trials), AS (2 trials), and nr-axSpA (1 trial) were analyzed up to a data cut-off of August 15, 2022. One PsA study included adalimumab as an active comparator. Treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) were summarized for PsA (pooled upadacitinib 15 mg once daily and adalimumab 40 mg biweekly), AS (pooled upadacitinib 15 mg), nr-axSpA (upadacitinib 15 mg), and pooled axSpA (pooled upadacitinib 15 mg from axSpA trials). TEAEs were reported as exposure-adjusted event rates per 100 patient-years (E/100 PY). RESULTS: A total of 1789 patients (PsA, n = 907; AS, n = 596; nr-axSpA, n = 286) received ≥ 1 dose of upadacitinib 15 mg for 3689 PY of exposure or adalimumab (n = 429) for 1147 PY of exposure. Overall TEAEs and serious TEAEs were highest in PsA and numerically higher with upadacitinib versus adalimumab; rates were similar between AS and nr-axSpA. In PsA, higher rates of serious infection, herpes zoster (HZ), lymphopenia, and nonmelanoma skin cancer (NMSC) were observed with upadacitinib versus adalimumab. Rates of malignancy excluding NMSC, adjudicated major adverse cardiovascular events, and adjudicated venous thromboembolic events were comparable between upadacitinib and adalimumab in PsA and were similar across diseases. CONCLUSION: Higher rates of serious infection, HZ, lymphopenia, and NMSC were observed with upadacitinib versus adalimumab in PsA; slightly elevated rates for most of these TEAEs were seen with upadacitinib in PsA versus axSpA. Upadacitinib 15 mg demonstrated a generally consistent safety profile across disease states with no new safety signals identified. TRIAL REGISTRATION: SELECT-AXIS 1: NCT03178487; SELECT-AXIS 2: NCT04169373; SELECT-PsA 1: NCT03104400; SELECT-PsA 2: NCT03104374.

Psoriatic arthritis, ankylosing spondylitis, and non-radiographic axial spondyloarthritis are a group of diseases that cause pain and inflammation of the joints and/or spine. Safety data were combined from five studies: two in psoriatic arthritis, two in ankylosing spondylitis, and one in non-radiographic axial spondyloarthritis. Patients were treated with upadacitinib or adalimumab for up to 5 years. Adalimumab was only used for patients participating in one of the two psoriatic arthritis studies. Side effects from treatment were more common in patients with psoriatic arthritis than those with ankylosing spondylitis and non-radiographic axial spondyloarthritis; more patients with psoriatic arthritis had side effects with upadacitinib than adalimumab. A similar number of patients across treatment groups and diseases had side effects that made them stop treatment. The number of cancer cases (except cancer of the upper layer of the skin), cardiovascular issues, and blood clots were similar between the upadacitinib and adalimumab groups in psoriatic arthritis and across diseases. Serious infections, painful rashes that cause blisters (herpes zoster, also commonly referred to as shingles), low levels of white blood cells, and cancer of the upper layer of the skin were more common with upadacitinib than adalimumab in patients with psoriatic arthritis; overall, these events occurred more often with upadacitinib in patients with psoriatic arthritis than with ankylosing spondylitis and non-radiographic axial spondyloarthritis. Our results showed that the safety of upadacitinib was generally similar across diseases, and patients could tolerate it well for up to 5 years. No new safety risks were found with upadacitinib treatment.

EULAR recommendations for the management of psoriatic arthritis with pharmacological therapies: 2023 update.

OBJECTIVE: New modes of action and more data on the efficacy and safety of existing drugs in psoriatic arthritis (PsA) required an update of the EULAR 2019 recommendations for the pharmacological treatment of PsA. METHODS: Following EULAR standardised operating procedures, the process included a systematic literature review and a consensus meeting of 36 international experts in April 2023. Levels of evidence and grades of recommendations were determined. RESULTS: The updated recommendations comprise 7 overarching principles and 11 recommendations, and provide a treatment strategy for pharmacological therapies. Non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs should be used in monotherapy only for mild PsA and in the short term; oral glucocorticoids are not recommended. In patients with peripheral arthritis, rapid initiation of conventional synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs is recommended and methotrexate preferred. If the treatment target is not achieved with this strategy, a biological disease-modifying antirheumatic drug (bDMARD) should be initiated, without preference among modes of action. Relevant skin psoriasis should orient towards bDMARDs targeting interleukin (IL)-23p40, IL-23p19, IL-17A and IL-17A/F inhibitors. In case of predominant axial or entheseal disease, an algorithm is also proposed. Use of Janus kinase inhibitors is proposed primarily after bDMARD failure, taking relevant risk factors into account, or in case bDMARDs are not an appropriate choice. Inflammatory bowel disease and uveitis, if present, should influence drug choices, with monoclonal tumour necrosis factor inhibitors proposed. Drug switches and tapering in sustained remission are also addressed. CONCLUSION: These updated recommendations integrate all currently available drugs in a practical and progressive approach, which will be helpful in the pharmacological management of PsA.

