Efficacy and safety of upadacitinib therapy in patients with rheumatoid arthritis in real-world clinical practice: 12-month follow-up results

Background/Purpose. Upadacitinib (UPA) is an oral Janus kinase inhibitor, which has selectivity of JAK1 over JAK2, JAK3, and tyrosine kinase 2. UPA demonstrated efficacy for the treatment of RA, with acceptable safety profiles. We analyzed efficacy and tolerability of UPA in small Russian cohort of patients with rheumatoid arthritis.

Materials and methods. Patients (n=24) with high RA activity (DAS 28 5.1±1.1, SDAI 27,5±11,2, CDAI 24,5±9,7) and an inadequate response of synthetic DMARDs (mainly methotrexate, 71 %) and biologics (mainly TNF-α blockers, 24 %) were included in the study. The majority of patients were middle-aged (46,8±15,4), RF (88 %) and ACPA (84 %) positive, with moderate functional impairment – 1.6 (1.25–2). UPA were administered per os, 15 mg daily. The evaluation of the effectiveness of the therapy was carried out according to the EULAR/ACR 2011 criteria and using SDAI, CDAI.

Results. UPA led to a significant (p<0.05) decrease activity of RA. Initially, more than half of the patients have high activity of the RA by SDAI (52 %; n=12), and moderate disease activity by CDAI (52 %; n=12), DAS 28 (58 %; n=14). After 6 months of therapy, the percentage of patients achieving low disease activity by CDAI was 42,9 % (n=6), after 12 months was 75 % (n=6), respectively. After 12 month of therapy DAS 28 was 2,2 (1,2–3,3), SDAI was 7,6 (3–10,9), CDAI was 7,5 (3–10,5). Clinical improvement according to EULAR criteria after 3 months of treatment was registered in 86,7 %, after 6 months was 76,9 %, after 9 months 92,3 % and after 12 months was 87,5 %. More than half of patients (53,3 %) achieved a good response after 3 months of therapy, 70 % – after 6 months and 87,5 % – after 12 months. Adverse events (AE) were registered in 14 % patients, the most frequent AE were upper respiratory tract infections. One case of Herpes Zoster infection was registered.

Conclusion. UPA has shown significant improvement clinical status in patients who had an inadequate response to previous therapy. UPA was well tolerated. AE were registered in a small number of patients.

1. Nasonov E. Nasonov E. L., Avdeeva A. S., Dibrov D. A. Revmatoidnyj artrit kak kliniko-immunologicheskij sindrom: fokus na seronegativnyj subtip zabolevaniya. Nauchno-prakticheskaya revmatologiya. 2023; 61 (3): 276–291. (In Russ.).

2. Nasonov E. L., Karateev D. E. Revmatoidnyj artrit. S 17. V kn.: Rossijskie klinicheskie rekomendacii. Revmatologiya/ pod red. E. L. Nasonova. M.: GEOTAR-Media, 2020. 448 s. (In Russ.).

3. Amirdzanova V. N., Kaigorodseva E. Y., Savenkova N. A. Kachestvo zhizni bol'nyh revmatoidnym artritom, poluchayushchih etanercept. Nauchno-prakticheskaya revmatologiya. 2009; 47 (4): 73–76. https://doi.org/10.14412/1995-4484-2009-1153

4. Smolen JS, Breedveld FC, Burmester GR. et al. Treating rheumatoid arthritis to target: 2014 update of the recommendations of an international task force. Ann Rheum Dis. 2016; 75: 3–15.

5. Van Vollenhoven R. Treat-to-target in rheumatoid arthritis – are we there yet? Nat Rev Rheumatol. 2019 Jan 30. DOI: 10.1038/s41584-019-0170-5

6. Burmester GR, Pope JE. Novel treatment strategies in rheumatoid arthritis. Lancet. 2017; 389 (10086): 2338–48. DOI: 10.1016/S0140–6736(17)31491-5

7. Sigidin YA.A., Lukina G. V. V kn.: Biologicheskaya terapiya v revmatologii. / YA.A. Sigidin, G. V. Lukina. 3-e izd., dop. M.: Prakticheskaya medicina, 2015. 336 s. (In Russ.).

