The JAK inhibitor tofacitinib for active rheumatoid arthritis: results from Phase III trials

2013 ◽  
Vol 8 (3) ◽  
pp. 315-326 ◽  
Author(s):  
Eva Salgado ◽  
Juan J Gómez-Reino
Keyword(s):  
Rheumatoid Arthritis ◽  
Active Rheumatoid Arthritis ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Jak Inhibitor ◽  
Phase Iii Trials

scholarly journals Efficacy and safety of sarilumab monotherapy versus adalimumab monotherapy for the treatment of patients with active rheumatoid arthritis (MONARCH): a randomised, double-blind, parallel-group phase III trial

2016 ◽  
Vol 76 (5) ◽  
pp. 840-847 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gerd R Burmester ◽  
Yong Lin ◽  
Rahul Patel ◽  
Janet van Adelsberg ◽  
Erin K Mangan ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Rheumatoid Arthritis ◽  
Disease Activity ◽  
Active Rheumatoid Arthritis ◽  
Activity Index ◽  
Joint Disease ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Inadequate Response ◽  
Efficacy And Safety ◽  
Double Blind ◽  
End Point

ObjectivesTo compare efficacy and safety of sarilumab monotherapy with adalimumab monotherapy in patients with active rheumatoid arthritis (RA) who should not continue treatment with methotrexate (MTX) due to intolerance or inadequate response.MethodsMONARCH was a randomised, active-controlled, double-blind, double-dummy, phase III superiority trial. Patients received sarilumab (200 mg every 2 weeks (q2w)) or adalimumab (40 mg q2w) monotherapy for 24 weeks. The primary end point was change from baseline in 28-joint disease activity score using erythrocyte sedimentation rate (DAS28-ESR) at week 24.ResultsSarilumab was superior to adalimumab in the primary end point of change from baseline in DAS28-ESR (−3.28 vs −2.20; p<0.0001). Sarilumab-treated patients achieved significantly higher American College of Rheumatology 20/50/70 response rates (sarilumab: 71.7%/45.7%/23.4%; adalimumab: 58.4%/29.7%/11.9%; all p≤0.0074) and had significantly greater improvement in Health Assessment Questionnaire-Disability Index (p=0.0037). Importantly, at week 24, more patients receiving sarilumab compared with adalimumab achieved Clinical Disease Activity Index remission (7.1% vs 2.7%; nominal p=0.0468) and low disease activity (41.8% vs 24.9%; nominal p=0.0005, supplemental analysis). Adverse events occurred in 63.6% (adalimumab) and 64.1% (sarilumab) of patients, the most common being neutropenia and injection site reactions (sarilumab) and headache and worsening RA (adalimumab). Incidences of infections (sarilumab: 28.8%; adalimumab: 27.7%) and serious infections (1.1%, both groups) were similar, despite neutropenia differences.ConclusionsSarilumab monotherapy demonstrated superiority to adalimumab monotherapy by improving the signs and symptoms and physical functions in patients with RA who were unable to continue MTX treatment. The safety profiles of both therapies were consistent with anticipated class effects.Trial registration numberNCT02332590.

scholarly journals Safety Profile of Baricitinib in Patients with Active Rheumatoid Arthritis with over 2 Years Median Time in Treatment

2018 ◽  
Vol 46 (1) ◽  
pp. 7-18 ◽  
Author(s):  
Josef S. Smolen ◽  
Mark C. Genovese ◽  
Tsutomu Takeuchi ◽  
David L. Hyslop ◽  
William L. Macias ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Rheumatoid Arthritis ◽  
Safety Profile ◽  
Active Rheumatoid Arthritis ◽  
Prolonged Exposure ◽  
Janus Kinase ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Integrated Analysis ◽  
Drug Discontinuation ◽  
Adverse Cardiovascular Event ◽  
Link Type

Objective.Baricitinib is an oral, once-daily selective Janus kinase (JAK1/JAK2) inhibitor for adults with moderately to severely active rheumatoid arthritis (RA). We evaluated baricitinib’s safety profile through 288 weeks (up to September 1, 2016) with an integrated database [8 phase III/II/Ib trials, 1 longterm extension (LTE)].Methods.The “all-bari-RA” group included patients who received any baricitinib dose. Placebo comparison was based on the 6 studies with 4 mg and placebo up to Week 24 (“placebo-4 mg” dataset). Dose response assessment was based on 4 studies with 2 mg and 4 mg including LTE data (“2 mg-4 mg–extended”). The uncommon events description used the non-controlled all-bari-RA.Results.There were 3492 patients who received baricitinib for 6637 total patient-years (PY) of exposure (median 2.1 yrs, maximum 5.5 yrs). No differences in rates of death, adverse events leading to drug discontinuation, malignancies, major adverse cardiovascular event (MACE), or serious infections were seen for 4 mg versus placebo or for 4 mg versus 2 mg. Infections including herpes zoster were significantly more frequent for 4 mg versus placebo. Deep vein thrombosis/pulmonary embolism were reported with 4 mg but not placebo [all-bari-RA incidence rate (IR) 0.5/100 PY]; the IR did not differ between doses (0.5 vs 0.6/100 PY, 2 mg vs 4 mg, respectively) or compared to published RA rates. All-bari-RA had 6 cases of lymphoma (IR 0.09/100 PY), 3 gastrointestinal perforations (0.05/100 PY), 10 cases of tuberculosis (all in endemic areas; 0.15/100 PY), and 22 all-cause deaths (0.33/100 PY). IR for malignancies (0.8/100 PY) and MACE (0.5/100 PY) were low and did not increase with prolonged exposure.Conclusion.In this integrated analysis of patients with moderate to severe active RA with exposure up to 5.5 years, baricitinib has an acceptable safety profile in the context of demonstrated efficacy. Trial registration numbers:NCT01185353,NCT00902486,NCT01469013,NCT01710358,NCT01721044,NCT01721057,NCT01711359, andNCT01885078atclinicaltrials.gov.

scholarly journals Golimumab for Rheumatoid Arthritis

2019 ◽  
Vol 8 (3) ◽  
pp. 387 ◽  
Author(s):  
Eleftherios Pelechas ◽  
Paraskevi Voulgari ◽  
Alexandros Drosos
Keyword(s):  
Rheumatoid Arthritis ◽  
Opportunistic Infections ◽  
Current Data ◽  
Genetically Engineered ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Real World Data ◽  
Standard Dosage ◽  
Subcutaneous Dose ◽  
Phase Iii Trials ◽  
Factor Α

Since the advent of infliximab for the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis (RA), new genetically-engineered molecules have appeared. This review aims to present the current data and body of evidence for golimumab (GLM). Safety, efficacy, tolerability and immunogenicity are all being investigated, not only through phase III trials (GO-BEFORE, GO-FORWARD, GO-AFTER, GO-MORE, GO-FURTHER, GO-NICE), but also through studies of real-world data. It seems that GLM in the subcutaneous form is an efficacious molecule with a good safety profile at the standard dosage scheme, but a 100 mg subcutaneous dose is associated with a higher risk of opportunistic infections, lymphoma and demyelination. Furthermore, when compared to other tumor necrosis factor-α molecules, it is non-inferior, and, at some points, such as when it comes to immunogenicity and persistence of the drug, it has a better profile. In summary, GLM is an effective, well-tolerated option for the treatment of RA, for both the clinician and patients who are seeking a convenient dosage scheme.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document