Baricitinib for systemic lupus erythematosus: a double-blind, randomised, placebo-controlled, phase 3 trial (SLE-BRAVE-I).

BACKGROUND: Baricitinib is an oral selective inhibitor of Janus kinase 1 and 2 approved for the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis, atopic dermatitis, and alopecia areata. In a 24-week phase 2 study in patients with systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE), baricitinib 4 mg significantly improved SLE disease activity compared with placebo. The objective of this trial was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of baricitinib in patients with active SLE in a 52-week phase 3 study. METHODS: In a multicentre, double-blind, randomised, placebo-controlled, parallel-group, phase 3 study, SLE-BRAVE-I, patients (aged ≥18 years) with active SLE receiving stable background therapy were randomly assigned 1:1:1 to baricitinib 4 mg, 2 mg, or placebo once daily for 52 weeks with standard of care. Glucocorticoid tapering was encouraged but not required per protocol. The primary endpoint was the proportion of patients reaching an SLE Responder Index (SRI)-4 response at week 52 in the baricitinib 4 mg treatment group compared with placebo. The primary endpoint was assessed by logistic regression analysis with baseline disease activity, baseline corticosteroid dose, region, and treatment group in the model. Efficacy analyses were done on a modified intention-to-treat population, comprising all participants who were randomly assigned and received at least one dose of investigational product. Safety analyses were done on all randomly assigned participants who received at least one dose of investigational product and who did not discontinue from the study for the reason of lost to follow-up at the first post-baseline visit. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03616912. FINDINGS: 760 participants were randomly assigned and received at least one dose of baricitinib 4 mg (n=252), baricitinib 2 mg (n=255), or placebo (n=253). A significantly greater proportion of participants who received baricitinib 4 mg (142 [57%]; odds ratio 1·57 [95% CI 1·09 to 2·27]; difference with placebo 10·8 [2·0 to 19·6]; p=0·016), but not baricitinib 2 mg (126 [50%]; 1·14 [0·79 to 1·65]; 3·9 [-4·9 to 12·6]; p=0·47), reached SRI-4 response compared with placebo (116 [46%]). There were no significant differences between the proportions of participants in either baricitinib group reaching any of the major secondary endpoints compared with placebo, including glucocorticoid tapering and time to first severe flare. 26 (10%) participants receiving baricitinib 4 mg had serious adverse events, 24 (9%) participants receiving baricitinib 2 mg, and 18 (7%) participants receiving placebo. The safety profile of baricitinib in participants with SLE was consistent with the known baricitinib safety profile. INTERPRETATION: The primary endpoint in this study was met for the 4 mg baricitinib group. However, key secondary endpoints were not. No new safety signals were observed. FUNDING: Eli Lilly and Company.

Health information use by patients with systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) pre and during the COVID-19 pandemic.

OBJECTIVE: We conducted an international survey of patients with SLE to assess their access, preference and trust in various health information sources pre-COVID-19 and during the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: Patients with SLE were recruited from 18 observational cohorts, and patients self-reporting SLE were recruited through five advocacy organisations. Respondents completed an online survey from June 2020 to December 2021 regarding the sources of health information they accessed in the 12 months preceding (pre-11 March 2020) and during (post-11 March 2020) the pandemic. Multivariable logistic regressions assessed factors associated with accessing news and social media post-11 March 2020, and self-reporting negative impacts from health information accessed through these sources. RESULTS: Surveys were completed by 2111 respondents; 92.8% were female, 76.6% had postsecondary education, mean (SD) age was 48.8 (14.0) years. Lupus specialists and family physicians were the most preferred sources pre-11 March 2020 and post-11 March 2020, yet were accessed less frequently (specialists: 78.5% pre vs 70.2% post, difference -8.3%, 95% CI -10.2% to -6.5%; family physicians: 57.1% pre vs 50.0% post, difference -7.1%, 95% CI -9.2% to -5.0%), while news (53.2% pre vs 62.1% post, difference 8.9%, 95% CI 6.7% to 11.0%) and social media (38.2% pre vs 40.6% post, difference 2.4%, 95% CI 0.7% to 4.2%) were accessed more frequently post-11 March 2020 vs pre-11 March 2020. 17.2% of respondents reported negative impacts from information accessed through news/social media. Those outside Canada, older respondents or with postsecondary education were more likely to access news media. Those in Asia, Latin America or younger respondents were more likely to access social media. Those in Asia, older respondents, males or with postsecondary education in Canada, Asia or the USA were less likely to be negatively impacted. CONCLUSIONS: Physicians, the most preferred and trusted sources, were accessed less frequently, while news and social media, less trusted sources, were accessed more frequently post-11 March 2020 vs pre-11 March 2020. Increasing accessibility to physicians, in person and virtually, may help reduce the consequences of accessing misinformation/disinformation.