Network meta‐analysis of tofacitinib versus biologic treatments in moderate‐to‐severe rheumatoid arthritis patients

摘要

Abstract What is known and objective Rheumatoid arthritis (RA) is an autoimmune disease characterized primarily by inflammation and pain in the joints. Tofacitinib is an oral drug recently approved for RA treatment; it inhibits Janus protein kinases (JAK) that reduces RA symptoms when conventional DMARDs do not trigger a response. This study aimed to compare the efficacy of biological DMARDs in monotherapy or combined with methotrexate in RA patients and compare the treatments. Methods We reviewed the literature for articles published up to June 2017, evaluating the efficacy and safety of the biological DMARDs indicated for RA in patients with inadequate responses to conventional DMARDs and na?ve to biological DMARDs, in similar populations, considering ACR50 as the efficacy variable. The odds ratio (OR) and 95% confidence interval (CI) were calculated for each drug combination, and these parameters were transformed into differences in responses to assess the effectiveness of the alternative medicines. Equivalence therapeutic alternatives (ETA) were ensured to assess the possibility of considering these medications with equivalent efficacy. A network meta‐analysis (NMA) was performed using Bayesian approaches and the fixed‐effects model. Results and discussion Twenty‐seven randomized clinical trials (RCTs) that met the pre‐established criteria were identified. The 95% CI of biological DMARDs was higher than that of placebo without methotrexate, except for certolizumab, golimumab‐m, anakinra‐m and adalimumab monotherapy. These DMARDs performed significantly better than the placebo, except for etanercept, certolizumab, tofacitinib and golimumab. Certolizumab‐m was better than anakinra‐m and adalimumab, and tocilizumab alone or combined with methotrexate was superior to adalimumab. Etanercept‐m yielded a higher difference in responses compared with the other biological DMARDs, which presented more homogeneous responses, except for adalimumab and anakinra‐m, which yielded worse results. None of the biological DMARDs displayed ETA to etanercept‐m; however, they displayed ETA with certolizumab‐m, except for adalimumab and anakinra‐m. What is new and conclusion All biological DMARDs used in combination with methotrexate, except for etanercept, anakinra, certolizumab and tocilizumab without methotrexate, were displayed ETA on using ACR50 at week 24 in patients na?ve to biological DMARDs. Etanercept displayed a greater difference in responses, although the high uncertainty of the comparative results prevented the confirmation of the increased efficacy of this drug.