Revising diagnosis of juvenile idiopathic arthritis in adults: a single-center retrospective study.

The study aimed to assess how many adult patients with juvenile idiopathic arthritis (JIA) treated with biologics fulfill classification criteria for adult rheumatic diseases and to evaluate the course of JIA in adulthood. 138 patients with JIA over 18 years old treated with biologics were included in a cross-sectional observative study. Among 138 adult patients with JIA treated with biologics, 81 patients remained with JIA diagnosis. 57 patients were rediagnosed. 31 patients met the criteria for spondyloarthropathy, among them 18 patients for ankylosing spondylitis, 10 patients for psoriatic arthritis, and 3 patients for non-radiographic axial spondyloarthritis. Rheumatoid arthritis was diagnosed in 24 patients and adults' Still disease in 2 patients. 84 patients of all adults with JIA received one biologic agent, 40 received two biologic agents, and 14 received three or more biologic therapies. 10 patients received biologic agents out of recommendations for JIA. Of the adult JIA patients treated with biologics, 41% met the classification criteria for adult inflammatory diseases. Spondyloarthropathy and rheumatoid arthritis were most commonly diagnosed. Nearly 40% of adult JIA patients required at least one modification of biological treatment. Therefore, it is worth considering a revision of JIA to adult-onset inflammatory disease entities, as it broadens the spectrum of disease-modifying drugs.

Multicenter evaluation of tofacitinib retention and safety in rheumatoid arthritis - why cardiovascular risk factors do not equate to overt risk.

Introduction: This multicenter, real-world, retrospective cohort study aimed to assess the effectiveness and safety of tofacitinib (TOFA) in rheumatoid arthritis (RA). Material and methods: Two hundred nine patients with active RA treated with TOFA, unresponsive to at least 2 conventional synthetic disease-modifying drugs, were recruited. Clinical characteristics were extracted from an electronic registry and supplemented with manual chart review and data linkage with ambulatory care. Drug retention and reasons for discontinuation were evaluated. Results: Median (interquartile range) follow-up in the whole sample was 16.9 (5.93-31.7) months. Mean (standard deviation) age was 51.44 (±11.84) years, with female predominance (n = 168, 80.4%). Only 30 patients (14.4%) had no pre-existing traditional cardiovascular (CV) risk factor at TOFA initiation. Tofacitinib retention rates were high, with median survival estimated at 89.3% at 6 months, 82.4% at 12 months, and 60.4% at 24 months. Ineffectiveness was the primary cause of discontinuation (n = 50). The rate of adverse events (AEs) was relatively low, with lipid abnormalities, blood count alterations, and infectious events among the most common. No major adverse CV event was reported. The incidence rate of AEs necessitating treatment switch was 60.34 (95% CI: 37-92) per 1,000 person-years of follow-up. Presence of multiple (> 3) CV risk factors was associated with lower odds of TOFA retention and treatment effectiveness. Conclusions: Tofacitinib demonstrated high retention rates and a favorable safety profile in RA patients, including those with traditional CV risk factors. Tofacitinib may be a valuable treatment option for RA patients when combined with individualized CV risk management. Further studies are warranted to explore the long-term effects of TOFA and its CV impact in larger populations.

Observational study of inflammatory arthritis treatment by etanercept originator switched to an etanercept biosimilar.

OBJECTIVES: The aim of the study was to assess the safety and efficacy of switching an etanercept originator to an etanercept biosimilar in rheumatoid arthritis, juvenile idiopathic arthritis, psoriatic arthritis, and ankylosing spondylitis patients. MATERIAL AND METHODS: In 162 patients etanercept originator treatment had been replaced with the biosimilar (Group 1), and in six patients the biosimilar was initiated as the first biological agent (Group 2). The efficacy and safety of the treatment were monitored at 3-6 months. RESULTS: In the majority of patients in Group 1 (n = 138) the etanercept biosimilar was well tolerated, whereas in 24 patients a switch back to the originator was required. The loss of efficacy was confirmed in nine patients using clinical scoring system, and nine patients reported subjective loss of efficacy; 13 patients reported adverse events, most often headache (n = 3) and skin lesions (n = 3). In four patients injection site reactions were present. The adverse events (AE) and/or the loss of the biosimilar efficacy were more commonly observed in women, patients with rheumatoid arthritis (especially in those who did not receive methotrexate), and in patients with a previous history of any other biological treatment. In patients in Group 2 the therapy was effective and no adverse events were observed. CONCLUSIONS: The etanercept biosimilar seems to be effective and well-tolerated in the majority of patients. Nevertheless, in some cases, switching from the originator to the biosimilar was associated with AEs or loss of efficacy.