Comparative Risk of Hospitalized Infection Associated With Biologic Agents in Rheumatoid Arthritis Patients Enrolled in Medicare

Trends in Hospitalization Rates, Major Causes of Hospitalization, and In-Hospital Mortality in Rheumatoid Arthritis in the United States From 2000 to 2014

Objective

To evaluate national trends in hospitalizations and in‐hospital mortality in rheumatoid arthritis (RA).

Methods

National Inpatient Sample from 2000‐2014 and United States Census data were used to study temporal trends in adult RA hospitalizations, reasons for hospitalizations, and in‐hospital mortality.

Results

The data represented 183 983 hospitalizations with a primary diagnosis of RA. The annual rates of hospitalization for the primary diagnosis of RA decreased from 76.54 admissions per 1 million in 2000 to 29.96 per 1 million in 2014 (P trend < 0.0001). The hospital mortality rate declined from 0.70% to 0.41% (P trend < 0.0001) in this group. With a primary or nonprimary diagnosis of RA, the mortality rate ranged between 1.95 and 2.87 (P trend 0.08). For a nonprimary diagnosis of RA, we noted that the proportion of hospitalizations with a diagnosis of myocardial infarction (6.4% in 2000 to 4.6% in 2014; P < 0.001) significantly decreased, but the absolute number of hospitalizations significantly increased. In contrast, the proportion and the absolute number of hospitalizations with any diagnosis of sepsis, congestive heart failure, lung disease, and urinary tract infection increased significantly. We also noted a significant increase in the actual rate and proportions for hospitalizations for hip and knee arthroplasty. Among in‐hospital deaths when RA was a nonprimary diagnosis, the most common primary diagnosis was pneumonia (12.5 %) in 2000, whereas sepsis accounted for the most deaths in 2014 (31.4%).

Conclusion

We observed that hospitalization rates and in‐hospital mortality rates in patients with RA have changed significantly over the past 15 years.

Recent progress in maintenance treatment of neuromyelitis optica spectrum disorder

Background

Treatment of neuromyelitis optica spectrum disorder (NMOSD) has so far been based on retrospective case series. The results of six randomized clinical trials including five different monoclonal antibodies targeting four molecules and three distinct pathophysiological pathways have recently been published.

Methods

Literature search on clinical trials and case studies in NMOSD up to July 10. 2020.

Results

We review mechanism of action, efficacy and side effects, and consequences for reproductive health from traditional immunosuppressants and monoclonal antibodies including rituximab, inebilizumab, eculizumab, tocilizumab and satralizumab.

Conclusion

In NMOSD patients with antibodies against aquaporin 4, monoclonal antibodies that deplete B cells (rituximab and inebilizumab) or interfere with interleukin 6 signaling (tocilizumab and satralizumab) or complement activation (eculizumab) have superior efficacy compared to placebo. Tocilizumab and rituximab were also superior to azathioprine in head-to-head studies. Rituximab, tocilizumab and to some extent eculizumab have well-known safety profiles for other inflammatory diseases, and rituximab and azathioprine may be safe during pregnancy.

Acute respiratory viral adverse events during use of antirheumatic disease therapies: A scoping review

INTRODUCTION

COVID-19 is an acute respiratory viral infection that threatens people worldwide, including people with rheumatic disease, although it remains unclear to what extent various antirheumatic disease therapies increase susceptibility to complications of viral respiratory infections.

OBJECTIVE

The present study undertakes a scoping review of available evidence regarding the frequency and severity of acute respiratory viral adverse events related to antirheumatic disease therapies.

METHODS

Online databases were used to identify, since database inception, studies reporting primary data on acute respiratory viral infections in patients utilizing antirheumatic disease therapies. Independent reviewer pairs charted data from eligible studies using a standardized data abstraction tool.

RESULTS

A total of 180 studies were eligible for qualitative analysis. While acknowledging that the extant literature has a lack of specificity in reporting of acute viral infections or complications thereof, the data suggest that use of glucocorticoids, JAK inhibitors (especially high-dose), TNF inhibitors, and anti-IL-17 agents may be associated with an increased frequency of respiratory viral events. Available data suggest no increased frequency or risk of respiratory viral events with NSAIDs, hydroxychloroquine, sulfasalazine, methotrexate, azathioprine, mycophenolate mofetil, cyclophosphamide, or apremilast. One large cohort study demonstrated an association with leflunomide use and increased risk of acute viral respiratory events compared to non-use.

CONCLUSION

This scoping review identified that some medication classes may confer increased risk of acute respiratory viral infections. However, definitive data are lacking and future studies should address this knowledge gap.

High rates of severe disease and death due to SARS-CoV-2 infection in rheumatic disease patients treated with rituximab: a descriptive study

The objective of this study is to describe the characteristics and outcomes of rheumatic and musculoskeletal disease (RMD) patients who were treated with rituximab and had suspected or confirmed severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection. In this descriptive study, RMD patients who were treated with rituximab in the last 12 months at the Rheumatology Department of our hospital were screened for SARS-CoV-2 infection via telephone interview and a comprehensive review of clinical health records (01/02/2020–26/05/2020). Those with probable or confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection were included. In total, 76 patients were screened. Of these, 13 (17.1%) had suspected or confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection. With regard to these 13 patients, the median age at coronavirus disease (COVID-19) diagnosis was 68 years (range 28–76 years) and 8 (61.5%) were female. Five patients had rheumatoid arthritis, three had systemic vasculitis, two had Sjögren syndrome, and two had systemic lupus erythematosus. Additionally, seven patients (53.8%) had pulmonary involvement secondary to RMD. Eight patients (61.5%) developed severe disease leading to hospitalization, and seven developed bilateral pneumonia and respiratory insufficiency. Of the eight hospitalized patients, five (62.5%) fulfilled the acute respiratory distress syndrome criteria and three developed a critical disease and died. Our cohort had a high rate of severe disease requiring hospitalization (61.5%), with bilateral pneumonia and hyperinflammation leading to a high mortality rate (23.1%). Treatment with rituximab should be considered a possible risk factor for unfavorable outcomes in COVID-19 patients with RMD. However, further study is required to confirm this association.

Rheumatoid arthritis in a patient with cystic fibrosis: challenging treatment options

A 26-year-old Caucasian male patient with a history of cystic fibrosis presented with a 6-month history of diffuse joint pain and swelling. He was found to have active synovitis in bilateral wrists and proximal interphalangeal joints of the hands on physical examination. He was diagnosed with seropositive rheumatoid arthritis since he had positive anti-cyclic citrullinated peptide antibodies and erosions on hand and foot X-rays. The patient has responded well to abatacept which may have less infection risk compared with other biological therapies.

Comparison of infection-related hospitalization risk and costs in tumor necrosis factor inhibitor-experienced patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) treated with abatacept or other targeted disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs (tDMARDs)

Background: Evidence on the cost and risk of infection-related hospitalizations associated with targeted disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs (tDMARDs) in patients with RA previously treated with a tumor necrosis factor inhibitor (TNFi) is limited. This study compared the risk and cost of infection-related hospitalizations in commercially insured TNFi-experienced RA patients receiving abatacept, TNFi, or another non-TNFi.Methods: A retrospective observational study was conducted using 2 large insurance claims databases (1 January 2009-30 June 2017). Adult TNFi-experienced RA patients initiating a subsequent tDMARD (initiation date of tDMARD = index date) with 12 months of continuous enrollment pre-index date, and who had ≥1 inpatient or ≥2 outpatient medical RA claims on 2 different dates were included. Abatacept was compared to TNFis (adalimumab, certolizumab pegol, etanercept, golimumab, and infliximab) and other non-TNFis (tocilizumab, rituximab, and tofacitinib). Cox proportional hazards models estimated the adjusted risk for infection-related hospitalization; costs were calculated on a per-member-per-month (PMPM) and per-patient-per-month (PPPM) basis using generalized linear models.Results: More patients in the abatacept cohort had an infection-related hospitalization at baseline (4.5%) vs TNFis (2.0%, p < .0001) and other non-TNFis (3.6%, p = .2619). However, during follow-up abatacept patients had fewer infection-related hospitalizations (abatacept: 2.8%, TNFi: 3.7% and other non-TNFis: 5.2%; p < .05). Regression results indicated that compared to patients on abatacept, patients receiving a TNFi [HR: 1.6 (95% CI: 1.1, 2.2)] and other non-TNFis [HR: 1.9 (95% CI: 1.3, 2.8)] had a significantly higher risk of infection-related hospitalization. Abatacept PMPM costs were lowest ($0.25 vs $0.39 and $0.43 for TNFi and other non-TNFi respectively). Mean PPPM (95% CI) cost in the follow-up was lower for abatacept compared to TNFi ($73 vs. $115; p = .042), and other non-TNFi ($73 vs. $125; p = .039).Conclusions: There were significantly lower infection-related hospitalizations and associated costs in TNF-experienced RA patients treated with abatacept than TNFis and other non-TNFis.

Drug retention of 7 biologics and tofacitinib in biologics-naïve and biologics-switched patients with rheumatoid arthritis: the ANSWER cohort study

Background

This multi-center, retrospective study aimed to clarify retention rates and reasons for discontinuation of 7 biological disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (bDMARDs) and tofacitinib (TOF), one of the janus kinase inhibitors, in bDMARDs-naïve and bDMARDs-switched patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA).

Methods

This study assessed 3897 patients and 4415 treatment courses with bDMARDs and TOF from 2001 to 2019 (2737 bDMARDs-naïve courses and 1678 bDMARDs-switched courses [59.5% of switched courses were their second agent], female 82.3%, baseline age 57.4 years, disease duration 8.5 years; rheumatoid factor positivity 78.4%; Disease Activity Score in 28 joints using erythrocyte sedimentation rate 4.3; concomitant prednisolone [PSL] dose 6.1 mg/day [usage 42.4%], and methotrexate [MTX] dose 8.5 mg/week [usage 60.9%]). Treatment courses included abatacept (ABT; n = 663), adalimumab (ADA; n = 536), certolizumab pegol (CZP; n = 226), etanercept (ETN; n = 856), golimumab (GLM; n = 458), infliximab (IFX; n = 724), tocilizumab (TCZ; n = 851), and TOF (n = 101/only bDMARDs-switched cases). Drug discontinuation reasons (categorized into lack of effectiveness, toxic adverse events, non-toxic reasons, or remission) and rates were estimated at 36 months using Gray’s test and statistically evaluated after adjusted by potential clinical confounders (age, sex, disease duration, concomitant PSL and MTX usage, starting date, and number of switched bDMARDs) using the Fine-Gray model.

