Tofacitinib and risk of cardiovascular outcomes: results from the Safety of TofAcitinib in Routine care patients with Rheumatoid Arthritis (STAR-RA) study

ObjectivesRecent results from ‘ORAL Surveillance’ trial have raised concerns regarding the cardiovascular safety of tofacitinib in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA). We further examined this safety concern in the real-world setting.MethodsWe created two cohorts of patients with RA initiating treatment with tofacitinib or tumour necrosis factor inhibitors (TNFI) using deidentified data from Optum Clinformatics (2012–2020), IBM MarketScan (2012–2018) and Medicare (parts A, B and D, 2012–2017) claims databases: (1) A ‘real-world evidence (RWE) cohort’ consisting of routine care patients and (2) A ‘randomised controlled trial (RCT)-duplicate cohort’ mimicking inclusion and exclusion criteria of the ORAL surveillance trial to calibrate results against the trial findings. Cox proportional hazards models with propensity score fine stratification weighting were used to estimate HR and 95% CIs for composite outcome of myocardial infarction and stroke and accounting for 76 potential confounders. Database-specific effect estimates were pooled using fixed effects models with inverse-variance weighting.ResultsIn the RWE cohort, 102 263 patients were identified of whom 12 852 (12.6%) initiated tofacitinib. The pooled weighted HR (95% CI) comparing tofacitinib with TNFI was 1.01 (0.83 to 1.23) in RWE cohort and 1.24 (0.90 to 1.69) in RCT-duplicate cohort which aligned closely with ORAL-surveillance results (HR: 1.33, 95% CI 0.91 to 1.94).ConclusionsWe did not find evidence for an increased risk of cardiovascular outcomes with tofacitinib in patients with RA treated in the real-world setting; however, tofacitinib was associated with an increased risk of cardiovascular outcomes, although statistically non-significant, in patients with RA with cardiovascular risk factors.Trial registration numberNCT04772248.

The Efficacy of Baricitinib in Real-World Patients with Refractory or Severe Juvenile Dermatomyositis:A Monocentric Retrospective Study

Objective To evaluate the efficacy and safety of low dose baricitinib in children with refractory or severe juvenile dermatomyositis (JDM) in a real-world setting. Methods A monocentric retrospective real-world study was conducted, in which fourteen refractory and one severe newly diagnosed JDM patients were included. These patients were all treated by low dose baricitinib (below the recommended dose) combined with corticosteroids and or immunosuppressive agents. Clinical data were collected at the baseline and 4, 12, 24 weeks after baricitinib implication. Treatment response (complete response (CR), Partial response (PR) and non-response (NR)) was evaluated using both the Paediatric Rheumatology International Trials Organization (PRINTO) remission criteria and skin Disease Activity Score (DAS). All the adverse events (AEs) were recorded. Results After baricitinib treatment, all 15 patients showed improvement of skin involvement, including 14 patients with recurrent skin rashes and one newly diagnosed JDM. Calcinosis stabilized in two patients (2/3) and partially regressed in one. Four patients (4/15) had interstitial lung disease (ILD), which normalized in one, improved in two and stabilized in one. One patient complicated with macrophage activation syndrome (MAS) achieved clinical remission. CR was achieved in 3/15 patients, ranging from 4 to 12 weeks after baricitinib initiation. Five patients (5/15) got PR 4 to 24 weeks after baricitinib use. Daily steroid dosage was decreased from 0.632 mg/kg to 0.357 mg/kg (P = 0.043) at 24 weeks in all responders. However, there was no statistically difference in muscle improvement. One patient was stopped using baricitinib because of varicella zoster virus infection, while no other serious side effect was observed in this study. Conclusion Low dose baricitinib had efficacy and was safe to applied in refractory or severe JDM patients, especially for recurrent skin rashes. Baricitinib may also be helpful for JDM complicated with ILD and MAS.

Real-world effectiveness of liraglutide versus dulaglutide in Japanese patients with type 2 diabetes: a retrospective study

Real-world data comparing the effectiveness of various glucagon-like peptide 1 receptor agonists (GLP-1 RAs) in type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) are limited. We investigated the clinical effectiveness of liraglutide and dulaglutide in Japanese T2DM in a real-world setting. This retrospective study included 179 patients with T2DM who were treated with GLP-1 RA for at least 12 months (liraglutide, n = 97; dulaglutide, n = 82). We used stabilized propensity score-based inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) to reduce selection bias and confounding by observed covariates. Changes in glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) at the end of the 12-month treatment were evaluated. After adjustment by stabilized propensity score-based IPTW, no significant differences were observed in patient characteristics between the liraglutide and dulaglutide groups. HbA1c was significantly lower at 12 months in both groups (liraglutide, 8.9 to 7.4%; dulaglutide, 8.7 to 7.5%). Multivariate linear regression analysis showed no differences in the extent of changes in HbA1c at 12 months between the two agents. High baseline HbA1c, the addition of GLP-1 RA treatment modality, and in-hospital initiation of GLP-1 RA treatment were identified as significant contributing factors to HbA1c reduction. The effects of liraglutide and dulaglutide on lowering HbA1c levels at 12 months were comparable in a real-world setting.