Safety of Upadacitinib in Immune-Mediated Inflammatory Diseases: Systematic Literature Review of Indirect and Direct Treatment Comparisons of Randomized Controlled Trials.

INTRODUCTION: Immune-mediated inflammatory diseases including rheumatoid arthritis (RA), psoriatic arthritis (PsA), ankylosing spondylitis (AS), non-radiographic axial spondylarthritis (nr-axSpA), atopic dermatitis (AD), ulcerative colitis (UC), and Crohn's disease (CD) pose a substantial burden on patients and their quality of life. Upadacitinib is an orally administered, selective, and reversible Janus kinase inhibitor indicated for seven conditions, but data on its safety versus other active treatments are limited. A systematic literature review of indirect and direct treatment comparisons of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) was conducted to assess the safety profile of upadacitinib. METHODS: MEDLINE, Embase, and Cochrane Library databases were searched for indirect and direct treatment comparisons of RCTs that (1) included licensed upadacitinib dosages; (2) studied any of the seven conditions; (3) reported any adverse events (AEs), serious AEs (SAEs), AEs leading to discontinuation, major adverse cardiovascular event, venous thromboembolism, malignancies, infections or serious infections, and death; and (4) were published between January 2018 and August 2022. RESULTS: A total of 25 studies were eligible for inclusion. SAEs, AEs leading to discontinuation, and any AEs were commonly studied. RA was the most studied condition, followed by AD and UC. Most studies (16/25, 64%) reported no statistically significant difference in the studied safety outcomes between upadacitinib and other active treatments (e.g., tumor necrosis factor blockers, interleukin receptor antagonists, integrin receptor antagonists, T cell co-stimulation modulator), or placebo (placebo ± methotrexate or topical corticosteroids). Other studies (9/25, 36%) reported mixed results of no statistically significant difference and either statistically higher (8/25, 32%) or lower rates (1/25, 4%) on upadacitinib. CONCLUSION: Most studies suggested that upadacitinib has no statistically significant difference in the studied safety outcomes compared to active treatments or placebo in patients with RA, PsA, AS, AD, UC, and CD. A few studies reported higher rates, but findings were inconsistent with limited interpretation.

Targeting IL-6 or IL-6 Receptor in Rheumatoid Arthritis: What Have We Learned?

The use of different pathways in the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis has led to a significant decrease in the number of treatment-resistant patients. In this context, interleukin (IL)-6 inhibition has filled an important gap in rheumatoid arthritis treatment with its effectiveness and safety in both monotherapy and combinations. The process of IL-6 inhibition initiated with IL-6 receptor blockers has prompted questions regarding the potential impact and safety of different inhibitions of this pathway, such as the direct blockade of IL-6. Following the termination of the development of sirukumab because of mortality data in early studies, the investigation of olokizumab, which targets a different region of the IL-6 cytokine, has renewed the hope in this area and the safety concerns have been largely alleviated by the open-label extension data. In addition, the efficacy and safety of tocilizumab and sarilumab have led to a rapid investigation of biosimilars and new potent IL-6 receptor blockers. A comprehensive understanding of mechanisms of this pathway with further long-term clinical data and basic research may provide a decisive impact on selecting the appropriate mechanism as the first choice in personalized treatments.

Differences in treatment response between female and male psoriatic arthritis patients during IL-12/23 therapy with or without methotrexate: post hoc analysis of results from the randomised MUST trial.