8. Nasonov E. L., Lila A. M. Revmatoidnyj artrit: dostizheniya i nereshennye problemy. Terapevticheskij arhiv. 2019; 91 (5): 4–7. (In Russ.). DOI: 10.26442/00403660.2019.05.000259

9. Revmatoidnyj artrit [Elektronnyj resurs] // Rubrikator klinicheskih rekomendacij / Associaciya revmatologov Rossii. 2024 g. URL: https://cr.minzdrav.gov.ru/view-cr/250_3 (data obrashcheniya: 30.01.2025). (In Russ.).

10. Nasonov E. L., Lila A. M. Effektivnost’ i bezopasnost’ upadacitiniba pri revmatoidnom artrite. Nauchno-prakticheskaya revmatologiya. 2020; 58 (5): 532–543. (In Russ.). DOI: 10.47360/1995-4484-2020-532-543

11. Schwartz D. M., Kanno Y., Villarino A. et al. JAK inhibition as a therapeutic strategy for immune and inflammatory diseases. Nat Rev Drug Discov. 2017; 16 (12): 843–862. DOI: 10.1038/nrd.2017.201

12. Nasonov E. L., Lila A. M. Janus kinase inhibitors in immuno-inflammatory rheumatic diseases: new opportunities and prospects. Nauchno-prakti cheskaya revmatologiya = Rheumatology Science and Practice. 2019; 57 (1): 8–16 (In Russ.). DOI: 10.14412/1995-4484-2019-8-16

13. Novikov P. I., Moiseev S. V. Ingibitory yanus-kinaz v lechenii revmatoidnogo artrita. Klin. farmakol. ter. 2017; 26 (4): 26–32. (In Russ.).

14. Tanaka Y. A review of upadacitinib in rheumatoid arthritis. Mod Rheumatol. 2020 Sep; 30 (5): 779–787. DOI: 10.1080/14397595.2020.1782049. Epub 2020 Jul 13. PMID: 32530345.

15. Banerjee S, Biehl A, Gadina M, Hasni S, Schwartz DM. JAK-STAT Signaling as a Target for Inflammatory and Autoimmune Diseases: Current and Future Prospects. Drugs. 2017 Apr; 77 (5): 521–546. DOI: 10.1007/s40265-017-0701

16. Sanmartí R., Corominas H. Upadacitinib for Patients with Rheumatoid Arthritis: A Comprehensive Review. J. Clin. Med. 2023; 12: 1734. https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm12051734

17. Fragoulis G. E., Brock J. Basu N., McInnes I.B., Siebert S. The role for JAK inhibitors in the treatment of immune-mediated rheumatic and related conditions. J. Allergy Clin. Immunol. 2021; 148: 941–952.

18. Ghoreschi K, Laurence A, O'Shea JJ. Janus kinases in immune cell signaling. Immunol Rev. 2009 Mar; 228 (1): 273–87. DOI: 10.1111/j.1600–065X.2008.00754.x

19. Nasonov E. L., Korotaeva T. V. Ingibitory YAnus-kinaz pri immunovospalitel’nyh zabolevaniyah: 10 let klinicheskoj praktiki v revmatologii. Nauchno-prakticheskaya revmatologiya. 2022; 60 (2): 131–148. (In Russ.).

20. Nash P. Clinical use of Jak 1 inhibitors for rheumatoid arthritis. Rheumatology (Oxford). 2021 May 5; 60 (Suppl 2): ii31–ii38. DOI: 10.1093/rheumatology/keab265

21. Amirjanova VN, Karateev AE, Pogozheva EY, Baranov AA, Mazurov VI, Samigullina RR, Anoshenkova ON, Lapkina NA, Grineva TYu, Nasonov EL, Lila AM. The first experience of using Upadacitinib in the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis in real clinical practice (results of the multicenter project “RACURS”). Nauchcno-Prakticheskaya Revmatologia = Rheumatology Science and Practice. 2021; 59 (5): 571–577 (In Russ.). DOI: 10.47360/1995-4484-2021-571-577

22. Burmester GR, Kremer JM, Van den Bosch F. et al. Safety and efficacy of upadacitinib in patients with rheumatoid arthritis and inadequate response to conventional synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (SELECT-NEXT): a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled phase 3 trial. Lancet. 2018; 391 (10139): 2503–12.

