Induction of antinuclear antibodies in patients with rheumatoid arthritis treated with infliximab and leflunomide

Infection is the major trigger of hemophagocytic syndrome in adult patients treated with biological therapies

INTRODUCTION

Hemophagocytic syndromes (hemophagocytic lymphohistiocytosis, HLH) are characterized by a wide range of etiologies, symptoms, and outcomes, but have a common etiopathogenic pathway leading to organ damage: an excessive inflammatory response. Biological therapies have been proposed as a therapeutic option for refractory HLH, but have also been related to the development of HLH in severe immunosuppressed patients.

OBJECTIVES AND METHODS

The purpose of this study was to analyze the clinical characteristics and outcomes of adult patients who developed HLH after receiving biological therapies.

RESULTS

We identified 30 patients (29 from the PubMed search and one unpublished case), including 19 women and 11 men, with a mean age of 46.5 years. Underlying diseases consisted of rheumatologic/autoimmune diseases in 24 patients and hematological neoplasia in the remaining 6. Biological agents received before the development of HLH were mainly anti-TNF agents (n = 19). Search for microorganisms confirmed systemic infection in 20 (67%) patients, including Mycobacterium tuberculosis (n = 5), cytomegalovirus (CMV) (n = 4), Epstein-Barr virus (EBV) (n = 3), Histoplasma capsulatum (n = 3), Escherichia coli (n = 2), Staphylococcus aureus, Leishmania amastigotes and Brucella melitensis (n = 1, respectively); viral infections were mainly reported in inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) patients. Patients with infections had more frequently received previous immunosuppressive therapies (p = 0.036) and had lower leukocyte counts (p = 0.020) in comparison with patients without associated infections. The outcome was described in 29 patients. After a mean follow-up of 6.3 months, 8 patients died (28%) and 6 had received anti-TNF agents. There was a high mortality rate in patients aged >65 years and those with tuberculosis (62% and 60%, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

In patients receiving biological therapies who develop HLH, searching for a concomitant infectious process is mandatory, and specific surveillance for EBV/CMV infections (in patients with IBD) and for bacteria, including mycobacteria (in elderly patients receiving anti-TNF therapy), is recommended.

Open-label observation of addition of etanercept versus a conventional disease-modifying antirheumatic drug in subjects with active rheumatoid arthritis despite methotrexate therapy in the Latin American region

BACKGROUND

Previous global studies examined etanercept (ETN) + methotrexate (MTX) for treatment of rheumatoid arthritis (RA), but included few subjects from Latin America.

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this study was to compare the safety and efficacy of ETN + MTX versus a standard-of-care disease-modifying antirheumatic drug (DMARD) + MTX in Latin American subjects with moderate to severe active RA despite MTX therapy.

METHODS

This open-label, active-comparator study (NCT00848354) randomized subjects 2:1 to ETN 50 mg/wk + MTX or investigator-selected DMARD (sulfasalazine or hydroxychloroquine) + MTX (ETN + MTX, n = 281; DMARD + MTX, n = 142). The primary end point was the proportion achieving American College of Rheumatology (ACR) 50 at week 24. Secondary end points included ACR20/70, disease activity score (DAS) 28 measures, and mean change in modified total Sharp score. Patient-reported outcomes were the Health Assessment Questionnaire, 36-item Short-Form, Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale, Work Productivity and Activity Impairment: RA (WPAI:RA), and Caregiver Burden and Resource Utilization. Statistical analyses were stratified by country; χ test and analysis of covariance were used. Adverse events were monitored.

RESULTS

More subjects achieved ACR50 at week 24 with ETN + MTX versus DMARD + MTX (62% vs 23%, respectively), in addition to secondary end points (P < 0.0001 for all); mean change in modified total Sharp score was lower for the ETN + MTX group (0.4 vs 1.4, respectively; P = 0.0270). Improvements in patient-reported outcomes favored ETN + MTX for Health Assessment Questionnaire, 36-item Short-Form, Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale for depression, WPAI:RA, and Caregiver Burden and Resource Utilization emergency department visits for RA (P < 0.01). Overall, adverse events were similar between the groups (69% vs 68%,); serious adverse events were also similar (4% vs 1%). The rate of overall infections was higher with ETN + MTX (38%) than DMARD + MTX (22%, P ≤ 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Consistent with published global data among RA patients with inadequate response to MTX, adding ETN to MTX demonstrated better efficacy than adding one other conventional DMARD to MTX. No new safety issues were observed. ETN + MTX provided favorable benefit-risk profile among RA patients from LA region.

What is the utility of routine ANA testing in predicting development of biological DMARD-induced lupus and vasculitis in patients with rheumatoid arthritis? Data from a single-centre cohort

OBJECTIVE

To determine whether serial ANA testing predicts biological disease modifying antirheumatic drugs (bDMARD)-associated ANA/dsDNA production in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA).

