Effectiveness of Tofacitinib in Patients with Psoriatic Arthritis Initiating Monotherapy Versus Combination Therapy: Results from the CorEvitas Psoriatic Arthritis/Spondyloarthritis Registry.

IF 3.1 3区 医学 Q2 RHEUMATOLOGY
Rheumatology and Therapy Pub Date : 2026-02-01 Epub Date: 2025-12-04 DOI:10.1007/s40744-025-00811-4
Alexis Ogdie, Nicole Middaugh, Taylor Blachley, Tran Bourgeois, You-Li Ling, Rajiv Mundayat, Lara Fallon, Karim R Masri, Philip J Mease
{"title":"Effectiveness of Tofacitinib in Patients with Psoriatic Arthritis Initiating Monotherapy Versus Combination Therapy: Results from the CorEvitas Psoriatic Arthritis/Spondyloarthritis Registry.","authors":"Alexis Ogdie, Nicole Middaugh, Taylor Blachley, Tran Bourgeois, You-Li Ling, Rajiv Mundayat, Lara Fallon, Karim R Masri, Philip J Mease","doi":"10.1007/s40744-025-00811-4","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>This study evaluated the real-world effectiveness of tofacitinib monotherapy versus combination therapy in patients with psoriatic arthritis (PsA) enrolled in the CorEvitas PsA/Spondyloarthritis Registry.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This study (NCT05195814) included adult patients with PsA initiating tofacitinib (from December 14, 2017 to October 1, 2023) as monotherapy, or in combination with oral small molecules (OSMs: methotrexate, leflunomide, sulfasalazine, hydroxychloroquine, and apremilast). Patients with baseline and 6-month follow-up visits (± 3 months) were included.</p><p><strong>Outcomes: </strong>mean change from baseline (∆) in/proportions achieving, disease activity measures (including body surface area [BSA] = 0%), and patient-reported outcomes. Continuous endpoints at month 6 were analyzed as ∆ with an analysis of covariance model including treatment and baseline value as covariates. ∆ in least squares (LS) means and adjusted LS means/odds ratios are presented.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The study included 141 patients (66/141 monotherapy; 75/141 combination therapy). Patients were predominantly female (61.0%) and white (94.3%), and average age was 56.7 years. More monotherapy initiators were OSM treatment-naïve and had higher mean Patient Global Assessment of Arthritis, compared with combination therapy initiators. By 6 ± 3 months, 28.8% and 25.3% of monotherapy and combination therapy initiators, respectively, discontinued tofacitinib. At 6 ± 3 months, 15.0% of monotherapy initiators achieved minimal disease activity, and 27.1% had BSA = 0%. Corresponding data for combination therapy initiators were 20.7%, and 22.0%, respectively. Differences between groups were not significant. LS mean differences from baseline in overall work impairment/activity impairment were - 13.0/- 21.8 and 1.4/- 2.9 for monotherapy and combination therapy initiators, respectively.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Monotherapy and combination therapy initiators demonstrated improvements across effectiveness outcomes. Tofacitinib monotherapy initiators experienced numerical improvements in overall work impairment/activity impairment. This highlights tofacitinib effectiveness as monotherapy/combination therapy for a diverse PsA population. However, the small sample size limited the statistical power, and so results should be interpreted cautiously.</p><p><strong>Trial registration: </strong>ClinicalTrials.gov identifier, NCT05195814.</p>","PeriodicalId":21267,"journal":{"name":"Rheumatology and Therapy","volume":" ","pages":"195-212"},"PeriodicalIF":3.1000,"publicationDate":"2026-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12816449/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Rheumatology and Therapy","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s40744-025-00811-4","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/12/4 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"RHEUMATOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction: This study evaluated the real-world effectiveness of tofacitinib monotherapy versus combination therapy in patients with psoriatic arthritis (PsA) enrolled in the CorEvitas PsA/Spondyloarthritis Registry.

Methods: This study (NCT05195814) included adult patients with PsA initiating tofacitinib (from December 14, 2017 to October 1, 2023) as monotherapy, or in combination with oral small molecules (OSMs: methotrexate, leflunomide, sulfasalazine, hydroxychloroquine, and apremilast). Patients with baseline and 6-month follow-up visits (± 3 months) were included.

Outcomes: mean change from baseline (∆) in/proportions achieving, disease activity measures (including body surface area [BSA] = 0%), and patient-reported outcomes. Continuous endpoints at month 6 were analyzed as ∆ with an analysis of covariance model including treatment and baseline value as covariates. ∆ in least squares (LS) means and adjusted LS means/odds ratios are presented.

