AI Article Synopsis

  • Rheumatoid arthritis (RA) is a long-term autoimmune disease, and Upadacitinib (UPA) is a new treatment option that is being compared to adalimumab (ADA) for its effectiveness and safety.
  • The analysis used data from a specific clinical trial (SELECT-COMPARE) to assess how well UPA works compared to ADA and a placebo over time, focusing on how many patients achieve significant improvements and experience adverse events.
  • Results showed that UPA was generally more effective than ADA in improving clinical outcomes over various time periods, with similar safety profiles except for a higher risk of herpes zoster with UPA.

Article Abstract

Introduction: Rheumatoid arthritis (RA) is a chronic autoimmune disease requiring long-term treatment. Upadacitinib (UPA), a Janus kinase (JAK) inhibitor, is a new treatment for RA. The benefit-risk profile of a medication is best understood by evaluating the number needed to treat (NNT) and the number needed to harm (NNH). This analysis evaluated the comparative risk-benefit of UPA versus adalimumab (ADA).

Methods: Post-hoc analyses were performed using data from the SELECT-COMPARE trial of UPA versus placebo (PBO) and UPA versus ADA among patients with active RA who remained on stable methotrexate (MTX) treatment and had an inadequate response; patients who failed to achieve response were rescued by predefined criteria-PBO or ADA switch to UPA, and UPA switch to ADA (all patients on PBO were switched to UPA at week 26). This analysis assessed efficacy and adverse events of special interest (AESIs) at week 26, 48, and 156 (3 years). NNT and NNH (95% confidence intervals) values were calculated between UPA versus ADA for all time points, and between UPA versus PBO for week 26. NNT and NNH values were applied to a hypothetical cohort of 100 patients to estimate the comparative efficacy and safety profiles.

Results: UPA consistently showed greater efficacy than ADA, as evidenced by NNT values < 10 for achievement of Disease Activity Score in 28 joints based on C-reactive protein (DAS28-CRP) of < 2.6 and ≤ 3.2, respectively, and functional improvement. Based on indices for disease assessment other than the DAS28-CRP, remission outcomes were higher with UPA versus ADA over 26 weeks (NNTs: 7-12), 48 weeks (NNTs: 9-16), and 156 weeks (NNTs: 9-15). With the exception of herpes zoster, other AESIs demonstrated a similar risk with UPA versus ADA.

Conclusion: In patients with active RA despite MTX use, UPA demonstrated an incremental achievement of clinical outcomes compared to ADA together with a similar profile of AESIs with ADA (with the exception of herpes zoster).

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8814262PMC
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s40744-021-00399-5DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

upa versus
20
upa
10
rheumatoid arthritis
8
number needed
8
versus ada
8
ada patients
8
nnt nnh
8
patients
5
versus
5
ada
5

Similar Publications

Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?

Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!