Advertisement

Comparative Efficacy and Safety of Peficitinib 25, 50, 100, and 150 mg in Patients with Active Rheumatoid Arthritis: A Bayesian Network Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

  • Young Ho LeeEmail author
  • Gwan Gyu Song
Original Research Article
  • 98 Downloads

Abstract

Background and Objective

Peficitinib, a JAK3-selective inhibitor that blocks the signal transduction and then suppresses immune responses, has been developed for the treatment of patients with moderate to severe active rheumatoid arthritis (RA). We assessed the relative efficacy and safety of once-daily administration of peficitinib (a JAK3-selective inhibitor) 25 mg, 50 mg, 100 mg, and 150 mg in patients with active RA.

Methods

A Bayesian network meta-analysis was conducted to combine direct and indirect evidence from eligible randomized controlled trials (RCTs). The literature search was performed up to May 2019 using MEDLINE, Embase, and the Cochrane Controlled Trials Register.

Results

Three RCTs involving 948 patients met the inclusion criteria. There were ten pairwise comparisons, including five direct comparisons and five interventions. The American College of Rheumatology 20% (ACR20) response rate was significantly higher in the peficitinib 150-mg group than in the placebo group (odds ratio (OR): 3.61; 95% credible interval (CrI): 2.35–5.57). Similarly, the ACR20 response rate was significantly higher in the peficitinib 100-mg group than in the placebo group (OR: 2.33, 95% CrI: 1.51–3.56). The peficitinib 50-mg group had a significantly higher ACR20 response rate than the placebo group. However, the ACR20 response rate was not significantly higher in the peficitinib 25-mg group than in the placebo group. The ranking probability based on the surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA) indicated that peficitinib 150 mg was likely to achieve the best ACR20 response rate (SUCRA = 0.995), followed by peficitinib 100 mg (SUCRA = 0.696), peficitinib 50 mg (SUCRA = 0.558), peficitinib 25 mg (SUCRA = 0.153), and placebo (SUCRA = 0.098). The ACR50 and ACR70 response rates showed a similar distribution pattern to the ACR20 response rate. The difference in the number of patients with adverse events (AEs) among the intervention groups was not statistically significant.

Conclusions

Peficitinib 50, 100, and 150 mg once daily was effective in treating active RA, without causing a significant risk for AEs.

Notes

Compliance with Ethical Standards

Funding

This research received no specific grants from any public, commercial, or not-for-profit sector funding agencies.

Conflict of interest

YH Lee and GG Song have no conflict of interest.

Supplementary material

40261_2019_863_MOESM1_ESM.pdf (23 kb)
Supplementary material 1 (PDF 24 kb)

