Search

Introduction: ORAL Surveillance, a post-authorisation safety study of patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) enriched for cardiovascular (CV) risk, demonstrated increased risk of major adverse CV events (MACE) and malignancies (excluding non-melanoma skin cancer [NMSC]) for tofacitinib versus tumour necrosis factor inhibitors (TNFi). This analysis of a real-world Canadian observational study evaluated tofacitinib safety/effectiveness in patients meeting or not meeting CV risk criteria., Methods: CANTORAL included patients with moderate-to-severe RA initiating tofacitinib (10/2017-07/2020; N = 504). Interim data (data-cut: 07/2021) were stratified as CV risk-enriched (CV+ ; patients ≥ 50 years with ≥ 1 additional CV risk factor) or not CV risk-enriched (CV-; ≥ 50 years without additional CV risk factors and 18-49 years with/without CV risk factors). Safety and persistence were evaluated to month (M) 36. Effectiveness outcomes to M18 included Clinical Disease Activity Index (CDAI)-defined low disease activity (LDA)/remission (CANTORAL co-primary endpoints) and Disease Activity Score in 28 joints, C-reactive protein (DAS28-4[CRP]) < 3.2/ < 2.6., Results: Overall, 272/232 patients were included in CV+ /CV- cohorts (full analysis set) (435/356 patient-years [safety analysis set]). Incidence rates (events/100 patient-years) in CV+ /CV- cohorts were 138.5/112.5 for treatment-emergent adverse events (AEs); 17.0/5.6 for serious AEs; 1.2/0.3 for deaths; 5.5/1.7 for serious infections; 1.4/1.1 for herpes zoster; 1.6/0.0 for MACE; 2.1/0.3 for malignancies (excluding NMSC); 0.7/0.6 for NMSC; 0.5/0.0 for venous thromboembolic events. Persistence was generally comparable between cohorts. In CV+ /CV- cohorts, at M6, CDAI LDA and remission rates were 51.5%/54.6% and 12.0%/19.6%; DAS28-4(CRP) < 3.2/ < 2.6 rates were 44.0%/39.3% and 31.5%/28.8%, respectively; effectiveness was generally maintained to M18., Conclusions: In concordance with studies of background risk, AEs were more common in patients with CV risk enrichment, particularly those aged ≥ 65 years. Tofacitinib effectiveness/persistence were generally similar regardless of CV risk enrichment. These findings support individualised treatment benefit-risk assessment, including CV assessment/management, to optimise RA outcomes., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

Background: Etrasimod is an oral, once-daily (QD), selective sphingosine 1-phosphate1,4,5 receptor modulator for the treatment of moderately to severely active ulcerative colitis (UC). Here, we evaluate the impact of etrasimod 2 mg QD on health-related quality of life (HRQoL) in patients with UC., Methods: This post hoc analysis used data from the Phase 3 randomized controlled trials, ELEVATE UC 52 and ELEVATE UC 12. HRQoL measures included: Inflammatory Bowel Disease Questionnaire (IBDQ), 36-Item Short Form Survey (SF-36), and Work Productivity and Activity Impairment Questionnaire: Ulcerative Colitis (WPAI:UC) completed at baseline, Week 12 (both trials), and Week 52 (ELEVATE UC 52 only). For IBDQ analyses, patients were stratified by prior exposure to biologics/Janus kinase inhibitors (JAKi) and baseline modified Mayo score (MMS; 4-6 or 7-9)., Results: Generally, significantly greater proportions of patients receiving etrasimod (N = 527) vs placebo (N = 260) achieved IBDQ remission (IBDQ total score ≥170) and IBDQ response (IBDQ total score increase from baseline ≥16), with significant improvement in all IBDQ domain scores at Week 12 and maintained through Week 52. Significant differences in IBDQ remission and IBDQ response rates between etrasimod and placebo were more consistent among biologic/JAKi-naive patients vs those who were biologic/JAKi-experienced and in those with baseline MMS 7-9 vs 4-6. Significant improvements were observed in several SF-36 domain and summary scores and WPAI:UC domain scores at Week 12 and Week 52., Conclusions: Etrasimod 2 mg QD demonstrated significant and clinically meaningful improvements across multiple HRQoL measures, including WPAI, vs placebo., Clinical Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT03945188; NCT03996369., (© 2024 Crohn’s & Colitis Foundation. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of Crohn’s & Colitis Foundation.)

Introduction: Routine care studies of psoriatic arthritis (PsA) and ankylosing spondylitis (AS) demonstrated attenuated responses to tumor necrosis factor inhibitors in current/past versus never smokers. This post hoc analysis assessed tofacitinib efficacy and safety in patients with PsA or AS by cigarette smoking status at trial screening., Methods: Pooled data from phase 3 and long-term extension (safety only) PsA trials and phase 2 and 3 AS trials were assessed by current/past versus never smoker status. Analysis included efficacy and safety data for tofacitinib 5 (PsA/AS) and 10 (PsA only) mg twice daily (BID) or placebo, and safety data in AS for tofacitinib 2 and 10 mg BID. Efficacy outcomes included American College of Rheumatology ≥ 50% responses (ACR50) and minimal disease activity (MDA) responses to month (M)6/M3 (tofacitinib/placebo) in PsA; and ≥ 40% improvement in Assessment of SpondyloArthritis international Society responses (ASAS40) and AS Disease Activity Score (ASDAS) < 2.1 responses to week (W)16 in AS. Safety was assessed to M48/W48 (PsA/AS), adjusted for treatment/smoking status/median body mass index (BMI) status/sex/trial/treatment-smoking status interaction., Results: PsA/AS cohorts included 342/178 current/past and 572/194 never smokers. Tofacitinib efficacy was generally greater versus placebo to M3/W6 (PsA/AS), and comparable in current/past and never smokers to M6/W16 (PsA/AS). In patients receiving ≥ 1 tofacitinib dose, adjusted treatment-emergent adverse event (TEAE)/serious AE (SAE)/discontinuation due to AE incidence rates (IRs) to M48 in PsA were higher in current/past versus never smokers; adjusted IRs to W48 in AS were higher in current/past versus never smokers for TEAEs, but similar for SAEs/discontinuation due to AEs., Conclusions: In both patients with PsA and AS, tofacitinib efficacy was greater versus placebo, and comparable across smoking categories. Adjusted IRs were higher in current/past versus never smokers for TEAEs, SAEs, discontinuation due to AEs in PsA, and for TEAEs in AS, complementing reports of associations between smoking and comorbidities in spondyloarthritis. Findings support increased surveillance/caution for patients with PsA or AS with smoking history., Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT01877668/NCT01882439/NCT03486457/NCT01976364/NCT01786668/NCT03502616., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

Introduction: The aim of our work is to assess the prevalence of probable major depressive disorder and/or probable generalized anxiety disorder (pMDD/pGAD) in patients with moderate to severe rheumatoid arthritis (RA), and to evaluate the efficacy of tofacitinib on RA symptoms stratified by baseline pMDD/pGAD status., Methods: Data were pooled from five phase 3 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and one phase 3b/4 RCT, assessing tofacitinib 5 or 10 mg twice daily (BID), adalimumab (two RCTs), or placebo. pMDD/pGAD was defined as Short Form-36 Health Survey (SF-36) Mental Component Summary (MCS) score ≤ 38. Efficacy outcomes over 12 months included least squares mean change from baseline in SF-36 MCS score and Health Assessment Questionnaire-Disability Index, proportions of patients with pMDD/pGAD in those with baseline pMDD/pGAD, and American College of Rheumatology 20/50/70 response, and Disease Activity Score in 28 joints, erythrocyte sedimentation rate remission (< 2.6) rates., Results: A total of 4404 patients with non-missing baseline values were included. Baseline pMDD/pGAD was reported by 44.5%, 39.8%, 45.4%, and 39.1% of patients receiving tofacitinib 5 mg BID, tofacitinib 10 mg BID, adalimumab, and placebo, respectively. SF-36 MCS improvements were greater for tofacitinib versus adalimumab/placebo through month 6, with numerical improvements for tofacitinib versus adalimumab sustained through month 12, when the proportions of patients with baseline pMDD/pGAD who continued to have pMDD/pGAD were reduced. RA efficacy outcomes were generally similar in patients with/without baseline pMDD/pGAD., Conclusions: The percentage of patients with pMDD/pGAD reduced from baseline over 1 year of treatment with tofacitinib or adalimumab. Effective treatment of underlying RA may lead to improvements in depression and anxiety, based on the SF-36 MCS. Specially designed studies using gold-standard diagnostic tools would be warranted to investigate this further. Video Abstract available for this article., Trial Registration: NCT00960440, NCT00847613, NCT00814307, NCT00856544, NCT00853385, NCT02187055. Video Abstract (MP4 204475 KB)., (© 2023. The Author(s).)

Background: Tofacitinib is an oral small molecule Janus kinase inhibitor for the treatment of ulcerative colitis (UC)., Aims: To evaluate real-world data in US patients with UC receiving tofacitinib., Methods: Characteristics and outcomes of patients with UC initiating tofacitinib between 2018 and 2019 were assessed using data from the IBM® MarketScan® claims database. The index date was the first tofacitinib claim; pre- and post-index periods were 12 months. Outcomes included tofacitinib adherence/persistence, oral corticosteroid (OCS) use, and healthcare resource utilization (HCRU) and costs., Results: Of 276 patients with UC who initiated tofacitinib, 68 (24.6%) were bio-naïve, and 208 (75.4%) bio-experienced. At month 12, overall median tofacitinib adherence (proportion of days covered) was 0.82 (mean 0.68); 43.8% of patients discontinued tofacitinib (90-day gap). Of patients receiving OCS during the post-index 16-week tapering period, 40.4% discontinued OCS up to 12 months post-index. OCS use decreased in patients continuing tofacitinib versus those discontinuing tofacitinib (29.7% vs 59.5%, respectively). Reductions in all-cause and UC-related outpatient visits were observed for bio-naïve (- 1.34 and - 0.88, respectively) and bio-experienced (- 4.72 and - 5.16, respectively) patients, post-index. Decreased UC-related costs per year were observed for bio-experienced patients (difference in post-index vs pre-index, - US$12,448; driven by changes in pharmacy costs), but not for bio-naïve patients (US$47,152)., Conclusions: In this real-world analysis in a mostly bio-experienced population, the majority of US patients with UC initiating tofacitinib remained on therapy at 12 months, and OCS use was reduced with tofacitinib treatment. HCRU (all patients) and UC-related costs were reduced in bio-experienced patients. The majority of patients with ulcerative colitis starting tofacitinib in this real-world study continued therapy at 12 months; there was a reduction in the use of steroids, and a decrease in healthcare resournce utilization and costs., (© 2023. The Author(s).)

Introduction: The SmartClic ® /ClicWise ® autoinjector is a new reusable, multi-use, single-patient device for the administration of subcutaneously administered biologics in the treatment of chronic conditions, including rheumatoid arthritis. The device will be used in conjunction with a mobile application (app). The aim of this study was to collect feedback on the usability, functionality, and applicability of the device and the companion app from health care professionals (HCPs) who perform injections as part of their role and care for patients with rheumatic conditions., Methods: The study was conducted from September to October 2020 in Germany. HCPs participated in a training session for the device and gained experience by performing simulated injections with water. Following the simulations, HCPs answered questions on the ease of use, feature design, effectiveness, and injection speed of the SmartClic/ClicWise device and estimate the patient training time required. They also answered questions on the functionality of the proposed app after attending a storyboard presentation. Responses were recorded as multiple-choice answers, Likert scale ratings (seven-point scale), or open-ended comments. The mean, median, and mode scores were recorded., Results: Twenty-five HCPs (mean age, 38.2 years; females, n = 22 [88%]; registered nurses, n = 19 [76%]) participated in the study. HCP feedback on questions related to the SmartClic/ClicWise device was positive overall, with mean scores > 4.50 across questions; mean scores < 5.00 were reported on 2/40 questions. Twenty-four of 25 participants (96%) estimated that a training time of ≤ 20 min would suffice for patients learning to use the device. Positive feedback was also reported on questions related to the companion app, with mean scores > 5.70., Conclusions: Initial feedback from HCPs on the SmartClic/ClicWise device and proposed app was generally favorable, suggesting they will provide an acceptable alternative for self-administration of biologics for patients with rheumatoid arthritis and other chronic conditions., (© 2023. The Author(s).)