METHODS

Serial autoantibody profiles, bDMARD treatment sequences and clinical data were collected from patients identified from our database that since 2005 received (i) a first bDMARD (tumour necrosis factor inhibitor (TNFi)) and (ii) tocilizumab and/or abatacept.

RESULTS

Of over 1000 patients, 454 RA patients received a first TNFi. Infliximab group demonstrated higher ANA seroconversion rates (31.2%) compared with etanercept (11.8%) and adalimumab (16.1%) (p<0.001). Median (range) treatment duration prior to ANA seroconversion was 10.9 (1.3-80.0) months. Positive anti-dsDNA titres of IgG class (median (range) of 77 IU/mL (65-109)) were noted in six (7.2%) patients, within a median (range) of 2.0 (0.8-4.2) years. Three patients developed classifiable lupus. 4 of 74 (5.4%) primary non-responders and 24 of 111 (21.6%) secondary non-responders developed positive ANA antibodies after TNFi initiation (p=0.003). Seven (9.5%) tocilizumab-treated patients changed to positive ANA; five (8.6%) abatacept-treated patients changed to positive ANA status.

CONCLUSIONS

This study demonstrates no utility of serial ANA/dsDNA testing that could be used to predict onset of seroconversion and therefore the development of lupus/vasculitis. An association however between seroconversion and the development of a secondary non-response to bDMARD therapy is suggested.

Biologic and oral disease-modifying antirheumatic drug monotherapy in rheumatoid arthritis

Clinical evidence demonstrates coadministration of tumour necrosis factor inhibitor (TNFi) agents and methotrexate (MTX) is more efficacious than administration of TNFi agents alone in patients with rheumatoid arthritis, leading to the perception that coadministration of MTX with all biologic agents or oral disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs is necessary for maximum efficacy. Real-life registry data reveal approximately one-third of patients taking biologic agents use them as monotherapy. Additionally, an analysis of healthcare claims data showed that when MTX was prescribed in conjunction with a biologic agent, as many as 58% of patients did not collect the MTX prescription. Given this discrepancy between perception and real life, we conducted a review of the peer-reviewed literature and rheumatology medical congress abstracts to determine whether data support biologic monotherapy as a treatment option for patients with rheumatoid arthritis. Our analysis suggests only for tocilizumab is there evidence that the efficacy of biologic monotherapy is comparable with combination therapy with MTX.

Leflunomide: a drug with a potential beyond rheumatology

Leflunomide, an inhibitor of the dihydroorotase dehydrogenase and thereby pyrimidine synthesis, was introduced and licensed for the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis in 1998. In the following years, its antiviral properties were discovered and the drug was used in solid organ transplantation for polyomavirus type BK or cytomegalovirus infection. Owing to its long half-life and weak interaction with the cytochrome system, special considerations apply in the use of this drug. This article summarizes the clinical experience with leflunomide in rheumatology and in the evolving field of transplantation.

Impact of concomitant use of DMARDs on the persistence with anti-TNF therapies in patients with rheumatoid arthritis: results from the British Society for Rheumatology Biologics Register

Objective

To evaluate the effect of different concomitant disease modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs) on the persistence with antitumour necrosis factor (anti-TNF) therapies in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA).

Method

This analysis included 10 396 patients with RA registered with the British Society for Rheumatology Biologics Register, a prospective observational cohort study, who were starting their first anti-TNF therapy and were receiving one of the following DMARD treatments at baseline: no DMARD (n=3339), methotrexate (MTX) (n=4418), leflunomide (LEF) (n=610), sulfasalazine (SSZ) (n=308), MTX+SSZ (n=902), MTX+ hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) (n=401) or MTX+SSZ+HCQ (n=418). Kaplan–Meier survival analysis was used to study the persistence with anti-TNF therapy in each DMARD subgroup up to 5 years. Multivariate Cox proportional hazard models, stratified by anti-TNF used and start year and adjusted for a number of potential confounders, were used to compare treatment persistence overall and according to the reason for discontinuation between each of the DMARD subgroups, using MTX as reference.

Results

One-year drug survival (95% CI) for the first anti-TNF therapy was 71% (71% to 72%) but this dropped to 42% (41% to 43%) at 5 years. Compared with MTX, patients receiving no DMARD, LEF or SSZ were more likely to discontinue their first anti-TNF therapy while patients receiving MTX in combination with other DMARDs showed better treatment persistence.

Conclusions

These results support the continued use of background DMARD combinations which include MTX. Consideration should be given to the discontinuation of LEF and SSZ monotherapy at the time anti-TNF therapies are started, with the possible exception of the SSZ+ETN combination.