Results

Cumulative incidence of drug discontinuation for each reason was as follows: lack of effectiveness in the bDMARDs-naïve group (from 13.7% [ABT] to 26.9% [CZP]; P < 0.001 between agents) and the bDMARDs-switched group (from 18.9% [TCZ] to 46.1% [CZP]; P < 0.001 between agents); toxic adverse events in the bDMARDs-naïve group (from 4.6% [ABT] to 11.2% [ETN]; P < 0.001 between agents) and the bDMARDs-switched group (from 5.0% [ETN] to 15.7% [TOF]; P = 0.004 between agents); and remission in the bDMARDs-naïve group (from 2.9% [ETN] to 10.0% [IFX]; P < 0.001 between agents) and the bDMARDs-switched group (from 1.1% [CZP] to 3.3% [GLM]; P = 0.9 between agents).

Conclusions

Remarkable differences were observed in drug retention of 7 bDMARDs and TOF between bDMARDs-naïve and bDMARDs-switched cases.

Incidence of Serious Infections and Design of Utilization and Safety Studies for Biologic and Biosimilar Surveillance

BACKGROUND

There is a need for postmarketing evidence generation for novel biologics and biosimilars.

OBJECTIVE

To assess the feasibility, strengths, and limitations of the Biologics and Biosimilars Collective Intelligence Consortium (BBCIC) Distributed Research Network (DRN) to examine the utilization and comparative safety of immune-modulating agents among patients with autoimmune diseases.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective cohort study among patients enrolled in health insurance plans participating in the BBCIC DRN between January 1, 2006, and September 30, 2015. Eligible patients were adult (≥18 years) new users of a disease-modifying nonbiologic and/or biologic agent with a prior diagnosis of rheumatoid arthritis (RA), other inflammatory conditions (psoriasis, psoriatic arthritis, ankylosing spondylitis), or inflammatory bowel disease (IBD). Follow-up started at treatment initiation and ended at the earliest of outcome occurrence (serious infection); treatment discontinuation; or switching, death, disenrollment, or end of study period. The study leveraged the FDA Sentinel System infrastructure for data management and analysis; descriptive statistics of patient characteristics and unadjusted incidence rates of study outcomes during follow-up were calculated.

RESULTS

Eligible patient drug episodes included 111,611 with RA (75% female), 61,050 with other inflammatory conditions (51% female), and 30,628 with IBD (52% female). Across all 3 cohorts, approximately half of the patient drug episodes initiated a biologic (50% in RA; 60% in psoriasis, psoriatic arthritis, ankylosing spondylitis; and 55% in IBD). The crude incidence rate of serious infection was 9.8 (9.5-10.0) cases per 100 person-years in RA, 7.1 (6.8-7.5) in other inflammatory conditions, and 14.2 (13.6-14.8) in IBD patients.

CONCLUSIONS

This study successfully identified large numbers of new users of biologics and produced results that were consistent with those from earlier published studies. The BBCIC DRN is a potential resource for surveillance of biologics.

DISCLOSURES

This study was funded by the Biologics and Biosimilars Collective Intelligence Consortium (BBCIC). HealthCore conducted this study in collaboration with Harvard Pilgrim Health Care. Zhang and Sridhar were employed by HealthCore at the time of this study. Haynes is employed by HealthCore funded by PCORI, the NIH, and the FDA. Barr and Eichelberger were employed by AMCP at the time of this study. Lockhart is employed by the BBCIC. Holmes and Clewell are employed by AbbVie. Accrott is an employee of and shareholder in Amgen. Marshall and Brown are employed by Harvard Pilgrim Health Care. Barr is a shareholder in Roche/Genentech. Curtis has received research grants from and consults with the following: Amgen, AbbVie, BMS, CORRONA, Lilly, Janssen, Myriad, Pfizer, Roche, Regeneron, and UCB. Brown has received research grants from GSK and Pfizer and consulting fees from Bayer, Roche, and Jazz Pharmaceuticals, along with funding from the Reagan-Udall Foundation for the FDA to conduct studies for medical product manufacturers, including Eli Lilly, Novartis, Abbvie, and Merck. Brown is also funded by PCORI, the NIH, and the FDA. McMahill-Walraven subcontracts with Harvard Pilgrim Health Care Institute for public health and safety surveillance distributed data network activtities and with the FDA, GSK, and Pfizer. She also reports fees from Reagan Udall Foundation for the FDA and the Patient Centered Outcomes Research Institute.

Comparative risk of serious infections among real-world users of biologics for psoriasis or psoriatic arthritis

OBJECTIVE

To examine whether initiation of interleukin (IL)-17, IL-12/23 or tumour necrosis factor (TNF) inhibitor is associated with an increased risk of serious infection among real-world psoriasis (PsO) or psoriatic arthritis (PsA) patients.

METHODS

We assembled a retrospective cohort of commercially insured adults in the USA diagnosed with PsO or PsA between 2015 and 2018. Exposure was dispensation for IL-17 (ixekizumab or secukinumab), IL-12/23 (ustekinumab) or TNF (adalimumab, certolizumab pegol, etanercept, golimumab and infliximab). The outcome was infection requiring hospitalisation after biologic initiation. Incidence rates (IRs) per 100 person-years were computed, and hazard ratios (HRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were estimated using Cox proportional hazards regression models, adjusted for inverse probability of treatment-weighted propensity scores.

RESULTS

A total of 11 560 new treatment episodes were included. Overall, 190 serious infections (2% of treatment episodes) were identified in 9264 person-years of follow-up. Class-specific IRs were similar among IL-17 and TNF, yet significantly lower for IL-12/23. After adjustment for propensity scores, there was no increased risk with IL-17 compared with either TNF (HR=0.89, 95% CI 0.48 to 1.66) or IL-12/23 (HR=1.12, 95% CI 0.62 to 2.03). By contrast, IL-23/23 were associated with a lower risk of infections than TNF (HR=0.59, 95% CI 0.39 to 0.90).

CONCLUSIONS

Relative to TNF and IL-17, IL-12/23 inhibitors were associated with a reduced risk of serious infection in biologic-naïve patients with PsO or PsA. In biologic-experienced individuals, there was no difference in infection risk across TNF, IL-17 or IL-12/23 inhibitors.

Risk of admission to hospital for serious infection after initiating tofacitinib versus biologic DMARDs in patients with rheumatoid arthritis: a multidatabase cohort study

BACKGROUND

The risk of serious infection is a major concern when prescribing a disease-modifying antirheumatic drug (DMARD) for rheumatoid arthritis. Little evidence exists with regard to serious infection risk associated with tofacitinib, a targeted synthetic (ts)DMARD, compared with biologic DMARDs (bDMARDs) among patients with rheumatoid arthritis. We compared the risk of serious infection in patients with rheumatoid arthritis initiating tofacitinib versus one of the seven bDMARDs.

METHODS

In this multidatabase cohort study, we identified eight mutually exclusive groups of patients with rheumatoid arthritis initiating tofacitinib or one of the seven bDMARDs using US public (Medicare 20012-15) and private (Optum Clinformatics 2012-18 and IBM MarketScan 2012-17) health insurance programmes. Eligible patients were aged 18 years or older, and had one inpatient visit or two or more outpatient visits (7-365 days apart) for rheumatoid arthritis using International Classification of Diseases 9th and 10th revision codes. The primary outcome was a composite endpoint of admission to hospital for serious infection including bacterial, viral, or opportunistic infection based on the inpatient principal diagnosis code. Secondary outcomes were individual types of serious infections and herpes zoster. We adjusted for more than 60 potential confounders through propensity score-based inverse probability treatment weighting in each database. Database-specific adjusted hazard ratios (aHRs) were combined using a fixed-effects meta-analysis.

FINDINGS

We identified 130 718 patients with rheumatoid arthritis across the three databases. During 100 790 person-years of follow-up, 3140 serious infections occurred (crude incidence rate per 100 person-years 3·12, 95% CI 3·01-3·23). The aHR for serious infection associated with tofacitinib was 1·41 (95% CI 1·15-1·73) versus etanercept, 1·20 (0·97-1·49) versus abatacept, 1·23 (0·94-1·62) versus golimumab, and 1·17 (0·89-1·53) versus tocilizumab. The serious infection risk with tofacitinib was similar to adalimumab (1·06, 0·87-1·30) and certolizumab (1·02, 0·80-1·29), and was lower than infliximab (0·81, 0·65-1·00). Tofacitinib was associated with a 2-fold higher risk of herpes zoster versus all bDMARDs.

INTERPRETATION

This study found potential differences between tofacitinib and several bDMARDs in the risk of admission to hospital for serious infection, as well as herpes zoster, in patients with rheumatoid arthritis. These results contribute to the evolving understanding of the overall risk-benefit profile of tofacitinib.

FUNDING

Division of Pharmacoepidemiology and Pharmacoeconomics, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Harvard University, MA, USA.

