Objectives To investigate the effect of Janus kinase inhibitors (Jakinibs) on cardiovascular risk in adult patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) via a meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials (RCTs). Methods PubMed, Embase and Cochrane library were thoroughly searched for RCTs reporting safety issues in patients with RA receiving Jakinibs, from inception to October 2018. The primary and secondary outcomes were all cardiovascular events (CVEs) and major adverse cardiovascular events (MACEs)/venous thromboembolism events (VTEs). OR and 95% CI were calculated using the Mantel-Haenszel fixed-effect method. Results 26 RCTs randomising 11 799 patients were included. No significant difference was observed regarding all CVEs risk following Jakinibs usage in general (OR 1.04 (0.61 to 1.76), p = 0.89), tofacitinib (OR 0.63 (0.26 to 1.54), p = 0.31), baricitinib (OR 1.21 (0.51 to 2.83), p = 0.66), upadacitinib (OR 3.29 (0.59 to 18.44), p = 0.18), peficitinib (OR 0.43 (0.07 to 2.54), p = 0.35) or decernotinib (OR 1.12 (0.13 to 10.11), p = 0.92). Likewise, there was no significant difference for Jakinibs treatment overall regarding occurrence of MACEs (OR 0.80 (0.36 to 1.75), p = 0.57) or VTEs (OR 1.16 (0.48 to 2.81), p = 0.74). Dose-dependent impact of Jakinibs on the risks of all CVEs, MACEs and VTEs was not observed in tofacitinib (5 mg vs 10 mg), upadacitinib (15 mg vs 30 mg), whereas baricitinib at 2 mg was found to be safer than 4 mg in all CVEs incidence (OR 0.19 (0.04 to 0.88), p = 0.03). Conclusion The existing evidence from RCTs indicated no significant change in cardiovascular risk for Jakinib-treated patients with RA in a short-term perspective, but postmarketing data are sorely needed to ascertain their cardiovascular safety, especially at the higher dose, due to increased risk of thromboembolism events for both tofacitinib and baricitinib at higher dosage.

Objective: It remains debated whether patients with primary Sjögren’s syndrome (pSS) are at greater risk of mortality. We aimed to determine the magnitude of all-cause mortality risk in patients with pSS compared with the general population through a systematic review and meta-analysis. Methods: We searched PubMed, EMBASE and Cochrane Library for studies published from inception to October 2020. Stata meta-analysis software was used to calculate the pooled risk estimates for mortality (standardized mortality ratio, SMR). Results: Our search identified 2796 articles, of which 14 studies with 14 584 patients were eventually included for the analysis. A total of 902 deaths were observed. Overall, we found a 1.46-fold increased risk of death in pSS patients when compared with the general population [meta-standardized mortality ratio (SMR): 1.46, 95% CI: 1.10, 1.93]. Subgroup analyses showed that mortality risks were higher in European countries (meta-SMR: 1.55, 95% CI: 1.04, 2.33), in retrospective studies (meta-SMR: 1.50, 95% CI: 1.09, 2.05), in studies based on referral cohorts (meta-SMR: 1.55, 95% CI: 1.04, 2.30), in studies that enrolled >500 patients (meta-SMR: 1.70, 95% CI: 1.11, 2.61) and in studies with follow-up time longer than 8 years (meta-SMR: 1.55, 95% CI: 0.87, 2.77). Significantly greater mortality risk was found in patients with older age, male gender, vasculitis, interstitial lung disease, low complements, positive anti-La/SSB and cryoglobulinaemia. Conclusion: The existing data indicated ∼50% increase of mortality among patients with pSS compared with the general population. More attention should be paid to those patients with poor prognostic factors.

Objectives: To explore the risk of new and recurrent cancer in adult RA patients with prior malignancy and subsequently exposed to biologic therapies. Methods: Separate searches were performed of PubMed, EMBASE and Cochrane Library and conference proceedings for observational studies reporting cancer incidence or recurrence in patients with RA and prior malignancy treated with biologics and conventional synthetic DMARDs (csDMARDs). Mantel-Haenszel fixed-effects method was conducted to calculate relative risk and 95% CI. Results: A total of 12 studies involving 13 598 patients and 32 473 patient-years of follow-up were included (10, 3 and 1 studies for TNF inhibitors [TNFi], rituximab and anakinra, respectively). The crude incidence of new and recurrent cancer per 1000 patient-years were 34.4 for TNFi, 32.3 for rituximab, 32.3 for anakinra and 31.8 for csDMARDs. In the quantitative meta-analysis, biologics were not associated with an increased risk of new or recurrent cancer compared with csDMARDs in patients with RA and prior cancer (TNFi: relative risk = 0.95, 95% CI = 0.83, 1.09; rituximab: relative risk = 0.89, 95% CI = 0.52, 1.53). Secondary analyses of stratification of cancer types, the interval between initiation of TNFi and prior cancer diagnosis, and duration of TNFi exposure, found similar results. Conclusion: Compared with csDMARDs, there is no increased risk of developing cancer overall or some specific subtypes in RA patients with a prior cancer receiving biologics. More investigations are warranted to explore the risk of cancer development in individual cancer as well as to determine optimal time to initiate biologic therapy after the diagnosis of cancer or completion of cancer treatment.

CXCL17, the last described chemokine, has recently been found to be abundantly and specifically expressed in mucosal sites, while its receptor is still not well determined. Accumulative studies indicate that CXCL17 could potentially exhibit chemotactic, anti‐inflammatory, antimicrobial activities under multiple biological conditions. However, the mechanism by which it contributes to the physiological and pathological processes within specific mucosal tissues is still far from being fully elucidated. In this present review, we therefore summarize the current available evidence of CXCL17 with specific emphasis on its biological role and pathophysiological significance, in order to aid in the advancement of CXCL17‐related studies.