Cardiovascular Safety During Treatment With Baricitinib in Rheumatoid Arthritis.
ABSTRACT: OBJECTIVE:To assess the frequency of cardiovascular and venous thromboembolic events in clinical studies of baricitinib, an oral, selective JAK1 and JAK2 inhibitor approved in more than 50 countries for the treatment of moderately-to-severely active rheumatoid arthritis (RA). METHODS:Data were pooled from 9 RA studies. Placebo comparison up to 24 weeks included data from 6 studies. Randomized dose comparison between baricitinib doses of 2 mg and 4 mg used data from 4 studies and from the associated long-term extension study. The data analysis set designated "All-bari-RA" included all baricitinib exposures at any dose. RESULTS:Overall, 3,492 RA patients received baricitinib (7,860 patient-years of exposure). No imbalance compared to the placebo group was seen in the incidence of major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) (incidence rates [IRs] of 0.5 per 100 patient-years for placebo and 0.8 per 100 patient-years for 4 mg baricitinib), arterial thrombotic events (ATE) (IRs of 0.5 per 100 patient-years for placebo and 0.5 per 100 patient-years for 4 mg baricitinib), or congestive heart failure (CHF) broad term (IRs of 4.3 per 100 patient-years for placebo and 2.4 per 100 patient-years for 4 mg baricitinib). Deep vein thrombosis (DVT)/pulmonary embolism (PE) were reported in 0 of 1,070 patients treated with placebo and 6 of 997 patients treated with 4 mg baricitinib during the placebo-controlled period; these events were serious in 2 of 6 patients, while all 6 had risk factors and 1 patient developed DVT/PE after discontinuation of the study drug. In the 2 mg-4 mg-extended data analysis set, IRs of DVT/PE were comparable between the doses across event types (IRs of 0.5 per 100 patient-years in those receiving 2 mg baricitinib and 0.6 per 100 patient-years in those receiving 4 mg baricitinib). In the All-bari-RA data analysis set, the rates were stable over time, with an IR of DVT/PE of 0.5 per 100 patient-years. CONCLUSION:In RA clinical trials, no association was found between baricitinib treatment and the incidence of MACE, ATE, or CHF. With regard to incidence of DVT/PE, 6 events occurred in patients treated with 4 mg baricitinib, but no cases of DVT/PE were reported in the placebo group. During longer-term evaluation, the incidence of DVT/PE was similar between the baricitinib dose groups, with consistent IR values over time, and this was similar to the rates previously reported in patients with RA.
Project description: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)).
Project description:BACKGROUND:Tofacitinib is an oral, small molecule JAK inhibitor for the treatment of ulcerative colitis (UC). AIM:To report incidence of deep vein thrombosis (DVT) and pulmonary embolism (PE) in the tofacitinib UC programme. METHODS:DVT and PE were evaluated from one phase 2 and two phase 3 induction studies, one phase 3 maintenance study and an ongoing, open-label, long-term extension (OLE) study (September 2018 datacut). Data were analysed in induction, maintenance and overall (patients receiving ? 1 dose of tofacitinib 5 or 10 mg b.d. in any phase 2, 3 or OLE study) cohorts. RESULTS:1157 patients (2404 patient-years' exposure; ? 6.1 years' tofacitinib treatment) were evaluated in the overall cohort. In induction, one placebo-treated patient had DVT and one had PE; no tofacitinib-treated patients had DVT/PE. In maintenance, one placebo-treated patient had DVT and one had PE; no tofacitinib-treated patients had DVT/PE. In the overall cohort, one patient had DVT (incidence rate [patients with events/100 patient-years; 95% CI]: 0.04 [0.00-0.23]); four had PE (0.16 [0.04-0.41]); all received predominant dose tofacitinib 10 mg b.d.; all had venous thromboembolism risk factors alongside UC. CONCLUSIONS:In this post hoc analysis of patients with UC, during tofacitinib exposure, one patient had DVT and four had PE, all during the OLE study, on predominant dose 10 mg b.d. (83% of overall cohort patients received predominant dose 10 mg b.d.) with venous thromboembolism risk factors. This analysis is limited by small sample size and limited drug exposure; further studies are needed. ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT00787202, NCT01465763, NCT01458951, NCT01458574, NCT01470612.