BACKGROUND: The influence of sex on treatment outcomes during interleukin-12/23 therapy in patients with psoriatic arthritis (PsA) has not been explored. OBJECTIVE: To conduct exploratory post hoc analyses of sex-stratified data from the MUST trial, an investigator-initiated, multicentre, phase 3b study in which patients with active PsA initiating treatment with open-label ustekinumab were randomised to treatment with placebo or methotrexate (MTX). METHODS: We evaluated baseline characteristics, key treatment outcomes and adverse events stratified by sex, with a focus on outcomes that did not include erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR) as a component due to the known elevation of ESR in females. RESULTS: A total of 166 patients were treated with ustekinumab+MTX (37 female, 50 male) or ustekinumab+placebo (32 female, 47 male). At baseline, females had a significantly longer time since PsA diagnosis and greater impairment in physical function, but similar joint counts. At week 24, both females and males showed marked improvements to ustekinumab with or without MTX. Females generally had numerically reduced treatment responses compared with males, although differences did not achieve statistical significance. MTX did not show an overall effect on treatment outcomes, but was associated with faster enthesitis responses in males only. Adverse events were generally comparable, but females in the ustekinumab+MTX group had higher levels of gastrointestinal disorders. CONCLUSION: Females and males with PsA had differences in baseline characteristics, treatment responses and adverse events during therapy. A better understanding of sex-based differences in PsA may help optimise treatment.

Comparative Effectiveness, Time to Discontinuation, and Patient-Reported Outcomes with Baricitinib in Rheumatoid Arthritis: 2-Year Data from the Multinational, Prospective Observational RA-BE-REAL Study in European Patients.

INTRODUCTION: RA-BE-REAL is a 3-year, multinational, prospective, observational study of adult patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) evaluating time to discontinuation of initial RA treatment along with patient baseline characteristics. This study's primary objective was to assess the time to discontinuation of initial baricitinib, any other targeted synthetic disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drug (tsDMARD), or any biologic disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drug (bDMARD) treatment for all causes (excluding sustained clinical response) over 24 months in a European population. METHODS: Patients initiated treatment with baricitinib (cohort A) or any bDMARD or tsDMARD (cohort B) for the first time. This study's primary objective was to assess the time to discontinuation of initial baricitinib, any other targeted synthetic disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drug (tsDMARD), or any biologic disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drug (bDMARD) treatment for all causes (excluding sustained clinical response) over 24 months in a European population. Comparative effectiveness analyses, over 24 months, included time to treatment discontinuation for all causes (excluding sustained clinical response), percentage of patients achieving Clinical Disease Activity Index (CDAI) remission or low disease activity (LDA), as well as mean changes from baseline for CDAI, pain visual analogue scale, and the Health Assessment Questionnaire-Disability Index (HAQ-DI). For this European subpopulation, comparative analyses were performed using a frequentist model averaging (FMA) framework based on a data-driven machine learning causal inference approach to compare time to discontinuation, effectiveness, rates of remission or LDA, and patient-reported outcomes over 24 months comparing baricitinib with TNFi, as well as non-TNFi and tsDMARD grouped as other mechanism of action (OMA) drugs. RESULTS: In the European sample of RA-BE-REAL, patients with RA treated with baricitinib experienced fewer discontinuations in comparison to those treated with tumour necrosis factor inhibitors or OMA. Overall, patients naïve to b/tsDMARDs achieved a higher rate of LDA and remission compared with experienced patients. A significantly greater proportion of patients treated with baricitinib achieved LDA compared with b/tsDMARDs. CONCLUSION: This real-world data can better inform clinicians about baricitinib effectiveness and drug survival when prescribing treatment for patients with RA across different subpopulations.

Post-Marketing Safety Surveillance of Tofacitinib over 9 Years in Patients with Psoriatic Arthritis and Rheumatoid Arthritis.

