Systematic review: infections with JAK inhibitors

2021 ◽  
Vol 1854 (1) ◽  
pp. 11-11
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Jak Inhibitors

scholarly journals AB0332 IMMUNOSUPPRESSIVE AND IMMONOMODULATING AGENTS IN RHEUMATOID ARTHRITIS: A SYSTEMATIC REVIEW OF CLINICAL TRIALS AND THEIR CURRENT DEVELOPMENT STAGE

2020 ◽  
Vol 79 (Suppl 1) ◽  
pp. 1464.1-1465
Author(s):  
J. Blaess ◽  
J. Walther ◽  
J. E. Gottenberg ◽  
J. Sibilia ◽  
L. Arnaud ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Rheumatoid Arthritis ◽  
Systematic Review ◽  
B Cells ◽  
Phase I ◽  
Phase Ii ◽  
Clinical Development ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Jak Inhibitors ◽  
Exclusion Criteria ◽  
Immunomodulating Drugs

Background:Rheumatoid arthritis (RA) is the most frequent chronic inflammatory diseases with an incidence of 0.5% to 1%. Therapeutic arsenal of RA has continuously expanded in recent years with the recent therapeutic progress with the arrival of conventional synthetic disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs (csDMARDs), biological (bDMARDs) and targeted synthetic (tsDMARDs), JAK inhibitors. However, there are still some unmet needs for patients who do not achieve remission and who continue to worsen despite treatments. Of note, only approximately 40% of patients are ACR70 responders, in most randomized controlled trials. For these patients, finding new therapeutic avenues is challenging.Objectives:The objective of our study was to analyze the whole pipeline of immunosuppressive and immunomodulating drugs evaluated in RA and describe their mechanisms of action and stage of clinical development.Methods:We conducted a systematic review of all drug therapies in clinical development in RA in 17 databases of international clinical trials. Inclusion criterion: study from one of the databases using the keywords “Rheumatoid arthritis” (search date: June 1, 2019). Exclusion criteria: non-drug trials, trials not related to RA or duplicates. We also excluded dietary regimen or supplementations, cellular therapies, NSAIDs, glucorticoids or their derivatives and non-immunosuppressive or non-immunomodulating drugs. For each csDMARD, bDMARD and tsDMARD, we considered the study at the most advanced stage. For bDMARDs, we did not take into account biosimilars.Results:The research identified 4652 trials, of which 242 for 243 molecules met the inclusion and exclusion criteria. The developed molecules belong to csDMARDs (n=21), bDMARDs (n=117), tsDMARDs (n=105).Among the 21 csDMARDs molecules: 8 (38%) has been withdrawn, 4 (19%) are already labelled in RA (hydroxychloroquine, leflunomide, methotrexate and sulfasalazine) and 9 (43%) are in development: 1 (11%) is in phase I/II, 5 (56%) in phase II, 3 (33%) in phase IV.Among the 117 bDMARDs molecules: 69 (59%) has been withdrawn, 9 (8%) are labeled in RA (abatacept, adalimumab, anakinra, certolizumab, etanercept, golimumab, infliximab, rituximab, sarilumab, tocilizumab) and 39 (33%) are in development: 9 (23%) in phase I, 3 (8%) in phase I/II, 21 (54%) in phase II, 5 (12%) are in phase III, 1 (3%) in phase IV. bDMARDs currently under development target B cells (n=4), T cells (n=2), T/B cells costimulation (n=2),TNF alpha (n=2), Interleukine 1 or his receptor (n=3), Interleukine 6 or his receptor (n=7), Interleukine 17 (n=4), Interleukine 23 (n=1), GM-CSF (n=1), other cytokines or chemokines (n=5), integrins or adhesion proteins (n=3), interferon receptor (n=1) and various other targets (n=4).Among the 105 tsDMARDs molecules: 64 (61%) has been withdrawn, 6 (6%) JAK inhibitors, have just been or will probably soon be labelled (baricitinib, filgotinib, peficitinib, tofacitinib and upadacitinib), 35 (33%) are in development: 8 (24%) in phase I, 26 (74%) in phase II, 1 (3%) in phase III and. tsDMARDs currently under development target tyrosine kinase (n=12), janus kinase (JAK) (n=3), sphingosine phostate (n=3), PI3K pathway (n=1), phosphodiesterase-4 (n=3) B cells signaling pathways (n=3) and various other targets (n=10).Conclusion:A total of 242 therapeutic trials involving 243 molecules have been or are being evaluated in RA. This development does not always lead to new treatments since 141 (58%) have already been withdrawn. Hopefully, some of the currently evaluated drugs will contribute to improve the therapeutic management of RA patients, requiring a greater personalization of therapeutic strategies, both in the choice of molecules and their place in therapeutic sequences.Disclosure of Interests:Julien Blaess: None declared, Julia Walther: None declared, Jacques-Eric Gottenberg Grant/research support from: BMS, Pfizer, Consultant of: BMS, Sanofi-Genzyme, UCB, Speakers bureau: Abbvie, Eli Lilly and Co., Roche, Sanofi-Genzyme, UCB, Jean Sibilia: None declared, Laurent Arnaud: None declared, Renaud FELTEN: None declared