Project description:OBJECTIVES:To evaluate the effect of baricitinib on patient-reported outcomes (PROs) in patients with active rheumatoid arthritis (RA) and an inadequate response or intolerance to conventional synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs. METHODS:In this phase III study, patients were randomised 1:1:1 to placebo (N=228), baricitinib 2?mg once daily (QD, N=229) or baricitinib 4?mg QD (N=227). PROs included the Health Assessment Questionnaire-Disability Index (HAQ-DI), Patient's Global Assessment of Disease Activity (PtGA), patient's assessment of pain, measures from patient electronic daily diaries (duration and severity of morning joint stiffness (MJS), Worst Tiredness, Worst Joint Pain), Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy-Fatigue (FACIT-F), SF-36, EuroQol 5-D index scores and visual analogue scales (VAS) and the Work Productivity and Activity Impairment Questionnaire-RA. The primary time point for the study was week 12. Treatment comparisons were assessed with logistic regression for categorical measures and analysis of covariance for continuous variables. RESULTS:Statistically significant improvements were observed for both baricitinib groups versus placebo in HAQ-DI, PtGA, pain, daily diary measures, EuroQoL index scores and SF-36 physical component score at week 12 and for those measures when assessed at week 24. Baricitinib 2 mg and baricitinib 4 mg were statistically significantly improved versus placebo for the EuroQoL VAS and FACIT-F, respectively, at week 24. CONCLUSIONS:Baricitinib 2 or 4?mg provided significant improvement versus placebo in PROs across different domains of RA, including physical function, MJS, fatigue, pain and quality of life. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER:NCT01721057; Results.
Project description:Statins may reduce the risk of first and recurrent venous thromboembolism (VTE). No data are available on their potential benefit in patients treated with the oral anticoagulant rivaroxaban.The EINSTEIN DVT/PE and EINSTEIN Extension studies compared rivaroxaban with standard of care (n=8280) and placebo (n=1188), respectively. The incidences of recurrent VTE and major bleeding per 100 patient-years for exposure (or not) to statins were calculated. A Cox proportional hazards model was constructed, stratified by index event and intended treatment duration, with statin use as a time-dependent variable, for each treatment group (rivaroxaban vs enoxaparin/vitamin K antagonist or placebo) and adjusted for relevant variables.In EINSTEIN DVT/PE, 1509 (18.3%) patients used statins during the at-risk period, and 6731 (81.7%) did not. Overall, 2.6 recurrent VTEs occurred per 100 patient-years with statin use compared with 3.8 per 100 patient-years without statins (adjusted hazard ratio [HR] 0.76; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.46-1.25). HRs for recurrent VTE were similar for concomitant use of rivaroxaban-statin and enoxaparin/VKA-statin. Major bleeding events occurred in 3.0 per 100 patient-years with statin use compared with 2.3 per 100 patient-years without statins (adjusted HR 0.77; 95% CI 0.46-1.29). Due to adjustments in the Cox regression model, the direction of this HR is in contrast to the crude comparison. In EINSTEIN Extension, no recurrent VTEs occurred with statin use in the rivaroxaban group compared with 1.6 per 100 patient-years without statins. In the placebo group, 12.2 recurrent VTEs occurred per 100 patient-years with statin use compared with 13.2 per 100 patient-years without (adjusted HR 0.81; 95% CI 0.35-1.86).The effect of statins in this secondary analysis of the EINSTEIN VTE treatment program is consistent with other studies that suggest a reduced risk of recurrent VTE, but conclusive evidence of this benefit is lacking. Statins are simple to use, inexpensive, very safe and do not cause bleeding. Therefore, the potential effect on reducing recurrent VTE, which is in the range of that of acetylsalicylic acid, deserves evaluation in a large randomized trial.ClinicalTrials.gov: EINSTEIN PE, NCT00439777; EINSTEIN DVT, NCT00440193; EINSTEIN Extension, NCT00439725.
Project description:Rheumatoid arthritis (RA) is associated with cardiovascular disease (CVD), but little is known about its association with another form of vascular disorder, venous thromboembolism (VTE).A retrospective cohort study was conducted using US insurance claims. RA and non-RA patients were matched on age, sex, and index date. Incidence rates (IRs) and rate ratios (RRs) of VTE, defined as the composite of deep vein thrombosis (DVT) or pulmonary embolism (PE), were calculated. Cox proportional hazards models compared VTE risks between RA and non-RA patients, adjusting for VTE risk factors such as CVD, surgery, hospitalization, medications, and acute-phase reactants.Over the mean followup of 2 years, the IR for VTE among RA patients was 6.1 per 1,000 person-years, 2.4 times higher (95% confidence interval [95% CI] 2.1-2.8) than the rate of non-RA patients. The IRs for both DVT (RR 2.2, 95% CI 1.9-2.6) and PE (RR 2.7, 95% CI 2.2-3.5) were higher in RA patients compared with non-RA patients. After adjusting for risk factors of VTE, the VTE risk remained elevated in RA patients (hazard ratio 1.4, 95% CI 1.1-1.7) compared to non-RA patients. The result was similar after further adjustment for elevated acute-phase reactants (hazard ratio 1.5, 95% CI 0.3-6.5). One-third of patients who developed VTE had at least 1 major VTE risk factor 90 days before and after the VTE event.Our results showed an increased risk of developing VTE for RA patients compared with non-RA patients. The risk was attenuated but remained elevated even after adjusting for various risk factors for VTE.