INTRODUCTION: The safety of tofacitinib in psoriatic arthritis (PsA) and rheumatoid arthritis (RA) has been demonstrated in clinical studies of ≤ 4 and 9.5 years, respectively. Post-marketing surveillance (PMS) data for tofacitinib from spontaneous and voluntary adverse event (AE) reports have been published for RA, but not PsA. To inform the real-world safety profile of tofacitinib in PsA, we evaluated AE reports submitted to the Pfizer safety database (including RA data for context). METHODS: Endpoints included AEs, serious AEs (SAEs), AEs of special interest (AESIs; serious infections, herpes zoster, cardiovascular events, malignancies, venous thromboembolism), and fatal cases. Exposure was estimated using IQVIA global commercial sales data. Number, frequency, and reporting rates (RRs; number of events/100 patient-years' [PY] exposure) were summarized by indication and formulation (immediate release [IR] 5 or 10 mg twice daily], modified release [MR] 11 mg once daily, or all tofacitinib). The data-collection period differed by indication (PsA: 14 December 2017 [US approval, IR/MR] to 6 November 2021; RA: 6 November 2012 [US approval, IR] to 6 November 2021; MR approval, 24 February 2016). RESULTS: A total of 73,525 case reports were reviewed (PsA = 5394/RA = 68,131), with 20,706/439,370 PY (PsA/RA) of exposure. More AEs were reported for IR versus MR (IR/MR: PsA = 8349/7602; RA = 137,476/82,153). RRs for AEs (IR/MR: PsA = 59.6/113.4; RA = 44.0/64.8) and SAEs (PsA = 8.1/13.6; RA = 8.0/9.5) were higher with MR versus IR. AE RRs (RA) in the first 4 years after IR approval were 95.9 (IR; 49,439 PY) and 147.0 (MR; 2000 PY). Frequency of SAEs, AESIs, and fatal cases was mostly similar across formulations and indications. The most frequently-reported AE Preferred Terms (PsA/RA) included drug ineffective (20.0%/17.8%), pain (9.7%/10.6%), condition aggravated (9.9%/10.5%), headache (8.8%/7.9%) and, for PsA, off-label use (10.5%/3.4%). CONCLUSIONS: Tofacitinib PMS safety data from submitted AE reports were consistent between PsA and RA, and aligned with its known safety profile. Exposure data (lower MR versus IR; estimation from commercial sales data), reporting bias, reporter identity, and regional differences in formulation use limit interpretation.

Patient-level factors predictive of interstitial lung disease in rheumatoid arthritis: a systematic review.

Objective Interstitial lung disease (ILD) is an important cause of mortality in some patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA). Patient-level factors may predict which patients with RA are at the highest risk of developing ILD and are therefore candidates for screening for this complication of the underlying disease.Methods A systematic literature review was performed using PubMed, Embase and Scopus over a 10-year period up to July 2021. Publications reporting patient-level factors in patients with RA with and without ILD that were assessed before development of ILD (or were unchanged over time and therefore could be extrapolated to before development of ILD) were retrieved for assessment of evidence. Genetic variation in MUC5B and treatment with methotrexate were not included in the assessment of evidence because these factors have already been widely investigated for association with ILD.Results We found consistent associations of age, sex, smoking status and autoantibodies with development of ILD. For biomarkers such as Krebs von den Lungen 6, which have been shown to be diagnostic for ILD, there were no publications meeting criteria for this study.Conclusions This analysis provides an initial step in the identification of patient-level factors for potential development of a risk algorithm to identify patients with RA who may be candidates for screening for ILD. The findings represent a useful basis for future research leading to an improved understanding of the disease course and improved care for patients with RA at risk of development and progression of ILD.

Long-term safety and efficacy of sarilumab with or without background csDMARDs in rheumatoid arthritis.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the long-term safety and efficacy of sarilumab with/without conventional synthetic (cs)DMARDs in RA. METHODS: The analyses evaluated two open-label extensions (OLEs): EXTEND and MONARCH OLE, which included patients from six randomized trials. Patients received sarilumab 200 mg once every 2 weeks (q2w) for at least 264 weeks up to 516 weeks (EXTEND: Sarilumab Monotherapy and Sarilumab + csDMARD groups) or for 276 weeks (MONARCH OLE: Continuation and Switch groups). Primary endpoints included safety, immunogenicity and changes in laboratory parameters. Secondary endpoints included clinical signs and symptoms along with health-related quality-of-life (HRQOL) questionnaires. RESULTS: The Sarilumab Monotherapy (n = 111), Continuation (n = 165) and Switch (n = 155) groups received sarilumab monotherapy, while the Sarilumab + csDMARD group (n = 1910) received sarilumab in combination with csDMARDs. Incidence of one or more treatment-emergent adverse events was 126 (Sarilumab Monotherapy group), 169 (Sarilumab + csDMARD group), 159 (Continuation group) and 159 (Switch group) events/100 patient-years. Neutropenia was the most common adverse event. Neutropenia was not associated with an increased incidence of infections. Most neutropenia cases normalized on-treatment. Adverse events of special interests, such as malignancies, major adverse cardiovascular events, venous thromboembolism and gastrointestinal perforations, were rare. Immunogenicity was low and not associated with hypersensitivity reactions or discontinuations due to lack or loss of efficacy. Improvements in clinical signs and symptoms and HRQOL, observed during the initial blinded trials, were maintained throughout the OLE assessment period. CONCLUSIONS: Long-term sarilumab treatment with/without csDMARDs in patients with RA revealed no new safety findings. Efficacy and HRQOL were maintained or further increased over the open-label assessment period. TRIAL REGISTRATION: EXTEND, ClinicalTrials.gov, https://www.clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT01146652, NCT01146652; MONARCH OLE, ClinicalTrials.gov, https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02332590, NCT02332590.