Infection risk in patients undergoing treatment for inflammatory arthritis: non-biologics versus biologics

Introduction: Despite the therapeutic effectiveness of biologics targeting immune cells or cytokines in patients with inflammatory arthritis, which reflects their pathogenic roles, an increased infection risk is observed in those undergoing biological treatment. However, there are limited data regarding the comparison of infection risks in inflammatory arthritis patients treated with non-biologics (csDMARDs), biologics (bDMARDs), including tumor necrosis factor (TNF) inhibitors and non-TNF inhibitors, or targeted synthetic (ts)DMARDs.Areas covered: Through a review of English-language literature as of 30 June 2019, we focus on the existing evidence on the risk of infections caused by bacteria, Mycobacterium tuberculosis, and hepatitis virus in inflammatory arthritis patients undergoing treatment with csDMARDs, bDMARDs, or tsDMARDs.Expert opinion: While the risks of bacterial and mycobacterial infection are increased in arthritis patients treated with csDMARDs, the risks are further higher in those receiving bDMARDs therapy, particularly TNF inhibitors. Regarding HBV infection, antiviral therapy may effectively prevent HBV reactivation in patients receiving bDMARDs, especially rituximab. However, more data are needed to establish effective preventive strategies for HBsAg-negative/HBcAb-positive patients. It seems safe to use cyclosporine and TNF inhibitors in patients with HCV infection, while those undergoing rituximab therapies should be frequently monitored for HCV activity.Abbreviations: ABT: abatacept; ADA: adalimumab; AS: ankylosing spondylitis; bDMARDs: biologic disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs; CKD: chronic kidney disease; COPD: chronic obstructive pulmonary disease; CS: corticosteroids; CsA: cyclosporine A; csDMARDs: conventional synthetic disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs; CZP: certolizumab; DAAs: direct-acting antiviral agents; DM: diabetes mellitus; DOT: directly observed therapy; EIN: Emerging Infections Network; ETN: etanercept; GOL: golimumab; GPRD: General Practice Research Database; HBV: hepatitis B virus; HBVr: HBV reactivation; HBsAg+: HBsAg-positive; HBsAg-/anti-HBc+: HBsAg-negative anti-HBc antibodies-positive; HCV: hepatitis C virus; HCQ: hydroxychloroquine: IFX: infliximab; IL-6: interleukin-6; JAK: Janus kinase; LEF: leflunomide; LTBI: latent tuberculosis infection; mAb: monoclonal antibody; MTX: methotrexate; OR: odds ratio; PsA: psoriatic arthritis; PMS: post-marketing surveillance; RA: rheumatoid arthritis; TNF: tumor necrosis factor; TNFi: tumor necrosis factor inhibitor; SCK: secukinumab; SSZ: sulfasalazine; TOZ: tocilizumab; RCT: randomized controlled trial; RR: relative risk; RTX: rituximab; 3HP: 3-month once-weekly isoniazid plus rifapentine; TB: tuberculosis; tsDMARDs: targeted synthetic disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs; UTK: ustekinumab; WHO: World Health Organization.

Ten-year retrospective review of the incidence of serious infections in patients on biologic disease modifying agents for rheumatoid arthritis in three tertiary hospitals in Western Australia

BACKGROUND

Biologic disease modifying anti-rheumatic drugs (bDMARDs) have significantly improved the prognosis for patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA). However, due to their immunosuppressive nature, concerns remain about the potential for infection in patients receiving these medications.

AIMS

To evaluate the incidence of serious infections (SI) in a Western Australian cohort of patients with RA who are receiving bDMARDs. The role of confounders including age, gender, comorbidities and use of glucocorticoids was also evaluated. The incidence of SI was defined as any infection necessitating admission to the hospital and the use of antibiotics.

METHODS

A 10-year retrospective review was conducted of all patients with RA who were receiving bDMARDs at three tertiary hospitals in Western Australia. Discharge summaries and all available clinic letters were reviewed and patient demographics and clinical data were collected. Pearson Chi-squared test and Student's t-test were used for comparing demographic factors and clinical variables between the groups with SI and those without.

RESULTS

One hundred and two patients met the inclusion criteria for the period 2006-2016, 25 of whom had been admitted with SI, accounting for a total of 46 admissions. Skin and soft tissue infections were the most common (28%) followed by respiratory infections (26%) and urinary tract infections (20%). The incidence rate of SI was 8.98 per 100 person years. The rate was lowest with adalimumab (5.27 per 100 person years) and highest with infliximab (34.5 per 100 person years). Those with SI were older (68 years vs 60 years; P = 0.02) and had been on bDMARDs for longer period of time (6.05 years vs 4.68 years; P = 0.04). There was no significant increase in length of stay due to co-administration of glucocorticoids. The presence of comorbidities did not play a significant role in increasing the risk of SI.

CONCLUSION

Age and duration of bDMARD use were statistically significant factors associated with an increased risk of SI. Comorbidities did not play a significant role in increasing the incidence of SI. Patients who were on both glucocorticoids and bDMARDs did not have a significant increase in length of stay when compared with patients who were just on bDMARDs. More research is needed in this area with larger numbers to draw statistically significant conclusions regarding the role of comorbidities in SI risk and the individual infection risk associated with each bDMARD.

Peripheral Blood Lymphocyte Analysis in Oligo- and Polyarticular Juvenile Idiopathic Arthritis Patients Receiving Methotrexate or Adalimumab Therapy: A Cross-Sectional Study

Juvenile idiopathic arthritis (JIA) is an umbrella term for seven distinct chronic immune-mediated diseases. Disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs (DMARD) are used to treat the underlying joint inflammation as well as extra-articular manifestations. Immunosuppression is a considerable side effect of the drugs. The main goal of this study was to investigate the effect of different JIA therapies on leukocyte subpopulations, which play a role in immune-defense. Three study groups were established. The first group consisted of JIA patients treated with methotrexate solely, the second one received a combination of methotrexate (MTX) and adalimumab (ADA). The control group was made up of the patients' healthy siblings. A total of 63 children were recruited. Fourty-one children with JIA and 22 healthy controls were included in the study. The absolute number of CD3+ T-cells was significantly elevated in patients treated with biological therapy compared to healthy controls (p2 = 0.017). In contrast, the number of CD56+ natural killer cells was significantly lower in children receiving biological therapy in comparison with healthy donors (p2 = 0.039). A significant alteration was also demonstrated between patients treated with MTX and MTX/ADA group concerning CD 19+ B-cells (p3 = 0.042). This is the first study that demonstrates significant alterations in the number of B-cells and T-cells with a relative decrease of NK-cell ratios in JIA patients receiving different DMARD therapy. Clinical Trial Registration: NCT03833271. 21.01.2019.

Preparation of Chondroitin Sulfate-Glycyl-Prednisolone Conjugate Nanogel and Its Efficacy in Rats with Ulcerative Colitis

A conjugate between chondroitin sulfate (CS) and glycyl-prednisolone (GP), named CS-GP, was produced by carbodiimide coupling at a high GP/CS ratio. CS-GP was not water-soluble and gave a nanogel (NG) in aqueous solution. Two types of nanogels, NG(I) and NG(II), with prednisolone (PD) contents of 5.5 and 21.1% (w/w), respectively, were obtained. They had particle sizes of approximately 280 and 570 nm, respectively, and showed negative ζ-potentials of approximately -40 mV. The PD release rate was slower in the nanogels than in a solution of CS-GP with a PD content of 1.4% (w/w). The PD release rate was slower in NG(II) than in NG(I), and was elevated at pH 7.4 than at pH 6.8. NG(II) was applied in vivo to rats with trinitrobenzene sulfonic acid (TNBS)-induced colitis, and its therapeutic efficacy and pharmacokinetic features were investigated. The therapeutic efficacy of NG(II) was slightly better than that of PD alone. Drug delivery to the lower intestines was enhanced with NG(II). The CS-GP nanogel has potential as a potent DDS for the treatment of ulcerative colitis.

Risk of Hospitalized Infection and Initiation of Abatacept Versus Tumor Necrosis Factor Inhibitors Among Patients With Rheumatoid Arthritis: A Propensity Score-Matched Cohort Study

OBJECTIVE

We aimed to evaluate the comparative risk of hospitalized infection among patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) who initiated abatacept versus a tumor necrosis factor inhibitor (TNFi).

METHODS

Using claims data from Truven MarketScan database (2006-2015), we identified patients with RA ages ≥18 years with ≥2 RA diagnoses who initiated treatment with abatacept or a TNFi. The primary outcome was a composite end point of any hospitalized infection. Secondary outcomes included bacterial infection, herpes zoster, and infections affecting different organ systems. We performed 1:1 propensity score (PS) matching between the groups in order to control for baseline confounders. We estimated incidence rates (IRs) and hazard ratios (HRs) with 95% confidence intervals (95% CIs) for hospitalized infection.

RESULTS

We identified 11,248 PS-matched pairs of patients who initiated treatment with abatacept and TNFi with a median age of 56 years (83% were women). The IR per 1,000 person-years for any hospitalized infection was 37 among patients who initiated treatment with abatacept and 47 in those who initiated treatment with TNFi. The HR for the risk of any hospitalized infection associated with abatacept versus TNFi was 0.78 (95% CI 0.64-0.95) and remained lower when compared to infliximab (HR 0.63 [95% CI 0.47-0.85]), while no significant difference was seen when compared to adalimumab and etanercept. The risk of secondary outcomes was lower for abatacept for pulmonary infections, and similar to TNFi for the remaining outcomes.

CONCLUSION

In this large cohort of patients with RA who initiated treatment with abatacept or TNFi as a first- or second-line biologic agent, we found a lower risk of hospitalized infection after initiating abatacept versus TNFi, which was driven mostly by infliximab.

Risk of exacerbation of pulmonary comorbidities in patients with rheumatoid arthritis after initiation of abatacept versus TNF inhibitors: A cohort study

BACKGROUND

Biologic agents may pose a potential risk for exacerbations of pulmonary comorbidities in rheumatoid arthritis (RA) patients.

METHODS

Using U.S. Medicare and Truven MarketScan databases, we identified three cohorts of RA patients with interstitial lung disease (ILD), chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), or asthma who initiated abatacept or a TNF inhibitor (TNFi). The primary outcome was a composite exacerbation of individual pulmonary comorbidities based on inpatient or emergency department (ED) visits due to exacerbation of the given pulmonary comorbidity. To adjust for >60 baseline confounders, we used propensity-score fine stratification (PSS) and weighting. Negative binomial regression model estimated a cohort-specific incidence rate ratio (IRR) and 95% confidence interval (CI) of the primary outcome per database, comparing abatacept versus TNFi. Database-specific IRRs were combined using a random-effects meta-analysis.