23. Fleischmann R, Pangan AL, Song IH. et al. Upadacitinib versus placebo or adalimumab in patients with rheumatoid arthritis and an inadequate response to methotrexate: results of a phase III, double-blind, randomized controlled trial. Arthritis Rheumatol. 2019; 71 (11): 1788–800.

24. Genovese MC, Fleischmann R, Combe B. et al. Safety and efficacy of upadacitinib in patients with active rheumatoid arthritis refractory to biologic disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs (SELECT-BEYOND): a double-blind, randomised controlled phase 3 trial. Lancet. 2018; 391 (10139): 2513–24.

25. Smolen JS, Pangan AL, Emery P. et al. Upadacitinib as monotherapy in patients with active rheumatoid arthritis and inadequate response to methotrexate (SELECT-MONOTHERAPY): a randomised, placebo-controlled, double-blind phase 3 study. Lancet. 2019; 393 (10188): 2303–11.

26. Van Vollenhoven R, Takeuchi T, Pangan AL. et al. Efficacy and safety of upadacitinib monotherapy in methotrexate-naive patients with moderately-to-severely active rheumatoid arthritis (SELECT-EARLY): a multicenter, multi-country, randomized, double-blind, active comparator-controlled trial. Arthritis Rheumatol. 2020; 72 (10): 1607–20.

27. Gibofsky A., Dhillon B., Pearson M. E., Tundia N., Song Y., Dunlap K., Wright G. POS 0666 treatment effectiveness of upadacitinib at 3 months in US patients with rheumatoid arthritis from the united rheumatology normalized integrated community evidence (NICE[TM]) real-world data. Ann. Rheum. Dis. 2021; 80: 575–576.

28. Bessette L, Chan J, Chow A, Lisnevskaia L, Richard N, Fournier PA, Liazoghli D, Girard T, Haaland D. Real-World Effectiveness of Upadacitinib for Treatment of Rheumatoid Arthritis in Canadian Patients: Interim Results from the Prospective Observational CLOSE-UP Study. Rheumatol Ther. 2024 Jun; 11 (3): 563–582. DOI: 10.1007/s40744-024-00651-8

29. Witte T., Kiltz U., Haas F., Riecher, E., Prothmann U., Adolf D., Holland C., Hecht R., Rössler A., Famulla K. et al. Effectiveness of Upadacitinib in Patients with Rheumatoid Arthritis in German Real-World Practice: Interim Results from a Post-Marketing Observational Study [abstract]. Arthritis Rheumatol. 2021; 73 (Suppl. S 10): 578–581. Available online: https://acrabstracts.org/abstract/effectiveness-of-upadacitinib-in-patients-with-rheumatoid-arthri

30. Kremer JM, Tundia N, McLean R. et al POS 0435 Characteristics and 6-month outcomes among real-world patients with rheumatoid arthritis initiating upadacitinib: analysis from the CORRONA registry. Annals of the Rheumatic Diseases 2021; 80: 446.

31. Bergman M., Tundia N., Bryant A., Topuria I., Brecht T., Dunlap K., Gibofsky A. POS 0436 patient characteristics and outcomes in patients with rheumatoid arthritis treated with upadacitinib: The OM1 RA registry. Ann. Rheum. Dis. 2021; 80: 446–447.

32. Youssef P., Ciciriello S., Tahir T. et al. Real-World Persistence and Effectiveness of Upadacitinib versus Other Janus Kinase Inhibitors and Tumor Necrosis Factor Inhibitors in Australian Patients with Rheumatoid Arthritis. Rheumatol Ther. 2025; 12: 173–202. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40744-024-00736-4