scholarly journals Spleen and Symptom Responses of JAK Inhibitors in Myelofibrosis; A Systematic Review of Phase 2 and 3 Trials

Blood ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 136 (Supplement 1) ◽  
pp. 26-27
Author(s):  
Muhammad Ans Sharif ◽  
Muhammad Salman Faisal ◽  
Yazan Samhouri ◽  
Laila Hashim ◽  
Muhammad Yasir ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Side Effects ◽  
Phase Ii ◽  
Janus Kinase ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Symptom Improvement ◽  
Jak Inhibitors ◽  
Phase Ii Trials ◽  
Phase Iii Trials ◽  
Symptom Response

Background: The JAK-STAT pathway is a vital signaling pathway for various cytokines and growth factors. An abnormal upregulation of this pathway is seen in myeloproliferative disorders, especially the classic BCR-ABL negative myelofibrosis (MF). Janus kinase inhibitors (JAKi) have been evaluated in various clinical trials regarding their efficacy in improving the outcomes for MF patients. In this review, we looked at the reduction of splenomegaly and symptom improvement as markers for efficacy of JAKi. Methods: We did a comprehensive literature search, following PRISMA guidelines, on PubMed, Cochrane, clinicaltrials.gov and Embase databases. We used MeSH terms and related keywords for MF and JAKi, including generic and trade names. We screened 3261 articles and selected 23 trials for our study. Case reports, case series, meta-analysis, review articles, observational studies, phase I trials and studies not reporting spleen response were excluded. Spleen and symptom responses were used to determine the efficacy of JAK inhibitors. Spleen volume reduction (SVR) by >35%, spleen length reduction (SLR) by >50% and total symptom score (TSS) improvement by >50% were set as benchmarks for a positive response. Results: We included 23 trials (n= 4739) in our review. There were 15 phase II trials (n=964) and 8 phase III trials (n=3775). Of these 23 trials, 7 trials (n=598) included patients with median age below 65 years, while 16 trials (n=4141) included patients of median age more than 65 years. Of the 9 of trials of ruxolitinib, 4 were phase III trials (n= 2809) and 5 were phase II trials (n= 416). The dose of ruxolitinib used in these trials ranged from 5 mg twice daily to 20 mg twice daily. The percentage of patients who achieved spleen response ranged from 15.6% to 71.7%. There were 5 trials (n= 861) that evaluated efficacy of momelotinib. Three were phase II trials (n= 221), while 2 were phase III trials (n=326). The doses ranged from 150mg to 300mg. The splenic response in patients ranged from 7% to 48%. In one phase 3 randomized control trial, efficacy of momelotinib (N=215)and roxulotinib (N=217) were compared, and were found to be equally efficacious in terms of spleen response (26.5% in the momelotinib group while 29% in the ruxolitinib group) and symptom response (28.4% in the momelotinib group and 42.2% in the ruxolitinib group). In 4 trials (n= 453) of fedratinib, there were 2 phase II trials (n= 127) and 2 phase III trials (n=326). The splenic response ranged from 31% to 73% of the patient population. In phase II JAKARTA2 study, patients who were resistant or intolerant to ruxolitinib showed SVR of 31%. Lestaurtunib, Ilgitanib, pacritinib and itacitinib were studied in 2,1,1, and 1 phase II trials, respectively. The splenic response was 75%, 31%, 31%, and 68.8% respectively. Symptom response was reported in 12 studies (N=1477). The percentage of patients who achieved symptom response receiving roxulotinib were 20.8-49%, momelotinib (28.4-30.7%), ictatinib (51.1-59.4%), practinib (48%), and fedratinib (27-36%). In terms of safety, the most common hematological side effects seen were anemia (15% - 65%), thrombocytopenia (1.3% - 64%) and neutropenia (1% - 28%). These side effects were seen equally with different medications. The most common non hematological adverse effects