RESULTS

We identified 3,295 ILD, 7,161 COPD, and 5,613 asthma patients with RA who initiated either abatacept or a TNFi. IR of composite exacerbation was high in all three pulmonary cohorts but highest in COPD cohort (3.59-11.80 per 100 person-years in ILD, 20.68-34.97 in COPD, and 4.66-13.78 in asthma). After PSS weighting, the combined IRR (95%CI) in abatacept initiators versus TNFi initiators was 0.44 (0.18-1.09) for ILD exacerbation, 0.91 (0.80-1.03) for COPD exacerbation, and 0.81 (0.54-1.22) for asthma exacerbation.

CONCLUSION

Among patients with RA and pulmonary comorbidities, exacerbations requiring inpatient or ED visits occurred frequently after initiating abatacept or TNFi. Overall, we found no significant difference in the risk of ILD, COPD or asthma exacerbation between abatacept and TNFi initiators, but precision of our estimates is limited.

Targeting Interleukin-6 Signaling in Clinic

Interleukin-6 (IL-6) is a pleiotropic cytokine with roles in immunity, tissue regeneration, and metabolism. Rapid production of IL-6 contributes to host defense during infection and tissue injury, but excessive synthesis of IL-6 and dysregulation of IL-6 receptor signaling is involved in disease pathology. Therapeutic agents targeting the IL-6 axis are effective in rheumatoid arthritis, and applications are being extended to other settings of acute and chronic inflammation. Recent studies reveal that selective blockade of different modes of IL-6 receptor signaling has different outcomes on disease pathology, suggesting novel strategies for therapeutic intervention. However, some inflammatory diseases do not seem to respond to IL-6 blockade. Here, we review the current state of IL-6-targeting approaches in the clinic and discuss how to apply the growing understanding of the immunobiology of IL-6 to clinical decisions.

Risk of Serious Infection in Patients With Rheumatoid Arthritis Treated With Biologic Versus Nonbiologic Disease-Modifying Antirheumatic Drugs

Objective

The objective of this study is to examine the risk of serious infections (SIs) associated with biological disease‐modifying antirheumatic drugs (bDMARDs) compared with conventional synthetic disease‐modifying antirheumatic drugs (csDMARDs) in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA).

Methods

We studied patients with RA who initiated bDMARDs or csDMARDs from 2001 to 2016 in FORWARD–The National Databank for Rheumatic Diseases. Disease‐modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs) were categorized into three groups: (1) csDMARDs (bDMARD‐naïve; reference), (2) tumor necrosis factor α inhibitors (TNFis), and (3) non‐TNFi biologics (abatacept, rituximab, tocilizumab, and anakinra). SIs were defined as those requiring intravenous antibiotics or hospitalization or those resulting in death. We calculated the propensity score (PS), which reflected the probability of receiving a specific DMARD group, and estimated the hazard ratio (HR) (with the 95% confidence interval [CI]) for SI from multivariable Cox models, adjusting for PS and time‐varying confounders.

Results

A total of 694 (5.9%) first SIs were identified in 11 623 patients with RA during 27 552 patient‐years of follow‐up. The SI incidence rate per 1000 patient‐years was 22.4 (95% CI 19.2‐26.1) for csDMARDs, 26.9 (95% CI 24.5‐29.6) for TNFis, and 23.3 (95% CI 19.0‐28.5) for non‐TNFi bDMARDs. Adjusted HRs for SIs were 1.33 (95% CI 1.05‐1.68) for TNFis and 1.48 (95% CI 1.02‐2.16) for non‐TNFi bDMARDs, compared with csDMARDs. The SI risk with non‐TNFi bDMARDs versus TNFis was not different. Other risk factors for SI were older age, higher comorbidity burden (particularly pulmonary disease), higher weighted cumulative prednisone dose, disability and disease activity, and number of prior csDMARD failures.

Conclusion

TNFis and non‐TNFi bDMARDs were associated with an increased SI risk compared with csDMARDs in RA, even after accounting for risk‐associated patient characteristics.

Kuwait association of rheumatology 2018 treatment recommendations for patients with rheumatoid arthritis

The Kuwait Association of Rheumatology (KAR) aimed to develop a set of recommendations for the treatment of patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA), tailored to the unique patient population and healthcare system of Kuwait. Each recommendation was developed based on expert opinion and evaluation of clinical practice guidelines from other international and national rheumatology societies. Online surveys were conducted to collate feedback on each KAR member's level of agreement (LoA) with definitions of disease-/treatment-related terms used and the draft recommendations. Definitions/recommendations achieving a pre-defined cut-off value of ≥ 70% agreement were accepted for inclusion. Remaining statements were discussed and revised at a face-to-face meeting, with further modifications until consensus was reached. A final online survey was used to collect feedback on each KAR member's LoA with the final set of recommendation statements on a scale of 0 (complete disagreement) to 10 (complete agreement). Group consensus was achieved on 66 recommendation statements, including 3 overarching principles addressing the pharmacological treatment and management of RA. Recommendations focused on treatment of early RA, established RA, patients with high-risk comorbidities, women during pregnancy and breastfeeding, and screening and treatment of opportunistic infections. The KAR 2018 Treatment Recommendations for RA reported here are based on a synthesis of other national/international guidelines, supporting literature, and expert consensus considering the Kuwaiti healthcare system and RA patient population. These recommendations aim to inform the clinical decisions of rheumatologists treating patients in Kuwait, and to promote best practices, enhance alignment and improve the treatment experience for patients.

Methodologic considerations for noninterventional studies of switching from reference biologic to biosimilars

PURPOSE

As more biosimilars become available in the United States, postapproval noninterventional studies describing biosimilar switching and comparing effectiveness and/or safety between switchers and nonswitchers will play a key role in generating real-world evidence to inform clinical practices and policy decisions. Ensuring sound methodology is critical for making valid inferences from these studies.

METHODS

The Biologics and Biosimilars Collective Intelligence Consortium (BBCIC) convened a workgroup consisting of academic researchers, industry scientists, and practicing clinicians to establish best practice recommendations for the conduct of noninterventional studies of biosimilar and reference biologic switching. The workgroup members participated in eight teleconferences between August 2017 and February 2018 to discuss specific topics and build consensus.

RESULTS

This report provides workgroup recommendations covering five main considerations relating to noninterventional studies describing reference biologic to biosimilar switching and comparing reference biologic to biosimilars for safety and effectiveness in the presence of switching at treatment initiation and during follow-up: (a) selecting appropriate data sources from a range of available options including insurance claims, electronic health records, and registries; (b) study designs; (c) outcomes of interest including health care utilization and clinical endpoints; (d) analytic approaches including propensity scores, disease risk scores, and instrumental variables; and (e) special considerations including avoiding designs that ignore history of biologic use, avoiding immortal time bias, exposure misclassification, and accounting for postindex switching.

CONCLUSION

Recommendations provided in this report provide a framework that may be helpful in designing and critically evaluating postapproval noninterventional studies involving reference biologic to biosimilar switching.

Timing of Abatacept Before Elective Arthroplasty and Risk of Postoperative Outcomes

OBJECTIVE

Guidelines recommend withholding biologic therapies before hip and knee arthroplasty, yet evidence to inform optimal timing is limited. The aim of this study was to determine whether withholding abatacept infusions is associated with lower risk of adverse postoperative outcomes.

METHODS

This retrospective cohort study, which used US Medicare and Truven MarketScan administrative data from January 2006 to September 2015, evaluated adults with rheumatoid arthritis who received intravenous abatacept (precisely dated in claims data) within 6 months of elective primary or revision hip or knee arthroplasty. Propensity weighted analyses using inverse probability weights compared the risk of 30-day hospitalized infection and 1-year prosthetic joint infection (PJI) between patients with different abatacept stop timing (time between last infusion and surgery). Secondary analyses evaluated nonurinary hospitalized infections and 30-day readmissions.

RESULTS

After 1,939 surgeries among 1,780 patients, there were 175 hospitalized infections (9.0%), 115 nonurinary hospitalized infections (5.9%), 39 PJIs (2.4/100 person-years), and 114/1,815 30-day readmissions (6.3%). There were no significant differences in outcomes with abatacept stop timing <4 weeks (1 dosing interval) versus 4-8 weeks (hospitalized infection odds ratio [OR] 0.93 [95% confidence interval (95% CI) 0.65-1.34]; nonurinary hospitalized infection OR 0.93 [95% CI 0.60-1.44]; PJI hazard ratio 1.29 [95% CI 0.62-2.69]; 30-day readmission OR 1.00 [95% CI 0.65-1.54]). Similarly, there were no significant differences in outcomes with abatacept stop timing <4 weeks versus ≥8 weeks. Glucocorticoid use >7.5 mg/day was associated with greater risk of hospitalized infection (OR 2.19 [95% CI 1.28-3.77]) and nonurinary hospitalized infection (OR 2.38 [95% CI 1.22-4.64]).

CONCLUSION

Compared to continuing intravenous abatacept, withholding abatacept for ≥4 weeks (one dosing interval) before surgery was not associated with a lower risk of hospitalized infection, nonurinary hospitalized infection, PJI, or 30-day readmission.

Risk of Biologics and Glucocorticoids in Patients With Rheumatoid Arthritis Undergoing Arthroplasty: A Cohort Study

BACKGROUND

Patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) are at increased risk for infection after arthroplasty, yet risks of specific biologic medications are unknown.

OBJECTIVE

To compare risk for postoperative infection among biologics and to evaluate the risk associated with glucocorticoids.

DESIGN

Retrospective cohort study.

SETTING

Medicare and Truven MarketScan administrative data from January 2006 through September 2015.

PATIENTS

Adults with RA who were having elective inpatient total knee or hip arthroplasty, either primary or revision, and had a recent infusion of or prescription for abatacept, adalimumab, etanercept, infliximab, rituximab, or tocilizumab before surgery.

