Trial reportInternational journal of rheumatic diseases2021
Upadacitinib in patients from China, Brazil, and South Korea with rheumatoid arthritis and an inadequate response to conventional therapy.
Trial report in International journal of rheumatic diseases, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers, 6 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
14 citing papers in PubMed, 6 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 22 citations in OpenAlex.
- Efficacy and safety of upadacitinib in the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Frontiers in immunology · 2026Pooled it
- Gastrointestinal Perforation as a Safety Concern Among Patients With Rheumatoid Arthritis Receiving JAK Inhibitor Therapy: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis.Arthritis care & research · 2025Pooled it
- Safety profile and dose-dependent adverse events of upadacitinib in randomized clinical trials: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2025Pooled it
- Efficacy and safety of upadacitinib for patients with immune-mediated inflammatory diseases: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Frontiers in immunology · 2025Pooled it
- Pooled it
- Herpes zoster in patients with inflammatory arthritides or ulcerative colitis treated with tofacitinib, baricitinib or upadacitinib: a systematic review of clinical trials and real-world studies.Rheumatology international · 2023Pooled it
- Upadacitinib in patients from China, Brazil, and South Korea with rheumatoid arthritis and an inadequate response to conventional therapy.International journal of rheumatic diseases · 2021Trial
- Review
- Review
- Article
- Comparative efficacy of five approved Janus kinase inhibitors as monotherapy and combination therapy in patients with moderate-to-severe active rheumatoid arthritis: a systematic review and network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2024Review
- Managing Cardiovascular and Cancer Risk Associated with JAK Inhibitors.Drug safety · 2023Review
- Article
- The Effect of Upadacitinib on Lipid Profile and Cardiovascular Events: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.Journal of clinical medicine · 2022Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors at 8 institutions in 5 countries.
Funding
Abstract
aimThis study assessed the efficacy and safety of upadacitinib (UPA), in combination with conventional synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (csDMARDs), in Chinese, Brazilian, and South Korean patients with active rheumatoid arthritis (RA) and an inadequate response (IR) to csDMARDs.
methodsPatients on stable csDMARDs were randomized (1:1) to once-daily UPA 15 mg or matching placebo (PBO) for a 12-week, double-blind period. The primary endpoint was the proportion of patients achieving ≥20% improvement in American College of Rheumatology criteria (ACR20) at week 12.
resultsIn total, 338 patients were randomized and treated, of whom 310 (91.7%) completed the double-blind phase. The study met the primary endpoint of ACR20 at week 12 for UPA 15 mg vs PBO (71.6% vs 31.4%, P < .001), with a treatment difference observed as early as week 1. All ranked and other key secondary endpoints, including more stringent responses such as ACR50, ACR70 (≥50%/70% improvement in ACR criteria), and Disease Activity Score in 28 joints using C-reactive protein <2.6, were met for UPA 15 mg vs PBO. The incidence of serious infections (2.4% vs 0.6%) and herpes zoster (HZ: 1.8% vs 0.6%) was higher with UPA 15 mg vs PBO. There was one case of venous thromboembolism reported in the UPA group.
conclusionUPA 15 mg in combination with csDMARDs demonstrated clinical and functional improvement and an acceptable safety profile over 12 weeks among patients from China, Brazil, and South Korea who had moderately to severely active RA and an IR to csDMARDs.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.