Project description:Patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) are at increased risk for herpes zoster (HZ) (i.e., shingles). The aim of this study was to determine whether treatment with tofacitinib increases the risk of HZ in patients with RA.HZ cases were identified as those reported by trial investigators from the databases of the phase II, phase III, and long-term extension (LTE) clinical trials in the Tofacitinib RA Development Program. Crude incidence rates (IRs) of HZ per 100 patient-years (with 95% confidence intervals [95% CIs]) were calculated by exposure group. Logistic regression analyses were performed to evaluate potential risk factors for HZ (e.g., age, prednisone use).Among 4,789 participants, 239 were identified as having tofacitinib-associated HZ during the phase II, phase III, and LTE trials, of whom 208 (87%) were female and whose median age was 57 years (range 21-75 years). One HZ case (0.4%) was multidermatomal; none of the cases involved visceral dissemination or death. Twenty-four patients with HZ (10%) permanently discontinued treatment with tofacitinib, and 16 (7%) were either hospitalized or received intravenous antiviral drugs. The crude HZ IR across the development program was 4.4 per 100 patient-years (95% CI 3.8-4.9), but the IR was substantially higher within Asia (7.7 per 100 patient-years, 95% CI 6.4-9.3). Older age was associated with HZ (odds ratio 1.9, 95% CI 1.5-2.6), and IRs for HZ were similar between patients receiving 5 mg tofacitinib twice daily (4.4 per 100 patient-years, 95% CI 3.2-6.0) and those receiving 10 mg twice daily (4.2 per 100 patient-years, 95% CI 3.1-5.8). In the phase III trials among placebo recipients, the incidence of HZ was 1.5 per 100 patient-years (95% CI 0.5-4.6).In the Tofacitinib RA Development Program, increased rates of HZ were observed in patients treated with tofacitinib compared with those receiving placebo, particularly among patients within Asia. Complicated HZ among tofacitinib-treated patients was rare.
Project description:This article evaluates the efficacy and safety of baricitinib 4 mg versus placebo in United States including Puerto Rico (US) and rest of the world (ROW) subpopulations using data pooled from RA-BEAM and RA-BUILD, which enrolled patients with moderate-to-severe adult-onset rheumatoid arthritis (RA).In RA-BEAM, patients with an inadequate response (IR) to methotrexate, at least one X-ray erosion, and high sensitivity C-reactive protein (hsCRP) ≥ 6 mg/L were randomized to placebo or orally administered baricitinib 4 mg daily or subcutaneously administered adalimumab 40 mg every other week. In RA-BUILD, patients with an IR to at least one conventional synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drug (csDMARD) and with hsCRP ≥ 3.6 mg/L were randomized to placebo or baricitinib 2 or 4 mg daily. Patients in both trials were biologic naive. In this post hoc analysis, data from both studies were pooled (714 baricitinib 4 mg-treated, 716 placebo-treated patients).Overall, 188 US and 1242 ROW patients were included. Subgroups differed in baseline characteristics including race, weight, age, time since RA diagnosis, current corticosteroid use, and previous csDMARD use. At weeks 12 and 24, baricitinib-treated patients had larger responses compared to placebo-treated patients for multiple efficacy outcomes: American College of Rheumatology 20/50/70 response, low disease activity, remission, Disease Activity Score 28-C-reactive protein, and Health Assessment Questionnaire-Disability Index. Overall, similar efficacy was observed in US and ROW subgroups with no notable safety differences between subgroups at weeks 12 or 24.Baricitinib 4 mg was efficacious compared to placebo in US and ROW subpopulations. Safety was similar between subgroups.Eli Lilly & Company and Incyte Corporation.ClinicalTrials.gov identifiers, NCT01721057; NCT01710358.