MEASUREMENTS

Propensity-adjusted analyses using inverse probability weights evaluated comparative risks for hospitalized infection within 30 days and prosthetic joint infection (PJI) within 1 year after surgery between biologics or with different dosages of glucocorticoids. Secondary analyses evaluated non-urinary tract hospitalized infections and 30-day readmissions.

RESULTS

Among 9911 patients treated with biologics, 10 923 surgical procedures were identified. Outcomes were similar in patients who received different biologics. Compared with an 8.16% risk for hospitalized infection with abatacept, predicted risk from propensity-weighted models ranged from 6.87% (95% CI, 5.30% to 8.90%) with adalimumab to 8.90% (CI, 5.70% to 13.52%) with rituximab. Compared with a 2.14% 1-year cumulative incidence of PJI with abatacept, predicted incidence ranged from 0.35% (CI, 0.11% to 1.12%) with rituximab to 3.67% (CI, 1.69% to 7.88%) with tocilizumab. Glucocorticoids were associated with a dose-dependent increase in postoperative risk for all outcomes. Propensity-weighted models showed that use of more than 10 mg of glucocorticoids per day (vs. no glucocorticoid use) resulted in a predicted risk for hospitalized infection of 13.25% (CI, 9.72% to 17.81%) (vs. 6.78%) and a predicted 1-year cumulative incidence of PJI of 3.83% (CI, 2.13% to 6.87%) (vs. 2.09%).

LIMITATION

Residual confounding is possible, and sample sizes for rituximab and tocilizumab were small.

CONCLUSION

Risks for hospitalized infection, PJI, and readmission after arthroplasty were similar across biologics. In contrast, glucocorticoid use, especially with dosages above 10 mg/d, was associated with greater risk for adverse outcomes.

PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE

Rheumatology Research Foundation, National Institutes of Health, and Bristol-Myers Squibb.

Does Abatacept Increase Postoperative Adverse Events in Rheumatoid Arthritis Compared with Conventional Synthetic Disease-modifying Drugs?

Objective.

To investigate whether abatacept (ABA) causes more adverse events (AE) than conventional synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (csDMARD) after orthopedic surgery in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA).

Methods.

A retrospective multicenter nested case–control study was performed in 18 institutions. Patients receiving ABA (ABA group) were matched individually with patients receiving csDMARD and/or steroids (control group). Postoperative AE included surgical site infection, delayed wound healing, deep vein thrombosis or pulmonary embolism, flare, and death. The incidence rates of the AE in both groups were compared with the Mantel-Haenszel test. Risk factors for AE were analyzed by logistic regression model.

Results.

A total of 3358 cases were collected. After inclusion and exclusion, 2651 patients were selected for matching, and 194 patients in 97 pairs were chosen for subsequent comparative analyses between the ABA and control groups. No between-group differences were detected in the incidence rates of each AE or in the incidence rates of total AE (control vs ABA: 15.5% vs 20.7% in total, 5.2% vs 3.1% in death).

Conclusion.

Compared with csDMARD and/or steroids without ABA, adding ABA to the treatment does not appear to increase the incidence rates of postoperative AE in patients with RA undergoing orthopedic surgery. Large cohort studies should be performed to add evidence for the perioperative safety profile of ABA.

Safety of abatacept compared with other biologic and conventional synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs in patients with rheumatoid arthritis: data from an observational study

Background

To assess the risks of malignancies, infections and autoimmune diseases in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) treated with abatacept compared with other biologic (b) disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs) or conventional synthetic (cs)DMARDs, in a US-wide observational RA cohort

Methods

Data were reviewed from patients (≥ 18 years) with RA who were registered with FORWARD, the National Databank for Rheumatic Diseases, and who initiated abatacept, other bDMARDs or csDMARDs between 2005 and 2015. Patients who switched treatment during the study could be allocated to more than one group. The incidence rates (IRs) by treatment were calculated for malignancies, hospitalized infections and autoimmune diseases identified by six monthly questionnaires and medical records. The hazard ratios (HRs) (95% confidence intervals [CIs]) for all outcomes with abatacept compared with other bDMARDs or csDMARDs were determined using marginal structural models adjusted for clinical confounders.

Results

In the study sample, 1496 initiated abatacept, 3490 initiated another bDMARD and 1520 initiated a csDMARD. The risk of malignancies with abatacept was not statistically significant versus other bDMARDs (HR [95% CI)] 1.89 [0.93, 3.84]) or versus csDMARDs (HR [95% CI] 0.93 [0.20, 4.27]). Patients receiving abatacept versus other bDMARDs were at a lower risk of hospitalized infections (HR [95% CI] 0.37 [0.18, 0.75]); the risk versus csDMARDs was lower with wide CIs (HR [95% CI] 0.31 [0.09, 1.05]). The relative risks for psoriasis were similar between treatment groups (HR [95% CI] 1.46 [0.76, 2.81] and HR [95% CI] 2.05 [0.59, 7.16] for abatacept versus other bDMARDs and versus csDMARDS, respectively). The IR (95% CI) of severe infusion/injection reactions was lower with abatacept compared with other bDMARDs (1.57 [1.11, 2.17] vs 2.31 [1.87, 2.82] per 100 patient-years, respectively).

Conclusions

In this analysis, abatacept was well tolerated and did not result in an overall increased risk of malignancies, infections or autoimmune diseases compared with other bDMARDs or csDMARDs.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1186/s13075-019-1921-z) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Paeoniflorin-6'-O-benzene sulfonate alleviates collagen-induced arthritis in mice by downregulating BAFF-TRAF2-NF-κB signaling: comparison with biological agents

Paeoniflorin-6'-O-benzene sulfonate (CP-25) is a new ester derivative of paeoniflorin with improved lipid solubility and oral bioavailability, as well as better anti-inflammatory activity than its parent compound. In this study we explored whether CP-25 exerted therapeutic effects in collagen-induced arthritis (CIA) mice through regulating B-cell activating factor (BAFF)-BAFF receptors-mediated signaling pathways. CIA mice were given CP-25 or injected with biological agents rituximab or etanercept for 40 days. In CIA mice, we found that T cells and B cells exhibited abnormal proliferation; the percentages of CD19⁺ total B cells, CD19⁺CD27⁺-activated B cells, CD19⁺BAFFR⁺ and CD19⁺TACI⁺ cells were significantly increased in PBMCs and spleen lymphocytes. CP-25 suppressed the indicators of arthritis, alleviated histopathology, accompanied by reduced BAFF and BAFF receptors expressions, inhibited serum immunoglobulin levels, decreased the B-cell subsets percentages, and prevented the expressions of key molecules in NF-κB signaling. Furthermore, we showed that treatment with CP-25 reduced CD19⁺TRAF2⁺ cell expressions stimulated by BAFF and decreased TRAF2 overexpression in HEK293 cells in vitro. Thus, CP-25 restored the abnormal T cells proliferation and B-cell percentages to the normal levels, and normalized the elevated levels of IgA, IgG2a and key proteins in NF-κB signaling. In comparison, rituximab and etanercept displayed stronger anti-inflammatory activities than CP-25; they suppressed the elevated inflammatory indexes to below the normal levels in CIA mice. In summary, our results provide evidence that CP-25 alleviates CIA and regulates the functions of B cells through BAFF-TRAF2-NF-κB signaling. CP-25 would be a soft immunomodulatory drug with anti-inflammatory effect.

Safety of Abatacept Versus Placebo in Rheumatoid Arthritis: Integrated Data Analysis of Nine Clinical Trials

Objective

To assess the safety of abatacept treatment in rheumatoid arthritis (RA) using integrated data from multiple clinical trials.

Methods

Data from nine double‐blind, placebo‐controlled studies of abatacept treatment (seven intravenous, two subcutaneous) in patients with RA were pooled, focusing on safety events in the double‐blind treatment period of each study. Incidence rates (IRs) of adverse events (AEs) per 100 patient‐years of exposure were calculated for abatacept‐ and placebo‐treated patients. AEs in abatacept‐treated patients were combined regardless of dose and formulation.

Results

In total, 2653 patients received abatacept and 1485 received placebo, with 2357 and 1254 patient‐years of exposure, respectively. The mean (SD) durations of exposure in the abatacept and placebo groups were 10.8 (3.3) and 10.3 (3.5) months, respectively. The IRs (95% confidence interval [CI]) for serious AEs were 14.8 (13.3, 16.5) and 14.6 (12.5, 17.0) in the abatacept and placebo groups, respectively. Death occurred in 12 (0.5%) and 12 (0.8%) patients in the abatacept and placebo groups, respectively, and was most commonly caused by cardiac disorders. Malignancies were observed in 31 patients (1.2%) treated with abatacept (IR: 1.32 [95% CI: 0.90, 1.87]) versus 14 (0.9%; IR: 1.12 [0.61, 1.88]) who received placebo. Solid organ tumor was the most frequent malignancy reported in both groups (abatacept: 1.0%; IR: 1.11 [95% CI: 0.72, 1.62]; placebo: 0.8%; 0.96 [0.50, 1.67]).

Conclusion

In this integrated analysis, the IRs of safety events in the abatacept and placebo groups were similar with no new safety concerns identified.

Contribution of pulmonary function tests (PFTs) to the diagnosis and follow up of connective tissue diseases

Introduction

Connective Tissue Diseases (CTDs) are systemic autoimmune conditions characterized by frequent lung involvement. This usually takes the form of Interstitial Lung Disease (ILD), but Obstructive Lung Disease (OLD) and Pulmonary Artery Hypertension (PAH) can also occur. Lung involvement is often severe, representing the first cause of death in CTD. The aim of this study is to highlight the role of Pulmonary Function Tests (PFTs) in the diagnosis and follow up of CTD patients.