included diarrhea (4% - 32%), abdominal pain (2.6% - 27.1%) and fatigue (1.3% - 10%). Conclusion Splenomegaly and associated symptoms are major source of morbidity in MF patients. The rapid advancement in novel agents in the last decade changed the treatment paradigm in this disorder. Our systematic review summarizes the effect of JAKi on spleen and symptom responses. Disclosures Anwer: Incyte, Seattle Genetics, Acetylon Pharmaceuticals, AbbVie Pharma, Astellas Pharma, Celegene, Millennium Pharmaceuticals.: Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau. Fazal:Bristol Myers Squibb: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Speakers Bureau; Karyopharm: Speakers Bureau; Incyte: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Takeda: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Agios: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; GlaxoSmithKline: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Gilead/Kite: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Novartis: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Amgen: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Stemline: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Jazz: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Janssen: Speakers Bureau.

A systematic review and meta-analysis of infection risk with small molecule JAK inhibitors in rheumatoid arthritis

Rheumatology ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 58 (10) ◽  
pp. 1755-1766 ◽  
Author(s):  
Katie Bechman ◽  
Sujith Subesinghe ◽  
Sam Norton ◽  
Fabiola Atzeni ◽  
Massimo Galli ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Rheumatoid Arthritis ◽  
Systematic Review ◽  
Opportunistic Infections ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Incidence Rates ◽  
Jak Inhibitors ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Registration Number ◽  
Rate Ratios ◽  
Phase Ii And Iii

Abstract Objectives To evaluate the risk of serious infection (SI) and herpes zoster (HZ) in rheumatoid arthritis patients receiving JAK inhibitors. Methods We conducted a systematic literature review and meta-analysis of phase II and III randomized controlled trials of tofacitinib (5 mg bid), baricitinib (4 mg od) and upadacitinib (15 mg od). Patient-exposure years were calculated. A per-protocol analysis was applied, incorporating follow-up time from patients randomized to placebo who cross into the treatment arm. Pooled incidence rates per 100 person-years of SI and HZ were calculated. Incidence rate ratios (IRRs) of drug vs placebo were compared using a meta-synthesis approach. Results Twenty-one studies were included in the meta-analysis; 11 tofacitinib (5888 patients), six baricitinib (3520 patients) and four upadacitinib studies (1736 patients). For SI, the incidence rates were 1.97 (95% CI: 1.41, 2.68), 3.16 (95% CI: 2.07, 4.63) and 3.02 (95% CI: 0.98, 7.04), respectively. The IRRs comparing treatment arm to placebo were statistically non-significant: 1.22 (95% CI: 0.60, 2.45), 0.80 (95% CI: 0.46, 1.38) and 1.14 (95% CI: 0.24, 5.43), respectively. For HZ, the incidence rates were 2.51 (95% CI: 1.87, 3.30), 3.16 (95% CI: 2.07, 4.63) and 2.41 (95% CI: 0.66, 6.18), respectively. The IRR of HZ comparing baricitinib with placebo was 2.86 (95% CI: 1.26, 6.50). Non-significant IRRs were seen with tofacitinib and upadacitinib: 1.38 (95% CI: 0.66, 2.88) and 0.78 (95% CI: 0.19, 3.22), respectively. Indicator opportunistic infections excluding HZ were too rare to provide meaningful incidence rates. Conclusion The absolute SI rates were low. However across the JAK inhibitors, the incidence of HZ is higher than expected for the population (3.23 per 100 patient-years). While the risk was numerically greatest with baricitinib, indirect comparisons between the drugs did not demonstrate any significant difference in risk. Systematic review registration number Prospero 2017 CRD4201707879.

