Search

Rheumatoid arthritis (RA) is a chronic autoimmune disease, whose natural course has been deeply modified thanks to the development of new therapeutic approaches. The Janus kinase inhibitors (Jakinibs) represent the newest class of drugs introduced for treating RA. Among these, Filgotinib (FIL) has been developed as Janus kinase1 (JAK1) selective inhibitor, specifically targeting key pro-inflammatory mediators in RA pathogenesis.This narrative review provides an overview on FIL as new therapeutic approach for RA, with focus on its pharmacological properties, clinical efficacy, and safety profile. The following electronic databases were adopted for the study search: PubMed, Google Scholar, ClinicalTrials.gov and Abstract archive from the American College of Rheumatology and the European Alliance of Associations for Rheumatology.The phase II and phase III randomized controlled trials (RCTs) performed so far and their long-term extensions showed a comparable clinical efficacy of FIL to biologic treatments, with an acceptable safety profile. Thanks to these data, FIL was approved in Europe and Japan for the treatment of active RA, increasing the spectrum of therapeutic approaches and improving the possibility of a more tailored therapeutic strategy. Real-life data and head-to-head clinical trials will be needed to confirm its efficacy and safety.

Background Rheumatoid arthritis (RA) is a systemic autoimmune disease. The combination therapy of methotrexate (MTX) and Janus kinase inhibitor (JAKi) is commonly used. Patients with RA are at increased risk of malignancy, however, it remains unclear whether the combination therapy is associated with a higher risk. Objective To assess the malignancy risk among patients with RA receiving combination therapy of JAKi and MTX compared to MTX alone. Methods PubMed, Cochrane and Embase were thoroughly searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in patients with RA receiving JAKi and MTX, from inception to July 2020. Primary endpoints were malignancy events, Non melanomatous skin cancer (NMSC) and malignancy excluding NMSC and secondary endpoints were serious adverse events (SAE), deaths. Risk ratio (RR) and 95% CI were calculated using the Mantel–Haenszel random-effect method. Results 659 publications were screened and 13 RCTs with a total of 6911 patients were included in the analysis. There was no statistically significant difference in malignancy [RR = 1.42; 95% CI (0.59, 3.41)], neither NMSC [RR = 1.44 (0.36, 5.76)] nor malignancies excluding NMSC [RR = 1.12 (0.40, 3.13)]. No statistically significant difference between the two groups for SAE [RR = 1.15 (0.90, 1.47)] and deaths [RR = 1.99 (0.75, 5.27)] was found. Conclusion The adjunction of JAKi to MTX is not associated with an increased risk of malignancy when compared to MTX alone. There is no increased risk of SAE and deaths when compared to MTX alone in patients with RA.

Background/Aims Filgotinib is an oral, preferential janus kinase 1 inhibitor. FINCH 1 (NCT02889796) was a phase III, double-blind, placebo- and active-controlled study evaluating filgotinib efficacy and safety in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) after inadequate response to methotrexate (MTX; MTX-IR). Methods MTX-IR patients with moderately or severely active RA were randomised (3:3:2:3) to filgotinib 200 mg daily, filgotinib 100 mg daily, adalimumab 40 mg every 2 weeks, or placebo on a background of stable MTX for up to 52 weeks. An exploratory subgroup analysis of FINCH 1 was conducted in patients with moderately active RA based on Disease Activity Score in 28 joints with C-reactive protein (DAS28[CRP])>3.2-≤5.1 at baseline. Proportion of patients achieving 20%/50%/70% improvement from baseline in American College of Rheumatology core criteria (ACR20/50/70), DAS28(CRP)≤3.2, DAS28(CRP) Results Of 1,755 treated patients, 24% had moderate disease at baseline with similar proportions (21.9%-26.9%) across treatment groups. In each treatment arm, baseline characteristics were well balanced for the moderate disease activity subpopulation. The majority (77%) were female, mean (standard deviation [SD]) duration of RA was 7.8 (7.7) years; mean (SD) baseline DAS28(CRP) was 4.6 (0.42). At W12 and W24, proportions achieving ACR20/50/70, DAS28(CRP) Conclusion In a subgroup of patients from FINCH 1 with baseline moderately active RA, significantly greater improvements in disease activity were observed with both filgotinib doses over placebo and associated with lower radiographic progression and reduced functional deficit. Disclosure M.H. Buch: Consultancies; MHB reports serving as a consultant for AbbVie; Eli Lilly; Gilead Sciences, Inc.; Sandoz; Sanofi; and Serono. Grants/research support; MHB reports grants or research support from Pfizer, Roche, and UCB. D. Walker: Grants/research support; DW has received funding from Bristol-Myers Squibb; Eli Lilly; Gilead Sciences, Inc.; Novartis; and Pfizer, Inc. P.D.W. Kiely: Other; PK has attended advisory boards, been part of a speakers bureau, or received support to attend educational meetings from AbbVie, Gilead, Lilly, Novartis, and Sanofi. C.J. Edwards: Consultancies; CJE has provided consultancy for AbbVie; Biogen; Bristol-Myers Squibb; Celgene; Eli Lilly; Fresenius; Gilead Sciences, Inc.; GSK; Janssen; MSD; Mundipharma; Pfizer; Roche; Samsung; and Sanofi. Member of speakers’ bureau; CJE has served on speaker's bureaus for AbbVie; Biogen; Bristol-Myers Squibb; Celgene; Eli Lilly; Fresenius; Gilead Sciences, Inc.; GSK; Janssen; MSD; Mundipharma; Pfizer; Roche; Samsung; and Sanofi. Grants/research support; CJE reports grants from AbbVie; Biogen; Bristol-Myers Squibb; Celgene; Eli Lilly; Fresenius; Gilead Sciences, Inc.; GSK; Janssen; MSD; Mundipharma; Pfizer; Roche; Samsung; and Sanofi. J. Barry: Corporate appointments; JB is an employee of Gilead Sciences Ltd. G. McCaughey: Corporate appointments; GMcC is an employee of Gilead Sciences Ltd. L. Akroyd: Corporate appointments; LA is an employee of Gilead Sciences Ltd. I. Tiamiyu: Corporate appointments; IT is an employee of Gilead Sciences, Inc. L. Ye: Corporate appointments; LY is an employee of Gilead Sciences, Inc. K. Chen: Corporate appointments; KC is an employee of Gilead Sciences, Inc. P.C. Taylor: Consultancies; PCT has served as a consultant to AbbVie, Biogen, Galapagos, Gilead, GlaxoSmithKline, Janssen, Lilly, Pfizer, BMS, Roche, Sanofi, Nordic Pharma, Fresenius, and UCB. Grants/research support; PCT reports research grants from Gilead Sciences, Inc.; Galapagos, and Celgene.

Background/Aims Filgotinib (FIL) is an oral, potent, selective Janus kinase 1 (JAK1) inhibitor. FINCH 1 (NCT02889796) assessed FIL efficacy, safety and patient reported outcome (PRO) data in patients (pts) with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) with an inadequate response to methotrexate (MTX-IR). We report data through week 52 (W52) of the FINCH 1 study. Primary outcome results at week (W)12 and W24 were previously reported. Methods This global, phase 3, double-blind, active- and placebo (PBO)-controlled study randomised MTX-IR pts with active RA on a background of stable MTX 3:3:2:3 to oral FIL 200 mg or FIL 100 mg once daily, subcutaneous adalimumab (ADA) 40 mg every 2W, or PBO up to W52; pts receiving PBO at W24 were re-randomised to FIL 100 or 200 mg. Efficacy was assessed using clinical, radiographic, and pt-reported outcomes; W52 comparisons were not adjusted for multiplicity, and nominal p-values are reported. Safety endpoints included types and rates of adverse events (AEs) and laboratory abnormalities. PRO assessment included the HAQ-DI and VAS pain scale, SF-36, and FACIT-Fatigue questionnaire. Change from baseline (CFB) at various time points was assessed up to W52 for each treatment group. Results Of 1,755 treated pts, 1,417 received study drug through W52. FIL efficacy was sustained through W52 with DAS28(CRP) Conclusion Through W52, both FIL 200 and 100 mg showed sustained efficacy, rapid and sustained improvement in patient QoL based on clinical and pt-reported outcomes and were well tolerated in MTX-IR pts with RA. Disclosure D. Walker: Consultancies; Lilly, Pfizer, Novartis, Roche. A. Kivitz: Consultancies; AbbVie, Boehringer Ingelheim, Flexion, Janssen, Pfizer, Sanofi, Regeneron, SUN Pharma Advanced Research, Gilead Sciences, Inc. Shareholder/stock ownership; Pfizer, Sanofi, GlaxoSmithKline, Gilead Sciences, Inc., Novartis. Member of speakers’ bureau; Celgene, Merck, Lilly, Novartis, Pfizer, Sanofi, Genzyme, Flexion, AbbVie. Y. Tanaka: Honoraria; AbbVie, Asahi Kasei, Astellas, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Chugai, Daiichi-Sankyo, Eisai, Eli Lilly, Gilead Sciences, Inc., GlaxoSmithKline, Janssen, Mitsubishi Tanabe Pharma, Novartis, Pfizer, Sanofi and Y. Grants/research support; AbbVie, Chugai, Daiichi-Sankyo, Eisai, Mitsubishi-Tanabe, Takeda and UCB. S. Lee: Shareholder/stock ownership; Gilead Sciences, Inc. Other; Employee of Gilead Sciences, Inc. L. Ye: Shareholder/stock ownership; Gilead Sciences, Inc. Other; Employee of Gilead Sciences, Inc. H. Hu: Shareholder/stock ownership; Gilead Sciences, Inc. Other; Employee of Gilead Sciences, Inc. F. Matzkies: Shareholder/stock ownership; Gilead Sciences, Inc. Other; Employee of Gilead Sciences, Inc. B. Bartok: Shareholder/stock ownership; Gilead Sciences, Inc. Other; Employee of Gilead Sciences, Inc. B. Bartok: Shareholder/stock ownership; Gilead Sciences, Inc. Other; Employee of Gilead Sciences, Inc. Y. Guo: Shareholder/stock ownership; Gilead Sciences, Inc. Other; Employee of Gilead Sciences, Inc. J.S. Sundy: Shareholder/stock ownership; Gilead Sciences, Inc. Other; Employee of Gilead Sciences, Inc. A. Jahreis: Shareholder/stock ownership; Gilead Sciences, Inc. Other; Employee of Gilead Sciences, Inc. R. Besuyen: Shareholder/stock ownership; Galapagos BV. Other; Employee of Galapagos BV. B. Combe: Other; Reports research support, honoraria, consulting and speaker fees from AbbVie; Bristol-Myers Squibb; Eli Lilly & Co.; Gilead Sciences, Inc.; Janssen; Novartis; Pfizer; Roche-Chugai; Sanofi; and UCB. D. van der Heijde: Consultancies; AbbVie; Amgen; Astellas; AstraZeneca; Bristol-Myers Squibb; Boehringer Ingelheim; Celgene; Cyxone; Daiichi-Sankyo; Eisai; Eli Lilly & Co.; Galapagos; Gilead Sciences, Inc.; Glaxo-Smith-Kline; Janssen;, Merck; Novartis; Pfizer; Regeneron; Roche; Sanofi; Takeda; and UCB. J. Simon-Campos: None. H.S.B. Baraf: Grants/research support; AbbVie; Horizon; Gilead Sciences, Inc.; Pfizer; Janssen; and Merck. U. Kumar: None. C. Tasset: Shareholder/stock ownership; Galapagos NV. Other; Employee of Galapagos NV. N. Mozaffarian: Shareholder/stock ownership; Gilead Sciences, Inc. Other; Employee of Gilead Sciences, Inc. R.B.M. Landewé: Consultancies; AbbVie; AstraZeneca; Bristol-Myers Squibb; Eli Lilly & Co.; Gilead Sciences, Inc.; Galapagos NV; Novartis; Pfizer; and UCB. S. Bae: None. E. Keystone: Other; Reports research support, consulting, and speaker fees from AbbVie; Amgen; AstraZeneca; Bristol-Myers Squibb; Celltrion; F. Hoffman-La Roche Ltd.; Genentech, Inc; Gilead Sciences, Inc.; Janssen; Lilly, ; Merck; Myriad Autoimmune; Pfizer; PuraPharm; Sandoz; Sanofi-Genzyme; Samsung Bioepsis; and UCB. P. Nash: Other; Reports research support, consulting, and speaker and personal fees from AbbVie; Bristol-Myers Squibb; Celgene; Eli Lilly & Co.; Gilead Sciences, Inc; Janssen; Merck Sharp & Dohme; Novartis; Pfizer;, Roche; Sanofi; and UCB.