Project description:Patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) may experience residual pain and functional impairment despite good control of disease activity. This study compared improvements in pain and physical function in patients with well-controlled RA after 24 weeks' treatment with baricitinib, adalimumab or placebo in the 52-week RA-BEAM phase III study. Adults with active RA and inadequate response to methotrexate received baricitinib 4 mg once daily, adalimumab 40 mg every two weeks or placebo, with background methotrexate. Patients (N = 1010) were categorised as in remission, in remission or low disease activity, or not in remission or low disease activity at week 24. For patients in remission or low disease activity (n = 310), improvements in mean pain and physical function scores at week 24 were significantly greater with baricitinib than placebo (p < 0.001 and p < 0.01, respectively) and adalimumab (p < 0.05 for both). For both outcomes, differences between adalimumab and placebo were not significant. The proportions of patients in remission or low disease activity with minimal or no pain and with normalised physical function were numerically greater with baricitinib than placebo. Baricitinib 4 mg once daily provided enhanced improvement in pain and physical function in patients with well-controlled RA, suggesting it may produce effects beyond immunomodulation.
Project description:INTRODUCTION: Patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) have an increased risk of infection and this risk appears to be higher with anti-TNF (tumor necrosis factor) agents. We pooled data from the cumulative abatacept RA clinical development program, both double-blind and open-label periods, to estimate the incidence rates (IRs) of infections requiring hospitalization including pneumonia and opportunistic infections, in comparison with RA patients treated with non-biologic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs) from several reference cohorts. METHODS: Infections reported in seven abatacept clinical trials of RA patients (double-blind and open-label periods) were tabulated. Comparisons were made between the observed IRs in abatacept-treated patients and those in over 133,000 patients exposed to non-biologic DMARDs in six reference RA cohorts. Age- and sex-adjusted IRs of infections requiring hospitalization, including pneumonia (most frequent hospital infection), were used to estimate the expected IRs with abatacept by the method of indirect adjustment. Standardized incidence ratios (SIR) and 95% CI were calculated comparing incidence in the cumulative abatacept experience with incidence in each RA cohort. RESULTS: A total of 1,955 (double-blind period) and 4,134 (double-blind + open-label periods with a cumulative exposure of 8,392 person-years) abatacept-treated RA patients were analyzed. Observed IRs for infections requiring hospitalization during the double-blind period were 3.05 per 100-patient years for abatacept-treated patients and 2.15 per 100 patient years for placebo. In the cumulative population, observed IR for infections requiring hospitalization was 2.72 per 100-patient years. Rates for abatacept were similar to expected IRs based on other RA non-biologic DMARD cohorts. CONCLUSIONS: IRs of infections requiring hospitalization and pneumonia in abatacept trials are consistent with expected IRs based on reference RA DMARD cohorts. RA patients are at higher risk of infection compared with the general population, making the RA DMARD cohorts an appropriate reference group. The safety of abatacept, including incidence of infections requiring hospitalization, will continue to be monitored in a post-marketing surveillance program.
Project description:INTRODUCTION:This study assessed if concomitant use of conventional synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (csDMARDs) or corticosteroids altered the response or safety outcomes to baricitinib in rheumatoid arthritis (RA) patients. METHODS:Patients with???6 swollen/tender joints and no prior biologic DMARD were eligible for study inclusion. In RA-BUILD, csDMARD-inadequate responder (IR) patients were randomized to placebo or baricitinib (2 or 4 mg) once daily (QD). In RA-BEAM, methotrexate (MTX)-IR patients were randomized to placebo QD, baricitinib 4-mg QD, or adalimumab 40-mg biweekly. Patients continued background csDMARD (including MTX) therapy. This post hoc analysis of placebo and baricitinib 4-mg patients assessed the number and type of concomitant csDMARDS and concurrent corticosteroid use. RESULTS:From 716 placebo patients, 71, 21, and 6% were taking MTX alone, MTX?+???1 csDMARD, and non-MTX csDMARDs, respectively; from 714 baricitinib patients, the rates were 74, 18, and 6%; 56% of placebo and 55% of baricitinib patients used corticosteroids at baseline (mean dose, 6.0 mg/day for both groups); patients continued use throughout the studies. The odds ratios for achieving American College of Rheumatology response at the 20% improvement level (ACR20) and Clinical Disease Activity Index (CDAI)???10 at week 12 favored baricitinib for most subgroups; no significant interactions were observed. Rates of adverse events were similar regardless of csDMARD group or corticosteroid use. There were numerically more serious adverse events in placebo patients taking corticosteroids (4.2 vs. 1.6%) and a higher rate of discontinuations in baricitinib patients taking corticosteroids (4.1 vs. 1.2%). CONCLUSIONS:Baricitinib was efficacious regardless of concomitant use of csDMARDs or corticosteroids; the incidence of adverse events was similar across all groups of patients. FUNDING:Eli Lilly and Company and Incyte Corporation.