Reappraisal of the clinical use of leflunomide in rheumatoid arthritis and psoriatic arthritis

Leflunomide is a disease-modifying antirheumatic drug (DMARD) that has been in routine clinical use for the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis (RA) and psoriatic arthritis for a decade. In RA, clinical trials of up to two years' duration showed that leflunomide monotherapy was equivalent to methotrexate in clinical and radiographic disease outcomes (tender and swollen joint counts, physician and patient global assessments, American College of Rheumatology and Disease Activity Score responses, slowing or halting of radiographic progression). In a number of studies, quality of life measurements indicated that leflunomide is superior to methotrexate. Leflunomide has been studied in combination with methotrexate and shows efficacy in patients only partly responsive to this agent. Recent trials have shown that leflunomide can be used safely with biologic DMARDs, including antitumor necrosis factor agents and rituximab as part of the treatment algorithm in place of methotrexate as a cotherapy. Leflunomide has demonstrated efficacy as a monotherapy in psoriatic arthritis, and it also has a beneficial effect in psoriasis. Postmarketing studies have shown that retention on treatment with leflunomide is equal to methotrexate and superior to other DMARDs. In general, its side effect profile is acceptable compared with other DMARDS, with nausea, diarrhea, and hair fall occurring commonly, but only rarely leading to discontinuation. Liver toxicity is the most significant problem in clinical use although it is uncommon. Peripheral neuropathy, hypertension, pneumonitis, and cytopenia occur more rarely. Leflunomide is contraindicated in pregnancy and should be used with caution in women during child-bearing years. In this review, the place of leflunomide in therapy is discussed and practical advice informed by evidence is given regarding dosing regimens, safety monitoring, and managing side effects. Leflunomide remains one of the most useful of the nonbiologic DMARDs.

Benefit-risk assessment of leflunomide: an appraisal of leflunomide in rheumatoid arthritis 10 years after licensing

Evidence is accumulating for the early sustained usage of disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs (DMARDs) in rheumatoid arthritis. Leflunomide was licensed for the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis in 1998. Postmarketing surveillance, case reports and observational studies have highlighted less common or unexpected adverse events. Therefore, it is appropriate that we review the benefit-risk profile of leflunomide after 10 years of widespread usage. A wide-based search of relevant literature was performed to formulate this assessment. The improvements in rheumatoid arthritis shown by double-blind, randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of leflunomide have now been shown to be maintained beyond 4 years in open-label extension studies. Leflunomide is comparable to methotrexate, but better than sulfasalazine at 24 months in only one study. However, tolerance in clinical practice research shows higher than expected withdrawal rates due to both toxicity and lack of efficacy when compared with methotrexate and placebo. Adverse events reported include gastrointestinal upset, hypertension, headache, hepatotoxicity and hair loss, as well as predisposition to infection and peripheral neuropathy. The incidence of gastrointestinal adverse effects for leflunomide is similar to sulfasalazine but higher than those seen with methotrexate. Serious drug-induced hepatotoxicity leading to hospitalization is rare (0.02%), but isolated fatalities from liver failure have been documented. It is considered likely, but not yet proven, that there may be an increased incidence of weight loss and interstitial lung disease with leflunomide. Leflunomide in combination with methotrexate or sulfasalazine is an effective regimen in RCTs utilizing placebo controls, but more research is needed to confirm its effectiveness in combination with other DMARDs, particularly biologicals. The active metabolite of leflunomide is teratogenic in animal studies and is also found in breast milk. Therefore, contraception is advised in both males and females of child-bearing potential. There are genetic, pharmacokinetic and biochemical reasons to explain variation in both patient response and adverse event profile. Hence, blood and blood pressure monitoring are recommended and therapeutic drug monitoring should be considered in clinical nonresponders. Leflunomide is an effective DMARD that sustains a clinical and radiological response comparable to sulfasalazine and methotrexate. However, adverse effects necessitate frequent monitoring. It should be used with caution in those of child-bearing potential and with pre-existing lung and liver disease.

Comparison of combination therapies in the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis: leflunomide-anti-TNF-alpha versus methotrexate-anti-TNF-alpha

To compare the efficacy and safety of leflunomide (LEF)-anti-TNF-alpha combination therapy to methotrexate (MTX)-anti-TNF-alpha combination therapy in a group of patients with active rheumatoid arthritis (RA). We have recruited 120 patients with RA with a high disease activity despite being treated with MTX (15 mg/week) or LEF (20 mg/die) for 3 months, without side effects. In each of these patients, therapy with either MTX or LEF was continued and randomly combined with an anti-TNF-alpha drug: etanercept, infliximab, or adalimumab. Patients were assessed at study entry and at 4, 12, and at 24 weeks. The efficacy endpoints included variations in the DAS28-ESR and the ACR20, ACR50, and ACR70 responses. At each visit, any side-effect was recorded. There were no statistically significant differences in the DAS28 variations and in the ACR responses between the two groups or among the six subgroups. The number of discontinuation due to the appearance of serious side effects was higher, but not statistically significant, in the LEF-anti-TNF-alpha group than in the MTX-anti-TNF-alpha group. Other adverse events that did not necessitate the discontinuation of therapy occurred much more frequently in patients treated with MTX than in those treated with LEF. Anti-TNF-alpha drugs can be used in combination not only with MTX, but also with LEF, with the same probability of achieving significant clinical improvement in RA patients and without a significantly greater risk of serious adverse events. In contrast, it seems that combination therapy with LEF-anti-TNF-alpha is more readily tolerated than combination therapy with MTX-anti-TNF-alpha.

