Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2020 Jul;23(7):882-897.
doi: 10.1111/1756-185X.13853. Epub 2020 Jun 1.

Tofacitinib in the treatment of Indian patients with rheumatoid arthritis: A post hoc analysis of efficacy and safety in Phase 3 and long-term extension studies over 7 years

Affiliations

Tofacitinib in the treatment of Indian patients with rheumatoid arthritis: A post hoc analysis of efficacy and safety in Phase 3 and long-term extension studies over 7 years

Arvind Chopra et al. Int J Rheum Dis. 2020 Jul.

Abstract

Objectives: Tofacitinib is an oral Janus kinase inhibitor for the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis (RA). We characterized tofacitinib efficacy/safety in Indian vs rest of the world (ROW; excluding India) RA patients.

Methods: Efficacy data were pooled for disease-modified antirheumatic drug (DMARD) inadequate responders from Phase (P)3 studies. For Indian patients, ORAL Solo and ORAL Scan; ROW (excluding India), these studies plus ORAL Step, ORAL Sync, and ORAL Standard. Safety data also included ORAL Start (P3; methotrexate-naïve) and ORAL Sequel (long-term extension [LTE] study; data cut-off March 2017) for Indian patients, and these studies plus A3921041 (LTE study; Japanese study) for ROW. Efficacy outcomes at months 3/6: American College of Rheumatology (ACR)20/50/70; Disease Activity Score in 28 joints, erythrocyte sedimentation rate remission/low disease activity; change from baseline in Health Assessment Questionnaire-Disability Index. Incidence rates (IRs; patients with events/100 patient-years) for adverse events of special interest (AESIs) were assessed throughout. Descriptive data underwent no formal comparison.

Results: One-hundred-and-ninety-seven Indian and 3879 ROW patients were included. Compared with ROW patients, Indian patients were younger, had lower body mass index, shorter RA duration, and higher baseline disease activity; most Indian patients were non-smokers and all were biologic DMARD (bDMARD)-naïve. Month 3 ACR20 rates with tofacitinib 5 mg twice daily/10 mg twice daily/placebo were 67.4%/82.1%/40.9% (India) and 59.0%/66.1%/28.2% (ROW), and month 6 rates were 76.2%/92.1%/88.9% (India) and 69.0%/74.2%/66.5% (ROW). Month 3/6 improvements in other outcomes were generally numerically greater with tofacitinib vs placebo, and similar in both populations. Compared with ROW, Indian patients had numerically fewer AEs/serious AEs, and similar IRs for discontinuations due to AEs and AESIs, except that tuberculosis (TB) IR was higher in Indian (IR = 1.21; 95% CI 0.49, 2.49) vs ROW patients (IR = 0.17; 95% CI 0.11, 0.25).

Conclusions: Tofacitinib efficacy/safety were similar in both populations, except TB IR, which was higher in Indian patients but in line with those in bDMARD-treated RA patients from high-risk countries (IR = 0.00-2.56; TB IR >0.05 [World Health Organization]). Limitations included the small Indian population and baseline differences between populations.

Keywords: India; clinical aspects; drug treatment; rheumatoid arthritis; tofacitinib.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

A. Chopra, V. Shobha, S. Chandrashekara, R. Sharma, U.R. Rao, S. Wagh, and J.K. Kadel were paid investigators for Pfizer Inc; A.V. Thorat, C. Adhav, P. Santos Estrella, W. Yu, K. Kwok, and A. Wouters are employees and stockholders of Pfizer Inc; S.C.M. Veeravalli and S. Pandya have declared no conflicts.

Figures

FIGURE 1
FIGURE 1
The proportion of Indian patients achieving (A) ACR20, (B) ACR50, and (C) ACR70 responses at months 3 and 6; and the proportion of ROW patients achieving (D) ACR20, (E) ACR50, and (F) ACR70 responses at months 3 and 6. Patients receiving placebo in ORAL Solo and ORAL Step advanced in a blinded manner to tofacitinib 5 or 10 mg b.i.d. at month 3; placebo‐treated non‐responders (defined as patients not achieving ≥20% reduction from baseline in swollen and tender joint counts) in ORAL Scan, ORAL Sync, and ORAL Standard advanced in a blinded manner to tofacitinib 5 or 10 mg b.i.d. at month 3; remaining placebo‐treated patients advanced at month 6; efficacy analyses were based on observed cases without imputation for missing data; all endpoints are reported by descriptive statistics with no formal hypothesis testing. ACR, American College of Rheumatology; b.i.d., twice daily; CI, confidence interval; ROW, rest of the world
FIGURE 2
FIGURE 2
The proportion of Indian patients achieving (A) DAS28‐4(ESR) <2.6, (B) DAS28‐4(ESR) ≤3.2, and (C) change from baseline in HAQ‐DI, at months 3 and 6; and the proportion of ROW patients achieving (D) DAS28‐4(ESR) <2.6, (E) DAS28‐4(ESR) ≤3.2, and (F) change from baseline in HAQ‐DI, at months 3 and 6. Patients receiving placebo in ORAL Solo and ORAL Step advanced in a blinded manner to tofacitinib 5 or 10 mg b.i.d. at month 3; placebo‐treated non‐responders (defined as patients not achieving ≥20% reduction from baseline in swollen and tender joint counts) in ORAL Scan, ORAL Sync, and ORAL Standard advanced in a blinded manner to tofacitinib 5 or 10 mg b.i.d. at month 3; remaining placebo‐treated patients advanced at month 6; efficacy analyses were based on observed cases without imputation for missing data. b.i.d., twice daily; CI confidence interval; DAS28‐4(ESR), Disease Activity Score in 28 joints, erythrocyte sedimentation rate; HAQ‐DI, Health Assessment Questionnaire‐Disability Index; ROW, rest of the world; SE, standard error

References

    1. Strand V, Khanna D. The impact of rheumatoid arthritis and treatment on patients' lives. Clin Exp Rheumatol. 2010;28(3 Suppl. 59):S32‐S40. - PubMed
    1. McInnes I, Schett G. The pathogenesis of rheumatoid arthritis. N Engl J Med. 2011;365(23):2205‐2219. - PubMed
    1. Cross M, Smith E, Hoy D, et al. The global burden of rheumatoid arthritis: estimates from the global burden of disease 2010 study. Ann Rheum Dis. 2014;73(7):1316‐1322. - PubMed
    1. Chopra A. Disease burden of rheumatic diseases in India: COPCORD perspective. Indian J Rheumatol. 2015;10(2):70‐77.
    1. Rudan I, Sidhu S, Papana A, et al. Prevalence of rheumatoid arthritis in low‐ and middle‐income countries: a systematic review and analysis. J Glob Health. 2015;5(1):010409. - PMC - PubMed

MeSH terms

Grants and funding