In the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis (RA), Janus kinase inhibitors (jakinibs) represent an emerging class of targeted therapies in addition to biologics. The number of jakinibs has been growing and as of 2020, filgotinib was the latest jakinib to enter the international market for treating RA. Filgotinib has demonstrated preferential inhibition of JAK1-dependent cytokine signaling in in vitro assays. It has been evaluated in the DARWIN (phase 2) and FINCH (phase 3) series of clinical studies for treating patients with moderately-to-severely active RA. Filgotinib received regulatory approval in Japan and Europe in September 2020, while in August 2020 the United States Food and Drug Administration requested additional data from two ongoing clinical studies assessing the potential impact of filgotinib on sperm parameters. This article will review the pharmacological properties, efficacy, and safety of filgotinib as demonstrated in clinical studies. Expert opinion will be provided on jakinibs for RA treatment from the viewpoints of basic research and clinical practice.

The JAK kinase inhibitors (JAKis) represent an exciting class of therapies in rheumatology, and they are effective across a wide variety of immune-mediated diseases, in haematology (myelofibrosis, polycythemia vera and acute graft-versus-host disease), dermatology and gastroenterology (ulcerative colitis), interferonopathies, sarcoidosis and recently COVID-19 (baricitinib). Their use in rheumatoid arthritis (RA) has convincingly demonstrated an early onset of benefit and anecdotally, better adherence. In a combined analyses of the phase III RA randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and long-term extensions (LTE) with tofacitinib, approximately 78% remained on therapy at 2 years and 51% at 5 years.1 Orally administered, they are convenient and easy to use, without concerns regarding immunogenicity. And they have the shortest half-lives of all of our therapeutic classes. It is interesting that the approved JAKis demonstrate different selectivity profiles in vitro, modulating distinct cytokine signalling pathways to different degrees and duration. Yet, they do not potently or continuously inhibit any individual cytokine pathway over 24 hours.2 It is unclear which cell types and which signalling pathways are affected at any given time or for how long. Despite different selectivities, clinical responses are similar, especially across agents in RA, psoriatic arthritis (PsA) and spondyloarthritis (SpA). Four are EMA approved in RA (tofacitinib, baricitinib, upadacitinib and filgotinib), 3 by FDA (except filgotonib); tofacitinib in polyarticular JIA; tofacitinib in PsA with upadacitinib expected, as are tofacitinib and upadacitinib expected in SpA. Indications of efficacy based on open-label series or early trials are evident in systemic lupus erythematosus, dermatomyositis, systemic sclerosis, Sjogren’s syndrome and non-infectious uveitis. Perhaps even more compelling are the uniformly strong data available with all the JAKis studied in methotrexate incomplete responder (MTX-IR) patients with RA, resulting in clinically meaningful improvements (≥minimum clinically important differences (MCID)) across all patient-reported outcomes (PROs): patient global assessment of disease activity (PtGA), …

ObjectiveThis analysis evaluated efficacy and safety of filgotinib, a Janus-associated kinase 1-preferential inhibitor, in methotrexate (MTX)-naive patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) with multiple poor prognostic factors (PPFs).MethodsThis was a post hoc analysis of the phase III, randomised, double-blind, active-controlled, FINCH 3 study (clinicaltrials.gov NCT02886728). Patients received once-daily oral filgotinib 200 or 100 mg plus once-weekly oral MTX ≤20 mg (FIL200 + MTX and FIL100 + MTX), filgotinib 200 mg monotherapy (FIL200), or oral MTX monotherapy (MTX-mono) for up to 52 weeks. PPFs investigated were seropositivity for rheumatoid factor or anticyclic citrullinated peptide antibodies, high-sensitivity C reactive protein (CRP) ≥4 mg/L, Disease Activity Score in 28 joints with CRP (DAS28(CRP)) >5.1, and presence of erosions. Filgotinib efficacy and safety in patients with all four PPFs at baseline were explored versus MTX-mono within this subgroup and compared informally with the overall population.ResultsOf 1249 patients in FINCH 3, 510 (40.8%) had all PPFs. Efficacy of FIL200 + MTX among these patients was comparable to the overall population, with higher rates of 20%/50%/70% improvement from baseline by American College of Rheumatology criteria, DAS28(CRP) ConclusionFIL200 + MTX efficacy and safety in patients with multiple PPFs were similar to the overall population.

Introduction Filgotinib (FIL) is a JAK1 inhibitor under phase 3 clinical evaluation for treatment of IBD. We conducted a post hoc analysis in patients (pts) with moderately to severely active Crohn’s disease (CD) to assess the effect of FIL on markers of JAK1 signaling (STAT1/3 phosphorylation [pSTAT1/3]) within intestinal mucosa and their correlation to histologic/endoscopic indices (NCT02048618). Methods Baseline (BL) and Week 10 (W10) biopsies were collected from predefined bowel segments. Within-subject matched biopsies (FIL, n=42; placebo [PBO], n=18) were scored for histologic and endoscopic disease activity. Machine learning (Visiopharmv.2019.06) was used to quantify%pSTAT1 and%pSTAT3 positive nuclei within epithelium (Ep) and non-Ep regions. Basal pSTAT levels from 182 non-diseased segments were used to classify segments as low or high molecular disease activity (MDA). Agreement between endoscopy/histology and MDA was evaluated by Cohen’s kappa coefficient (κ) and% agreement. Results In segments with BL GHAS activity subscore ≥2, Ep (10–30%) and non-Ep (25–35%) MDA were elevated and correlated to histologic activity. Table 1 shows the effect of FIL on MDA in the intestinal mucosa: significantly fewer low BL MDA segments showed MDA worsening, and significantly more high BL MDA segments showed MDA improvement (pSTAT3 only) with FIL vs. PBO. Agreement for MDA and endoscopy was fair to moderate (κ 0.3–0.5), and for MDA and histology was moderate to good (κ 0.4–0.8). Conclusions FIL improved JAK1-related MDA within the mucosa of pts with CD. Agreement between MDA and clinical indices was highest with histology.

To investigate the protective effect of filgotinib in endotoxin-induced uveitis model in rats.This study used 24 Wistar Albino rats. Group I (control group) included the healthy controls; in Group II (sham group), only 300 µg/kg intraperitoneal (ip) lipopolysaccharide (LPS) was administered; and in Group III (treatment group), 3 mg/kg/day filgotinib was administered orally for 10 days followed by 300 µg/kg ip LPS. In all groups, clinical activity scores were evaluated after 24 h. Moreover, histopathological and immunological examinations were performed.In Groups I, II, and III, the mean clinical activity and histopathological examination scores were 0.00, 3.25 ± 0.70, and 1.89 ± 0.60 and 0.00, 2.88 ± 1.12, and 1.44 ± 0.52, respectively. The clinical activity and histopathological examination scores were significantly increased in the sham group compared to the control group (p 0.05); these findings were significantly reduced in the treatment group (p 0.05). The mean TNF-α and IL-6 ELISA levels in all groups were 50.20 ± 3.24, 59.87 ± 2.98, and 54.34 ± 4.62 and 30.88 ± 1.79, 36.77 ± 1.21, and 33.66 ± 1.86, respectively. The TNF-α and IL-6 ELISA levels were significantly decreased in the treatment group compared to the sham group (p 0.05); there was no significant difference between the treatment group and the control group (p = 0.105, p = 0.067, respectively) CONCLUSION: Filgotinib may be an alternative treatment option in preventing the development of noninfectious uveitis.

The global prevalence of ulcerative colitis is increasing, and induction and maintenance of remission is a crucial therapeutic goal. We assessed the efficacy and safety of filgotinib, a once-daily, oral Janus kinase 1 preferential inhibitor, for treatment of ulcerative colitis.This phase 2b/3, double-blind, randomised, placebo-controlled trial including two induction studies and one maintenance study was done in 341 study centres in 40 countries. Eligible patients were aged 18-75 years with moderately to severely active ulcerative colitis for at least 6 months before enrolment (induction study A: inadequate clinical response, loss of response to or intolerance to corticosteroids or immunosuppressants, naive to tumour necrosis factor [TNF] antagonists and vedolizumab [biologic-naive]; induction study B: inadequate clinical response, loss of response to or intolerance to any TNF antagonist or vedolizumab, no TNF antagonist or vedolizumab use within 8 weeks before screening [biologic-experienced]). Patients were randomly assigned 2:2:1 to receive oral filgotinib 200 mg, filgotinib 100 mg, or placebo once per day for 11 weeks. Patients who had either clinical remission or a Mayo Clinic Score response at week 10 in either induction study entered the maintenance study. Patients who received induction filgotinib were rerandomised 2:1 to continue their induction filgotinib regimen or to placebo. Patients who received induction placebo continued receiving placebo. The primary endpoint was clinical remission by Mayo endoscopic, rectal bleeding, and stool frequency subscores at weeks 10 and 58. For the induction studies, efficacy was assessed in all randomised patients who received at least one dose of study drug or placebo within that study. For the maintenance study, efficacy was assessed in all patients randomised to any filgotinib treatment group in the induction studies who received at least one dose of study drug or placebo in the maintenance study. Patients who received placebo throughout the induction and maintenance study were not included in the full analysis set for the maintenance study. Safety was assessed in all patients who received at least one dose of the study drug or placebo within each study. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02914522.Between Nov 14, 2016, and March 31, 2020, we screened 2040 patients for eligibility. 659 patients enrolled in induction study A were randomly assigned to receive filgotinib 100 mg (n=277), filgotinib 200 mg (n=245), or placebo (n=137). 689 patients enrolled into induction study B were randomly assigned to receive filgotinib 100 mg (n=285), filgotinib 200 mg (n=262), or placebo (n=142). 34 patients in induction study A and 54 patients in induction study B discontinued the study drug before week 10. After efficacy assessment at week 10, 664 patients entered the maintenance study (391 from induction study A, 273 from induction study B). 93 patients continued to receive placebo. 270 patients who had received filgotinib 100 mg in the induction study were randomly assigned to receive filgotinib 100 mg (n=179) or placebo (n=91). 301 patients who had received filgotinib 200 mg in the induction study were randomly assigned to receive filgotinib 200 mg (n=202) or placebo (n=99). 263 patients discontinued treatment in the maintenance study. At week 10, a greater proportion of patients given filgotinib 200 mg had clinical remission than those given placebo (induction study A 26·1% vs 15·3%, difference 10·8%; 95% CI 2·1-19·5, p=0·0157; induction study B 11·5% vs 4·2%, 7·2%; 1·6-12·8, p=0·0103). At week 58, 37·2% of patients given filgotinib 200 mg had clinical remission versus 11·2% in the respective placebo group (difference 26·0%, 95% CI 16·0-35·9; p0·0001). Clinical remission was not significantly different between filgotinib 100 mg and placebo at week 10, but was significant by week 58 (23·8% vs 13·5%, 10·4%; 0·0-20·7, p=0·0420). The incidence of serious adverse events and adverse events of interest was similar between treatment groups. In the induction studies, serious adverse events occurred in 28 (5·0%) of 562 patients given filgotinib 100 mg, 22 (4·3%) of 507 patients given filgotinib 200 mg, and 13 (4·7%) of 279 patients given placebo. In the maintenance study, serious adverse events were reported in eight (4·5%) of 179 patients given filgotinib 100 mg, seven (7·7%) of 91 patients in the respective placebo group, nine (4·5%) of 202 patients in the filgotinib 200 mg group, and no patients in the respective placebo group. No deaths were reported during either induction study. Two patients died during the maintenance study; neither was related to treatment.Filgotinib 200 mg was well tolerated, and efficacious in inducing and maintaining clinical remission compared with placebo in patients with moderately to severely active ulcerative colitis.Gilead Sciences.

Objectives To evaluate efficacy and safety of filgotinib in Japanese RA patients who have failed or were intolerant to one or more biologic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (bDMARD) from the global FINCH 2 study (NCT02873936) Methods This subgroup analysis was performed using the predefined statistical analyses. The FINCH 2 study is a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, Phase 3 study in adult RA patients with inadequate response to bDMARDs. The randomized patients were treated with once-daily filgotinib 200 mg, filgotinib 100 mg or placebo on a background of csDMARDs for 24 weeks. Results Of 449 patients enrolled in the overall population, 40 patients were enrolled from Japan. In the Japanese population, the American College of Rheumatology 20% response rates at week 12 (primary endpoint) were 83.3% and 53.3% for filgotinib, 200 mg and 100 mg, respectively, vs 30.8% for placebo. Filgotinib was well tolerated, similar to the overall population. Conclusions Both doses of once-daily filgotinib 200 mg and filgotinib 100 mg were effective, and generally well-tolerated in Japanese patients with active refractory RA.