Safety profile of upadacitinib over 15 000 patient-years across rheumatoid arthritis, psoriatic arthritis, ankylosing spondylitis and atopic dermatitis.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the long-term safety profile for upadacitinib across rheumatoid arthritis (RA), psoriatic arthritis (PsA), ankylosing spondylitis (AS) and atopic dermatitis (AD). METHODS: Safety data from clinical trials of upadacitinib 15 mg and upadacitinib 30 mg (AD only) for treating RA, PsA, AS and AD as of 30 June 2021 were analysed; some RA and PsA studies included adalimumab and methotrexate as active comparators. Treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) were presented by disease as exposure-adjusted event rates per 100 patient years (E/100 PY). RESULTS: The analysis included 6991 patients (RA, n=3209; PsA, n=907; AS, n=182; AD, n=2693) who received at least one dose of upadacitinib, representing 15 425 PY of exposure (maximum duration 2.75-5.45 years) across diseases. Rates (E/100 PY) of any TEAE (205.5-278.1) and TEAE leading to discontinuation (4.5-5.4) were similar across diseases; serious TEAEs were numerically higher in patients with RA and PsA. Rates of herpes zoster (1.6-3.6), non-melanoma skin cancer (0-0.8) and elevations in creatine phosphokinase levels (4.4-7.9) were higher with upadacitinib than with active comparators in the RA and PsA populations. Deaths (0-0.8), serious infections (0-3.9), major adverse cardiovascular events (0-0.4), venous thromboembolism (<0.1-0.4) and malignancies (0.3-1.4) were observed, with rates generally lowest in AS and AD. Increased rates of acne were observed in patients with AD only. CONCLUSIONS: Findings from this analysis demonstrate that upadacitinib is generally well tolerated with observed differences in safety profiles likely reflective of varying patient characteristics across RA, PsA, AS and AD populations. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBERS: NCT02675426, NCT02706951, NCT02706847, NCT02629159, NCT02706873, NCT03086343, NCT03104374, NCT03104400, NCT03178487, NCT03569293, NCT03568318 and NCT03607422.

EULAR recommendations for the management of rheumatoid arthritis with synthetic and biological disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs: 2022 update.

OBJECTIVES: To provide an update of the EULAR rheumatoid arthritis (RA) management recommendations addressing the most recent developments in the field. METHODS: An international task force was formed and solicited three systematic literature research activities on safety and efficacy of disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs) and glucocorticoids (GCs). The new evidence was discussed in light of the last update from 2019. A predefined voting process was applied to each overarching principle and recommendation. Levels of evidence and strengths of recommendation were assigned to and participants finally voted on the level of agreement with each item. RESULTS: The task force agreed on 5 overarching principles and 11 recommendations concerning use of conventional synthetic (cs) DMARDs (methotrexate (MTX), leflunomide, sulfasalazine); GCs; biological (b) DMARDs (tumour necrosis factor inhibitors (adalimumab, certolizumab pegol, etanercept, golimumab, infliximab including biosimilars), abatacept, rituximab, tocilizumab, sarilumab and targeted synthetic (ts) DMARDs, namely the Janus kinase inhibitors tofacitinib, baricitinib, filgotinib, upadacitinib. Guidance on monotherapy, combination therapy, treatment strategies (treat-to-target) and tapering in sustained clinical remission is provided. Safety aspects, including risk of major cardiovascular events (MACEs) and malignancies, costs and sequencing of b/tsDMARDs were all considered. Initially, MTX plus GCs is recommended and on insufficient response to this therapy within 3-6 months, treatment should be based on stratification according to risk factors; With poor prognostic factors (presence of autoantibodies, high disease activity, early erosions or failure of two csDMARDs), any bDMARD should be added to the csDMARD; after careful consideration of risks of MACEs, malignancies and/or thromboembolic events tsDMARDs may also be considered in this phase. If the first bDMARD (or tsDMARD) fails, any other bDMARD (from another or the same class) or tsDMARD (considering risks) is recommended. With sustained remission, DMARDs may be tapered but should not be stopped. Levels of evidence and levels of agreement were high for most recommendations. CONCLUSIONS: These updated EULAR recommendations provide consensus on RA management including safety, effectiveness and cost.

