Explore the vast range of titles available.

Upadacitinib is a selective Janus kinase (JAK) inhibitor which is approved by the US Food and Drug Administration, the European Medicines Agency, as well as other agencies around the world for the treatment of several chronic inflammatory diseases, including rheumatic, dermatologic, and gastrointestinal diseases. Through inhibition of JAK, upadacitinib inhibits phosphorylation of downstream effector proteins, which consequently inhibits cytokine signaling for key pathways involved in inflammatory diseases. Upadacitinib more potently inhibits JAK1 than other JAK isoforms. The pharmacokinetics, pharmacodynamics, efficacy, and safety of upadacitinib were characterized in many clinical trials, which demonstrated the superiority of upadacitinib treatment over placebo or an active comparator in rheumatoid arthritis, psoriatic arthritis, ankylosing spondylitis, non‐radiographic axial spondyloarthritis, atopic dermatitis, Crohn's disease, and ulcerative colitis. The safety profile of upadacitinib supported a favorable benefit–risk profile across all the approved indications. In this article, we review the mechanism of action of upadacitinib and describe how the JAK–STAT (Janus kinase–signal transducers and activators of transcription) pathway is involved in the pathogenesis of several chronic and progressive immune‐mediated inflammatory diseases. In addition, this review also provides an overview of key clinical trials that were conducted as well as relevant data which supported the clinical development of upadacitinib and informed the recommended dose(s) in each of the approved indications.

Upadacitinib, an oral selective Janus kinase (JAK) inhibitor, is under investigation for the treatment of Crohn's disease. In two phase 3 induction trials (U-EXCEL and U-EXCEED), we randomly assigned patients with moderate-to-severe Crohn's disease to receive 45 mg of upadacitinib or placebo (2:1 ratio) once daily for 12 weeks. Patients who had a clinical response to upadacitinib induction therapy were randomly assigned in the U-ENDURE maintenance trial to receive 15 mg of upadacitinib, 30 mg of upadacitinib, or placebo (1:1:1 ratio) once daily for 52 weeks. The primary end points for induction (week 12) and maintenance (week 52) were clinical remission (defined as a Crohn's Disease Activity Index score of <150 [range, 0 to 600, with higher scores indicating more severe disease activity]) and endoscopic response (defined as a decrease in the Simple Endoscopic Score for Crohn's Disease [SES-CD; range, 0 to 56, with higher scores indicating more severe disease] of >50% from baseline of the induction trial [or for patients with an SES-CD of 4 at baseline, a decrease of ≥2 points from baseline]). A total of 526 patients underwent randomization in U-EXCEL, 495 in U-EXCEED, and 502 in U-ENDURE. A significantly higher percentage of patients who received 45-mg upadacitinib than those who received placebo had clinical remission (in U-EXCEL, 49.5% vs. 29.1%; in U-EXCEED, 38.9% vs. 21.1%) and an endoscopic response (in U-EXCEL, 45.5% vs. 13.1%; in U-EXCEED, 34.6% vs. 3.5%) (P<0.001 for all comparisons). At week 52 in U-ENDURE, a higher percentage of patients had clinical remission with 15-mg upadacitinib (37.3%) or 30-mg upadacitinib (47.6%) than with placebo (15.1%), and a higher percentage had an endoscopic response with 15-mg upadacitinib (27.6%) or 30-mg upadacitinib (40.1%) than with placebo (7.3%) (P<0.001 for all comparisons). Herpes zoster infections occurred more frequently in the 45-mg and 30-mg upadacitinib groups than in the respective placebo groups, and hepatic disorders and neutropenia were more frequent in the 30-mg upadacitinib group than in the other maintenance groups. Gastrointestinal perforations developed in 4 patients who received 45-mg upadacitinib and in 1 patient each who received 30-mg or 15-mg upadacitinib. Upadacitinib induction and maintenance treatment was superior to placebo in patients with moderate-to-severe Crohn's disease. (Funded by AbbVie; U-EXCEL, U-EXCEED, and U-ENDURE ClinicalTrials.gov numbers, NCT03345849, NCT03345836, and NCT03345823.).