The uptake of Jak inhibitors in the RA space has been among the most rapid in rheumatology, based on the results of comprehensive clinical trial programmes of five agents. Newer generations of Jak inhibitors, like upadacitinib and filgotinib, target Jak 1 selectively with the aim of maximizing efficacy and to improve safety. This article will review the clinical significance of evidence on: (i) Jak 1 selectivity; (ii) efficacy from the SELECT and FINCH clinical trial programmes including patient intolerant or inadequately responding to MTX (MTX-IR) and other csDMARDs patients who are bDMARD-IR) and those using monotherapy when MTX is not tolerated or contraindicated and those treated when methotrexate naive; and (iii) safety from the clinical trial programmes of these two agents will be discussed.

Rheumatoid arthritis (RA) is the most common autoimmune inflammatory arthritis in adults. In the past decade, many treatments have emerged to expand the therapeutic armamentarium of rheumatologists. Among emerging treatments, Janus Kinase inhibitors (JAKi) are promising in treating RA and several other inflammatory conditions, such as psoriatic arthritis (PsA). The JAK/STAT signaling pathway is located downstream certain cytokines receptors that are known to be involved in RA pathogenesis. So far, three JAKi are approved for the treatment of RA, while other JAKi, are under investigation.Herein, the authors review those JAKi approved and emerging for the treatment of RA and provide their expert perspectives on the subject area.JAKi represent an interesting alternative to other DMARDs when MTX has failed. Long-term extension studies are still ongoing, but one can assume that most of the major safety concerns have already come out. Switching from one JAKi to another DMARD has been little studied, but in such cases, preferring a treatment which does not interfere with the JAK/STAT pathway seems to be a reasonable choice.

Copyright © 2021 Moura and Fonseca. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License(CC BY). The use,distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use,distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms, Rheumatoid arthritis (RA) is a chronic, systemic immune-mediated inflammatory disease that can lead to joint destruction, functional disability and substantial comorbidity due to the involvement of multiple organs and systems. B cells have several important roles in RA pathogenesis, namely through autoantibody production, antigen presentation, T cell activation, cytokine release and ectopic lymphoid neogenesis. The success of B cell depletion therapy with rituximab, a monoclonal antibody directed against CD20 expressed by B cells, has further supported B cell intervention in RA development. Despite the efficacy of synthetic and biologic disease modifying anti-rheumatic drugs (DMARDs) in the treatment of RA, few patients reach sustained remission and refractory disease is a concern that needs critical evaluation and close monitoring. Janus kinase (JAK) inhibitors or JAKi are a new class of oral medications recently approved for the treatment of RA. JAK inhibitors suppress the activity of one or more of the JAK family of tyrosine kinases, thus interfering with the JAK-Signal Transducer and Activator of Transcription (STAT) signaling pathway. To date, there are five JAK inhibitors (tofacitinib, baricitinib, upadacitinib, peficitinib and filgotinib) approved in the USA, Europe and/ or Japan for RA treatment. Evidence from the literature indicates that JAK inhibitors interfere with B cell functions. In this review, the main results obtained in clinical trials, pharmacokinetic, in vitro and in vivo studies concerning the effects of JAK inhibitors on B cell immune responses in RA are summarized.

As efficacy and safety data emerge, differences between JAK inhibitor subclasses are appearing. JAK1 selective drugs, upadacitinib and filgotinib, have broadly come with the same overarching safety recommendations as other immunosuppressive drugs for RA: caution is needed regarding infection risk; monitoring for laboratory abnormalities, including lipids and muscle enzymes, is indicated. A distinguishing feature of JAK inhibitors is a risk for zoster reactivation. Numerically, overall rates of serious infection are similar among JAK inhibitor classes. There are currently no signals for diverticular perforation. VTE incidence rates were similar across comparator groups for the JAK1 selective agents. These observations are not yet conclusive evidence for different safety profiles between JAK1 selective agents and other JAK inhibitors. Differences in study population, design, and concomitant steroid use are examples of potential confounders. It is too early to draw conclusions on long-term outcomes such as malignancy and cardiovascular risk. Post-marketing pharmacovigilance studies will be essential.

COVID-19, a pandemic affecting virus, which is caused by the current SARS-CoV2 coronavirus. The present research is performed on anti virus and immune-modulating therapies. Cytokine storms are the toxic drivers and mortality caused by various human viral infections. In addition, the intensity was linked to an elevated risk of acute respiratory failure, myocardial injury, and mortality in SARS-CoV-2-infected patients. The Janus kinase (JAK) therapeutic inhibitor class showed significant clinical benefits in anti-inflammatory and anti-viral effects. Among them, filgotinib has been approved as an active JAK inhibitor by decreasing biomarkers with main immune reaction functions and markers supporting matrix-degradation, angiogenesis, leukocyte adhesion, and recruitment in both research trials. In this study, we tried to get an insight into the choice of this drug in controlling the jack, to treat Covid 19 using drug design methods will be discussed.

Despite effective antiretroviral therapy, HIV-1–infected cells continue to produce viral antigens and induce chronic immune exhaustion. We propose to identify HIV-1–suppressing agents that can inhibit HIV-1 reactivation and reduce HIV-1–induced immune activation. Using a newly developed dual-reporter system and a high-throughput drug screen, we identified FDA-approved drugs that can suppress HIV-1 reactivation in both cell line models and CD4(+) T cells from virally suppressed HIV-1–infected individuals. We identified 11 cellular pathways required for HIV-1 reactivation as druggable targets. Using differential expression analysis, gene set enrichment analysis, and exon-intron landscape analysis, we examined the impact of drug treatment on the cellular environment at a genome-wide level. We identified what we believe to be a new function of a JAK inhibitor, filgotinib, that suppresses HIV-1 splicing. First, filgotinib preferentially suppresses spliced HIV-1 RNA transcription. Second, filgotinib suppresses HIV-1–driven aberrant cancer-related gene expression at the integration site. Third, we found that filgotinib suppresses HIV-1 transcription by inhibiting T cell activation and by modulating RNA splicing. Finally, we found that filgotinib treatment reduces the proliferation of HIV-1–infected cells. Overall, the combination of a drug screen and transcriptome analysis provides systematic understanding of cellular targets required for HIV-1 reactivation and drug candidates that may reduce HIV-1–related immune activation.

Three Janus kinase (JAK) inhibitors are approved for rheumatoid arthritis (RA) with a fourth awaiting approval. Multiple clinical trial results with these molecules have recently been reported. These were the first small molecule oral targeted synthetic DMARDs (tsDMARDs) to be approved for RA. Preclinical studies have suggested differential affinity for JAK isoform inhibition but it is not presently clear that there is any difference in efficacy in the clinic with these therapies. Preliminary data has suggested that filgotinib may have a modestly different safety profile but lacking direct comparisons, this will be difficult to confirm. Long-term safety studies have suggested similar safety signals to biologics although a possible signal for VTE/PE risk has been noted with tofacitinib and baricitinib. Having an oral small molecule such as the JAK inhibitors with similar or better efficacy than biologics has been a major advance in RA treatment.

Different options on performing incurred sample reanalysis (ISR) on dried blood spot (DBS) cards were investigated using drugs belonging to various therapeutic areas: (a) darolutamide (to treat prostate cancer) and (b) filgotinib (to treat rheumatoid arthritis). The proposed novel methodology included the generation of half-DBS and quarter-DBS discs after initial blood collection using the full-DBS discs. Accordingly, blood collection via DBS was performed in male BALB/c mice following intravenous and oral dosing of darolutamide; in male Sprague Dawley rats following intravenous and oral dosing of filgotinib. The ISR data generated from the full-DBS disc, half-DBS disc and quarter-DBS disc were compared for the assessment of the proposed methodology. Quantification of darolutamide and filgotinib was accomplished using liquid chromatography-electrospray ionization/tandem mass spectrometry methods. Darolutamide and filgotinib ISR samples, which were collected and prepared using full-, half- and quarter-DBS discs, met the acceptance criteria for ISR analysis. In conclusion, this is the first report showing a viable tool for the performance of ISR on DBS cards. The use of quarter- or half-DBS discs would aid in not only ISR but also in long-term storage experiments of analytes because it would avoid the need for additional blood sampling in patients.

Objectives We assessed the relative efficacy and safety of once-daily administration of 100 and 200 mg filgotinib (a JAK1-selective inhibitor) in patients with active rheumatoid arthritis (RA). Materials and methods We conducted a Bayesian network meta-analysis combining the direct and indirect evidence from randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that examined the efficacy and safety of filgotinib in patients with active RA. Results Five RCTs involving 3,920 patients met the inclusion criteria. There were 15 pairwise comparisons, including 8 direct comparisons and 7 interventions. The ACR20 response rate was significantly higher in the filgotinib 200 mg + methotrexate (MTX) group than in the placebo or placebo + MTX group (odds ratio (OR): 12.39, 95% credible interval (CrI): 3.36 - 45.98.10; OR: 2.68, 95% CrI: 1.80 - 4.39). Compared to the placebo group, the filgotinib 100 mg, adalimumab 40 mg + MTX, filgotinib 200 mg, and placebo + MTX groups showed a significantly higher ACR20 response rate. The ranking probability based on the surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA) indicated filgotinib 200 mg + MTX was likely to achieve the best ACR20 response rate (SUCRA = 0.902), followed by filgotinib 100 mg + MTX (SUCRA = 0.694), filgotinib 100 mg (SUCRA = 0.675), adalimumab 40 mg + MTX (SUCRA = 0.661), filgotinib 200 mg (SUCRA = 0.305), placebo + MTX (SUCRA = 0.259), and placebo (SUCRA = 0.005). The safety based on the number of serious adverse events (SAEs) did not differ significantly among 6 six interventions. Conclusion Filgotinib 100 and 200 mg administration once daily in combination with MTX was the most efficacious intervention for active RA, with no significant risk of SAEs.

Filgotinib (FIL) is a potent and selective JAK1 inhibitor in clinical development for treatment of severe inflammatory diseases. A drug-drug interaction study to evaluate the potential effect of FIL on the pharmacokinetics (PK) of the oral contraceptive levonorgestrel (LEVO)/ethinyl estradiol (EE) was conducted. This was a phase 1, open-label, randomized, crossover study in healthy female subjects (N = 24). Subjects received a single dose of LEVO (150 μg)/EE (30 μg) alone (reference), or in combination with multiple-dose FIL (200 mg once daily for 15 days; test). Intensive PK sampling was conducted, and safety was assessed throughout the study. PK interactions were evaluated using 90% confidence intervals of the geometric least squares mean ratios of the test versus reference treatments. All 24 subjects enrolled completed study treatments. Coadministration of FIL with the oral contraceptive did not alter the PK of LEVO and EE; the 90% confidence intervals of the geometric least squares mean ratios were contained within bioequivalence bounds (80%-125%). Exposures of FIL were consistent with observed clinical exposure data. Study treatments were generally well tolerated. All adverse events were mild. Coadministration with FIL did not alter the PK of LEVO/EE, and hormonal contraceptives can serve as an effective contraception method for subjects on FIL treatment.