Results: The study included 141 patients (66/141 monotherapy; 75/141 combination therapy). Patients were predominantly female (61.0%) and white (94.3%), and average age was 56.7 years. More monotherapy initiators were OSM treatment-naïve and had higher mean Patient Global Assessment of Arthritis, compared with combination therapy initiators. By 6 ± 3 months, 28.8% and 25.3% of monotherapy and combination therapy initiators, respectively, discontinued tofacitinib. At 6 ± 3 months, 15.0% of monotherapy initiators achieved minimal disease activity, and 27.1% had BSA = 0%. Corresponding data for combination therapy initiators were 20.7%, and 22.0%, respectively. Differences between groups were not significant. LS mean differences from baseline in overall work impairment/activity impairment were - 13.0/- 21.8 and 1.4/- 2.9 for monotherapy and combination therapy initiators, respectively.

Conclusion: Monotherapy and combination therapy initiators demonstrated improvements across effectiveness outcomes. Tofacitinib monotherapy initiators experienced numerical improvements in overall work impairment/activity impairment. This highlights tofacitinib effectiveness as monotherapy/combination therapy for a diverse PsA population. However, the small sample size limited the statistical power, and so results should be interpreted cautiously.

Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier, NCT05195814.

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

托法替尼对银屑病关节炎患者单药治疗与联合治疗的有效性:来自CorEvitas银屑病关节炎/脊椎关节炎登记的结果
本研究评估了托法替尼单药治疗与联合治疗在CorEvitas PsA/Spondyloarthritis Registry登记的银屑病关节炎(PsA)患者的实际疗效。方法:本研究(NCT05195814)纳入了PsA启动tofacitinib(从2017年12月14日至2023年10月1日)作为单一治疗或与口服小分子(OSMs:甲氨喋呤、来氟米特、磺胺嘧啶、羟氯喹和阿普利米司特)联合治疗的成人患者。包括基线和6个月随访(±3个月)的患者。结果:从基线的平均变化(∆)/比例达到,疾病活动性测量(包括体表面积[BSA] = 0%),以及患者报告的结果。第6个月的连续终点以∆进行分析,并对协方差模型进行分析,其中治疗和基线值为协变量。∆为最小二乘(LS)均值和调整后的LS均值/比值比。结果:共纳入141例患者(66/141单药治疗,75/141联合治疗)。患者以女性(61.0%)和白人(94.3%)为主,平均年龄56.7岁。与联合治疗启动者相比,更多的单一治疗启动者是OSM treatment-naïve,并且具有更高的关节炎平均患者总体评估。在6±3个月时,分别有28.8%和25.3%的单药和联合治疗起始者停止使用托法替尼。在6±3个月时,15.0%的单药治疗起始者达到最小的疾病活动度,27.1%的BSA = 0%。联合治疗启动者的相应数据分别为20.7%和22.0%。组间差异不显著。单药治疗和联合治疗启动者的总体工作障碍/活动障碍与基线的平均LS差异分别为- 13.0/- 21.8和1.4/- 2.9。结论:单药治疗和联合治疗起始者在疗效结局上均有改善。托法替尼单药治疗启动者在整体工作障碍/活动障碍方面经历了数值改善。这突出了托法替尼作为单一疗法/联合疗法对不同PsA人群的有效性。然而,样本量小限制了统计效力,因此结果应谨慎解释。试验注册:ClinicalTrials.gov标识符,NCT05195814。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Rheumatology and Therapy
Rheumatology and Therapy RHEUMATOLOGY-
CiteScore
6.00
自引率
5.30%
发文量
91
审稿时长
6 weeks
期刊介绍: Aims and Scope Rheumatology and Therapy is an international, open access, peer reviewed, rapid publication journal dedicated to the publication of high-quality clinical (all phases), observational, real-world and health outcomes research around the discovery, development, and use of rheumatologic therapies. Studies relating to diagnosis, pharmacoeconomics, public health, quality of life, and patient care, management, and education are also welcomed. Areas of focus include, but are not limited to, rheumatoid arthritis, gout, gouty arthritis, psoriatic arthritis, osteoarthritis, juvenile idiopathic/rheumatoid arthritis, systemic lupus erythematosus, axial spondyloarthritis, Pompe’s disease, inflammatory joint conditions, musculoskeletal conditions, systemic sclerosis, and fibromyalgia. The journal is of interest to a broad audience of healthcare professionals and publishes original research, reviews, case reports, trial protocols, communications and letters. The journal is read by a global audience and receives submissions from all over the world. Rheumatology and Therapy will consider all scientifically sound research be it positive, confirmatory or negative data. Submissions are welcomed whether they relate to an international and/or a country-specific audience, something that is crucially important when researchers are trying to target more specific patient populations. This inclusive approach allows the journal to assist in the dissemination of all scientifically and ethically sound research. Ethics and Disclosures The journal is a member of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) and subscribes to its principles on how to deal with acts of misconduct thereby committing to investigate allegations of misconduct in order to ensure the integrity of research. Content in this journal is peer-reviewed (Single-blind). For more information on our publishing ethics policies, please see here: https://www.springer.com/gp/editorial-policies Rapid Publication The journal’s rapid publication timelines aim for a peer review decision within 2 weeks of submission. If an article is accepted it will be published online 3-4 weeks from acceptance. These rapid timelines are achieved through the combination of a dedicated in-house editorial team, who closely manage article workflow, and an extensive Editorial and Advisory Board who assist with rapid peer review. This allows the journal to support the rapid dissemination of research, whilst still providing robust peer review. Combined with the journal’s open access model this allows for the rapid and efficient communication of the latest research and reviews, allowing the advancement of rheumatologic therapies. Personal Service The journal’s dedicated in-house editorial team offer a personal “concierge service” meaning that authors will always have a personal point of contact able to update them on the status of their manuscript. The editorial