Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32297280›Full record

ArticleAdvances in therapy2020

Comparative Efficacy of JAK Inhibitors for Moderate-To-Severe Rheumatoid Arthritis: A Network Meta-Analysis.

Janet Pope, Ruta Sawant, Namita Tundia, Ella X Du, Cynthia Z Qi, Yan Song, Patrick Tang, Keith A Betts

Open access · hybridAbstract readNetwork Meta-Analysis
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Advances in therapy, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 34 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
34citing papers in PubMed
6.3field-weighted citation impact, top 3% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

34 citing papers in PubMed, 55 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Efficacy of Janus kinase inhibitors in rheumatoid arthritis.Inflammation research : official journal of the European Histamine Research Society ... [et al.] · 2023
    Review
  19. Review
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Janet PopeUniversity of Western Ontario, London, ON, Canada. Janet.Pope@sjhc.london.on.ca.
Ruta SawantAbbVie, Inc, North Chicago, IL, USA.
Namita TundiaAbbVie, Inc, North Chicago, IL, USA.
Ella X DuAnalysis Group, Inc, Los Angeles, CA, USA.
Cynthia Z QiAnalysis Group, Inc, Boston, MA, USA.
Yan SongAnalysis Group, Inc, Boston, MA, USA.
Patrick TangAnalysis Group, Inc, Boston, MA, USA.
Keith A BettsAnalysis Group, Inc, Los Angeles, CA, USA.
Analysis Group (United States) · USAbbVie (United States) · USWestern University · CA

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionJanus kinase (JAK) inhibitors are a class of targeted therapies for rheumatoid arthritis (RA) with established clinical efficacy. However, little is known about their efficacy compared with each other. This network meta-analysis (NMA) estimated the comparative efficacy of JAK inhibitors currently approved for RA.

methodsA targeted literature review was conducted for phase III randomized controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating the efficacy of three approved JAK inhibitors (tofacitinib, baricitinib, and upadacitinib) as monotherapy or combination therapy among patients with moderate-to-severe RA who had inadequate response to conventional synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (csDMARD-IR). Using Bayesian NMA, American College of Rheumatology (ACR) 20/50/70 responses and clinical remission (defined as DAS28-CRP < 2.6) were evaluated separately at 12 and 24 weeks.

resultsEleven RCTs were identified and included in the NMA. All JAK inhibitors demonstrated significantly better efficacy than csDMARD. Among combination therapies, upadacitinib 15 mg had the highest 12-week ACR50 responses (median [95% credible interval]: 43.4% [33.4%, 54.5%]), followed by tofacitinib 5 mg (38.7% [28.6%, 49.8%]), baricitinib 2 mg (37.1% [25.0%, 50.6%]), and baricitinib 4 mg (36.7%, [27.2%, 47.0%]). Similar results were observed for ACR20/70 and at week 24. Upadacitinib 15 mg + csDMARD was also found to have the highest clinical remission rates at week 12 (29.8% [16.9%, 47.0%]), followed by tofacitinib 5 mg (24.3%, [12.7%, 40.2%]), baricitinib 4 mg (22.8%, [11.8%, 37.5%]), and baricitinib 2 mg (20.1%, [8.6%, 37.4%]). Similar results were seen at week 24. Among monotherapies, upadacitinib had a higher ACR50 response (38.5% [25.3%, 53.2%]) than tofacitinib (30.4% [18.3%, 45.5%]). The differences in efficacy measures were not statistically significant between the JAK inhibitors.

conclusionsThe NMA found that upadacitinib 15 mg once daily had numerically higher efficacy in terms of ACR response and clinical remission among approved JAK combination therapies and monotherapies for csDMARD-IR patients with RA.

Indexed as

AdultAntirheumatic AgentsArthritis, RheumatoidAzetidinesBayes TheoremClinical Trials, Phase III as TopicDrug Therapy, CombinationFemaleHeterocyclic Compounds, 3-RingHumansJanus Kinase InhibitorsMethotrexatePiperidinesPurinesPyrazolesPyrimidinesAntirheumatic AgentsAzetidinesbaricitinibHeterocyclic Compounds, 3-RingJanus Kinase InhibitorsMethotrexatePiperidinesPurinesPyrazolesPyrimidinesPyrrolesSulfonamidestofacitinibupadacitinibClinical remissionDisease-modifying antirheumatic drugsJanus kinase inhibitorsNetwork meta-analysisRheumatoid arthritisRheumatology

Identifiers

PMID32297280
PMCPMC7467453
OpenAlexW3016333849

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.