ArticleFrontiers in immunology2026
Dual effects of JAK vs TNF inhibitors on osteoporosis, fractures and mortality in rheumatoid arthritis: a real-world cohort study.
Article in Frontiers in immunology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: This real-world study compared the effects of JAK inhibitors (JAKi) versus TNF inhibitors (TNFi) on bone health and survival in rheumatoid arthritis (RA) patients. Methods: We conducted a retrospective cohort study using the collaborative electronic health records (EHR) database network (2016-2024). After 1:1 propensity score matching, 16, 572 JAKi and 16, 572 TNFi users were included, with follow-up for up to 5 years. Primary outcomes were a composite of "any fracture or osteoporosis, " individual fracture and osteoporosis events, and all-cause mortality. Results: In the propensity score-matched cohort, JAKi use was associated with a lower risk of the composite outcome (HR = 0.930) and osteoporosis (HR = 0.906) compared with TNFi. However, a reduction in fracture risk was not clearly observed. JAKi use was also associated with higher all-cause mortality (HR = 1.582). Subgroup estimates suggested potential heterogeneity, but these findings were exploratory. Conclusion: In this large EHR-based cohort, JAKi initiation was associated with lower rates of osteoporosis-related outcomes but higher all-cause mortality compared with TNFi. Given the observational design, potential residual confounding, and limited follow-up for many patients, these findings should be interpreted as associations and warrant confirmation in other datasets and prospective studies. Rationale: To compare real-world associations of JAKi vs TNFi with bone outcomes and all-cause mortality in RA. Main result: In a propensity score-matched cohort, JAKi use was associated with lower osteoporosis-related outcomes but higher all-cause mortality compared with TNFi. Significance: These observational findings suggest a potential trade-off and highlight the need for individualized risk-benefit discussions and confirmation in other datasets/prospective studies.
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.