Background Filgotinib (FIL), an orally administered, potent, selective inhibitor of janus kinase 1 (JAK1), has shown good efficacy and was well tolerated for treatment of rheumatoid arthritis (RA). The objectives of this study were to compare efficacy and safety of FIL with and without methotrexate (MTX) in patients with RA who were naïve to MTX therapy. Methods This Phase 3, double-blind, active-controlled study randomised patients with moderately to severely active RA (2:1:1:2) to FIL 200mg daily+MTX, FIL 100mg+MTX, FIL 200mg (+placebo [PBO]), or MTX (+PBO) up to 52 weeks; results are through week 24. Primary endpoint was proportion achieving ACR20 response at week 24. Safety endpoints included adverse events types and rates. Results Of 1,252 randomised patients, 1,249 received study drug (416 FIL 200mg+MTX; 207 FIL 100mg+MTX; 210 FIL 200mg monotherapy; 416 MTX monotherapy) and were analysed; 1,130 completed week 24. Most (76.9%) were female; mean time since RA diagnosis was 2.2 years (median 0.4 years); mean (standard deviation [SD]) DAS28-CRP was 5.7 (1.0); and 35.9% were using oral steroids at baseline. At week 24, significantly more patients in the FIL 200mg+MTX (81.0%; P Conclusion The JAK1 inhibitor FIL in combination with MTX led to significant improvements in RA signs and symptoms, physical function, and patient-reported outcomes compared to MTX alone and was well tolerated in patients with early active RA naïve to MTX. Clinically meaningful response to FIL occurred as early as 2 weeks after treatment initiation. Disclosures N. McKay: None. D. van der Heijde: Corporate appointments; Director of Imaging Rheumatology bv. Consultancies; Consultant for AbbVie, Amgen, Astellas, AstraZeneca, BMS, Boehringer Ingelheim, Celgene, Daiichi, Eli Lilly, Galapagos, Gilead, Glaxo-Smith-Kline, Janssen, Merck, Novartis, Pfizer, Regeneron, Roche, Sanofi, Takeda Pharmaceutical Company Ltd., UCB. R. Westhovens: Corporate appointments; Advisor for Celltrion and Galapagos/Gilead. Other; Advisor for Celltrion and Galapagos/Gilead. W.F.C. Rigby: Consultancies; Consultant for Gilead. D.W.T. Ching: Corporate appointments; Speaker for AbbVie. Member of speakers’ bureau; Speaker for AbbVie. B. Bartok: Corporate appointments; Employee of Gilead Sciences, Inc. Shareholder/stock ownership; Shareholder of Gilead Sciences, Inc. F. Matzkies: Corporate appointments; Employee of Gilead Sciences, Inc. Shareholder/stock ownership; Shareholder of Gilead Sciences, Inc. Z. Yin: Corporate appointments; Employee of Gilead Sciences, Inc. Shareholder/stock ownership; Shareholder of Gilead Sciences, Inc. Y. Guo: Corporate appointments; Employee of Gilead Sciences, Inc. Shareholder/stock ownership; Shareholder of Gilead Sciences, Inc. C. Tasset: Corporate appointments; Employee of Galapagos NV. J.S. Sundy: Corporate appointments; Employee of Gilead Sciences, Inc. Shareholder/stock ownership; Shareholder of Gilead Sciences, Inc. N. Mozaffarian: Corporate appointments; Employee of Gilead Sciences, Inc. Shareholder/stock ownership; Shareholder of Gilead Sciences, Inc. O.D. Messina: Honoraria; Received Honoraria from Pfizer, Amgen, and Americas Health Foundation (AHF). R.B.M. Landewé: Consultancies; Consultant for AbbVie, AstraZeneca, BMS, Galapagos, Pfizer, Eli Lilly, Novartis, and UCB. T. Atsumi: None. G.R. Burmester: Honoraria; Received Honoraria from AbbVie, Gilead, Eli Lilly, and Pfizer.

Background Filgotinib (FIL) is an orally administered, selective janus kinase 1 (JAK1) inhibitor in development for psoriatic arthritis (PsA). Efficacy and safety of FIL in patients with active PsA were evaluated in a 16-week phase 2 study (EQUATOR, NCT03101670). After 16 weeks, patients could roll-over to an Open Label Extension (OLE) Study (EQUATOR2, NCT03320876) for the purpose of evaluating long-term safety and efficacy. The aim of this analysis was to assess safety and efficacy through 52 weeks of exposure to filgotinib. Methods Patients who completed the randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled study were eligible for participation in the OLE, during which all patients received once daily (qd) open-label FIL 200mg. In this interim analysis of OLE, for the safety analysis, all data were included from the screening in the core study up to the data cut of 18 April 2019 in the OLE. For the efficacy analysis, all data until OLE Week 52 visit for each patient were included (observed case analysis). Results Of the 131 patients randomised and dosed in EQUATOR, 124 (95%) completed the study and 122 (93%) enrolled in EQUATOR2; 50% were female and mean age was 50. At this interim analysis, 106/122 (87%) remained in the OLE (premature discontinuations during OLE due to: 4 for safety, 11 withdrew consent, and 1 for other reasons). Cumulative patient years of exposure (PYE) on FIL were 160, median time on FIL was 66 weeks. Key safety data are summarised in Table 1. Key ≥Grade 2 treatment-emergent laboratory abnormalities seen with FIL arm (N = 128) compared with PBO (N = 66) were lymphocyte decrease 11.1% vs 4.5%, neutrophil decrease 5.5% vs 0%, ALT increase 1.6% vs 1.5% and creatinine increase 0.8% vs 0%, respectively. At week 52, 34% of the patients fulfilled criteria for minimal disease activity and 81%, 55%, and 33% of patients, respectively, achieved ACR20/50/70 responses. Conclusion FIL 200mg qd was generally well tolerated and the safety profile in PsA was comparable to that observed in the FIL rheumatoid arthritis studies. The data from this interim analysis suggest that further improvement of the patient condition can be expected beyond 16 weeks of treatment. Disclosures L. Coates: Other; Received support from Abbvie, Amgen, Celgene, Galapagos, Janssen, Lilly, Novartis, Pfizer, Prothena, Sun pharma, and UCB. P. Mease: Other; Received support from Abbvie, Amgen, BMS, Celgene, Galapagos, Genentech, Gilead, Janssen, Eli Lilly, Merck, Novartis, Pfizer, SUN, and UCB. D. Gladman: Other; Received support from Abbvie, Amgen, Celgene, Eli Lilly, Gilead, Janssen, Novartis, Pfizer, UCB, BMS, and Galapagos. F. Van den Bosch: Other; Received support from Abbvie, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Eli Lilly, Galapagos, Janssen, Merck, Novartis, Pfizer, and UCB. A. Rychlewska-Hanczewska: Other; Received support from Galapagos and Gilead Sciences. C. Tasset: Corporate appointments; Employee of Galapagos NV. L. Meuleners: Corporate appointments; Employee of Galapagos NV. M. Trivedi: Corporate appointments; Employee of Gilead Sciences, Inc. Shareholder/stock ownership; Shareholder of Gilead Sciences, Inc. Y. Guo: Corporate appointments; Employee of Gilead Sciences, Inc... Shareholder/stock ownership; Shareholder of Gilead Sciences, Inc. R. Besuyen: Other; Employee of Galapagos NV. P. Helliwell: Other; Received support from Abbvie, Amgen, Celgene, Galapagos, Janssen, Novartis, Pfizer, and UCB.

Background Filgotinib (FIL) is an oral, selective janus kinase 1 inhibitor under development for the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis (RA) and other inflammatory diseases. Safety and efficacy of FIL was investigated in the FINCH clinical program, which includes three Phase 3, summarized, summarized studies in patients with moderate to severely active RA. FINCH1: patients with inadequate response to MTX (NCT02889796); FINCH2: patients receiving conventional disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (csDMARDs) with inadequate response to biological DMARDs (NCT02873936); FINCH3: MTX-naïve patients initiating MTX ± FIL, or receiving FIL monotherapy (NCT02886728). We present pooled safety data up to 24 weeks (W24). Methods The FINCH studies enrolled patients with RA (2010 ACR/EULAR criteria), ≥6 swollen joints and ≥6 tender joints at screening and Day 1. Safety analyses included patients receiving ≥1 dose of study drug. Patients in FINCH 1 and 2 who did not experience at least a 20% improvement in both swollen joint count and tender joint count by W14 discontinued study drug and switched to standard of care. W24 safety data from all studies were aggregated and ummarized. Key safety endpoints were treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs), serious TEAEs, TEAEs of interest, deaths and treatment-emergent laboratory abnormalities. Results 3,452 patients were evaluated; 2,088 received FIL. At W24, the frequency of TEAEs and TEAEs of interest were similar for those who received FIL and those in the control groups (Table 1). Most TEAEs were infections. Laboratory abnormality rates were similar between FIL and control groups, and were mild to moderate (grades 1 and 2). Overall, the frequency of major adverse cardiac events, herpes zoster virus, deep vein thrombosis and pulmonary embolism was low, and similar across groups. Conclusion Pooled data from this large database highlights the favourable safety and tolerability profile of FIL in patients with RA both as monotherapy and in combination with MTX/csDMARD. Disclosures D. Walker: Other; Received support from Lilly, Pfizer, Novartis and Roche. K. Winthrop: Grants/research support; Received grants for clinical research from Bristol-Myers Squibb Company and Insmed Incorporated. Other; Received support from AbbVie, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Gilead, Janssen, Eli Lilly & Co., MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche-Chugai, Sanofi, and UCB. M.C. Genovese: Other; Gilead Sciences Inc., Galapagos NV, AbbVie Inc. Eli Lilly and Company, Pfizer. B.G. Combe: Honoraria; Honoraria from AbbVie, BMS, Gilead, Janssen, Eli Lilly and Co., MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche-Chugai, Sanofi and UCB. Y. Tanaka: Honoraria; Received from Daiichi-Sankyo, Astellas, Chugai, Eli Lilly and Co., Pfizer, AbbVie, YL Biologics, BMS, Takeda, Misubishi-Tanabe, Novartis, Eisai, Janssen, Teijin. Grants/research support; Received grant support from Asahi-Kasei, Mitsubishi-Tanabe, Chugai, Takeda, Sanofi, BMS, UCB, Daiichi-Sankyo, Eisai, and Ono. A. Kivitiz: Consultancies; Consultant for AbbVie, Celgene, Horizon, Janssen, Merck, Novartis, Pfizer, UCB, Genzyme,Sanofi, Regeneron, SUN Pharma Advanced Research, Boehringer Ingelheim and Flexion. Shareholder/stock ownership; Shareholder of Novartis. F. Matzkies: Corporate appointments; Employee of Gilead Sciences, Inc. Shareholder/stock ownership; Shareholder of Gilead Sciences, Inc. B. Bartok: Corporate appointments; Employee of Gilead Sciences, Inc. Shareholder/stock ownership; Shareholder of Gilead Sciences, Inc. L. Ye: Corporate appointments; Employee of Gilead Sciences, Inc. Shareholder/stock ownership; Shareholder of Gilead Sciences, Inc. Y. Guo: Corporate appointments; Gilead Sciences, Inc. Shareholder/stock ownership; Gilead Sciences, Inc. C. Tasset: Corporate appointments; Employee of Galapagos NV. J.S. Sundy: Corporate appointments; Employee of Gilead Sciences, Inc. Shareholder/stock ownership; Shareholder of Gilead Sciences, Inc. E. Keystone: Consultancies; AbbVie, Amgen, AstraZeneca Pharma, Biotest, BMS Canada, Celltrion, Crescendo, Bioscience, F.Hoffman-La Roche Inc., Genentech, Janssen, Eli Lilly and Co., Merck, Pfizer, PuraPharm, Sandoz,, Sanofi-Aventis, Sanofi- Genzyme Samsung Bioepsis, and UCB. Other; AbbVie, Amgen, AstraZeneca Pharma, Biotest, BMS Canada, Celltrion, Crescendo, Bioscience, F.Hoffman-La Roche Inc., Genentech, Janssen, Eli Lilly and Co., Merck, Pfizer, PuraPharm, Sandoz,, Sanofi-Aventis, Sanofi-Genzyme, Samsumg Bioepsis, and UCB. R. Westhovens: Corporate appointments; An investigator and advisor for Celltrion and Galapagos/Gilead. W. Rigby: Consultancies; Consultancy for Gilead. G.R. Burmester: Consultancies; Consultancy from AbbVie, Gilead, Eli Lilly, and Pfizer. Honoraria; Honoraria from AbbVie, Gilead, Eli Lilly, and Pfizer.

Background Cytopoenias are common in patients treated for rheumatoid arthritis (RA) with non-janus kinase 1 (JAK1)-selective inhibitors, possibly due to JAK2-mediated haematopoietic growth factor inhibition. We investigated the extent of cytopoenia in patients with active RA, despite prior treatment with biological disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (bDMARDs), treated with the JAK1-selective inhibitor filgotinib (FIL), in a Phase 3 trial (FINCH2; NCT02873936). Methods In the double-blind, Phase 3 FINCH2 trial, patients were randomised 1:1:1 to receive oral FIL 200mg, 100mg, or placebo (PBO) once daily for 24 weeks (W) + conventional synthetic DMARDs. We assessed shifts from baseline at 12 and 24 weeks in haemoglobin, platelets, neutrophils and lymphocytes. Results 448 patients were treated: FIL 200mg, n = 147; FIL 100mg, n = 153; PBO, n = 148. Overall, haemoglobin, platelet, lymphocyte and neutrophil levels remained consistent throughout the study. At baseline, 129 (28.8%), 4 (0.9%), 10 (2.2%) and 26 (5.8%) patients had mild-moderate low levels of haemoglobin, platelets, neutrophils and lymphocytes, respectively, and 5 (1.1%) had severely low levels of lymphocytes. Of the patients with mild-moderate low haemoglobin levels at baseline, 10-13% achieved normal levels by W24 vs 8% receiving PBO (Table). Of those with normal baseline haemoglobin levels, 6-10% had mild low levels at W24. All patients with baseline mild-moderate low platelets and neutrophils had normal levels at W24, except one patient with mild neutropoenia receiving FIL 100mg. Of the patients with normal platelet and neutrophil levels at baseline, >94% maintained these at W24 in all treatment groups. By W24, 3.2%, 5.2% and 2.2% of patients treated with FIL 200mg, FIL 100mg and PBO, respectively in the baseline mild-moderate subgroup and 1.7% in the severe subgroup treated with FIL 100mg had normal lymphocyte counts. Conclusion In this study, most patients in the baseline normal cell count subgroups maintained this status over 24 weeks of FIL treatment. Of the patients with mild-to-moderately low haemoglobin at baseline, >9% shifted towards haemoglobin normalisation. Similar patterns of improvement from baseline were observed for platelet, lymphocyte and neutrophil counts. FIL appears not to increase the incidence of cytopenias in patients with active RA despite prior biologic therapies. Disclosures D. Walker: Other; Received support from Lilly, Pfizer, Novartis, Roche. M.C. Genovese: Other; Received support from Gilead Sciences Inc., Galapagos NV, AbbVie Inc. Eli Lilly and Company, Pfizer. K. Kalunian: Grants/research support; Grand support from Gilead. J. Gottenberg: None. B. Bartok: Corporate appointments; Employee of Gilead Sciences, Inc. Shareholder/stock ownership; Shareholder of Gilead Sciences, Inc. Y. Tan: Corporate appointments; Employee of Gilead Sciences, Inc... Shareholder/stock ownership; Shareholder of Gilead Sciences, Inc. Y. Guo: Corporate appointments; Employee of Gilead Sciences, Inc. Shareholder/stock ownership; Shareholder of Gilead Sciences, Inc. C. Tasset: Other; Employee of Galapagos. J.S. Sundy: Corporate appointments; Employee of Gilead Sciences, Inc. Shareholder/stock ownership; Shareholder of Gilead Sciences, Inc. K. de Vlam: None. T. Takeuchi: None.