Background: Evaluate the impact of sex on tofacitinib efficacy, safety and persistence (time to discontinuation) in patients with psoriatic arthritis (PsA)., Methods: Data were pooled from two phase 3 randomised controlled trials. Patients were randomised to tofacitinib 5 mg or 10 mg two times per day, adalimumab 40 mg every 2 weeks or placebo. Efficacy outcomes to month 12 included American College of Rheumatology (ACR)20/50/70, minimal disease activity (MDA), Psoriasis Area Severity Index (PASI)75, change from baseline (∆) in Health Assessment Questionnaire-Disability Index (HAQ-DI) and ∆Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy-Fatigue (FACIT-F). Safety was assessed to month 12 and persistence was assessed to month 42 of a long-term extension study., Results: Overall, 816 patients were included (54.3% females). At baseline, higher tender joint counts, enthesitis scores and worse HAQ-DI and FACIT-F were reported in females versus males; presence of dactylitis and PASI were greater in males versus females. At month 3, tofacitinib efficacy generally exceeded placebo in both sexes. Overall, similar ACR20/50/70, PASI75, ∆HAQ-DI and ∆FACIT-F were observed for tofacitinib between sexes; females were less likely to achieve MDA. Similar proportions of males/females receiving tofacitinib (both doses) experienced treatment-emergent adverse events (AEs). Serious AEs occurred in 3.4%/6.6% and 4.0%/5.9% males/females with tofacitinib 5 mg and 10 mg two times per day. Persistence was generally similar between sexes., Conclusion: Tofacitinib efficacy exceeded placebo in both sexes and was comparable between sexes. Consistent with previous studies of PsA treatments, females were less likely to achieve MDA, likely due to baseline differences. Safety and time to discontinuation were generally similar between sexes., Trial Registration Number: NCT01877668; NCT01882439; NCT01976364., Competing Interests: Competing interests: LE has served as a consultant for AbbVie, Eli Lilly, Janssen, Novartis, Pfizer and UCB, and has received grant and/or research support from AbbVie, Eli Lilly, Fresenius Kabi, Janssen, Novartis, Pfizer, Sandoz and UCB. DDG has served as a consultant for AbbVie, Amgen, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Celgene, Eli Lilly, Galapagos, Gilead Sciences, Janssen, Novartis, Pfizer and UCB, and has received grant and/or research support from AbbVie, Amgen, Celgene, Eli Lilly, Novartis, Pfizer and UCB. PM has served as a consultant for AbbVie, Amgen, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Eli Lilly, Galapagos, Gilead Sciences, Inmagene, Janssen, Novartis, Pfizer, Sun and UCB, and has received grant and/or research support from AbbVie, Amgen, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Eli Lilly, Galapagos, Gilead Sciences, Janssen, Novartis, Pfizer, Sun and UC. RAP, RL, DG, MJC and CK are employees and shareholders of Pfizer. SZA has served as a consultant for AbbVie, Celgene, Eli Lilly, Janssen, Novartis, Pfizer and UCB, has received grant and/or research support from AbbVie, Celgene, Eli Lilly, Novartis, Pfizer and Sanofi, and has received speakers’ fees from AbbVie, Novartis and Pfizer. AO has received grant and/or research support from AbbVie, Amgen, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Celgene, Corrona, Eli Lilly, Novartis and Pfizer, and is a shareholder of Amgen, Novartis and Pfizer. VS has served as a consultant for AbbVie, Amgen, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Celltrion, Eli Lilly, Genentech/Roche, GlaxoSmithKline, Inmedix, Janssen, Kiniksa, Merck, Novartis, Pfizer, Regeneron, Samsung, Sandoz, Sanofi, Scipher, Setpoint, Sofusa, Spherix and UCB., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2023. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Objective: The Canadian Tofacitinib for Rheumatoid Arthritis Observational (CANTORAL) is the first Canadian prospective, observational study assessing tofacitinib. The objective was to assess effectiveness and safety for moderate to severe rheumatoid arthritis (RA). Coprimary and secondary outcomes are reported from an interim analysis., Methods: Patients initiating tofacitinib from October 2017 to July 2020 were enrolled from 45 Canadian sites. Coprimary outcomes (month 6) included the Clinical Disease Activity Index (CDAI)-defined low disease activity (LDA) and remission. Secondary outcomes (to month 18) included the CDAI and the 4-variable Disease Activity Score in 28 joints (DAS28) using the erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR)/C-reactive protein (CRP) level to define LDA and remission; the proportions of patients achieving mild pain (visual analog scale <20 mm), and moderate (≥30%) and substantial (≥50%) pain improvements; and the proportions of patients achieving a Health Assessment Questionnaire disability index (HAQ DI) score greater or equal to  normative values (≤0.25) and a HAQ DI score greater or equal to minimum clinically important difference (MCID) (≥0.22). Safety was assessed to month 36., Results: Of 504 patients initiating tofacitinib, 44.4% received concomitant methotrexate. At month 6, 52.9% and 15.4% of patients were in CDAI-defined LDA and remission, respectively; a similar proportion of patients achieved outcomes by month 3 (first post-baseline assessment). By month 3, 27.2% and 41.7% of patients, respectively, were in DAS28-ESR-defined LDA and DAS28-CRP <3.2; 14.7% and 25.8% achieved DAS28-ESR remission and DAS28-CRP <2.6. By month 3, mild pain and moderate and substantial pain improvements occurred in 29.6%, 55.6%, and 42.9% of patients, respectively; 19.9% and 53.7% of patients achieved a HAQ DI score greater than or equal to normative values and a HAQ DI score greater than or equal to MCID, respectively. Outcomes were generally maintained to month 18. Incidence rates (events per 100 patient-years) for treatment-emergent adverse events (AEs), serious AEs, and discontinuations due to AEs were 126.8, 11.9, and 14.5, respectively, and AEs of special interest were infrequent., Conclusion: Tofacitinib was associated with early and sustained improvement in RA signs and symptoms in real-world patients. Effectiveness and safety were consistent with the established tofacitinib clinical profile., (© 2022 Pfizer Inc. Arthritis Care & Research published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of American College of Rheumatology.)

Background: Many patients with atopic dermatitis (AD) have a suboptimal response to systemic therapy., Objective: This study assessed predictors of nonresponse to dupilumab in patients with AD., Methods: Data (April 2017 through June 2019) for patients aged 12 years and above with AD (International Classification of Diseases-9/10-Clinical Modification: 691.8/L20.x) who initiated dupilumab on or after April 1, 2017 (index date) were collected from an electronic health record and insurance claims database. Nonresponse indicators (dupilumab discontinuation, addition of another systemic therapy or phototherapy, addition of a high-potency topical corticosteroid, AD-related hospital visit, AD-related emergency department visit, incident skin infection) were predicted from available demographic and clinical variables using machine learning., Results: Among 419 patients (mean age: 45 years), 145 (35%) experienced at least 1 indicator of nonresponse in the 6-month postindex period. In patients with at least 1 indicator, the most common was dupilumab discontinuation (47% [68/145]). Of note, this analysis could not capture nonmedical reasons for dupilumab discontinuation (eg, cost, access). The most common predictors of nonresponse were a claim for ibuprofen (in 69% of patients with a nonresponse indicator) and a Quan-Charlson Comorbidity Index value of 3 to 4 (59%)., Conclusion: Systemic dupilumab therapy for AD can be associated with a relatively high prevalence of nonresponse indicators. Factors associated with these indicators-that is, predictors of nonresponse-may be used to optimize disease management., (Copyright © 2022 American College of Allergy, Asthma & Immunology. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Purpose: Using data from real-world practice, this analysis compared outcomes in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) initiating treatment with an oral Janus kinase inhibitor, tofacitinib, in combination with persistent, discontinued, or interrupted treatment with oral methotrexate (MTX)., Methods: This retrospective claims analysis (MarketScan® databases) included data from US patients with RA and at least one prescription claim for tofacitinib, dated between January 1, 2013, and April 30, 2017. Eligible patients were continuously enrolled for ≥12 months before and after treatment initiation, and initiated tofacitinib in combination with oral MTX, with at least two prescription claims for each. Patients were grouped according to treatment pattern (MTX-Persistent, MTX-Discontinued, or MTX-Interrupted). Tofacitinib treatment persistence, adherence, and effectiveness, as well as all-cause and RA-related health care costs, were assessed., Findings: A total of 671 patients were eligible for inclusion; 504 (75.1%) were MTX-Persistent; 131 (19.5%), MTX-Discontinued; and 36 (5.4%), MTX-Interrupted. Rates of tofacitinib treatment persistence, adherence, and effectiveness at 12 months were similar between the MTX-Persistent and MTX-Discontinued cohorts. The percentage of patients switched from tofacitinib to another advanced disease-modifying antirheumatic drug within 12 months of tofacitinib initiation was greater in the MTX-Persistent cohort compared with that in the MTX-Discontinued cohort. RA-related health care costs at 12 months post-initiation were significantly greater in the MTX-Persistent cohort compared with those in the MTX-Discontinued cohort., Implications: The findings from this analysis of real-world data indicate that patients who initiate tofacitinib in combination with oral MTX may discontinue MTX and still experience outcomes similar to those in patients who persist with MTX, with lesser RA-related health care costs. These results support those from a previous clinical study on methotrexate withdrawal in patients with RA (NCT02831855)., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest Prof. Cohen has received research grants, consulting fees, or other remuneration from Pfizer Inc. Dr. Haraoui has received research grants from AbbVie; consultant's fees or other remuneration from AbbVie, Amgen, Eli Lilly, Merck, Pfizer Inc, and UCB; and has participated in speakers' bureaus for Amgen, Pfizer Inc, and UCB. Dr. Curtis has received research grants, consultant's fees, or other remuneration from AbbVie, Amgen, Bristol-Myers Squibb, CorEvitas LLC (formerly Corrona LLC), Eli Lilly, Janssen, Myriad, Pfizer Inc, Radius, Roche, and UCB. Drs. Woolcott and Gruben are employees of, and hold stock options in, Pfizer Inc. Drs. Smith and Murray were employees of Pfizer Inc at the time of this analysis. The authors have indicated that they have no other conflicts of interest with regard to the content of this article., (Copyright © 2022. Published by Elsevier Inc.)

Introduction: This study characterized real-world demographic and baseline clinical characteristics, as well as treatment persistence and adherence, in patients with psoriatic arthritis (PsA) who had newly initiated tofacitinib treatment., Methods: This retrospective cohort study included patients aged 18 years or older in the IBM MarketScan™ US database with at least one tofacitinib claim (first = index) between December 14, 2017 and April 30, 2019; PsA diagnoses on/within 12 months pre-index; and no diagnoses of rheumatoid arthritis any time pre-index. Patients were continuously enrolled for 12 months pre-index and 6 months post-index, with no pre-index claims for tofacitinib. Patient demographic and clinical characteristics on the day of index, and history of advanced treatments (including tofacitinib monotherapy or combination therapy), were recorded. Outcomes at 6 months post-index included tofacitinib persistence (less than 60-day gap without tofacitinib treatment) and adherence (proportion of days covered [PDC] and medication possession ratio 80% or higher)., Results: Of the 10,354 patients with tofacitinib claims within the study period, 318 patients with PsA met the inclusion criteria. More than 60% of patients received tofacitinib monotherapy post-index, with a mean duration of PsA of 760.5 days at index. For patients who received tofacitinib combination therapy post-index, methotrexate was the most common concomitant conventional synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drug. At 6 months post-index, persistence was similar in patients receiving tofacitinib monotherapy (69.8%) versus combination therapy (73.1%); adherence (as measured by PDC ≥ 0.8) was numerically lower in patients receiving tofacitinib monotherapy (56.8%) versus combination therapy (65.5%)., Conclusions: This analysis of US-based claims data described patients who had newly initiated tofacitinib treatment an average of 2 years after PsA diagnosis, with approximately two-thirds of patients receiving tofacitinib monotherapy. Observed rates of tofacitinib persistence were similar across patients who received tofacitinib monotherapy and combination therapy 6 months after initiation; adherence rates were numerically lower in patients receiving monotherapy., (© 2022. Pfizer Inc.)

