Treatment with Upadacitinib in Active Psoriatic Arthritis: Efficacy and Safety Data of the First 192 Patients from the UPJOINT Study, a Multicentre, Observational Study in Clinical Practice
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Our aim was to investigate the efficacy and safety of upadacitinib (UPA) in patients with either oligo- or polyarticular active psoriatic arthritis (PsA) using routine clinical practice data from an observational, prospective, multicentre study. This interim analysis contains upadacitinib efficacy and safety data from the UPJOINT study, collected from baseline to the week 24 visit with a focus on composite measures, clinical assessments and patient-reported outcomes, amongst others, including minimal disease activity (MDA), very low disease activity (VLDA), Disease Activity Index for Psoriatic Arthritis (DAPSA), Leeds Enthesitis Index (LEI), resolution of dactylitis and nail psoriasis and body surface area affected by skin psoriasis (BSA). A total of 296 patients with baseline data and 192 with completed week 24 visits were included in the analysis. The proportion of patients achieving MDA increased from 2.7% at baseline to 39.1% at week 24 (95% CI 32.1, 46.3). Similarly, the number of patients in DAPSA remission (DAPSA ≤ 4) increased from 0 at baseline to 32 (16.7%) by week 24. At that time, 59.4% of the patients were either in DAPSA remission or had low disease activity (DAPSA ≤ 14). During the 24 weeks time frame, the proportion of patients with BSA ≤ 3 increased from 80.7% to 91.1%. Furthermore, at weeks 12 and 24, 45.14% and 47.19% of affected patients showed a resolution of enthesitis. Active dactylitis and nail psoriasis at baseline were reported to affect 10.5% and 22.0%, decreasing to 2.6% and 5.7% at week 24, respectively. The safety findings are consistent with the known safety profile of upadacitinib in rheumatoid arthritis and PsA; no new safety risks were identified. The data from this study confirm the findings of previous randomized controlled trials suggesting UPA is an effective treatment for active PsA without any new safety signals in patients from daily clinical practice. ClinicalTrials.gov identifier, NCT04758117. Upadacitinib is an antirheumatic medical therapy approved for treating psoriatic arthritis with insufficient response to previous conventional or biological therapies (DMARD-IR). Psoriatic arthritis is a chronic inflammatory disease affecting the joints, spine, tendons/entheses, skin, nails and other parts of the musculoskeletal system. Early diagnosis and treatment initiation are essential for patients with psoriatic arthritis given the potentially irreversible damage to joints, spine, and entheses and the considerable impact on quality of life. The results presented in this manuscript help clinicians evaluate whether the efficacy and the safety profile of upadacitinib found in previous clinical trials can be reproduced in patients seen in daily clinical practice. This analysis presents descriptive data on the real-world efficacy and safety of upadacitinib, measured by clinical and patient-reported outcomes assessed in four visits over 24 weeks. In summary, our findings confirm the results of previous clinical trials showing that upadacitinib effectively reduces symptom severity of PsA and substantially increases the proportion of patients achieving treatment goals relevant to clinical practice, such as remission or very low disease activity. In addition, safety data were consistent with previous studies of upadacitinib in rheumatoid arthritis or psoriatic arthritis; no new risks to the patients' safety were identified.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it