JAK inhibitors and psoriatic arthritis: A systematic review and meta-analysis

2021 ◽  
pp. 102902
Author(s):  
Francesco Campanaro ◽  
Alberto Batticciotto ◽  
Andrea Zaffaroni ◽  
Antonella Cappelli ◽  
Marco Paolo Donadini ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Psoriatic Arthritis ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Jak Inhibitors

scholarly journals Efficacy of Monotherapy with Biologics and JAK Inhibitors for the Treatment of Rheumatoid Arthritis: A Systematic Review

2018 ◽  
Vol 35 (10) ◽  
pp. 1535-1563 ◽  
Author(s):  
Paul Emery ◽  
Janet E. Pope ◽  
Klaus Kruger ◽  
Ralph Lippe ◽  
Ryan DeMasi ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Rheumatoid Arthritis ◽  
Systematic Review ◽  
Jak Inhibitors

scholarly journals Efficacy and tolerability of Janus kinase inhibitors in myelofibrosis: a systematic review and network meta-analysis

2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (7) ◽  
Author(s):  
Léa Sureau ◽  
Corentin Orvain ◽  
Jean-Christophe Ianotto ◽  
Valérie Ugo ◽  
Jean-Jacques Kiladjian ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Myeloproliferative Neoplasm ◽  
Janus Kinase ◽  
Comparable Efficacy ◽  
Line Treatment ◽  
Jak Inhibitors ◽  
First Line ◽  
Patient Profile ◽  
First Line Treatment

AbstractMyelofibrosis is a myeloproliferative neoplasm associated with constitutional symptoms, increasing splenomegaly, and worsening cytopenias. Janus kinase (JAK) inhibitors have been used for the treatment of myelofibrosis for several years, but there is a lack of comparative information between those treatments. A systematic review and network meta-analysis was performed on randomized controlled trials in patients with myelofibrosis receiving JAK inhibitor or placebo or control. Primary outcomes were efficacy on spleen volume reduction and total symptom score reduction. Additional analyses were conducted on anemia and thrombopenia events. Seven studies were included in the network meta-analysis including 1953 patients randomly assigned to four JAK inhibitors—ruxolitinib, fedratinib, pacritinib, momelotinib—or control. In first-line therapy, momelotinib and fedratinib were associated with comparable efficacy to ruxolitinib, and with less toxicity on erythrocytes and platelets, respectively. Pacritinib was less effective on splenomegaly than ruxolitinib as a first-line treatment but seemed effective in second line, after ruxolitinib exposure. Fedratinib and ruxolitinib that are FDA approved in myelofibrosis have both confirmed being valuable option to treat splenomegaly and constitutional symptoms, and their slightly different tolerance-profiles can guide therapeutic choice for first-line treatment, according to patient profile. Momelotinib could be another option especially due to its positive effect on anemia.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document