Background Filgotinib (FIL) is an oral, potent, selective Janus kinase 1 inhibitor that has shown good efficacy and was well tolerated for treatment of rheumatoid arthritis (RA). The objective of this study was to evaluate efficacy and safety of FIL treatment in patients with RA who have had an inadequate response to methotrexate (MTX). Methods This Phase 3, double-blind, active- and placebo (PBO)-controlled study randomised patients with active RA (3:3:2:3) to FIL 200mg, FIL 100mg, adalimumab [ADA] 40mg every 2 weeks, or PBO daily for up to 52 weeks; results through week 24 are presented. Patients also received background MTX. Primary efficacy endpoint was proportion of patients achieving ACR20 at week 12; additional clinical assessments included ACR50 and ACR70 and DAS28-CRP score ≤3.2 and 50% of ADA response) was performed for DAS28-CRP ≤3.2 and Results Of 1,759 patients randomised, 1,755 received study drug: 475 FIL 200mg; 480 FIL 100mg; 325 ADA; and 475 PBO, of which 89.5%, 90.4%, 88.9%, and 81.3%, respectively, completed 24 weeks of study drug. 81.8% were female, mean (standard deviation [SD]) duration of RA was 7.8 (7.6) years, and mean (SD) DAS28-CRP was 5.7 (0.9). At week 12, significantly more patients in the FIL 200mg and 100mg arms achieved an ACR20 improvement vs PBO (Table 1). More patients receiving FIL achieved ACR50 and ACR70 improvements, DAS28-CRP scores ≤3.2 and Conclusion FIL 200mg and 100mg led to significant improvement in signs and symptoms of RA, prevented radiographic progression, improved physical function compared to PBO, and was well-tolerated. Efficacy of FIL 200mg was non-inferior to ADA based on DAS28-CRP ≤3.2. Disclosures D. Walker: Other; Received support from Lilly, Pfizer, Novartis and Roche. B.G. Combe: Honoraria; Received honoraria from AbbVie, BMS, Gilead, Janssen, Eli Lilly and Co., MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche-Chugai, Sanofi and UCB. A.J. Kivitiz: Consultancies; Consultant to AbbVie, Celgene, Horizon, Jansses, Merck, Novartis, Pfizer, UCB, Genzyme, Sanofi, Regeneron, SUN Pharma Advanced Research, Boehringer Ingelheim, Flexion and Novartis. Shareholder/stock ownership; Shareholder of Novartis. Y. Tanaka: Honoraria; Honoraria from Daiichi-Sankyo, Astellas, Chugai, Eli Lilly ans Co., Pfizer, AbbVie, YL Biologics, BMS, Takeda, Misubishi-Tanabe, Novartis, Eisai, Janssen, Teijin. Grants/research support; Grant support from Asahi-Kasei, Mitsubishi-Tanabe, Chugai, Takeda, Sanofi, BMS, UCB, Daiichi-Sankyo, Eisai, Ono, Astellas, Eli Lilly, Pfizer, Abbvi and YL. D. van der Heijde: Corporate appointments; Director of Imaging Rheumatology bv. Consultancies; Consultant for consultant for AbbVie, Amgen, Astellas, AstraZeneca, BMS, Boehringer Ingelheim, Celgene, Daiichi, Eli Lilly, Galapagos, Gilead, Glaxo-Smith-Kline, Janssen, Merck, Novartis, Pfizer, Regeneron, Roche, Sanofi, Takeda, and UCB. F. Matzkies: Corporate appointments; Employee of Gilead Sciences, Inc. Shareholder/stock ownership; Shareholder of Gilead Sciences, Inc. B. Bartok: Corporate appointments; Employee of Gilead Sciences, Inc. Shareholder/stock ownership; Shareholder of Gilead Sciences, Inc. L. Ye: Corporate appointments; Employee of Gilead Sciences, Inc.. Shareholder/stock ownership; Shareholder of Gilead Sciences, Inc. Y. Guo: Corporate appointments; Employee of Gilead Sciences, Inc. Shareholder/stock ownership; Shareholder of Gilead Sciences, Inc. C. Tasset: Corporate appointments; Employee of Galapagos NV. J.S. Sundy: Corporate appointments; Employee of Gilead Sciences, Inc. Shareholder/stock ownership; Shareholder of Gilead Sciences, Inc. N. Mozaffarian: Corporate appointments; Employee of Gilead Sciences, Inc. Shareholder/stock ownership; Shareholder of Gilead Sciences, Inc. R.B.M. Landewé: Consultancies; Consultant for AbbVie, AstraZeneca, BMS, Galapagos, Pfizer, Eli Lilly, Novartis, and UCB.. S. Bae: None. E.C. Keystone: Consultancies; Consultant for AbbVie, Amgen, AstraZeneca Pharma, Biotest, BMS Canada, Celltrion, Crescendo, Bioscience, F.Hoffman-La Roche Inc., Genentech, Janssen, Eli Lilly and Co., Merck, Pfizer,, PuraPharm, Sandoz, Sanofi-Aventis, Sanofi-Genzyme, Samsumg Bioepsis, and UCB. P. Nash: Consultancies; Consultant for AbbVie, BMS, Jansses, Pfizer, Roche, Lilly, Sanofi, MSD, Novartis, Celgene and Gilead.

Background Filgotinib (FIL), an oral JAK1-selective inhibitor, was safe and effective in FINCH2, a randomised, double-blind, placebo (PBO)-controlled, phase 3 study in patients with active rheumatoid arthritis (RA) who had an inadequate response to methotrexate (MTX) and ≥1 biologic disease-modifying antirheumatic drug. A longitudinal study of cytokines from patients in FINCH2 was conducted to identify RA-associated biomarkers related to bone biology, immune cell migration, and inflammation that are altered by FIL therapy; and FIL-associated biomarkers that correlate with clinical response (DAS28CRP, swollen and tender joint counts, pain, and fatigue). Methods Plasma, serum and urine samples from RA patients (n = 449) receiving FIL (100mg, 200mg) or PBO once daily plus MTX were analysed at baseline (BL) and week 12 (W12) for 42 disease-relevant cytokines using validated, commercially available single- or multiplex assays. PBO corrected on-treatment changes in cytokine levels from BL to W12 were compared between treatment arms (Wilcoxon rank sum). Spearman rank correlation was used to compare changes in cytokine level from BL to W12 and clinical response. P-values Results At W12, 18 of 42 cytokines significantly decreased with FIL 100mg treatment relative to PBO; FIL 200mg decreased these cytokines to a similar or greater degree. An additional 6 cytokines were significantly decreased by FIL 200mg. Conversely, 2 cytokines increased relative to PBO with FIL 100mg, and 6 cytokines increased with FIL 200mg (sIL-6R, IL10, GMCSF, IL2, leptin, and IL17A). Biomarkers most significantly modulated by FIL 200mg (p < 0.0001) included markers related to bone biology (MMP1 [-22.8%], MMP3 [-24.7%], CTX1 [-27.4% ], and NTX [-16.4%]), immune cell migration (VCAM1 [-20.0%], ICAM1 [-14.2%], CXCL13 [-45.0%], and CXCL10 [-32.3%]), and inflammation (TNFRI[-20.7%], CRP [-77.4%], SAA [-61.8%], and resistin [-20.2%]). Hierarchical clustering of BL biomarker levels revealed distinct groups of cytokines that were strongly correlated with each other. Among them, SAA, IL6 and CXCL10, were significantly positively correlated with each other (rho>0.6) and with RA disease activity (DAS28CRP) at BL (rho>0.3). Biomarkers, including CRP (IL6, SAA), PainVAS (CRP, SAA), and SJC28 (CRP, IL6, CXCL10), were also significantly correlated with individual components of DAS28CRP. Several biomarkers associated with RA disease activity at BL were decreased with FIL at W12 relative to PBO (FIL 100mg: CRP [-48.7%], SAA [-36.9%], and IL6 [-2.6%] and FIL 200mg: CRP [-77.4%], SAA [-61.8%], IL6 [-13.6%], CXCL10 [-32.3%]), suggesting FIL impacts these disease activities at a molecular level. Conclusion Twelve weeks of FIL treatment significantly reduced 24 disease-relevant cytokines in patients with active RA. Effects were dose-dependent and suggest a shift toward restored immune homeostasis. Findings are consistent with the clinical efficacy of FIL in FINCH2. Disclosures P.C. Taylor: Consultancies; Consultant for AbbVie, BMS, Jansses, Pfizer, Roche, Lilly, Sanofi, MSD, Novartis, Celgene and Gilead. E. Elboudwarej: Corporate appointments; Employee of Gilead Sciences, Inc. Shareholder/stock ownership; Shareholder of Gilead Sciences, Inc. W. Li: Corporate appointments; Employee of Gilead Sciences, Inc. Shareholder/stock ownership; Shareholder of Gilead Sciences, Inc. R.E. Hawtin: Corporate appointments; Employee of Gilead Sciences, Inc. Shareholder/stock ownership; Shareholder of Gilead Sciences, Inc. J. Liu: Corporate appointments; Employee of Gilead Sciences, Inc. Shareholder/stock ownership; Shareholder of Gilead Sciences, Inc. A.M. Mirza: Corporate appointments; Employee of Gilead Sciences, Inc. Shareholder/stock ownership; Shareholder of Gilead Sciences, Inc.

Filgotinib is a selective JAK1 (Janus kinase) inhibitor, showed efficacy in patients suffering from moderate-to-severe rheumatoid arthritis. In this paper, we present the data on the development and validation of a sensitive, selective and high-throughput LC-MS/MS (liquid chromatography with tandem mass spectrometry) method for the quantitation of filgotinib from rat dried blood spot (DBS) cards. To the DBS disc cards, 0.2 % formic acid enriched with internal standard (IS) was added and sonicated. Thereafter the extraction of filgotinib and the IS (tofacitinib) was accomplished using ethyl acetate as an extraction solvent. The resolution of filgotinib and the IS was achieved on a Gemini C18 column with an isocratic mobile phase, which is a mixture of 0.2 % formic acid:acetonitrile (20:80, v/v) at a flow-rate of 0.9 mL/min. The total run time was 2.90 min and the retention time of filgotinib and the IS was ~1.31 and 0.89 min, respectively. Filgotinib and the IS were analyzed using positive ion scan mode and parent-daughter mass to charge ion (m/z) transition of 426.3®291.3 and m/z 313.2®149.2, respectively, for quantitation. The calibration range was 1.37-1937 ng/mL. No matrix effect and carry over were observed. All the validation parameters met the acceptance criteria. The validated method has been applied to a pharmacokinetic study in rats. A good correlation between DBS and plasma concentrations for filgotinib was observed.

The relative efficacy and tolerability of tofacitinib, baricitinib, upadacitinib, and filgotinib compared to adalimumab were assessed in rheumatoid arthritis (RA) patients with inadequate responses to methotrexate (MTX).We performed a Bayesian network meta-analysis to combine direct and indirect evidence from randomized controlled trials (RCTs) to examine the efficacy and safety of tofacitinib, baricitinib, upadacitinib, filgotinib, and adalimumab in RA patients with inadequate responses to MTX.Four RCTs comprising 5451 patients met the inclusion criteria. Baricitinib 4 mg + MTX and upadacitinib 15 mg + MTX showed a significantly higher American College of Rheumatology 20% (ACR20) response rate than adalimumab 40 mg + MTX. Ranking probability based on the surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA) indicated that baricitinib 4 mg + MTX had the highest probability of being the best treatment for achieving the ACR20 response rate, followed by upadacitinib 15 mg + MTX, tofacitinib 5 mg + MTX, filgotinib 200 mg + MTX, filgotinib 100 mg + MTX, adalimumab 40 mg + MTX, and placebo + MTX. Upadacitinib 15 mg + MTX and baricitinib 4 mg + MTX showed significantly higher ACR50 and ACR70 response rates than adalimumab 40 mg + MTX. For herpes zoster infection, the ranking probability based on SUCRA indicated that placebo + MTX was likely to be the safest treatment, followed by filgotinib 200 mg + MTX, filgotinib 100 mg + MTX, adalimumab 40 mg + MTX, tofacitinib 5 mg + MTX, upadacitinib 15 mg + MTX, and baricitinib 4 mg + MTX. No statistically significant differences were found between the intervention groups in terms of safety.In RA patients with an inadequate response to MTX, baricitinib 4 mg + MTX and upadacitinib 15 mg + MTX showed the highest ACR response rates, suggesting a difference in efficacy among the different JAK inhibitors.ZIEL DER ARBEIT: Bei Patienten mit rheumatoider Arthritis (RA) und inadäquatem Ansprechen auf Methotrexat (Mtx) wurde die relative Wirksamkeit und Verträglichkeit von Tofacitinib, Baricitinib, Upadacitinib und Filgotinib im Vergleich zu Adalimumab untersucht.Die Autoren führten eine Bayes-Netzwerk-Metaanalyse durch, um direkte und indirekte Evidenz aus randomisierten kontrollierten Studien (RCT) zu kombinieren und so die Wirksamkeit und Sicherheit von Tofacitinib, Baricitinib, Upadacitinib, Filgotinib und Adalimumab bei RA-Patienten mit inadäquatem Ansprechen auf MTX zu untersuchen.Die Einschlusskriterien wurden von 4 RCT mit 5451 Patienten erfüllt. Unter Baricitinib 4 mg + MTX und Upadacitinib 15 mg + MTX zeigte sich eine signifikant höhere ACR20-Ansprechrate (gemäß American College of Rheumatology) als unter Adalimumab 40 mg + MTX. Wie die Rangfolgewahrscheinlichkeit, basierend auf der Oberfläche unter der kumulativen Rangfolgenkurve (SUCRA, „surface under the cumulative ranking curve“), ergab, stellte Baricitinib 4 mg + MTX mit größter Wahrscheinlichkeit die beste Behandlung zur Erzielung der ACR20-Ansprechrate dar, es folgten Upadacitinib 15 mg + MTX, Tofacitinib 5 mg + MTX, Filgotinib 200 mg + MTX, Filgotinib 100 mg + MTX, Adalimumab 40 mg + MTX und Placebo + MTX. Upadacitinib 15 mg + MTX und Baricitinib 4 mg + MTX wiesen signifikant höhere ACR50- und ACR70-Ansprechraten auf als Adalimumab 40 mg + MTX. In Bezug auf eine Herpes-zoster-Infektion ergab die auf SUCRA basierende Rangfolgewahrscheinlichkeit, dass Placebo + MTX am ehesten die sicherste Therapie darstellte, dem folgten Filgotinib 200 mg + MTX, Filgotinib 100 mg + MTX, Adalimumab 40 mg + MTX, Tofacitinib 5 mg + MTX, Upadacitinib 15 mg + MTX und Baricitinib 4 mg + MTX. Es wurden keine statistisch signifikanten Unterschiede zwischen den Interventionsgruppen hinsichtlich der Sicherheit festgestellt.Bei RA-Patienten mit inadäquatem Ansprechen auf MTX ergaben Baricitinib 4 mg + MTX und Upadacitinib 15 mg + MTX die höchsten ACR-Ansprechraten, was ein Hinweis auf einen Unterschied in der Wirksamkeit der verschiedenen JAK-Inhibitoren sein könnte.

Filgotinib is a selective JAK1 (Janus kinase) inhibitor, filed in Japan for the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis. In this paper, we report a validated liquid chromatography coupled with tandem mass spectrometry for the quantification of filgotinib in rat plasma using tofacitinib as an internal standard (IS) as per the Food and Drug Administration regulatory guidelines. Filgotinib and the IS were extracted from rat plasma using ethyl acetate as an extraction solvent and chromatographed using an isocratic mobile phase (0.2% formic acid:acetonitrile; 20:80, v/v) at a flow rate of 0.9 mL/min on a Gemini C18 column. Filgotinib and the IS were eluted at ~1.31 and 0.89 min, respectively. The MS/MS ion transitions monitored were m/z 426.3 → 291.3 and m/z 313.2 → 149.2 for filgotinib and the IS, respectively. The calibration range was 0.78-1924 ng/mL. No matrix effect and carryover were observed. Intra- and inter-day accuracies and precisions were within the acceptance range. Filgotinib was stable for three freeze-thaw cycles: on bench-top up to 6 h, in an autosampler up to 21 h, and at -80°C for 1 month. This novel method has been applied to a pharmacokinetic study in rats.

Luca Navarini,1,* Damiano Currado,1,* Luisa Costa,2 Marco Tasso,2 Maria Sole Chimenti,3 Francesco Caso2 1Unit of Rheumatology, Immunology and Clinical Medicine, Università Campus Bio-Medico Di Roma, Rome, Italy; 2Rheumatology Unit, Department of Clinical Medicine and Surgery, School of Medicine and Surgery, University of Naples Federico II, Naples, Italy; 3Rheumatology, Allergology and Clinical Immunology, Department of Systems Medicine, University of Rome Tor Vergata, Rome, Italy*These authors contributed equally to this workCorrespondence: Francesco CasoRheumatology Unit, Department of Clinical Medicine and Surgery, School of Medicine and Surgery, University of Naples Federico II, Via Pansini 5, Naples 80131, ItalyTel +39 081 7463773Fax +39 081 5463445Email francescocaso1@yahoo.itAbstract: In recent years, different studies have shown in psoriatic arthritis (PsA), the pathogenetic role of multiple cytokines other than tumor necrosis factor-α, such as interleukin-17 (IL-17), and IL-23 and dysfunction of Janus kinase (JAK)-signal family pathway. These molecules also represent the target of recently developed biologic (bDMARDs) and targeted synthetic disease modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs) (tsDMARDs) currently investigated in several Phase II and III randomized controlled trials (RCTs). This review examines the therapeutic efficacy and safety of most recent developed IL-17, IL-23 and JAK inhibitors and highlights how these new PsA therapies are going to revolutionize the management of PsA in the next few years. Ongoing RCTs of these molecules in PsA are also described. Available literature on new anti-IL-17 and anti-IL-23 agents and JAK inhibitors demonstrates the potential role of these molecules as effective therapeutic strategies across multiple PsA clinical domains, along with an acceptable tolerability and safety profile, thus expanding the treatment options available for PsA patients. Of note, other molecules are under investigation, and among those, potential therapeutic strategies seem to be represented by single antibodies blocking simultaneously two cytokines, the agents inhibiting mammalian target of rapamycin (mTOR), receptor retinoic acid receptor-related orphan receptor gamma (RORγt), A3 adenosine receptor (A3 AR), and K+ channel voltage channel inhibitors. Remarkable progress has been made in PsA pharmacotherapy, and novel bDMARDs targeting IL17A and tsDMARDs (JAK-inhibitors) represent promising therapies. More clinical trials are needed to better characterize the efficacy and safety profile of these therapeutic agents in PsA treatment.Keywords: bDMARDs, filgotinib, IL-17 inhibitors, IL-23 inhibitors, JAK-inhibitors, psoriatic arthritis, tofacitinib, tsDMARDs, upadacitinib

Introduction: In recent years, different studies regarding psoriatic arthritis (PsA) have shown the pathogenetic role of dysfunction of signaling pathways involving the phosphodiesterase-4 enzyme and transcription factors or enzymes belonging to the kinase (JAK)–signal family pathway. These also represent the target of several drugs known as targeted synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (tsDMARDs). Areas covered: The authors performed a systematic literature search using the PubMed database, as well as through retrieving data from randomized controlled trials, their post-hoc analysis, and pooled data analysis on the efficacy and safety profile of the PDE4 inhibitor (PDE4i), apremilast, and the inhibitors of JAK (JAKis), tofacitinib, filgotinib, baricitinib, and upadacitinib, in PsA. Expert opinion: In PsA, the PDE4i, apremilast, and the JAKi, tofacitinib, are effective across multiple clinical domains and have an acceptable tolerability profile, thus expanding the treatment options available for PsA patients. Apremilast and tofacitinib show several advantages mainly represented by their oral administration, a fast onset of action, and a short half-life. Data on tsDMARDs in PsA are still limited, and randomized trials and real-life studies are advocated.

ObjectivesReview of efficacy and safety of Janus kinase (JAK) inhibition in immune-mediated inflammatory diseases (IMIDs).MethodsA systematic literature research (SLR) of all publications on JAK inhibitors (JAKi) treatment published until March 2019 using MEDLINE, EMBASE and the Cochrane Library. Efficacy and safety were assessed in randomised controlled trials (RCTs), integrating long-term extension periods additionally for safety evaluation.Results3454 abstracts were screened with 85 included in the final analysis (efficacy and RCT safety: n=72; safety only: n=13). Efficacy of RCTs investigating tofacitinib (TOFA, n=27), baricitinib (BARI, n=9), upadacitinib (UPA, n=14), filgotinib (FILGO, n=7), decernotinib (DEC, n=3) and peficitinib (PEF, n=7) was evaluated. Six head-to-head trials comparing JAKi with tumour necrosis factor inhibitors (TNFi) were included. Efficacy of JAKi was shown in rheumatoid arthritis (RA) for all agents, psoriatic arthritis (TOFA, FILGO), ankylosing spondylitis (TOFA, FILGO), systemic lupus erythematosus (BARI), chronic plaque psoriasis (TOFA, BARI, PEF), ulcerative colitis (TOFA, UPA), Crohn’s disease (UPA, FILGO) and atopic dermatitis (TOFA, BARI, UPA). Safety analysis of 72 RCTs, one cohort study and 12 articles on long-term extension studies showed increased risks for infections, especially herpes zoster, serious infections and numerically higher rates of venous thromboembolic events. No increased malignancy rates or major adverse cardiac events were observed.ConclusionJAKi provide good efficacy compared to placebo (and to TNFi in RA and Pso) across various IMIDs with an acceptable safety profile. This SLR informed the task force on points to consider for the treatment of IMIDs with JAKi with the available evidence.

Aims Filgotinib (GS-6034, formerly GLPG0634) is an oral, selective Janus kinase 1 (JAK1) inhibitor that showed early response and sustained efficacy in patients with rheumatoid arthritis and with Crohn's disease. The aim of the present study was to investigate the impact of age and renal impairment (RI) on the pharmacokinetics (PK) of filgotinib and its main metabolite. Methods The effect of age was assessed in two groups of 10 elderly healthy subjects (65-74 and ≥75 years of age) and a control group of 10 younger healthy subjects (40-50 years of age). The impact of RI was investigated in three groups of subjects with mild (n = 6), moderate (n = 6) and severe (n = 3) RI [estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) 60-89, 30-59 and 15-29 ml min-1 1.73 m-2 , respectively] and a control group (n = 9) with normal renal function (eGFR ≥90 ml min-1 1.73 m-2 ). The PK of filgotinib and its metabolite were evaluated following filgotinib 100 mg once-daily doses for 10 days. Results At steady state, the exposure [area under the concentration-time curve over the dosing interval (AUC0-24 h )] of filgotinib and its metabolite was moderately higher (1.45- and 1.33-fold, respectively) in the elderly subjects (≥75 years) compared with younger subjects. Renal clearance for filgotinib and its metabolite decreased with the degree of RI, leading to a maximum increase in AUC0-24 h of 1.54-fold for filgotinib and 2.74-fold for the metabolite in subjects with severe RI. Filgotinib was generally safe and well tolerated. Conclusions Age and mild to moderate impairment of renal function had limited impact on the PK of filgotinib. In subjects with severe RI, the exposure to the metabolite of filgotinib was elevated, consistent with its renal elimination pathway.