Background: Fatigue, a common symptom of rheumatoid arthritis (RA), is detrimental to health-related quality of life (HRQoL). We evaluated the impact of tofacitinib on fatigue, sleep, and HRQoL and explored associations between fatigue, related patient-reported outcomes (PROs), and disease activity in RA patients., Methods: This post hoc analysis pooled data from three Phase 3 studies of tofacitinib (ORAL Scan; ORAL Standard; ORAL Sync) in RA patients. Patients received tofacitinib 5 or 10 mg twice daily, placebo, or adalimumab (active control; ORAL Standard only, not powered for superiority) with conventional synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs. Assessed through Month (M)12 were changes from baseline in disease activity, Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy-Fatigue (FACIT-F), Medical Outcomes Study Sleep scale (MOS-SS), and Short Form-36 Health Survey (SF-36) composite/domain scores, and proportions of patients reporting improvements from baseline in FACIT-F total and SF-36 domain scores ≥ minimum clinically important differences (MCIDs) or ≥ population normative values. Pearson correlations examined associations among PROs at M6. Treatment comparisons were exploratory, with p < 0.05 considered nominally significant., Results: Generally, active treatment led to significant improvements from baseline in FACIT-F total, and MOS-SS and SF-36 composite/domain scores vs placebo, observed by M1 and maintained through M6 (last placebo-controlled time point). Through M6, more patients achieved improvements from baseline ≥ MCID and achieved scores ≥ population normative values in FACIT-F total and SF-36 domain scores with tofacitinib vs placebo. Through M12, some nominally significant improvements with tofacitinib vs adalimumab were observed. With active treatment at M6, FACIT-F scores were moderately (0.40-0.59) to highly (≥ 0.60) correlated with SF-36 composite/domain scores (particularly vitality), moderately correlated with most MOS-SS domain scores, and highly correlated with MOS-SS Sleep Problems Index I scores. Disease activity correlations were moderate with FACIT-F scores and low (0.20-0.39) to moderate with SF-36 general health domain/composite scores., Conclusion: Tofacitinib and adalimumab generally conferred significant, clinically meaningful improvements in fatigue, sleep, and HRQoL (including vitality) vs placebo through M6, with improvements maintained to M12. M6 correlations between FACIT-F, PROs of sleep, HRQoL, and disease activity underscore the interrelatedness of multiple PROs and disease activity in RA., Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT00847613 (registered: February 19, 2009); NCT00853385 (registered: March 2, 2009); NCT00856544 (registered: March 5, 2009)., (© 2022. The Author(s).)

Introduction: Atopic dermatitis (AD) is a chronic and relapsing inflammatory skin disease that negatively impacts overall health, quality of life (QoL), and work productivity. Prior studies on AD burden by severity have focused on moderate-to-severe disease. Here, we describe the clinical and humanistic burden of AD in Europe across all severity levels, including milder disease., Methods: Data were analyzed from the 2017 National Health and Wellness Survey from adult respondents with AD in the EU-5 (France, Germany, Italy, Spain, and the UK). AD disease severity was defined based on self-reported assessments as "mild," "moderate," or "severe" and by Dermatology Life Quality Index (DLQI) severity bands. Self-reported outcomes for AD respondents by severity were assessed using propensity score matching. These outcomes included a wide range of selected medical/psychological comorbidities, overall QoL and functional status (EuroQol 5-Dimensions 5-Level and Short Form-36 version 2 questionnaires), and work productivity and activity impairment (Work Productivity and Activity Impairment questionnaire)., Results: In total, 4208 respondents with AD (mild AD, 2862; moderate AD, 1177; severe AD, 169) and 4208 respondents without AD were included in this analysis. Results showed greater burden across severity levels compared with matched non-AD controls. A higher proportion of respondents with mild-to-moderate AD, defined by DLQI severity bands, reported atopic comorbidities (P < 0.05) and a wide range of cardiac, vascular, and metabolic comorbidities, including hypertension, high cholesterol, angina, and peripheral vascular disease (P < 0.005), compared with non-AD controls. Relative to potential impacts of various medical and psychological burdens, respondents with mild-to-moderate AD reported higher activity impairment than controls (P < 0.0001)., Conclusion: Clinical and humanistic burden was observed in European respondents with AD compared with matched non-AD controls across severity levels, with burden evident even in milder disease, highlighting the importance of improving disease management in early stages of AD., (© 2022. The Author(s).)

Introduction: Comparative data on the economic burden of alopecia areata relative to the general population are limited. The objective of this retrospective database analysis was to evaluate healthcare resource utilization and direct medical costs among patients with alopecia areata from the US payer perspective compared with matched controls., Methods: Validated billing codes were used to identify patients with alopecia areata from the IQVIA PharMetrics Plus (2016-2018) who had continuous pharmacy and medical enrollment for 365 days both before (baseline period) and after (evaluation period) the index date. Demographic and clinical characteristics were characterized, and baseline comorbidities were assessed with the Quan Charlson Comorbidity Index., Results: Using the exact matching feature from Instant Health Data, 14,340 patients with alopecia areata were matched with 42,998 control patients aged ≥ 12 years. Patients with alopecia areata had higher healthcare resource utilization and adjusted total all-cause mean medical costs versus matched controls ($8557 versus $6416; p < 0.0001), because of higher inpatient costs, emergency department visits, ambulatory visits, number of prescriptions and prescription costs, and other costs such as durable medical equipment and home healthcare. The number of inpatient visits did not significantly differ between the two groups. Mean ambulatory costs were $3640 for patients with alopecia areata and $2062 for controls, and mean pharmacy costs were $3287 and $1843, respectively (p < 0.0001 for both). Pharmacy costs related to immunologic agents represented 50.0% of the total difference in pharmacy spending between patients with alopecia areata and controls. Surgery on the integumentary system accounted for 9.5% of the total difference in ambulatory costs., Conclusion: Alopecia areata is associated with significant incremental healthcare resource utilization and costs relative to matched controls due to increased spending in areas such as surgical procedures and psychological and pharmacological interventions. Costs are primarily driven by ambulatory and pharmacy spending., (© 2022. The Author(s).)

Background: Biologic therapies are often used in patients with ulcerative colitis (UC) who are nonresponsive to conventional treatments. However, nonresponse or loss of response to biologics often occurs, leading to dose escalation, combination therapy, and/or treatment switching. We investigated real-world treatment patterns of biologic therapies among patients with UC in the USA., Methods: This study analyzed data from the IBM® MarketScan® Commercial and Medicare Supplemental Databases (medical/pharmacy claims for >250 million patients in the USA) to identify patients with UC initiating a biologic therapy (adalimumab, infliximab, golimumab, or vedolizumab) with 12 months of follow-up post-initiation. Key measures were patient baseline characteristics, dose escalation (average maintenance dose >20% higher than label), adherence (proportion of days covered), and ulcerative colitis-related healthcare costs in the 12 months following biologic therapy initiation., Results: Of 2,331 patients included in the study (adalimumab [N = 1,291], infliximab [N = 810], golimumab [N = 127], and vedolizumab [N = 103]), 28.1% used concomitant immunosuppressant therapy within 12 months post-initiation. Overall, 23.6% (adalimumab), 34.8% (infliximab), 9.9% (golimumab), and 39.2% (vedolizumab) of patients dose escalated within 12 months. Patients who dose escalated incurred USD 20,106 higher total UC-related healthcare costs over 12 months than those who did not. Adherence (covariate-adjusted proportion of days covered) ranged from 0.63 to 0.73, and 39.3% of patients discontinued within 12 months (median treatment duration = 112 days)., Conclusion: Dose escalation was common, and incurred higher costs, in patients with UC initiating biologic therapies. Suboptimal adherence and/or discontinuation within 12 months of initiation occurred frequently, highlighting the challenges in managing these patients., (© 2021 The Author(s). Published by S. Karger AG, Basel.)

Objective: Tofacitinib is an oral JAK inhibitor for the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis (RA). To better understand tofacitinib treatment responses, we used group-based trajectory modeling to investigate distinct disease activity trajectories and associated baseline variables in patients with active RA., Methods: This post hoc analysis used data from a phase III study of methotrexate-naive patients receiving tofacitinib 5 mg twice daily. Changes in the 4-variable Disease Activity Score in 28 joints, using the erythrocyte sedimentation rate (DAS28-ESR) from baseline to month 24 were used in group-based trajectory modeling to identify distinct disease activity trajectories. Patient and disease characteristics, changes in radiographic progression and patient-reported outcomes, and safety up to month 24 were compared among trajectory groups., Results: From 346 methotrexate-naive patients, 5 disease trajectory groups, defined by DAS28-ESR scores, were identified, which progressed from high disease activity (HDA) to remission (group 1, n = 28), to low disease activity (LDA) rapidly (group 2, n = 107), to moderate disease activity (group 3, n = 98), to LDA gradually (group 4, n = 46), or remained in HDA (group 5, n = 67), at month 24. At baseline, groups 1 and 2 generally had lower disease activity and more favorable patient-reported outcomes, compared with other groups. Improvements in radiographic progression and patient-reported outcomes over 24 months were generally consistent with DAS28-ESR-predicted disease activity trajectories. Adverse event rates were generally comparable across groups., Conclusion: Distinct phenotypic subgroups identified heterogeneity in patients with RA normally analyzed as a single population. Trajectory modeling may enable separation of clinically meaningful subsets of patients with RA, and may help optimize treatment outcomes., (© 2021 The Authors. Arthritis Care & Research published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of American College of Rheumatology.)

The approval of new medicinal agents requires robust efficacy and safety clinical trial data demonstrated to be applicable to population subgroups. Limited data have previously been reported by drug sponsors on the topic of clinical trial diversity. In order to establish a baseline of diversity in our clinical trials that can be used by us and other sponsors, an analysis of clinical trial diversity was conducted covering race, ethnicity, sex, and age. This analysis includes Pfizer interventional clinical trials that initiated enrollment between 2011 through 2020. The data set comprises 213 trials with 103,103 US participants. The analysis demonstrated that overall trial participation of Black or African American individuals was at the US census level (14.3% vs 13.4%), participation of Hispanic or Latino individuals was below US census (15.9% vs 18.5%), and female participation was at US census (51.1% vs 50.8%). The analysis also examined the percentage of trials that achieved racial and ethnic distribution levels at or above census levels. Participant levels above census were achieved in 56.1% of Pfizer trials for Black or African American participants, 51.4% of trials for White participants, 16.0% of trials for Asian participants, 14.2% of trials for Native Hawaiian and Pacific Islander participants, 8.5% of trials for American Indian and Alaska Native participants, and 52.3% of trials for Hispanic or Latino participants. The results presented here provide a baseline upon which we can quantify the impact of our ongoing efforts to improve racial and ethnic diversity in clinical trials., (Copyright © 2021 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Introduction: The burden of mild-to-moderate atopic dermatitis (AD) in the United Kingdom (UK) is not well understood. Long-lasting AD flares may lead to systemic inflammation resulting in reversible progression from mild to more severe AD. This study aimed to assess the clinical and economic burden of mild-to-moderate AD in the UK., Methods: AD patients were identified in the Health Improvement Network (THIN) from 2013 to 2017 and propensity score matched to non-AD controls by demographics. Patients were identified based on continuous disease activity using validated algorithms and sufficient patient status to fully validate data integrity for the entire period. Mild-to-moderate AD patients were identified by using treatment as a surrogate. Demographics, clinical characteristics and healthcare resource use (HCRU) were obtained from THIN. Literature reviews were conducted to obtain additional outcomes. A cost-of-illness model was developed to extrapolate the burden in 2017 to the UK population and in subsequent years (2018-2022)., Results: In 2017, the prevalence of mild-to-moderate AD in THIN was 1.28%. These patients reported higher comorbidity rates and significantly higher (p < 0.0001) HCRU, encompassing mean general practitioner visits (5.57 versus 3.59), AD-related prescriptions (5.85 versus 0.68) and total referrals (0.97 versus 0.82) versus matched non-AD controls. The model projected total HCRU and drug excess costs of €462.99M over the 5 years. The excess cost decreased to €417.35M after excluding patients on very potent topical corticosteroids, who most likely had at least moderate disease. The excess costs increased to €1.21B and €7.06B when considering comorbidity burden and productivity losses, respectively., Conclusion: Mild-to-moderate AD patients had higher comorbidity burden, HCRU and cost compared with matched non-AD controls. Overall, UK country-based economic burden was high given partly the high prevalence of this disease. Moreover, productivity burden and comorbidities had considerable impact on the economic burden, which further suggests the importance of optimal disease management.