Phase 2 studies with upadacitinib, a selective Janus kinase 1 (JAK1) inhibitor, have shown safety and efficacy in the treatment of patients with active rheumatoid arthritis. We did this study to further assess the safety and efficacy of upadacitinib in patients with an inadequate response to biologic disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs (bDMARDs). We did this double-blind, randomised controlled phase 3 trial at 153 sites in 26 countries. Patients were aged 18 years or older, had active rheumatoid arthritis and previous inadequate response or intolerance to bDMARDs, and were receiving concomitant background conventional synthetic DMARDS (csDMARDs). We randomly assigned patients (2:2:1:1) by interactive response technology to receive once-daily oral extended-release upadacitinib 15 mg or 30 mg or placebo for 12 weeks, followed by upadacitinib 15 mg or 30 mg from week 12 onwards. The two separate primary endpoints were the proportions of patients achieving a 20% improvement in American College of Rheumatology criteria (ACR20) at week 12 and the proportion of patients achieving a 28-joint disease activity score using C-reactive protein (DAS28[CRP]) of 3·2 or less at week 12. Efficacy and safety analyses were done in the modified intention-to-treat population of all patients who received at least one dose of study drug. Data are presented up to week 24 of this ongoing study. The trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT02706847). Between March 15, 2016, and Jan 10, 2017, 499 patients were randomly assigned (n=165 upadacitinib 15 mg; n=165 upadacitinib 30 mg; n=85 placebo then upadacitinib 15 mg; and n=84 placebo then upadacitinib 30 mg) and one patient was withdrawn from the 15 mg upadacitinib group before the start of study treatment. Mean disease duration was 13·2 years (SD 9·5); 235 (47%) of 498 patients had received one previous bDMARD, 137 (28%) had received two, and 125 (25%) had received at least three; 451 (91%) patients completed treatment up to week 12 and 419 (84%) patients completed treatment up to week 24. At week 12, ACR20 was achieved by 106 (65%; 95% CI 57–72) of 164 patients receiving upadacitinib 15 mg and 93 (56%; 49–64) of 165 patients receiving upadacitinib 30 mg compared with 48 (28%; 22–35) of 169 patients receiving placebo (p<0·0001 for each dose vs placebo). DAS28(CRP) of 3·2 or less was achieved by 71 (43%; 95% CI 36–51) of 164 patients receiving upadacitinib 15 mg and 70 (42%; 35–50) of 165 patients receiving upadacitinib 30 mg versus 24 (14%; 9–20) of 169 patients receiving placebo (p<0·0001 for each dose vs placebo). Up to week 12, overall numbers of patients with adverse events were similar for the placebo group (95 [56%] of 169) and the upadacitinib 15 mg group (91 [55%] of 164), but higher in the upadacitinib 30 mg group (111 [67%] of 165). At week 12, the most common adverse events occurring in at least 5% of patients in any treatment group were upper respiratory tract infection (13 [8%] of 169 in the placebo group; 13 [8%] of 164 in the upadacitinib 15 mg group; ten [6%] of 165 in the upadacitinib 30 mg group), nasopharyngitis (11 [7%]; seven [4%]; nine [5%]), urinary tract infection (ten [6%]; 15 [9%]; nine [5%]), and worsening of rheumatoid arthritis (ten [6%]; four [2%]; six [4%]). The number of patients with serious adverse events was higher in the upadacitinib 30 mg group (12 [7%]) than in the upadacitinib 15 mg group (eight [5%]); no serious adverse events were reported in patients receiving placebo. More patients in the upadacitinib 30 mg group had serious infections, herpes zoster, and adverse events leading to discontinuation than in the upadacitinib 15 mg and placebo groups. During the placebo-controlled phase of the study, one case of pulmonary embolism, three malignancies, one major adverse cardiovascular event, and one death were reported in patients receiving upadacitinib; none were reported in patients receiving placebo. Both doses of upadacitinib led to rapid and significant improvements compared with placebo over 12 weeks in patients with refractory rheumatoid arthritis. AbbVie Inc.

Upadacitinib is a Janus kinase 1 inhibitor developed for treatment of moderate to severe rheumatoid arthritis (RA) and was recently approved by the US Food and Drug Administration for this indication in adults who have had an inadequate response or intolerance to methotrexate. Upadacitinib is currently under regulatory review by other agencies around the world. Ongoing trials are investigating the use of upadacitinib in other inflammatory autoimmune diseases. In this article, we review the clinical pharmacokinetic data available to date for upadacitinib that supported the clinical development program in RA and ultimately regulatory applications for upadacitinib in treatment of patients with moderate to severe RA.