Background: There is a great unmet clinical need for efficacious, tolerable, economical and orally administrated drugs for the treatment of inflammatory bowel disease (IBD). New therapeutic avenues have become possible including the development of medications that target specific genetic pathways found to be relevant in other immune mediated diseases. Aims: To provide an overview of recent clinical trials for new generation oral targeted medications that may have a future role in IBD management. Methods: Pubmed and Medline searches were performed up to 01/03/18 using keywords: ‘IBD’, ‘UC’, ‘CD’, ‘inflammatory bowel disease’ ‘ulcerative colitis’, Crohn’s disease’ in combination with ‘phase’, ‘study’, ‘trial’, and ‘oral’. A manual search of the clinical trial register, article reference lists, abstracts from meetings of Digestive Disease Week, United European Gastroenterology Week and ECCO congress were also conducted. Results: In randomised controlled trials primary efficacy endpoints were met for tofacitinib (JAK 1/3 inhibitor-phase III), upadacitinib (JAK 1 inhibitor-phase II) and AJM-300 (α4-integrin antagonist-phase II) in ulcerative colitis. Ozanimod (S1P receptor agonist-phase II) also demonstrated clinical remission. For Crohn’s disease, filgotinib (JAK1 inhibitor-phase II) met primary endpoints and laquinimod (quinolone-3-carboxide small molecule-phase II) was also efficacious. Trials using mongersen (SMAD7 inhibitor) and vidofludimus (dihydroorotate dehydrogenase inhibitor) have been halted. Conclusions: This is potentially the start of an exciting new era in which multiple therapeutic options are at the disposal of physicians to treat IBD on an individualised basis. Head-to-head studies with existing treatments and longer term safety data are needed for this to be possible.

Inflammatory bowel diseases, such as Crohn's disease (CD) and ulcerative colitis (UC), are widespread diseases (with an estimated 2.2 million Europeans affected), and even populations previously considered 'low risk' (such as Japan and India) are witnessing an increasing incidence. CD is a chronic, progressive immunologically driven disease, with an evolution characterized by succession of periods of progression and remission. New physiopathological pathways are continuously being discovered, the more we understand about how the disease appears and progresses, the more targets become available for the development of novel therapies. Areas covered: Filgotinib is one of these promising new therapies; this article discusses the currently available data. We used an exhaustive search of the PubMed database to corroborate information regarding its chemical characteristics, and the studies evaluating clinical efficacy and safety. Expert opinion: Up to now, the phase-II study evaluating Filgotinib yielded very promising results in moderate to severe CD patients, with good clinical response, mucosal healing, while having few and moderate adverse effects, both in anti-TNF naïve and resistant patients. Phase-III studies are still ongoing and will help decide whether Filgotinib will be a worthwhile drug in the treatment of CD and the best way to use it.

Background: Crohn’s disease (CD) is a chronic immune-mediated disorder of the gastrointestinal tract. The pathophysiological understanding of this disease is limited and no curative therapy is available so far. Therefore, most patients require long-lasting or even life-long immunosuppressive therapies for the suppression of symptoms to improve quality of life and reduction of long-term risks. However, in a relevant subgroup of patients, these therapeutic goals cannot be sufficiently attained. Summary: Clinically established therapies in active CD comprise corticosteroids and immunosuppressants such as azathioprine. After the introduction of anti-TNFα (Tumor necrosis factor alpha) antibodies, other biologicals (e.g., vedolizumab and ustekinumab) have also been approved. New drugs in the pipeline like filgotinib, upadacitinib, risankizumab or rifaximin could improve the therapy of CD in the near future. Thus, an individualized therapy management, based on optimal selection of therapeutic agents will become more important. Additionally, the local application of mesenchymal stem cells might be helpful in the management of fistulas. Key Messages: The targeted biological therapeutic agents (anti-TNFα antibodies, vedolizumab, ustekinumab) are well established for therapy in CD. There are several new substances in the pipeline with promising results in phase II trials (filgotinib, rifaximin, risankizumab, upadacitinib). The upcoming extension of the therapeutic arsenal will require methods for an optimized selection of substances, thus enabling a more individualized therapy.

Background:The Janus kinase-1 preferential inhibitor filgotinib (FIL) improved rheumatoid arthritis (RA) signs and symptoms in phase (P)3 trials.1–3 RA elevates cardiovascular disease risk; statins are used to reduce risk.Objectives:To assess safety of statin and filgotinib coadministration across the clinical program.Methods:Patients (pts) meeting 2010 ACR/EULAR RA criteria in P2 DARWIN 1–2 (D1–2; NCT01888874, NCT01894516), P3 FINCH 1–3 (F1–3; NCT02889796, NCT02873936, NCT02886728), and long-term extensions DARWIN 3 and FINCH 4 (D3, F4; NCT02065700, NCT03025308) receiving FIL 100 mg (FIL100) QD, FIL 200 mg QD (FIL200), adalimumab (ADA), methotrexate (MTX), or placebo (PBO) were included. Events related to statin use were analysed as exposed by treatment received. N and % were provided.Week (W)12 PBO-controlled safety analysis included pts receiving FIL100, FIL200, or PBO for ≤12W (D1–2, F1–2); as-treated safety analysis included pts receiving long-term FIL100 QD (n=1647), FIL200 QD (n=2267), ADA (n=325), MTX (n=416), or PBO (n=781) (D1–3, F1–4); P3 as-randomised analysis included data up to W52 (F1–3) per assigned treatment.Results:In each arm, similar proportions of pts took statins at baseline (9.4%–11.9%); initiation during study was low (1.2%–6.8%). Through W12 in PBO-controlled analysis, mean creatine phosphokinase (CPK; Figure 1), alanine aminotransferase (ALT), and aspartate aminotransferase (AST) levels were similar regardless of statin use and remained within normal levels across all arms.Mean baseline ALT and AST levels were 20–23 and 20–22 U/L, respectively; at W12, ALT and AST ranged from 22–24 and 20–25 U/L, respectively. Graded CPK, ALT, and AST elevations are in Table 1.Table 1.Graded laboratory abnormalities at week 12 by baseline statin use in PBO-controlled analysisConcomitantNoneFIL200(n=68)FIL100(n=95)PBO(n=93)FIL200 (n=709)FIL100(n=693)PBO(n=688)CPK increased*598281562549537G1 (≤2.5×ULN)10 (16.9)13 (15.9)6 (7.4)71 (12.6)47 (8.6)18 (3.4)G2 (>2.5 to 5×ULN)3 (5.1)006 (1.1)2 (0.4)3 (0.6)G3 (>5 to 10×ULN)0001 (0.2)03 (0.6)G4 (>10×ULN)0001 (0.2)2 (0.4)0AST increased**689492708692684G1 (≤3.0×ULN)9 (13.2)11 (11.7)7 (7.6)97 (13.7)79 (11.4)60 (8.8)G2 (>3.0 to 5.0×ULN)0003 (0.4)2 (0.3)3 (0.4)G3 (>5.0 to 20.0×ULN)01 (1.1)02 (0.3)00G4 (>20.0×ULN)000000ALT increased**689492708692684G1 (≤3.0×ULN)13 (19.1)14 (14.9)13 (14.1)98 (13.8)92 (13.3)72 (10.5)G2 (>3.0 to 5.0×ULN)02 (2.1)010 (1.4)5 (0.7)6 (0.9)G3 (>5.0 to 20.0×ULN)0001 (0.1)01 (0.1)G4 (>20.0×ULN)000000Data are n (%). Grading per Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events v4.03*FINCH 1–2**DARWIN 1–2, FINCH 1–2ALT, alanine aminotransferase; AST, aspartate aminotransferase; CPK, creatine phosphokinase; csDMARD, conventional synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drug; FIL200/100, filgotinib 200/100 mg + csDMARDs; Grade, G; PBO, placebo; ULN, upper limit of normal.In the long-term as-treated analysis, 1 (0.5%)/6 (3.2%)/0/0/0 treatment-emergent adverse events (AE) of myalgia occurred in pts on statins at baseline receiving FIL200/FIL100/ADA/MTX/PBO and in 12 (0.6%)/8 (0.5%)/3 (1.0%)/2 (0.5%)/1 (0.1%) pts not on statins. Muscle spasms occurred in 2 (0.9%)/3 (1.6%)/1 (3.2%)/0/1 (1.1%) pts on statins at baseline receiving FIL200/FIL100/ADA/MTX/PBO and 21 (1.0%)/8 (0.5%)/0/3 (0.8%)/1 (0.1%) pts not on statins at baseline. One patient not on statins receiving FIL200 reported rhabdomyolysis. For all treatment arms in P3 as-randomised analysis, mean LDL and HDL increased similarly from baseline (108–110 and 56–59 mg/dL, respectively) to W52 (119–130 and 59–71 mg/dL, respectively).Conclusion:No increases in statin-induced AEs such as muscle or liver toxicities occurred with statins and filgotinib coadministration; results are supported by a drug-drug interaction study.4 Mean LDL and HDL increased at W52 in all treatment arms.References:[1]Genovese et al. JAMA. 2019;322:315–25.[2]Westhovens et al. Ann Rheum Dis. 2021; online first.[3]Combe et al. Ann Rheum Dis. 2021; online first.[4]Anderson et al. EULAR 2021 abstract.Disclosure of Interests:Peter C. Taylor Consultant of: AbbVie, Biogen, Eli Lilly, Fresenius, Galapagos, Gilead, GlaxoSmithKline, Janssen, Nordic Pharma, Pfizer, Roche, BMS, Sanofi, Celltrion, and UCB, Grant/research support from: Celgene, Eli Lilly, Galapagos, and Gilead, Christina Charles-Schoeman Consultant of: Gilead, Pfizer, and Regeneron-Sanofi, Grant/research support from: AbbVie, Bristol-Myers Squibb and Pfizer Inc, Muhsen Alani Shareholder of: Gilead Sciences, Inc., Employee of: Gilead Sciences, Inc., Mona Trivedi Shareholder of: Gilead Sciences, Inc., Employee of: Gilead Sciences, Inc., Vanessa Castellano Shareholder of: Gilead Sciences, Inc., Employee of: Gilead Sciences, Inc., Iyabode Tiamiyu Shareholder of: Gilead Sciences, Inc., Employee of: Gilead Sciences, Inc., Deyuan Jiang Shareholder of: Gilead Sciences, Inc., Employee of: Gilead Sciences, Inc., Lei Ye Shareholder of: Gilead Sciences, Inc., Employee of: Gilead Sciences, Inc., Sander Strengholt Shareholder of: Galapagos BV, Employee of: Galapagos BV, Michael Nurmohamed Speakers bureau: AbbVie, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Eli Lilly, Roche, and Sanofi, Consultant of: AbbVie, Celgene, Celltrion, Eli Lilly, Janssen, and Sanofi, Grant/research support from: AbbVie, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Celgene, Eli Lilly, Janssen, MSD, Mundipharma, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, and Sanofi, Gerd Rüdiger Burmester Speakers bureau: AbbVie, Eli Lilly, Pfizer, and Gilead Sciences, Inc., Consultant of: AbbVie, Eli Lilly, Pfizer, and Gilead Sciences, Inc.

