Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate tofacitinib real-world safety/effectiveness in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) in Japan in a 3-year all-case postmarketing surveillance study. METHODS: All patients with RA who initiated tofacitinib (30 July 2013-03 December 2017) were registered in Japan. Serious infections/malignancy/mortality incidences were compared in patients with active RA after >8 mg methotrexate/week for ≥3 months who received tofacitinib or other drugs (control: methotrexate/other disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs/immunosuppressants). Disease activity was assessed over 3 years. RESULTS: The adherent comparative safety analysis set included 3731/2419 (tofacitinib/control) patients. Baseline (tofacitinib/control) biologic disease-modifying antirheumatic drug history (53.3%/12.2%), methotrexate history (81.4%/98.6%), and RA stage (I-II: 45.3%/67.1%) and class (1-2: 76.5%/90.8%) varied between groups. For tofacitinib vs control, incidence rates [patients with event/100 patient-years (95% confidence interval)] were 6.86 (5.96-7.86) vs 1.42 (0.97-2.00) for serious infections (adjusted hazard ratios 3.25-3.80); 1.40 (1.18-1.66) vs 0.88 (0.66-1.15) for malignancies (adjusted hazard ratios 1.37-1.53); 0.89 (0.72-1.10) vs 0.26 (0.15-0.43) for mortality (unadjusted hazard ratio 3.29). Remission/low disease activity rates with tofacitinib increased over 3 years. CONCLUSIONS: Serious infection rates were higher, and malignancy rates were numerically higher with tofacitinib vs control. Results should be interpreted cautiously due to imbalanced groups and unmeasured confounders.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Kuwana et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: