Tofacitinib Monotherapy in Rheumatoid Arthritis: Clinical Trials and Real-World Data Contextualization of Patients, Efficacy, and Treatment Retention
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose: To evaluate the characteristics, efficacy, and retention of tofacitinib monotherapy in patients with rheumatoid arthritis using data from randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and real-world data (RWD). Patients and Methods: Three patient groups receiving tofacitinib 5 mg twice daily (BID) monotherapy were defined for post hoc RCT/long-term extension (LTE) analyses: (1) disease-modifying antirheumatic drug (DMARD)-inadequate responder patients from phase 3/3b/4 RCTs; (2) methotrexate-naïve patients from a phase 3 RCT; and (3) index study patients continuing in an LTE study. Outcomes included low disease activity (LDA)/remission rates defined by Clinical Disease Activity Index (CDAI); Disease Activity Score in 28 joints (DAS28-4), erythrocyte sedimentation rate; DAS28-4, C-reactive protein (DAS28-4[CRP]); and rates of/time to discontinuation due to lack of efficacy/adverse events. RWD were identified by non-systematic literature searches of PubMed, Embase, and American College of Rheumatology/European Alliance of Associations for Rheumatology congress abstracts (2012-2022). Results: RCT/LTE analyses included 1000/498 patients receiving tofacitinib 5 mg BID monotherapy. Baseline disease activity was high; patients tended to receive concomitant glucocorticoids; most were biologic DMARD-naïve. CDAI LDA rates were 32.2-62.2% for Groups 1/2 (months 3-12) and 64.0-70.7% for Group 3 (months 12-72). In Groups 1, 2, and 3, 4.0%, 15.6%, and 27.7% of patients, respectively, discontinued tofacitinib monotherapy due to lack of efficacy/adverse events. From 11 RWD publications, 16.6-66.1% received tofacitinib monotherapy. Consistent with clinical data, tofacitinib monotherapy effectiveness (month 6 CDAI LDA, 30.2%; month 3 DAS28-4[CRP] remission, 53.4%) and persistence were observed in RWD, with retention comparable to tofacitinib combination therapy. Conclusion: Tofacitinib monotherapy demonstrated clinically significant responses/persistence in RCT/LTE analyses, with effectiveness observed and persistence comparable to combination therapy in RWD. Trial Registration: NCT00814307, NCT02187055, NCT01039688, NCT00413699, NCT00661661 (ClinicalTrials.gov).
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.
How this classification was reachedexpand
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 | 0.014 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".