Introduction: Atopic dermatitis (AD) is associated with sleep difficulties, depression, and anxiety. We evaluated the relationship between these psychosocial comorbidities and health outcomes among adults with moderate-to-severe AD in the USA., Methods: Data were analyzed from the 2017 US National Health and Wellness Survey. Respondents with a physician diagnosis of AD or eczema with moderate-to-severe AD based on a Dermatology Life Quality Index score of 6 or more were included. Generalized linear models were used to examine the relationship between psychosocial comorbidities (sleep difficulties and anxiety based on self-report, depression based on the Patient Health Questionnaire-9) and health outcomes [the 36-item Short Form Health Survey, version 2; EuroQol five-dimension, five-level; Work Productivity and Activity Impairment questionnaire; and healthcare resource utilization (HRU)]., Results: Among respondents with moderate-to-severe AD (N = 1017), 56.6%, 70.7%, and 60.9% reported sleep difficulties, depression, and anxiety, respectively. These comorbidities were significantly associated with reduced physical and mental component summary scores and increased overall work impairment (P < 0.05 for all). Increased HRU was also observed., Conclusion: Psychosocial comorbidities were frequently reported by respondents with moderate-to-severe AD and were significantly associated with health status, work loss, and HRU.

Introduction: Atopic dermatitis (AD) is a common inflammatory disease of the skin, which may have a substantial impact on patients' health-related quality of life (HRQoL). The aim of this study was to quantify the economic burden (direct and indirect costs) of moderate-to-severe AD and evaluate the prevalence and impact of psychosocial comorbidities among patients in the European Union-5 (France, Germany, Italy, Spain, and the UK)., Methods: Data were analyzed from the 2017 EU5 National Health and Wellness Survey. Respondents with a physician diagnosis of AD/eczema who were considered to have moderate-to-severe AD based on a Dermatology Life Quality Index (DLQI) score  ≥ 6 were included. Direct costs, indirect costs, and psychosocial comorbidities (sleep difficulties and anxiety based on self-report, depression based on the Patient Health Questionnaire-9) were reported descriptively. Generalized linear models were used to examine the relationship between psychosocial comorbidities and health outcomes (the Short Form-36 version 2 [SF-36v2], EuroQoL 5-dimension 5-level, Work Productivity and Activity Impairment questionnaire, and healthcare resource utilization)., Results: Overall, 1014 patients were included in the analysis. Total annual direct costs ranged from €2242 to €6924 and total annual indirect costs ranged from €7277 to €14,236, depending on the level of disease severity. Sleep difficulties, anxiety, and depression were reported by 61.6%, 52.7%, and 75.8% of patients, respectively. These comorbidities were significantly associated with reduced physical and mental component summary scores from SF-36v2 and increased overall work impairment (p < 0.05 for all)., Conclusions: A significant economic burden was observed for patients with moderate-to-severe AD. Sleep difficulties, depression, and anxiety were observed in more than half of moderate-to-severe AD patients and were significantly associated with decrements in HRQoL and with work-related impairment. Reducing the burden of these psychosocial comorbidities in AD could have significant benefit to patients and society.

Introduction: Tofacitinib is an oral Janus kinase inhibitor for the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis (RA). To provide additional clinical evidence in regulatory submissions for a modified-release (MR) once-daily (QD) tofacitinib formulation, we compared real-world adherence and effectiveness between patients initiating the MR QD formulation and patients initiating an immediate-release (IR) twice-daily (BID) formulation., Methods: Two noninterventional cohort studies were conducted. First, adherence and two effectiveness proxies were compared between patients with RA who newly initiated tofacitinib MR 11 mg QD or IR 5 mg BID in the IBM ® MarketScan ® Commercial and Medicare Supplemental US insurance claims databases (March 2016-October 2018). Second, using data collected in the Corrona US RA Registry (February 2016-August 2019), two Clinical Disease Activity Index (CDAI)-based measures of effectiveness were compared between tofacitinib MR 11 mg QD and IR 5 mg BID, and against noninferiority criteria derived from placebo-controlled clinical trials of the tofacitinib IR formulation. Multiple sensitivity analyses of the registry data were conducted to reassure regulators of consistent results across different assumptions., Results: In each study, approximately two-thirds of patients initiated the MR formulation. In the claims database study, improved adherence and at least comparable effectiveness were observed with tofacitinib MR vs IR over 12 months, particularly in patients without prior advanced therapy. In the registry study, the noninferiority of tofacitinib MR vs IR was demonstrated for both CDAI outcomes at ~6 months; this finding was robust across multiple sensitivity analyses., Conclusion: These results demonstrate the value of real-world evidence from complementary data sources in understanding the impact of medication adherence with a QD formulation in clinical practice. These analyses were suitable for regulatory consideration as an important component of evidence for the comparability of tofacitinib MR 11 mg QD vs IR 5 mg BID in patients with RA., Trial Registration: Claims database study: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier NCT04018001, retrospectively registered July 12, 2019. Corrona US RA Registry study: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier NCT04267380, retrospectively registered February 12, 2020.

Objectives: Tofacitinib is an oral Janus kinase inhibitor for the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis (RA). Here we present data from the completed Phase 3 randomised controlled trial (RCT) ORAL Scan (NCT00847613), which evaluated the impact of tofacitinib on patient-reported outcomes (PROs) through 24 months in patients with active RA and inadequate responses to methotrexate (MTX-IR)., Methods: Patients were randomised 4:4:1:1 to receive tofacitinib 5 or 10 mg twice daily (BID), or placebo advanced to tofacitinib 5 or 10 mg, plus background MTX. Patients receiving placebo advanced to tofacitinib at month 3 (non-responders) or month 6 (remaining patients). Mean changes from baseline in PROs, assessed at months 1-24, included Health Assessment Questionnaire-Disability Index, Patient Global Assessment of disease activity (visual analogue scale [VAS]), Patient Assessment of Arthritis Pain (VAS), health-related quality of life (Short Form-36 version 2), Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy-Fatigue and Medical Outcomes Study-Sleep., Results: Overall, 539/797 (67.6%) patients completed 24 months' treatment. At month 3, tofacitinib-treated patients reported signi cant (p<0.05) mean changes from baseline versus placebo across all PROs, and significantly more patients reported improvements ≥ minimum clinically important differences versus placebo. Improvements in PROs with tofacitinib were sustained to month 24. Following advancement to tofacitinib, placebo-treated patients generally reported changes of similar magnitude to tofacitinib-treated patients., Conclusions: Patients with RA and MTX-IR receiving tofacitinib 5 or 10 mg BID plus MTX reported significant and clinically meaningful improvements in PROs versus placebo at month 3, which were sustained through 24 months.

Background: Ulcerative colitis (UC) treatment aims to induce response and maintain steroid-free remission. For patients with moderate to severe UC and/or nonresponse to conventional treatment, advanced therapies (immunosuppressants and biologics) are available. We assessed real-world effectiveness of advanced UC therapies., Methods: This retrospective analysis of claims data included adult patients with UC initiating immunosuppressant or biologic therapy, with 12 months' continuous enrollment pre- and postinitiation. Patients had no prescription for biologic therapy (and/or immunosuppressant if initiating immunosuppressant) in the previous 12 months. Proportion of patients remaining steroid-free (excluding 14-week tapering period), hospitalizations, and costs in the 12 months postinitiation were assessed., Results: In total, 3562 patients were included in the analysis. Most patients (83.0%) used steroids in the 12 months before initiating advanced therapy. Overall, 47.8% remained steroid-free after 12 months (excluding tapering). After adjusting for patient characteristics, remaining steroid-free was significantly more likely with infliximab (43.9%) than with adalimumab (39.4%; P < 0.05); golimumab (38.2%) and vedolizumab (41.4%) were not significantly different vs adalimumab. Overall, 12.2% of patients had a UC-related hospitalization within 12 months of initiation, with a mean (SD) total length of stay of 8.2 (8.9) days and no significant differences between biologic therapies. Mean, unadjusted, UC-related costs in the 12 months postinitiation were $42,579 and were similar between therapies., Conclusions: Patients with UC initiating advanced therapy frequently continued using steroids for at least a year. Some patients experienced extended UC-related hospitalizations, with high UC-related costs overall. This suggests an ongoing challenge in managing patients with moderate to severe UC., (© 2019 Crohn’s & Colitis Foundation. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of Crohn’s & Colitis Foundation.)

Objectives: To describe characteristics, treatment patterns and persistence in patients with RA treated with tofacitinib, an oral Janus kinase inhibitor, in Canadian clinical practice between 1 June 2014 and 31 May 2017., Methods: Data were obtained from the tofacitinib eXel support programme. Baseline demographics and medication history were collected via patient report/special authorization forms; reasons for discontinuation were captured by patient report. Treatment persistence was estimated using Kaplan-Meier methods, with data censored at last follow-up. Cox regression was applied to analyse baseline characteristics associated with treatment discontinuation., Results: The number of patients with RA enrolled from 2014 to 2017 was 4276; tofacitinib utilization increased during that period, as did the proportion of biologic (b) DMARD-naïve patients prescribed tofacitinib. Of patients who initiated tofacitinib, 1226/3678 (33.3%) discontinued, mostly from lack of efficacy (35.7%) and adverse events (26.9%). Persistence was 62.7% and 49.6% after 1 and 2 years of treatment, respectively. Prior bDMARD experience predicted increased tofacitinib discontinuation (vs bDMARD-naïve, P < 0.001). Increased retention was associated with older age (56-65 years and >65 years vs ⩽45 years; P < 0.05), and time since diagnosis of 15 to <20 years (vs <5 years; P < 0.01). In bDMARD-naïve, post-1 bDMARD, post-2 bDMARD and post-⩾3 bDMARD patients, median survival was >730, 613, 667 and 592 days, respectively., Conclusion: Since 2014, tofacitinib use in Canadian patients with RA increased, especially among bDMARD-naïve/post-1 bDMARD patients. Median drug survival was ∼2 years. Likelihood of persistence increased for bDMARD-naïve (vs bDMARD-experienced) patients and those aged ⩾56 (vs ⩽45) years., (© The Author(s) 2019. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the British Society for Rheumatology.)