team check all manuscripts to ensure that articles conform to the most recent COPE, GPP and ICMJE publishing guidelines. This supports the publication of ethically sound and transparent research. We also encourage pre-submission enquiries and are always happy to provide a confidential assessment of manuscripts. Digital Features Rheumatology and Therapy offers a range of additional features designed to increase the visibility, readership and educational value of the journal’s content. Each article is accompanied by key summary points, giving a time-efficient overview of the content to a wide readership. Articles may be accompanied by plain language summaries to assist readers who have some knowledge of, but not in-depth expertise in, the area to understand the scientific content and overall implications of the article. The journal also provides the option to include various types of digital features including animated abstracts, video abstracts, slide decks, audio slides, instructional videos, infographics, podcasts and animations. All additional features are peer reviewed to the same high standard as the article itself. If you consider that your paper would benefit from the inclusion of a digital feature, please let us know. Our editorial team are able to create high-quality slide decks and infographics in-house, and video abstracts through our partner Research Square, and would be happy to assist in any way we can. For further information about digital features, please contact the journal editor (see ‘Contact the Journal’ for email address), and see the ‘Guidelines for digital features and plain language summaries’ document under ‘Submission guidelines’. For examples of digital features please visit: https://springerhealthcare.com/expertise/publishing-digital-features/ Preprints We encourage posting of preprints of primary research manuscripts on preprint servers, authors'' or institutional websites, and open communications between researchers whether on community preprint servers or preprint commenting platforms. Posting of preprints is not considered prior publication and will not jeopardize consideration in our journals. Authors should disclose details of preprint posting during the submission process or at any other point during consideration in the journal. Once the manuscript is published, it is the author''s responsibility to ensure that the preprint record is updated with a publication reference, including the DOI and a URL link to the published version of the article on the journal website. Please see here for further information on preprint sharing: https://www.springer.com/gp/authors-editors/journal-author/journal-author-helpdesk/submission/1302#c16721550 Peer Review Process Upon submission, manuscripts are assessed by the editorial team to ensure they fit within the aims and scope of the journal and are also checked for plagiarism. All suitable submissions are then subject to a comprehensive single-blind peer review. Reviewers are selected based on their relevant expertise and publication history in the subject area. The journal has an extensive pool of editorial and advisory board members who have been selected to assist with peer review based on the afore-mentioned criteria. At least two extensive reviews are required to make the editorial decision. Where reviewer recommendations are conflicted, the editorial board will be contacted for further advice and a presiding decision. Manuscripts are then either accepted, rejected or authors are required to make major or minor revisions (both reviewer comments and editorial comments may need to be addressed). Once a revised manuscript is re-submitted, it is assessed along with the responses to reviewer comments and if it has been adequately revised it will be accepted for publication. Accepted manuscripts are then copyedited and typeset by the production team before online publication. Appeals against decisions following peer review are considered on a case-by-case basis and should be sent to the journal editor, and authors are welcome to make rebuttals against individual reviewer comments if appropriate. Considering the time and effort required for a detailed peer review we reward our regular reviewers with the opportunity to publish without publication fees (pending peer review) for every three reviews completed per calendar year. Copyright Rheumatology and Therapy is published under the Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial License, which allows users to read, copy, distribute, and make derivative works for non-commercial purposes from the material, as long as the author of the original work is cited. The author assigns the exclusive right to any commercial use of the article to Springer. For more information about the Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial License, click here: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0. Publication Fees Upon acceptance of an article, authors will be required to pay the mandatory Rapid Service Fee of €5,250/$6,000/£4,300. The journal will consider fee discounts and waivers for developing countries and this is decided on a case-by-case basis. Open Access All articles published by Rheumatology and Therapy are published open access. Contact For more information about the journal, including pre-submission enquiries, please contact charlotte.maddocks@springernature.com.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书