This observational study compares the effectiveness of baricitinib (BARI), a targeted synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drug (tsDMARD), with alternative biological DMARDs (bDMARDs) in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA), from a prospective, longitudinal cohort.

We compared patients initiating a treatment course (TC) of BARI, tumour necrosis factor inhibitors (TNFi) or bDMARDs with other modes of action (OMA), during a period when all these DMARDs were available in Switzerland. The primary outcome was drug maintenance; secondary outcomes included discontinuation rates related specifically to ineffectiveness and adverse events. We further analysed rates of low disease activity (LDA) and remission (REM) at 12 months and drug maintenance in bDMARD-naïve and tsDMARD-naïve population.

A total of 1053 TCs were included: 273 on BARI, 473 on TNFi and 307 on OMA. BARI was prescribed to older patients with longer disease duration and more previous treatment failures than TNFi. Compared with BARI, the adjusted drug maintenance was significantly shorter for TNFi (HR for discontinuation: 1.76; 95% CI, 1.32 to 2.35) but not compared with OMA (HR 1.27; 95% CI, 0.93 to 1.72). These results were similar in the b/tsDMARD-naïve population. The higher discontinuation of TNFi was mostly due to increased discontinuation for ineffectiveness (HR 1.49; 95% CI, 1.03 to 2.15), with no significant differences in drug discontinuation for adverse events (HR 1.46; 95% CI, 0.83 to 2.57). The LDA and REM rates at 12 months did not differ significantly between the three groups.

BARI demonstrated a significantly higher drug maintenance compared with TNFi, mainly due to lower drug discontinuations for ineffectiveness. We found no difference in drug maintenance between BARI and OMA. Clinical outcomes did not differ between the three groups. Our results suggest that BARI is an appropriate therapeutic alternative to bDMARDs in the management of RA.

Obesity is associated with lower treatment response in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA). In patients with obesity, abatacept was suggested as a preferable option to tumour necrosis factor-alpha inhibitors. We aimed to assess the comparative effectiveness of etanercept, infliximab and abatacept, compared with adalimumab, in patients with RA with obesity. Secondarily, we also investigated this in patients with overweight and normal weight for completeness.

Observational cohort study.

Swiss Clinical Quality Management in Rheumatic Diseases (SCQM) registry (1997–2019).

Adult patients with RA from the SCQM registry who received etanercept, infliximab, abatacept or adalimumab as their first biological or targeted synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drug were classified based on their body mass index (BMI) at the start of that treatment in three cohorts: obese, overweight, normal weight. They were followed for a maximum of 1 year.

The study exposure of interest was the patients’ first biological, particularly: etanercept, infliximab and abatacept, compared with adalimumab.

The primary study outcome was remission within 12 months, defined as 28-joint Disease Activity Score (DAS28)

The study included 443 obese, 829 overweight and 1243 normal weight patients with RA. There were no statistically significant differences in the odds of DAS28-remission at ≤12 months for etanercept, infliximab and abatacept, compared with adalimumab, in any of the BMI cohorts.

No differences in DAS28-remission were found between the study drugs and adalimumab as first biologic in patients with RA, independently of the BMI cohort. We did not find evidence that treatment with abatacept increased the likelihood of remission compared with adalimumab among obese patients with RA.