Objective: To describe the efficacy of tofacitinib in reducing pain in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA), psoriatic arthritis (PsA) or ankylosing spondylitis (AS) in a post-hoc analysis of randomised controlled trials., Methods: Data were collected from patients in seven tofacitinib studies: six phase III (four RA, two PsA) and one phase II study (AS), and grouped into five analysis populations based on rheumatic disease diagnosis and category of prior inadequate response (IR) to treatment: conventional synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs-IR (RA and PsA), tumour necrosis factor inhibitors-IR (RA and PsA), or non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs-IR (AS). Only patients who received tofacitinib 5 or 10 mg twice daily or placebo were included. Pain assessments included: Patient's Assessment of Arthritis Pain, Short-Form Health Survey 36v2 Question (Q)7 and Bodily Pain domain, Ankylosing Spondylitis Quality of Life Q9 and Q14, EuroQol Five Dimensions Pain/Discomfort dimension and Bath Ankylosing Spondylitis Disease Activity Index Q2 and Q3. Data were reported to month 6 (placebo to month 3) in the RA and PsA populations, and week 12 (tofacitinib and placebo) in the AS population., Results: Overall, 3330 patients were included in this analysis. In the RA and PsA populations, pain improvements in tofacitinib-treated patients compared with placebo were observed at the earliest time point assessed and at month 3 (maintained to month 6). In the AS population, pain improvements compared with placebo were observed at week 12., Conclusion: Tofacitinib was associated with rapid and sustained improvements across multiple pain measures in patients with inflammatory rheumatic musculoskeletal diseases., Competing Interests: Competing interests: AO has served as a consultant for AbbVie, Amgen, BMS, Celgene, Corrona, Eli Lilly, Novartis, Pfizer Inc and Takeda, and has received grant support from Novartis and Pfizer Inc. KdV has received consulting fees or other remuneration from Eli Lilly and Pfizer Inc, and has participated in a trial with Galapagos. IBM has received research grants from Celgene, Janssen, Novartis, Pfizer Inc, Roche and UCB, and has received consulting fees or other remuneration from AbbVie, Celgene, Janssen, Novartis and UCB. PJM has received research grants from AbbVie, Amgen, BMS, Celgene, Eli Lilly, Janssen, Novartis, Pfizer Inc, Sun Pharmaceutical and UCB, has received consulting fees or other remuneration from AbbVie, Amgen, BMS, Celgene, Eli Lilly, Janssen, Novartis, Pfizer Inc, Sun Pharmaceutical and UCB, and is on the speakers’ bureau for AbbVie, Amgen, BMS, Celgene, Genentech, Janssen, Novartis, Pfizer Inc and UCB. PB has received consulting fees or other remuneration from AbbVie, Amgen, Eli Lilly, Johnson and Johnson, Novartis, Paladin, Sanofi-Genzyme and Takeda, and is on the speakers’ bureau for Amgen, Eli Lilly, Janssen and Pfizer Inc. TL, DG, KK, CW, and M-AH are employees and shareholders of Pfizer Inc. AM is a shareholder, and was an employee, of Pfizer Inc during the time of this analysis., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2020. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Purpose: Current knowledge of the reasons for patients' preference for rheumatoid arthritis (RA) treatment modes is limited. This study was designed to identify preferences for four treatment modes, and to obtain in-depth information on the reasons for these preferences., Patients and Methods: In this multi-national, cross-sectional, qualitative study, in-depth interviews were conducted with adult patients with RA in the United States, France, Germany, Italy, Spain, Switzerland, the United Kingdom, and Brazil. Patients' strength of preference was evaluated using a 100-point allocation task (0-100; 100=strongest) across four treatment modes: oral, self-injection, clinic-injection, and infusion. Qualitative descriptive analysis methods were used to identify, characterize, and summarize patterns found in the interview data relating to reasons for these preferences., Results: 100 patients were interviewed (female, 75.0%; mean age, 53.9 years; mean 11.6 years since diagnosis). Among the four treatment modes, oral administration was allocated the highest mean (standard deviation) preference points (47.3 [33.1]) and was ranked first choice by the greatest percentage of patients (57.0%), followed by self-injection (29.7 [27.7]; 29.0%), infusion (15.4 [24.6]; 16.0%), and clinic-injection (7.5 [14.1]; 2.0%). Overall, 56.0% of patients had a "strong" first-choice preference (ie, point allocation ≥70); most of these patients chose oral (62.5%) vs self-injection (23.2%), infusion (10.7%), or clinic-injection (3.6%). Speed and/or ease of administration were the most commonly reported reasons for patients choosing oral (52.6%) or self-injection (55.2%). The most common reasons for patients not choosing oral or self-injection were not wanting to take another pill (37.2%) and avoiding pain due to needles (46.5%), respectively., Conclusion: These data report factors important to patients regarding preferences for RA treatment modes. Patients may benefit from discussions with their healthcare professionals and/or patient support groups, regarding RA treatment modes, to facilitate shared decision-making., Competing Interests: PCT has received research grants from Eli Lilly, Galapagos, and UCB; and is a consultant for AbbVie, Eli Lilly, Galapagos, Gilead, and Pfizer Inc. NB is a consultant for Amgen, Eli Lilly, Grunenthal, Pfizer Inc, Roche, and Sanofi; reports personal fees from GSK and from Global Alliance for Patient Access, and is International Liaison Officer for EULAR. TMB, DW, and OO-A are employees of RTI Health Solutions, who were paid consultants to Pfizer Inc in connection with the development of this manuscript. JW, CC, PD, DPdL, DG, and LF are employees and shareholders of Pfizer Inc. AJK is a shareholder of Novartis; a consultant for AbbVie, Boehringer Ingelheim, Flexion, Genzyme, Janssen, Pfizer Inc, Regeneron, Sanofi, SUN Pharma, and UCB; a member of speakers’ bureaus for Celgene, Flexion, Genentech, Genzyme, Horizon, Ironwood, Merck, Novartis, Pfizer Inc, Regeneron, and Sanofi; and President of Altoona Center for Clinical Research. He also reports personal fees from Amgen, personal fees from Gilead, personal fees from GSK, outside the submitted work. CZ has received research grants from Amgen, Biogen, Eli Lilly, Merck, Novartis, Pfizer Inc, and Sanofi; and is a member of speakers’ bureaus for Amgen, Eli Lilly, Pfizer Inc, and Sanofi. The authors report no other conflicts of interest in this work., (© 2020 Taylor et al.)

Introduction: No published studies exist comparing the effectiveness of tofacitinib with other advanced therapies for the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis (RA) in real-world clinical practice. Here, we report differences in effectiveness of tofacitinib compared with standard of care, tumor necrosis factor inhibitors (TNFi), with or without concomitant methotrexate (MTX), using US Corrona registry data., Methods: This observational cohort study included RA patients receiving tofacitinib (from 6 November 2012; N = 558) or TNFi (from 1 November 2001; N = 8014) with or without MTX until 31 July 2016. Efficacy outcomes at 6 months included modified American College of Rheumatology 20% responses, Clinical Disease Activity Index (CDAI) and Pain. Outcomes were compared between patients receiving TNFi and tofacitinib with or without MTX and by line of therapy. Outcomes within therapy lines were compared using propensity-score matching; between-group differences were estimated using mixed-effects regression models., Results: Patients receiving tofacitinib had longer RA duration and a greater proportion had previously received biologics than those receiving TNFi; other baseline characteristics were comparable. In patients receiving second- and third-line TNFi therapy, CDAI low disease activity/remission response rates were significantly better with concomitant MTX. Too few patients received tofacitinib as second line for meaningful assessment. No significant differences were observed in outcomes between tofacitinib as monotherapy and tofacitinib with concomitant MTX., Conclusions: In clinical practice, TNFi efficacy is improved with concomitant MTX in the second and third line. In the third/fourth line, patients are likely to achieve similar efficacy with tofacitinib monotherapy, or TNFi or tofacitinib in combination with MTX., Funding: Pfizer Inc.

Objective: To provide the first direct comparison of patient-reported outcomes (PROs) following treatment with tofacitinib monotherapy versus tofacitinib or adalimumab (ADA) in combination with methotrexate (MTX) in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) with inadequate response to MTX (MTX-IR)., Methods: ORAL Strategy (NCT02187055), a phase IIIB/IV, head-to-head, randomised controlled trial, assessed non-inferiority between tofacitinib 5 mg two times per day monotherapy, tofacitinib 5 mg two times per day+MTX and ADA 40 mg every other week+MTX. PROs assessed included the following: Patient Global Assessment of disease activity (PtGA), Pain, Health Assessment Questionnaire-Disability Index, Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy-Fatigue and 36-Item Short-Form Health Survey (SF-36) summary and domain scores., Results: Substantial improvements from baseline were reported across all PROs in all treatment arms, which, in the majority, met or exceeded minimum clinically important differences. Compared with tofacitinib monotherapy, tofacitinib+MTX combination treatment conferred significantly greater improvements in PtGA, Pain and SF-36 physical component summary scores at month 6. Statistically or numerically greater improvements were often, but not uniformly, reported for combination treatments compared with tofacitinib monotherapy at other time points., Conclusion: Treatment with tofacitinib+MTX, ADA+MTX and tofacitinib monotherapy resulted in clinically meaningful improvements in PROs in MTX-IR patients with RA. These were comparatively greater with combination treatments versus tofacitinib monotherapy, although differences between treatment arms were small, limiting our ability to confer clinical meaning., Trial Registration Number: NCT02187055., Competing Interests: Competing interests: VS has received consulting fees from AbbVie, Amgen, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Celltrion, Corrona, Eli Lilly, Genentech/Roche, GSK, Janssen, Merck, Novartis, Pfizer Inc, Regeneron, Samsung, Sandoz, Sanofi and UCB. EM has received research grants, consulting fees or other remuneration from, and is a member of the speakers’ bureau for, AbbVie, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Eli Lilly, Janssen, MedImmune, Pfizer Inc and Roche. RJM has received research grants and consulting fees from, or is a member of the speakers’ bureau for, AbbVie, AKL Pharma, Biogen, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Chugai, Eli Lilly, Novartis, Pfizer Inc, Roche, Sandoz, Sanofi and UCB. DG, KS and NI are employees and shareholders of Pfizer Inc. GVW and RD were employees and shareholders of Pfizer Inc at the time of the analysis. JSS has received consulting fees, speaking fees and honoraria from AbbVie, Amgen, AstraZeneca, Astro, Celgene, Celltrion, Eli Lilly, GSK, ILTOO, Janssen, MedImmune, MSD, Novartis-Sandoz, Pfizer Inc, Roche, Samsung, Sanofi and UCB Pharma; and has received institutional grants from AbbVie, Eli Lilly, Janssen, MSD, Pfizer Inc and Roche. RF has received research grants or consulting fees from AbbVie, ACEA, Amgen, AstraZeneca, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Celltrion, Eli Lilly, Genentech, GSK, Janssen, Novartis, Pfizer Inc, Samsung, Sanofi-Aventis, Tahio and UCB., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2019. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Objective: Tofacitinib is an oral JAK inhibitor for the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis (RA). The phase III, 24-month, placebo-controlled Oral Rheumatoid Arthritis (ORAL) Scan trial was undertaken to evaluate the efficacy, including inhibition of structural progression, and safety of tofacitinib in patients with active RA and an inadequate response to methotrexate (MTX). Month 24 data from the completed study are reported here., Methods: Patients were randomized 4:4:1:1 to receive tofacitinib 5 mg or 10 mg twice daily, or placebo, switched to tofacitinib 5 mg or 10 mg twice daily, with stable background MTX. Patients receiving placebo switched to tofacitinib at month 3 (nonresponders) or month 6 (remaining patients). Clinical efficacy, structural progression, and treatment-emergent adverse events were evaluated. Analyses were performed on the full analysis set with observed data or nonresponder imputation with no advancement penalty for clinical efficacy, and imputation by linear extrapolation for structural progression., Results: Overall, 797 patients were treated; 539 (67.6%) completed 24 months of treatment. Responses according to the American College of Rheumatology criteria for 20% improvement (ACR20), ACR50, and ACR70; the proportion of patients in whom remission or low disease activity was achieved according to the 4-variable Disease Activity Score in 28 joints using the erythrocyte sedimentation rate, Clinical Disease Activity Index, or Simplified Disease Activity Index; Boolean remission; and Health Assessment Questionnaire disability index scores were maintained from month 12 to 24 and were similar between tofacitinib dosages. Limited structural damage was observed at months 12 and 24. Safety events were similar in type and frequency for both tofacitinib dosages, and were consistent with those previously reported., Conclusion: Our findings indicate that clinical and radiographic treatment effects are sustained in months 12-24 in patients with RA receiving tofacitinib 5 mg or 10 mg twice daily plus MTX. The safety profile is consistent with that of other tofacitinib studies., (© 2019 Pfizer Inc. Arthritis & Rheumatology published by Wiley Periodicals, Inc. on behalf of American College of Rheumatology.)