Background:The Janus kinase (JAK)-1 preferential inhibitor filgotinib (FIL) improved rheumatoid arthritis (RA) signs and symptoms in 3 phase (P)3 trials.1–3 Like other RA therapies, JAK inhibition is associated with increased infection rates.4Objectives:To assess long-term safety across the FIL program regarding infections, including serious infections (SI).Methods:Patients (pts) meeting 2010 ACR/EULAR RA criteria in pooled analysis of P2 DARWIN 1–2 (D1–2), P3 FINCH 1–3 (F1–3), and long-term extension studies (DARWIN 3, FINCH 4) were included. The placebo (PBO)-controlled as-randomised data set included pts receiving FIL 100 mg (FIL100), FIL 200 mg (FIL200), or PBO up to week (W)12 (D1–2, F1–2). The active-controlled as-randomised data set included pts receiving FIL100, FIL200, adalimumab (ADA), or methotrexate (MTX) up to W52 (F1, F3). The long-term as-treated data set included pts in all 7 studies receiving FIL100 or FIL200; data after rerandomisation were included and contributed to treatment received.Exposure-adjusted incidence rates (EAIRs) per 100 patient-years exposure (PYE) and differences with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated using Poisson regression; EAIRs for tuberculosis (TB) in active controlled sets were calculated using an Exact Poisson method. Kaplan-Meier (KM) event probabilities with 95% CIs were provided for SI. If pts had multiple events within the same treatment period, only the first event was counted in EAIR calculation; PYE were calculated up to the last follow-up time or day before next treatment, including after first event. For KM analysis, time to event was calculated until the first event.Results:Of 2267/1647 pts in as-treated set receiving FIL200/FIL100, 1697 had treatment-emergent infection; 118 were SI. Baseline potential risk factors for pts with SI are in Table.Table 1.Baseline characteristics of pts with/without treatment emergent SIaParameter, n (%)SIN = 92No SIN = 2491Medical history Chronic lung disease13 (14.1)125 (5.0) Chronic renal disease3 (3.3)23 (0.9) Infections and infestations29 (31.5)499 (20.0)Baseline body mass index, kg/m2 64 (69.6)1749 (70.2) ≥3028 (30.4)742 (29.8)Age, years 67 (72.8)2006 (80.5) ≥6525 (27.2)485 (19.5)Former/current smoker30 (32.6)677 (27.2)Oral corticosteroids, mg 28 (56.0)731 (66.1) ≥7.522 (44.0)375 (33.9) Missing data421385aPhase 3 (FINCH 1-4) studies, as randomised.SI, serious infection.In 12W PBO-controlled period, infection rates were 17.9%/15.6%/13.3% for FIL200/FIL100/PBO. In 52W ADA-controlled period, infection EAIRs (95% CIs)/100 PYE were 46.9 (40.9, 53.7)/43.7 (38.0, 50.4)/43.4 (36.5, 51.5), FIL200/FIL100/ADA; and 38.5 (33.8, 43.9)/39.0 (31.1, 48.8)/42.2 (36.1, 49.3), FIL200/FIL100/MTX in 52W MTX-controlled period; 24.8 (23.1, 26.5)/34.4 (30.4, 38.8), FIL200/FIL100 in long-term analysis. In 12W PBO-controlled period, there was no active TB for FIL200/FIL100/PBO. In 52W ADA-controlled period, active TB EAIRs (95% CIs)/100 PYE were: 0 (0.0, 0.8)/0 (0.0, 0.8)/0.3 (0.0, 1.9), FIL200/FIL100/ADA and 0 (0.0, 0.6)/0 (0.0, 1.9)/0 (0.0, 1.0), FIL200/FIL100/MTX in 52W MTX-controlled period; 0/0.1 (0.0, 0.5), FIL200/FIL100 in long-term analysis.SI rate or EAIRs are in Figure. Most common infections were upper respiratory tract infection and nasopharyngitis; majority were low grade. Pneumonia was most common SI (Conclusion:EAIRs of infections and SI for FIL were similar to PBO, ADA, and MTX. At 52W, incidence rates of SI were comparable for FIL100 and FIL200. Long-term SI EAIR for FIL100 was slightly higher than for FIL200.References:[1]Genovese et al. JAMA. 2019;322:315–25.[2]Westhovens et al. Ann Rheum Dis. 2021; online first.[3]Combe et al. Ann Rheum Dis. 2021; online first.[4]Strand et al. Arthritis Res Ther. 2015;17:362.Disclosure of Interests:James Galloway Speakers bureau: Pfizer, Bristol-Myers Squibb, UCB and Celgene, Maya H Buch Consultant of: Pfizer; AbbVie; Eli Lilly; Gilead Sciences, Inc.; Merck-Serono; Sandoz; and Sanofi, Grant/research support from: Pfizer, Roche, and UCB, Kunihiro Yamaoka Speakers bureau: AbbVie, Actelion Pharmaceuticals Japan, Asahikasei Pharma Corp, Astellas Pharma, AYUMI Pharma Co, Boehringer Ingelheim Japan, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Chugai Pharma, Daiichi Sankyo, Eisai Pharma, Eli Lilly, GlaxoSmithKline, Gilead G.K., Hisamitsu Pharma Co., Janssen Pharma, Mitsubishi-Tanabe Pharma, MSD, Nippon Kayaku, Nippon Shinyaku, Ono Pharma, Otsuka Pharma, Pfizer, Sanofi, and Takeda Industrial Pharma, Consultant of: Asahikasei Pharma Corp., AbbVie, Gilead G.K., Pfizer, Astellas Pharma Inc, Eli Lilly Japan K.K., and Japan Tobacco Inc., Grant/research support from: Takeda Industrial Pharma, Pfizer, Astellas Pharma, Daiichi Sankyo, Eli Lilly, Eisai Pharma, Teijin Pharma, MSD, Shionogi, Chugai Pharma, Nippon Kayaku, Mitsubishi-Tanabe Pharma, and AbbVie, Cianna Leatherwood Shareholder of: Gilead Sciences, Inc., Employee of: Gilead Sciences, Inc., Alena Pechonkina Shareholder of: Gilead Sciences, Inc., Employee of: Gilead Sciences, Inc., Iyabode Tiamiyu Shareholder of: Gilead Sciences, Inc., Employee of: Gilead Sciences, Inc., Deyuan Jiang Shareholder of: Gilead Sciences, Inc., Employee of: Gilead Sciences, Inc., Lei Ye Shareholder of: Gilead Sciences, Inc., Employee of: Gilead Sciences, Inc., Robin Besuyen Shareholder of: Galapagos BV, Employee of: Galapagos BV, Daniel Aletaha Speakers bureau: AbbVie, Celgene, Lilly, Merck, Novartis, Pfizer, Sanofi Genzyme, UCB, Consultant of: AbbVie, Amgen, Celgene, Lilly, Medac, Merck, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, Sandoz, Sanofi Genzyme, Grant/research support from: AbbVie, Novartis, Roche, Kevin Winthrop Consultant of: AbbVie, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Eli Lilly and Co., Galapagos NV, Gilead Sciences, GlaxoSmithKline, Pfizer, Roche, and UCB, Grant/research support from: AbbVie, Bristol-Myers Squibb, and Pfizer

Background Filgotinib (FIL) is a once-daily, oral, preferential Janus kinase 1 inhibitor in development for the treatment of inflammatory bowel disease. FIL for the treatment of moderately to severely active ulcerative colitis (UC) was evaluated in the phase 2b/3 randomized, double-blind, placebo (PBO)-controlled SELECTION study (NCT02914522). Long-term use of corticosteroids (CS) is associated with significant side effects. The aim of this post hoc analysis was to assess the CS-sparing effects of FIL in the SELECTION study. Methods Patients (18–75 years old) with moderately to severely active UC were randomized (2:2:1) to receive FIL 100 mg (n = 564), FIL 200 mg (n = 507) or PBO (n = 280) once daily orally for up to 11 weeks (induction study). At week 11, FIL induction responders were rerandomized 2:1 to continue their induction FIL dose or to receive PBO (maintenance study). CS use was kept stable up to week 14, at which point mandatory CS tapering occurred. CS could be resumed during the maintenance study; however, if the baseline CS dose was exceeded this was considered treatment failure. In this post hoc analysis, CS-free remission was defined as remission at week 58 (endoscopic subscore ≤ 1, rectal bleeding subscore = 0 and ≥ 1-point decrease in stool frequency subscore to achieve 0 or 1) without systemic or localized CS use that was indicated for UC in the previous 1, 3, 6 or 8 months. Results The baseline characteristics of patients in the maintenance study were similar across treatment groups (Table 1). Of the 92 patients receiving CS at maintenance baseline (week 11; maintenance week 0) who received FIL 200 mg during the maintenance study, 25 (27%) were in remission at week 58 and had been continuously CS-free for at least the previous 6 months (Table 2). The proportion of CS-free remitters in the FIL 200 mg group was consistently higher than with PBO (Table 2). In patients taking CS at maintenance baseline who had continued CS-use post baseline, lower median prednisone dosing was observed with FIL 200 mg than with PBO throughout the maintenance study (maximum difference at week 34 [maintenance week 23]: 5.0 mg vs 13.8 mg) (Figure 1). In SELECTION, a total of 199 patients received FIL 200 mg in the maintenance study, of whom 74 (37.2%) were in remission at week 58; of these 74 patients, 69 (93.2%) were continuously CS-free for at least the previous 6 months (Figure 2). Conclusion In this post hoc analysis of SELECTION maintenance study data, FIL 200 mg was effective in reducing and eliminating CS use through to week 58 in patients with moderately to severely active UC. The vast majority of patients taking FIL 200 mg who were in remission at week 58 had not taken CS in the previous 6 months.

Background Filgotinib (FIL), an oral preferential Janus kinase 1 inhibitor, was evaluated for the treatment of ulcerative colitis in the phase 2b/3 double-blind, placebo (PBO)-controlled SELECTION study (NCT02914522). Clinical, histological and endoscopic remission rates at week 58 were significantly greater with FIL 200 mg than with PBO (p < 0.025 for all comparisons). Here, we identify disease characteristics contributing to histo-endoscopic mucosal healing (HEMH; Geboes histological remission and endoscopic subscore ≤ 1) at week 58. FIL 100 mg data are excluded from by-treatment summaries because histological and endoscopic remission rates were not significantly different from PBO in SELECTION. Methods Eligible patients (18–75 years old) with moderately to severely active ulcerative colitis were enrolled in Induction Study A (biologic-naïve) or B (biologic-experienced) and randomized to receive FIL 200 mg, FIL 100 mg or PBO (2:2:1) once daily for up to 11 weeks, with response assessed at week 10. At week 11, FIL responders were re-randomized 2:1 to continue their induction FIL dose or to receive PBO for the 47-week maintenance study. PBO responders continued receiving PBO. For the maintenance study, univariate logistic regression was used to identify baseline and week 10 disease characteristics associated with HEMH (defined as achieving both Geboes histological remission [Grade 0 of ≤0.3, Grade 1 of ≤ 1.1, Grade 2a of ≤ 2A.3, Grade 2b of 2B.0, Grade 3 of 3.0, Grade 4 of 4.0, and Grade 5 of 5.0] and an endoscopic subscore of 0 or 1) at week 58 for patients receiving FIL 200 mg; variables with p < 0.05 in the univariate analysis were included in a multivariate analysis. Results Patients had similar characteristics across the treatment groups for both the induction (Table 1) and maintenance studies (Table 2). HEMH was achieved in a greater proportion of patients receiving FIL 200 mg than those receiving respective PBO at week 58 (32.7% vs 10.2%; p < 0.0001). No associations between disease characteristics (at baseline and week 11) and HEMH at week 58 were found (Table 3). Conclusion FIL 200 mg was effective at establishing HEMH compared with PBO at week 58; there were no baseline characteristics identified to be associated with HEMH at week 58.

Corona Virus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) caused by Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) has become a global pandemic. Additionally, the SARS-CoV-2 infection in the patients of Gastric Cancer (GC; the third leading cause of death in the world) pose a great challenge for the health management of the patients. Since there have been uncertainties to develop a new drug against COVID-19, there is an urgent need for repurposing drugs that can target key proteins of both SARS-CoV-2 and GC. The SARS-CoV-2-RdRp protein contains the NiRAN domain, which is known to have kinase-like folds. A docking study of the FDA approved drugs against GC was performed using AutoDock 4.2 and Glide Schrodinger suite 2019 against SARS-CoV-2-RdRp protein. MMGBSA and MD simulation studies were performed to investigate the binding and stability of the inhibitors with the target protein. In this study, we have found 12 kinase inhibitors with high binding energies namely Baricitinib, Brepocitinib, Decernotinib, Fasudil, Filgotinib, GSK2606414, Peficitinib, Ruxolitinib, Tofacitinib, Upadacitinib, Pamapimod and Ibrutinib. These FDA approved drugs against GC can play a key role in the treatment of COVID-19 patients along with GC as comorbidity. We also hypothesize that JAK, ITK, Rho-associated kinases, FGFR2, FYN, PERK, TYK2, p38-MAPK and SYK kinases can be considered as key therapeutic targets in COVID-19 treatment. Taken altogether, we have proposed the SARS-CoV-2-RdRp as a potential therapeutic target through in-silico studies. However, further in-vitro and in-vivo studies are required for the validation of the proposed targets and drugs for the treatment of COVID-19 patients already suffering from GC.

Janus kinases inhibitors are molecules that target Janus kinases—signal transducers and activators of transcription (JAK/STAT). They inhibit this intracellular signal pathway, blocking the gene transcription of crucial proinflammatory cytokines that play a central role in the pathogenesis of many inflammatory and autoimmune diseases, including psoriasis. This process reduces psoriatic inflammation. The JAK inhibitors are divided into two generations. The first generation of JAK inhibitors blocks two or more different Janus kinases. The second generation is more specified and blocks only one type of Janus kinase and has less side effects than the first generation. Tofacitinib, ruxolitinib and baricitinib belong to first generation JAK inhibitors and decernotinib and filgotinib belong to second group. This narrative review summarizes the role of Janus kinase inhibitors in the therapy of psoriasis. Oral JAK inhibitors show promise for efficacy and safety in the treatment of psoriasis. Studies to date do not indicate that JAK inhibitors are superior to recent biologic drugs in terms of efficacy. However, JAK inhibitors, due to their lack of increased incidence of side effects compared to other biologic drugs, can be included in the psoriasis treatment algorithm because they are orally taken. Nevertheless, further studies are needed to evaluate long-term treatment effects with these drugs.