A systematic literature review informing the consensus statement on efficacy and safety of pharmacological treatment with interleukin-6 pathway inhibition with biological DMARDs in immune-mediated inflammatory diseases.

OBJECTIVES: Informing an international task force updating the consensus statement on efficacy and safety of biological disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (bDMARDs) selectively targeting interleukin-6 (IL-6) pathway in the context of immune-mediated inflammatory diseases. METHODS: A systematic literature research of all publications on IL-6 axis inhibition with bDMARDs published between January 2012 and December 2020 was performed using MEDLINE, EMBASE and Cochrane CENTRAL databases. Efficacy and safety outcomes were assessed in clinical trials including their long-term extensions and observational studies. Meeting abstracts from ACR, EULAR conferences and results on clinicaltrials.gov were taken into consideration. RESULTS: 187 articles fulfilled the inclusion criteria. Evidence for positive effect of IL-6 inhibition was available in various inflammatory diseases such as rheumatoid arthritis, juvenile idiopathic arthritis, giant cell arteritis, Takayasu arteritis, adult-onset Still's disease, cytokine release syndrome due to chimeric antigen receptor T cell therapy and systemic sclerosis-associated interstitial lung disease. Newcomers like satralizumab and anti-IL-6 ligand antibody siltuximab have expanded therapeutic approaches for Castleman's disease and neuromyelitis optica, respectively. IL-6 inhibition did not provide therapeutic benefits in psoriatic arthritis, ankylosing spondylitis and certain connective tissue diseases. In COVID-19, tocilizumab (TCZ) has proven to be therapeutic in advanced disease. Safety outcomes did not differ from other bDMARDs, except higher risks of diverticulitis and lower gastrointestinal perforations. Inconsistent results were observed in several studies investigating the risk for infections when comparing TCZ to TNF-inhibitors. CONCLUSION: IL-6 inhibition is effective for treatment of several inflammatory diseases with a safety profile that is widely comparable to other bDMARDs.

Treatment of relapsing polychondritis: a systematic review.

OBJECTIVES: Due to the rarity of relapsing polychondritis (RP), no randomised clinical trial has been conducted to date and treatment remains empirical. We performed a systematic literature review to assess the efficacy of the main conventional immunosuppressants and biotherapies used in RP. METHODS: We searched MEDLINE for original articles without language restriction. Abstracts from American College of Rheumatology (ACR) and European Alliance of Associations for Rheumatology (EULAR) were also considered for inclusion. Observational studies and clinical trials reporting on the efficacy of conventional immunosuppressants and biotherapies in adult patients with RP were selected and pooled response rates for each treatment were computed. RESULTS: Of 304 articles and abstracts identified, 31 underwent full-text review, and 11 were included. The studies involved a total of 177 patients, exposed to a total of 247 lines of treatments. The main treatments studied (by number of lines) were: TNF inhibitors (TNFi), n=92; methotrexate (MTX), n=38; tocilizumab (TCZ), n=26; anakinra (ANA), n=21; rituximab (RTX), n=16; abatacept (ABT), n=14; cyclophosphamide (CYC), n=14; azathioprine (AZA), n=13. The pooled response rates across studies were: 72% [95% CI: 42-95] for ABT, 66% [95% CI: 49-82] for TCZ, 64% [95% CI: 53-74] for TNFi, 56% [95% CI: 37-73] for MTX, 47% [95% CI: 26-68] for ANA, 43% [95% CI: 20-68] for RTX. Based on more limited data, response rates for AZA and CYC ranged from 38 to 100% and from 25 to 100%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: In this systematic review of available evidence regarding the treatment of relapsing polychondritis, ABT, TCZ and TNFi were the drugs associated with the best outcomes. ABT efficacy must be interpreted in light of the small number of patients treated. While MTX had slightly less efficacy, it is one of the drugs for which data are the most robust.