Background and Objectives: Rheumatoid arthritis (RA) is a chronic, debilitating disease affecting an estimated 1.5 million patients in the US. The condition is associated with a substantial health and economic burden. An economic model was developed to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of tofacitinib (a novel oral Janus kinase inhibitor) versus biologic therapies commonly prescribed in the US for the treatment of RA., Methods: A cost-utility model was developed whereby sequences of treatments were evaluated. Response to treatment was modeled by HAQ change, and informed by a network meta-analysis. Mortality, resource use and quality of life were captured in the model using published regression analyses based on HAQ score. Treatment discontinuation was linked to response to treatment and to adverse events. Patients were modeled as having had an inadequate response to methotrexate (MTX-IR), or to a first biologic therapy (TNFi-IR)., Results: The tofacitinib strategy was associated with cost savings compared with alternative treatment sequences across all modeled scenarios (i.e. in both the MTX-IR and TNFi-IR scenarios), with lifetime cost savings per patient ranging from $65,205 to $93,959 (2015 costs). Cost savings arose due to improved functioning and the resulting savings in healthcare expenditure, and lower drug and administration costs. The tofacitinib strategies all resulted in an increase in quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), with additional QALYs per patient ranging from 0.01 to 0.22., Conclusions: Tofacitinib as a second-line therapy following methotrexate failure and as a third-line therapy following a biologic failure produces lower costs and improved quality of life compared with the current pathway of care.

Background: The implementation of treat-to-target principles in rheumatoid arthritis (RA) has not been fully investigated in patients with inadequate response to tumor necrosis factor (TNF) inhibitor treatment., Objectives: To evaluate the prevalence of an inadequate response to initial TNF inhibitor treatment at 6 and 12 months among patients with RA in a real-world patient registry, as well as the delay in therapy adjustment and its impact on disease activity and patient-reported outcome (PRO) measures., Methods: This analysis is based on data of patients with moderate or severe disease activity (Clinical Disease Activity Index [CDAI] score >10) who were included in the Consortium of Rheumatology Researchers of North America (Corrona) RA registry, a prospective, observational database. The patients had never received treatment with a biologic disease-modifying antirheumatic drug (DMARD) and had initiated treatment with a TNF inhibitor (adalimumab, certolizumab pegol, etanercept, golimumab, or infliximab) between October 2001 and December 2014. We evaluated treatment response (CDAI score ≤10), select PRO measures, and treatment changes at 6 months. Patients who had an inadequate response to TNF inhibitor therapy at 6 months and continued to use their initial TNF inhibitor were evaluated again at 12 months., Results: This retrospective analysis included 2282 patients. At 6 months, 1732 (75.9%) of the patients continued to use their initial TNF inhibitor; of these, 803 (46.4%) patients had an inadequate response to treatment. Of the 803 patients who had an inadequate response at 6 months, 488 (60.8%) continued their initial treatment at 12 months. Of these 488 patients, 315 (64.5%) had an inadequate response at 12 months, and 173 (35.5%) had a response. Numerically greater improvements in all PRO measures were observed for patients who responded to therapy compared with patients with an inadequate response., Conclusions: In this real-world analysis of data from the Corrona RA registry, a considerable proportion of patients with RA had an inadequate response to the initial TNF inhibitor therapy at 6 and 12 months. Many patients continued to have moderate or high disease activity, without accelerating treatment (eg, addition or increase in the dose of concurrent conventional synthetic DMARDs or a TNF inhibitor), contrary to treat-to-target principles, thus remaining at risk for accumulating joint damage and disability.

Objective: Tofacitinib is an oral JAK inhibitor that is used for the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis (RA). In previous clinical trials of tofacitinib, a Disease Activity Score in 28 joints (DAS28)-based analysis was used to assess outcomes. In this study, remission rates according to various remission criteria were evaluated across 5 phase III randomized controlled studies., Methods: In all 5 studies, tofacitinib was administered at a dosage of 5 mg twice daily or 10 mg twice daily, either as monotherapy or with background methotrexate or other conventional synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs. One of the studies included adalimumab 40 mg once every 2 weeks. In addition to the 4-variable DAS28 using the erythrocyte sedimentation rate (DAS28-4[ESR]), a primary efficacy variable used in the phase III studies, disease activity was assessed post hoc by the 4-variable DAS28 using the C-reactive protein level (DAS28-4[CRP]), the Clinical Disease Activity Index (CDAI), the Simplified Disease Activity Index (SDAI), and Boolean-based assessment., Results: A total of 3,306 patients were analyzed (1,213 of these patients received tofacitinib 5 mg twice daily, 1,212 received tofacitinib 10 mg twice daily, 679 received placebo, and 202 received adalimumab 40 mg every 2 weeks). Remission rates varied according to the criteria used, with higher rates in the active-treatment groups for the DAS28-4(CRP) than for other scores. At month 3, remission rates with tofacitinib 5 mg twice daily were 18-22% using the DAS28-4(CRP), 5-10% using the DAS28-4(ESR), 4-7% using the SDAI, 5-6% using the CDAI, and 2-7% using the Boolean-based method. In contrast, the remission rates with placebo varied from 0% to 7%, with small differences between the DAS28-4(ESR) and the DAS28-4(CRP)., Conclusion: Although tofacitinib at dosages of 5 mg twice daily and 10 mg twice daily was effective compared with placebo in achieving disease remission, regardless of the disease activity measure, remission rates were substantially higher when the DAS28-4(CRP) was used. The presence or absence and type of acute-phase reactants in remission criteria were significant contributors to remission rates across treatment groups. This finding has important consequences for trial design and clinical practice., (© 2016, The Authors. Arthritis & Rheumatology published by Wiley Periodicals, Inc. on behalf of American College of Rheumatology.)

Objective: Tofacitinib is an oral Janus kinase inhibitor for the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis (RA). We compared patient-reported outcomes (PROs) in patients with RA treated with tofacitinib or placebo in combination with conventional disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs)., Methods: In a 12-month, phase III randomized controlled trial (ORAL Sync), patients (n = 795) with active RA and previous inadequate response to therapy with ≥1 conventional or biologic DMARD were randomized 4:4:1:1 to tofacitinib 5 mg twice daily (BID), tofacitinib 10 mg BID, placebo advanced to 5 mg BID, or placebo to 10 mg BID, in combination with stable background DMARD therapy. PROs included patient global assessment of arthritis (PtGA), patient assessment of arthritis pain (Pain), physical function (Health Assessment Questionnaire disability index [HAQ DI]), health-related quality of life (Short Form 36 health survey [SF-36]), fatigue (Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy-Fatigue [FACIT-F]), and sleep (Medical Outcomes Study Sleep [MOS Sleep])., Results: At month 3, statistically significant improvements from baseline versus placebo were reported in PtGA, Pain, HAQ DI, all 8 SF-36 domains, FACIT-F, and MOS Sleep with tofacitinib 10 mg BID, and in PtGA, Pain, HAQ DI, 7 SF-36 domains, FACIT-F, and MOS Sleep with tofacitinib 5 mg BID. Improvements were sustained to month 12. Significantly more tofacitinib-treated patients reported improvements of greater than or equal to the minimum clinically important differences at month 3 versus placebo in all PROs, except the SF-36 role-emotional domain (significant for tofacitinib 10 mg BID)., Conclusion: Patients with active RA treated with tofacitinib combined with background conventional DMARD therapy reported sustained, significant, and clinically meaningful improvements in PROs versus placebo., (© 2016, The Authors. Arthritis Care & Research published by Wiley Periodicals, Inc. on behalf of American College of Rheumatology.)

Objective . To compare the efficacy and tolerability of tofacitinib, an oral Janus kinase inhibitor for the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis (RA), as monotherapy and combined with disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs) versus biological DMARDs (bDMARDs) and other novel DMARDs for second-line moderate-to-severe rheumatoid arthritis (RA) patients by means of a systematic literature review (SLR) and network meta-analysis (NMA). Methods . MEDLINE®, EMBASE®, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were searched to identify randomized clinical trials (RCTs) published between 1990 and March 2015. Efficacy data based on American College of Rheumatology (ACR) response criteria, improvements in the Health Assessment Questionnaire Disability Index (HAQ-DI) at 6 months, and discontinuation rates due to adverse events were analyzed by means of Bayesian NMAs. Results . 45 RCTs were identified, the majority of which demonstrated a low risk of bias. Tofacitinib 5 mg twice daily (BID) and 10 mg BID monotherapy exhibited comparable efficacy and discontinuation rates due to adverse events versus other monotherapies. Tofacitinib 5 mg BID and 10 mg BID + DMARDs or methotrexate (MTX) were mostly comparable to other combination therapies in terms of efficacy and discontinuation due to adverse events. Conclusion . In most cases, tofacitinib had similar efficacy and discontinuation rates due to adverse events compared to biologic DMARDs., Competing Interests: Evelien Bergrath and Charles Makin are employees of Mapi Group, who were paid consultants to Pfizer Inc., in connection with the development of this manuscript.

Background: Real-world data comparing tofacitinib with biologic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (bDMARDs) are limited., Objective: To compare characteristics, treatment patterns, and costs of patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) receiving tofacitinib versus the most common bDMARDs (adalimumab [ADA], etanercept [ETN], and abatacept [ABA]) following a single bDMARD in a U.S. administrative claims database., Methods: This study was a retrospective cohort analysis of patients aged ≥ 18 years with an RA diagnosis (ICD-9-CM codes 714.0x-714.4x; 714.81) and 1 previous bDMARD filling ≥ 1 tofacitinib or bDMARD claim in the Truven MarketScan Commercial and Medicare Supplemental claims databases (November 1, 2012-October 31, 2014). Monotherapy was defined as absence of conventional synthetic DMARDs within 90 days post-index. Persistence was evaluated using a 60-day gap. Adherence was assessed using proportion of days covered (PDC). RA-related total, pharmacy, and medical costs were evaluated in the 12-month pre- and post-index periods. Treatment patterns and costs were adjusted using linear models including a common set of clinically relevant variables of interest (e.g., previous RA treatments), which were assessed separately using t-tests and chi-squared tests., Results: Overall, 392 patients initiated tofacitinib; 178 patients initiated ADA; 118 patients initiated ETN; and 191 patients initiated ABA. Tofacitinib patients were older versus ADA patients (P = 0.0153) and had a lower proportion of Medicare supplemental patients versus ABA patients (P = 0.0095). Twelve-month pre-index bDMARD use was greater in tofacitinib patients (77.6%) versus bDMARD cohorts (47.6%-59.6%). Tofacitinib patients had greater 12-month pre-index RA-related total costs versus bDMARD cohorts (all P < 0.0001) and greatest index use of monotherapy (P = 0.0080 vs. ABA). A similar (all P > 0.10) proportion of patients were persistent with tofacitinib (42.6%) versus ADA (37.6%), ETN (42.4%), and ABA (43.5%). Mean PDC was 0.55 for tofacitinib versus 0.57 (ADA), 0.59 (ETN), and 0.44 (ABA; P = 0.0003). Adjusted analyses generated similar findings to the unadjusted treatment patterns. Tofacitinib had lower adjusted 12-month post-index mean RA-related total costs ($23,568) versus ADA ($29,278; P < 0.0001), ETN ($26,885; P = 0.0248), and ABA ($30,477; P < 0.0001)., Conclusions: In this study, tofacitinib was more commonly used as monotherapy and yielded at least comparable persistence and adherence with lower adjusted mean RA-related total costs versus ADA, ETN, and ABA. Further analysis is warranted given the greater 12-month pre-index bDMARD use and RA-related costs for tofacitinib versus bDMARDs., Disclosures: This study was sponsored by Pfizer. Harnett, Gerber, Gruben, Koenig, and Chen are employees and shareholders of Pfizer. Some data reported in this manuscript have been previously presented at the Academy of Managed Care Nexus 2015; Orlando, Florida; October 26-29, 2015, and was submitted in abstract form to the European League Against Rheumatism Congress; London, United Kingdom; June 8-11, 2016. All authors were involved in the conception and design of this study. Harnett and Gruben were involved in data collection and analysis. All authors interpreted the data, critically reviewed and revised the manuscript, and read and approved the final manuscript.

