ReviewDrug, healthcare and patient safety2025
Evaluation of Real-World Evidence to Assess Effectiveness Outcomes of Janus Kinase Inhibitors for Rheumatoid Arthritis: A Systematic Review of US Studies.
Review in Drug, healthcare and patient safety, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Upadacitinib in Rheumatoid Arthritis After Prior TNF Inhibitor Failure: A 12-Month Multicenter Real-World Study.Journal of clinical practice and research · 2026Article
- Achievement and Maintenance of Disease Targets with Upadacitinib in Rheumatoid Arthritis: 2-Year Outcomes from the UPHOLD Real-World Study.Rheumatology and therapy · 2026Article
- Efficacy and Safety of Biologic and Targeted Synthetic DMARDs in Young-Onset Rheumatoid Arthritis: A Systematic Review.Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: This review summarized the real-world effectiveness outcomes of Janus kinase inhibitors (JAKi) for rheumatoid arthritis (RA) based on observational studies. Methods: A systematic review followed PRISMA guidelines, with searches conducted in PubMed, Embase, and CINAHL from each database's inception to June 2, 2023. Studies were included if they evaluated real-world effectiveness outcomes of JAKi for US RA patients. Search terms included "RA", "JAKi", and "real-world". All citations were imported into COVIDENCE platform. Two reviewers independently performed title/abstract screening and full-text eligibility. For each article, study characteristics and effectiveness measures focusing on treatment pattern, clinical response, and patient-reported outcomes (PROs) of JAKi were extracted. Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS) was utilized to assess the quality of the included articles. Results: In total, 35 studies representing 252-30,556 patients were included. A majority used the administrative claims datasets (n=23, 65.71%), followed by 9 studies using electronic medical record (EMR) data and 3 studies using patient registry databases. Across claims-based studies, adherence, persistence, and effectiveness of JAKi were common outcomes. Adherence rates varied, with a proportion of days covered (PDC) ranging from 0.53 to 0.83 across 11 studies. Persistence of JAKi in RA patients was reported in 14 studies, where the median persistence time in treatment was reported to be between 121-516 days. Six studies applied effectiveness algorithms, with 14.8-26% of patients meeting effective treatment criteria. In addition, the most common measure of clinical response throughout the studies was Clinical Disease Activity Index (CDAI), with 10 articles reporting mean CDAI changes between -4.7 and 5.1. Across 12 studies that measured the PROs, the most prevalent PRO was pain, with the mean change in pain ranging from -9.3 to 8.9 across these studies. Conclusion: Real-world studies on JAKi for RA reflect a range of effectiveness measures, illustrating the expanding role of JAKi in clinical practice.
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.