Upadacitinib is an oral Janus kinase inhibitor approved for the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis (RA) and recently approved by the European Medicines Agency for the treatment of psoriatic arthritis (PsA). The efficacy and safety profile of upadacitinib in PsA have been established in the SELECT‐PsA program in two global phase III studies, which evaluated upadacitinib 15 and 30 mg q.d. The analyses described here characterized upadacitinib pharmacokinetics and exposure‐response relationships for efficacy and safety endpoints using data from the SELECT‐PsA studies. Upadacitinib pharmacokinetics in patients with PsA were characterized through a Bayesian population analysis approach and were comparable to pharmacokinetics in patients with RA. Exposure‐response relationships for key efficacy and safety endpoints were characterized using data from 1916 patients with PsA. The percentage of patients achieving efficacy endpoints at week 12 (American College of Rheumatology [ACR]50 and ACR70), 16 and 24 (sIGA0/1) increased with increasing upadacitinib average plasma concentration over a dosing interval, whereas no clear exposure‐response trend was observed for ACR20 at week 12 or ACR20/50/70 at week 24 within the range of plasma exposures evaluated in the phase III PsA studies. No clear trends for exposure‐response relationships were identified for experiencing pneumonia, herpes zoster infection, hemoglobin less than 8 g/dl, lymphopenia (grade ≥ 3), or neutropenia (grade ≥ 3) after 24 weeks of treatment. Shallow relationships with plasma exposures were observed for serious infections and hemoglobin decrease greater than 2 g/dl from baseline at week 24. Based on exposure‐response analyses, the upadacitinib 15 mg q.d. regimen is predicted to achieve robust efficacy in patients with PsA and to be associated with limited incidences of reductions in hemoglobin or occurrence of serious infections.

Model‐informed drug development (MIDD) entails applying quantitative approaches to assist with decision‐making during drug development and has been used for dose optimization, to inform clinical trial design, and to support clinical trial waivers. With increasing cost and competitiveness in drug development, the use of tools that improve efficiency, like MIDD, is increasingly crucial. A unique case for the successful application of MIDD approaches from early Phase 1 through postapproval for the upadacitinib development program is described herein. Upadacitinib is an orally administered selective Janus kinase inhibitor, which is approved for rheumatoid arthritis, psoriatic arthritis, atopic dermatitis, axial spondylarthritis, nonradiographic axial spondyloarthritis, ulcerative colitis, and Crohn's disease for adults, in addition to recent approvals for polyarticular juvenile idiopathic arthritis and pediatric patients with psoriatic arthritis. Applications and impact of modeling and simulation approaches for informing key development decisions are presented to highlight the success of using MIDD for the clinical development of upadacitinib. The lessons learned can provide a framework for the clinical development of other drugs.

Recent reports suggest that plasma riboflavin may serve as a biomarker for BCRP inhibition in humans. However, the clinical data supporting this claim have been limited, with only two studies showing modest increases in riboflavin levels after administration of a BCRP inhibitor. We have recently demonstrated that co‐administration of 375 mg once daily (q.d.) cedirogant, an in vitro BCRP inhibitor, significantly increased rosuvastatin (an OATP1B1/1B3 and BCRP substrate) exposures but did not change the levels of the OATP1B endogenous biomarker coproporphyrin‐I, demonstrating that cedirogant is a clinical BCRP inhibitor. Samples from this same cedirogant clinical drug–drug interaction study were utilized to test the hypothesis that endogenous plasma riboflavin is a biomarker of BCRP inhibition. Plasma riboflavin levels in the absence of cedirogant ranged from 1 to 10 ng/mL across the 11 participants analyzed with minimal (<20%) intrasubject variability over a 24‐hour interval. Contrary to expectations, 375 mg q.d. oral administration of cedirogant did not increase riboflavin levels. These data strongly suggest that endogenous plasma riboflavin is not a viable biomarker for BCRP inhibition in humans.

A common challenge in conducting phase 1 studies that assess the impact of organ impairment on the pharmacokinetics of a drug is the recruitment of a demographically matched control group. The work presented here evaluated alternative approaches for generating control groups in these studies. Available phase 1 data from the upadacitinib and elagolix clinical programs were leveraged as case studies. A statistical matching approach and a population pharmacokinetic model‐based approach were evaluated retrospectively for these programs' hepatic and renal impairment clinical studies. Geometric mean ratios of logarithmically transformed Cmax and AUCinf were used to compare exposure in organ impairment groups to respective matched or virtual control groups. In the statistical matching approach, the genetic matching algorithm using Mahalanobis distance showed that external control groups were adequately demographically balanced across all impairment groups of the study except for age. A 3:1 k‐match approach minimized the prediction error between matched and reference in‐study results for both case studies, resulting in differences in geometric mean ratios ranging from −19% to 3% and −27% to 40% for upadacitinib and elagolix, respectively, compared to in‐study controls. Similarly, the population pharmacokinetic approach used models developed from phase 1 data in healthy participants and found that the results were generally comparable to the in‐study results, with differences in geometric mean ratios ranging from −30% to 17% and −24% to 41% for upadacitinib and elagolix, respectively. These analyses demonstrate that both approaches may be viable alternatives to assess the impact of organ impairment on pharmacokinetics.