Tofacitinib is an oral Janus kinase inhibitor for the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis (RA). Here, the safety and efficacy data from five Phase 2 studies of tofacitinib in patients with RA are summarized. Tofacitinib 1-30 mg twice daily was investigated, as monotherapy and in combination with methotrexate, in patients with RA. Tofacitinib 20 mg once daily was investigated in one study. Tofacitinib 5 and 10 mg twice daily were selected for investigation in Phase 3 studies; therefore, the efficacy and safety of tofacitinib 5 and 10 mg twice daily in Phase 2 studies are the focus of this review. Tofacitinib ≥ 5 mg twice daily was efficacious in a dose-dependent manner, with statistically significant and clinically meaningful reductions in the signs and symptoms of RA and patient-reported outcomes. The safety profile was consistent across studies. The efficacy and safety profile of tofacitinib in Phase 2 studies supported its further investigation and the selection of tofacitinib 5 mg twice daily and tofacitinib 10 mg twice daily for evaluation in Phase 3 studies., (© 2016 The Authors. International Journal of Rheumatic Diseases published by Asia Pacific League of Associations for Rheumatology and John Wiley & Sons Australia, Ltd.)

Objectives: To compare patient-reported outcomes (PROs) in methotrexate (MTX)-naive patients (defined as no prior treatment or ≤3 doses) receiving tofacitinib versus MTX., Methods: In the 24-month, phase III, randomised, controlled, ORAL Start trial (NCT01039688), patients were randomised 2:2:1 to receive tofacitinib 5 mg two times per day (n=373), tofacitinib 10 mg two times per day (n=397) or MTX (n=186). PROs assessed included Patient Global Assessment of disease (PtGA), pain, Health Assessment Questionnaire-Disability Index (HAQ-DI), Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy-Fatigue (FACIT-F) and health-related quality of life (Short Form-36 [SF-36])., Results: PROs improved following tofacitinib and MTX treatment: benefits were sustained over 24 months. Patients receiving tofacitinib reported earlier responses which were significantly different between each tofacitinib dose and MTX at month 3 through month 24. At month 6 (primary end point), significant improvements versus MTX were observed in PtGA, pain, HAQ-DI, SF-36 Physical Component Summary (PCS), 5/8 domain scores and FACIT-F with tofacitinib 5 mg two times per day; all PROs, except SF-36 Mental Component Summary Score and Medical Outcomes Survey-Sleep, with tofacitinib 10 mg two times per day. At month 6, the proportion of patients reporting improvements ≥minimum clinically important difference were significant versus MTX with tofacitinib 5 mg two times per day in PtGA and 3/8 SF-36 domains; and with tofacitinib 10 mg two times per day in PtGA, pain, HAQ-DI, SF-36 PCS, 4/8 domains and FACIT-F., Conclusions: Patients with rheumatoid arthritis receiving tofacitinib 5 and 10 mg two times per day monotherapy versus MTX reported statistically significant and clinically meaningful improvements in multiple PROs over 24 months; onset of benefit with tofacitinib treatment occurred earlier., Trial Registration Number: NCT01039688.

Background: The detection of statistically significant reductions in radiographic progression during clinical studies in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) has become increasingly difficult over the past decade due to early-escape study designs and declining rates of progression in control-group patients. We investigated the impact of extremes of radiographic data (outliers) and baseline prognostic factors on detection of treatment effects, to provide guidance on future analysis of joint structural data in RA clinical trials., Methods: Data were from two, phase 3, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trials of tofacitinib in adult patients with moderate to severe RA: ORAL Scan (NCT00847613) and ORAL Start (NCT01039688). These studies detected significant reductions in radiographic progression with tofacitinib 10 mg twice daily (BID) plus background methotrexate (ORAL Scan), and with tofacitinib 5 or 10 mg BID as monotherapy (ORAL Start). We evaluated mean changes from baseline in van der Heijde modified total Sharp score (mTSS) at month 6 and month 12, using analysis of covariance (ANCOVA). A trimmed analysis was used to deal with extremes of data. The impact of baseline prognostic factors on radiographic progression was evaluated using ANCOVA to analyze the mean change from baseline in mTSS for each factor in turn., Results: The analysis included data from 720 patients from ORAL Scan and 880 patients from ORAL Start. Trimmed analyses were unbiased for the true mean estimate and enabled us to remove the effect of influential extreme observations in the data set. Almost all patients had at least one poor prognostic factor at baseline (e.g., high level of disease activity, or positive for rheumatoid factor). The strongest predictor of treatment effect was the severity of radiographic damage at baseline., Conclusions: A trimmed analysis can establish whether any significant inhibition of structural damage is being driven by extremes of data, and should be one of the sensitivity analyses of choice for structural data in RA clinical trials. Furthermore, analysis of radiographic data based on baseline prognostic factors may reveal increased treatment effects. Application of these methods to analysis of radiographic data from clinical trials in patients with RA, allows a more complete interpretation of data., Trial Registration: Clinicaltrials.gov NCT00847613 (registered 17 February 2009) and NCT01039688 (registered 23 December 2009).

Background: Tofacitinib is an oral Janus kinase inhibitor for the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis (RA). The aim of this study was to explore the safety and efficacy of open-label tofacitinib following blinded treatment with adalimumab or tofacitinib for moderate to severe RA., Methods: Analyses included patients treated with adalimumab 40 mg once every 2 weeks or tofacitinib 10 mg twice daily (BID) with background methotrexate (MTX) in a 12-month randomized study (NCT00853385), who subsequently received tofacitinib 10 mg BID (with/without background MTX) in an open-label extension (NCT00413699). Patients with treatment-related serious adverse events (AEs) and serious or recurrent infections in the index study were excluded from the extension study. Exposure-adjusted incidence rates of safety-related events were assessed in 3-month and 12-month periods in the year before and in the year after switching. Efficacy was assessed 3 months before, at the time of, and 3 months after switching., Results: There were 233 (107 adalimumab to tofacitinib 10 mg BID, 126 blinded to open-label tofacitinib 10 mg BID) patients included in these analyses. Patients in both treatment sequences had similar incidence rates (per 100 patient-years) of discontinuation due to AEs, serious AEs, and serious infections in the year before and in the year after switching. Incidence rates of AEs were increased in the first 3 months after switching compared with the last 3 months before switching in both treatment groups. Switching from either blinded adalimumab or tofacitinib to open-label tofacitinib resulted in numerically higher incidence of responders for signs and symptoms of disease and improved physical function., Conclusions: Treatment can be directly switched from adalimumab to tofacitinib. A similar safety and efficacy profile was seen when patients received open-label tofacitinib after receiving either blinded adalimumab or tofacitinib., Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifiers: NCT00853385 , registered 27 February 2009; NCT00413699 , registered 18 December 2006.

Objective: To evaluate effects of tofacitinib or adalimumab on patient-reported outcomes (PROs) in patients with moderate to severe RA and inadequate responses to MTX., Methods: In this 12-month, phase 3, randomized controlled trial (ORAL Standard), patients (n = 717) receiving background MTX were randomized to tofacitinib 5 or 10 mg twice daily (BID), adalimumab 40 mg once every 2 weeks or placebo. PROs included HAQ-Disability Index, Patient Global Assessment of Arthritis, Patient Assessment of Arthritis Pain, health-related quality of life (Short Form-36 [SF-36]), fatigue (Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy-Fatigue) and sleep (Medical Outcomes Study-Sleep)., Results: At month 3, tofacitinib 10 mg BID treatment resulted in significant changes from baseline vs placebo across all PROs, sustained to month 12, with the highest number of patients reporting improvements ⩾minimum clinically important differences vs placebo (P < 0.05). Changes from baseline at month 3 with tofacitinib 5 mg BID and adalimumab were similar and statistically significant vs placebo across most PROs, excluding SF-36 Mental Component Score and Social Functioning, Role Emotional, and Mental Health domains, with significantly more patients reporting improvements ⩾minimum clinically important differences. Numbers Needed to Treat were lowest for tofacitinib 10 mg BID and similar between tofacitinib 5 mg BID and adalimumab., Conclusion: Patients with moderate to severe RA and inadequate responses to MTX reported improvements across a broad range of PROs with tofacitinib 5 and 10 mg BID and adalimumab that were significantly superior to placebo., (© The Author 2016. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the British Society for Rheumatology.)

Purpose: Tofacitinib is an oral Janus kinase inhibitor indicated for the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis (RA). Tofacitinib can be administered as a monotherapy or in combination with conventional synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs). This study describes RA patients' characteristics, treatment patterns, and costs for those initiating tofacitinib treatment as monotherapy or combination therapy, using US claims data from clinical practice., Methods: A retrospective cohort analysis of patients aged ≥18 years with RA (International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision code 714.xx) and with ≥1 tofacitinib claim in the Truven Marketscan (TM) or the Optum Clinformatics (OC) database. Index was defined as the first tofacitinib fill date (November 2012-June 2014). Patients were continuously enrolled for ≥12 months before and after index. Adherence was assessed using the proportion of days covered (PDC) and medication possession ratio (MPR). Persistence was evaluated using a 1.5× days' supply gap or switch. All-cause and RA-related costs in the 12-month pre- and post-index periods were evaluated. Unadjusted and adjusted analyses were conducted on data on treatment patterns and costs stratified by monotherapy status., Findings: A total of 337 (TM) and 118 (OC) tofacitinib patients met the selection criteria; 52.2% (TM) and 50.8% (OC) received monotherapy and 83.7% (TM) and 76.3% (OC) had pre-index biologic DMARD experience. Twelve-month mean PDC values were 0.56 (TM) and 0.53 (OC), and 12-month mean MPR was 0.84 (TM) and 0.80 (OC), with persistence of 140.0 (TM) and 124.6 (OC) days. Between 12-month pre- and post-index periods, mean (SD) 12-month RA-related medical costs decreased by $5784 ($31,832) in TM and $6103 ($25,897) in OC (both, P < 0.05), whereas total costs increased by $3996 ($30,397) in TM (P < 0.05) and $1390 ($26,603) in OC. There were no significant differences in adherence, persistence, or all-cause/RA-related costs between monotherapy and combination therapy in unadjusted/adjusted analyses., Implications: This analysis adds to the existing tofacitinib knowledge base and will enable informed clinical and policy decision making based on valuable datasets independent of randomized controlled trials., (Copyright © 2016 Elsevier HS Journals, Inc. All rights reserved.)

Objectives: Tofacitinib is an oral Janus kinase inhibitor for the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis (RA). Here we investigated the effects of tofacitinib on patient-reported outcomes (PRO) in patients with active RA., Methods: Two, 6-month, double-blind, placebo-controlled Phase 2b studies were performed. The combination study evaluated patients with inadequate response to methotrexate who received tofacitinib 1-15 mg twice daily (BID), 20 mg once daily or placebo, on background methotrexate. In the monotherapy study, patients with inadequate response to disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs received tofacitinib 1-15 mg BID, adalimumab 40 mg once every other week or placebo. PROs measured were: Patient's Assessment of Arthritis Pain (PAAP), Patient's Assessment of Disease Activity, HAQ-DI, FACIT-F and SF-36., Results: In the combination study (n=507), significant improvements (p<0.05) versus placebo were observed at Week 12 in PAAP (visual analogue scale) and HAQ-DI for all tofacitinib groups. In the monotherapy study (n=384), significant improvements in PAAP were observed at Week 12 for tofacitinib 5, 10 and 15 mg BID, and in HAQ-DI for tofacitinib 3, 5, 10 and 15 mg BID. Significant improvements versus placebo were seen at Week 2 in PAAP (both studies) and HAQ‑DI (monotherapy study) with tofacitinib, and were maintained throughout each study. In both studies, improvements in several domains of the SF-36 in the tofacitinib groups were observed at Weeks 12 and 24., Conclusions: In patients with active RA, tofacitinib, either in combination with methotrexate or as monotherapy, demonstrated rapid and sustained improvement in pain, physical functioning and health-related quality of life.