Main body

Rheumatoid Arthritis (RA) showed mainly an ILD with a Usual Interstitial Pneumonia (UIP) pattern in High-Resolution Chest Tomography (HRCT). PFTs are able to highlight a RA-ILD before its clinical onset and to drive follow up of patients with Forced Vital Capacity (FVC) and Carbon Monoxide Diffusing Capacity (DL_CO). In the course of Scleroderma Spectrum Disorders (SSDs) and Idiopathic Inflammatory Myopathies (IIMs), DL_CO appears to be more sensitive than FVC in highlighting an ILD, but it can be compromised by the presence of PAH. A restrictive respiratory pattern can be present in IIMs and Systemic Lupus Erythematosus due to the inflammatory involvement of respiratory muscles, the presence of fatigue or diaphragm distress.

Conclusions

The lung should be carefully studied during CTDs. PFTs can represent an important prognostic tool for diagnosis and follow up of RA-ILD, but, on their own, lack sufficient specificity or sensitivity to describe lung involvement in SSDs and IIMs. Several composite indexes potentially able to describe the evolution of lung damage and response to treatment in SSDs are under investigation. Considering the potential severity of these conditions, an HRCT jointly with PFTs should be performed in all new diagnoses of SSDs and IIMs. Moreover, follow up PFTs should be interpreted in the light of the risk factor for respiratory disease related to each disease.

Drug tolerability and reasons for discontinuation of seven biologics in elderly patients with rheumatoid arthritis -The ANSWER cohort study

BACKGROUND

The aim of this study is to evaluate the retention rates and reasons for discontinuation for seven biological disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (bDMARDs) in a real-world setting of elderly patients (65 years of age or older) with rheumatoid arthritis (RA).

METHODS

This multi-center, retrospective study assessed 1,098 treatment courses of 661 patients with bDMARDs from 2009 to 2018 (females, 80.7%; baseline age, 71.7 years; disease duration 10.5 years; rheumatoid factor positivity 81.3%; Disease Activity Score in 28 joints using erythrocyte sedimentation rate, 4.6; concomitant prednisolone dose 2.8 mg/day (45.6%) and methotrexate dose 4.4 mg/week (56.4%); and 60.2% patients were bio-naïve). Treatment courses included abatacept (ABT; n = 272), tocilizumab (TCZ; n = 234), etanercept (ETN; n = 184), golimumab (GLM; n = 159), infliximab (IFX; n = 101), adalimumab (ADA; n = 97), and certolizumab pegol (CZP; n = 51). Drug retention rates and discontinuation reasons were estimated at 36 months using the Kaplan-Meier method and adjusted for potential clinical confounders (age, sex, disease duration, concomitant PSL and MTX, starting date and switched number of bDMARDs) by Cox proportional hazards modeling.

RESULTS

A total of 51.2% of treatment courses were stopped, with 25.1% stopping due to lack of effectiveness, 11.8% due to toxic adverse events, 9.7% due to non-toxic reasons, and 4.6% due to remission. Drug retention rates for each discontinuation reason were as follows; lack of effectiveness [from 55.4% (ETN) to 81.6% (ABT); with significant differences between groups (Cox P<0.001)], toxic adverse events [from 79.3% (IFX) to 95.4% (ABT), Cox P = 0.043], and remission [from 94.2% (TCZ) to 100.0% (CZP), Cox P = 0.58]. Finally, overall retention rates excluding non-toxic reasons and remission for discontinuation ranged from 50.0% (ETN) to 78.1% (ABT) (Cox P<0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

ABT showed lowest discontinuation rate by lack of effectiveness and by toxic adverse events, which lead to highest overall retention rates (excluding non-toxic reasons and remission) among seven bDMARDs in adjusted model of elderly RA patients.

Perioperative management of immunosuppression in patients with rheumatoid arthritis

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Patients with rheumatoid arthritis are at increased risk of infection after surgery. Recent literature has provided more data and updated guidelines to guide the management of immunosuppression in the perioperative period.

RECENT FINDINGS

Studies over the past few years have confirmed that patients with rheumatoid arthritis are at increased risk of infection after surgery. Patients treated with biologics are at greater risk of postoperative infection, but this risk might be explained by the comorbidities and greater disease severity often seen in these patients. Recent observational studies have suggested that interruption of biologic therapies before surgery may not be associated with better outcomes. Glucocorticoids, however, have consistently been found to be risk factors for infection. Recent guidelines from the American College of Rheumatology/American Association of Hip and Knee Surgeons recommend continuing conventional disease-modifying drugs and holding biologics for one dosing interval before surgery.

SUMMARY

Prolonged interruption of conventional and biologic therapies before surgery does not appear to substantially reduce infection risk. Guidelines now recommend continuing conventional DMARDs and holding biologics for just one dosing interval before surgery. Glucocorticoids are strongly associated with the risk of postoperative infection and should be minimized before surgery.

Improved Quality of Life With Anti-TNF Therapy Compared With Continued Corticosteroid Utilization in Crohn's Disease

BACKGROUND

Corticosteroids (CS) and anti-TNF drugs are used to treat Crohn's disease (CD). In this study, we assessed the net health benefit of initiating anti-TNF therapy relative to additional CS use in CD using a novel combination of a retrospective cohort study and a simulation model.

METHODS

Using Medicaid data from 2001 to 2005 and Medicare data from 2006 to 2013, beneficiaries were identified with CD and CS use who subsequently received either an anti-TNF or reached a cumulative dose of >3000 mg CS during the year. By using overall and latent class-specific remission-time equivalent (RTE) estimates derived from discrete-choice experiments, mean 12-month cumulative RTEs were calculated after propensity score adjustment for baseline characteristics. A Markov model was constructed using transition probabilities derived from the retrospective cohort to perform additional sensitivity analyses of RTE estimates, analytic assumptions, and transition probabilities. Cumulative RTEs were calculated via Monte Carlo simulation in this model.

RESULTS

In the retrospective cohort, 1563 new anti-TNF initiators and 1563 propensity score-matched prolonged CS users were identified. Anti-TNF use was associated with greater mean RTEs at the end of 1 year (5.34 vs 4.54, incremental benefit: 0.79; 95% CI, 0.53-1.07). This benefit persisted in all latent classes. In the Markov model, anti-TNF therapy was the preferred strategy, and the results were robust in multiple sensitivity analysis and latent class analysis.

CONCLUSIONS

In both a retrospective cohort study and a simulation model, anti-TNF use was associated with improved quality of life, measured as RTEs, when compared with continued CS utilization for CD.

Drug tolerability and reasons for discontinuation of seven biologics in 4466 treatment courses of rheumatoid arthritis-the ANSWER cohort study

Background

The aim of this study is to evaluate the retention rates and reasons for discontinuation for seven biological disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (bDMARDs) in a real-world setting of patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA).

Methods

This multi-center, retrospective study assessed 4466 treatment courses of 2494 patients with bDMARDs from 2009 to 2017 (females, 82.4%; baseline age, 57.4 years; disease duration 8.5 years; rheumatoid factor positivity 78.6%; Disease Activity Score in 28 joints using erythrocyte sedimentation rate, 4.3; concomitant prednisolone (PSL) 2.7 mg/day (43.1%) and methotrexate (MTX) 5.0 mg/week (61.8%); and 63.6% patients were bio-naïve). Treatment courses included tocilizumab (TCZ; n = 895), etanercept (ETN; n = 891), infliximab (IFX; n = 748), abatacept (ABT; n = 681), adalimumab (ADA; n = 558), golimumab (GLM; n = 464), and certolizumab pegol (CZP; n = 229). Drug retention rates and discontinuation reasons were estimated at 36 months using the Kaplan-Meier method and adjusted for potential confounders (age, sex, disease duration, concomitant PSL and MTX, and switched number of bDMARDs) using Cox proportional hazards modeling.

Results

A total of 56.9% of treatment courses were stopped, with 25.8% stopping due to lack of effectiveness, 12.7% due to non-toxic reasons, 11.9% due to toxic adverse events, and 6.4% due to disease remission. Drug retention rates for each discontinuation reason were as follows: lack of effectiveness [from 65.5% (IFX) to 81.7% (TCZ); with significant differences between groups (Cox P < 0.001)], toxic adverse events [from 81.8% (IFX) to 94.0% (ABT), Cox P < 0.001], and remission [from 92.4% (ADA and IFX) to 97.7% (ETN), Cox P < 0.001]. Finally, overall retention rates excluding non-toxic reasons and remission for discontinuation ranged from 53.4% (IFX) to 75.5% (ABT) (Cox P < 0.001).

Conclusions

TCZ showed the lowest discontinuation rate by lack of effectiveness, ABT showed the lowest discontinuation rate by toxic adverse events, ADA and IFX showed the highest discontinuation rate by remission, and ABT showed the highest overall retention rates (excluding non-toxic reasons and remission) among seven bDMARDs in the adjusted model.

Prevention of Infection in the Perioperative Setting in Patients with Rheumatic Disease Treated with Immunosuppression

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Patients with autoimmune rheumatic disease are at increased risk of infection after surgery. The goal of this manuscript is to review current evidence on important contributors to infection risk in these patients and the optimal management of immunosuppression in the perioperative setting.

RECENT FINDINGS

Recent studies have confirmed that patients with autoimmune rheumatic disease, including rheumatoid arthritis (RA) and systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE), are at increased risk of infection after surgery, with most evidence coming from studies of joint replacement surgery. Immunosuppression, disease activity, comorbidities, demographics, and surgeon and hospital volume are all important contributors to post-operative infection risk. Recently published guidelines regarding immunosuppression management before joint replacement recommend continuing the conventional disease-modifying drugs used to treat RA (e.g., methotrexate) without interruption, holding more potent conventional therapies for 1 week unless the underlying disease is severe, and holding biologic therapies for one dosing interval before surgery. Recent observational data suggests that holding biologics may not have a substantial impact on infection risk. These data also implicate glucocorticoids as a major contributor to post-operative infection risk. Observational data supports recent recommendations to continue many therapies in the perioperative period with only short interruptions of biologics and other potent immunosuppression. Even brief interruptions may not significantly lower risk, although the field continues to evolve. Clinicians should also consider other risk factors and should focus on minimizing glucocorticoids before surgery when possible to limit the risk of post-operative infection.

