MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4411410150 · doi:10.1016/j.ard.2025.06.1575

ABS0675 COMPARATIVE EFFECTIVENESS OF UPADACITINIB VERSUS OTHER JAK INHIBITORS IN PATIENTS WITH RHEUMATOID ARTHRITIS IN A GLOBAL REAL-WORLD SETTING

2025· article· en· W4411410150 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Peter C. Taylor, A. Kadakia, J. Milligan, S. Strengholt, Oliver Howell, Priti Patel, Sophie Barlow, Roberto Caporali

Bibliographic record

VenueAnnals of the Rheumatic Diseases · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCytokine Signaling Pathways and Interactions
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineRheumatoid arthritisInternal medicineAntirheumatic Agents

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Network meta-analyses of phase 3 clinical trial data involving JAK inhibitor (JAKi)-treated patients with RA and an inadequate response to conventional synthetic DMARDs showed that upadacitinib (UPA) 15 mg had numerically higher efficacy vs other approved JAKis [1]. However, real-world data on the effectiveness of UPA in clinical practice relative to other JAKis is limited. Objectives: We assessed the effectiveness of UPA vs other JAKis, including tofacitinib, baricitinib, and peficitinib, using real-world data. Methods: Data were extracted from the Adelphi RA Disease-Specific Programme, a cross-sectional study with elements of retrospective data collection. Surveys were administered to rheumatologists and their patients in the EU, UK, Japan, Canada, and USA from July 2021 to February 2022. Patients receiving UPA 15 mg or other JAKis for ≥6 months were included. Physician-reported clinical outcomes included disease activity (with formal DAS28 scoring available for 35.5% of patients) categorized as follows: DAS28 remission (<2.6) and low, (2.6–< 3.2), moderate (3.2–5.1), and high (>5.1) disease activity (LDA, MDA, and HDA, respectively); pain and fatigue (none, mild, moderate, or severe); and medication adherence (completely adherent or not). A high degree of correlation (Spearman's coefficient, 0.68) was observed between formal DAS28 scores and disease activity category, justifying the use of physician-reported DAS28 categories. Unadjusted physician-reported outcomes are descriptively reported as the change in disease activity from initiation of current treatment to most recent follow up at ≥6 months. Adjusted physician-reported outcomes were compared for UPA vs other JAKis at the most recent follow-up visit using inverse probability weighted regression adjustment (IPWRA) methods. Results are reported as predicted percentages along with P values for each treatment group. Results: A total of 1440 patients were included (UPA 15 mg, n=1205; other JAKis, n=235), with most patients in the other JAKis group receiving baricitinib (n=120) or tofacitinib (n=113) and the remainder receiving peficitinib (n=2). Baseline characteristics are shown in Table 1, and the two treatment groups were weighted based on multiple covariates. At treatment initiation, 63% of UPA-treated patients were in MDA/HDA, while 51% of other JAKi-treated patients were in MDA/HDA. At the most recent follow-up visit, 85% and 88% of patients receiving UPA and other JAKis, respectively, were in LDA/remission (Table 1). IPWRA showed that patients on UPA were significantly more likely to have achieved physician-reported DAS28 remission (54% vs 44%, P =.03), no pain (43% vs 33%, P =.02), and complete medication adherence (60% vs 49%, P =.03) compared to those receiving other JAKis (Figure 1). Additionally, 43% of patients receiving UPA were evaluated as having no fatigue compared to 36% of patients receiving other JAKis ( P =.17). Conclusion: The findings of this real-world study of patients with RA demonstrate that greater proportions of patients attained physician-reported DAS28 remission, absence of pain, and medication adherence with UPA vs other JAKis. REFERENCES: [1] Pope J, et al. Adv Ther 2020;37:2356-72. Table 1 . Figure 1 Acknowledgements: Data collection was undertaken by Adelphi Real World as part of an independent survey, entitled the Adelphi Rheumatoid Arthritis Disease Specific Programme (DSP). The DSP is a wholly owned Adelphi product and is the intellectual property of Adelphi Real World. The analysis described here used data from the Adelphi RA DSP. AbbVie was one of multiple subscribers to the DSP and did not influence the original survey through either contribution to the design of questionnaires or data collection. All authors had access to the data results and participated in the development, review, and approval of this publication. No honoraria or payments were made for authorship. Medical writing support was provided by Matthew Eckwahl, PhD, of AbbVie. Disclosure of Interests: Peter C. Taylor AbbVie, Acelyrin Inc., Biogen, Eli Lilly and Company, Fresenius, Gilead, GSK, Janssen, Nordic Pharma, Pfizer, UCB Pharma, Immunovant, Sanofi and Kymab, Galapagos, Aditi Kadakia ABV, AbbVie Inc., Jack Milligan AbbVie, Sander Strengholt ABV, AbbVie, Oliver Howell AbbVie, Pankaj Patel ABV, AbbVie, Sophie Barlow AbbVie, Roberto F. Caporali AbbVie, Alfasigma, Accord, Celltrion, Lilly, Fresenius, Galapagos, Janssen, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer Inc, and UCB. © The Authors 2025. This abstract is an open access article published in Annals of Rheumatic Diseases under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/). Neither EULAR nor the publisher make any representation as to the accuracy of the content. The authors are solely responsible for the content in their abstract including accuracy of the facts, statements, results, conclusion, citing resources etc.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.022
Threshold uncertainty score0.437

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.025
GPT teacher head0.334
Teacher spread0.309 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAnnals of the Rheumatic DiseasesSame topicCytokine Signaling Pathways and InteractionsFrench-language works237,207