Clinical effectiveness of baricitinib and abatacept in patients with rheumatoid arthritis.

AIM: The objective of this study was to compare the clinical effectiveness of baricitinib and abatacept in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA).

METHODS

This study included 274 patients treated with abatacept and 241 treated with baricitinib who were followed for >52 weeks. Potential treatment selection bias was addressed by using inverse probability of treatment weighting. The paired t-test was used to assess differences in Clinical Disease Activity Index (CDAI) score relative to baseline. A generalized estimating equation was used to compare the two treatment groups.

RESULTS

The estimated mean CDAI score was 18.2 at baseline and significantly decreased to 12.6 at 4 weeks, 8.9 at 12 weeks, 7.4 at 24 weeks, and 6.1 at 52 weeks in the abatacept group. The estimated mean CDAI score was 18.6 at baseline and significantly decreased to 9.5 at 4 weeks, 6.5 at 12 weeks, 5.7 at 24 weeks, and 5.5 at 52 weeks in the baricitinib group. The baricitinib group had significantly lower CDAI scores at 4, 12, and 24 weeks compared to the abatacept group. Subgroup analyses revealed that this difference was evident among patients with high disease activity and without concomitant use of methotrexate but was less pronounced among those with remission to moderate disease activity status with methotrexate use.

CONCLUSION

Both baricitinib and abatacept were effective in reducing disease activity in patients with RA. Baricitinib demonstrated potential advantages over abatacept in terms of early disease control, particularly in patients with high disease activity and without methotrexate use.