Blood biomarkers recommended for diagnosing and monitoring IgG4-related disease. Considerations from the ERN ReCONNET and collaborating partners.

Immunoglobulin G4 (IgG4)-related disease (IgG4-RD) is a chronic, clinically heterogenous fibroinflammatory condition, characterised by an accumulation of IgG4 secreting plasma cells in affected tissues and associated with increased serum IgG4 concentrations. Despite a growing recognition of the disease among clinicians from different specialties worldwide, its indolent nature, lack of a single diagnostic test and ability to mimic other malignant, infective and inflammatory conditions, makes the diagnosis challenging. As treatment options evolve, biomarkers correlating with disease activity, predicting prognosis and response to treatment are deemed required. A multidisciplinary panel of experts from the European Reference Network for Rare and Complex Connective tissue diseases (ERN ReCONNET) and affiliated international partners have performed a narrative literature search and reviewed the current evidence of biomarkers in IgG4-RD, including immunoglobulins, cytokines, chemokines and other soluble immune mediators, and cellular components of the immune system. The aim of this paper is to provide useful information for clinicians as to the utility of biomarkers for diagnosing and monitoring IgG4-RD in clinical routine and sets out recommendations for clinical decision making.

Safety Profile of Upadacitinib up to 3 Years in Psoriatic Arthritis: An Integrated Analysis of Two Pivotal Phase 3 Trials.

INTRODUCTION: This integrated analysis describes the safety profile of upadacitinib, an oral Janus kinase inhibitor, at 15 and 30 mg once daily for up to 3 years of exposure in patients with active psoriatic arthritis (PsA) who had a prior inadequate response or intolerance to ≥ 1 non-biologic or biologic disease-modifying antirheumatic drug. METHODS: Safety data were pooled and analyzed from two randomized, placebo-controlled phase 3 trials. Both trials evaluated upadacitinib 15 mg and 30 mg once daily, and one trial also evaluated adalimumab 40 mg every other week. Treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) and laboratory data were summarized for four groups: pooled placebo, pooled upadacitinib 15 mg, pooled upadacitinib 30 mg, and adalimumab. TEAEs were reported as exposure-adjusted event rates (events per 100 patient-years [E/100 PY]) up to a data cut-off of June 29, 2020. RESULTS: A total of 2257 patients received ≥ 1 dose of upadacitinib 15 mg (N = 907) or 30 mg (N = 921) for 2504.6 PY of exposure or adalimumab (N = 429) for 549.7 PY of exposure. Upper respiratory tract infection, nasopharyngitis, and increased creatine phosphokinase (CPK) were the most common TEAEs with upadacitinib. Rates of malignancies, adjudicated major adverse cardiovascular events (MACEs) and venous thromboembolic events (VTEs), and deaths were similar across treatment groups. Rates of herpes zoster (HZ) and opportunistic infections (OI; excluding tuberculosis, HZ, and oral candidiasis) were higher with upadacitinib versus adalimumab. Serious infection, anemia, and CPK elevations were most frequent with upadacitinib 30 mg. Potentially clinically significant laboratory abnormalities were uncommon. CONCLUSIONS: Upadacitinib 15 mg and adalimumab had similar safety profiles with the exception of HZ and OIs, consistent with what was observed in rheumatoid arthritis. Rates of malignancies, MACEs, VTEs, and deaths were comparable among patients receiving upadacitinib and adalimumab. No new safety risks emerged with longer-term exposure to upadacitinib. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBERS: SELECT-PsA 1: NCT03104400; SELECT-PsA 2: NCT03104374.