References

  1. 1.
    Smolen JS, Aletaha D, McInnes IB. Rheumatoid arthritis. Lancet. 2016;388:2023–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Ghoreschi K, Laurence A, O’Shea JJ. Janus kinases in immune cell signaling. Immunol Rev. 2009;228:273–87.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Schindler C, Levy DE, Decker T. JAK-STAT signaling: from interferons to cytokines. J Biol Chem. 2007;282:20059–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Kubo S, Yamaoka K, Kondo M, Yamagata K, Zhao J, Iwata S, et al. The JAK inhibitor, tofacitinib, reduces the T cell stimulatory capacity of human monocyte-derived dendritic cells. Ann Rheum Dis. 2014;73:2192–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Norman P. Selective JAK inhibitors in development for rheumatoid arthritis. Expert Opin Investig Drugs. 2014;23:1067–77.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Roskoski R Jr. Janus kinase (JAK) inhibitors in the treatment of inflammatory and neoplastic diseases. Pharmacol Res. 2016;111:784–803.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Saxena R, Mohanty S, Srivastava A, Choudhry VP, Kotwal J. Pathogenetic factors underlying juvenile deep vein thrombosis (DVT) in Indians. Eur J Haematol. 1999;63:26–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Chrobak L, Dulicek P. Thrombophilic states. Vnitr Lek. 1998;44:481–6.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Takeuchi T, Tanaka Y, Iwasaki M, Ishikura H, Saeki S, Kaneko Y. Efficacy and safety of the oral Janus kinase inhibitor peficitinib (ASP015K) monotherapy in patients with moderate to severe rheumatoid arthritis in Japan: a 12-week, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled phase IIb study. Ann Rheum Dis. 2016;75:1057–64.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Smith GA, Uchida K, Weiss A, Taunton J. Essential biphasic role for JAK3 catalytic activity in IL-2 receptor signaling. Nat Chem Biol. 2016;12:373–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Genovese MC, Greenwald M, Codding C, Zubrzycka-Sienkiewicz A, Kivitz AJ, Wang A, et al. Peficitinib, a JAK inhibitor, in combination with limited conventional synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs in the treatment of moderate-to-severe rheumatoid arthritis. Arthritis Rheumatol. 2017;69:932–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Kivitz AJ, Gutierrez-Urena SR, Poiley J, Genovese MC, Kristy R, Shay K, et al. Peficitinib, a JAK inhibitor, in the treatment of moderate-to-severe rheumatoid arthritis in patients with an inadequate response to methotrexate. Arthritis Rheumatol. 2017;69:709–19.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Catalá-López F, Tobías A, Cameron C, Moher D, Hutton B. Network meta-analysis for comparing treatment effects of multiple interventions: an introduction. Rheumatol Int. 2014;34:1489–96.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Caldwell DM, Ades AE, Higgins JP. Simultaneous comparison of multiple treatments: combining direct and indirect evidence. BMJ. 2005;331:897–900.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Lee YH, Song GG. Comparative efficacy and safety of secukinumab and adalimumab in patients with active ankylosing spondylitis: a bayesian network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. J Rheum Dis. 2017;24:211–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Hochberg MC, Chang RW, Dwosh I, Lindsey S, Pincus T, Wolfe F. The American College of Rheumatology 1991 revised criteria for the classification of global functional status in rheumatoid arthritis. Arthritis Rheum. 1992;35:498–502.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Aletaha D, Landewe R, Karonitsch T, Bathon J, Boers M, Bombardier C, et al. Reporting disease activity in clinical trials of patients with rheumatoid arthritis: EULAR/ACR collaborative recommendations. Arthritis Rheum. 2008;59:1371–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Jadad AR, Moore RA, Carroll D, Jenkinson C, Reynolds DJ, Gavaghan DJ, et al. Assessing the quality of reports of randomized clinical trials: is blinding necessary? Control Clin Trials. 1996;17:1–12.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Moher D, Liberati A, Tetzlaff J, Altman DG, PRISMA Group. Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement. Ann Intern Med. 2009;151:264–9 W64.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Brown S, Hutton B, Clifford T, Coyle D, Grima D, Wells G, et al. A Microsoft-Excel-based tool for running and critically appraising network meta-analyses–an overview and application of NetMetaXL. Syst Rev. 2014;3:110.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Salanti G, Ades AE, Ioannidis JP. Graphical methods and numerical summaries for presenting results from multiple-treatment meta-analysis: an overview and tutorial. J Clin Epidemiol. 2011;64:163–71.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Dias S, Welton NJ, Sutton AJ, Caldwell DM, Lu G, Ades AE. Evidence synthesis for decision making 4: inconsistency in networks of evidence based on randomized controlled trials. Med Decis Making. 2013;33:641–56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Higgins JP, Jackson D, Barrett JK, Lu G, Ades AE, White IR. Consistency and inconsistency in network meta-analysis: concepts and models for multi-arm studies. Res Synth Methods. 2012;3:98–110.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    van Valkenhoef G, Lu G, de Brock B, Hillege H, Ades AE, Welton NJ. Automating network meta-analysis. Res Synth Methods. 2012;3:285–99.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Lee YH. Association between the neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio, and platelet-to-lymphocyte ratio and rheumatoid arthritis and their correlations with the disease activity: a meta-analysis. J Rheum Dis. 2018;25:169–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Song GG, Lee YH. Causal association between bone mineral density and osteoarthritis: a mendelian randomization study. J Rheum Dis. 2019;26:104–10.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Lee YH, Choi SJ, Ji JD, Song GG. Overall and cause-specific mortality in systemic lupus erythematosus: an updated meta-analysis. Lupus. 2016;25:727–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Rheumatology, Korea University Anam HospitalKorea University College of MedicineSeoulKorea

Personalised recommendations