Back

JAK Inhibitor Withdrawal Causes a Transient Proinflammatory Cascade: A Potential Mechanism for Major Adverse Cardiac Events

Gurevic, I.; Meudec, L.; Mariette, X.; Nocturne, G.; McCoy, S.

2025-02-01 immunology
10.1101/2024.09.25.615051 bioRxiv
Show abstract

ObjectiveOur objective was to define the effect of JAK1/2 inhibitor (JAKinib) withdrawal on JAK/STAT biochemical response in the context of systemic rheumatic diseases. MethodsWe tested Type I (bind kinase active conformation) and Type II (bind kinase inactive conformation) JAKinibs in vitro using mesenchymal stromal cells and endothelial cells. We translated our findings in vivo studying NK cells from rheumatoid arthritis (RA) patients treated with Type I JAKinibs or methotrexate. ResultsType I JAKinibs (ruxolitinib and baricitinib) increased phosphoJAK1 (pJAK1) and pJAK2 of IFN{gamma}-stimulated MSCs and HUVECs in a time- and dose-dependent manner, with effect peaking after 24 hours. As expected, pSTAT1 was completely suppressed by JAKinibs. We found a marked and rapid increase of pSTATs upon discontinuation of Type I JAKinibs, that occurred to a lesser extent after Type II JAKinib withdrawal. Type I JAKinib withdrawal increased interferon and urokinase expression when compared to Type II JAKinib withdrawal. We found NK cells from RA patients taking Type I JAKinibs had a pro-inflammatory profile after JAKinib withdrawal compared to patients on methotrexate. ConclusionsType I JAKinibs paradoxically accumulate functionally defective pJAK. Upon withdrawal, the primed pJAKs are de-repressed and initiate a pSTAT signaling cascade, resulting in high interferon and urokinase. Type II JAKinibs do not cause pJAK accumulation, pSTAT cascade, and subsequent pro-inflammatory transcripts. The resultant cytokines and proteins produced from this cascade might be associated with adverse cardiac outcomes. Thus, JAKinib withdrawal is a possible mechanism contributing to the major adverse cardiac events described with JAKinib therapy.

Matching journals

The top 11 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

50% of probability mass above

"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.