Makers of Oluminant Withdraw Lupus Treatment Approval Request in Face of JAK-Inhibitor Health Risks

Amid growing concerns over the side effects of Xeljanz and other JAK-inhibitor drugs in the same class of medications, the makes of Olumiant have decided not to pursue approval for use of the rheumatoid arthritis JAK-inhibitor as a potential lupus treatment.

In a January 28 press release, Eli Lilly and Company and Incyte announced they will not develop Olumiant for the treatment of lupus. In addition, the manufacturers and the U.S. Food and Drug Administration are at an impasse on approving the drug for treatment of moderate-to-severe atopic dermatitis.

Xeljanz (tofacitinib) and Olumiant (baricitinib) are both part of the same new class of medications, known as JAK inhibitors, which are prescribed to tamp down overactive immune system and ease joint pain associated with rheumatoid arthritis. The class also includes Rinvoq (upadacitinib), and the medications have quickly grown to become blockbuster drugs and widely recognized brands, amid direct-to-consumer advertising.

In September, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) announced a newย โ€œblack boxโ€ warning for Xeljanz, Olumiant and Rinvoq, requiring all manufacturers of JAK inhibitors to include information about an increased risk of heart attacks, strokes, cancer, blood clots and death, following a review of data from a large randomized clinical trial involving Xeljanz, which was the first member of this class to hit the market.

Spinal-Cord-Stimulation-Lawsuit
Spinal-Cord-Stimulation-Lawsuit

โ€œBased on top-line efficacy results from two pivotal Phase 3 trials (SLE-BRAVE I and II), Lilly has decided to discontinue the Phase 3 development program for Olumiant in lupus,โ€ the press release states. โ€œKey secondary endpoints were not met in either study.โ€

While the company says safety findings from previously published Olumiant data did not impact its decision not to seek approval, the company notes in its atopic dermatitis regulatory update that there is a disapproval with the FDA over Olumiantโ€™s safety profile, saying the company โ€œdoes not have alignmentโ€ with the FDA.

The press release states there is a possibility it will receive a Complete Response Letter for Olumiantโ€™s atopic dermatitis drug approval, which usually indicates the agency has rejected a request to approve a drug for a new use.

The drug is already approved as an atopic dermatitis drug in the European Union and Japan.

The study behind the FDAโ€™s Xeljanz concerns was initially launched in January 2012, and given the long latency period for many cancers, many users now face concerns they require on-going medical monitoring to detect and diagnose cases in the future.

Former users are now contacting lawyers who are investigatingย Xeljanz lawsuits over injuries that may been prevented if earlier warnings and information had been provided about the risk of heart attacks, cancer and blood clots.

Irvin Jackson
Written by: Irvin Jackson

Senior Legal Journalist & Contributing Editor

Irvin Jackson is a senior investigative reporter at AboutLawsuits.com with more than 30 years of experience covering mass tort litigation, environmental policy, and consumer safety. He previously served as Associate Editor at Inside the EPA and contributes original reporting on product liability lawsuits, regulatory failures, and nationwide litigation trends.




0 Comments


This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

Share Your Comments

This field is hidden when viewing the form
I authorize the above comments be posted on this page
Post Comment
Weekly Digest Opt-In

Want your comments reviewed by a lawyer?

To have an attorney review your comments and contact you about a potential case, provide your contact information below. This will not be published.

NOTE: Providing information for review by an attorney does not form an attorney-client relationship.

MORE TOP STORIES

The first Bard PowerPort lawsuit bellwether trial commences next week involving claims that a man suffered a severe infection due to the port catheter’s allegedly defective design.
A Louisiana man’s Boston Scientific WaveWriter Alpha SCS lawsuit claims the implant failed to provide the promised pain relief and, in fact, made things worse before it needed to be surgically removed.