Background and Objectives Upadacitinib is a janus kinase (JAK) 1 inhibitor being developed for the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis (RA) and other inflammatory diseases. This work characterized upadacitinib population pharmacokinetics in healthy subjects and RA patients and the effects of covariates on upadacitinib exposure. Methods Upadacitinib plasma concentrations ( n  = 6399) from 107 healthy subjects and 466 RA patients from three phase I and two 12-week RA phase IIb trials (1–48 mg immediate-release doses across studies) were analyzed using non-linear mixed-effects modeling. The models were qualified using bootstrap and stochastic simulations. Results A two-compartment model with first-order absorption and elimination described upadacitinib pharmacokinetics. Estimates (95% bootstrap confidence interval) for upadacitinib oral clearance, steady-state volume of distribution, absorption lag time, and mean absorption time were 39.7 (37.8–41.5) L/h, 210 (196–231) L, 0.48 (0.47–0.49) h, and 0.08 (0.04–0.12) h, respectively, for a typical healthy male. Matching on other covariates, a 16 and 32% higher upadacitinib area under the concentration–time curve (AUC) was estimated for females relative to males, and for subjects with RA relative to healthy volunteers, respectively. Subjects with RA with mild or moderate renal impairment were estimated to have 16 and 32% higher upadacitinib AUC, respectively, compared with subjects with RA with normal renal function. Upadacitinib clearance was not correlated with body weight. Conclusions Upadacitinib pharmacokinetics follow dose-proportional, bi-exponential disposition. A slightly lower upadacitinib clearance is estimated in subjects with RA than in healthy volunteers, consistent with observations for other JAK inhibitors. Other covariates (weight, sex, mild or moderate renal impairment) are not associated with clinically relevant effects on upadacitinib exposure. Trial Registration ClinicalTrials.gov ( https://clinicaltrials.gov/ ) identifiers: NCT01741493, NCT02066389, and NCT01960855.

Background and Objectives Upadacitinib is a selective Janus kinase (JAK) 1 inhibitor being developed as an orally administered treatment for patients with moderate to severe rheumatoid arthritis (RA) and other autoimmune disorders. These analyses characterized the population pharmacokinetics of upadacitinib across phase I–III clinical trials using data for immediate-release (IR) and extended-release (ER) formulations. Methods Pharmacokinetic data from 4170 subjects taking IR doses of 1–48 mg and ER doses of 7.5–30 mg across 12 studies spanning phase I–III clinical trials, with a total of 29,372 upadacitinib plasma concentrations, were analyzed using non-linear mixed-effects modeling. The model was evaluated using bootstrap analyses and visual predictive checks. Results A two-compartment model with first-order absorption with lag time for the IR formulation, mixed zero- and first-order absorption with lag time for the ER formulation, and linear elimination, adequately described upadacitinib plasma concentration–time profiles. Population estimates of upadacitinib apparent oral clearance and steady-state volume of distribution in healthy volunteers for the ER formulation were 53.7 L/h and 294 L, respectively. The relative bioavailability of the ER formulation compared with the IR formulation was estimated to be 76.2%. Statistically significant covariates were patient population (RA subjects vs. healthy subjects), creatinine clearance, and baseline bodyweight on apparent clearance (CL/F) and bodyweight on volume of distribution of the central compartment (Vc/F). The intersubject variability for upadacitinib CL/F and Vc/F were estimated to be 21% and 24%, respectively, in the phase I studies, and 37% and 53%, respectively, in the phase II/III studies. Upadacitinib area under the concentration–time curve (AUC) was estimated to be only 5% higher or lower for RA patients who were < 60 or > 100 kg, respectively, relative to subjects with a bodyweight of 60–100 kg. RA subjects with mild or moderate renal impairment had 13% and 26% higher AUC, respectively, compared with RA subjects with normal renal function. Sex, race, concomitant use of pH-modifying drugs, moderate cytochrome P450 3A inhibitors, or methotrexate use had no effect on upadacitinib exposure. Conclusions A robust population pharmacokinetic model was developed for upadacitinib using a large dataset from phase I–III clinical trials in healthy volunteers and subjects with RA. None of the identified covariates had a clinically meaningful effect on upadacitinib exposures. The model is appropriate to use for simulations and to evaluate the exposure–response relationship of upadacitinib.