Psoriatic arthritis is a disease that causes inflammation of the skin and joints. Upadacitinib and adalimumab are medicines that can be used to treat this condition. This analysis combined safety data from two studies of adults with psoriatic arthritis who took upadacitinib, adalimumab, or placebo (no medicine) for up to 3 years. The most common side effects of treatment with upadacitinib were infection and inflammation of the nose and throat and higher amounts of a protein in the blood called creatinine phosphokinase. The total number of cancer cases, heart (cardiovascular) problems, blood clots (embolisms), and deaths were similar across treatment groups, including the placebo (no medicine) group. However, more patients who took upadacitinib than adalimumab or placebo (no medicine) had a painful rash that causes blisters known as herpes zoster (shingles) and infections usually seen in people with a weakened immune system. Most patients had normal blood test results and continued their treatment. Overall, upadacitinib was well tolerated for up to 3 years in patients with psoriatic arthritis. These results agree with what has been found in studies of upadacitinib in patients with rheumatoid arthritis. Safety data of upadacitinib use over a longer time will be reported later.

Clinical Management of Herpes Zoster in Patients With Rheumatoid Arthritis or Psoriatic Arthritis Receiving Tofacitinib Treatment.

INTRODUCTION: Risk of herpes zoster (HZ) is increased with Janus kinase inhibitor use. We evaluated clinical study data relating to HZ management in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) or psoriatic arthritis (PsA) receiving tofacitinib. METHODS: This post hoc analysis included data from 21 RA and 3 PsA clinical studies; data were pooled for tofacitinib doses. Outcomes of HZ events (serious and non-serious) and tofacitinib treatment changes were evaluated in response to first and second HZ events. Median time to resolution was stratified by dermatomal involvement, history of HZ prior to tofacitinib, changes to tofacitinib treatment, anti-viral and corticosteroid use, and tofacitinib dose. RESULTS: Seven hundred eighty-three (11.1%, N = 7061) patients with RA experienced ≥ 1 HZ event, 63 (8.0%) of whom had ≥ 2 HZ events. In patients with PsA, 36 (4.6%, N = 783) experienced ≥ 1 HZ event, 1 (2.8%) of whom had ≥ 2 HZ events. For most HZ events, tofacitinib treatment was unchanged or temporarily discontinued. The majority of patients received anti-viral treatment, most within 3 days of onset. Post-herpetic neuralgia developed in 6.9% and 3.2% of patients with RA with first and second events, respectively, and in 2.8% of patients with PsA with a first event. Most first and second events resolved (RA: 97.6% and 96.8%, respectively; PsA: 94.4% and 100%, respectively). Median time to resolution was 22.0 days for first and 15.0 days for second events for RA and 20.5 days for first and 11.0 days for second events (n = 1) for PsA. Time to resolution of first events for RA and PsA was generally numerically shorter for patients with single dermatomal HZ, history of HZ, or anti-viral use versus those without. CONCLUSION: Among patients receiving tofacitinib, recurrent events were more common in patients with RA versus PsA; HZ duration was shorter for repeat events. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT01262118, NCT01484561, NCT00147498, NCT00413660, NCT00550446, NCT00603512, NCT00687193, NCT01164579, NCT00976599, NCT01059864, NCT01359150, NCT02147587, NCT00960440, NCT00847613, NCT00814307, NCT00856544, NCT00853385, NCT01039688, NCT02187055, NCT00413699, NCT00661661, NCT01877668, NCT01882439, NCT01976364.

Patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) or psoriatic arthritis (PsA) have weakened immune responses and are more likely to get herpes zoster (HZ; also known as shingles) infections compared with the general population. Patients who receive treatments for RA or PsA that have an effect on their immune system are more likely to get HZ. Here, we assessed how common HZ was in patients with RA or PsA who were given tofacitinib during clinical trials, the management of these infections, and how this affected the course of the infection. Approximately 1 in 10 patients with RA and 1 in 20 patients with PsA had HZ. Of those patients who had HZ, 1 in 12 with RA and 1 in 36 with PsA were infected again at a later point. A small number of patients also had long-lasting pain after HZ infection. When patients had a HZ infection, most either continued treatment with tofacitinib or paused treatment for a period of time. Pausing or continuing treatment did not appear to affect how long the infection lasted or whether patients had another infection. Most patients received treatment for HZ infection, and patients who were treated had shorter infections. In most patients, infections cleared up and were more likely to clear up more quickly when patients had HZ previously.