Infliximab in the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis

Infliximab was the first monoclonal antibody to human necrosis factor alpha (TNFalpha) developed for treating rheumatoid arthritis (RA). This chimeric antibody binds with high affinity to both soluble and trans-membrane TNF and is able to reduce synovial inflammation, bone resorption and cartilage degradation. The efficacy of infliximab has been observed in active RA despite treatment with multiple disease modifying anti-rheumatic drugs (DMARDs), and in early disease with no prior treatment by methotrexate (MTX). Infliximab has been shown to reduce joint inflammation and to slow radiographic progression, in both clinical and non-clinical responders. Recent data suggest that using infliximab early in RA treatment increases the percentage of clinical remission and allows infliximab discontinuation. The recommended dosage of 3 mg/kg could be increased up to 10 mg/kg with partial efficacy of the dose escalation. Antibodies to infliximab have been observed in 7% to 61% of patients and are associated with a low trough level of infliximab and secondary response failure. Their occurrence could be prevented by co-medication with MTX. The combination of DMARDs other than MTX with infliximab was found to be safe and efficacious. Infections, principally tuberculosis, are increased in treated patients, and the risk is greater at higher dose. Even if the treatment is generally safe and well tolerated, patients treated with infliximab should be closely monitored.

Prospective cohort study of effects of infliximab on rheumatoid factor, anti-cyclic citrullinated peptide antibodies and antinuclear antibodies in patients with long-standing rheumatoid arthritis

BACKGROUND

Antibodies to cyclic citrullinated peptide (anti-CCP) and IgM rheumatoid factor (IgM-RF) are well-established serological markers for rheumatoid arthritis (RA). Lupus-like disease with antinuclear antibodies (ANA) has been reported during TNFalpha antagonist therapy. Our objectives were to investigate the effect of infliximab therapy on these three autoantibodies in patients with established RA and to look for correlations linking IgM-RF and anti-CCP titres to a treatment response (defined as a good or moderate EULAR response) after 48 weeks of infliximab therapy.

METHODS

Thirty-six patients with long-standing RA not responding to disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs (DMARDs) received intravenous infliximab (starting dose: 3mg/kg) at 0, 2, and 6 weeks then at 8-week intervals, in combination with a DMARD. At baseline, week 24, and week 48, C-reactive protein (CRP) and the erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR) were determined and the disease activity score (DAS28) was calculated. Serum samples collected at the same time points were used to measure anti-CCP (commercial second-generation ELISA), IgM-RF (quantitative nephelometric assay), and ANA (indirect immunofluorescence in HEp2 cells). Correlations linking baseline autoantibody titres to changes in autoantibody levels were examined.

RESULTS

At baseline, tests were positive for anti-CCP in 31/36 (94.6%) patients, IgM-RF in 29/36 (80.5%) patients, and ANA in 16/36 (44%) patients. IgM-RF titres decreased significantly (p<0.001), whereas anti-CCP showed little change (p=0.053). ANA titres increased significantly (p<0.001). The treatment response was not associated with changes in anti-CCP or IgM-RF titres during infliximab therapy (OR for a response in patients with a 50% anti-CCP decrease, 0.77 [95%CI, 0.16-3.58]; OR for a response in patients with a 50% IgM-RF decrease, 0.82 [95%CI, 0.16-4.13]).

CONCLUSIONS

During infliximab therapy used to treat established RA, IgM-RF titres showed larger decreases than anti-CCP titres. Changes in IgM-RF and anti-CCP failed to correlate with the 48-week treatment response.

Current state of tumour necrosis factor {alpha} blockade in Wegener's granulomatosis

Tumour necrosis factor alpha (TNFalpha) is likely to be involved in the pathogenesis of Wegener's granulomatosis. This paper reviews published clinical trials of the anti-TNFalpha agents etanercept and infliximab with regard to their efficacy and safety in the treatment of Wegener's granulomatosis. On the basis of the high rate of adverse events, particularly an increased incidence of cancers, the use of etanercept in the management of Wegener's granulomatosis is not justified. However, the potential role for infliximab or the as yet untested adalimumab cannot be discounted. The development of novel approaches focusing on blockade of specific molecules including TNFalpha in the treatment of Wegener's granulomatosis is awaited.