Efficacy and safety of different Janus kinase inhibitors combined with methotrexate for the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis: a single-center randomized trial.

IF 2 4区 医学 Q3 RHEUMATOLOGY
Xiaoling Liao, Wang Huo, Wen Zeng, Fang Qin, Fei Dong, Wanling Wei, Ling Lei
{"title":"Efficacy and safety of different Janus kinase inhibitors combined with methotrexate for the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis: a single-center randomized trial.","authors":"Xiaoling Liao, Wang Huo, Wen Zeng, Fang Qin, Fei Dong, Wanling Wei, Ling Lei","doi":"10.1186/s42358-023-00331-1","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>To compare the efficacy and safety between baricitinib (BARI) and tofacitinib (TOFA) for the treatment of the rheumatoid arthritis (RA) patients receiving methotrexate (MTX) in clinical practice.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This retrospective study recruited 179 RA patients treated with BARI (2-4 mg/d) or TOFA (10 mg/d) at The First Affiliated Hospital of Guangxi Medical University from September 2019 to January 2022. The rate of low disease activity (LDA) was used as the primary end point. Secondary end points included the Disease Activity Scale-28 (DAS-28)-C-reactive protein (CRP); the rate of DAS28-CRP remission; visual analogue scale (VAS) for pain, swollen joint, and tender joint counts; and adverse events at the 6-month follow-up. Several factors affecting LDA achievement were also analyzed.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Seventy-four patients were treated with BARI and 105 were treated with TOFA, including 83.24% females, with a median (IQR) age of 56.0 (53.0-56.0) years old and disease duration of 12.0 (6.0-12.0) months. There was no difference of the rate of LDA between the BARI and TOFA treatment groups. All disease indices in the two groups were significantly improved, including a significantly lower VAS in the BARI group (P < 0.05), reflecting the drug efficacy after 1 and 6 months of treatment. The incidence of adverse reactions was similar in these two groups.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The treatment efficacy and safety of BARI and TOFA in the RA patients were similar, but BARI was more effective in pain relief than TOFA. An older baseline age was more likely to achieve LDA in the BARI group, while a low baseline erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR) was more likely to achieve LDA in the TOFA group.</p>","PeriodicalId":48634,"journal":{"name":"Advances in Rheumatology","volume":"63 1","pages":"50"},"PeriodicalIF":2.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-10-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Advances in Rheumatology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s42358-023-00331-1","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"RHEUMATOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective: To compare the efficacy and safety between baricitinib (BARI) and tofacitinib (TOFA) for the treatment of the rheumatoid arthritis (RA) patients receiving methotrexate (MTX) in clinical practice.

Methods: This retrospective study recruited 179 RA patients treated with BARI (2-4 mg/d) or TOFA (10 mg/d) at The First Affiliated Hospital of Guangxi Medical University from September 2019 to January 2022. The rate of low disease activity (LDA) was used as the primary end point. Secondary end points included the Disease Activity Scale-28 (DAS-28)-C-reactive protein (CRP); the rate of DAS28-CRP remission; visual analogue scale (VAS) for pain, swollen joint, and tender joint counts; and adverse events at the 6-month follow-up. Several factors affecting LDA achievement were also analyzed.

Results: Seventy-four patients were treated with BARI and 105 were treated with TOFA, including 83.24% females, with a median (IQR) age of 56.0 (53.0-56.0) years old and disease duration of 12.0 (6.0-12.0) months. There was no difference of the rate of LDA between the BARI and TOFA treatment groups. All disease indices in the two groups were significantly improved, including a significantly lower VAS in the BARI group (P < 0.05), reflecting the drug efficacy after 1 and 6 months of treatment. The incidence of adverse reactions was similar in these two groups.

Conclusion: The treatment efficacy and safety of BARI and TOFA in the RA patients were similar, but BARI was more effective in pain relief than TOFA. An older baseline age was more likely to achieve LDA in the BARI group, while a low baseline erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR) was more likely to achieve LDA in the TOFA group.

不同Janus激酶抑制剂联合甲氨蝶呤治疗类风湿性关节炎的疗效和安全性:一项单中心随机试验。
目的:比较巴里西替尼(BARI)和托法替尼(TOFA)治疗甲氨蝶呤(MTX)治疗类风湿性关节炎(RA)患者的临床疗效和安全性。方法:本回顾性研究招募了2019年9月至2022年1月在广西医科大学第一附属医院接受BARI(2-4 mg/d)或TOFA(10 mg/d)治疗的179名RA患者。以低疾病活动率(LDA)为主要终点。次要终点包括疾病活动量表-28(DAS-28)-C反应蛋白(CRP);DAS28-CRP缓解率;疼痛、关节肿胀和关节疼痛计数的视觉模拟评分(VAS);以及6个月随访时的不良事件。分析了影响LDA成绩的几个因素。结果:74名患者接受BARI治疗,105名患者接受TOFA治疗,其中女性83.24%,中位(IQR)年龄为56.0(53.0-56.0)岁,病程为12.0(6.0-12.0)个月。BARI和TOFA治疗组之间的LDA发生率没有差异。两组患者的各项疾病指标均有明显改善,其中BARI组VAS明显降低(P 结论:BARI和TOFA治疗RA患者的疗效和安全性相似,但BARI比TOFA更有效。BARI组基线年龄越大越有可能达到LDA,而TOFA组基线血沉越低越有可能实现LDA。
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
Advances in Rheumatology
Advances in Rheumatology Medicine-Rheumatology
CiteScore
4.00
自引率
4.30%
发文量
41
审稿时长
53 weeks
期刊介绍: Formerly named Revista Brasileira de Reumatologia, the journal is celebrating its 60th year of publication. Advances in Rheumatology is an international, open access journal publishing pre-clinical, translational and clinical studies on all aspects of paediatric and adult rheumatic diseases, including degenerative, inflammatory and autoimmune conditions. The journal is the official publication of the Brazilian Society of Rheumatology and welcomes original research (including systematic reviews and meta-analyses), literature reviews, guidelines and letters arising from published material.
×
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信