Risk of serious infections in tocilizumab versus other biologic drugs in patients with rheumatoid arthritis: a multidatabase cohort study

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the rate of serious bacterial, viral or opportunistic infection in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) starting tocilizumab (TCZ) versus tumour necrosis factor inhibitors (TNFi) or abatacept.

METHODS

Using claims data from US Medicare from 2010 to 2015, and IMS and MarketScan from 2011 to 2015, we identified adults with RA who initiated TCZ or TNFi (primary comparator)/abatacept (secondary comparator) with prior use of ≥1 different biologic drug or tofacitinib. The primary outcome was hospitalised serious infection (SI), including bacterial, viral or opportunistic infection. To control for >70 confounders, TCZ initiators were propensity score (PS)-matched to TNFi or abatacept initiators. Database-specific HRs were combined by a meta-analysis.

RESULTS

The primary cohort included 16 074 TCZ PS-matched to 33 109 TNFi initiators. The risk of composite SI was not different between TCZ and TNFi initiators (combined HR 1.05, 95% CI 0.95 to 1.16). However, TCZ was associated with an increased risk of serious bacterial infection (HR 1.19, 95% CI 1.07 to 1.33), skin and soft tissue infections (HR 2.38, 95% CI 1.47 to 3.86), and diverticulitis (HR 2.34, 95% CI 1.64 to 3.34) versus TNFi. An increased risk of composite SI, serious bacterial infection, diverticulitis, pneumonia/upper respiratory tract infection and septicaemia/bacteraemia was observed in TCZ versus abatacept users.

CONCLUSIONS

This large multidatabase cohort study found no difference in composite SI risk in patients with RA initiating TCZ versus TNFi after failing ≥1 biologic drug or tofacitinib. However, the risk of serious bacterial infection, skin and soft tissue infections, and diverticulitis was higher in TCZ versus TNFi initiators. The risk of composite SI was higher in TCZ initiators versus abatacept.

The effects of TNF-alpha inhibitor therapy on the incidence of infection in JIA children: a meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Juvenile Idiopathic arthritis (JIA) is the most common chronic rheumatic disease in childhood. The diagnosis is based on the underlying symptoms of arthritis with an exclusion of other diseases Biologic agents are increasingly used on the side of disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs (DMARD) in JIA treatment.

MAIN BODY

The aim of this meta-analysis was to investigate the observed infections in JIA children during tumor necrosis factor (TNF)-alpha inhibitor therapy. A systematic search of three databases (Medline via PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library) was carried out up to May 2018. Published trials that evaluated the infectious adverse events in patients receiving TNF-alpha inhibitor vs. a control group were included in the analysis. Full-text data extraction was carried out independently by the investigators from ten relevant publications. 1434 patients received TNF-alpha inhibitor therapy; the control group consisted of 696 subjects. The analysis presented the risk of infection in the active treatment group (OR = 1.13; 95% CI: 0.76-1.69; p = 0.543). The majority of infections were upper respiratory tract infections (URTIs). Furthermore, the subgroup analysis demonstrated a higher infection rate in the observed localization.

CONCLUSION

Anti-TNF therapy slightly but not significantly increases the incidence of infection in JIA children compared to other therapies (GRADE: moderate evidence). The most common infections reported were mild URTIs. Further studies with larger patients number with a strong evidence level are crucially needed to finalize the answer whether anti-TNF therapy elevates and if yes on what extent the incidence of infection in JIA children.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Prospero: CRD42017067873 .

Risk of serious infections in patients with rheumatoid arthritis treated in routine care with abatacept, rituximab and tocilizumab in Denmark and Sweden

OBJECTIVE

To estimate (1) crude and age-and gender-adjusted incidence rates (IRs) of serious infections (SI) and (2) relative risks (RR) of SI in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) initiating treatment with abatacept, rituximab or tocilizumab in routine care.

METHODS

This is an observational cohort study conducted in parallel in Denmark and Sweden including patients with RA in Denmark (DANBIO) and Sweden (Anti-Rheumatic Treatment in Sweden Register/Swedish Rheumatology Quality Register) who started abatacept/rituximab/tocilizumab in 2010-2015. Patients could contribute to more than one treatment course. Incident SI (hospitalisations listing infection) and potential confounders were identified through linkage to national registries. Age- and gender-adjusted IRs of SI per 100 person years and additionally adjusted RRs of SI during 0-12 and 0-24 months since start of treatment were assessed (Poisson regression). Country-specific RRs were pooled using inverse variance weighting.

RESULTS

We identified 8987 treatment courses (abatacept: 2725; rituximab: 3363; tocilizumab: 2899). At treatment start, rituximab-treated patients were older, had longer disease duration and more previous malignancies; tocilizumab-treated patients had higher C reactive protein. During 0-12 and 0-24 months of follow-up, 456 and 639 SI events were identified, respectively. The following were the age- and gender-adjusted 12-month IRs for abatacept/rituximab/tocilizumab: 7.1/8.1/6.1 for Denmark and 6.0/6.4/4.7 for Sweden. The 24-month IRs were 6.1/7.5/5.2 for Denmark and 5.6/5.8/4.3 for Sweden. Adjusted 12-month RRs for tocilizumab versus rituximab were 0.82 (0.50 to 1.36) for Denmark and 0.76 (0.57 to 1.02) for Sweden, pooled 0.78 (0.61 to 1.01); for abatacept versus rituximab 0.94 (0.55 to 1.60) for Denmark and 0.86 (0.66 to 1.13) for Sweden, pooled 0.88 (0.69 to 1.12); and for abatacept versus tocilizumab 1.15 (0.69 to 1.90) for Denmark and 1.14 (0.83 to 1.55) for Sweden, pooled 1.13 (0.91 to 1.42). The adjusted RRs for 0-24 months were similar.

CONCLUSION

For patients starting abatacept, rituximab or tocilizumab, differences in baseline characteristics were seen. Numerical differences in IR of SI between drugs were observed. RRs seemed to vary with drug (tocilizumab < abatacept < rituximab) but should be interpreted with caution due to few events and risk of residual confounding.

Special Article: 2018 American College of Rheumatology/National Psoriasis Foundation Guideline for the Treatment of Psoriatic Arthritis

OBJECTIVE

To develop an evidence-based guideline for the pharmacologic and nonpharmacologic treatment of psoriatic arthritis (PsA), as a collaboration between the American College of Rheumatology (ACR) and the National Psoriasis Foundation (NPF).

METHODS

We identified critical outcomes in PsA and clinically relevant PICO (population/intervention/comparator/outcomes) questions. A Literature Review Team performed a systematic literature review to summarize evidence supporting the benefits and harms of available pharmacologic and nonpharmacologic therapies for PsA. GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation) methodology was used to rate the quality of the evidence. A voting panel, including rheumatologists, dermatologists, other health professionals, and patients, achieved consensus on the direction and the strength of the recommendations.

RESULTS

The guideline covers the management of active PsA in patients who are treatment-naive and those who continue to have active PsA despite treatment, and addresses the use of oral small molecules, tumor necrosis factor inhibitors, interleukin-12/23 inhibitors (IL-12/23i), IL-17 inhibitors, CTLA4-Ig (abatacept), and a JAK inhibitor (tofacitinib). We also developed recommendations for psoriatic spondylitis, predominant enthesitis, and treatment in the presence of concomitant inflammatory bowel disease, diabetes, or serious infections. We formulated recommendations for a treat-to-target strategy, vaccinations, and nonpharmacologic therapies. Six percent of the recommendations were strong and 94% conditional, indicating the importance of active discussion between the health care provider and the patient to choose the optimal treatment.

CONCLUSION

The 2018 ACR/NPF PsA guideline serves as a tool for health care providers and patients in the selection of appropriate therapy in common clinical scenarios. Best treatment decisions consider each individual patient situation. The guideline is not meant to be proscriptive and should not be used to limit treatment options for patients with PsA.

2018 American College of Rheumatology/National Psoriasis Foundation Guideline for the Treatment of Psoriatic Arthritis

Objective:

To develop an evidence-based guideline for the pharmacologic and nonpharmacologic treatment of psoriatic arthritis (PsA), as a collaboration between the American College of Rheumatology (ACR) and the National Psoriasis Foundation (NPF).

Methods:

We identified critical outcomes in PsA and clinically relevant PICO (population/intervention/comparator/outcomes) questions. A Literature Review Team performed a systematic literature review to summarize evidence supporting the benefits and harms of available pharmacologic and nonpharmacologic therapies for PsA. GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation) methodology was used to rate the quality of the evidence. A voting panel, including rheumatologists, dermatologists, other health professionals, and patients, achieved consensus on the direction and the strength of the recommendations.

Results:

The guideline covers the management of active PsA in patients who are treatment-naive and those who continue to have active PsA despite treatment, and addresses the use of oral small molecules, tumor necrosis factor inhibitors, interleukin-12/23 inhibitors (IL-12/23i), IL-17 inhibitors, CTLA4-Ig (abatacept), and a JAK inhibitor (tofacitinib). We also developed recommendations for psoriatic spondylitis, predominant enthesitis, and treatment in the presence of concomitant inflammatory bowel disease, diabetes, or serious infections. We formulated recommendations for a treat-to-target strategy, vaccinations, and nonpharmacologic therapies. Six percent of the recommendations were strong and 94% conditional, indicating the importance of active discussion between the health care provider and the patient to choose the optimal treatment.

Conclusion:

The 2018 ACR/NPF PsA guideline serves as a tool for health care providers and patients in the selection of appropriate therapy in common clinical scenarios. Best treatment decisions consider each individual patient situation. The guideline is not meant to be proscriptive and should not be used to limit treatment options for patients with PsA.

Special Article: 2018 American College of Rheumatology/National Psoriasis Foundation Guideline for the Treatment of Psoriatic Arthritis

OBJECTIVE

To develop an evidence-based guideline for the pharmacologic and nonpharmacologic treatment of psoriatic arthritis (PsA), as a collaboration between the American College of Rheumatology (ACR) and the National Psoriasis Foundation (NPF).