Background: Adherence to biologic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (bDMARDs) among patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) is often suboptimal in routine clinical practice. Low or nonadherence can reduce the effectiveness of bDMARD therapies., Objective: To evaluate filling of newly prescribed initial bDMARDs for the treatment of RA and evaluate potential for characterizing treatment decisions and patient outcomes., Methods: In this retrospective cohort analysis, patients aged ≥ 18 years with an RA diagnosis (ICD-9-CM code 714.xx) were selected from a de-identified database of clinical information from the Electronic Health Record (EHR; Humedica) database linked to health care claims (Optum) from commercial and Medicare Advantage health plans (2007-2013). The first biologic prescription date in EHR was the index date. Patients were categorized as filling the prescription within 30 days (early fillers), 31-180 days (late fillers), or not at all within 180 days (nonfillers) of index date., Results: Of 373 patients meeting inclusion criteria, 170 (45.6%), 59 (15.8%), and 144 (38.6%) were categorized as early fillers, late fillers, and nonfillers, respectively. Most prescriptions were written or ordered for tumor necrosis factor inhibitors (88.7%). Compared with late and nonfillers, early fillers were younger and more likely to be female, with higher pain scores (among those reporting pain scores) and RA severity scores pre-index, and filled more prescriptions for any reason pre-index. More nonfillers (66.0%) were Medicare patients than early (17.7%) and late (35.6%) fillers. During days 0-30 post-index, conventional synthetic DMARD use was greatest for early fillers (45.9%) and lowest among nonfillers (24.3%); however, during days 31-180 post-index, the proportion was highest for late fillers (61.0%) and lowest for nonfillers (35.4%). Of early fillers, 12.9% did not fill/receive a bDMARD after 30 days. Only 23 patients had pre/post-index pain scores, and 47 patients had a rationale for stopping or not filling a bDMARD. In patients with pharmacy and medical coverage for 180 days post-index, early fillers had greater RA-related pharmacy and medical resource use and costs than late and nonfillers combined., Conclusions: These findings confirm a high rate of primary nonadherence to bDMARDs among patients with RA.

Introduction: Tofacitinib is an oral Janus kinase inhibitor for the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis., Method: In this 6-month, phase 3, randomized, placebo-controlled trial, 611 patients with inadequate response to disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs (DMARD-IR) were randomized 4:4:1:1 to receive: tofacitinib 5 mg BID or tofacitinib 10 mg BID for the duration of the study, or placebo for 3 months followed by tofacitinib 5 mg BID or tofacitinib 10 mg BID. Patient-reported outcomes (PROs) included: Patient Global Assessment of Disease Activity (PtGA); Patient Assessment of Pain (Pain); Health Assessment Questionnaire-Disability Index (HAQ-DI); Medical Outcomes Survey (MOS) Short Form-36 (SF-36); Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy-Fatigue (FACIT-F); and MOS Sleep Scale. Time-to-event data (PtGA and Pain) were collected using an interactive voice response system daily diary (baseline through day 14)., Results: At month 3, tofacitinib 5 and 10 mg BID demonstrated statistically significant improvements versus placebo in PtGA (both p < 0.0001), Pain (both p < 0.0001), HAQ-DI (both p < 0.0001), SF-36 Physical (p < 0.0001) and Mental (p < 0.05 [5 mg BID] and p < 0.0001 [10 mg BID]), Component Summary scores and all domain scores (p < 0.05-p < 0.0001) and FACIT-F (both p < 0.0001). Statistically significant changes from baseline in MOS Sleep Scale were reported for 10 mg BID (p < 0.05). Benefits of tofacitinib treatment were rapid in onset and significant improvements were reported at week 2 for PtGA, Pain and HAQ-DI, and differentiation from baseline was seen as early as 3 days after treatment initiation for interactive voice response system (IVRS) PtGA and IVRS Pain. The numbers needed to treat for patients to report changes greater than or equal to the minimum clinically important difference in PtGA, Pain, HAQ-DI, SF-36 Physical Component Summary score and FACIT-F ranged between 4.0-6.1 (5 mg BID) and 3.2-5.0 (10 mg BID)., Conclusion: Tofacitinib monotherapy in DMARD-IR patients resulted in statistically significant and clinically meaningful improvements in multiple PROs versus placebo at month 3, with sustained improvements over 6 months., Trial Registration: Clinicaltrials.gov registration NCT00814307 , registered 22 December 2008.

Objective: To assess patient-reported outcomes (PROs) for tofacitinib, an oral JAK inhibitor for the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis (RA), in a 6-month, phase III, randomized controlled trial., Methods: Patients ages ≥18 years with active RA with an inadequate response to ≥1 tumor necrosis factor inhibitor (TNFi) and receiving stable background methotrexate were randomized 2:2:1:1 to tofacitinib 5 mg or 10 mg twice daily, or placebo advanced to tofacitinib 5 mg or 10 mg twice daily at month 3. PROs measured at month 3 included patient global assessment of disease activity (PtGA), pain, Health Assessment Questionnaire (HAQ) disability index (DI), Medical Outcomes Study (MOS) Short Form 36 Health Survey version 2 (SF-36v2; acute), Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy-Fatigue (FACIT-F), and MOS Sleep Scale., Results: Patients received tofacitinib 5 mg (n = 133) or 10 mg (n = 134) or placebo advanced to tofacitinib 5 mg (n = 66) or 10 mg (n = 66). HAQ DI (reported previously), PtGA (P < 0.0001), and SF-36v2 physical and mental component summary (P < 0.05) scores were improved for both tofacitinib doses versus placebo. Furthermore, improvements greater than or equal to the minimum clinically important difference were more frequently reported by tofacitinib-treated patients versus placebo for PtGA (P < 0.05), pain (P < 0.0001), HAQ DI (P < 0.05), SF-36v2 physical and mental component summary scores (P < 0.05), and FACIT-F (P < 0.001 for 5 mg twice daily). No statistical differences were observed in the MOS Sleep Scale., Conclusion: Tofacitinib treatment resulted in significant, clinically meaningful improvements in multiple PROs versus placebo over 3 months of treatment in patients with active RA and a previous inadequate response to TNFi., (Copyright © 2015 by the American College of Rheumatology.)

Background: Methotrexate is the most frequently used first-line antirheumatic drug. We report the findings of a phase 3 study of monotherapy with tofacitinib, an oral Janus kinase inhibitor, as compared with methotrexate monotherapy in patients with rheumatoid arthritis who had not previously received methotrexate or therapeutic doses of methotrexate., Methods: We randomly assigned 958 patients to receive 5 mg or 10 mg of tofacitinib twice daily or methotrexate at a dose that was incrementally increased to 20 mg per week over 8 weeks; 956 patients received a study drug. The coprimary end points at month 6 were the mean change from baseline in the van der Heijde modified total Sharp score (which ranges from 0 to 448, with higher scores indicating greater structural joint damage) and the proportion of patients with an American College of Rheumatology (ACR) 70 response (≥70% reduction in the number of both tender and swollen joints and ≥70% improvement in three of five other criteria: the patient's assessment of pain, level of disability, C-reactive protein level or erythrocyte sedimentation rate, global assessment of disease by the patient, and global assessment of disease by the physician)., Results: Mean changes in the modified total Sharp score from baseline to month 6 were significantly smaller in the tofacitinib groups than in the methotrexate group, but changes were modest in all three groups (0.2 points in the 5-mg tofacitinib group and <0.1 point in the 10-mg tofacitinib group, as compared with 0.8 points in the methotrexate group [P<0.001 for both comparisons]). Among the patients receiving tofacitinib, 25.5% in the 5-mg group and 37.7% in the 10-mg group had an ACR 70 response at month 6, as compared with 12.0% of patients in the methotrexate group (P<0.001 for both comparisons). Herpes zoster developed in 31 of 770 patients who received tofacitinib (4.0%) and in 2 of 186 patients who received methotrexate (1.1%). Confirmed cases of cancer (including three cases of lymphoma) developed in 5 patients who received tofacitinib and in 1 patient who received methotrexate. Tofacitinib was associated with increases in creatinine levels and in low-density and high-density lipoprotein cholesterol levels., Conclusions: In patients who had not previously received methotrexate or therapeutic doses of methotrexate, tofacitinib monotherapy was superior to methotrexate in reducing signs and symptoms of rheumatoid arthritis and inhibiting the progression of structural joint damage. The benefits of tofacitinib need to be considered in the context of the risks of adverse events. (Funded by Pfizer; ORAL Start ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01039688.).

Objective: To describe the longterm safety and efficacy profile of tofacitinib in patients with moderate to severe active rheumatoid arthritis (RA)., Methods: Data were pooled from 2 open-label studies (NCT00413699, NCT00661661) involving patients who had participated in qualifying phase I, II, or III index studies of tofacitinib. Safety data included over 60 months of observation; efficacy data are reported up to Month 48. Treatment was initiated with tofacitinib 5 or 10 mg twice daily. Primary endpoints were adverse events (AE) and laboratory safety data. Secondary endpoints included American College of Rheumatology (ACR) response rates, and Disease Activity Score (28 joints) (DAS28)-4[erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR)] and Health Assessment Questionnaire-Disability Index (HAQ-DI) assessments., Results: Overall, 4102 patients were treated for 5963 patient-years; mean (maximum) treatment duration was 531 (1844) days; 20.8% of patients discontinued treatment over 60 months. The most common AE were nasopharyngitis (12.7%) and upper respiratory tract infection (10.5%). Serious AE were reported in 15.4% of patients with an exposure-estimated incidence rate of 11.1 events/100 patient-years. Serious infections were reported in 4.5% of patients with an exposure-estimated incidence rate of 3.1 events/100 patient-years (95% CI: 2.66-3.55). Mean values for laboratory variables were stable over time and consistent with phase II and III studies. Persistent efficacy was demonstrated through Month 48, as measured by ACR response rate (ACR20/50/70) DAS28-4-ESR, and HAQ-DI. Safety and efficacy were similar for patients receiving tofacitinib as monotherapy or with background nonbiologic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs., Conclusion: Tofacitinib demonstrated consistent safety and persistent efficacy over 48 months in patients with RA.

Background: Many patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) do not achieve adequate and safe responses with disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs). Tofacitinib is a novel, oral, Janus kinase inhibitor that treats RA., Objective: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of tofacitinib in combination with nonbiologic DMARDs., Design: 1-year, double-blind, randomized trial (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT00856544)., Setting: 114 centers in 19 countries., Patients: 792 patients with active RA despite nonbiologic DMARD therapy., Intervention: Patients were randomly assigned 4:4:1:1 to oral tofacitinib, 5 mg or 10 mg twice daily, or placebo advanced to tofacitinib, 5 mg or 10 mg twice daily., Measurements: Primary end points were 20% improvement in American College of Rheumatology (ACR20) criteria; Disease Activity Score for 28-joint counts based on the erythrocyte sedimentation rate (DAS28-4[ESR]) of less than 2.6; DAS28-4(ESR)-defined remission, change in Health Assessment Questionnaire Disability Index (HAQ-DI) score, and safety assessments., Results: Mean treatment differences for ACR20 response rates (month 6) for the 5-mg and 10-mg tofacitinib groups compared with the combined placebo groups were 21.2% (95% CI, 12.2% to 30.3%; P < 0.001) and 25.8% (CI, 16.8% to 34.8%; P < 0.001), respectively. The HAQ-DI scores (month 3) and DAS28-4(ESR) less than 2.6 response rates (month 6) were also superior in the tofacitinib groups versus placebo. The incidence rates of serious adverse events for patients receiving 5-mg tofacitinib, 10-mg tofacitinib, or placebo were 6.9, 7.3, or 10.9 events per 100 patient-years of exposure, respectively. In the tofacitinib groups, 2 cases of tuberculosis, 2 cases of other opportunistic infections, 3 cardiovascular events, and 4 deaths occurred. Neutrophil counts decreased, hemoglobin and low- and high-density lipoprotein cholesterol levels increased, and serum creatinine levels had small increases in the tofacitinib groups., Limitations: Placebo groups were smaller and of shorter duration. Patients received primarily methotrexate. The ability to assess drug combinations other than tofacitinib plus methotrexate was limited., Conclusion: Tofacitinib improved disease control in patients with active RA despite treatment with nonbiologic DMARDs, primarily methotrexate., Primary Funding Source: Pfizer.