METHODS

We identified critical outcomes in PsA and clinically relevant PICO (population/intervention/comparator/outcomes) questions. A Literature Review Team performed a systematic literature review to summarize evidence supporting the benefits and harms of available pharmacologic and nonpharmacologic therapies for PsA. GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation) methodology was used to rate the quality of the evidence. A voting panel, including rheumatologists, dermatologists, other health professionals, and patients, achieved consensus on the direction and the strength of the recommendations.

RESULTS

The guideline covers the management of active PsA in patients who are treatment-naive and those who continue to have active PsA despite treatment, and addresses the use of oral small molecules, tumor necrosis factor inhibitors, interleukin-12/23 inhibitors (IL-12/23i), IL-17 inhibitors, CTLA4-Ig (abatacept), and a JAK inhibitor (tofacitinib). We also developed recommendations for psoriatic spondylitis, predominant enthesitis, and treatment in the presence of concomitant inflammatory bowel disease, diabetes, or serious infections. We formulated recommendations for a treat-to-target strategy, vaccinations, and nonpharmacologic therapies. Six percent of the recommendations were strong and 94% conditional, indicating the importance of active discussion between the health care provider and the patient to choose the optimal treatment.

CONCLUSION

The 2018 ACR/NPF PsA guideline serves as a tool for health care providers and patients in the selection of appropriate therapy in common clinical scenarios. Best treatment decisions consider each individual patient situation. The guideline is not meant to be proscriptive and should not be used to limit treatment options for patients with PsA.

Long-Term Safety of Rituximab in Rheumatoid Arthritis: Analysis From the SUNSTONE Registry

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the long-term safety of rituximab in an observational cohort of patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) who had an inadequate response to ≥ 1 antitumor necrosis factor therapies in the United States (SUNSTONE Registry).

METHODS

In this prospective, observational cohort study, patients received rituximab according to their physician's standard practice and were evaluated at standard-of-care follow-up visits at least every 6 months. The primary outcome was the incidence of protocol-defined significant infections. Secondary outcomes included serious adverse events potentially associated with rituximab, cardiovascular or thrombotic (CVT) events, seizures, deaths and pregnancies. Posthoc analyses assessed outcomes by concomitant medication use.

RESULTS

Overall, 989 patients (safety-evaluable population) received ≥ 1 dose of rituximab, with a total follow-up of 3844 patient-years (PYs; mean duration, 3.9 years). In total, 341 significant infections occurred in 197 patients (19.9%). The incidence rates (95% CI) for significant infections, CVT events, and seizures were 8.87 (7.98, 9.86), 1.95 (1.56, 2.45), and 0.18 (0.09, 0.38) per 100 PYs, respectively. The incidence of significant infections did not increase with time or with cumulative rituximab exposure. During the study, 64 patients died (crude mortality [95% CI]: 1.66 per 100 PYs [1.30, 2.13]). The most common causes of death were infections (19 patients), malignancy (14), and cardiovascular events (13). Eight pregnancies were reported in 7 patients.

CONCLUSION

In patients with RA treated with rituximab for up to 5 years, the rates of significant infections were stable over time and higher in patients who received long-term systemic steroid treatment. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.

New insights and long-term safety of tocilizumab in rheumatoid arthritis

Rheumatoid arthritis is a leading musculoskeletal cause of disability in Western society. Therapeutic options have expanded rapidly with the advent of biological agents as treatment options. One of these, tocilizumab, targets the interleukin-6 receptor and has been approved since the late 2000s in many jurisdictions. This approval was based on 6-12 month trials. It is now appropriate to look at longer-term studies and what new insights they have provided into this agent. Data are based largely on observational studies with their well-known limitations as well as some further randomized trials and provide a number of important observations regarding both efficacy and safety. In conclusion, the longer-term data suggest tocilizumab efficacy increases over time for both signs and symptoms and radiographic change. It is also corticosteroid sparing. The safety data are consistent with the shorter-term trials and are largely reassuring but some questions still remain over cardiovascular safety and cancer risk.

Management of Juvenile Idiopathic Arthritis in ABO-incompatible Kidney Transplantation: A Case Report

Biologic agents are a beneficial therapy for juvenile idiopathic arthritis (JIA). However, there is a lack of evidence with regard to management of these agents for JIA patients who undergo kidney transplantation (KTx). A 36-year-old woman with JIA who was treated with tocilizumab targeting interleukin-6 (IL-6) receptor underwent ABO-incompatible kidney transplantation (ABOi KTx). To prevent over-immunosuppression, tocilizumab was discontinued before ABOi KTx. Rituximab, tacrolimus, mycophenolate mofetil, everolimus, and methylprednisolone were used for immunosuppression. Clinical remission of joint pain was maintained for over 3 years despite complete discontinuation of tocilizumab. Both serum IL-6 and soluble IL-6 receptor levels were markedly decreased, suggesting that multitargeted immunosuppression for ABOi KTx induced long-term clinical remission of JIA through inhibition of the IL-6 pathway. However, levels of C-reactive protein (CRP) and matrix metalloproteinase-3 (MMP-3) gradually increased thereafter and abatacept was initiated to prevent joint deterioration. These levels decreased without any adverse events. The patient's renal graft function was well maintained.

Comparing the effectiveness of biological disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs using real-world data

OBJECTIVES

The objective of this study is to compare the effectiveness of biological disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (bDMARDs) by analyzing claims data of 13 Japanese national university hospitals.

METHODS

We evaluated 4970 cases of rheumatoid arthritis treated with bDMARDs from the Clinical Information Statistical Analysis database, which has collected and integrated 13 Japanese national university hospitals' claims data for 10 years. We surveyed the medications and calculated the retention rates of bDMARDs using the Kaplan-Meier method and differentiated the effectiveness between the two bDMARDs by comparing the retention rates after switching from one drug to another.

RESULTS

Of the 4970 cases, 1364 switched bDMARDs at least once. Tocilizumab (TCZ) reported the highest retention rate, whereas abatacept (ABT) revealed a similar rate compared with only naïve cases. The retention rate curves were higher in cases on TCZ that switched from the other bDMARDs than those in the reversed cases. Following TCZ, ABT and etanercept indicated better results than the other bDMARDs.

CONCLUSION

We could compare the effectiveness among bDMARDs by differentiating the retention rates from big claims data. TCZ reported higher retention rates in both naïve and switched cases than other bDMARDs.

Interleukin-6/Stat3 signaling has an essential role in the host antimicrobial response to urinary tract infection

The signaling networks regulating antimicrobial activity during urinary tract infection (UTI) are incompletely understood. Interleukin-6 (IL-6) levels increase with UTI severity, but the specific contributions of IL-6 to host immunity against bacterial uropathogens are unknown. To clarify this we tested whether IL-6 activates the Stat3 transcription factor, to drive a program of antimicrobial peptide gene expression in infected urothelium during UTI. Transurethral inoculation of uropathogenic Escherichia coli led to IL-6 secretion, urothelial Stat3 phosphorylation, and activation of antimicrobial peptide transcription, in a Toll-like receptor 4-dependent manner in a murine model of cystitis. Recombinant IL-6 elicited Stat3 phosphorylation in primary urothelial cells in vitro, and systemic IL-6 administration promoted urothelial Stat3 phosphorylation and antimicrobial peptide expression in vivo. IL-6 deficiency led to decreased urothelial Stat3 phosphorylation and antimicrobial peptide mRNA expression following UTI, a finding mirrored by conditional Stat3 deletion. Deficiency in IL-6 or Stat3 was associated with increased formation of intracellular bacterial communities, and exogenous IL-6 reversed this phenotype in IL-6 knockout mice. Moreover, chronic IL-6 depletion led to increased renal bacterial burden and severe pyelonephritis in C3H/HeOuJ mice. Thus, IL-6/Stat3 signaling drives a transcriptional program of antimicrobial gene expression in infected urothelium, with key roles in limiting epithelial invasion and ascending infection.

One-year risk of serious infection in patients treated with certolizumab pegol as compared with other TNF inhibitors in a real-world setting: data from a national U.S. rheumatoid arthritis registry

Background

Registry studies provide a valuable source of comparative safety data for tumor necrosis factor inhibitors (TNFi) used in rheumatoid arthritis (RA), but they are subject to channeling bias. Comparing safety outcomes without accounting for channeling bias can lead to inaccurate comparisons between TNFi prescribed at different stages of the disease. In the present study, we examined the incidence of serious infection and other adverse events during certolizumab pegol (CZP) use vs other TNFi in a U.S. RA cohort before and after using a methodological approach to minimize channeling bias.

Methods

Patients with RA enrolled in the Corrona registry, aged ≥ 18 years, initiating CZP or other TNFi (etanercept, adalimumab, golimumab, or infliximab) after May 1, 2009 (n = 6215 initiations), were followed for ≤ 12 months. A propensity score (PS) model was used to control for baseline characteristics associated with the probability of receiving CZP vs other TNFi. Incidence rate ratios (IRRs) of serious infectious events (SIEs), malignancies, and cardiovascular events (CVEs) in the CZP group vs other TNFi group were calculated with 95% CIs, before and after PS matching.

Results

Patients were more likely to initiate CZP later in the course of therapy than those initiating other TNFi. CZP initiators (n = 975) were older and had longer disease duration, more active disease, and greater disability than other TNFi initiators (n = 5240). After PS matching, there were no clinically important differences between CZP (n = 952) and other TNFi (n = 952). Before PS matching, CZP was associated with a greater incidence of SIEs (IRR 1.53 [95% CI 1.13, 2.05]). The risk of SIEs was not different between groups after PS matching (IRR 1.26 [95% CI 0.84, 1.90]). The 95% CI of the IRRs for malignancies or CVEs included unity, regardless of PS matching, suggesting no difference in risk between CZP and other TNFi.

Conclusions

After using PS matching to minimize channeling bias and compare patients with a similar likelihood of receiving CZP or other TNFi, the 1-year risk of SIEs, malignancies, and CVEs was not distinguishable between the two groups.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s13075-017-1496-5) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.